# Building a budget carbine ?



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

AR platform in 223/5.56 or I actually kick around the idea of 300acc blackout as I am less likely to shoot long range and 30cal might be nice , add that to the debate 

the goal is a very usable carbine built or bought on a budget for classes and entry into 3 gun matches and for real world use 

what parts are worth spending on and what parts really don't change much


----------



## Chuck R.

GREENCOUNTYPETE said:


> AR platform in 223/5.56 or I actually kick around the idea of 300acc blackout as I am less likely to shoot long range and 30cal might be nice , add that to the debate
> 
> the goal is a very usable carbine built or bought on a budget for classes and entry into 3 gun matches and for real world use
> 
> what parts are worth spending on and what parts really don't change much


Based on your intended use, I'd skip the 300acc and stick with 5.56. An average class is about 300-400 rds a day, and average 3 gun match might be 60-100 rds depending on the stages. That translates into a lot of brass which I sometimes (a lot of times) don't get back. This is where .223/5.56 excels, no issue getting brass/components. 

"Real world use" to me contradicts "budget". The AR15 "platform" has gone through 40 something years of modifications to make it what it is today. Some of the "budget" makers omit certain steps, or QC checks. 

The average shooter that goes through a couple of boxes a session will probably never see the effect of any shortcuts. Go to a decent class, shoot in the dust/sand in various positions for 3-500 rds and you'll get to see guns fail. I've seen bolt lugs break, and gas keys that were improperly staked start short-stroking the gun. 

IF I was putting together a carbine for serious work, I wouldn't skimp anywhere on the upper. Get a quality bolt, and bolt carrier group by a company that know's what they're doing, and has it MPI'd. Make sure that the upper has properly cut M4 feed ramps (not "dremeled" in after it's anodized). The bolt carrier needs to be chrome lined etc. 

There used to be a pretty good chart available that detailed where some makers came up short compared to the DoD TDP (Technical Data Package) of what an M4 carbine "should be". It's been gone for a while now. 

I did find this link however that lists some of the desirable technical aspects:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pwswheghNQsEuEhjFwPrgTA&single=true&gid=5&output=html

Here's an older version of "the chart":










That gives you an idea of the features to look for.

Chuck


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

I see much talk about chrome lined chamber and bore But I would be thinking about going with a heavier contour stainless steel barrel , does the stainless steel barrel make chromed lined a non issue


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl

Chrome-lined and SS are not really comparable. Chrome lining will improve the life of a CM barrel beyond what a SS barrel could, but often comes with some sacrifice in accuracy. If the barrel is an area where you're putting a more critical eye to, check out FNC/Melonite. It's sort of like a high-temp bluing, really (VERY high-temp salt-bath), that converts the surface of the steel, rather than coating it. It starts as a CM barrel, but ends up with better corrosion resistance than SS, longer life than a chrome-lined one, doesn't suffer the accuracy issues of chrome, and is black - win-win-win.

I agree with Chuck's recommendation to put most of your money-horsepower into the upper components. The upper itself is not so critical, but the barrel and bolt-carrier group are. His chart is out of date, though. I'm sure there are other ticks on it that have changed, but, for example, I know for a fact that at least one of the manufacturers listed there are, in fact, shot-peened and magnetic-particle inspected post-proof. I've watched one of them do it that, according to the chart, do not. 

On that note, the shot-peening is much more critical than MPI. The SP actually makes an improved bolt, where the MPI just confirms that it didn't fail during proof. With the current-standard bolts, failure during proof is a near non-issue. In reality, few of the manufacturers listed on the chart even make their own bolt and barrel extensions. In fact, having worked some sourcing efforts for mil-spec M4/M16 production exercises, I'd be willing to bet that at least 75% of the bolts out there comes from the same company, Microbest, in CT. 

If you truly want a poop-hot bolt, check the specs of your component sources, and look for one that is made from Carpenter 158. Taking the effort to make it from the mil-spec material, they are assuredly going to shot-peen it, and MPI becomes an afterthought that they probably do just to justify the stamp.

My recommendation is to equip the lower with whatever furniture suits your tastes (I'm a big fan of "throwback" fixed A1 stocks, but current, ergonomic pistol grips, myself), and focus on a _first_ upper in whichever of the two calibers you see an immediate need for first. I'm a .300BO devotee, myself. Over the last couple years, the lowers I have wearing uppers for home-defense, and even the one I have for varmint shooting to the tree-line and garden 100m away, have all drifted to .300BO. I even use one for deer hunting. But, if 5.56 suits your immediate needs and ammo availability, build that upper first, and consider adding a .300 upper later.

Though, you haven't seen what a white-tail woods rifle is until you've carried a 16" .300BO, front-slung, with a snag-free, fixed A1/2 stock, and short, 10rd mag. It's light, quick, ready at-hand if you jump something, and both hands are always free for wading through the brush.


----------



## littlejoe

Hope you guys keep talking about AR's. Uppers and lowers, and such. I don't know diddly about them. The two or three I've shot, I was disappointed with, accuracy wise. Kinda like the mini-14's I've had, so I just never ventured. Actually they'r not very appealing aesthetically.

From talk, I've heard some can be very accurate, if you spend enough? But, if theyre not accurate, they're not fun to shoot. I kept the last mini-14 I ended up with, and set it up as a home defense firearm.

THe other two I had rode in a ranch pickup, and got filthy dirty. Never failed to fire or cycle, but had a much hard(er) time hitting a coyote past a 150 yards.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

little Joe watching the you tube videos of people assembling their kits short of doing it your self gives the best look at what does what and where all the parts go and why , definitely with a lower cost factor.

I am much more familiar with the Mini and the AK myself but trying to learn the AR and get one at some point 

300 black out does sound nice to me it is unlikely any of my shots will be over 150 yards and the 300bo is much more cast lead friendly than the 223 and If I am not shooting my own cast I am likely not shooting .
It would also make a better hunting gun , and if I built it I would have to take it hunting at least some.
but it does lack the easy availability of 223


----------



## Shrek

How does the firearm manufacturing regulations the prez E.O'd in a few years back affect building a firearm?

I recall restrictions were placed on how , where and what materials could be used for manufacturing components.

Do any of those E.O'd regulations restrict milling and modifications of parts from different pre-manufactured sources or salvaged from other weapons to make a custom weapon like the ATF regulations against filing down the catch in a semi auto to make it full auto?

I remember back in the 1990s when the triburst bolt on trigger ratchets some put on their semi autos so one trigger pull produced a 3 shot burp without actually altering the weapon itself other than moving the trigger forward a bit received quite a bit of negative publicity and were up for being banned or regulated also.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

as far as I know building a semi auto from a purchased 100% complete receive is a non issue as long as the barrel is 16 inches for a rifle or if you build a pistol under 16 with no shoulder stock 

and if you finish your own 80% or make your own receiver you can never sell that receiver is my understanding of it.

the standard thing of no making SBRs without NFA papers applies 

you can keep your full auto my finger works faster than I can get on target any way


----------



## kycrawler

I have had decent results from the model 1 sales parts kits reasonable priced and mine were all accurate enough. I am looking at building a 7.62x39 16 inch carbine be a handy little deer /ranch rifle and the Russian bulk ammo is cheap not a big fan of 300 bk in a semi auto lots of time making brass to chuck it everywhere


----------



## Chuck R.

GCP,

Don't know how budget you want to go, but here a S&W M&P-15 1-9 twist for $627.00 delivered:

http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/..._id/71969/Rifles/Smith+&+Wesson/M&P+15+Rifles

Looks to be a pretty decent deal. 

Chuck


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

I had been thinking this kit and a 59 dollar stripped lower 
http://www.midwayusa.com/product/84...9-twist-16-dissapator-barrel?cm_vc=subv840432

thinking that longer sight radius would be better than shorter 

then I saw yours and see the logic to having the light above the barrel in front of the sight but you need some space for that that the disipator kit doesn't leave

I have definitely looked at the S&W sport , is it a concern not having a forward assist ?


