Page 9 of 16 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 154

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

  1. #81
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    E. Tenn
    Posts
    1,179
    Feedback Score
    0
    I vote this thread as a "sticky" or at least added to the "knowledge base threads".

    Thanks Grant, thanks for the info and thanks for the great CS you have given.

  2. #82
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    335
    Feedback Score
    0
    Maybe creation of the midlength was a way to sell more guns in a different configuration, a marketing tool, colt doesn't need to utilize this as a marketing tool they already had the name an the quality to back it up.

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    42
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    The mid lenght do have a different feel for a carbine. Just my two cents.

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    231
    Feedback Score
    62 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Magic_Salad0892 View Post
    Doesn't BCM, KAC, DD, and LMT also have a access to the TDP?...
    Whether they do or not, like IraqGunz said, it's what those manufacturers do with the information that matters.

    If we—as IG specified—say for discussion sake that every AR manufacturer has seen the full TDP at some point, why do some of them stake castle nuts while others (still, in 2011) don't? Why do some use MIM parts and some don't? It's not a secret which is better. Or correct.

    It comes down to the companies who are smart, understand the intricacies of the weapon system, and in the end, the companies who actually give a damn about the end-user.

  5. #85
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by brzusa.1911 View Post
    Thanks Grant, great thread.
    Glad you liked it and hopefully it helps.


    C4

  6. #86
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Magic_Salad0892 View Post
    I take it you either don't know, or couldn't tell us what they are.

    Or... where those ''rumors'' came from.

    IMHO. Rumors like that don't start unless there's a good reason for it.
    Oh, I know what some of the deviations are, but am not going to say them on the internet (Sorry).




    C4

  7. #87
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Magic_Salad0892 View Post
    That concern is understood, but we don't know just how Colt does things differently than other manufacturers.

    Doesn't BCM, KAC, DD, and LMT also have a access to the TDP?...
    A current, up to date (LEGAL) one? Doubtful.



    C4
    Last edited by C4IGrant; 09-09-11 at 09:46.

  8. #88
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by JimmyB62 View Post
    Grant, you state that Vickers/Hackathorn both chose carbine gas systems over middys recently when they clearly had a choice, then alluded to that choice being a "clue."

    What is that clue? In what way would the carbine system be better than mid-length? Or I should ask; why do you think they chose that system? I ask because I don't know, not because I'm trying to debate. Thanks Grant.
    The clue is that mid-length barrels do not do enough over a properly gassed carbine to warrant having one.


    C4

  9. #89
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by JSGlock34 View Post
    MILSPEC/TDP is a useful benchmark to measure the industry by. But if every company simply attempted to match the TDP, there would be little innovation. I seem to recall in one of the Black Rifle books that Colt has even suggested changes to the military that have not been adopted.
    Totally agree.

    Deviation from standards due to cost cutting (use of inferior steel, failure to stake components, inferior components) shouldn't be confused with the efforts of companies like KAC and HK to build a better lightbulb.
    This is the norm though (not better products).

    Personally, I don't see any great revolution on the horizon in terms of lethality, accuracy, reliability or ergonomics. I think the true potential of systems like the 416 and SR16 for the military is logistical in nature, as more durable barrels and bolts push out the unit maintenance schedule far beyond that of the current M4. Considering most civilians will never shoot out the bolt or barrel of their AR, I doubt these improvements will grab the public's imagination.

    Certainly I'm interested to see how these variants stack up in the forthcoming military trials.
    Just as an FYI, lots .Mil groups that are using the 416 are dumping them (some Tier 1 guys on this forum can comment further on it if they like). So no, the 416 really isn't the next evolution.

    For the record though, I like the Navy 416 and wouldn't mind having one.


    C4
    Last edited by C4IGrant; 09-09-11 at 09:52.

  10. #90
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dunderway View Post
    Great post Grant.

    What I am curious about are the "smaller things". I've seen a lot of people post that Biff McMallninja's carbine's are the same as Colt/BCM, "because they posted their specs/testing for barrels/bolts, so you're getting TDP for less money."

    Fair enough, I guess, but what about LPKs, barrel extensions, buffers, etc.? Do these companies know how to produce those parts to spec? If so, they have never mentioned what is in the TDP for those parts. Should I take it as a clue that a Colt LPK costs at least double of any other, and the same with LMT if you can even find one?

    Good question. Yes, there is a spec for everything. I once had a bolt cath roll pin that I thought was out of spec. So I made a phone call to someone that had the legit TDP. Sure enough, it was.

    Is the roll pin spec all that exciting and interesting? No. Is there a standard material and size req? Yep.

    The thing you have to remember about companies stating that they follow the TDP is that don't really have the REAL TDP. They also don't make anything in house (which means no control). So they buy parts from companies that "advise" them that they know what the spec is. This again could be very true or it could be a lie. You be the judge. Oh wait, you don't know what the TDP says either. See my bolt catch roll pin story.



    C4

Page 9 of 16 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... 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
  •