AR Sponsor
Posted: 11/5/2002 1:36:04 AM EDT
| I'm considering using a chromed bolt in a Colt upper. I've read about the pros and cons of chromed bolts and believe the pros have it. My question is for those that have experience with DPMS's bolts/carriers, especially with Colt uppers in particular. How do they perform? Do they fit well? Does the chrome flake or chip off? And so on. If anyone has had good experience with another manufacturer, let me know about that too. Thanks. |
|
Chuck, The wear on the interior of the upper is less due to the decreased friction afforded the chromed bolt vs. the parkerized bolt. It's also a heck of a lot easier to clean than a regular bolt group (you can see the fouling easier and crud doesn't stick because it's less porous). Not to mention it looks way nicer. I'm just concerned about inferior quality and fit at this point. |
|
Noone here has had a problem with chromed bolt/carriers wearing the upper reciever. None of the members here have ever produced a document stating the reason for the chrome carrier not being milspec any more is because of excess upper wear. As for hard chroming not being a precision coating this is wrong. I am having a full auto Colt bolt and carrier machined to semi specs and am then having it hard chromed. The tolerances on hard chrome are tighter and thinner than any other coating. I just cant wait to get my carrier back and put 1000 rounds through the rifle to give my report of reliability and take pics of the upper to show wear. I hope if I have no malfunctions or upper wear this urban legend will finally die. Ask Pinco Palla about the wear in his uppers. I understand ALL of his AR15s have chromed carriers. |
| The thickness of the hard chrome is so thin relative to the clearance between the carrier and receiver housing it is irrelevant. The diminsions of new parts vary more than the thickness of the plating. A hard chromed carrier will not produce more wear on the aluminum receiver, it produces less wear. |
|
Yes, this issue of chrome vs parked finish has come up before. I am a Class III dealer who specializes in putting together M16 uppers. I use chrome bolt carriers and chrome bolts in most of my uppers. I have some uppers that I have fired so many rounds through that I have worn out the barrels and have had to replace them. Even after that, these uppers show no appreciable wear. What wears the metal surfaces making sliding contact like that is increased friction. Since chrome has a low coefficient of friction, there is much less friction between the chrome bolt carrier and the anodized upper receiver in comparison to the friction between a parked bolt carrier and the anodized upper receiver. Therefore, there is less wear. No one knows why the military stopped using the chrome bolt carriers. I think it was a matter of keeping the cost down. At any rate, it does no good to speculate about the chrome bolt carriers wearing out the upper receivers. What needs to be done is to fire 20K rounds or so and prove that the upper receiver wears prematurely with the chrome bolt carrier. I have not been able to prove that with my shooting. Charles Tatum Alamo Professional Arms |
AR Sponsor