User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/23/2017 3:33:15 PM EDT
Several quality receiver extensions available.
Weapon role? Milspec sizing or commercial? Budget? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2017 5:18:31 PM EDT
So long as it's 7075 and mil-spec dimensions, I have no brand loyalty on receiver extensions.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2017 5:36:48 PM EDT
A Mil-Spec sized tube for a carbine.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2017 5:44:50 PM EDT
It really does not matter who you get it from, if it is a .mil spec tube they all work the same way.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2017 5:46:08 PM EDT
Colt/LMT/BCM/Spikes/ALG/Aero Precision off the top.
Colt/LMT are my preferred. You may like something different. Buy 7075 from a reputable company and you are gtg. Past that it's bells/whistles and finish to choose from. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2017 6:35:43 PM EDT
Quote History Quoted:
So long as it's 7075 and mil-spec dimensions, I have no brand loyalty on receiver extensions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2017 6:46:03 PM EDT
Quote History Quoted:
I'm in this camp. Toms tactical has 7075-t6 mil spec 6 position buffer tube kits for like $36, it's so budget friendly that I never run any 6061 buffer tubes except for a few rifle length buffer tubes |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2017 7:34:37 PM EDT
I only buy Anderson. They're amazing for the money.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2017 7:41:07 PM EDT
I'm going to give the Magpul receiver extension a try when I can find one for sale.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2017 7:50:52 PM EDT
Quote History Quoted:
I'm going to give the Magpul receiver extension a try when I can find one for sale. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2017 8:22:40 PM EDT
Quote History Quoted:
Is it available in A5 length? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2017 10:09:31 PM EDT
ALG makes a good 7075 tube for a decent price.
Doesn't really matter much, though. Buy the cheapest 7075 tube from a known manufacturer you can find and it will work fine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2017 10:27:34 AM EDT
Quote History Quoted:
Don't think so. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Is it available in A5 length? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2017 4:17:05 PM EDT
Quote History |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/25/2017 10:23:10 AM EDT
Quote History Quoted:
That looks nice. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/25/2017 10:46:15 AM EDT
Quote History Quoted:
Is it available in A5 length? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/25/2017 11:57:26 AM EDT
I am ok with the Brownell’s house brand tube.
I have one in use, but not many rounds through the weapon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/25/2017 1:19:33 PM EDT
Bought a buffer tube made by POF. Has similar features to the PWS EBT Mod 2 at a lower price.
https://pof-usa.com/shop/upgrades-accessories/buffer-components/buffer-tube-anti-tilt-6-position/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/25/2017 7:30:49 PM EDT
I have enjoyed the Vltor A5 tube. I run it in on a 14.5" build.
Yes, it takes a proprietary buffer but it really has made shooting a carbine more liken to shooting a rifle in terms of softness and recoil jolt. https://www.vltor.com/shop/ar/stocks/aebk-a5-vltor-a5-stock-combo-kit/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 3:11:11 PM EDT
It won't matter to most people, but there's a difference between mil spec size and actual mil spec. IIRC, true spec tubes are extruded, with rolled threads for strength.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 4:05:46 PM EDT
Quote History Quoted:
It won't matter to most people, but there's a difference between mil spec size and actual mil spec. IIRC, true spec tubes are extruded, with rolled threads for strength. That's why I'm interested in the new Magpul unit, you have to be able to trust the manufacturer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 4:26:47 PM EDT
You do have to be careful, there are a lot of tubes on the market right now that were made in China and even if they say they are 7075, I am willing to bet the majority are actually 6061. I have run into a few of them over the last couple of years.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 4:43:51 PM EDT
Quote History Quoted:
You do have to be careful, there are a lot of tubes on the market right now that were made in China and even if they say they are 7075, I am willing to bet the majority are actually 6061. I have run into a few of them over the last couple of years. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 6:20:35 PM EDT
Sons of Liberty Gun Works
7075 steel, mil spec On sale for $30 |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 6:46:36 PM EDT
Quote History Quoted:
Sons of Liberty Gun Works 7075 steel, mil spec On sale for $30 |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 7:03:37 PM EDT
Quote History Quoted:
How did you determine that they were actually 6061? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 8:56:50 PM EDT
Quote History Quoted:
My Partner with his machine shop also has the ability to test different metal materials to see if he is getting what he orders for many critical jobs he does for government contracts, part of the contracts he signs, he has to be able to guarantee they are what they spec out. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
How did you determine that they were actually 6061? I'd be interested in the method/s used. I have not found any nondestructive method as of yet. Chemical testing is FUBAR with the anodizing process, contaminating the results. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 9:31:51 PM EDT
Quote History Quoted:
I'd be interested in the method/s used. I have not found any nondestructive method as of yet. Chemical testing is FUBAR with the anodizing process, contaminating the results. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 9:51:13 PM EDT
LMT
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 10:04:07 PM EDT
Quote History Quoted:
This above, you would have to destroy a buffer tube to figure out if it were 6061 or 7075. Flame photometry or atomic absorption spectroscopy are closely related methods, but involve destructive testing. These methods are most commonly used in material composition testing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 10:16:45 PM EDT
Quote History Quoted:
XRF (X-Ray Fluorescence) is non destructive but about $10k investment. Flame photometry or atomic absorption spectroscopy are closely related methods, but involve destructive testing. These methods are most commonly used in material composition testing. 10K is nothing, he has several millions dollars of machines in his shop. But again, I never claimed it was non destructive... LOL |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 10:22:20 PM EDT
Quote History Quoted:
LMT |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2017 10:37:11 PM EDT
Quote History Quoted:
I never said it was non destructive, where did you guys get the idea I did? virtually ever single piece of metal he tests is destroyed, including the buffer tubes we have tested.. 10K is nothing, he has several millions dollars of machines in his shop. But again, I never claimed it was non destructive... LOL Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
XRF (X-Ray Fluorescence) is non destructive but about $10k investment. Flame photometry or atomic absorption spectroscopy are closely related methods, but involve destructive testing. These methods are most commonly used in material composition testing. 10K is nothing, he has several millions dollars of machines in his shop. But again, I never claimed it was non destructive... LOL I was just curious as to what means were used to test material properties. 
|
|
|
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 © 1996-2022 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.