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl

GREENCOUNTYPETE said:


> ...is it a concern not having a forward assist ?


No. Not a big concern.

If you have a round that doesn't want to chamber, it is usually best not to use a mechanical means of forcing it in there. Get it out, move on to the next round, and keep going.

The one legitimate purpose for a forward assist is (near) silent charging. If you have to charge your rifle, or want to press-check, and don't want the enemy to hear you, you can ride the charging handle, and use the forward assist to manually push the carrier into battery.


----------



## Chuck R.

Agree, the original Stoner design omitted the FWD assist, the majority of the AR10/SR25 rifles also omit it. 

Although I was trained by the Army to hit it was part of âlock and loadingâ I cannot ever remember having to use it. As Gunmonkey points out, if you have an issue with a round, the best COA is to go through a malfunction drill (Tap-rack-bang or variant) and get the round out of there. 

The sight radius is moot IF you plan on running an optic. I like a fixed FSB because itâs one less thing to screw with should your optic go down. Iâve trained to use the optic tube in conjunction with the front sight to mimic a giant ghost ring sight picture with a lower 1/3rd co-witness. At CQB distances itâs accurate enough to get the job done. 

IF I had my druthers and were setting up a carbine strictly for 3 gun, Iâd run a mid-length gas system on about an 18â barrel (1-9 twist), with a free-float tube forearm, and either a 1-4x or 1-6X optic. That would handle about the majority of shots youâd encounter. For BUIS, Iâd get one of the off-set variants that you use by ârollingâ the rifle slightly. With the longer FF forearms, you can mount the light FWD and the front sight behind it, still giving you a 12 OâClock mount. 

With the dissipater kit, youâd want one of these mounts (which is what Iâm using):
http://www.mossietactics.com/productinfo_v3.aspx?productid=MT2400FSB-U









This is not the most accurate setup due to the mount on the FSB and a non-FF handguard. 

This is where youâll need to decide what you want the gun to do match grade VS defensive carbine. Theyâre not mutually exclusive, but if youâre going the match route optimizing accuracy, the rifle needs to be set-up that way from the start. Whereas a defensive carbine, usually intended for SD distances accuracy isnât really that large of a concern. My LE6920 fills a defensive role, so itâs set up that way. Itâs accuracy is âgood enoughâ, itâs optic is fantastic for speed, but again âgood enoughâ for accuracy at SD type distance. 

Chuck


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

well I did it , I pulled the trigger on my budget AR build 

I think I found the best I could without going overly high priced black friday sales helped 

PSA was nice enough to put together a nice kit at a nice price , I think for my first it will be good , and I don't have to second guess if I got all the right parts 

here are the specs 

*Barrel*: This 16" chrome lined, Mil-B-11595E, chrome moly vanadium steel barrel is chambered in 5.56 NATO with a 1/7 twist, M4 barrel extensions, mid-length gas system, and has an A2-style profile. The barrel is high pressure tested and magnetic particle inspected, and then phosphate coated. The barrel is finished off with a .750" diameter F-marked front sight base with sling swivel, Magpul MOE handguards, and an A2 flash hider. Barrel is made for us right here in Columbia by FN Manufacturing.
*Upper*: Forged 7075-T6 A3 AR upper is hard coat anodized black for durability. Featuring M4 feedramp cuts, T-marks, these upper upper receivers are made for us right here in the USA.
*Bolt Carrier Group*: Shot peened Carpenter 158 Bolt, MP tested & phosphate coated. 8620 full auto profile steel carrier is chrome lined and phosphate coated. Chrome lined gas key is fastened with grade 8 bolts and staked per mil-spec.
*Lower Build Kit:* Includes Palmetto State Armory MOE Lower Parts Kit with MOE grip, MOE stock, and Mil-Spec buffer tube assembly. Everything you need to finish your stripped lower!

I have an anderson stripper lower to build this on 

total cost for the rifle 475 

399.99 for the kit , 25 for shipping 
50 for the lower through a local dealer at my club 

it seemed like a good balance for quality for cost


----------



## unioncreek

I have basically the same from PSA. The only thing I changed right away was put a Anderson trigger group in. To me it's a much better trigger. I also did the mod to tpget rid of as much trigger pre-travel as I could and still keep it safe. I run 400 - 500 rounds a session through mine and have never had a problem. I'm planning on building a 300BO and will shoot mostly subsonic rounds.

Bob


----------



## Jolly

I'll be the first to admit I'm not a knowledgeable guy about AR platforms. As I've mentioned before, I have had good luck with an Adams Arms - the gas system seems to be a lot cleaner.

Something to consider when shooting a lot of rounds, or not?


----------



## Texaspredatorhu

I have built a few ARs. I cannot for the life of me remember what brand the bolts were. I do know that I have had nothing but luck out of the Yankee Hill Machine barrels. I have built them all on palmetto uppers and lowers. Mag pul stocks, regular A2 stocks, whatever was available. I always bought the blemished receivers as well because I have them cerakoted anyways. The true beauty of an AR is that if you ever want the 300aac you can get an upper for it. I was looking at the Ruger American with 16" barrel for a 300aac because they come "can" ready. But the energy on the subsonic rounds is less than desirable. I want to build another AR but I'm in saving mode with my 4th kid coming along. So I am Johnny cashin' it!


----------



## unioncreek

The reason for subsonic rounds is accuracy, the 300BO doesn't stabilize the bullet very well when it transitions from supersonic to subsonic. Plus they work well with a suppressor when running a tactical coarse. 

Bob


----------



## Texaspredatorhu

unioncreek said:


> The reason for subsonic rounds is accuracy, the 300BO doesn't stabilize the bullet very well when it transitions from supersonic to subsonic. Plus they work well with a suppressor when running a tactical coarse.
> 
> Bob


I don't know about the accuracy part but the purpose of subsonic rounds is to suppress them. The sonic part is the crack and without it you can keep the gun pretty quiet. If you can get a 5.56 subsonic and you can you will group about 2.5inches at 50 yards. A 300aac with 110 grain pills work pretty good out to 250-300 yards off a bench but the subsonic takes a lot more adjustments to go that range m. The subsonics are for CQC


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

I think the standard for entry gun had been Suppressed 9mm with 147gr ammo , the 300 gives 220gr high BC bullets that work well at 3 yards but carry their energy well at 100 meters in a platform that keeps the mags the same with the 5.56 and only the barrel changes making things very convenient it also more than doubles the energy on target over the 9mm 147gr load 

from a training officers position it has to look very good to have an entry gun that is identical in all but caliber to the rifle carried in the squad car that the officers are already trained on 


most of the shotguns that were in police use have been sold off , I bought one from a local department via a local dealer, they are good guns but represent another thing to train on and I hear some officers didn't like the recoil of the 12 ga slugs 

also many of the new police officers are coming from the armed forces and are already very familiar with the AR platform


----------



## Dutch 106

Hey Guys I walked in here to start this very story I picked up a couple of cheap Anderson lowers at the gun show and plan on one of them being a 300 blackout and the other 5.56. I'm getting frustrated with the low number of interesting guns that aren't priced thru the roof. 
SO I figured I parts piece together these over the winter.
I cannot quite figure out if its cheaper to buy a complete upper or part it together. Part of this is to add to my knowledge base on Armory level repairs.
Dutch


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

it depends what your trying to build , and whats on a better sale and the answer changes sometimes by the hour 

web sites for parts 

http://palmettostatearmory.com/

https://rouschsports.com/

http://www.andersonrifles.com/

I have been watching these sights for parts and It just happened that for a few hours PSA had very close to what I wanted at a price I couldn't beat by purchasing all the parts separate


----------



## JeepHammer

OK, just to add to the confusion...

This is what I learned from the Marines & from 40 years of personal experence...

In the military, the gunsmiths/builders 'Cherry Pick' military barrels,
Mostly looking for chrome lined barrels that were 'Tight',
But the chroming process didn't 'Choke' the barrel.

Since chrome lining does NOT build up evenly, the barrels were gauged to make sure the barrel was NOT fire forming the bullet, 
At the very least, making it longer & thinner, undersized for the rest of the bore...
The closer to the chamber the choke point is, the less accurate he barrel will be.

Some chokes can actually cause the rifling to sheer through the bullet jacket, and a sheered jacket is a 'Flyer' since a severed jacket is an airfoil when it peels away from the core at 300,000 RPM in heavy air resistance.

Stainless barrels, particularly if they are cryo treated, will live as long as common steel barrels, and be just as accurate, while being more accurate than common chrome lined barrels, and being just as or more corrosion resistant.

Inaccuracy is usually one, or both, of two basic things...
There is no reason an AR can't be as accurate as the average bolt rifle,
When you address these two common issues.

1. Barrel Rifling Twist Rate.
Guys that buy 1/7 in barrels LOVE to shove light weight, fast 'Varmint' bullets through a super fast rate military barrel designed for slower, longer, heavier military bullets.

The facts are facts,
You shove a THIN JACKET varmint bullet, very short/very little bullet load baring surface (the part in contact with the rifling),
And that rifling twist rate is too fast for the short, thin skinned bullet,
The rifling is simply going to sheer the copper jacket off the bullet.

The rifling becomes a 'Fluted' reaming die sizer since the bullet can't hold to the rifling twist rate.

The next thing is CENTRIFUGAL FORCES that come into play when the bullet leaves the barrel,
You just cut deeply into the THIN copper jacket, then you throw that bullet into open space spinning at well above the 300,000 RPM fly apart rotational speed most bullets are designed for (.223/5.56).

This is VERY easy to adjust for, simply 'Load Down', slow the bullet down...
If this improves accuracy, it conclusively proves you are shoving too light of a bullet down a fast rate barrel way too fast...

A 1/9 barrel will shoot 40 to 55 grain bullets REALLY well at the usual 3,000 FPS (+/-).
A 1/10 barrel will shoot 30 grain bullets well, 

While a 1/6 or 1/7 twist usually doesn't start to shoot well under 60 grain bullets, but will be accurate with bullets up around 77 to 90 grains really well...
Long, heavy, SLOWER bullets when you are talking super fast twist rates.

1/10 or 1/11 has been the 'Standard' bolt/varmint rifle twist rate since the inception of the .223 round with varmint weight bullets...

2. The second thing that makes ARs 'Inacurate' is the barrel to upper reciever facing.
I have yet to see a 'Factory' AR upper reciever be square with the upper reciever bore.

With that barrel face cocked at an angle, the barrel has ZERO chance of mating squarely with the upper reciever. PERIOD.

Since sights are mounted to the upper, the barrel is at some stupid angle to your barrel,
Do NOT expect to hit anything other than one fixed range where you have adjusted the sight line to intersect with the barrel centerline.

Upper and barrel MUST share a common centerline to be accurate.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

My upper and parts kit have arrived , it took about a week for PSA to process the order and ship , then 3-4 days to get here.

looking it over the blem that saved me a fair amount is really small , a scuff in the finish on the upper near the charging handle , not a concern to me I bought this to use it not look at it. 

my dealer said he will have my stripped lower in next week 

so while I wait I have a coffee can of once fired 223 brass I have been working on I got them sized and am working on trimming now


----------



## Dutch 106

Hi Guys,
I got what I thought was a lower receiver parts kit from Stoner. they are short the trigger sear hammer and springs. and pistol grip. so gona go and find those. My buddy sent me a care package with his ar build kit and a couple of these gadgets are very handy. There is a very handy roll pin driver from Brownells that makes putting in the roll pin for the bolt hold back a snap it has all the ear marks f a needs four hands to do project, between this tool and a little scotch tape its was easy. also a tool for getting the detent pins for the front retaining pin. Really helped!
Dutch


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

a co-worker who has done a few builds and attended a class has the tools and I pick them up tomorrow , dealer called my lowers in if I can get there I can pick that up also tomorrow or over the weekend 

I think I know of the AR Stoner kit your talking about , it is whay they call their "upgradeable" trigger kit , it looks like it costs less but thats because they leave out the trigger and sear so you can put your upgraded one in without having extra parts you don't need 

you might think about registering over at ar15.com check out their barter / swap and sell part of the site i have heard this is a inexpensive way to pick up parts many people upgrade on their stock rifle then have laying around and will take 

Midway has a sale on Hornady bullets right now if you buy 1K it gets them down to 8.3 cents each , the local shop has the same bullet at 19.9 cents each


----------



## Dutch 106

Hi Guys,
All the Stoner parts fit perfectly in the Anderson lowers. SO I'm not complaining just embarrassing I didn't check closer. 
Did you see CDNN in the shotgun news has complete uppers in 556 for 250 and 300 blackout for 300? hard to buy the parts for that!
Dutch


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

Got my lower this afternoon , had everything else ready to go , had borrowed some tools 

primarily roll pin holders http://www.brownells.com/gunsmith-t...h-tools/punches/roll-pin-holders-prod781.aspx these were handy and the spanner to tighten the castle nut on the buffer tube 

also a good idea to have some painters tape on hand , cheap protection from a scratched lower and a block of wood to support the the lower while putting in the trigger guard roll pin 

the build went well , everything fit well


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

I know picks or it didn't happen


----------



## Veedog

Looks good Pete. Is the front sight pinned on?

And remember the place that forges Andersons lowers is Cerro, and they make the same exact lowers for all the more expensive companies in the ar15 game. I've never had a problem with any Anderson stuff. And if I ever do I'm confident they will send out a replacement. And all the Anderson uppers and lowers have been nice and tight. Just got 2 more in today and even tried their 16" carbine barrels for these. They were $65 each barrel and they look superb. And they are melonited. Which lasts twice as long as stainless steel. So I think Anderson is the best deal going. I'm gonna order a few lowers to keep stashed for when Obama signs his background check for every gun executive order. You might want to get a few 80% lower kits for your stash also.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

yes the front is pinned , the upper was complete from PSA

the hole thing was a kit all I needed was the lower , I figured keep the first one simple


----------



## Veedog

Pete did you lap your reciever on this build? I've never done it yet, but I just ordered the tool to do it finally. Almost cheaper than making one on a lathe. And I'm wondering how that barrel shoots now too. I've heard nothing but good things about how accurate those FN barrels are. And they are the same as their machine gun barrels. So they last upwards of 10,000 rounds I've heard anyway. Let us know what you are shooting for groups at 100 yards with that barrel and those 55 hornady soft points. I also picked up that hornady bullet deal at midway. Happened to be ordering some other stuff and just saw the special. If they shoot good I will get more. I've seen the 6000 bullet box of those for $389 plus shipping last summer. You can get the 55 grain soft points, or the 55 fmj for that. I don't like fmj even for plinking. With the 55 soft points at least I can still plink but also hunt and use for self defense in a pinch. I won't know for a month or so since I'm moving to Alabama though. At least I'll have a 100 and 200 yard range right in the back yard there though.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

didn't lap , this is my first AR , not new to guns but I am new to ARs


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

it took way to long to get out and shoot this between work and holidays , rain and lack of daylight , but I got out today and worked good 

I can see getting one of those brass catchers that attaches to the gun , it was a pain picking them all up from the snow , at least it had a good hard crust on it and they don't sink in , they did melt in a but then refreeze but not real bad


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl

On-board catchers can be problematic. 

