AR Sponsor
Posted: 12/31/2010 6:56:13 PM EDT
| I recently purchased a "Tactical" bolt catch from a well known manufacturer and was disappointed to find, upon arrival, that it was an MIM part. Curious, I rummaged through my spare parts pile and analyzed all the standard bolt catches I had. To my surprise they all appeared to be cast. Is this a fact? Are most "mil spec" bolt catches being sold cast parts or am I misinterpreting what I am seeing? Am I being overly concerned about the required durability of this part, e.g. MIM or cast parts will function fine? |
|
I can recall seeing injected hammers, triggers, bolt catches and mag buttons back as far as the early 90's... about the same time I first saw a mag catch break by dropping the hammer on an assembled lower. I've also seen non-MIM hammers and triggers that were so soft they rounded off after less than a thousand rounds. Moral of that story: Don't use "baggie" parts kits on serious guns. |
| I completely agree with sub-MOA! Don't put junk parts on a series gun fighting rifle. If this is a patrol rifle spend the money and buy quality parts. It is no big secret that most parts in your AR / M4 are cast or MIM. The biggest example in quality difference between a cast part and a quality CNC machined part would be the Battle Arms Development ambi-safety. The cast parts consistently wear out quickly vs the CNC quality that we have have seen from Battle Arms. Quality parts are far more precise, built from far better materials, and will last far longer than any cast or MIM part. Do they cost a little more...Yes! Is it worth it for smoother, more reliable operation...YES! As previously mentioned...if this is a home defense or patrol weapon or any weapon that you demand consistent reliability buy quality parts! |
|
Interesting that you should ask this. Of all the LPK parts I've had (most from known "good" suppliers), bolt catches have failed more than anything else - not by breaking, but just by wearing to a point of being unreliable. I finally just ordered a bag of Colt bolt catches from SAW, and I use them as replacements when appropriate (also for any new assemblies).
ETA - And I did try the "tactical" catch that is, I believe, a DPMS part with the same excessive wear as a result. |
| What made me pick on the bolt catch, as you articulated, is that it is one part in an LPK that cheap production methods will reveal themselves. This part literally gets slammed by the bolt at the end of every magazine, yet most manufacturers treat it as a low stress part. Did the Colt manufactured bolt catches pass muster? |
|
I opted for a Colt unit as well. Yesterday, I cried to Duffy over at Battle Arms Developments about the lackluster quality of some of these overlooked small parts. He indicated that their company is looking into building a top shelf quality bolt catch.
If it is reminiscent of their selectors in any way, it will be a winner. |
|
Quoted:
Moral of that story: Don't use "baggie" parts kits on serious guns. I do not agree with that statement at all. I have seen far more aftermarket triggers fail than standard triggers. The Magpul guys specifically state they run factory trigger groups for reliability. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Moral of that story: Don't use "baggie" parts kits on serious guns. I do not agree with that statement at all. I have seen far more aftermarket triggers fail than standard triggers. The Magpul guys specifically state they run factory trigger groups for reliability. A bit of a non sequitur there YaNi05. |
What didn't make sense? I was stating that there is nothing wrong with the run of the mill lower parts kits. It works for the thousands and thousands of LEO/MIL guys every day...
AR Sponsor