Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 12/26/2003 9:10:51 AM EDT
Hey guys.  My "Apocolipse Now" gun is a Bushmaster VMatch Carbine (16").  It's actually such a highbred abortion I won't even go into it, but BM did it for me and it works like the Third I.D. on the Republican Guard.

So I took it out into the desert looking for al-Queda boys setting up on our glide apporach to sight in the back up iron sights.  Unfortunately, there weren't any (Terrorists) so I used paper targets.  I believe that at this particular point in time that weapon shoots better than I can shoot it.  But at any rate, it's more that accurate enough for any combat I'VE ever been around.  And reliable.

So, take the gun home and clean it?  O.K.  And reassemble everything and load it and store it.  Then I'm contemplating ('cause I know Santa's not flying with Hammas in the air) the play between the upper and the lower receivers.  It's tiny, but we HAVE to have something to worry about now, don't we?

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here, but who cares?  The gun is loaded.  The round is in the chamber.  The barrel is part of the upper receiver group.  Who cares what the lower part of the receiver is doing?  It's job is to hold the magazine full of ammo and let the hammer fall on the firing pin (upper receiver assembly) while the gun goes bang.

You could use the lower receiver, or you could use a ball peen hammer, but the accuracy factor has already been set in that all of the ballistic dynamics, until the bullet leaves the barrel, are occurring in the upper receiver.  I don't see that tollerance (upper/lower receiver) as critical, or even relevant, to the weapon's accuracy.

Of course, I could be wrong?

What do you guys think?-


Link Posted: 12/26/2003 11:49:59 PM EDT
I recently purchased a Bushy Varminter (swapped out for a chromy barrel) and I noticed some play in mine.  In my knowledge, yes that's logical.  The upper houses all the optics, sites, cartridge, bolt.  And so automatically, those crucial pieces are aligned.  The lower is kind of the slacker in the group.  It just does the "hammering".

Let me direct you to a thread about this very thing, (including a letter from Armalite about this subject).

[url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=176895[/url]
Link Posted: 12/27/2003 8:42:48 PM EDT
Thanks.  

Yeah, I mean I expect there to be some degree of "fit" there.  I wouldn't describe either of mine (Bush or Colt) as sloppy.  It's my assessment that they fit the way they were intended.  There's no reason why they need to lock like a bank safe vault that I can see?

You don't think we over think this crap do you (lol)?
Link Posted: 12/31/2003 8:57:02 AM EDT
Shove an accu-wedge in there and be done with it.  Just take up the slop, you don't want so much pressure you're scoring your reciever's holes every time you slide the pins.  Get an exacto knife and trim your wedge if needed.

You can help this somewhat by using a higher-pressure lubricant there, just a little bit of it though.
Link Posted: 12/31/2003 8:13:27 PM EDT
Really Jaaven?  I seriously haven't a clue.  

I did, just now and for the hell of it, pull out my Colt HBAR that I bought back in 1986.  The thing is as tight as a drum with no discernable play what-so-ever.

BUT, remember that's a screwed in front pin on the Colt.  Again, I don't know that IT makes a difference either.  I should take them to the range for the hell of it and try to set up equal circumstances to compare them side by side for accuracy.  Which is really easy (iron sights at 100 yards) I suppose?  

I wonder if you order something like one of the custom AR's from somebody like Les Baer or Wilson Combat if they're lock solid tight.  For $3k I guess I'll have to read the answer to that question somewhere.

"Accuwedge," eh?  That sound like, . . . na, I'm not going there.

Jaaven.  You've peaked my curiosoty.  Range time (first day over 50).      
Link Posted: 1/1/2004 8:08:43 AM EDT
[url]http://www.fulton-armory.com/AccuWedge.html[/url]

Dave S
Link Posted: 1/1/2004 10:30:48 AM EDT
Personally I think the original AR design should have a steel sleeve fixed inside the receiver pivot holes so that the holes don't get enlarged as time go on.  Wearing against steel is one of the biggest problems from aluminum material.
Link Posted: 1/1/2004 10:49:29 AM EDT
O.K.  But I still want to know if the $3k guns are, and stay, tight?  And (seriously) the bigger question is really, does it matter, or are we back in the realm of folklore?    
Link Posted: 1/3/2004 7:53:52 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Beyond_Visual_Range:
Personally I think the original AR design should have a steel sleeve fixed inside the receiver pivot holes so that the holes don't get enlarged as time go on.  Wearing against steel is one of the biggest problems from aluminum material.
View Quote


I believe the Aluminum oxide on the outside of your AR is in deed harder then most commerical steels.

Top Top