Hopefully, you'll find that, once it breaks in, the ejection pattern calms down a little and starts throwing everything into a smaller area. 

If I'm doing some high-volume shooting (>1000 or so in one session), I'll put down a tarp. Otherwise, I try to align a truck bed to catch it, or put up a cardboard wind brake. I've also tacked a tarp onto a couple target uprights curved it, and situated it over a bucket. 
All much less intrusive than hanging a bag over the out hole.


----------



## JeepHammer

GCP,
When your optics/sights are mounted, go out and shoot different ranges.
Grab a ballistics card on the WEIGHT/MUZZLE VELOCITY of your 'Standard' bullet, (that will give you drop, 'Spin Drift', ect.),
They are free for the download all over the internet.

This will tell you if your sights/optics are NOT centered/plumb over the barrel centerline.

*IF* it shoots to one side of a 200 Yard zero at LESS than 200 yards,
And shoots to the other side of the zero at MORE than 200 yards,
Then the barrel is probably cocked at some stupid angle in the upper receiver.

See, the MACHINING process for AR uppers is about the same all over, so is the coating process.
Once the upper is forged, then machined, they stuff that upper into a barrel nut threading machine, which distorts the front barrel face and the barrel doesn't line up with the upper,
Your sights are mounted on the upper, and the centerline of the bore doesn't line up with the sights/optics.

A simple lapping tool will face that upper off square with the bore in the upper, and hopefully with the sight/optic mounting rail.
Lapping tools use the center line of the upper bore (Bolt carrier bore) as the guide, and square off the front barrel face SQUARELY with the upper bore.

All things go right, the barrel will be in line with the upper when you bolt it back on.

http://i1298.photobucket.com/albums/ag58/JeepHammer1/UpperTools01_zpsej5a7anq.gif

This is a lapping bar mounted vertically in a drill fixture, common hand drill.
Grease the bar where it inserts into the upper receiver, 
Use grit, lapping compound under the 'Mushroom' head, and spin it a little.
When you come up with a shiny ring on the front of the receiver, you have an absolutely square barrel face in regards to the upper receiver bore.
Takes about a minute.

http://i1298.photobucket.com/albums/ag58/JeepHammer1/IMG_00601_zpslmirkfco.jpg

Left Untouched, brand new,
Right, One partly done.
These are military grade uppers, it's just a quirk of the machining/coating process that one side of the barrel flange can be up to 0.035" out of square.

http://i1298.photobucket.com/albums/ag58/JeepHammer1/UppersTools_zpsy0zzgr9v.gif

This is a new/untouched upper with a trued, ready to install upper.

-------------------

NOW!
If you have to shave so much off the chamber/barrel moves back to the point you have cycling problems, 
Several companies sell shims that will bring the barrel back out to the proper specification SQUARELY.

The shim IS NOT a 'Scab',
The barrel/chamber nut MUST BE SQUARE with the upper receiver bore, BEFORE the bolt will lock up squarely in the chamber nut, and before you will hit anything at different ranges...
This is the 'Correct' or 'Proper' way to square up the receiver, which since it's a self guiding process, you don't need machine tools to do at home,
And it's absolutely MANDATORY to get that upper receiver & barrel on the same axis line.

--ONE TIP,
When the lapping bar WILL NOT insert into the upper,
That means the COATING in the upper has the bore UNDERSIZE.
This causes bolt carrier wear, and it is an ABSLOUTE indicator the bolt isn't locking up square or constantly.

You *MAY* have to use a little lapping compound on the bar guide end to make the upper bore CONCENTRIC, and remove the coatings that are interfering with the bolt carrier.

BE SURE TO CLEAN THAT UPPER OUT REALLY WELL, REMOVING ALL[/b] ABRASIVES BEFORE YOU LAP THE UPPER BARREL FACE!

The deal here is, LOUSY threading process on the front of the upper.
If these threads were cut on a lathe, they would be PERFECTLY in line with the bore of the upper.

The other problem is the coatings.
Most upper receivers are dipped in a salt or acid bath, have an electrical current run through them to create the coatings.

Since they are hung on wires from the hole in the rear lug,
The excess acids/salt bath reside accumulate on the front barrel face and build up/continue to attack the aluminum...
You get THICK spots, usually top/left of the barrel face, and if you don't remove that thick crud & square up the barrel face, the barrel has ZERO chance of aligning with the upper receiver bore...

------------------------

The NEXT step is a little more complicated, but you *CAN* do it at home,
Most people won't...
I'll just lay it out for you in case you ever want to hit anything past 200 yards.

In the world of a machinist, we have what's called a 'Center',
It's just a pointed piece of metal that 'Centers' anything with a hole in it.

I going to show simple centers, ones you can buy or have a machinist buddy make for little or nothing...

Here is a 'Gunsmith Trick', use 'Scope' optics mounts to clamp your 'Centers'.
(1" or 30mm 'Centers' when you acquire them, standard 'Scope Tube' sizes)
They are cheap, we usually have dozens laying around for stuff we didn't use, and they mount fast for the barrel nut 'Run Out' check,
To see if the barrel/chamber nut is on the barrel squarely or not, or if the barrel is cocked sideways in the chamber nut...

Mount the barrel between centers, chamber and muzzle.
This puts your barrel center line/bore as the stable access line to measure off of.

The use a dial indicator to see of the two critical faces on the barrel nut are 'True' with the bore of the barrel.
It's REAL simple, and most of the time the chamber nuts will be lathe turned, so they will check out,
But a FEW will not be ture, especially if they were 'Imports'...

http://i1298.photobucket.com/albums/ag58/JeepHammer1/Centers_zpsoucm4evb.gif

The Angle iron in the foreground is your platform, but remember, the barrel will be between centers, so you don't need a perfectly flat surface for this.
I use angle iron for the home version, I do this on my head mill table when I do it.
The centers don't care since they are lining up on the centerline of the bore, perfectly flat mounting table IS NOT required, just something solid...

The 'Centers' are just the run of the mill 'Scope' ring alignment kit, about $25 from Brownells or Midway.

http://i1298.photobucket.com/albums/ag58/JeepHammer1/BetweenCenters_zpswnsdybcx.gif

Barrel mounted between centers so it can rotate on the BORE axis,
And the dial indicator getting ready to be mounted, which again, is simple since it only has to be solid. It's not a moving part, and it doesn't have to be perfectly aligned on a flat surface.

http://i1298.photobucket.com/albums/ag58/JeepHammer1/IndicatorLip_zpsxpqpexde.gif

Dial indicator checking the barrel/chamber nut flange for run out/warp, wobble as the barrel is rotated between centers.
If this flange is cocked sideways to the bore, the barrel will be at an angle when fired.

Some idiots say this doesn't matter, since it's 'Just A Stop' or 'Depth Stop', but that's not true.
When the rifle is fired, the barrel is forced back into the receiver, a warped lip here will cock the barrel in the upper, misaligning sights, and the rifle will shoot all over the place.

http://i1298.photobucket.com/albums/ag58/JeepHammer1/IndicatorLocations_zpsbnwclqm7.gif

This shows you where to check for Run Out to make sure the barrel nut is on the barrel CONCENTRIC TO BORE,

NOT Concentric to outside profile of the barrel.
The bore is what counts...

---------------------

These few simple steps will give you a rifle that shoots ANY RANGE right on the ballistics of the bullet.
It will also take the 'Cock' out of the chamber nut, so your bolt locks and unlocks correctly,
And your bolt will lock CONSITANTLY on the round in the chamber.

*NOTHING QUITE LIKE HAVING A RIFLE, THAT WITH THE 'CORRECT' AMMO, WILL SHOOT 600 YARD GROUPS UNDER AN M.O.A., RIGHT ON THE BALLISTIC TABLES!
POINT OF AIM IS POINT OF IMPACT! 
DOPE THE SCOPE AND SHOOT!*


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

I have been thinking about making something to the effect of a small hockey goal that sits on the shooting bench and catches brass made out of 3/4 inch pvc , plan is to use some window screen material


----------



## JeepHammer

One Addendum,
If you want to shoot SPECIFICALLY on the EXISTING ballistics tables,
You MUST use a muzzle velocity, weight, olgive bullet that matches the tables.

Faster muzzle velocity bullet than the table you are using will cause the rifle to shoot high,
Slower will cause the point of impact to be low,
Oglive of the bullet usually doesn't show up until you get past 300 yards, but a different olgive (aerodynamic coefficient) of the bullet will slow it or not relative to the ballistic tables you find.

'Spin Drift' (I hate that term...) will change with barrel rifling twist rates.
Faster bullets will climb/move right or left with the rotational speed of the bullet.
To a lesser extent, the 'Spin Drift' will change with longer bullets since there is more surface area that has rifling 'Climbing' the air as it rotates.

Honestly, a 500 yard shot is all I try to do with a .223, my hit rate goes down between 500 & 600. Mostly old eyes and not as steady/strong as I used to be.
Not really the rifle's fault,
And I mostly shoot LIGHT WEIGHT 'Varmint' bullets which don't buck cross winds like the heavier/longer bullets do.

Don't worry about the 'Torqueing' of the upper receiver you read about on the internet with a .223...
It's mostly crap.

First off, 'Torque' is a MEASUREMET of rotational force,
Not an 'Effect' of forces on the aluminum upper, so they are using the wrong term to start with... That should tell you something...

Secondly, the military standard A-4 Uppers (Forged, with flat top rail) are MUCH stronger than the old A-1 carry handle tops.
A forged military standard flat top upper will shoot dead on at 600 yards with no issues, usually within 1 M.O.A. or a little better if you tune it up and make sure the optics are plumb/true with the bore center line at any given range.

I know you want 'Carbine', but consider that adjustable butt stock takes away accuracy.
A fixed stock will have you hitting much more consistently...
There is just too much rattle and flex in those CAR stocks most people use,
And a solid collapsible shoulder stock costs as much as the rifle, and really isn't an 'Instant' collapsible anymore since they use screw adjustments to make things solid.

When you go to mount a 'Scope' or Optics to that thing,
Try and find a LONG, SOLID mount that gets a big foot print on the upper Picatanny rail.
The longer the footprint, the more solid the mount, and the more you PROTECT the rail from damage that might throw your optics out.

The optics are only as good as the mounts, so a solid mount is an investment in accuracy...

http://i1298.photobucket.com/albums/ag58/JeepHammer1/ARmount_zpso8p5ctwl.gif

This is an original AR/Stoner mount, full length grip claws, and the rings were CNC machined when the mount was built, 
No twisting between rings that will twist the tube when you mount.

Notice the ring beds have been lapped in a STRIGHT LINE,
This took VERY LITTLE lapping since they were dead square with each other BEFORE the coating was applied to the unit.
Just had to shave that uneven anodizing down to get them perfectly aligned for the optics.

----------------

When you go to mount optics,
The best advice I can give you,

Mount the rifle/upper in a rest/gun vice!
Drop a 'Plumb Line' (string/plumb bob) out in front about 20 yards.
Center the BORE OF THE BARREL on the plumb line.
(another tip, that bright pink or orange string helps see the line!)

Use the adjustments on the optic to CENTER THE RETICLE!
A reticle that is way off out in the adjustment range won't do you a bit of good!
Just turn the adjustment all the way one way, back to the other stop on the adjustment, counting turns, then come back HALF way to center.

Remember, only about 10% of the adjustment range built into an optic is in the center line of the lenses!
Get out of that 10% and you get optical illusions!

Then put your optics in the mount, line up the vertical reticle line in the optics with the string.
This ENSURES the bore and optics reticle are plumb/square with each other.

If you have to move the optics to get the 'Cross Hairs' on the plumb line,
It's better to take the time and MODIFY THE MOUNTS than to crank on the optic adjustments and get out of that 10% adjustment range.

You modify the mount(s) ONCE and they line back up where they are supposed to be in the first place, your optic is centered optically, so it's showing you an accurate sight picture.
Grinding/filing on mounts goes 180* out from what most have been taught,
BUT,
Which is cheaper? Finding an optic that has optical center line crooked sideways to fit the mounts, or just modifying the mount a little to get the optic centered?
My mounts are MUCH cheaper than the optics I use, so I'm modifying the mounts!

This *USUALLY* isn't a huge issue with ONE PIECE mounts like the one I show, but split, free rings are OFTEN screwed up beyond belief and take a TON of modification.

With the reticle in the optics centered, in the center of the optical centerline, there are no optical illusions,
With the optics TURE/LEVEL/PLUMB with the BORE CENTERLINE, you have a base line that will let you shoot 'Point Of Aim-Point Of Impact' nearly every time...

REMEBER, you only do this stuff ONCE!
The long claw on the optics mount will put you right back on zero when you have to take the mount/optics off,
The barrel isn't going ANYWHERE, so you come right back to 'Zero' when you swap from magnified optics, to red dot, to night vision, ect.


----------



## JeepHammer

GREENCOUNTYPETE said:


> I have been thinking about making something to the effect of a small hockey goal that sits on the shooting bench and catches brass made out of 3/4 inch pvc , plan is to use some window screen material


I'm as right handed as anyone ever was, so I'm always shooting from the left side of the bench...
I stretched a tarp with a pretty good sag from bench to posts, with a hole in the bottom.
Brass hits the tarp, rolls down into the hole, falls into a bucket.

Probably can't do that at a public range, but it works good at home and only cost 4 eye bolts and some dog snaps to do.

Depending on the size of the tarp, it's handy for handgun brass or any other brass that might be flying...

You CAN tune your extractor/ejector to pile your brass up in about a 3 foot circle. (depending on keeping your rounds/loads consistent)

The LENGHT of the EJECTOR PIN determines how far and at what angle the brass get ejected,
The extractor claw angle and depth determine when the brass gets released from the bolt and ejected.

I public ranges, I prefer to throw my brass FORWARD of the firing line, 
Keeps from throwing brass on anyone else, and it keeps people from stepping on my brass.

At home, I throw the brass directly side ways, let the tarp catch them.

Only costs an extra bolt to throw it where you want it depending on where you are, and when I shot competition, I always had an extra properly head-spaced bolt/carrier anyway...

-----

Also, getting 'D' shaped brass out of an AR is common, especially with a short gas system on carbine length barrels.
Shorten the EJECTOR PIN a little, and you won't bang those brass mouths closed like that...

FUNCTION is all in 'Tuning', and tuning isn't hard on an AR, since it's pretty much the 'Erector Set' of rifles.

Do you want to know how to have a 'Match' trigger for about 50 cents? Get rid of all that creep, grit and uneven break?
Takes a set screw, a little time, and maybe a fine flat file if you have a TON of trigger creep before it breaks...


----------



## Bearfootfarm

GREENCOUNTYPETE said:


> I have been thinking about making something to the effect of a small hockey goal that sits on the shooting bench and catches brass made out of 3/4 inch pvc , plan is to use some window screen material


I'd use a tarp and a couple of T-posts.

I've also just used a tarp or blanket spread flat on the ground.

I'd fire a few rounds to see where they were going to land and then spread the cloth there to catch the majority

I suspect it will throw it over anything small enough to fit the bench and not be in your way


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

the trigger isn't bad I have definitely felt worse , it isn't great either , I don't want to make it to light , but If I could smooth it out that would be great

this will be a 200 yard and under gun with the 1x optic I won't be able to see much more 

I may try different optics on it at some point , I am more likely to build another upper or second rifle with a 20 inch barrel and set it up as more of a varmint gun 

I shoot at a private club , all the ranges around here I have access to are 100 yards there are 2 clubs that I don't belong to but know people that belong to both a decent drive that have a longer range . the other club I belong to also private has purchased the land and is working on a 200 yard range but I expect that will be a few more years 

the longest opening on the land I hunt is only about 125 yards


----------



## JeepHammer

Doesn't matter what optic/sight you use mounted to the receiver, if the barrel is cocked in the upper receiver, you aren't going to shoot on a straight line without truing the barrel face on that receiver.
It will shoot one size of zero at ranges LESS than you zeroed,
And it will shoot the other side of zero at ranges GREATER than you zeroed.

Zero is the intersection of two separate lines, bore and line of sight...
The lapping bar is cheap, and stops ALL that crap from happening,
And don't forget, that 'Lump' in the front of the receiver face is never even horizontally, it will shoot right/left, then also move groups up/down the same way, 
Pretty far off normal trajectory when the barrel is aimed up/down where it's not supposed to be.
Again, lapping bar stops all that crap, and it's the ONE piece of specialized equipment you really need to mate barrel to upper...

---------------

35 years ago when I started doing this, there wasn't light weight trigger/hammer springs, and there wasn't a pistol grip bolt with a screw inside it.
You can buy both now...

What I used to do was de-temper the trigger spring, or lift one 'Leg' by bending the coil tighter on one side to take some tension off the trigger.
Now you just throw a few bucks at a lighter trigger spring.

Here is the deal, 
The Eugene Stoner trigger group was INTENTIONALLY built for idiots that couldn't avoid the draft and couldn't keep a job at a gas station or fast food joint.

You don't worry too much about the more experienced guys, it's the LOWEST common denominator you have to build to, dumb down for, ect.
It has to be as safe as can be for the SLOWEST guy in the room when you do military weapons...

The AR/Stoner trigger group is DEAD SAFE,
You can drop that AR out of a helicopter and it won't go off when it hits the ground...
And that's the bad news if you want a trigger that doesn't take a crowbar to fire.

If you watch the trigger group in action, the hammer actually MOVES BACKWARDS when you are trying to release the trigger,
That means you are trying to take on the ENTIRE FORCE of the hammer spring AND trigger spring to move the hammer backwards when you release.

The normal 'Cut & Polish' won't work, the military trigger groups, both trigger and hammer, are cast, then case hardened.
Take off more than 0.002" or 0.003" and you are into soft cast metal which smears and galls.

The ONLY thing you can do for the trigger lip and hammer sear is a VERY light polish to remove burrs, and lube them with Molybdenum 'Action Grease' right at the connection between trigger & hammer.
The release is often VERY crisp once the usual assortment of burrs is removed since they are all machine jig cut and polished before case hardening.

Use a SET SCREW up through the pistol grip screw hole, about 1/4" long.
As you adjust it UP, you will start to see the trigger move backwards.
This is the easiest way to take the creep out of the trigger, along with a BUNCH of annoying 'Grit' along the way.

If it has a REALLY LONG take up, you may have to adjust the DISCONNECT so it grabs the hammer and you don't get full auto, like it or not, 
And this IS NOT controlled full auto, it's the hammer following the bolt closed and striking the firing pin, 
The bolt usually isn't in full battery lock when the round goes off...

So it's a good idea to get that disconnect working so you don't screw up the rifle, and you don't go to jail for a full auto rifle...

Once you have the creep out, a clean break between trigger and hammer, and the disconnect working,
Then you work on the safety...
It will need to be adjusted once you get the trigger releasing correctly & the disconnect working.

Once that's working, you can fiddle with spring weights to make for a lighter trigger pull...

This will take a 1/4" set screw 1/4" long, some lock-tite to keep that set screw from moving once you get adjusted in,
A dremel tool or round file to get the safety working again if there is a ton of take-up/slop you removed,
A flat file to get the disconnect working, 
And some action lube for the hammer/trigger sear seats.

http://www.civilianjeep.info/jyg/firearms/AR-15/ar08.html

If you screw this up, it will cost you a factory trigger/disconnect at most...

I've been doing this for 35 years or more, just a few years ago the lightened springs came along, and last year someone made a grip bolt with a smaller screw up through the middle to imitate this very thing.

What they don't tell you is how to modify the safety or disconnect to get them functioning SAFELY...

Also, when you are 'Snapping' the action, don't let that hammer crash into the front of your receiver (with the top off) so you don't crack the wall between action well and mag well...
All you are looking for is the break over, the hammer doesn't have to crash into anything.

*YOUR RESULTS, AND SAFETY OF THE TRIGGER GROUP/RIFLE IS DEPENDANT ENTIRELY ON YOUR SKILLS HERE, I TAKE NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR A POORLY DONE JOB THAT MAKES FOR AN UNSAFE RIFLE!
GO SLOW WITH A MIND TOWARDS SAFETY! 
Better safe than 'Hair Trigger' light or having an 'Accidental Discharge'! *

(It's not an 'Accident' if you screwed it up and let it off the bench into someone's home, even yours!)

If you go slow, take time to see how the parts work together, most results are as good as the lesser 'Match' and 'Bench' triggers, and ultimately safe.
The $300 to $600 range of aftermarket triggers *CAN* and often do work better than this tuning, but that's a lot of money for a trigger in a 'Plinker' and behind the seat truck rifle...
Under $300 I haven't found a trigger that beats what you can do with this tuning.

I bang the butt stock on the floor, smack the muzzle brake and sides of the rifle to make SURE the trigger doesn't discharge before I let one out the door with this modification, I suggest you be rough with yours also, 
And unsafe trigger is just that, and should NEVER be allowed to leave the bench!
The Military/Stoner trigger group is VERY safe, it simply need to be PROPERLY adjusted to fit the specific rifle receiver it's installed in.


----------



## JeepHammer

WOW! 
Three days up and the 'Half-Arsed' bunch hasn't gone off the deep end!

Must be doing 'Internet' research to try and find misspelling since they didnt fly off the deep end right away...

With the optics, or rear 'Iron' sight, mounted on the RECIEVER,
Accuracy at different ranges will always depend on getting the barrel centerline & true with the reciever,
And getting sights plumb & true with the bore.

With the AR platform, that just happens to be easier than with most bolt rifles.
With the upper reciever having a full length bore centered with the barrel, you simpy use a lapping tool to true the upper barrel face.

Sometimes the 'Flat Top' (Picatinney Rail) isn't exactly true with the bolt carrier bore,
You fix that by lapping the optics mount to correct the misalignment.
Optics mounts are the cheapest & easiest way to correct a misaligned mount rail, and you don't have to gouge the corrosion resistance off the upper receiver.

People all the time say they will NEVER shoot 600 yards,
But making the little rifle shoot accurately at 600 and anything less is so easy,
So why not while you are banging one together?

For lapping the optics mount to center with the bore,
I use a long STEEL Picatinney rail to keep the correct angles,
(Gunsmith supply places sell steel rails by the foot 'In The White', raw steel with no finish)
And use the same lapping grit compound that I use for lapping rings and the upper reciever.
Keeps your material removal even and true full length, where you might get a little uneven with a file on a deep cut.

Lapping rings gives you a stright line between rings, cocked rings will try to bend the tube,
And round rings will keep the rings from crushing the optics tube egg shaped or some other stupid shape.

Once the rings are round & true, use a little silicone grease in the rings & caps.
This will allow the tube to move a little if thermal conditions expand/contract the mounts/reciever.

Never use a 'Two Screw' ring, always 4 screws or more to spread the load out,
And no more than 15 INCH pounds of torque on the screws!
Most wont use an inch pound screwdriver, but you don't have to try and crush the rings/tube with the longer 4 screw caps.

Once my rings are lapped round, the caps are propritary.
I use a pilot punch to mark the front with one 'Dot', the rear with two 'Dots' on one side only. 
Both ring and cradle... Just line up the cap and cradle 'Dots' for proper pairing.
This gets the caps back on facing forward and on the correct ends should I ever change optics.

Consistancy is a requirement for accuracy, 
When the rings fit the tube and are aligned,
The mount fits the rail its mounted on,
The optic reticle is as precisely plum with the centerline of the bore as you can make it,
And the barrel is aligned with the reciever,
Then I hone the optics mount to bring the cross hairs onto the plumb line (windage).
Laser bore sights are rarely needed to get on 8" targets @ 100 yards,
And since I centered the reticle before I started all this, I'm still well inside the optics centerline 10% where there aren't any optical illusions even with lesser quality optics.

Lapping the rings also lets you lap in extra MOA of elevation if you are going to shoot long, keeping you in that optic center 10%.
Not nessary under 300 yards, but available if you decide to shoot farther later on.

Having that optic centered, then lapping the rings/mount to get you on paper the first time is labor intensive, but if you want hyper accuracy, this is a cheap & effective way to get it!


----------



## JeepHammer

The 'Red Dots' come in two basic types,
Prisum & true holographic.

I use what the military trained me on, holographic.

I look for a unit that takes common batteries, usually AA size,
Some of the 'China' clones will cost you more for an odd size button cell than the unit cost in the first place...

Turn the dot down as low as you can possibly see it.
That increases battery life a BUNCH,
And it uncovers a bunch of target, making you more accurate.

A big, super bright dot will have a corona that covers target, and the dot intensity itself becomes destracting, slows your target acquisition.

Most people will buy the $30 'China' unit over the $700 US made versions,
Be aware the 'China' units are NOT water tight, and the guts shoot lose over time.
(Heavy recoil and 'China' don't get along at all...) 

I mount far forward, allows me to keep both eyes open, and allows for 'Co-Witness' rear 'Iron' or back up/pop up rear sight.
Forward mount also allows for your night vision to mount behind the sight.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> WOW!
> Three days up and *the 'Half-Arsed' bunch* hasn't gone off the deep end!


Maybe we just *stopped* paying any attention to someone who says things like:



> Zero is the intersection of two separate lines, *bore and line of sight*...


That line only intersects once

"Zero" is where the line of sight intersects with *the bullets trajectory* at a specified distance. 

It happens twice on each shot, once up close and once farther out


----------



## JeepHammer

Yup, I knew it...

No, that's not zero.
The bullet crosses LINE OF SIGHT twice,
Only if the sights are mounted low enough for that to happen.
Tall rings won't always allow the bullet to cross line of sight twice before bullet strikes the target.

With an AR and military 'Iron' sights,
The bullet will cross line of sight at about 50 meters, and again at 150 meters.
'Zero' will have the bullet striking 4.5 to 5 CM high of point of aim at 100 meters.

This is called 'Point Blank Zero', anything between muzzle and 300 meters will blow out a human heart.
Slightly high at 100 meters and 300 meters slightly low, but the target has a wound channel that will stop your target in its tracks.

Like everything in civilian world, the definition is misused & abused.
'Zero' is supposed to mean 'Zero Point',
The base line you START from when you make sight ADJUSTMENTS SO POINT OF AIM IS POINT OF IMPACT.

If you don't have Zero Point firmly dialed into the optic,
Then you have no base to figure windage, elevation adjustments and you won't hit ANYTHING beyond your point blank range...


----------



## JeepHammer

So!
From 'Zero' you figure bullet drop, about 355" at 1,000 yards with a .308,
Then you figure spin drift, wind for windage adjustment,
Dope the optics and send the round.

The next round might be 600 yards,
So you go back to 'Zero',
Do the math, dope the scope, and shoot again.

If you are a long range shooter (1,000 yards or more) your 'Zero' will often be 600 yards.

Short range shooters use a 100 yard zero,
Intermeadate range shooters usually use 200 yards,
Varmint shooters for example.

The guy that sets the 'Zero' and never changes it is a 'Common Useage' shooter,
Mostly a plinker,
Which is fine if that is what you do and never stretch your skills,
Plinking is perfectly acceptable,
But those guys probably should stay out of hyper accurate shooting conversations.
They don't have rifles or optics that would reach long range,
They don't have sights with enough adjusent to shoot accurately that far,
And if they did, they don't have the practice/skills to shoot long range.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

Yup, I knew it...



> No, that's not zero.
> The bullet crosses LINE OF SIGHT twice,
> Only if the sights are mounted low enough for that to happen.
> *Tall rings won't always allow the bullet to cross line of sight twice before bullet strikes the target.*


When you're in a hole, you should just stop digging


----------



## Texaspredatorhu

Military m16 is 36 and 200. A 22-250 will do 50 and 2000 with 55 grain pills. I have a Remington 700 in 300 RUM that'll I can go 1500 with all day everyday and I paid less than 600 bucks for the rifle and less than 700 for the scope. Sure I'm a marine but a 6000 dollar rifle and a "plinker" probably won't out shoot me with my Marlin model 60. Going long range as you should know because you are a long range shooter I presume, your bullet crossing line of sight will have a much larger gap. So for a 600 zero, the bullet will cross initially closer than if it was a 200 years zero.


----------



## JeepHammer

That's always an argument with the guys.

'Zero' is the base line you start from.
Get the bullet point of impact hitting point of aim,
Then 'Zero' the dials on the optics for the baseline starting point.

Add or subtract optic adjustment from 'Zero' to produce a point of impact on point of aim at any given range,
Adjustments based on your ballistics tables, wind, ect.
Just not that hard of. Concept to grasp.

My .308 competition rifles usually get the optics knobs 'Zeroed' at 600 yards.
Point of Impact being Point Of Aim at 600 yards,
Then simply 'Zeroing' the adjustment knobs and figuring my MOA adjustments & windage/spin drift adjustments from 600 yards.

The idea the optics designers came up with when they introduced the idea of 'Zero' is,
There is only so much adjustment in the optic,
And you want to stay in the 10% center of the lenses,
So you adjust the optics to center the reticle in the lenses,
You use an MOA mount to approximate the range WITHOUT cranking on the reticle, keeping it centered.. 

This gives you an intermediate range 'Zero' without burning up all the adjustment in the optic. 
If you have looked at the mounts lately, they come in 0 (Zero) MOA, 10 MOA, 20 MOA, 30 MOA, Ect, giving you more adjustment both 'Up' & 'Down' from the 'Zero' Point.

Its all esoteric for the blunder buss shooters, the spray & pray types, the guys that will never shoot more than a couple hundred yards...
*IF* you choose to put the time & effort into being accurate at intermediate & long range, various ranges where you have to change scope adjustments for point of impact to be point of aim, then you are going to have to muster the IQ points to grasp this concept...

Some will, some won't, some won't need to, too much brush or hills where they live,
Some just wont get a grasp on the geometry or simple math required to figure the scope dope, even if someone else builds the rifle for them, sets the mounts/optics, ect.

As for a $5,000 or $6,000 rifle,
More than one long range competition shooter plucks a $400 rifle off the shelf, tunes it up, and competes/wins with it.
David Tubb shooting a box stock Remington 700 some years back comes to mind right away.
Excellent article of exactly what he pulled right off the shelf and how he tuned the rifle to win a national competition.
Without optics, I think he invested $550 in rings, mounts, rifle & sling.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl

JeepHammer said:


> WOW!
> Three days up and the 'Half-Arsed' bunch hasn't gone off the deep end!
> 
> Must be doing 'Internet' research to try and find misspelling since they didn&#8217;t fly off the deep end right away...


See. 
That, there, is exactly the problem. 
You seem to have an issue with the calibration of your perspective. 

