Seeing about how the VPC is going on and on about Armalite makes me want to buy one. I still haven't gotten my AR-15 yet, and I'll have an extra 500 dollars in a month so I guess I'll go ahead and put one on layway. I've researched Bushmaster and Colt, but I don't know too much about Armalite. I know there in the ABCs, have Chrome-Lined Barrels, and use 4140 steel. So what else should/need to know. Since this is a first rifle, I'm probably going to go for a 20" A4. So enlighten me.

(My other choice is a Colt 6400C, but I'm still waiting on how Colt will react on the AWB. )

Quoted: Seeing about how the VPC is going on and on about Armalite makes me want to buy one. I still haven't gotten my AR-15 yet, and I'll have an extra 500 dollars in a month so I guess I'll go ahead and put one on layway. I've researched Bushmaster and Colt, but I don't know too much about Armalite. I know there in the ABCs, have Chrome-Lined Barrels, and use 4140 steel. So what else should/need to know. Since this is a first rifle, I'm probably going to go for a 20" A4. So enlighten me. (My other choice is a Colt 6400C, but I'm still waiting on how Colt will react on the AWB. )

Between Eagle Arms/ArmaLite & Colt, ArmaLite is the better choice...

Although they're not the original ArmaLite that designed the gun, Eagle Arms produces good guns...

I know they bought the Armalite name. Is there really a difference in the 4140 steel and the 4150 steel. My line of work requires me to scale off Blackhawks and fight hundreds of terrorists that have zombie grizzly bears as backup. So the best gear is important for my line of work.

Really, is there a difference?

ArmaLite or Colt both are the best, you cant find any better

Those damn zombie grizzly bears with their retractable claws and forward vertical teeth...they really should be banned...

Quoted: I know they bought the Armalite name. Is there really a difference in the 4140 steel and the 4150 steel. My line of work requires me to scale off Blackhawks and fight hundreds of terrorists that have zombie grizzly bears as backup. So the best gear is important for my line of work. Really, is there a difference?

This is lightweight Tit-less WAF shit. A Mini14 with a slightly bent barrel and Wolf ammo would be more than sufficient...!
PS---www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=181565

Colt has the oddball large hammer/trigger pins, and the offset, screw type front pivot.  Sear block that does not allow use of some aftermarket triggers.

Armalite has parts and pivot pin that that interchange with everything else on the market, but for Colt.

I have in my safe, Olympic Arms, DPMS, J&T, Cav Arms, and some other parts guns.  I did have an Armalite but sold it to a LEO friend who is very happy with it.  All of these uppers, and the parts inside them, will interchange.  And if I had Bushmaster and RRA, those would interchange, too.

So, Colt or Armalite?  Go ARMALITE!

Quoted: Colt has the oddball large hammer/trigger pins, and the offset, screw type front pivot.  Sear block that does not allow use of some aftermarket triggers.

It's been a long time since Colt used the offset and oversized front pivots.  All of their models, save the MT6400C, still use the screw type pivot pin intead of the captured pivot pin, however.  


Armalite is good to go.  No worries.  

Current production Colts hav e a .250" screwed pivot pin. It can be fixed.

I like Colt the best. They have the best quality control and lowest lemon factory I have seen. I would rank Bushmaster next. I have not shot one but I have heard good things about RRA.
Pat

Quoted: Current production Colts hav e a .250" screwed pivot pin. It can be fixed.

Not true.  All current production Colts have the .250" front PUSH pins.

However, I'd still go with Armalite because of their pre-paid Sunset program, their mid-length gas system, and the way they handled the SEBR affair.

Really, when did they start that?  I haved been ignoring Colts for a few years.  The screw assembly pivot was a pain in the drain.  Well, the large pins and sear block is enough to nix a Colt, too.  I have enough trouble stocking small parts.

Most of the Colts I have seen the last few years have been left new in box as "collectors" items.  I thought guns were for shootin'.

Quoted: Are you going to be sustaining rapid or full auto fire for extended periods?  If not, 4140 will do you fine.

The specified sustained rate of fire for the M16 using 4150 steel is 12 rounds per minute.  When I'm practicing I shoot at a lot, lot, lot faster rate then 12 rounds per minute.  Sometimes it not that hard to go through almost two mags in minute when practicin NSR drills.  So I went for 4150 chrome lined barrel.

Also, I don't really think there is much of a price difference between 4150 and 4140 barrels so why scrimp to save a few bucks?

4140 should do just fine,  I shot 7 30s thru mine with out a hitch. Why don't you look into Rock river arms.

Quoted: A single mag dump, won't test 4140 steel.  I've seen 4140 barrels shoot 5 mags straight and there were no ill effects.  The barrel was barely smoking. IIRC it was 9 mags and it got so hot it melted the handguards to the barrel.  Steve said it still shoots the same and other than peeling the handguards off he's seen no side effects.

BTW, when I do the drills I mentioned I'll do around 250 rounds and the damn barrel gets hot!  I like the extra insurance of the 4150, needed or not.

I see your point about the 4140, now what about the price difference?  I still say there is very little to none if you shop around so why not get the 4150?

If you price out an Armalite, Bushmaster, RRA and LMT uppers they will be very close especially if you go through one of the site dealers.  It's not uncommon to see new unfired uppers with 4150 steel barrels on EE for even better prices.  

So, I guess the question is really why should one get a 4140 instead of a 4150 barrel?

Touche my friend!  Good answer!

-Chris

As far as rapid fire, the only time I will do that is after break-in. After about 750 round being shot to break in, I'll run 4 magazines as fast as I can fire to make sure everything is working properly. I don't bump fire unless I have an AK. So rapid fire is only a relibility tester, thats it.

One more question. Do new Armalites come with a carry handle on the A4 models?

www.bushmaster.com

Armalite A4's come with the 1" scope mount, but no carry handle.  They also include a cable lock.

I wouldn't hesitate to buy a Bushmaster or DPMS.  I wouldn't slam them, as I haven't owned  them.  I do own an OLY and an Armalite.  Let me tell you about all of my stoppages and failure to feeds:





.......birds chirping.


And then there are those reliability and accuracy issues as follows:


......frogs going ribbit, birds chirping.


So, from an owner and shooter, you won't go wrong with an Armalite.  Order now, there is high demand, as there has been for several years running.

So would it be best to just order a spare from Bushmaster or another vendor?

you know I don't know how I missed that.

I would gladly buy an Armalite if I could get a 20" chrome lined barrel in 1:7 twist. I have been looking over their website and the nearest I found were the SS match barrels in 1:8. Any advice?

Thank you!

Quoted: In my opinion, there isn't really any significant difference between 4140 and 4150 for rifle barrels. If you can imagine looking at tempering temperature/hardness graphs for the two types, the 4150 graph just extends farther up into an area that is not useable for the desired purpose anyway. If anyone is making claims to the contrary, I'd say they are at least 99.99% a marketing gimmick.”

If there's very little difference then why not make 4150 barrels in 1/7 and shut up all us picky SOB's?

Well said by the Armalite rep.  It's nice to actually see some science behind a claim.  Marketing is very attractive, though.

Armalite may have found that boring is actually more difficult to do on the higher grade steel.  More difficult to do well, that is.  I'm sure their machines will bore just about anything but I wouldn't be surprised if quality control is actually better with the 'inferior' steel.

What would you rather have, a better guarantee of bore consistancy or 1% more resistance to corrosion (on a rifle you KNOW you give proper love to)?

I doubt you even actually GET that 1%.

From Armalite's post:
"I'd say they are at least 99.99% a marketing gimmick.”

We know the US military orders their firearm barrels made from the 4150 steel, so "gimmick" or not, Colt and Bushmaster uses this steel for their barrels, while others don't.

This is kind of like the discussions about cast vs. forged AR receivers. Many folks would come in and state that there was little or even no advantage gained by going with the forged receiver. As time went by, more and more AR firms decided to spend the few extra bucks to give the customers what they mostly requested.......... the forged receiver (as the military uses).

How about AR receiver finishes? Some firms were using (maybe still are) sprayed and baked on paint/epoxy finishes. More and more AR folks found out that our military requires a certain type of anodized finish, in addition to having a baked in dry lube done on the upper receiver. And it sure seems like many AR firms that did spray on finishes, either went away, or have made their finishes look more like what our military gets on their rifles.

Same thing seems to have happened with the Chrome Lining issue. Many people would come in and say that the chrome lining was a ridiculous issue to worry about in a civilian AR, and of course they would say that the usually small accuracy advantage that may be gained by having a non chrome lined barrel was in itself a good enough reason to go with the non chrome lined (even when the shooter did not need match competition accuracy). Even so, slowly but surely, more and more AR firms have decided to add chrome lined barrels to their line of products. Chrome lined being what many, if not most AR folks are requesting (and being the way the military demands their barrels).

Similar discussions have been held about other AR components and their manufacturing methods. There was the Cast VS. Forged gas chamber/front sight issue. The phosphate VS. blued issue. The roll pin VS. solid taper pin issue. The plastic buffer VS. metal buffer issue. The plastic VS. metal trigger guard issue. The plastic VS. metal delta ring issue. And a bunch of other things. Some issues were pretty minute, others were not. In the end, most folks will lean toward whatever is closest to what our military demands in their M16/M4 rifles.  


Now we see this 4140 vs. 4150 barrel material discussion going on. People will come in and say that the differences are small, or even don't exsist. As time goes on, more AR folks will ask for the 4150 barrels (for whatever their reasons), and more and more AR firms will spend the few extra bucks to give them what they want.......... 4150 steel barrels (like the material used to manufacture the military barrels).

See the  pattern



Yojimbo may have a point when he said:

"If there's very little difference then why not make a 4150 barrels in 1/7 and shut up all us picky SOB's?"  

LOL!!

One thing I don't see mentioned when it comes to the 4140 vs 4150 argument is availability and economics.
4140 useage in the manufacturing world almost 4 times that of 4150.
This isn't just making barrels, this is total steel industry useage.
Factor in the situation in the steel market right now (just getting the material), it is no wonder that most barrel makers are using 4140. It is common and they don't have to wait for the mills to make a special run.
My guess is the only reason that Colt is using 4150 instead of 4140 is that they can't get their goverment contract updated so they could use 4140.
Getting the goverment to change a specification borders on impossibility, even if you throw money back at them using both hands.
Sure, the goverment uses it, but they sure must be paying for it too.
Goverment contractors also have a better chance of getting what the goverment wants, remember: we are at war. The goverment gets first crack at materials it deems necessary anyway.

You want to trade 10 points of carbon for 10-20 points of hardness and eat the cost of trying to get it?
Be my guest.

What about 4150 over 4140 do you find better?  It's not like we're talking 10 karat gold vs 14.  .1% carbon or 1001 pts carbon vs 1000 in doesn't seem like a big deal.

Then we remember that in chemistry small variations can mean big changes in the finished product.  So -what is- the finished product?  Is it the raw barrel blank?

Obviously the answer is no.  Milling and hardening, threading, crowning and chambering.  Not to mention applying a chrome lining then phosphating / finishing.

OK, now you have a barrel.  Not a bit of 4140, 4150 one-bellion-twenty or ANY OTHER metallurgical designation.  This isn't a structural support in a suspension bridge, it's not a bolt, nut, washer, pry-bar, anvil or propeller on a nuclear submarine.  It's a RIFLE BARREL.  I gather most of you wouldn't attempt the prybar thing or use your bbl as an anvil.

Now, AS A BARREL, what is the difference between one and the other?  Corrosion?  OK, go soak yours in salt spray - like I said no sub propellers here just rifles.  I dont plan on leaving fouling substances on mine long enough to be a problem. EVEN IF I DID, I'm not leaving it on the barrel, it's on either the finish or the chrome lining, neither of which depend heavilly on the content of the base metal for the quality of their resistance (yes, it's true they do rely on it but the differences between a phosphated 4140 bbl and a phosphated 4150 bbl will probably not alarm anyone).

Maybe strength?  Hmm.  If the metals available in 1898 worked ok for Mauser I'm sure 300%+ more physical material in a modern steel alloy will work for me.  As a rifle.  You know... not a bridge support, barbell or anvil.

Pitting?  If you pitted out the chrome in your barrel or the phosphate do you really think 4150 would have made a difference?

OK - rant off.  Not trying to get on anyone's case here but I think I have some good points.

Just like I figured it would be, a lot of yada yada yada about what makes one just as good as another. And just like I knew it would be, an almost never-ending battle


Like I had mentioned above, some of the "this" VS. "that" on AR's makes more sense than others.
The barrel twist rate is just another one of those debates, and some firms just choose to offer what they feel is the best compromise to serve both the old standard military bullet weight (55 grains), and the modern standard military bullet weight (62 grains). Some of these same firms even offer barrels with faster twists as an alternative option for handling the longer/heavier rounds by offering barrel rifle twists like the 1 turn in 8" and 1 turn in 7".  


Like I had said:
"People will come in and say that the differences are small, or even don't exsist. As time goes on, more AR folks will ask for the 4150 barrels (for whatever their reasons), and more and more AR firms will spend the few extra bucks to give them what they want.......... 4150 steel barrels"

Many folks want their AR guns to be made with the same types of materials that the US military demands their guns be made of. The fact is, whether or not one believes that 4140 steel is about as good as 4150, it will not change the fact that it will still be looked at by many as being a substitute material (when comparing it to the 4150 steel used in the M16/M4 barrels).

When an AR firm is keen enough to use the 4150 steel, and then goes on to chrome line their 1 turn in 7" and 1 turn in 9" rifled barrels, they pretty much eliminate a possibly small debate issue. Though the barrel steel being 4150 is not a big deal to some, it oftentimes will be appreciated by those wanting their AR to more closely represent the US M16/M4. Oh sure, nobody would be able to tell, but the owner would. Kinda why some would not want a lab made diamond, nobody would know that it's not natural, but the owner would. By using the same materials used to manufacture the US military M16/M4 barrels, the subject then becomes a non issue for most AR buyers. Then, by offering shorter, longer, stainless, phosphated, muzzle braked muzzle, threaded muzzle, plain muzzled, bayonet lugged, non bayonet lugged, fluted, thicker, thinner, and a ton of other options, they attempt to make even more people happy. There is no way that a firm will make everyone happy by trying to offer every possible configuration, but some AR firms are sure trying

In the end, the firm that hears the buying public best, will probably end up having more of the AR market share. As of right now, that would be Bushmaster.

Quoted: I would gladly buy an Armalite if I could get a 20" chrome lined barrel in 1:7 twist. I have been looking over their website and the nearest I found were the SS match barrels in 1:8. Any advice? Thank you!

There is absolutely NO round that you will commonly encounter that won't be sufficiently stabilized with a 1:8 twist.  I frequently fire 80 gr bullets out of 1:8 barrels at a distance of 600 yards with no stabilization issues, as do thousands of other highpower shooters.  The only two rounds you MIGHT have an issue with stabilization are the tracer round and the 90 gr JLKs.  Though I haven't shot any of it myself, I'm reluctant to believe that the 62 gr tracer round (I forget the designation) won't stabilize in a 1:8 barrel, even with its long length.

In short, a 1:8 will do it all.

oh, and if you're looking for something to build up a rifle with,
|
|
|
V

It all went right over your head.

If an AR firm was going to ask a bunch of average potential buyers whether they want a barrel made of 4150 or 4140, the responses would probably favor the 4150, especially if the potential buyers know that the US military counterpart barrels are made of 4150.

If the same folks were asked whether they wanted a chrome lined bore and chamber, or a non chrome lined version, the responses would again probably favor the chrome lining, especially if the pontential buyer knows that the US military counterpart barrels are chrome lined.

Of course there will be exceptions, like with competitive shooters, but the average AR buyer would most likely prefer the chrome lined 4150 barrel.
For the exceptions, some AR firms are keen enough to do what I stated earlier, which is to try and make optional products that fill those peoples requirements.  



Place ten thousand quality barrels at roughly the same price on a firearms sales board.
Five thousand will be 1 turn in 9" barrels made of 4150 and chrome lined.
The other five thousand will be 1 turn in 9" barrels made of 4140 and chrome lined.
The 4150 barrels will most likely be the better sellers. A company like Bushmaster knows this, and that is one of the major reasons why they are still the top selling AR's in the country

That is why I stated this above:
"In the end, the firm that hears the buying public best, will probably end up having more of the AR market share. As of right now, that would be Bushmaster."

I guess you must feel that the US specifying the use of 4150 steel for their gun barrels is a gimmick as well?


Just listen to yourself! LOL!

I mean, should the heat be on Bushmaster for using the proper military M16 barrel steel? For using was is probably the more expensive steel?
Does that sound like a gimmick or something they should be ridiculed for? Or, does it sound like they are trying to make and offer an AR that for the most part is actually made using the same materials found in the M16?

Or, maybe the heat should be on Armalite for using what is probably a less expensive steel? For using a substitute, rather than using the 4150 steel specified by our US Government?

You may be in the crowd that would choose the 4140 chrome lined barrel, but I still feel that the majority of potential buyers would go with the materials chosen by our military. It may have miniscule advantages, but miniscule or not, they chose the higher grade steel for a reason. When in doubt, use what the design calls for.  

Maybe the folks that choose 4150 over a 4140 are just not very bright (including the folks that chose the 4150 steel for use in manufacturing US military barrels), but since the civilian legal AR's we speak of are pretty much M16's redesigned to be in semi auto form, I feel that sticking with the current specified M16 materials makes a lot of sense
How anyone can say that Bushmaster is using gimmicks by using the same materials that are used on military M16's, is somewhat strange. They are only doing what they feel the public actually wants, which again, their sales numbers have proven!


The curse words were not needed to explain your position, but I'm sure a classy guy like yourself already knew that    

I own three Armalite rifles. I am completely satisfied with each of my rifles, and I look forward to the day when I can purchase another. I am a devoted Armalite customer because they make a quality rifle.

I can end this now. Someone show some proof or the end difference of some barrels that are 4140 and 4150 that are used and defected buy USES. Come on, the real world I dont think 1% of carbon is going to stop the Earth from turning. LIVE IT SHOOT IT.