User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 10:28:20 AM EDT
[#1]
Dont chrome bolt carriers and bolts cause the aluminum in the upper to wear out faster?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 10:38:25 AM EDT
[#2]
I believe 'go chrome or go home' refers to the bore.
From Bushmaster.com: "There are several technical reasons not to use chrome bolts and carriers. Mil. spec. in the Viet Nam era required chroming the bolts and carriers to guard against rust and corrosion, but it was found that chroming caused problems. The hydrogen present in the chroming process was sufficient to create a condition called hydrogen embrittlement wherein the hydrogen would react with the highly hardened steel of the bolt and/or carrier - and make it susceptible to catastrophic breakage if a final stress relieving process was not correctly followed. Additionally, if the chroming process was not done correctly, the chrome could “flake” up from bolt or carrier surfaces and effectively gouge or scrape off the receiver's baked lubricant coating and subsequently gall on the aluminum surfaces inside the receiver. This condition could very quickly stop the rifle's firing cycle - all good reasons why the Mil. Spec. does not now call for chromed carriers or bolts." |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 1:42:56 PM EDT
[#3]
Somebody should tell Smith Enterprises, DPMS and Les Baer immediately!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 1:50:08 PM EDT
[#4]
this whole chrome issue is a much ado about nothing.......chrome lined bores are one thing in a M16 that will see plenty of abuse and neglect, and will have some protection against rust etc... on a civilian AR, the most abuse those see is the occasional scratch as it comes out the safe, or gun case. it's just not necessary to have a chrome bore or bolt carrier group...frankly it's just a big waste of money.
so this whole "go chrome, or go home" is just a bunch of phooey. the only folks that really care about chrome lined barrels, are the same people that think they're little AR is the same as a M16. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 1:56:17 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted: Somebody should tell Smith Enterprises, DPMS and Les Baer immediately! There is little doubt in my mind that Clint Smith mentioned this to Les Baer and was duly ignored. Clint did tell him to keep his carbine down to 6lbs, and Les told him he could do it, if he left off the barrel. The Les Baers are overkill. As for the others, it is their job to seperate you from your money. I believe DPMS also markets a titanium firing pin. Nuff said. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 1:58:39 PM EDT
[#6]
I am also of the belief that chrome is not necessary for a civilian defense rifle. Even the first AR's to go to 'Nam weren't chrome lined and they worked fien for the SF troops.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 1:58:58 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted: this whole chrome issue is a much ado about nothing.......chrome lined bores are one thing in a M16 that will see plenty of abuse and neglect, and will have some protection against rust etc... on a civilian AR, the most abuse those see is the occasional scratch as it comes out the safe, or gun case. it's just not necessary to have a chrome bore or bolt carrier group...frankly it's just a big waste of money. so this whole "go chrome, or go home" is just a bunch of phooey. the only folks that really care about chrome lined barrels, are the same people that think they're little AR is the same as a M16. Cheap ammo and tracers never get fired down civvy bores. Nah, never. Fact is, a lot of these rifles are kept with an eye toward self defense. In that case, isn't a little extra green, for a little extra reliability, a wise investment? There is nothing wrong with unlined bores, on range guns, target rifles/varmint rifles, and plinkers, but they are great for the defensive rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 2:00:15 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted: this whole chrome issue is a much ado about nothing.......chrome lined bores are one thing in a M16 that will see plenty of abuse and neglect, and will have some protection against rust etc... but on a civilian AR, it's just not necessary...and a waste of money. so this whole "go chrome, or go home" is just a bunch of phooey. Waste of money? What is it, like $20-$50 more for chromelining? Just the time saved because of easier cleaning is worth that much to me, not to mention the other benefits. Following your logic only the military and police need AR's, civilians don't need them at all and it's a waste of money...[rolleyes] |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 3:11:46 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: I am also of the belief that chrome is not necessary for a civilian defense rifle. Even the first AR's to go to 'Nam weren't chrome lined and they worked fien for the SF troops. Wow, you really don't know what you're talking about, do you? The first M16 in 'Nam had chromed chambers, but not bores. With the high humidity, the barrels became rusted very quickly. It was a cost cutting move at the time to not chrome the bores, but it was soon shown to be one of the worst mistakes in cost management the Army had every seen. Why do you think military barrels have been chrome lined since the 1910's (the 1911 was chromed)????? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 4:47:58 PM EDT
[#10]
The first M16 rifles sent to Vietnam did not have chrome chambers or bores.
