I was checking out the "Tank's Rifle Shop" website and stumbled on the statement below:

"We have worked with or had a chance to inspect most of the commercially available M14 type receivers over the years.  This experience has instituted the following policy.  We no longer work on any M14 rifle unless it uses a Springfield M1A, LRB, Smith or Fulton receiver.  Why? I have found them to be the only ones without major flaws that effect either safety or functioning.

Some will argue that a cast receiver is not as strong as one made from a solid steel block or forging.  While this is basically a true statement, the strength differences are of small significance.  I like to point out that the majority of Ruger’s firearms are based on castings.  Bottom line, I would rather have a good quality casting than a poor alternative any day."



I realize that the cast vs. forged horse has been beat to death here regarding bolts and receivers. I can personally understand why a cast bolt would not be quite as desireable as a forged one. But I think that "Tank" may have a good point regarding receivers. Has anyone heard of any actual instances of the actual receiver being blown-up or breaking because it was cast instead of forged? I've heard about the "exploding bolts", but not receivers. And while I'm asking that question... how exactly does putting a USGI extractor in a new SA cast bolt make it less likely to explode? I don't understand the mechanics here? Thanks for educating a noob guys.


BTW... all things being equal I do understand the desire to own forged instead of cast parts. I bought my Bushy AR largely based on the fact that the barrel is 4150 instead of 4140 steel. When in reality I would probably never know the difference. But why not buy the best you can afford? Right now, the best that I can afford is a new SA M1A and I am at peace with that decision. But to hear some around here talk, cast is junk... PERIOD. And forged is ALWAYS better. Evidently "Mr. Tank" doesn't quite see it that way.  

Springfield M1A, LRB, Smith or Fulton receiver,

Only the LRB reciever out of this bunch are forged.

The problems is not the method that was used to make the receiver, but rather there are some receivers out there that have been milled so out of spec that trying to install parts is smithing the parts out of spec to fit the out of spec receiver.

P.S. My NM rigs are built on M1a receivers also.

Quoted: And while I'm asking that question... how exactly does putting a USGI extractor in a new SA cast bolt make it less likely to explode? I don't understand the mechanics here? Thanks for educating a noob guys.

That's where loose internet slang causes confusion. The bolts aren't "exploding" as many like to say, it's more like they're "spontaneously disassembling themselves while in the rifle"The post, or leg, of the extractor that inserts into the bolt and the extractor pivots on is too long on some of the cast pieces, which causes it to protrude from the bottom of the bolt a bit when assembled. This lets rounds in the mag put upward pressure on it, which can lead to the extractor flying out of the bolt at a bad time.There can also be issues with the spring tension and the detent for the plunger which retain the extractor. The USGI piece is of the proper dimesions to prevent this.When the extractor goes bye-bye, all the other pieces of the bolt, which are interlocked in place by the extractor, also go flying. Leading to the "exploding bolt" misnomer.

It's only getting worse with terminology in the '14 world. Wait til you go bugeyed reading some of the descriptive names people come up with for the connector lock.

Ahhh soooo... now I get it. I thought that the bolts were literally exploding! LOL. But heck, I think I'd rather have one really explode than to shoot little parts and springs all-over the place so I can't find them.

You may not ever find anything again if one actually "explodes" in your face !


Longhunter