Mil Spec Buffer Tubes?

[Venom]

yes, no problem; just get yourself the right tool for the extension and its normally a thing of 5 mins to swap them.

[ripper]

Thanks for the information . . . in process.

[Shrockp]

Just remember that when you change them out you will need to change stocks as well

[Exporter]

Here's some info from Paul @ Bravocompany:

"Milspec receiver extentions are machined from 7075T6 Impact extrusions, they are not forged.
No such thing as a milspec forged receiver extension.

An impact extrusion is NOT the same as an extrusion. "

Original Post: http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.htm...f=138&t=187490

[Specialized Armament]

Here's some info from Paul @ Bravocompany:

"Milspec receiver extentions are machined from 7075T6 Impact extrusions, they are not forged.
No such thing as a milspec forged receiver extension.

An impact extrusion is NOT the same as an extrusion. "

Original Post: http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.htm...f=138&t=187490

What is the point of your post? If you came in here to draw fire, mission accomplished...

[Exporter]

Sorry, I thought everyone was discussing RE's and I was trying to share info.
You asked the question "Can 7075 even be extruded (hollow extrusion)?" and I thought the info. would help.

[Specialized Armament]

Sorry, I thought everyone was discussing RE's and I was trying to share info.
You asked the question "Can 7075 even be extruded (hollow extrusion)?" and I thought the info. would help.

While I can appreciate your addition to the thread, there are way to many engineering terms being used and I doubt any two people are applying the same definition. Paul's contribution to the manufacturing process of a receiver extension is correct but overly simple. I may be willing to argue that impact and forged are equally descriptive of the process but neither entirely correct. The point of the thread I believe was a 7075 v. 6061 question moreover than the exact process by which the two are manufactured.

[Quentin]

I ordered the BCM receiver extension kit with H-buffer and Gen 2 stock and hope to get it in a couple days. Time to replace a Del-Ton commercial tube and figured BCM would be as good as any out there.

[Jimbo45]

While I can appreciate your addition to the thread, there are way to many engineering terms being used and I doubt any two people are applying the same definition. Paul's contribution to the manufacturing process of a receiver extension is correct but overly simple. I may be willing to argue that impact and forged are equally descriptive of the process but neither entirely correct. The point of the thread I believe was a 7075 v. 6061 question moreover than the exact process by which the two are manufactured.

I don't understand your hostility, here!? He was simply contributing info, that came from Paul!? I understood the post just fine, but not sure what you are getting at. The OP never even mentioned 7075 vs. 6061, but was asking the DIFFERENCE in milspec and commercial tubes....I think process of manufacture would fall within this discussion, no?

[Skintop911]

I don't understand your hostility, here!? He was simply contributing info, that came from Paul!? I understood the post just fine, but not sure what you are getting at. The OP never even mentioned 7075 vs. 6061, but was asking the DIFFERENCE in milspec and commercial tubes....I think process of manufacture would fall within this discussion, no?

<obs>
Jimbo, take it easy. That was not even remotely hostile. When you see hostile from SA, it will be unmistakable.
</obs>

[Jimbo45]

<obs>
Jimbo, take it easy. That was not even remotely hostile. When you see hostile from SA, it will be unmistakable.
</obs>

Ok, I agree, hostile maybe was a strong word. How about "standoff-ish"? Just wondered where it came from....seemed relavent to me.?

[5pins]

I agree with Jimbo. I found Exporter’s post to be relevant and interesting, and SA’s response unnecessary.

[Dos Cylindros]

I agree with Jimbo. I found Exporter’s post to be relevant and interesting, and SA’s response unnecessary.

So did I. I will say, SA is without debate one of the foremost experts on the ar platform and his advice and knowledge should be strongly considered when debating anything related to the AR platform and it's reliability/durability/performance. That being said, I also know there is a very strong Colt bias (or perhaps preference is the better term), and often an unwillingness to consider anything that is not Colt to be an inferior product. Colt is deffinately the top of the heap for AR manufacture, but there are a few other companies that make very high quality ar platform weapns, BCM and LMT come to mind.

[Specialized Armament]

Apologies to those whose skin is a bit on the thin side. The WEVO staff is welcome to remove all of our posts from the thread.

[Stickman]

The internet is a funny thing, comments that are meant one way can be taken many different ways. I don't think anyone is being insulting, we are all on the same side here. This is a nonevent as far as I'm concerned.


If it makes anyone feel any better, I'm convinced that after the day I had, you guys should all buy me a beer.