AK Sponsor
Posted: 3/18/2013 11:18:05 AM EDT
|
I saw on the FB website that the mini Beryl has a 1 in 9 barrel twist. Is this accurate? I know these websites can have mistakes sometimes, and reason I ask is that I was planning on having the barrel on an Archer cut to minimum length with a pinned flash hider. Should there be any issues with this?
Thanks |
| Thanks, is there any variants of the Beryl with a barrel length somewhere between the 18 in on the standard rifles, and the shorter length of the mini Beryls? I remember seeing a picture somewhere with a Beryl that looked like it had the front sight block moved back to the gas block, much like what many people here do to cut barrel length. I don't know if these were standard production or just something that was custom modified |
|
Quoted:
Thanks, is there any variants of the Beryl with a barrel length somewhere between the 18 in on the standard rifles, and the shorter length of the mini Beryls? I remember seeing a picture somewhere with a Beryl that looked like it had the front sight block moved back to the gas block, much like what many people here do to cut barrel length. I don't know if these were standard production or just something that was custom modified Beryl Commando. Several prototypes were made, but to lack of interest it was never produced in numbers. 375mm (16") barrel. Gas system is "middle length" between Beryl and Mini Beryl. Link to article on Beryl Commando, via Google Translate |
|
I'm surprised there was lack of interest in it. It seems like everyone prefers the more compact rifles now.
I have seen other posts that you have a mini beryl, it is the civilian version correct? How do you like it? Is there really a practical use for it? I mean, I heard ballistics for 5.56 out of a short barrel are not the most preferred. Is it more of just a "fun" gun or is it really something to consider SBRing? Here in US we have to pay extra tax and fill out papers for this, but you probably know Another thing I noticed was that the civilian Beryls sold over there are marked as .223 while the ones on the US market are marked 5.56. Is there any differences in the two rifles? I know .223 and 5.56 are almost the same, but there are some rifles said not to fire 5.56 ammunition in rifles marked as .223. Also, what is Polish military currently using for barrel treatment? Do they do Chrome lining? Or is it chrome nitrate/nitride (sorry that could be wrong, it's just what I can remember it being called at the moment)? Are the civilian rifles being sold with the same barrels used for military? If not, is the option available? Thanks again |
|
Quoted:
I'm surprised there was lack of interest in it. It seems like everyone prefers the more compact rifles now. I have seen other posts that you have a mini beryl, it is the civilian version correct? How do you like it? Is there really a practical use for it? I mean, I heard ballistics for 5.56 out of a short barrel are not the most preferred. Is it more of just a "fun" gun or is it really something to consider SBRing? Here in US we have to pay extra tax and fill out papers for this, but you probably know Another thing I noticed was that the civilian Beryls sold over there are marked as .223 while the ones on the US market are marked 5.56. Is there any differences in the two rifles? I know .223 and 5.56 are almost the same, but there are some rifles said not to fire 5.56 ammunition in rifles marked as .223. Also, what is Polish military currently using for barrel treatment? Do they do Chrome lining? Or is it chrome nitrate/nitride (sorry that could be wrong, it's just what I can remember it being called at the moment)? Are the civilian rifles being sold with the same barrels used for military? If not, is the option available? 1. Intended users for this version opted to adopt HK416 in 14.5" and 16.5" configuration. 2. Yes, it is civilian version, meaning no auto sear hole and no "expensive" switch. 3. I use it for some 3Gun shooting (we do not have PF requirement, only that we use intermediate or rifle cartridges). It is as good as any AR inside 100m, but for longer ranges it is 3-4MOA rifle. Must account for that. According to SBR cost, believe me, $200 tax stamp is nothing compared to time and money involved to get firearms permit in Poland, with great chances to not get it at all, even when all legal requirements are fulfilled. 4. In Europe "5.56 vs .223rem" is synonymous, as C.I.P. specifies exactly same pressure requirements for .223rem, as NATO specifies for 5.56 NATO. My rifle has 5.56 stamped on barrel and trunion. My German made HK MR rifle is marked as .223rem, by has 5.56 chamber. Not using 5.56 in rifles marked .223rem is SAAMI advice and applies to firearms made to SAAMI specs. 5. Polish military uses chrome lining. For some reason as US does: "it was best 100 years ago, so it is best today". 6. Civilian rifles are sold full mil-spec. Actually they usually are made as part of military production batches. Archers, for US had separate batches, because of changes from mil-spec specified by I.O. There are also some special run barrels made for civilian rifles, when carbon nitriding of barres is required. All barrels made by FB Radom are cold hammer forged. FB Radom do use carbon nitriding also on internal parts (bolts, carriers, gas pistons). Personally I would prefer to have barrel carbon nitrided, but I got my Mini as birthday gift from my parents and my GF and factory only hade mil-spec ones on hand, so I do not complain. |
|
That clears a lot of things up, thank you.
I guess the SBR stamp is not so bad, while I would like to get both, that might not be possible for me. So I was wondering if the mini would be a better choice than the rifle if I had to pick one. Of course right now we don't have any mini versions in the US yet, but I heard rumors that another importer might take over from IO. I don't know how true it is, maybe you know more about this? As for carbon nitriding in special runs, these special runs are made only for the civilian rifles correct? Is there any reason why they bother offering both chrome lining and carbon nitriding? You said you would prefer a carbon nitrided barrel, what advantages does it offer? I heard perhaps barrels with carbon nitriding are more accurate, but are they as durable? I have heard that some US carbon nitrided barrels do not last as long as the chrome lined barrels, but then again they were not cold hammer forged, maybe that was what makes the difference? |
|
Quoted:
I guess the SBR stamp is not so bad, while I would like to get both, that might not be possible for me. So I was wondering if the mini would be a better choice than the rifle if I had to pick one. Of course right now we don't have any mini versions in the US yet, but I heard rumors that another importer might take over from IO. I don't know how true it is, maybe you know more about this? As for carbon nitriding in special runs, these special runs are made only for the civilian rifles correct? Is there any reason why they bother offering both chrome lining and carbon nitriding? You said you would prefer a carbon nitrided barrel, what advantages does it offer? I heard perhaps barrels with carbon nitriding are more accurate, but are they as durable? I have heard that some US carbon nitrided barrels do not last as long as the chrome lined barrels, but then again they were not cold hammer forged, maybe that was what makes the difference? I know, but I can not tell you, because then I would need to kill you, but I do not want to spend my money on plane ticket to came and do that ;) As to "mini" there was always a plan to deliver them in pistol configuration, but I.O. did not order them, even original contract included 500 "pistols" to be ordered. Factory uses nitriding also on other barrels they make (they do CHF barrel for some other European manufacturers). Also they do nitriding on several internal parts. Actually nitriding (per research they done back in 1994) is superior to CL in every aspect in quality CHF barrel made from alloy they use (they did not test other kind of barrel, as they make only CHF). But nitriding must be made very carefully and matched to barrel alloy properties. To thin penetration and it will wear out and barrel will have life much shorter than CL one. To deep penetration and surface will became to hard, prone to bristle and cracking. Personally I prefer nitriding over CL. Better accuracy is one of factory, provided barrel is properly made in first place. Nitriding does not change barrel dimensions or surface, so it preserves barrel accuracy. Chrome lining adds layer of chrome. Even in very carefully prepared barrel, there is not way to have absolute control over uniformity of chrome layer thickness and this can affect accuracy. Of course if barrel is bad at the beginning all that both CL or nitriding do, is preserving those faults. Take in mind that CL is 100 years old technology, adopted by Soviets to make up for low quality steel, corrosive ammo and poor maintenance. U.S. done quite good trough WW2 without it (partial CL was used in some designs but not complete barrel lining). Back during WW1 only regular carbon steel or stainless steel was available, those days we have myriads of modern, low chromium alloys (that do not count as "stainless steel", because it is high chromium alloy) that have superb corrosion resistance and are much better suited for rifle barrels than stainless steel. Those alloys benefit much more from ntiriding that from chrome lining. Hoever there is nothing more conservative, than military when it comes to small arms - rule is, that CL worked good in the past, so it is way to go in the future. Firearms manufacturers must take this attitude in mind, if they want contracts. CL is there and it is not going anywhere. |
|
Quoted:
As to "mini" there was always a plan to deliver them in pistol configuration, but I.O. did not order them, even original contract included 500 "pistols" to be ordered. ARG! I've been wanting one of these ever since I heard about them. I hope somebody eventually imports them! |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I guess the SBR stamp is not so bad, while I would like to get both, that might not be possible for me. So I was wondering if the mini would be a better choice than the rifle if I had to pick one. Of course right now we don't have any mini versions in the US yet, but I heard rumors that another importer might take over from IO. I don't know how true it is, maybe you know more about this? As for carbon nitriding in special runs, these special runs are made only for the civilian rifles correct? Is there any reason why they bother offering both chrome lining and carbon nitriding? You said you would prefer a carbon nitrided barrel, what advantages does it offer? I heard perhaps barrels with carbon nitriding are more accurate, but are they as durable? I have heard that some US carbon nitrided barrels do not last as long as the chrome lined barrels, but then again they were not cold hammer forged, maybe that was what makes the difference? I know, but I can not tell you, because then I would need to kill you, but I do not want to spend my money on plane ticket to came and do that ;) As to "mini" there was always a plan to deliver them in pistol configuration, but I.O. did not order them, even original contract included 500 "pistols" to be ordered. Factory uses nitriding also on other barrels they make (they do CHF barrel for some other European manufacturers). Also they do nitriding on several internal parts. Actually nitriding (per research they done back in 1994) is superior to CL in every aspect in quality CHF barrel made from alloy they use (they did not test other kind of barrel, as they make only CHF). But nitriding must be made very carefully and matched to barrel alloy properties. To thin penetration and it will wear out and barrel will have life much shorter than CL one. To deep penetration and surface will became to hard, prone to bristle and cracking. Personally I prefer nitriding over CL. Better accuracy is one of factory, provided barrel is properly made in first place. Nitriding does not change barrel dimensions or surface, so it preserves barrel accuracy. Chrome lining adds layer of chrome. Even in very carefully prepared barrel, there is not way to have absolute control over uniformity of chrome layer thickness and this can affect accuracy. Of course if barrel is bad at the beginning all that both CL or nitriding do, is preserving those faults. Take in mind that CL is 100 years old technology, adopted by Soviets to make up for low quality steel, corrosive ammo and poor maintenance. U.S. done quite good trough WW2 without it (partial CL was used in some designs but not complete barrel lining). Back during WW1 only regular carbon steel or stainless steel was available, those days we have myriads of modern, low chromium alloys (that do not count as "stainless steel", because it is high chromium alloy) that have superb corrosion resistance and are much better suited for rifle barrels than stainless steel. Those alloys benefit much more from ntiriding that from chrome lining. Hoever there is nothing more conservative, than military when it comes to small arms - rule is, that CL worked good in the past, so it is way to go in the future. Firearms manufacturers must take this attitude in mind, if they want contracts. CL is there and it is not going anywhere. Haha, no worries I understand. I hope whoever the new importer is, that they will have them here before this coming January. How do you like the rail on the mini? It looks like it sits a little high, any problems? |
|
Quoted:
How do you like the rail on the mini? It looks like it sits a little high, any problems? Are asking about short rail that is cantilever over to cover (aka POPC4)? No problems at all, hex wrench, two set screws loosened and rail is removed and thrown away  (together with built in rear sight)
Fro me it was completely useless. Unfortunately Polish Army strongly believes in idea of using iron sights by looking under red dot or optics. This is source of this rail abominations on Beryl or UMK-2000 GPMG (http://www.zmt.tarnow.pl/pdf/039_aUKM%207,62x51%20mm.pdf). |
AK Sponsor