Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 136

Thread: McFarland Gas Ring vs. Standard

  1. #21
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by jmart
    Grant,

    With respect to CS springs, the claimed benefits are pretty well understood. Then it's up to a user to decide whether or not these claimed benefits are truly beneficial for their application and whether or not to pay the added premium.

    Having said that, what's the benefit to the McFarland gas ring? I understand the design differences, continuous one piece vs three pieces, but what is the benefit? Better gas seal? Longer term relaibility?
    As I stated at the top of this thread, they use better materials which translates into them lasting longer (less PM's). This is generally the same reason why we go to CS springs for our extractor and buffer.



    C4
    Last edited by C4IGrant; 01-26-07 at 12:44.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    1,857
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by C4IGrant
    As I stated at the top of this thread, they use better materials which translates into them lasting longer (less PM's). This is generally the same reason why we go to CS springs for our extractor and buffer.



    C4
    How often do you replace the existing three-piece ring setup? Is the McFarlnd really that big of an advantage?

    The CS spring argument to me makes a lot more sense -- longer lifetime and much greater consistency in performance across it's life. But given that a
    weapon will run with a single ring in a three-ring setup, you have double redundancy built into the design. And the replacement test is simple to perform, so it's not as if diagnosing when rings need repalcement is difficult.

    I'm not knocking McFarlnd rings, but to me it sounds more like a convenience justification than a performance justification, that's all.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by jmart
    How often do you replace the existing three-piece ring setup? Is the McFarlnd really that big of an advantage?

    The CS spring argument to me makes a lot more sense -- longer lifetime and much greater consistency in performance across it's life. But given that a
    weapon will run with a single ring in a three-ring setup, you have double redundancy built into the design. And the replacement test is simple to perform, so it's not as if diagnosing when rings need repalcement is difficult.

    I'm not knocking McFarlnd rings, but to me it sounds more like a convenience justification than a performance justification, that's all.

    If I remember correctly, proper PM's are supposed to be done on gas rings (cheap ones) every 3K. The same goes with cheap extractor and buffer springs.

    Yes, a weapon will work with a single gas ring, but no one does that on purpose because it isn't the most reliable way to run your weapon.

    I view the McFarland as a convenience thing as well (less PM's). I don't know about you, but I forget to do proper PM's on my weapon so having components that don't need to be changed out as often (or if at all) are big plus one in my book.

    I would also like to state, that I could care less if anyone buys the McFarland gas rings from me. I bought them so I can add them to my bolts.


    C4

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    4,922
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    I suspect the McFarland would be less prone to having an end break off of it.

    And as far as regular rings go, I visuallyy inspect and see if the carrier will collapse over the bolt under its own weight. I have had gas rings go well beyond the 3K interval, much beyond it. And you do have some reserve capacity so if one fails, you have time to fix it later.

    I strongly suspect agressive full auto fire greatly shortens their life as well as very short barreled carbines and AR pistols.

    I also keep the inside of the bolt carrier well lubed and that seems to do more to keep the rings alive than anything else.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    738
    Feedback Score
    0
    Grant- why are you stating that Dean changed buffers on his department guns? Do you have the source for that or is it an assumption?
    You may want to reconsider what you state as fact on this.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Pat_Rogers
    Grant- why are you stating that Dean changed buffers on his department guns? Do you have the source for that or is it an assumption?
    You may want to reconsider what you state as fact on this.

    Hey Pat, the info came from Paul (which he posted in this thread) and is what I went off of. I thought it strange as well that they would alter a Factory weapon (especially for LE work).

    Submariner: Did you stop reading after the first sentence? His department seems to think Colt Commandos with standard buffers, Colt action springs and gas rings are sufficient for their needs. They don't use model 1 products. They also don't see the need for H, H2, H3, 9mm buffers, CS action springs or McFarland gas rings. People other tham me asked these questions in class (except for the CS spring issue which I asked in class.) Why? He said they tested these things and found out what worked made those carbines run best.


