Page 2 of 16 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 154

Thread: Is there better than "Mil-Spec?"

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    York, PA
    Posts
    191
    Feedback Score
    0
    Thank you for the very informative post, Grant. It's always great to have a thread started that will generate thoughful responses based on knowledge and experience. I will read them eagerly.

    It does seem to me... that lately here on M4C there's been a resurgance of appreciation for the carbine-length gas system on 16" and 14.5" barrels. The fact that this thread mentioned the idea of mid-length gas systems being "better" than mil-spec, and the resulting analysis will be interesting. From reading recent posts here on M4C made by knowledgable/respected members, it seems each gas system needs to be tuned correctly to function well, and one is not inherently more reliable than the other.

    Chris

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    23
    Feedback Score
    0
    Great and informative indeed. On the subject of gas systems, I generally follow this; less than 16in barrel is a carbine length gas system; greater than or equal to 16 inches, but not more than 18 is mid length; and greater than or equal to 18in is rifle length. I'm not an expert by any means (Probably not even an amateur.) But, it just seems that those lengths will keep the gas port far enough away from the muzzle as to ensure reliable functioning of the rifle. It also maximizes usable rail space in conjunction with a FSP. My reasoning behind this was the reason why they don't run the gas port all the way to the end of the barrel on a dissipator carbine, and also had a lot to do with the Colt model 605 (Experimental carbine developed during Vietnam, found at retroblackrifle.com) and its unreliable functioning as a result of the gas port being too close to the end of the barrel.
    Last edited by Panzerfaust; 09-08-11 at 11:08.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,438
    Feedback Score
    12 (100%)
    This thread is going to be enlightening. Gavin's Razor comes to mind...

    Be careful what you wish for because it may land on you!

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    615
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Thanks for the post.
    Especially appreciated after reading that other thread which you mentioned.
    former cat herder

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,505
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Thanks for the post. Having an independent tester may be the litmus test to claims of MPI, etc. It could help to cite this in threads where people make generalized claims for/against particular brands, as more and more firms are claiming "the spec".

    Would CHF barrels (particularly FN) be "better" as far as specification than Colt following TDP?

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    7,868
    Feedback Score
    0
    When it comes to ''better'' than the TDP I don't think of gas systems specifically.

    Bushmaster makes a midlength: that doesn't mean they exceed the TDP.

    Things like the Noveske barrel profile, and M249 barrel steel.

    Things like salt bath nitride, or the KAC E3 bolt, KAC's IWS Lower Receiver, or LMT's MRP chassis design.

    Things like HK MR556's barrel steel, or something. Noveske Switchblock. Custom gas ports. VLTOR's A5 receiver extension.

    Those are features that IMHO exceed the spec, proprietary parts that perform better (even marginally) than the standard.
    Last edited by Magic_Salad0892; 09-08-11 at 11:20.
    We miss you, AC.
    We miss you, ToddG.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    263
    Feedback Score
    0
    Why not buy both and switch uppers than you'll have a Colt-BCM.

    I don't have the experience that many of you do but if it works, and the company has a great reputation for good products I'm happy.

    I completely agree with the comment about the unnamed manufacturer who does most of their carbines in house. I'm pretty sure that's Olympic, and from first hand experience I have seen two of them fail intermittently, although it was frequent enough to make me stay away.
    Last edited by turdbocharged; 09-08-11 at 11:28.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris17404 View Post
    Thank you for the very informative post, Grant. It's always great to have a thread started that will generate thoughful responses based on knowledge and experience. I will read them eagerly.

    It does seem to me... that lately here on M4C there's been a resurgance of appreciation for the carbine-length gas system on 16" and 14.5" barrels. The fact that this thread mentioned the idea of mid-length gas systems being "better" than mil-spec, and the resulting analysis will be interesting. From reading recent posts here on M4C made by knowledgable/respected members, it seems each gas system needs to be tuned correctly to function well, and one is not inherently more reliable than the other.

    Chris
    I think you are correct. Quality built is quality built. So either way the consumer is a winner.


    C4

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    2,081
    Feedback Score
    5 (86%)
    Quote Originally Posted by C4IGrant View Post
    I think you are correct. Quality built is quality built. So either way the consumer is a winner.


    C4

    Interesting point, the consumer is the winner! We now have so many more options than when I first got into ARs in the early '90s, and it would appear that at least some of the lower tier ARs have been raising their standards to meet demand.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Magic_Salad0892 View Post
    When it comes to ''better'' than the TDP I don't think of gas systems specifically.

    Bushmaster makes a midlength: that doesn't mean they exceed the TDP.

    Things like the Noveske barrel profile, and M249 barrel steel.

    Things like salt bath nitride, or the KAC E3 bolt, KAC's IWS Lower Receiver, or LMT's MRP chassis design.

    Things like HK MR556's barrel steel, or something. Noveske Switchblock. Custom gas ports. VLTOR's A5 receiver extension.

    Those are features that IMHO exceed the spec, proprietary parts that perform better (even marginally) than the standard.
    Many do (in regards to the barrel). I chose the middy barrel because it was talked about in the other thread that I referenced.

    The term "better" has to show clear advantages over the other. In order to do or show this, we would need to see hundreds of weapons tested side by side over long periods of time. To date, all of the items you posted as being "better" than the TDP are purely speculative and or personal likes. None of them have been proven/shown to be superior.


    C4

Page 2 of 16 FirstFirst 123412 ... 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
  •