Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26

Thread: Barrel nut question

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    1,365
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Tweak View Post
    you'll get Al scuffs on the outside of the barrel that will take time to remove.
    That's what handguards are for. But seriously, don't use a barrel clamp if you don't have to.

    When I built my FAL, I had to put it together with a barrel vice, since the actual barrel is threaded on. After it was timed correctly I had G1 markings on the barrel from where the cast was made. Made my IMBEL barrel look pretty cool.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    473
    Feedback Score
    0
    oddly enough, it wasn't that long ago that barrel blocks were the only option.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    NoVA
    Posts
    10,780
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)
    I wish there was an affordable device to clamp the receiver and the barrel at the same time for barrel nut tightening.
    Chief Armorer for Elite Shooting Sports in Manassas VA
    Chief Armorer for Corp Arms (FFL 07-08/SOT 02)

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Back where I belong
    Posts
    1,661
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    So is the consensus upper receiver clamp the best to use to prevent damage, or is there a better solution?

    I've only used upper reciever clamps in the vice, so my knowledge is limited.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    380
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by fixit69 View Post
    So is the consensus upper receiver clamp the best to use to prevent damage, or is there a better solution?

    I've only used upper reciever clamps in the vice, so my knowledge is limited.
    I'd like to know this too. I would have thought that clamping the barrel was not a good alternative for the reasons noted above. I don't ever want to throw bad information around though.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    SATX
    Posts
    1,187
    Feedback Score
    0
    The barrel clamp (vice jaw barrel blocks) have been used by the military for a long time. I never saw a rifle damaged using them either. I have seen some barrels slightly marked though if that is a concern.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Iraq
    Posts
    489
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by fixit69 View Post
    So is the consensus upper receiver clamp the best to use to prevent damage, or is there a better solution?

    I've only used upper reciever clamps in the vice, so my knowledge is limited.
    The very best solution would be as Robb said above - secure both the receiver and the barrel to stop any possibility of lateral twist of any kind. I am surprised no-one has come out with a handy one piece that can do it all.....guess people think it is probably overkill. You could set something up yourself if you have two vises I guess.

    But barring that, the general consensus these days is to use an upper receiver block of some kind (opinions vary on which one...user preference, I personally like the DPMS Panther Claw type). IMO the benefits of using an upper receiver block are that they are generally easier to use than clamping up your barrel when you might require some reasonably heavy torque (at the upper end of the scale 80ft/lbsish), and you've less chance of some sort of marks being left (like aluminum on the barrel which takes a good bit of scrubbing to get off).
    Last edited by SA80Dan; 09-30-11 at 13:39.
    Dan

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Northern Alabama
    Posts
    992
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Robb Jensen View Post
    I wish there was an affordable device to clamp the receiver and the barrel at the same time for barrel nut tightening.
    A fixture with two vises!
    Oh no, not another lube thread! Read this first: Lubrication 101.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    NoVA
    Posts
    10,780
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by kartoffel View Post
    A fixture with two vises!
    I generally use a DPMS claw block and if it requires more than 50ft lbs of torque I install it sideways in the vise with one jaw on the bottom of the block and the other jaw with a bronze vise jaw against the top of the flat top receiver. If an A2 upper requires more than 50ft lbs of torque I use the Brownells clamp type.
    Chief Armorer for Elite Shooting Sports in Manassas VA
    Chief Armorer for Corp Arms (FFL 07-08/SOT 02)

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    796
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    A setup that held both the receiver and barrel at the same time wouldn't work.

    As the nut is tightened it draws the barrel extension into the reciever, and if both ends are fixed to not move, then the barrel extension cannot seat, yet it will seem to take the proper torque.
    Well, right up until you take it out of the jig and the barrel starts to flop around because the extension never fully seated in the upper receiver.

    To get the receiver extension to seat using such a device would require gobs of torque more than what is currently called for as either the reciever or barrel has to get closer to the opposite so as to seat, which would potentially also leave linear marks along the barrel equal to the amount of distance the nut pulled the extension into the receiver. Might be 5-10 thousandths, might be 1/2". Just depends on how things were initally set up before any real tightening occurred.

    **

    In restrospect, having both the receiver and barrel clamped 'could' work without having to fight the draw, if one or the other was on a linear dovetail to allow the pulling together to occur, or the barrel was in an affixment that prevented all rotation but would allow linear slide.
    Though any amount of slide via dovetail or otherwise will eventually translate into rotational movement regardless as clearances are taken up during torque and/or the jig starts to wear from use.

    WAY too tedious a device to design and build, and would likely cost about 136 times more than it could ever possibly be worth even on a level of volume associated with factory manufacturing production let alone someone sitting at home building thousands less than that a year.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 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
  •