Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 311121314 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 132

Thread: Phosphate under gas block

  1. #121
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    2,047
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by rsilvers View Post
    We fired 58 300 AAC BLACKOUT proof rounds on one of our bolts. They were about 75,000 psi. That bolt is now in my home defense rifle. I have absolutely no concern about it.
    Out of curiosity have you guys tested other bolts as well?

    Well, I know the answer is yes, are you able to disclose the same data for the other bolts tested?

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,705
    Feedback Score
    0
    I have tested a lot of bolts. I had to pick which design to use for the AAC uppers. No, I can't compare them, but it was useful to make sure we got the best ones.

  3. #123
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Louisville / Detroit
    Posts
    76
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by MistWolf View Post
    Mr. Silvers, BM has a long way to go before they establish themselves as a top quality manufacturer.
    Hit the nail on the head.
    As for the CMM cost comment: I don't see how any CMM sampling is 'inexpensive.' Even laser CMM's like the Faro and Nikon's I have worked with require a dedicated operator and some time for set-up. We would utilize them for developing our X bar and R charts, but 100% sampling is unheard of in high volume manufacturing. The best bet you would have is utilizing vision systems (i.e. a $18k Cognex camera), but even then you're looking at insane amounts of camera investment and requires the attention of a full time engineer. So you're stuck at batch sampling first and last offs if you're operation has it's **** together. Which if you're doing this and have a competent QC staff, you're on par with any 'world class manufacturer.'

    Quality control isn't rocket science and I know any manufacturer is capable of it. That being said, I would only trust a manufacturer with a tainted track record if they would be transparent in their QC process. Specification control (finished material qualitites, dimensional), supply chain control (active inventory level management, quality of distribution).

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    2,047
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by rsilvers View Post
    I have tested a lot of bolts. I had to pick which design to use for the AAC uppers. No, I can't compare them, but it was useful to make sure we got the best ones.
    Can't compare... Does that mean you cannot disclose results, or you did not directly compare them side by side and instead just grabbed desirable features?

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Louisville / Detroit
    Posts
    76
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by tresmonos View Post
    ...a lot of QC babble...
    Forgot to mention: the most important part of a successful QC department is developing a relationship with a customer. We always hosted our major customers, showed them our processes, let them have input on what they thought was most important to them, then co-developed our processes and standards with them. That is the only way you're going to sell to your target customer. Now, it's up to your management when it comes to transparancy (how much you want to hate your life) of current production. In the end, your customer will see your product, it's just a question of how well you trust your personnel to react to situations that may be caught in the supply chain.

    Bushmaster doesn't 'play the game' with m4c's community. That's what I saw before I purchased my Colt. And, in my opinion, m4c maintains it's credibility through it's moderators, ind. professionals and it's subject matter experts.
    Last edited by tresmonos; 12-08-11 at 18:39.

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    8,422
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    My apologies to all on this forum. I posted the following which is incorrect-

    The proper way to verify torque is to set the torque wrench to the correct torque and tighten.

    Total torque of the gas key bolts is 55 in/lbs + torque from staking. Specification for torque + staking is 55 in/lbs - 100 in/lbs. Verification would require setting the torque wrench to the nominal torque, which is halfway between minimum and maximum. That would be 77.5 in/lbs. Rounding up to 80 is acceptable. Apply 80 in/lbs of torque after staking to verify final torque.


    After posting, I realized that re-torquing a staked bolt is an unacceptable procedure. One, there is a risk of compromising the mechanical lock feature of the stake. Two, if the staking is on the minimum side, it would be possible to over-torque the bolt. The proper way to check the torque of a staked bolt would be to break torque, then torque using the proper procedures. It's been a long week with too little sleep

    Thank you and again, I apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused
    Last edited by MistWolf; 12-08-11 at 18:23.
    INSIDE PLAN OF BOX
    1. ROAD-RUNNER LIFTS GLASS OF WATER- PULLING UP MATCH
    2. MATCH SCRATCHES ON MATCH-BOX
    3. MATCH LIGHTS FUSE TO TNT
    4. BOOM!
    5. HA-HA!!

    -WILE E. COYOTE, AUTHOR OF "EVERYTHING I NEEDED TO KNOW IN LIFE, I LEARNED FROM GOLDBERG & MURPHY"

    http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n289/SgtSongDog/AR%20Carbine/DSC_0114.jpg
    I am American

  7. #127
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    North Florida
    Posts
    2,679
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by MistWolf View Post
    ....Simply claiming that it's believed a certain manufacture does or does not perform certain tests is not enough, especially if it is not first hand knowledge....
    Folks who have absolutely no first hand information almost daily repeat the accusation that BM does not stake or does not properly stake their carrier keys.

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,705
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by orionz06 View Post
    Can't compare... Does that mean you cannot disclose results, or you did not directly compare them side by side and instead just grabbed desirable features?
    I mean we tested many bolts to destruction, and I cannot disclose the results. But I used the information to select what bolt to use.

  9. #129
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    473
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by rsilvers View Post
    The military standard is that the stakes should not distort the side surfaces, and they should result in a removal torque no less than 55 and no more than 100 inch-lbs.
    Granted, my 23&P only goes to C6 but how does one stake the sides of the key without distorting them? My book shows 35-40 in/lb.

    In what spec is the 55-100 in/lb?

  10. #130
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    3,055
    Feedback Score
    21 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Tweak View Post
    Granted, my 23&P only goes to C6 but how does one stake the sides of the key without distorting them? My book shows 35-40 in/lb.

    In what spec is the 55-100 in/lb?
    You can't distort the side bearing surfaces.

    Near the top of the key it narrows and that's where the stake is.
    Black River Tactical
    BRT OPTIMUM HFCL Barrels - Hammer Forged Chrome Lined 11.5", 12.5", 14.5"
    BRT OPTIMUM Barrels - 16" MPR, 14.5" MPC, 12.5" MRC, 11.5" CQB, 9" PDW
    BRT EZTUNE Preset Gas Tubes - CAR and MID
    BRT Covert Comps 7.62, 5.56, 6X, 9mm
    BRT MarkBlue Gas Tubes - BRT EXT, EXC and PDW Lengths
    BRT MicroPin Gas Blocks - .750" & .625"
    BRT MicroTUNE Adjustable Gas Blocks
    BRT CustomTUNE Gas Ports

Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 311121314 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
  •