Chrome lining was one of the things they did to improve the reliablity of the early M16. THE BLACK RIFLE has all the history: [img]http://www.booktrail.com/Guns_Rifles/The%20Black%20Rifle.jpg[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 5:09:01 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted: Wow, you really don't know what you're talking about, do you? The first M16 in 'Nam had chromed chambers, but not bores. With the high humidity, the barrels became rusted very quickly. It was a cost cutting move at the time to not chrome the bores, but it was soon shown to be one of the worst mistakes in cost management the Army had every seen. Why do you think military barrels have been chrome lined since the 1910's (the 1911 was chromed)????? Not here to pick fights but like the other guy said the first M16 didn't have chromed bores or chambers. And as for our other military rifles M1 Garand and 1903's they didn't niether. The only thing on a Garand that might be chromed is the gas port area. I for one want my little rifles to have a chromed bore and chamber. [;D] WarDawg |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 5:44:15 PM EDT
[#12]
Just as a side note, the M14 rifle DID have a chrome lined barrel.
So also does almost every rifle adopted by a military force since WW2. Whether the extra $35-$50 is worth it to you, is something for you to decide. I personally would like to see some stats on the crome plated components, but as far as barrels are concerned, I have made my choice. Chrome lined please... :) Tex78 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 5:53:10 PM EDT
[#13]
I use baer chromed extractors because I use alot of wolf and it minimizes wear with steel case ammo If I could chrome a couple of other things I would chrome to the rear inside of the carrier where the f rear of the firing pin sticks out always alot of carbon there and the firing pin tract inside the bolt also I beleive the LMT bolt carriers bolt is electrolosis chrome wich is a lighter covering than full hard chrome.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 7:34:24 PM EDT
[#14]
The only disavantage to a chrome bore is a slight loss of accuracy that can only be known to a very few shoters that use their rifles in field conditions.
Bench shooters and a few good highpower shooters can tell the accuracy difference but there is no real world difference. I am not sure about the AR but on a M1a the USGI chrome bore will out last three unlined bores and shoot almost as good. So in my opinion in a field combat self defense type rifle you need a chrome bore and chamber. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 8:07:06 PM EDT
[#15]
As far as chrome lined chambers I can add this: My Olympic arms rifles were 90%+ reliable with their unchromed chambers/bore. My Colt Hbar is 100% reliable with it's chrome chamber. For accuracy I think the Colt is better than the Oly ever was. I no longer own an OLY, my rifles need to be 100% reliable and I'll never own another non chrome chambered AR except for maybe a varmint upper, NEVER a defensive rifle.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 8:26:25 PM EDT
[#16]
A chrome carrier will not wear out the aluminum upper faster. That is TOTALLY FALSE. Industrial hard chrome is used to reduce friction and wear. Some how someone decided that the metal in AR15s is different than the metal on the rest of planet Earth and this casues wear on the upper reciever.
Bangz, Since this is your post and its going off topic could you post a pic of your new bolt and carrier? I am thinking of having it done by them myself. I have had several all hard chromed weapons before and wear was never increased. The usual thing that is referenced is the relative hardness of chrome. That has nothing to do with wear. The friction or lack of it does and chrome reduced the friction and thus the wear. AR15s were originally spec'd to have all the steel internals hard chromed. If not done right this can cause hydrogen enbrittlement. AP&W does the hard chrome right. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 8:29:17 PM EDT
[#17]
All my uppers have Chrome lined barrels and Chrome LINED carriers only! Never had a problem or accuracy complaint,why do we need to second guess the milspec if it ain't broke?Regards,Blade
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/7/2003 8:54:32 PM EDT
[#18]
Another vote for chrome lined bores and chambers.
