|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Is it worth the money? The user decides. DLC's on engine parts are getting very interesting - lifters, rocker arms, etc are being developed with DLC as the finish. The designs eliminate rollers on tappets and rocker arms and have direct surface contact with the driving parts, just like the old days using zinc fortified oils. Because the surface treatment is hard and almost as slick as Teflon, friction is reduced dramatically. The finish has such good adherence to the substrate it has to be machined off.
Nissan and Hyundai are using DLC flat tappets this year, eliminating the previously used roller lifters. Nascar is experimenting with rocker arms with no rollers either on the valve contact or in the shaft mount. They are much lighter and will rev higher.
Durability of DLC coated parts like lifters is approaching the point where engine builders may just throw used lifters back in the block regardess of what cam lobe they were previously use on. Composite lifters are already done that way - a major break from accepted orthodoxy in engine building. Any other lifter would immediately fail.
Reducing friction in the operation of the BCG means one less factor in stoppages. If it takes twice as much contanimation to slow the bolt, and saves your life, is it worth it?
Just couldn't resist that last line.
Considering the $150 premium some pay extra for a special stock or railed handguard compared to milspec, I'd rather put the money toward internal improvements. But I'm not a show and tell kind of builder.
The aluminum extrusion industry uses it on the dies, and hard drives in the computer you are on right now has DLC on the platter to reduce head crashing. DOD has tested it and the reports are positive.
I would hazard a guess that hammer forged barrels (Colt recently bought machines to do that) and DLC could easily be milspec at some time in the future. From a tech perspective, it's a no brainer.
What people need to realize is that most shooters out there will not shoot enough to realize the true benefits of an Ionbonded BCG, except the "it's easier to clean" benefit.
Those that do shoot it to it's full potential see the merit of the extra $$$.
I wouldn't mind trying one in my main go-to gun but I won't be changing out all of my other BCGs fir a new one. The BCM BCGs in the others are more than up to the task.
Only hits count......you can not miss fast enough to catch up
I think I'll go chrome for my Recee.
Low Speed, High Drag Phone Operator
Basically the Ionbond process is $60 extra thru Bravo. Being an automotive guy, I find improvements in operating efficiency generally have long term benefits the average owner will never see. I keep my vehicles for at least 15 years.
I don't bling them in the latest styles, but try to improve what breaks as it ages. This constitutes the kind of upgrade one you like to check off the option list up front. If you could specify a alternator, starter, and water pump with 250k mile bearings and seals for $60 more, would you do it?
I see far too many who would rather spend $150 extra for a stock, another $200 for a 4 rail tube, etc and trick out their stick. I see the same on the road, 20" bling rims, extra plastic ports stuck to the fender, billet lights, etc.
The ride and performance are actually worse, but the 'hood is impressed.
I'm trying to build to a personal TDP that is biased on reliability and performance. Ionbond is precisely the kind of real world improvement that delivers. It's also comparatively cheap.
What it doesn't deliver is "oh, cool!" at the range, which is not my focus at all. The target is the only real indicator there.
Why would you not want a serious improvement for the bolt of a DI gun?
Bookmarks