Quote History Quoted:
All those past decades a mil-spec barrel nut was pretty much all that was available.
Recent years have shown a vast array of rail options with many of them having a proprietary mounting system, a few of them requiring shims to time the barrel nut.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Quote History Quoted:
Quoted:
They don't have them because nobody makes them because nobody needs them.
What is up with the recent rash of people who can't seem to clock a barrel nut? We've made it how many decades now without the need for a barrel nut shim in service by any manufacturer or armorer in the world, and yet..
All those past decades a mil-spec barrel nut was pretty much all that was available.
Recent years have shown a vast array of rail options with many of them having a proprietary mounting system, a few of them requiring shims to time the barrel nut.
I think the answer to BS's question above is more questions: What is up with all the out of spec receivers and or aftermarket parts that don't time correctly with in-spec receivers, whichever is the cause in any given case? While I agree with the point inferred by BS; ie. General engineering / technical principles dictate that the best / first choice for solving a well understood problem is usually the decades old tried and true method . I do think sometimes there is room for a newer less labor intensive solution. So IMHO the REAL question is: Are barrel shims a reasonable, safe, reliable and mechanically sound alternative for producing an end product AR that meets requirements? ...or is it a hackey short-cut that is gonna come back and bite in a wholly unacceptable way later on?
I personally lapped my out of spec receiver face after torqueing and untorqueing with three different barrel nuts and days of sweaty hair pulling. Pretty sure 0.001" or 0.002" wouldn't FUBAR feedramp alignment, but didn't want to risk that, or risk getting slapped hard for daring to ask the question here.