View Poll Results: Do you think rounded/domed cam pins improve performance of your AR?

Voters
11. You may not vote on this poll
  • Absolutely. The pin moves more freely, eliminating some friction and heat/wear

    1 9.09%
  • Meh. I've read about it, but the world isn't going to end if I don't get around to it.

    9 81.82%
  • WWTBLS?/I like chicken. Who else likes chicken?

    1 9.09%
  • I've written a long diatribe of my jejune cogitations for you to peruse. Prepare to be enlgihtened!

    0 0%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 37
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    In a warm, moist environment... Usually.
    Posts
    3,234
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by mustangfreek View Post
    Swapped out a can pin once in a certain bcg as it was guoging upper pretty bad and having some issues , to a NIB one ( don't remember brand) had some issues and upon inspection measuring they were bigger, thru back in a new std colt pin or something of the like and no problems since.

    Other then that always ran the one that came with the bcg, never ran a nitride one I'm just talking std stuff..
    I don't have any NIB stuff, mainly because there's still so much mixed sentiment. Phosphate and Nitride has been good enough for me and it looks like it'll stay that way.

    Again, thanks for the input, everybody. There's a gap between what's written down and real experience that's too big for google to jump sometimes.
    There's no "Team" in F**K YOU!

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,911
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    I think for my opinion after thinking on it for a while... you need to consider this:

    Is your upper exactly the correct dimensions inside?

    Is the cam pin milled exactly to perfect specs?

    While the variances there might be small, but there are still variances. That compounds itself from one manufacturer to another.

    That alone makes perceptible problems and perceptible solutions all over the map. I still don't think it's that big of a deal and if there is really a problem there is probably something more serious going on.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    In a warm, moist environment... Usually.
    Posts
    3,234
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Alamo, the issue of tolerance stacking is present, but expectedly more common and with larger variables in lesser quality brands. Everybody has preferences and there are a few that everybody agrees to stay away from. I think in the case of trying to get a finnicky system to work better a round peg in a linear track might help, but I am not going to get myself into that jam (Hopefully) by sticking to upper shelf stuff.

    Of course then there's Colt and their own special mess of tolerance variables they call a TDP...
    There's no "Team" in F**K YOU!

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,911
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Joelski View Post
    Of course then there's Colt and their own special mess of tolerance variables they call a TDP...
    Everybody talks about Colt as if they are the AK47's of AR's

    I have never even shot one so I have no opinion of it either way. LOL

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    2,218
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by alamo5000 View Post
    Everybody talks about Colt as if they are the AK47's of AR's

    I have never even shot one so I have no opinion of it either way. LOL
    The value of the Colt standard has been lost nowadays since there's a CNC machine on every corner. Historically, Colt was the standard (via the TDP) AND had the means to meet the standard. This is why a Colt M16 (or select-fire AR-15) commands a price premium now. Back when they were being made, the handful of other manufacturers making machine guns didn't have the manufacturing process coupled with the TDP standards.

    Nowadays, it's less of an issue because it's much easier to both measure the standard and then replicate the standard on a modern-day machine. The problem is a lot of the Colt fan boys now don't even understand why they pray at the altar of the pony, and that altar isn't as important now with all of the other options available.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    In a warm, moist environment... Usually.
    Posts
    3,234
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by alamo5000 View Post
    Everybody talks about Colt as if they are the AK47's of AR's

    I have never even shot one so I have no opinion of it either way. LOL
    Alamo, I bought my first AR-15 in 1984 and back then, there weren't many choices for accessories and add-on parts, mostly because the internet didn't exist for a lot of us back then and so we had what the LGS carried.
    There's no "Team" in F**K YOU!

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    13,711
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by alamo5000 View Post
    Everybody talks about Colt as if they are the AK47's of AR's

    I have never even shot one so I have no opinion of it either way. LOL
    As if you could tell the difference when shooting it.

    No one else builds to the TDP. That's why Colt's are boringly reliable.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,420
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by UWone77 View Post
    As if you could tell the difference when shooting it.

    No one else builds to the TDP. That's why Colt's are boringly reliable.
    Doesn't FN? They've won some sizeable contracts. Either way, you are talking about competing to be the lowest bidder on a 20+ year old spec (How old is the current TDP for an M4, anyway? Mid-90's is when the Army started switched over from th M16A2 to the M4, IIRC. I got out in 99 and never carried an M4 as my unit (1AD) was, I believe, the last in the regular Army to switch over.)

    "boringly reliable" sums it up well. I wish they were a pro 2A company, though. Then I might actually buy their stuff. Instead, I'd prefer to support companies that are both clearly taking a pro 2A stand and also spending money innovating new products. That's why my last major purchase was on a Sig (MPX).

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bentonville,AR
    Posts
    781
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by gatordev View Post
    The value of the Colt standard has been lost nowadays since there's a CNC machine on every corner. Historically, Colt was the standard (via the TDP) AND had the means to meet the standard. This is why a Colt M16 (or select-fire AR-15) commands a price premium now. Back when they were being made, the handful of other manufacturers making machine guns didn't have the manufacturing process coupled with the TDP standards.

    Nowadays, it's less of an issue because it's much easier to both measure the standard and then replicate the standard on a modern-day machine. The problem is a lot of the Colt fan boys now don't even understand why they pray at the altar of the pony, and that altar isn't as important now with all of the other options available.
    They also don't understand that even back then, the Mini-14 was probably more reliable than the Colt AR15. I know a guy responsible for hundreds of AR15's over his LE career many decades ago, and he is just NOW getting back into AR's, because of how finicky and poorly they performed back when it was just Colt and a few "Copies" in the game.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bentonville,AR
    Posts
    781
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by BoilerUp View Post
    Doesn't FN? They've won some sizeable contracts. Either way, you are talking about competing to be the lowest bidder on a 20+ year old spec (How old is the current TDP for an M4, anyway? Mid-90's is when the Army started switched over from th M16A2 to the M4, IIRC. I got out in 99 and never carried an M4 as my unit (1AD) was, I believe, the last in the regular Army to switch over.)

    "boringly reliable" sums it up well. I wish they were a pro 2A company, though. Then I might actually buy their stuff. Instead, I'd prefer to support companies that are both clearly taking a pro 2A stand and also spending money innovating new products. That's why my last major purchase was on a Sig (MPX).
    The TDP belongs to Colt. Colt is the only one who can use it commercially, as I understand. When the military awards a contract to someone like SDI (gone), or FN, they get a copy of the TDP, but CANNOT use it to manufacture civilian goods, as that would be stealing IP from Colt. Just how I understand it.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    13,711
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by BoilerUp View Post
    Doesn't FN? They've won some sizeable contracts. Either way, you are talking about competing to be the lowest bidder on a 20+ year old spec (How old is the current TDP for an M4, anyway? Mid-90's is when the Army started switched over from th M16A2 to the M4, IIRC. I got out in 99 and never carried an M4 as my unit (1AD) was, I believe, the last in the regular Army to switch over.)

    "boringly reliable" sums it up well. I wish they were a pro 2A company, though. Then I might actually buy their stuff. Instead, I'd prefer to support companies that are both clearly taking a pro 2A stand and also spending money innovating new products. That's why my last major purchase was on a Sig (MPX).
    Funny you mention it's a 20 year old, lowest bidder spec...one that many fail to meet even now.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,911
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by gatordev View Post
    The value of the Colt standard has been lost nowadays since there's a CNC machine on every corner. Historically, Colt was the standard (via the TDP) AND had the means to meet the standard. This is why a Colt M16 (or select-fire AR-15) commands a price premium now. Back when they were being made, the handful of other manufacturers making machine guns didn't have the manufacturing process coupled with the TDP standards.

    Nowadays, it's less of an issue because it's much easier to both measure the standard and then replicate the standard on a modern-day machine. The problem is a lot of the Colt fan boys now don't even understand why they pray at the altar of the pony, and that altar isn't as important now with all of the other options available.
    I am guessing TDP is 'mil spec'? Either way that is extremely interesting information. Thanks for sharing. While obviously I am interested in firearms, but I am increasingly getting more interested in the history of it all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Joelski View Post
    Alamo, I bought my first AR-15 in 1984 and back then, there weren't many choices for accessories and add-on parts, mostly because the internet didn't exist for a lot of us back then and so we had what the LGS carried.
    The internet didn't exist for anyone back in 1984! LOL

    In 1984 I was still watching cartoons on Saturday mornings LOL!

    Quote Originally Posted by UWone77 View Post
    As if you could tell the difference when shooting it.

    No one else builds to the TDP. That's why Colt's are boringly reliable.
    I think now (at least from what I see) you have a whole crap ton of manufacturers that all try to specialize in one specific component or a series of specific components.

    My take on it now (and I am up for being corrected) is that companies like CMC make triggers. Companies like Battle Arms Development started out making selector switches and then branched out into other products. A lot of the companies like that though when they get into 'other products' have 3rd parties make their stuff to whatever specs they are given.

    But now, how many companies make a full rifle tip to tail in house including all of the components? Probably not very many. It seems like the move is towards design and not as much on in house manufacturing except where specialization exists. Outsourcing seems to be the name of the game now.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    In a warm, moist environment... Usually.
    Posts
    3,234
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by alamo5000 View Post
    I am guessing TDP is 'mil spec'? Either way that is extremely interesting information. Thanks for sharing. While obviously I am interested in firearms, but I am increasingly getting more interested in the history of it all..
    The vaunted TDP is more than a sheet of specs, it's the compendium of knowledge gained and lessons learned between Colt and the military throughout the history of the weapon. It's where spec adjustments (A-2 to A-4), and child branches (AR, CAR, M-4, etc.) are derived. Obviously, the exciting stuff is the latest data.

    Think of it as the M16's family tree, and every time the military examines a new spec., it stands in the shade of a grand old Oak.
    There's no "Team" in F**K YOU!

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    2,218
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by alamo5000 View Post
    I am guessing TDP is 'mil spec'? Either way that is extremely interesting information. Thanks for sharing. While obviously I am interested in firearms, but I am increasingly getting more interested in the history of it all.
    To add on to Joelski's post... "Mil Spec" gets thrown around entirely too much by people who don't understand what that means. At work, we have what is essentially a Swiffer dust mop thingy, however it's built to a military specification. That doesn't mean it's chrome-lined or has had MPC testing, it just means that it was procured to meet a very specific design spec. In this case, it's to clean some VERY expensive mirrors.

    Mil Spec can mean anything. The actual specifications are part of some sort of data package and are a result of specific requirements brought to a contractor for them to design and build to. At the end of the day, the USG owns the package and can always take that information to another contractor and continue procure the product from another source (after lengthy contract negotiations, of course).

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    In a warm, moist environment... Usually.
    Posts
    3,234
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    ^^^^

    This, plus the fact the majority of people who throw around the term "Mil-Spec", really mean to say "We took measurements and reverse-engineered the Colt piece, plus or minus." Thus, the origin of tolerance stacking.

    Another important facet of tolerance is end-play, or "slop". I have two really high quality, expensive components that barely fit together, let alone reciprocate properly because interpretation of dimensions and tolerances isn't the same as known, good measurements backed up by gazillions of pallets of rounds.

    Along with FN, I'd venture that LMT has also been trusted at some point to peek at the TDP.
    Last edited by Joelski; 6 August 2016 at 08:48.
    There's no "Team" in F**K YOU!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •