User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/10/2015 11:38:59 AM EDT
[#1]
The billet will generally be prettier, but the forged will have greater structural integrity.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2015 12:10:34 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The billet will generally be prettier, but the forged will have greater structural integrity. !!!!!WRONG!!!!! Billet will had better aesthetic lines you are correct. Billet uppers are usually always bigger and beefier so to speak. Forged will most always be 7075. Billet will be 6061 or 7075. 7075 is not harder and yet becomes more brittle. 6061 is softer yes but 100% fine. I run billet. Never an issue. I have forged, never an issue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2015 12:17:03 PM EDT
[#3]
So nothing impressive enough to justify the cost. I like to keep it cost/worthiness.
If the billet had a significant advantage, I could justify the cost.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2015 12:21:07 PM EDT
[#4]
agreed they are not for everyone. If you like matching sets and have a billet lower that's the way to go. Other advantage to billet is you can get them with or without forward assist.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2015 12:24:00 PM EDT
[#5]
7075 is not harder and yet becomes more brittle. You need to learn your alloys. 7075-T6 is 64% harder than 6061-T6, has 84% higher tensile strength, 64% higher fatigue strength and 60% higher shear strength, but the fracture toughness is identical. In short, 7075 is much harder and stronger than 6061, but no more brittle. 6061 has only two advantages over 7075 that make it more common: cost and weldability. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2015 12:25:53 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
!!!!!WRONG!!!!! Billet will had better aesthetic lines you are correct. Billet uppers are usually always bigger and beefier so to speak. Forged will most always be 7075. Billet will be 6061 or 7075. 7075 is not harder and yet becomes more brittle. 6061 is softer yes but 100% fine. I run billet. Never an issue. I have forged, never an issue. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The billet will generally be prettier, but the forged will have greater structural integrity. !!!!!WRONG!!!!! Billet will had better aesthetic lines you are correct. Billet uppers are usually always bigger and beefier so to speak. Forged will most always be 7075. Billet will be 6061 or 7075. 7075 is not harder and yet becomes more brittle. 6061 is softer yes but 100% fine. I run billet. Never an issue. I have forged, never an issue. Metallurgists agree that the forging process results in the aluminum having continuous grain characteristics, which results in the lower becoming stronger than billet or cast aluminum. Also, Forging is the only process that allows the material to keep a dipole-dipole coupling, thus once again, improving strength and structural integrity over billet. end of story. Forged > Billet, same reason why all of our contracts imply that we may not use Billet materials, as they have been shown to be "weaker", if you will. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2015 12:30:27 PM EDT
[#7]
who am I to say. Just lots and lots of 60 and 70 series racing parts in high horsepower builds that I have made.
The contract buster is cost. you can but a forgings for $8-12 you can buy a block of 60 or 70 series $16-22. Much more shaping is needed here. Forging is not stronger. simply agree to disagree unless you care to put some products out and test them with me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2015 12:32:31 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You need to learn your alloys. 7075-T6 is 64% harder than 6061-T6, has 84% higher tensile strength, 64% higher fatigue strength and 60% higher shear strength, but the fracture toughness is identical. In short, 7075 is much harder and stronger than 6061, but no more brittle. 6061 has only two advantages over 7075 that make it more common: cost and weldability. Quote HistoryQuoted:
7075 is not harder and yet becomes more brittle. You need to learn your alloys. 7075-T6 is 64% harder than 6061-T6, has 84% higher tensile strength, 64% higher fatigue strength and 60% higher shear strength, but the fracture toughness is identical. In short, 7075 is much harder and stronger than 6061, but no more brittle. 6061 has only two advantages over 7075 that make it more common: cost and weldability. while you do agree with my comment 7075 is harder. we are also comparing forging 7075 to billet 6061. Take a hammer to your 7075 lower and I will take one to my 6061. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2015 12:34:47 PM EDT
[#9]
this will always be an argument. It comes down to so many variables as to why one would choose a certain material over the other. For what I do. 6061 is preferred all day.
In our hobby use of sending lead neither material will fail on us. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2015 12:40:25 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
!!!!!WRONG!!!!! Billet will had better aesthetic lines you are correct. Billet uppers are usually always bigger and beefier so to speak. Forged will most always be 7075. Billet will be 6061 or 7075. 7075 is not harder and yet becomes more brittle. 6061 is softer yes but 100% fine. I run billet. Never an issue. I have forged, never an issue. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The billet will generally be prettier, but the forged will have greater structural integrity. !!!!!WRONG!!!!! Billet will had better aesthetic lines you are correct. Billet uppers are usually always bigger and beefier so to speak. Forged will most always be 7075. Billet will be 6061 or 7075. 7075 is not harder and yet becomes more brittle. 6061 is softer yes but 100% fine. I run billet. Never an issue. I have forged, never an issue. lolz |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2015 12:53:46 PM EDT
[#11]
As has been mentioned, a billet receiver can be made with more features.