HUNTER. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 1:07:41 AM EDT
[#19]
I won't even go into the chrome debate, but will add this. The LMT bolt I have appears nickel plated and is really smooth, and puuurdy!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 2:31:29 AM EDT
[#20]
[Quoted:Wow, you really don't know what you're talking about, do you? ]
When it was just Special Forces in 'Nam serving as "advisers" they had M-16's with unlined chambers and bores like Stoner had designed. They were also using IMR stick powder loads, as was originally pec'd by Stoner. They also provided proper maintenance to their firearms. McNamara and his wizz kids tried to "improve" the range of the 5.56 by changing to "ball" powder which caused fouling and higher cyclic rates. The Army also didn't issue cleaning kits to the troops, telling them the rifle was maintenance free. Then the reliability problems reared their ugly head. Odd thing was before the Army could come up with a cheap and reliable way to chrome line the bore, the problems of pitting, erosion and reliability went awya because proper maintenance was being performed just as Stoner had said. For that matter Denny Hansen had an Oly with unlined chamber and bore that went 80,000 rounds before he changed the barrel. So who doesn't know what they are talking about[?] |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 4:14:13 AM EDT
[#21]
Quoted: A chrome carrier will not wear out the aluminum upper faster. That is TOTALLY FALSE. Industrial hard chrome is used to reduce friction and wear. Some how someone decided that the metal in AR15s is different than the metal on the rest of planet Earth and this casues wear on the upper reciever. Bangz, Since this is your post and its going off topic could you post a pic of your new bolt and carrier? I am thinking of having it done by them myself. I have had several all hard chromed weapons before and wear was never increased. The usual thing that is referenced is the relative hardness of chrome. That has nothing to do with wear. The friction or lack of it does and chrome reduced the friction and thus the wear. AR15s were originally spec'd to have all the steel internals hard chromed. If not done right this can cause hydrogen enbrittlement. AP&W does the hard chrome right. I heard about this chrome-wear business some time ago. Why did they stop chroming the exterior of the bolts? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 5:21:40 AM EDT
[#22]
For those of you who think it's a worthy investment, Steve @ [url=www.adcofirearms.com]ADCO Firearms[/url] does a nice job with hard chrome. I've seen bolts and complete bolt groups of his. Very nice.
Not sure on the price, but he's quick to answer e-mail. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 6:01:44 AM EDT
[#23]
i would like to ask a question on this topic. i have a rra m4gery and it has a chrome moly barrel. this is different than chrome lined. is it better or worse than chrome lining and why?
please answer, i would like a bit of edumication |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 7:46:36 AM EDT
[#24]
To be honest noone knows why they stopped chroming the bolts and carriers. There has been speculation the chrome was too bight thus giving away your position. There has been specualtion it was a cost saving measure. There was speculation it was because the hard chroming was done by the lowest bidder and heat treated impropperly resulting in hydrogen embrittlement. There was speculation it was done to allow visual verification to the grunt of the newly redsigned and now reliable M16s in Vietnam. There is only speculation on this point but no hard proven facts.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 7:47:57 AM EDT
[#25]
All chrome lined barrels are made of chrome moly steel. Yours is unlined thus harder to clean, less corrosion resistant and the chamber is not as slick thus not as reliable.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 10:33:27 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: As far as chrome lined chambers I can add this: My Olympic arms rifles were 90%+ reliable with their unchromed chambers/bore. My Colt Hbar is 100% reliable with it's chrome chamber......I'll never own another non chrome chambered AR except for maybe a varmint upper, NEVER a defensive rifle. I had a blue car, but it had engine problems so I paid a ton of money and bought a RED car instead. I will never own a blue car again. Chrome and non-chrome is not going to make a difference in "reliability"...for anything. If you have problems w/ rounds getting stuck on the feed ramps, take 2 minutes with a Dremel tool and polish them up. For people worried about corrosion...get a stainless steel barrel and keep it lubed/clean. Chrome-plating/lining is a waste of $$. Great for Vietnam when nobody had cleaning kits; but for a home defense rifle? How much jungle rot are you going to get in your closet? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 10:52:54 AM EDT
[#27]
Another "expert without a clue" heard from.
The chrome chamber is one of the greatest improvements ever done to the AR M-16 system and that is a fact known to anyone that knows anything at all about the system. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 10:53:43 AM EDT
[#28]
Quoted: Quoted: As far as chrome lined chambers I can add this: My Olympic arms rifles were 90%+ reliable with their unchromed chambers/bore. My Colt Hbar is 100% reliable with it's chrome chamber......I'll never own another non chrome chambered AR except for maybe a varmint upper, NEVER a defensive rifle. I had a blue car, but it had engine problems so I paid a ton of money and bought a RED car instead. I will never own a blue car again. Chrome and non-chrome is not going to make a difference in "reliability"...for anything. If you have problems w/ rounds getting stuck on the feed ramps, take 2 minutes with a Dremel tool and polish them up. For people worried about corrosion...get a stainless steel barrel and keep it lubed/clean. Chrome-plating/lining is a waste of $$. Great for Vietnam when nobody had cleaning kits; but for a home defense rifle? How much jungle rot are you going to get in your closet? [noclue] this sounds like some of the sour grapes on my M4 thread..."Waddya need with all that shit anyway??" Translation- "I can't afford it, so I'll denigrate it." |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 11:01:45 AM EDT
[#29]
I do know chrome air cleaners and valve covers make cars go faster.
I do know that USGI chrome lined M14 barrels will last longer than non-chrome lined barrels. I do know that chrome bolt carriers and bolts are pretty and clean up a bit easier. As far as super tough Denny (he always looks so pissed and tough in the pictures) goes I call Bullshit… Quoted: Denny Hansen had an Oly with unlined chamber and bore that went 80,000 rounds before he changed the barrel. I know the gun writers never lie but come on, 80,000 rounds. I think Denny doesn’t know what he’s talking about. J |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 11:18:19 AM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: the only folks that really care about chrome lined barrels, are the same people that think they're little AR is the same as a M16. You mean my evil bullet hose isn't an fully automatic M16 capable of killing an entire villiage and bringing down military aircraft with a single pull of the trigger while holding it from my hip???!!!! Hmmmmm that would explain a lot. :-) |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 11:20:13 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote "I know the gun writers never lie but come on, 80,000 rounds. I think Denny doesn’t know what he’s talking about. "
If I read correctly at Oly's website, this was verified by them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 11:26:39 AM EDT
[#32]
MY .02 on chrome barrels and bolts;;;
my experience with non-chrome bores is this, the damn spent shell case would not extract after less than 200 rounds of fire because the bore was so dirty. ever since i switched to chrome lined barrels i find they don't need cleaning but every 500 to 1000 rounds. this is with Q3131A and Xm193 ammo too. personally i don't want to clean my barrel every 100 rounds. "time out bad guy, i need to scrub my bore" on the carrier/bolt side of this issue i can say this, i had a hard chromed bolt break lugs off upon extraction. i also saw another chrome bolt do the same form a friends rifle, first hand. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 11:50:31 AM EDT
[#33]
Hmm, add my .02 in the mix. My RRA non chromed lined barrel went 2500rds before I had my 1st FTE using all Wolf ammo w/ no cleaning. The FTE finally happened after leaving it & 12 30rd mags with a friend who decided it would be fun to see how hot he could get it.
Let it cool down for a couple of minutes & continued to fire for the rest of the day. And what's this nonsense about a non-chrome lined barrel being difficult to clean? Maybe if you fit into the lowest comon denominator category that the military writes it's manuals for. Here's a new cliche, Stainless it's more painless. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 1:45:29 PM EDT
[#34]
did some one say my name? and who says i'm painless?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 2:51:28 PM EDT
[#35]
Industry chromes many parts used in machines that endure harsh/extreme use. Theres nothing wrong with chromed bbl's, and there's evidence that chroming increases many positive factors of the rifle.
I got myself a Durachrome M4 barrel and bolt (not carrier) from Oly when they still made them. I think the best anti-corrosion low Maintenance combo would be a chromed stainless barrel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 6:07:18 PM EDT
[#36]
You cant chrome stainless without using a copper, then nickle undercoats thus it becomes less relible than a straight hard chromed piece of chrome moly steel.
Who ever said use stainless instead of hard chrome earlier is a moron. Hard chrome resists corrosion more than stainless. Hard chromed chambers have less friction upon extraction. Thats a fact. Just becasue ONE unchromed rifle didnt have a problem does not mean hard chroming will not increase reliability for the vast majority. Go peddle your misinformation elsewhere. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2003 6:55:54 PM EDT
[#37]
I have to say that there have been a lot of posts in here that make me just [rolleyes].
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2003 6:10:55 AM EDT
[#38]
Why would I chrome a stainless barrel?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2003 6:23:15 AM EDT
[#39]
Quoted: You cant chrome stainless without using a copper, then nickle undercoats thus it becomes less relible than a straight hard chromed piece of chrome moly steel. Who ever said use stainless instead of hard chrome earlier is a moron. Hard chrome resists corrosion more than stainless. Hard chromed chambers have less friction upon extraction. Thats a fact. Just becasue ONE unchromed rifle didnt have a problem does not mean hard chroming will not increase reliability for the vast majority. Go peddle your misinformation elsewhere. Hey buddy, if you have the education of a 7 year old you can keep your barrel chamber clean. I'm all for having a chrome lined barrel but understand firearms have been with out them for a hundred years. The average Joe Blow really doesn't need one. If you have one great good for you. Edited for bad language. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2003 6:34:23 AM EDT
[#40]
Go Nickel-Boron or Go Home!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2003 8:25:59 AM EDT
[#41]
Like I said just because you read somehting online does not make it true. Hard chromed carriers CANNOT wear your upper reciever faster. It is pure science. There is no exception for ARs. As for deployable rifles that could just as easily be becasue they give away your position and are not as low profile. ALso the chromed carriers are likely VERY OLD and I would not want a very old carrier in my rifle either if I can have a new one.
Also it reduced cost. You see with chromed barrel/chamber and inside the carrier these parts have their lives extended so much that the chroming process more than pays for itself in extending the weapons life. The hard chromed carrier and bolts do offer more corrosion resistance and better reliability and even less wear on the upper reciever but those DO NOT pay for themselves in increased life of the parts. This is the most logical explanation as it is pure economics. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2003 8:41:05 AM EDT
[#42]
you having a chromed bore for some of the same reasons a chamber and bolt are chromed. In full auto a non chromed bolt will fail before a chromed bolt, about 200 rounds on full auto non stop firing if barrel does not go first Failure is because of heat most of the time. chrome is good if done right and cleans up nicer then non chrome
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2003 8:54:23 AM EDT
[#43]
nothing wrong with a model t ford but i am glad i dont drive one to work every day
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2003 11:56:08 AM EDT
[#44]
If chroming your barrels,bolts,chambers makes you feel all warm and squishy inside. Go right ahead.
A vast majority of AR owners do not live in the jungles of Vietnam, they don't have heat issues with full-auto applications, they DO have cleaning kits and CLP, and they DO have an IQ high enough to warm a slice of bread. My bolt/carrier is Blak-Tac. NOT chromed. I polished the feed ramps to the chamber a little to make them more forgiving to a wider variety of ammo and crud build up...no feeding problems whatsoever. The chamber is standard chromeMOLY and works just fine with anything cycled throught it. The rifle is cleaned after every shooting session like Uncle Sam taught me. If this, along with the testimony of hundreds of AR owners, gunsmiths, and manufacturing R&D is 'misinformation'....then I would say your opinion is in the minority and you can peddle your arrogance elsewhere. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2003 12:30:05 PM EDT
[#45]
"i would like to ask a question on this topic. i have a rra m4gery and it has a chrome moly barrel. this is different than chrome lined. is it better or worse than chrome lining and why?"
"chrome moly" refers to a steel alloy that has had chromium and molybdenum added to the iron and carbon to add strength and resiliency. The alloy metals are mixed uniformly into the steel. It's a whole different ball game from chrome lining, which is basically plating the barrel and/or chamber with hard chromium. It's no "better" or "worse" than chrome lining, it's a description of an unrelated aspect of the barrel's construction. My Bushmaster, for example, has a cromoly barrel that was then chrome lined. As far as I know ALL AR15 barrels are made of cromoly steel these days. I'll take my barrels chrome lined if I have the option, thank you. But if any Unlined Barrel Hardliners (UBHs) want to GIVE me a unlined barrel free of charge, I won't turn my nose up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2003 1:31:37 PM EDT
[#46]
If you are buying or building an AR and you have the choice between a chrome chamber and a non chrome chamber it would take the dumbest bastard on the planet not to go with the chrome chamber.
You can claim the chrome BORE causes a loss of accuracy and that MAY be true. No one wants a chrome BORE on a match rifle. You can ponder the usefullness of a chrome bolt and carrier and go either way and it will be fine. A chrome carrier could be hard on the reciever but that is not for sure A chrome chamber makes a huge improvement on any semi auto rifle and that is a fact known by most intelligent people but apparently not by a few here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2003 1:51:49 PM EDT
[#47]
I've been building up civie copies og all the different M16 models used by the military oiver the past 40 years, and in building up an original Air Force version M16 type, have installed an unnotched chromed Carrier and bolt. This is the only one of my ARs w/such, and only done for authenticty. The barrel is unlined, but the chamber is chromed; for just the reasons put forth by others.
You better believe that the M16A1 copy has the parked bolt/carrier and the fully lined barrel, though.[:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2003 4:28:58 PM EDT
[#48]
Quoted: Like I said just because you read somehting online does not make it true. Hard chromed carriers CANNOT wear your upper reciever faster. Well, they actually CAN, under the right circumstances. What was happening to the Army's carriers was that the chrome was flaking off, and the chrome flakes would get onto the wear surfaces and grind away at the aluminum (being softer than the steel carrier). This was a very real and legitimate problem. Now, the question is: was that a problem with early 60's chroming methods? Maybe. It's possible that modern industrial hard-chromed parts wouldn't have that problem. But the Army feels pretty strongly that the chromed bolts and carriers that remain in their inventory (from the 60's) aren't good enough to be deployed. We also know that flaking chrome has been a problem for some aftermarket bolts that were given less-than-ideal chroming jobs, and that some of them have had problems with hydrogen embrittlement (cracked bolts & lugs). Does this mean that chrome-plating can't be done right? I dunno; I believe it can, but I also believe that the $100 chrome BCs probably aren't up to the job *I* want out of my rifle. -Troy |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2003 5:45:05 PM EDT
[#49]
A modern properly done hard chroming CANNOT flake off. You can bend the steel and the underlying steel will show through the places where the chrome seperates but the chrome will not unbond itself. I dropped one of my all hard chromed revlvers once and the metal dented and the chrome stayed conformed to the dent. I also have not heard of the Hard chromed slides of Sig pistols wearing out the black hard anodised frames of Sig handguns. Perhaps they used a type of decorative chrome or did the process wrong back in the day. But if that were the case youd think the chrome would flake off the barrel and chamber WAY before it would come off the bolt and carrier. There is far more abbrasion and pressure genreated in the chamber and bore.
Where did you get the info on chrome flaking Troy? I have heard that story but never found a source for it. One member said his flaked off on this board and he would mail it to me if I posted my address. I did and he then told me I had to pay shipping etc. It went on and on and I never got to see it nor was a pic ever posted. I have a DECORATIVE chromed punch in my tool set and it flakes like a mofo but its nothing like the finish I had on my pistols. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2003 5:57:55 PM EDT
[#50]
This thread reminds of harley riders with their chrome battery covers and chrome air cleaner covers arguing with hi-tech sport bike riders sporting carbon fiber and aircraft grade billet aluminum. Neither will ever see the others point of view, and both are blinded by their own experience. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