    C4

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Southern Indiana
    Posts
    1,888
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)

    Here's what I said...

    ee
    His department seems to think Colt Commandos with standard buffers, Colt action springs and gas rings are sufficient for their needs.
    That is what was stated in class (from my contemporaneous notes, not memory): standard carbine buffers, Colt action springs and gas rings. Given all the bandwidth prior to that time (July 2006) on heavier buffers and such for short barrels, his statement was noteworthy. (ETA: So I made a note of it. He did not state, nor do I recall anyone asking, how the guns came from the factory. I corroborated this with two other people who were actually there. Could it be that is how they came from the factory? Could they have been purchased some time ago? Since you are talking to Dean, you might ask him.)

    I think your recollection on periodicity of checking the gas rings is is faulty. Here is the TM: TM9-1005-319-23. Check out Section 2-7 dealing with Preventive Maintenance Checks and Services. PM's are Quarterly, not every 3000 rounds. (Crane hasn't finished its shot counter yet.) While a good idea, it requires the user to maintain a gun book. And that notion, also very good, is not a requirement of the TM. So they schedule it quarterly.
    "The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts." Justice Robert Jackson, WV St. Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943)

    "I don’t care how many pull ups and sit ups you can do. I care that you can move yourself across the ground with a fighting load and engage the enemy." Max Velocity

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    738
    Feedback Score
    0
    OK, copy on all Paul and Grant.
    I speak w/ Dean about daily. I just had a telcon with him a few minutes ago.
    He has stated that he has never changed the buffers. His patrol rifle program is 11 years old (and may be one of the most successful in the country- how many cops on motorcycles have a Commando mounted?).
    That may account for the information confusion.
    I have first hand knowledge of his program (and more importantly, the results) and can talk about the quality of the arms and the training (as recently as last weekend).
    I take Dean's word as an authority on this stuff but am of course open minded about a lot- as is he. I have worked with Dean for about 10 years now, and consider him an SME.
    Plus he is a genuine gunfighter...

  9. #29
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Pat_Rogers
    OK, copy on all Paul and Grant.
    I speak w/ Dean about daily. He has stated that he has never changed the buffers. His patrol rifle program is 11 years old (and may be one of the most successful in the country- how many cops on motorcycles have a Commando mounted?)
    I take Dean's word as an authority on this stuff but am of course open minded about a lot. I have worked with Dean for about 10 years now, and consider him an SME.
    Plus he is a genuine gunfighter...

    Roger Pat. The next time you talk to him, please ask him what buffers they are running in their 11.5's. I would be curious to know as we now have two different opinions on what they run.

    Side note, Commando's on Motorcycles??? Would love to see a pic of that going down the road!


    C4
    Last edited by C4IGrant; 01-26-07 at 18:51.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    305
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by C4IGrant
    Sorry, missed your question. They are made out of 300 series, heat treated SS.

    Standard gas rings are made out of stamped sheet metal.

    C4
    Which 300 series CRES (Corrosion-REsistant Steel)? 321? Heat-treated to what temper?

    Sheet metal? You do realize that 3xx CRES comes in sheet form? Sheet is a material form, like rod, bar, plate... Sheet form is not necessarily "cheap" or inferior. It may, in fact, be the logical choice for a part. Sheet-metal parts may also be heat-treated and otherwise processed to meet requirements. Best-value designs utilize cost-effective materials and manufacturing processes AS APPROPRIATE. If more-expensive materials and/or processes are required to meet requirements, then they are appropriate. However, if less-expensive materials and/or processes meet the requirements, then the customer gets a less-expensive product and/or the manufacturer enjoys a higher profit margin.

    Now if one product form allows greater reliability or service life (increased requirements) than that allowed by another, then additional material or processing cost may be justifiable.

    Are the McFarland gas rings more reliable? Do they last longer? Has anyone actually documented any testing to verify this? I read on the errornet that the SOPMOD kit that included the Crane O-ring and 5-coil extractor spring also included the McFarland gas rings. Is this still the case? Can anyone share test data with us that might demonstrate that these parts are indeed superior?
    Aubrey<><

Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •