AR Sponsor
Posted: 10/4/2015 1:31:16 AM EDT
|
Which would you use in your rifle a Stag semi auto BCG or an Aim Surplus NiB BCG?
Thanks... |
|
I have 1 AIM NIB and 3 AIM black nitride. I like the black nitride better because the NIB will eventually stain.
I can highly recommend their customer service. I had one that was damaged when a reload was pushed back into the case. They replaced it with no hassles, even though it was a reload. |
|
Quoted:
Compared to CMT, AIM is cheaping out. For the record, CMT is a USGI contractor. Why people are recommending AIM over CMT is confusing me lol I have an AIM nitride BCG that has been flawless. I don't have any experience with CMT, therefore I didn't recommend them. |
|
Quoted:
CMT builds stag bcg's to stags specs. I recommend aim due to my experience with them Quoted:
Quoted:
Compared to CMT, AIM is cheaping out. For the record, CMT is a USGI contractor. Why people are recommending AIM over CMT is confusing me lol CMT builds stag bcg's to stags specs. I recommend aim due to my experience with them My buddy had his entire rifle lock up due to an out of spec AIM BCG, then purchased another and the gas key was cocked off to one side. I have a CMT (M16) BCG in my CQBR, and it's been one of the best I've owned, right up there with BCM. |
|
Quoted:
Compared to CMT, AIM is cheaping out. For the record, CMT is a USGI contractor. Why people are recommending AIM over CMT is confusing me lol I see what your saying but the reality is that Aim has these mass produced and shit will happen with such high numbers just like any other company.. What about a Toolcraft BCG too?? Also look at the price difference too and I believe the AIM V2 has a lifetime warranty . I would love to see someone keep track of rounds and shoot say 2.5k through each bolt BCG and show which hold and which don't make it .. |
|
Quoted:
I see what your saying but the reality is that Aim has these mass produced and shit will happen with such high numbers just like any other company.. What about a Toolcraft BCG too?? Also look at the price difference too and I believe the AIM V2 has a lifetime warranty . I would love to see someone keep track of rounds and shoot say 2.5k through each bolt BCG and show which hold and which don't make it .. Quoted:
Quoted:
Compared to CMT, AIM is cheaping out. For the record, CMT is a USGI contractor. Why people are recommending AIM over CMT is confusing me lol I see what your saying but the reality is that Aim has these mass produced and shit will happen with such high numbers just like any other company.. What about a Toolcraft BCG too?? Also look at the price difference too and I believe the AIM V2 has a lifetime warranty . I would love to see someone keep track of rounds and shoot say 2.5k through each bolt BCG and show which hold and which don't make it .. Toolcraft is also a great option in my book. And also a gov contractor. AIM makes a nice BCG, but people tend to forget what it is. It's a budget BCG with decent quality. Just like Primary Arms was before they started their top of the line reticle line of scopes. |
|
Quoted:
I see what your saying but the reality is that Aim has these mass produced and shit will happen with such high numbers just like any other company.. What about a Toolcraft BCG too?? Also look at the price difference too and I believe the AIM V2 has a lifetime warranty . I would love to see someone keep track of rounds and shoot say 2.5k through each bolt BCG and show which hold and which don't make it .. Quoted:
Quoted:
Compared to CMT, AIM is cheaping out. For the record, CMT is a USGI contractor. Why people are recommending AIM over CMT is confusing me lol I see what your saying but the reality is that Aim has these mass produced and shit will happen with such high numbers just like any other company.. What about a Toolcraft BCG too?? Also look at the price difference too and I believe the AIM V2 has a lifetime warranty . I would love to see someone keep track of rounds and shoot say 2.5k through each bolt BCG and show which hold and which don't make it .. Have we seen issues with Colt and BCM? All I have ever run was Colt, BCM and DD with zero issues and the production numbers are comparable. |
|
Quoted:
Have we seen issues with Colt and BCM? All I have ever run was Colt, BCM and DD with zero issues and the production numbers are comparable. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Compared to CMT, AIM is cheaping out. For the record, CMT is a USGI contractor. Why people are recommending AIM over CMT is confusing me lol I see what your saying but the reality is that Aim has these mass produced and shit will happen with such high numbers just like any other company.. What about a Toolcraft BCG too?? Also look at the price difference too and I believe the AIM V2 has a lifetime warranty . I would love to see someone keep track of rounds and shoot say 2.5k through each bolt BCG and show which hold and which don't make it .. Have we seen issues with Colt and BCM? All I have ever run was Colt, BCM and DD with zero issues and the production numbers are comparable. Keep running those 3. They are in my top 5 with CMT and Toolcraft |
|
Quoted:
CMT builds stag bcg's to stags specs. I recommend aim due to my experience with them Quoted:
Quoted:
Compared to CMT, AIM is cheaping out. For the record, CMT is a USGI contractor. Why people are recommending AIM over CMT is confusing me lol CMT builds stag bcg's to stags specs. I recommend aim due to my experience with them Continental Machine Tool's owner is the father of the guy who owns STAG. I would seriously doubt the bolt carrier groups are specific to STAG only. Buy with confidence, CMT is top notch. |
|
I would go with the Aim bcg for the fact its full auto not semi. If we are looking at the standard stag semi auto BCG listed on their web site you have to pay extra for HP and MPI testing the carrier is 8620 steel the bolt is C158, Aim is Carrier 8620 steel bolt is 9310 plus the Aim is NiB coated. from my brief research into each of the metals I found both are made by Carpenter and Carpenter says the 9310 is the stronger metal. Again this is just a quick google search from various pages including ARFcom. So IMO the Average joe shooter isnt going to ever noteice a difference between the two one is mil spec the other isnt.
If chuck norris killed a unicorn and made an AR out its bones and shot rainbow laser that vaperized it target and abosrbed it soul to make it stronger you would still have those that would cry its not mil spec |
|
Quoted:
I would go with the Aim bcg for the fact its full auto not semi. If we are looking at the standard stag semi auto BCG listed on their web site you have to pay extra for HP and MPI testing the carrier is 8620 steel the bolt is C158, Aim is Carrier 8620 steel bolt is 9310 plus the Aim is NiB coated. from my brief research into each of the metals I found both are made by Carpenter and Carpenter says the 9310 is the stronger metal. Again this is just a quick google search from various pages including ARFcom. So IMO the Average joe shooter isnt going to ever noteice a difference between the two one is mil spec the other isnt. If chuck norris killed a unicorn and made an AR out its bones and shot rainbow laser that vaperized it target and abosrbed it soul to make it stronger you would still have those that would cry its not mil spec 9310 is used in cheap bolts because it's just that, cheaper than C-158. C-158 will continue to be all I buy, and all the military uses for utmost durability at best cost. |
|
Quoted:
9310 is used in cheap bolts because it's just that, cheaper than C-158. C-158 will continue to be all I buy, and all the military uses for utmost durability at best cost. Quoted:
Quoted:
I would go with the Aim bcg for the fact its full auto not semi. If we are looking at the standard stag semi auto BCG listed on their web site you have to pay extra for HP and MPI testing the carrier is 8620 steel the bolt is C158, Aim is Carrier 8620 steel bolt is 9310 plus the Aim is NiB coated. from my brief research into each of the metals I found both are made by Carpenter and Carpenter says the 9310 is the stronger metal. Again this is just a quick google search from various pages including ARFcom. So IMO the Average joe shooter isnt going to ever noteice a difference between the two one is mil spec the other isnt. If chuck norris killed a unicorn and made an AR out its bones and shot rainbow laser that vaperized it target and abosrbed it soul to make it stronger you would still have those that would cry its not mil spec 9310 is used in cheap bolts because it's just that, cheaper than C-158. C-158 will continue to be all I buy, and all the military uses for utmost durability at best cost. From what I have read it is more that C-158 must be purchased in much larger quantities than 9310 so only the big manufacturers can afford to buy it. |
|
Quoted:
From what I have read it is more that C-158 must be purchased in much larger quantities than 9310 so only the big manufacturers can afford to buy it. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would go with the Aim bcg for the fact its full auto not semi. If we are looking at the standard stag semi auto BCG listed on their web site you have to pay extra for HP and MPI testing the carrier is 8620 steel the bolt is C158, Aim is Carrier 8620 steel bolt is 9310 plus the Aim is NiB coated. from my brief research into each of the metals I found both are made by Carpenter and Carpenter says the 9310 is the stronger metal. Again this is just a quick google search from various pages including ARFcom. So IMO the Average joe shooter isnt going to ever noteice a difference between the two one is mil spec the other isnt. If chuck norris killed a unicorn and made an AR out its bones and shot rainbow laser that vaperized it target and abosrbed it soul to make it stronger you would still have those that would cry its not mil spec 9310 is used in cheap bolts because it's just that, cheaper than C-158. C-158 will continue to be all I buy, and all the military uses for utmost durability at best cost. From what I have read it is more that C-158 must be purchased in much larger quantities than 9310 so only the big manufacturers can afford to buy it. That's the opposite of the info I have. If you look a few years back all that was on the mainstream market was C-158, then the cheaper 9310 came on the scene and SO many manufacturers switched to 9310, I owned a couple and did not care for the bolts. The corners of the lugs rounded off and started making my bolt skip over rounds in the mag. After that I never purchased another 9310 bolt again. I am of the C-158 for life camp. |
|
Quoted:
9310 is used in cheap bolts because it's just that, cheaper than C-158. C-158 will continue to be all I buy, and all the military uses for utmost durability at best cost. Quoted:
Quoted:
I would go with the Aim bcg for the fact its full auto not semi. If we are looking at the standard stag semi auto BCG listed on their web site you have to pay extra for HP and MPI testing the carrier is 8620 steel the bolt is C158, Aim is Carrier 8620 steel bolt is 9310 plus the Aim is NiB coated. from my brief research into each of the metals I found both are made by Carpenter and Carpenter says the 9310 is the stronger metal. Again this is just a quick google search from various pages including ARFcom. So IMO the Average joe shooter isnt going to ever noteice a difference between the two one is mil spec the other isnt. If chuck norris killed a unicorn and made an AR out its bones and shot rainbow laser that vaperized it target and abosrbed it soul to make it stronger you would still have those that would cry its not mil spec 9310 is used in cheap bolts because it's just that, cheaper than C-158. C-158 will continue to be all I buy, and all the military uses for utmost durability at best cost. Err...no. Having worked in the firearms industry and provided parts to the military. I can say with confidence that changing a print for a part is nearly an insurmountable hassle once it's been approved for the military to purchase. C158 is an obsolete metal that is not in wide use anymore, 9310 is not a "cheap" alternative. It's actually quite expensive but it is a more readily available material. And it does work, just as well, if not better than C158 IF AND ONLY IF it is properly heat treated. There are a lot of these new AR parts manufacturers that have no clue how to heat treat their parts. C158 is not a magical formula that was specially developed for the M16 bolt. It's simply plastic injection mold steel that's been heat treated a certain way. |
|
Quoted:
Err...no. Having worked in the firearms industry and provided parts to the military. I can say with confidence that changing a print for a part is nearly an insurmountable hassle once it's been approved for the military to purchase. C158 is an obsolete metal that is not in wide use anymore, 9310 is not a "cheap" alternative. It's actually quite expensive but it is a more readily available material. And it does work, just as well, if not better than C158 IF AND ONLY IF it is properly heat treated. There are a lot of these new AR parts manufacturers that have no clue how to heat treat their parts. C158 is not a magical formula that was specially developed for the M16 bolt. It's simply plastic injection mold steel that's been heat treated a certain way. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would go with the Aim bcg for the fact its full auto not semi. If we are looking at the standard stag semi auto BCG listed on their web site you have to pay extra for HP and MPI testing the carrier is 8620 steel the bolt is C158, Aim is Carrier 8620 steel bolt is 9310 plus the Aim is NiB coated. from my brief research into each of the metals I found both are made by Carpenter and Carpenter says the 9310 is the stronger metal. Again this is just a quick google search from various pages including ARFcom. So IMO the Average joe shooter isnt going to ever noteice a difference between the two one is mil spec the other isnt. If chuck norris killed a unicorn and made an AR out its bones and shot rainbow laser that vaperized it target and abosrbed it soul to make it stronger you would still have those that would cry its not mil spec 9310 is used in cheap bolts because it's just that, cheaper than C-158. C-158 will continue to be all I buy, and all the military uses for utmost durability at best cost. Err...no. Having worked in the firearms industry and provided parts to the military. I can say with confidence that changing a print for a part is nearly an insurmountable hassle once it's been approved for the military to purchase. C158 is an obsolete metal that is not in wide use anymore, 9310 is not a "cheap" alternative. It's actually quite expensive but it is a more readily available material. And it does work, just as well, if not better than C158 IF AND ONLY IF it is properly heat treated. There are a lot of these new AR parts manufacturers that have no clue how to heat treat their parts. C158 is not a magical formula that was specially developed for the M16 bolt. It's simply plastic injection mold steel that's been heat treated a certain way. I probably still have a 9310 bolt around here with rounded off lugs. I'll snap you a pic and upload it in a few. It could've been bad heat treating, but either way it strayed me away from 9310 permanently. |
|
Quoted:
Err...no. Having worked in the firearms industry and provided parts to the military. I can say with confidence that changing a print for a part is nearly an insurmountable hassle once it's been approved for the military to purchase. C158 is an obsolete metal that is not in wide use anymore, 9310 is not a "cheap" alternative. It's actually quite expensive but it is a more readily available material. And it does work, just as well, if not better than C158 IF AND ONLY IF it is properly heat treated. There are a lot of these new AR parts manufacturers that have no clue how to heat treat their parts. C158 is not a magical formula that was specially developed for the M16 bolt. It's simply plastic injection mold steel that's been heat treated a certain way. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would go with the Aim bcg for the fact its full auto not semi. If we are looking at the standard stag semi auto BCG listed on their web site you have to pay extra for HP and MPI testing the carrier is 8620 steel the bolt is C158, Aim is Carrier 8620 steel bolt is 9310 plus the Aim is NiB coated. from my brief research into each of the metals I found both are made by Carpenter and Carpenter says the 9310 is the stronger metal. Again this is just a quick google search from various pages including ARFcom. So IMO the Average joe shooter isnt going to ever noteice a difference between the two one is mil spec the other isnt. If chuck norris killed a unicorn and made an AR out its bones and shot rainbow laser that vaperized it target and abosrbed it soul to make it stronger you would still have those that would cry its not mil spec 9310 is used in cheap bolts because it's just that, cheaper than C-158. C-158 will continue to be all I buy, and all the military uses for utmost durability at best cost. Err...no. Having worked in the firearms industry and provided parts to the military. I can say with confidence that changing a print for a part is nearly an insurmountable hassle once it's been approved for the military to purchase. C158 is an obsolete metal that is not in wide use anymore, 9310 is not a "cheap" alternative. It's actually quite expensive but it is a more readily available material. And it does work, just as well, if not better than C158 IF AND ONLY IF it is properly heat treated. There are a lot of these new AR parts manufacturers that have no clue how to heat treat their parts. C158 is not a magical formula that was specially developed for the M16 bolt. It's simply plastic injection mold steel that's been heat treated a certain way. There in lies the problem one can truly never know this all one can do is trust who you are buying from in the case Aim who has a great reputation here is having them done right. I swapped out my Aero BCG with a C158 bolt for an Aim NIB/Nitrate bcg w/9310 bolt because it looked cool really. You know there is mil spec for toilet paper but im sticking with angel soft |
|
Quoted:
I probably still have a 9310 bolt around here with rounded off lugs. I'll snap you a pic and upload it in a few. It could've been bad heat treating, but either way it strayed me away from 9310 permanently. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I would go with the Aim bcg for the fact its full auto not semi. If we are looking at the standard stag semi auto BCG listed on their web site you have to pay extra for HP and MPI testing the carrier is 8620 steel the bolt is C158, Aim is Carrier 8620 steel bolt is 9310 plus the Aim is NiB coated. from my brief research into each of the metals I found both are made by Carpenter and Carpenter says the 9310 is the stronger metal. Again this is just a quick google search from various pages including ARFcom. So IMO the Average joe shooter isnt going to ever noteice a difference between the two one is mil spec the other isnt. If chuck norris killed a unicorn and made an AR out its bones and shot rainbow laser that vaperized it target and abosrbed it soul to make it stronger you would still have those that would cry its not mil spec 9310 is used in cheap bolts because it's just that, cheaper than C-158. C-158 will continue to be all I buy, and all the military uses for utmost durability at best cost. Err...no. Having worked in the firearms industry and provided parts to the military. I can say with confidence that changing a print for a part is nearly an insurmountable hassle once it's been approved for the military to purchase. C158 is an obsolete metal that is not in wide use anymore, 9310 is not a "cheap" alternative. It's actually quite expensive but it is a more readily available material. And it does work, just as well, if not better than C158 IF AND ONLY IF it is properly heat treated. There are a lot of these new AR parts manufacturers that have no clue how to heat treat their parts. C158 is not a magical formula that was specially developed for the M16 bolt. It's simply plastic injection mold steel that's been heat treated a certain way. I probably still have a 9310 bolt around here with rounded off lugs. I'll snap you a pic and upload it in a few. It could've been bad heat treating, but either way it strayed me away from 9310 permanently. That's cool I'm not saying you have to prove anything, I'm just saying I'd put my money behind a reputable, competent manufacturer rather than the material. C158 and 9310 can be a crap product, and both can be a great product. Kinda like the CHF vs button rifled debate, which drives me nuts as well. |
AR Sponsor