I got a Mega billet ambi set as I shoot left handed and wanted a bolt release on the right side. Right both literally and figuratively. :) I was willing to pay more to have a receiver that was better for me ergonomically but I would not likely have bought the Mega billet if it was 6061 instead of 7075. A billet receiver can be made to have a better finish and more details, aesthetics. The discussion would be more useful if all of the posters were to specify which alloy of aluminum they were referring to, some have. As has been pointed out the characteristics of 7075 are far superior to 6061 so a blanket statement of "billet is better' or 'forged is better' is not particularly meaningful. Billet with either alloy will be more expensive because of the work involved to produce it. Handy link to more information on forged vs billet including metallurgical analysis of 6061 and 7075 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2015 12:56:59 PM EDT
[#12]
while you do agree with my comment 7075 is harder. we are also comparing forging 7075 to billet 6061.
Take a hammer to your 7075 lower and I will take one to my 6061. Both will fracture. The 6061 will simply show more deformation and peripheral cracking, where the 7075 will break clean. However, the higher hardness and tensile strength of 7075 means it will resist deformation better; run them over with a car, the 6061 receiver is far more likely to be deformed. Also, aluminum doesn't have near the strength gain from forging that carbon steels do. There is very little difference in the toughness of forged vs. billet aluminum. For what I do. 6061 is preferred all day. Unless cost or weldability are concerns, there is no good reason to choose 6061 over 2099, 2219, 2024, 7075, 7085, 7068, etc. It is an inferior alloy, period. It's like comparing 1018 cold roll to 4XXX series chromoly steels, and then justifying the decision to choose cold roll because you can bend it easier, even though the application makes the higher strength and hardness of the chromoly steels a far better choice. It will only "always be an argument" for those who do not understand why one alloy is more appropriate than another in a given application. 6061-T6 (651, 6511, etc) will work fine for AR receivers, but it is not the best choice. It is the cheaper choice, which is why some of these manufacturers opt for it. When you're starting out with a solid chunk of billet, you're turning 80+% into chips, so material cost becomes a very real consideration. A 1.5x5x12 piece of 6061-T6511 is about $40, while the same piece of 7075-T6 costs $130. 7068-T6511 would actually be the best, but it didn't exist when Stoner developed the AR, and it is prohibitively expensive (not far behind Ti) |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2015 1:14:18 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As has been mentioned, a billet receiver can be made with more features. I got a Mega billet ambi set as I shoot left handed and wanted a bolt release on the right side. Right both literally and figuratively. :) I was willing to pay more to have a receiver that was better for me ergonomically but I would not likely have bought the Mega billet if it was 6061 instead of 7075. A billet receiver can be made to have a better finish and more details, aesthetics. The discussion would be more useful if all of the posters were to specify which alloy of aluminum they were referring to, some have. As has been pointed out the characteristics of 7075 are far superior to 6061 so a blanket statement of "billet is better' or 'forged is better' is not particularly meaningful. Billet with either alloy will be more expensive because of the work involved to produce it. Handy link to more information on forged vs billet including metallurgical analysis of 6061 and 7075 Steve you raise excellent points, but you can do the same machining on a forged upper/lower that you can do to a true billet set like a Mega. One could start with a forged upper/lower do all the machining that Mega does, and up with a less costly piece. The forging process is far less expensive, but doesnt mean that its inferior. Forged is just less expensive because it takes less time to machine which in turn drastically reduces the cost of the piece. Billet is simply used as buzzword because in some applications it is marginally better. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2015 1:38:47 PM EDT
[#14]
Forged is just less expensive because it takes less time to machine which in turn drastically reduces the cost of the piece. Billet is simply used as buzzword because in some applications it is marginally better. Not just time & tooling; materials is a huge part of it. A 0% 7075 forging weighs 1.5 pounds; a 1.5x5x8 7075 billet (the size needed for a billet lower) is 6 lbs. When you're talking a material that runs $15/pound even in quantity, that's huge. However, for smaller scale production, billet makes more sense. The forging equipment is hugely expensive, and you still need a 5-axis CNC to finish them out. You have to produce an awful lot of lowers to amortize that cost. Production of billet pieces is higher in both material cost and machine time, but is much more feasible for smaller scale production. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2015 2:05:35 PM EDT
