Noveske build part 2

[rxer311]

So my upper receiver parts for my Noveske build came today. Noveske MUR upper and NSR 13.5" rail. I have decided that I am going to go with a 14.5" CHF Noveske Barrel with a pinned Silencerco trifecta flash hider. I currently do not have a suppressor but have considered adding one. Using this mounting system should allow for easy attachment of a saker can.

As for BCG, I don't think there is any reason to go with a Noveske RBC BCG so I think I may use a Fail Zero nickel boron BCG and save a few bucks. Any reason I should go with a Noveske. For reference I have always used AIM surplus BCGs on my builds in the past and have always had a good experience with the. Any reason to not go with an AIM surplus BCG for a top shelf build?

[Slippers]

Just my opinion, but I'd choose a different mounting system. I own a Saker and eventually had Silencerco replace my third trifecta maad with the ASR mount. No problems since. It also opens you up to using the omega and specwar cans.

[rxer311]

Thanks for the advice. I will research it a bit more.

[UWone77]

Listen to Slippers...don't pin and weld anything until you know for 100% fact what can and mounting system you're getting.

[rxer311]

Listen to Slippers...don't pin and weld anything until you know for 100% fact what can and mounting system you're getting.

Agreed. I will research this more.

Thoughts on the BCG?

[UWone77]

Agreed. I will research this more.

Thoughts on the BCG?

I think you mean the Rubber City RCA Nitride BCG with the Noveske laser engraving?

I've got 2. They are Ok, nothing special. RCA doesn't have the best customer service reputation. They told one member here to sell their defective BCG to someone else as they thought it was in spec.

For the money, you can get another quality BCG, even Noveske's phosphate version. The phosphate ones are lightly marked with an "N" on the opposite side, much like Colt Marks theirs with a "C" If you insist on having the Noveske Logo, the RCA is your only choice.

[Slippers]

Agreed. I will research this more.

Thoughts on the BCG?

As long as you trust the bcg manufacturer shouldn't be a problem. I'm a phosphate fan, though. I like my bcm, colt, lmt groups. :)

[The FNG]

BCM is good to go. I've used their stuff quite a bit and never had an issue. Their customer service is phenomenal. I bought a used BCG from the arfcom EE with about 1500 on it, I emailed BCM about it (fully disclosed where it was from and all) and was told that if I ever had an issue they would make it right. Lifetime warranty on them is what I was told. Can't beat it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JGifford]

Not a fan of the SAKER, and never was. Mounting system sucks. They break. That sucks. Surefire WARCOMP CT is the next mount I'm pinning on something. I love Surefire cans. I love their Warcomp series mounts. YMMV, there. But don't do the SAKER thing, IMO.

The BCG? I have been very pleased with Guy's BCG's from FATHOM Arms. Mil-spec QPQ. Guy has done a lot of behind the scenes QA/QC on these, that you won't elsewhere for sale. They flat-out run. I set my BCG's up ever so slightly different from Guy, but I ran one for over 1500 rounds with Wolf, suppressed, never adding lube (only started with light application of MPRO7 LPX ), and it was still running. It sure was a pain to clean! But yeah...she ran!

I have a total of around 3,000 rounds (about 80% suppressed) on one of Guy's BCG's, and the wear is...very minimal. I am a huge fan of properly done QPQ BCG's.

[JGifford]

As long as you trust the bcg manufacturer shouldn't be a problem. I'm a phosphate fan, though. I like my bcm, colt, lmt groups. :)

Why are you a fan of phosphate? I'm not arguing over it or trying to "start something", but I am genuinely curious. Especially in light of the military using a "slick" type of coating and it performing very well thus-far in testing. https://www.army.mil/article/161883/ Also keep in mind, LMT uses QPQ'ed gas-keys, and says they "last longer" based on their testing.This is over a phosphate/ CL item. The gas-key is a friction-wear-item (sides), and has a gas-tube wearing on the ID of its bore, so it does kindof encompass "all of the activities" of a BCG as a whole, save load-bearing.

LMT statement:

"We currently use the Stoner System and found that wear on the gas tube decreases the
performance of the system, as well as, friction of the key on the upper receiver. Our goal
was to increase performance of the weapon on the previously mentioned areas with no
consideration for impact on cost and/or delivery.

We started by measuring the wear and friction on the weapon and how this affected the
performance of the system. After analyzing the results, we concluded that performance
could be enhanced by improvements to two areas; heat treating and coating. There were
preliminary tests conducted on several processes and further tested until one was selected
for validation.

This study was started in early 2008 and finished toward the end of April 2008. We used
over 135,000 rounds of ammunition to test and validate our improvements. Results
confirmed improvement to wear resistance, decreased coefficient of friction, enhanced
corrosion resistance, decreased surface roughness, while still meeting or exceeding
military specifications for performance standards. See attached copy of test data
collected. "

*Alluded to data: http://www.gandrtactical.com/images/...une%202009.pdf


Piggybacking on the coefficient of friction mentioned in the .mil link, as well as LMT's gas-key data, was my own personal test *(see post above this one), as well as this data:
http://www.burlingtoneng.com/wear_resistance.html

[Joelski]

Honest question: you've come this far to compile Noveske parts, why stop at the bolt for the sake of a few bucks? Noveske commonly sells barrel/bolt combos, so they'd presumably cover any headspacing issues encountered. I'd think inclusion of the bolt would get you as close to a factory spec rifle as possible while still saving a couple bucks at the finish line.

[JGifford]

Honest question: you've come this far to compile Noveske parts, why stop at the bolt for the sake of a few bucks? Noveske commonly sells barrel/bolt combos, so they'd presumably cover any headspacing issues encountered. I'd think inclusion of the bolt would get you as close to a factory spec rifle as possible while still saving a couple bucks at the finish line.

Because OP was considering a RCA BCG. My experience is that RCA is run by an asshole, and the parts are not the most precisely machined. It's not a Noveske part. It's a part with the Maltese cross lasered onto it and sold by Noveske.

[Slippers]

Why are you a fan of phosphate? I'm not arguing over it or trying to "start something", but I am genuinely curious. Especially in light of the military using a "slick" type of coating and it performing very well thus-far in testing. https://www.army.mil/article/161883/ Also keep in mind, LMT uses QPQ'ed gas-keys, and says they "last longer" based on their testing.This is over a phosphate/ CL item. The gas-key is a friction-wear-item (sides), and has a gas-tube wearing on the ID of its bore, so it does kindof encompass "all of the activities" of a BCG as a whole, save load-bearing.

LMT statement:


*Alluded to data: http://www.gandrtactical.com/images/...une%202009.pdf


Piggybacking on the coefficient of friction mentioned in the .mil link, as well as LMT's gas-key data, was my own personal test *(see post above this one), as well as this data:
http://www.burlingtoneng.com/wear_resistance.html

My preferred bolt carrier is the LMT enhanced, and it only comes in phosphate. As for the LMT gas key, the finish wears off the sides after a few hundred cycles. Mine are shiny. If it helps reduce gas tube wear by having a slicker surface inside the gas key, so be it.

In the end, I honestly don't care how my carriers are finished. The contact surfaces are small and polish themselves through use. The inside of a good phosphate carrier is chrome lined. Carbon build up is self limiting in the carrier. I see no reason to spend extra money on a finish that doesn't actually do something for me.

Re: RCA - I am in agreement with JGifford. Avoid RCA.

[JGifford]

My preferred bolt carrier is the LMT enhanced, and it only comes in phosphate. As for the LMT gas key, the finish wears off the sides after a few hundred cycles. Mine are shiny. If it helps reduce gas tube wear by having a slicker surface inside the gas key, so be it.

In the end, I honestly don't care how my carriers are finished. The contact surfaces are small and polish themselves through use. The inside of a good phosphate carrier is chrome lined. Carbon build up is self limiting in the carrier. I see no reason to spend extra money on a finish that doesn't actually do something for me.

Re: RCA - I am in agreement with JGifford. Avoid RCA.

The ID of the chrome lined carriers are rougher than the polished ID of a qpq carrier. Also, the finish does not wear off. Just the color. QPQ is a metal treatment that extends into the surface beyond the color wear you noted. This is most apparent in the lack of wear and peening of a qpq cam pin.

[Slippers]

The ID of the chrome lined carriers are rougher than the polished ID of a qpq carrier. Also, the finish does not wear off. Just the color. QPQ is a metal treatment that extends into the surface beyond the color wear you noted. This is most apparent in the lack of wear and peening of a qpq cam pin.

One of the interesting things about the LMT e-carrier is that most bolts fit tighter in them, which supposedly helps delay unlocking. The "rough" chrome lining feels lovely to me. :)

As for the color wearing off, the finish can too, if there's enough wear. Just like how hard anodizing extends into the surface, but the cam pin eventually reaches raw aluminum where it rubs inside an upper receiver.

Everything smooths out over time. You won't convince me to suddenly believe in QPQ carriers. If you like them, nothing wrong with that. I like my old and busted phosphates. I only have a few rifles, and they get a good bit of use. My 11.5 BCM has already had over 3,000 rounds through it this year, all suppressed. No complaints from my LMT e-carriers.

I think we've gone off topic enough in this thread.