Results 46 to 60 of 62
Thread: More Barrel Questions
-
17 November 2014, 22:57 #46
-
17 November 2014, 22:58 #47
Still reading... one thing that I saw come up... already... not barrel related... this is the second time I have heard I should consider staking my castle nut.
What is a proper procedure for doing such? Is it 'that important? Based on the photos, yes. Especially since my sling is attached to that plate.
Would blue loctite be a viable alternative to staking or should I stake mine instead?
-
17 November 2014, 23:00 #48
-
17 November 2014, 23:13 #49
Damnit man! Why did you have to do this to me.
Crap.
http://nightforceoptics.com/compacts...ct-riflescope/
$1500 more bucks.
And its a 30mm tube...so it will fit my mounts and everything....
-
17 November 2014, 23:25 #50
You asked what I built:
And yeah, that's a NF 2.5-10x32. :)Will - Owner of Arisaka LLC - http://www.arisakadefense.com
-
17 November 2014, 23:33 #51
-
17 November 2014, 23:49 #52
It's a Noveske SPR barrel, so 18" with intermediate gas. You can also get it in rifle length gas through MSTN.
I'm currently fighting with the optic mount height and cheek weld problems, but the barrel shoots wonderfully when I do my part.Will - Owner of Arisaka LLC - http://www.arisakadefense.com
-
18 November 2014, 01:53 #53
-
19 November 2014, 13:52 #54
Follow up report:
I just got off the phone with Rainier Arms. I told them that I was considering getting the barrel nitrocarberized (sp?) but that I wanted to check with them first because their website says they do some kind of hardening process already. I didn't want to double do it if I didn't need to.
He told me that they tried to do Nitrocarberizing those specific barrels but that in tests it made the barrel TOO hard which led to at least a 15% or more failure rate and a shorter overall barrel life vs other alternative methods. He also said that it made other manufacturing processes much more difficult when it was done on those Select Medcon barrels.
He basically said over hardening caused a lot of problems. Far too many than they found acceptable. His number not mine was "15%" meaning failure rate but I also assume this applies to an actual shorter barrel life as well.
What he also told me is they developed a proprietary system that is 'similar' to nitrocarberizing but without all those issues.
He flat out told me that I was going to get between 12-15,000 rounds through this barrel before I start to see it opening up. He said their hardening process they use found that 'sweet spot' for performance and life. The guy I talked to was a 3 gunner who actually uses that specific barrel on his personal gun so he was able to tell me a lot of details.
He didn't tell me a Rockwell Hardness number, but that is irrelevant knowing all the other information. On another website that I saw though it says Nitrocarberizing creates a surface hardness of at least 59... so based on that number if that is 'too hard' for this specific type of metal, one can only surmise the Rockwell hardness range after Rainier's hardening process... somewhere between 40 to 50 would be about in the ball park I am guessing. Again though, irrelevant information in the grand scheme of things.
But what he was saying makes perfect sense. If the barrel is TOO stiff and TOO hard it starts to develop cracks and such with the whiplash of each repeated shot (over time)...not to mention further complications in manufacturing processes.
This was straight from the horses mouth... and it does make sense... He flat out told me that 'even if you are a hard user you will easily get 10,000 or more, probably 12,000 rounds through it, but if you aren't a hard user probably 15,000 or more'...
Interesting information. Very interesting. Soft barrels are easy to wear out, but hard barrels have downsides too... but if I can get 12-15,000 rounds down range with the accuracy of a stainless steel barrel.... it sounds like they got the formula for the soup on barrels just about right....
But a lot of myths busted about 'stainless steel'...
-
19 November 2014, 14:08 #55
It really sounds like to me that Rainier Arms has their crap together. Just saying.
But I think with all these hardening processes and such and using different kinds of metals, and this or that it's a good thing to not talk about barrels in such a black and white way. It really does open the game up a lot. Especially when you consider what KIND of metal and all sorts of other factors as well as their processes for manufacturing and so on and so forth....
Just based on my whole little experiment here and asking the right people and willingness to learn stuff... there is a whole lot more to it than blanket statements about one kind of barrel or another.
-
19 November 2014, 14:12 #56
-
19 November 2014, 15:35 #57
-
19 November 2014, 15:44 #58
Like I said, I think they have their crap together. After that conversation today it's apparent that they really do put a lot of brain power into what they do. It is also abundantly clear that a lot of people on the internet are full of sh*t.
Are you saying the Select Line is a basic entry level barrel? If so bring em on!!! LOL
Or do you think they should be a 'standard' to go by??? (not quite getting your meaning)...
If these are middle of the road barrels, I wonder what makes a match grade barrel a match grade barrel? What else do they do to them to go 'up from here'?Last edited by alamo5000; 19 November 2014 at 15:49.
-
19 November 2014, 15:48 #59
I am just now testing my optic. It was cheap ($200 bucks)... I invested a lot of time and effort into understanding what I was getting as to the AR platform itself... now I need to devote at least that much time and effort into understanding optics and how they work and why one does one thing and the other does another... it's a whole different banana. The choice of optic can change the entire 'purpose and intended function' of the gun....
Once I learn more and build my wallet back up I will try to make some informed choices on optics....
-
19 November 2014, 15:49 #60
The Select Line is considered their entry level match barrel. Still uses a 5.56 chamber vs the .223 Wylde. I would guess most people can't shoot the barrel to it's potential. In fact, I couldn't shoot sub-MOA with it at 100, so it's a much better barrel than I am a shooter.
Here's my review of it from about 4 years ago:
http://www.weaponevolution.com/forum...-5.56MM-Barrel