[#15]
I have a forged 7075-T6 Upper Id be willing to put under the press.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2015 2:06:16 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You need to learn your alloys. 7075-T6 is 64% harder than 6061-T6, has 84% higher tensile strength, 64% higher fatigue strength and 60% higher shear strength, but the fracture toughness is identical. In short, 7075 is much harder and stronger than 6061, but no more brittle. 6061 has only two advantages over 7075 that make it more common: cost and weldability. Quote HistoryQuoted:
7075 is not harder and yet becomes more brittle. You need to learn your alloys. 7075-T6 is 64% harder than 6061-T6, has 84% higher tensile strength, 64% higher fatigue strength and 60% higher shear strength, but the fracture toughness is identical. In short, 7075 is much harder and stronger than 6061, but no more brittle. 6061 has only two advantages over 7075 that make it more common: cost and weldability. ...and both are WAY harder, stronger, and far less brittle than plastic, which is all you need for a lower, so both are complete overkill for the requirements of a lower. IOW, there is NO difference functionally, it's all cosmetics and budget (just like every other part on every AR). |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2015 2:22:18 PM EDT
[#17]
and both are WAY harder, stronger, and far less brittle than plastic, which is all you need for a lower, so both are complete overkill for the requirements of a lower. IOW, there is NO difference functionally, it's all cosmetics and budget (just like every other part on every AR). I never said 6061 wasn't strong enough, just factually refuting the notion that 6061 is in any way better than 7075 for this application. Having said that, 6061 is not a great choice for an upper. It's not a strength issue; it's abrasion resistance. 6061 scratches and galls much easier, which is a very real concern when you have a large piece of steel reciprocating in a bore. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/11/2015 3:24:29 AM EDT
[#18]
I have a Seekins upper and lower for one AR, and I'd say those alone, unmatched, would do more than a matched billet set from one of the cheaper makers.
That said, there isn't much difference to be had in accuracy for either option I wouldn't think. Someone once suggested buying billet to a friend of mine. I asked why and the guy said that once he was tightening a barrel nut and the upper cracked in the front bottom corner of the ejection port. I asked how he had the upper held and like I thought it was with one of those takedown pin type vise blocks. I asked if the billet upper was any stronger in that area that cracked, and he then admitted it wasn't. He may have claimed something about billet being thicker walled so that it was more rigid, and therefore the bcg wears less on the upper because there's less flex in the upper. I don't think I buy that, but not sure if it's correct. I've been unable to find a tangible reason for billet uppers, or even lowers except to match the billet upper. Lol. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/11/2015 8:05:57 AM EDT
[#19]
From what I've learned reading about this (I'm no expert):
Billet: Pros: Customization - you can get ambi controls, built in trigger guard, flared magwell, the sky is the limit here Looks - many think they look cooler Fit - If you buy a matched pair, they usually have a better fit than forged Cons: Billet not as strong as forged - they usually make the billet receivers beefier to account for this Bulkier - see the first point against Non-standard - many time parts are incompatible. For example, FF handguards with alignment tabs sometimes won't work More expensive Forged Pros Forged are incrementally stronger for a given size/thickness Standardized - They are all pretty much interchangeable Less Expensive Cons: Minimal customization - ambi controls are typically a "workaround" for example Can be sloppy upper/lower fit Not as flashy looking Overall, for me, I greatly prefer forged. Cheaper, standardized/interchangeable, stronger, etc. I just can't justify the expense of billet and would not want to risk it not being compatible with some future handguard or something. If I were building a no holds barred custom AR or a presentation piece, I'd go billet. That's just me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/11/2015 8:26:33 AM EDT
[#20]
!!!!!WRONG!!!!! Geeesh!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2015 10:03:39 PM EDT
[#21]
cost and weldability.
This is old school, you are right and I like it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 12:15:36 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: From what I've learned reading about this (I'm no expert): Billet: Pros: Customization - you can get ambi controls, built in trigger guard, flared magwell, the sky is the limit here Looks - many think they look cooler Fit - If you buy a matched pair, they usually have a better fit than forged Cons: Billet not as strong as forged - they usually make the billet receivers beefier to account for this Bulkier - see the first point against Non-standard - many time parts are incompatible. For example, FF handguards with alignment tabs sometimes won't work More expensive Forged Pros Forged are incrementally stronger for a given size/thickness Standardized - They are all pretty much interchangeable Less Expensive Cons: Minimal customization - ambi controls are typically a "workaround" for example Can be sloppy upper/lower fit Not as flashy looking Overall, for me, I greatly prefer forged. Cheaper, standardized/interchangeable, stronger, etc. I just can't justify the expense of billet and would not want to risk it not being compatible with some future handguard or something. If I were building a no holds barred custom AR or a presentation piece, I'd go billet. That's just me. EDIT: I have seen a lot of these threads with people battling over misinformation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 1:22:58 AM EDT
[#23]
Explain this?? A 7075 billet is usually thicker than a 7075 forged. The billet originally comes from a forged block. I am not saying one stronger or weaker. I am saying there cannot be that much difference, short one having a bunch more strategically placed metal. I don't know if anybody has ever done a test on them. But these threads give me tired head at the misinformation or lack of accounting for the many differences in each brand of receiver. Blanket statements usually don't work out well in this form. There's no significant difference with aluminum; variations from batch to batch, plant to plant will affect the material just as much as the different processes. Aluminum just doesn't realize the benefits that steel does (molecular alignment) |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 2:17:55 AM EDT
[#24]
Billet is heavier and weaker, and costs more. When does that get fun? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 9:52:46 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Billet is heavier and weaker, and costs more. When does that get fun? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 9:55:46 AM EDT
[#26]
nevermind
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 10:13:14 AM EDT
[#27]
If we created two receivers that are dimensionally very similar the one made from a forging would be marginally stronger than the billet assuming the same alloy and heat treat. The forged receiver will be cheaper to machine than the billet since some feature will not need machined. The forged receiver production will have a greater start up cost due to the cost of creating the forging dies in addition to machine fixtures etc. In the long run the reduced machining costs of a forged receiver will make them cheaper than the same volume of billet receivers.
For specific dimensions and alloy/heat treat the forged receivers are better all around assuming you are making them in high enough volumes to justify start up costs. Billet's only advantage is for making them in small batches, where billet is more economical. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 10:23:41 AM EDT
[#28]
I came across this table
at this link Not sure how helpful it is. If someone wants to translate some shit there, I'd appreciate it 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 10:49:08 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I came across this table http://i747.photobucket.com/albums/xx119/sanchomaul/3999DDD6-BA3B-4C36-9999-7F34A0B4A50E.png at this link Not sure how helpful it is. If someone wants to translate some shit there, I'd appreciate it |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 11:01:19 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You need to learn your alloys. 7075-T6 is 64% harder than 6061-T6, has 84% higher tensile strength, 64% higher fatigue strength and 60% higher shear strength, but the fracture toughness is identical. In short, 7075 is much harder and stronger than 6061, but no more brittle. 6061 has only two advantages over 7075 that make it more common: cost and weldability. Quote HistoryQuoted:
7075 is not harder and yet becomes more brittle. You need to learn your alloys. 7075-T6 is 64% harder than 6061-T6, has 84% higher tensile strength, 64% higher fatigue strength and 60% higher shear strength, but the fracture toughness is identical. In short, 7075 is much harder and stronger than 6061, but no more brittle. 6061 has only two advantages over 7075 that make it more common: cost and weldability. This man has the correct answer...Thank you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 11:04:11 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Translation 6061 has approximately half the yield strength of 7075. 7075 be stronger. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I came across this table http://i747.photobucket.com/albums/xx119/sanchomaul/3999DDD6-BA3B-4C36-9999-7F34A0B4A50E.png at this link Not sure how helpful it is. If someone wants to translate some shit there, I'd appreciate it Yep, got that part. I looked into what some of those terms mean up there. And if I understood what I've read correctly, those differences are almost neglegable. For me, the consumer anyway. I think if you're budget minded, stick with forged. If aesthetics matter and some small additional features are important go with billet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 11:07:47 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not just time & tooling; materials is a huge part of it. A 0% 7075 forging weighs 1.5 pounds; a 1.5x5x8 7075 billet (the size needed for a billet lower) is 6 lbs. When you're talking a material that runs $15/pound even in quantity, that's huge. However, for smaller scale production, billet makes more sense. The forging equipment is hugely expensive, and you still need a 5-axis CNC to finish them out. You have to produce an awful lot of lowers to amortize that cost. Production of billet pieces is higher in both material cost and machine time, but is much more feasible for smaller scale production. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Forged is just less expensive because it takes less time to machine which in turn drastically reduces the cost of the piece. Billet is simply used as buzzword because in some applications it is marginally better. Not just time & tooling; materials is a huge part of it. A 0% 7075 forging weighs 1.5 pounds; a 1.5x5x8 7075 billet (the size needed for a billet lower) is 6 lbs. When you're talking a material that runs $15/pound even in quantity, that's huge. However, for smaller scale production, billet makes more sense. The forging equipment is hugely expensive, and you still need a 5-axis CNC to finish them out. You have to produce an awful lot of lowers to amortize that cost. Production of billet pieces is higher in both material cost and machine time, but is much more feasible for smaller scale production. Correct yet again. However, how many companies out there are actually doing the forgings? Makes me wonder if there just a couple sources for forgings, that sell to everyone? Different strokes for different folks. I see a ton of people defending their choice to purchase a billet vs forged, just because it cost more, so it must be better. Comments like fit and finish, blah blah blah. What a bunch of BS. The reality is as long as the forged pieces are properly milled and finished, they are no worse than a billet set. Someone said it before "billet = heavier and weakier" and I had to chuckle when the first response was "they make them stronger/heavier" which I guess if you want a heavier gun is cool. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 11:54:54 AM EDT
[#33]
However, how many companies out there are actually doing the forgings? Makes me wonder if there just a couple sources for forgings, that sell to everyone? Receiver forging outfits and their respective marks: Forging marks/makers: A (splintered) = Anchor Harvey Aluminum AF = Alcoa Forge C AF = Colt Alco Forge C MB = Colt / Mueller Brass Cardinal (stylized) = Cardinal Forge CH = Colt Harvey Aluminum CK = Colt / Kaiser Aluminum Circle/Crooshairs w/"AR" = ArmaLite CM = Colt / Martin Marietta D (stylized) = Diemaco DK = Diemaco / Kaiser Aluminum E = Emco EK = EMCO/Kaiser E MB = EMCO/Mueller Brass F keyhole = FNMI / Cerro Forge FA = FNMI / Anchor Harvey FK = FNMI / Kaiser Aluminum FM = FN/Martin Marietta FMB = FNMI / Mueller Brass Keyhole = Cerro Forge L = Lewis Machine & Tool LK = LAR / Kaiser Aluminum LM = LAR / Martin Marietta M (under diamond) = Mueller Industries PA = Capco / Anchor Harvey PM = Capco / Martin Marietta Square = BAFE As you can see, only a few of the companies that sell complete rifles actually forge their own receivers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 1:11:16 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Explain this?? A 7075 billet is usually thicker than a 7075 forged. The billet originally comes from a forged block. I am not saying one stronger or weaker. I am saying there cannot be that much difference, short one having a bunch more strategically placed metal. I don't know if anybody has ever done a test on them. But these threads give me tired head at the misinformation or lack of accounting for the many differences in each brand of receiver. Blanket statements usually don't work out well in this form. EDIT: I have seen a lot of these threads with people battling over misinformation. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
From what I've learned reading about this (I'm no expert): Billet: Pros: Customization - you can get ambi controls, built in trigger guard, flared magwell, the sky is the limit here Looks - many think they look cooler Fit - If you buy a matched pair, they usually have a better fit than forged Cons: Billet not as strong as forged - they usually make the billet receivers beefier to account for this Bulkier - see the first point against Non-standard - many time parts are incompatible. For example, FF handguards with alignment tabs sometimes won't work More expensive Forged Pros Forged are incrementally stronger for a given size/thickness Standardized - They are all pretty much interchangeable Less Expensive Cons: Minimal customization - ambi controls are typically a "workaround" for example Can be sloppy upper/lower fit Not as flashy looking Overall, for me, I greatly prefer forged. Cheaper, standardized/interchangeable, stronger, etc. I just can't justify the expense of billet and would not want to risk it not being compatible with some future handguard or something. If I were building a no holds barred custom AR or a presentation piece, I'd go billet. That's just me. EDIT: I have seen a lot of these threads with people battling over misinformation. My understanding is that the forging process increases the strength. Assuming that's correct, the forged receiver is stronger at any given point given the same thickness. I noted (as did you) that the billet receivers are frequently beefier. My understanding is that it's thicker to account for the fact that it's not as strong at the same thickness. After all, not many people are clamoring for a thicker, beefier, heavier receiver. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 1:52:39 PM EDT
[#35]
We have machined thousands of forged parts, and have found that we often have a scrap rate on the raw forgings of about 8%. Most of this is from core shift, or depressions in the forging. The forgings also move a great deal during the machining process. All that tension is trying to get out, it results in an upper opening like a taco shell, and getting shorter end to end by .003. It can be compensated for, but we also found variance in how things relieve from die to die (Die mark on forging) It ends up being a major pain in the butt to get things where we expect them with a forging.
For our own product we ended up going to a Billet as we could control it much better. The main bore walls on our BALIOS-lite upper is still thicker than a forged product, yet we are able to make it much lighter and retain dimensional stability. They both have there place. We have never had a problem with durability. Our most in shape guy (round is a shape he says!) is 280 lbs and hung off the back end of the BALIOS lower on the RE and we had no problems with deformation or breakage. We eventually were able to brake the RE off of the lower with a shot filled mallet, and a whole lot of hammering. The RE broke at the threads, leaving a stub in the lower. You have to work fairly hard to damage most any 7075 lower or upper. Ryan 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 2:29:25 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We have machined thousands of forged parts, and have found that we often have a scrap rate on the raw forgings of about 8%. Most of this is from core shift, or depressions in the forging. The forgings also move a great deal during the machining process. All that tension is trying to get out, it results in an upper opening like a taco shell, and getting shorter end to end by .003. It can be compensated for, but we also found variance in how things relieve from die to die (Die mark on forging) It ends up being a major pain in the butt to get things where we expect them with a forging. For our own product we ended up going to a Billet as we could control it much better. The main bore walls on our BALIOS-lite upper is still thicker than a forged product, yet we are able to make it much lighter and retain dimensional stability. They both have there place. We have never had a problem with durability. Our most in shape guy (round is a shape he says!) is 280 lbs and hung off the back end of the BALIOS lower on the RE and we had no problems with deformation or breakage. We eventually were able to brake the RE off of the lower with a shot filled mallet, and a whole lot of hammering. The RE broke at the threads, leaving a stub in the lower. You have to work fairly hard to damage most any 7075 lower or upper. Ryan https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-lBzlUa8RWVI/VS1S-aLY8bI/AAAAAAAAAPA/sUXRw-CW2Jk/w609-h608-no/bkhang.jpg Excellent info. Thanks for posting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 3:24:38 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How is it weaker????? Do you even realize that Billets made from 7075 and usually thicker?? Have you done this testing yourself? Differences between Billet 7075 and Forged 7075 should be negligible in terms of strength. Or did you like many others read it on the forums 5 years ago or more when most Billets were made from 6061? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Billet is heavier and weaker, and costs more. When does that get fun? MIM < CAST < BILLET < FORGED No matter what alloy this holds true. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 4:41:10 PM EDT
[#38]
MIM < CAST < BILLET < FORGED
No matter what alloy this holds true. Nope. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2015 1:17:22 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
From what I've learned reading about this (I'm no expert): Billet: Pros: Customization - you can get ambi controls, built in trigger guard, flared magwell, the sky is the limit here Looks - many think they look cooler Fit - If you buy a matched pair, they usually have a better fit than forged Cons: Billet not as strong as forged - they usually make the billet receivers beefier to account for this Bulkier - see the first point against Non-standard - many time parts are incompatible. For example, FF handguards with alignment tabs sometimes won't work More expensive Forged Pros Forged are incrementally stronger for a given size/thickness Standardized - They are all pretty much interchangeable Less Expensive Cons: Minimal customization - ambi controls are typically a "workaround" for example Can be sloppy upper/lower fit Not as flashy looking Overall, for me, I greatly prefer forged. Cheaper, standardized/interchangeable, stronger, etc. I just can't justify the expense of billet and would not want to risk it not being compatible with some future handguard or something. If I were building a no holds barred custom AR or a presentation piece, I'd go billet. That's just me. You can get built in trigger guards with forged also. 
Noveske Gen 2 and Anderson 
And "FLASHY" is a matter of opinion anyways. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2015 4:58:37 AM EDT
[#40]
I have both and both work just fine. The only difference is in the looks department. Done!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2015 5:53:38 AM EDT
[#41]
In general a forging in steel is stronger. In aluminum you get almost no benefit except the fact that you use way less metal to make the part. You can actually have areas that are weaker on a forging due to the stresses of the material flowing into smaller areas. Yes things get stress relieved, no it never takes out all the stresses completely.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2015 11:14:17 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If we created two receivers that are dimensionally very similar the one made from a forging would be marginally stronger than the billet assuming the same alloy and heat treat. The forged receiver will be cheaper to machine than the billet since some feature will not need machined. The forged receiver production will have a greater start up cost due to the cost of creating the forging dies in addition to machine fixtures etc. In the long run the reduced machining costs of a forged receiver will make them cheaper than the same volume of billet receivers. For specific dimensions and alloy/heat treat the forged receivers are better all around assuming you are making them in high enough volumes to justify start up costs. Billet's only advantage is for making them in small batches, where billet is more economical. Quote HistoryQuoted:
If we created two receivers that are dimensionally very similar the one made from a forging would be marginally stronger than the billet assuming the same alloy and heat treat. The forged receiver will be cheaper to machine than the billet since some feature will not need machined. The forged receiver production will have a greater start up cost due to the cost of creating the forging dies in addition to machine fixtures etc. In the long run the reduced machining costs of a forged receiver will make them cheaper than the same volume of billet receivers. For specific dimensions and alloy/heat treat the forged receivers are better all around assuming you are making them in high enough volumes to justify start up costs. Billet's only advantage is for making them in small batches, where billet is more economical. It sounds like you are saying that a forged receiver will be dimensionally more accurate than one that is milled? Quoted:
However, how many companies out there are actually doing the forgings? Makes me wonder if there just a couple sources for forgings, that sell to everyone? Receiver forging outfits and their respective marks: Forging marks/makers: As you can see, only a few of the companies that sell complete rifles actually forge their own receivers. This thread, while rather silly at certain points, did increase my understanding somewhat. Being in the commercial airplane business I had a pretty good understanding of the relative qualities of different alloys of aluminum. I did not know that forging had a much lesser effect on aluminum than it did on steel. The list of manufacturers and their respective forging suppliers was very interesting. I have a billet upper/lower set. When I got it one of the considerations was that it was 7075, not that I have reason to believe that I 'need' it. The main consideration was the features that were available. I shoot left handed and wanted a bolt release button on the right side. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2015 5:59:48 PM EDT
[#43]
So because I don't really care too much about aesthetics, I'll save the $$$ and go with the forged receiver.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2015 5:57:48 PM EDT
[#44]
Some engineering 101:
1. All metal starts with a casting. The liquid metal is poured into a mold and allowed to cool. All metal starts here and once the casting is removed from the mold it is called a "billet." A metal billet to be exact. 2. Forging refers to a process of heating a billet and then pounding or pressing it into the desired shape. The metal for forging is typically softer to allow re-shaping through a forging. This is most like a traditional blacksmith but modern presses and dies are used. Machining may or may not be required after a forging. Typically only a small amount of machining is desired else the forging process becomes cost prohibitive. For example, all the holes in forged uppers and lowers are machined, i.e. drilled. 3. Machining is a process where the billet is cut, drilled, and shaved into the desired shape. Machining is typically used for relatively harder metals because they can't be forged. In the case of ARs, someone, at some point, started using the term "billet" incorrectly when referring to machining. Now "billet" is simply a marketing term used to differentiate one product line from another. For a MILSPEC M4 unit there should be no difference in the critical tolerances between a billet or forged unit. No reputable manufacturer is going to sell you an upper or lower that is too soft, out of MILSPEC. On the flip side, a metal that is too hard actually becomes brittle and it will fail after a smaller round count than a metal of the correct hardness. Yes, the metal used in any particular unit may be slightly harder or softer but you'll never see the difference unless you exceed the MILSPEC for total rounds cycled. A billet unit should have cleaner lines from the machining process but one would need a trained eye to discern. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2015 6:20:41 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Some engineering 101: 1. All metal starts with a casting. The liquid metal is poured into a mold and allowed to cool. All metal starts here and once the casting is removed from the mold it is called a "billet." A metal billet to be exact. that sounds like an ingot to me 2. Forging refers to a process of heating a billet and then pounding or pressing it into the desired shape. The metal for forging is typically softer to allow re-shaping through a forging. This is most like a traditional blacksmith but modern presses and dies are used. Machining may or may not be required after a forging. Typically only a small amount of machining is desired else the forging process becomes cost prohibitive. For example, all the holes in forged uppers and lowers are machined, i.e. drilled. 3. Machining is a process where the billet is cut, drilled, and shaved into the desired shape. Machining is typically used for relatively harder metals because they can't be forged. In the case of ARs, someone, at some point, started using the term "billet" incorrectly when referring to machining. Now "billet" is simply a marketing term used to differentiate one product line from another. For a MILSPEC M4 unit there should be no difference in the critical tolerances between a billet or forged unit. No reputable manufacturer is going to sell you an upper or lower that is too soft, out of MILSPEC. On the flip side, a metal that is too hard actually becomes brittle and it will fail after a smaller round count than a metal of the correct hardness. Yes, the metal used in any particular unit may be slightly harder or softer but you'll never see the difference unless you exceed the MILSPEC for total rounds cycled. A billet unit should have cleaner lines from the machining process but one would need a trained eye to discern. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2015 8:21:23 PM EDT
[#46]
Some engineering 101:
1. All metal starts with a casting. The liquid metal is poured into a mold and allowed to cool. All metal starts here and once the casting is removed from the mold it is called a "billet." A metal billet to be exact. 2. Forging refers to a process of heating a billet and then pounding or pressing it into the desired shape. The metal for forging is typically softer to allow re-shaping through a forging. This is most like a traditional blacksmith but modern presses and dies are used. Machining may or may not be required after a forging. Typically only a small amount of machining is desired else the forging process becomes cost prohibitive. For example, all the holes in forged uppers and lowers are machined, i.e. drilled. 3. Machining is a process where the billet is cut, drilled, and shaved into the desired shape. Machining is typically used for relatively harder metals because they can't be forged. In the case of ARs, someone, at some point, started using the term "billet" incorrectly when referring to machining. Now "billet" is simply a marketing term used to differentiate one product line from another. For a MILSPEC M4 unit there should be no difference in the critical tolerances between a billet or forged unit. No reputable manufacturer is going to sell you an upper or lower that is too soft, out of MILSPEC. On the flip side, a metal that is too hard actually becomes brittle and it will fail after a smaller round count than a metal of the correct hardness. Yes, the metal used in any particular unit may be slightly harder or softer but you'll never see the difference unless you exceed the MILSPEC for total rounds cycled. A billet unit should have cleaner lines from the machining process but one would need a trained eye to discern. So much wrong with this I'm not even going to bother dissecting. We'll just leave it at "NO!" |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2015 7:21:14 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Receiver forging outfits and their respective marks: Forging marks/makers: A (splintered) = Anchor Harvey Aluminum AF = Alcoa Forge C AF = Colt Alco Forge C MB = Colt / Mueller Brass Cardinal (stylized) = Cardinal Forge CH = Colt Harvey Aluminum CK = Colt / Kaiser Aluminum Circle/Crooshairs w/"AR" = ArmaLite CM = Colt / Martin Marietta D (stylized) = Diemaco DK = Diemaco / Kaiser Aluminum E = Emco EK = EMCO/Kaiser E MB = EMCO/Mueller Brass F keyhole = FNMI / Cerro Forge FA = FNMI / Anchor Harvey FK = FNMI / Kaiser Aluminum FM = FN/Martin Marietta FMB = FNMI / Mueller Brass Keyhole = Cerro Forge L = Lewis Machine & Tool LK = LAR / Kaiser Aluminum LM = LAR / Martin Marietta M (under diamond) = Mueller Industries PA = Capco / Anchor Harvey PM = Capco / Martin Marietta Square = BAFE As you can see, only a few of the companies that sell complete rifles actually forge their own receivers. Quote HistoryQuoted:
However, how many companies out there are actually doing the forgings? Makes me wonder if there just a couple sources for forgings, that sell to everyone? Receiver forging outfits and their respective marks: Forging marks/makers: A (splintered) = Anchor Harvey Aluminum AF = Alcoa Forge C AF = Colt Alco Forge C MB = Colt / Mueller Brass Cardinal (stylized) = Cardinal Forge CH = Colt Harvey Aluminum CK = Colt / Kaiser Aluminum Circle/Crooshairs w/"AR" = ArmaLite CM = Colt / Martin Marietta D (stylized) = Diemaco DK = Diemaco / Kaiser Aluminum E = Emco EK = EMCO/Kaiser E MB = EMCO/Mueller Brass F keyhole = FNMI / Cerro Forge FA = FNMI / Anchor Harvey FK = FNMI / Kaiser Aluminum FM = FN/Martin Marietta FMB = FNMI / Mueller Brass Keyhole = Cerro Forge L = Lewis Machine & Tool LK = LAR / Kaiser Aluminum LM = LAR / Martin Marietta M (under diamond) = Mueller Industries PA = Capco / Anchor Harvey PM = Capco / Martin Marietta Square = BAFE As you can see, only a few of the companies that sell complete rifles actually forge their own receivers. Wow... Good to see some familiar names. I always figured some of those guys had their hands in a lot of baskets. Nice listing ! |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