First, you refer to a group of unnamed individuals, presumably anyone who would disagree with anything in your post, as &#8220;Half-Arsed&#8221;, blatantly insulting them. And, at the same time, imply the value of your own statements is so high, that the only thing anyone who might disagree with any of it could POSSIBLY find wrong with your statements is spelling errors &#8211; and that they&#8217;d even care to take the time to go ferret those out.

Anytime that anyone fails to accept your take on things as the immutable gospel, you seem to take it as a personal attack. But, the ironic part is that **most** of what folks around here have taken issue with you over is your way of speaking in absolutes and, in the body of your post, insulting, by whit preemptively attacking, anyone who might disagree with what you&#8217;re saying.
For example, your first post in this particular dissertation:



JeepHammer said:


> And it's absolutely MANDATORY to get that upper receiver & barrel on the same axis line.


It&#8217;s not &#8220;absolutely mandatory&#8221; that the upper receiver and bore be on the same axis line. Hundreds of Thousands of carbines (which, incidentally is what GCP&#8217;s specifically-stated build goal was here (re-read the OP if that detail has dropped off your radar)) were built with rack components and met their operators&#8217; expectations perfectly. Soldiers and Marines have killed countless bad-guys, and recreational shooters have poked countless holes in paper at the ranges they endeavor to engage them at, with rack-grade carbines. Truing an AR upper is a custom step that is worthwhile when you&#8217;re goal is to wring out the last drops of performance potential, but far from &#8220;mandatory&#8221;. To boot, not only is it not necessary, in fact, it&#8217;s technically impossible. No machinist, with no amount of experience and tooling can get a perfect axial alignment. There is always error, no matter what care is taken in the preparation of the parts, so the difference between one that has had this &#8220;mandatory&#8221; procedure performed on it, and on that has not, is a difference of margins; degree of error. So, it may be a technicality, but what you&#8217;re telling the reader MUST be done, really CAN&#8217;T be done. Which brings up another point of irony; you often write things like this:



JeepHammer said:


> Don't worry about the 'Torqueing' of the upper receiver you read about on the internet with a .223...
> It's mostly crap.
> 
> First off, 'Torque' is a MEASUREMET of rotational force,
> Not an 'Effect' of forces on the aluminum upper, so they are using the wrong term to start with... That should tell you something...


Sure, &#8220;torqueing&#8221; the upper is not a common occurrence, but there are occasions where using improper upper fixtures, and assembling barrel nuts that require the upper end of the torque spec to get the gas tube slot aligned with the window in the upper, that a receiver (most likely its TD pin lugs) can be damaged by the torque that is transferred to them. Perhaps &#8220;torqueing&#8221; is not the proper term, but it is a generally accepted short-hand for damaging something by applying excessive torque to it. So, if GPC, or any other member asked for some help on a particular procedure, and I, or someone else replied, &#8220;&#8230;but take care with your sprocket wrench on that step, or you&#8217;ll end up torqueing your flux capacitor.&#8221; They&#8217;d know exactly what we were saying. It&#8217;s technically incorrect terminology, but effective shorthand that&#8217;s meaning is not lost on the audience. 

On the other-hand, your platitude, for example, about axial alignment between the barrel and receiver being &#8220;absolutely MANDATORY&#8221; is not only technically incorrect/impossible, but it&#8217;s inaccuracy actually COULD mislead someone. It is possible that a member who came to this thread to learn about building, oh, say, a &#8220;budget carbine&#8221; could read that to mean that they have to true the receiver or it won&#8217;t work, which is clearly not true.

Bear was correct when he pointed out that you were incorrect when you said that a bullet's flight only crosses the line of sight once. At short ranges, this is often true, but at the extended ranges you keep talking about in this "budget carbine" thread, the bullet is sure to cross the line of sight twice - with all the long-range shooting you've done, I'm sure you've watched a bullet trace up out of the FoV of your optic, then dive bomb onto the point of aim. It obviously started below your line of sight, climbed up to and crossed it, then dropped back down to meet it again. You may have meant something else, but your statement was incorrect. Simple as that. Instead of replying, "yeah, Bear, you're right. My bad.", and moving on, you had to dog the argument to try to spin it to look like you were somehow right for being wrong.

We&#8217;re all a little sloppy with our language from time to time, but it seems that you hold you and &#8216;us&#8217; to separate standards on when it is acceptable.




To compound the issue, you sometimes present yourself like a self-important blow-hard. I apologize for the unflattering terms. That is truly not meant as an insult, I&#8217;m not saying that&#8217;s what you are, but, really, it&#8217;s the best descriptor I can find for the demeanor of many of your posts. GPC started a thread on building a first AR on the simple/cheap. Being that this is a homesteading forum, with a membership that tends to be rural, has a working firearms knowledge, and a penchant for DIY, this is potentially a very valuable thread. Members who wish to build up their first AR are likely to see this thread, find useful info in it, and continue adding to the discussion for years to come. 

Your page after page of dissertation on the finer details of carbine building and general rifle concerns are unnecessary, actually devalue the thread by muddying it up with things unrelated to &#8220;building a budget carbine&#8221;, and really just come off as an attempt to show off what you know. It&#8217;s not necessary here. This is not a photography forum with a firearms annex, where the membership needs you to save them from their own ignorance. This is the firearms section of a HOMESTEADING forum. In general, the membership here has a high level of practical firearms knowledge. The folks here have, in general at least, grown up and lived their entire lives with guns in their truck, barn, and bedrooms. 

I grew up in a gunsmith shop, have gunsmithed professionally my entire adult life, and am the head field gunsmith and trainer for one of the major manufacturers, but I learned long ago that, no matter how much I might think I&#8217;m the &#8220;smartest guy in the room&#8221;, I&#8217;m often not, and, at the very least, there are folks in the room that know something I don&#8217;t. Even if they never made firearms a profession or even a hobby, I suspect that everyone who posts in here has a gun I&#8217;ve never seen and/or done something with a gun that I never had. So, I find it much more valuable to participate in the conversation here rather than try to dominate it. 

You do this to yourself, Jeep. When a topic comes up that you have something to add to, do it. It will be appreciated by the membership. But, not every topic needs to be turned into another dissertation on &#8220;Firearms According to JeepHammer&#8221;, and DEFINITELY, not everyone who disagrees with something you add needs to be called an idiot. Do, or don&#8217;t do, with this advice what you will.

$0.02


----------



## JeepHammer

So, You don't really have anything to add to the conversation about the geometry involved in the flight path/barrel/receiver/line of sight conversation?

-----------

The 'Torqueing' conversation is the upper receiver twisting in relationship to the rear lug and bullet being forced down the barrel, trying to twist the barrel/front of the upper receiver.
Not the 'Torque' put on the barrel retaining nut...

Although I suppose someone *Could* ignore the 35 Ft.Lbs. +/- 5 Ft.lbs. recommended by most manufacturers...

As for lining up the barrel retaining nut for the gas tube to enter the upper receiver,
Again, it's pretty easy to HAND FIT any barrel nut with a little hand lapping to PRECISELY line up the prongs so the gas tube fits...
All you need is a flat plate (sheet of glass, honing steel) and some lapping compound...
Or you could just buy the commercially available shims to get the gas tube aligned, they are only about 7 cents apiece and all thicknesses so you can align any gas tube...

'Hammer Builders' don't take the time to hand fit the parts, so they wind up with way over or under torqued barrel retaining nuts to clear the gas tube in a lot of cases.

---------

'Torqueing' problems are almost always traced back to upper/lower fit and loose pins/over size lug holes/under size pins...

The reason for (cheap) 'Accu-Wedge' products, rubber under the rear lug,
Or angle split pins that wedge in the lug holes to make the upper solid with the lower.

Some places make slightly oversized uppers that can be honed/lapped to precisely fit the lower, but that's a LOT of work that has to be VERY carefully done to be 'Correct'...

Current forged uppers are plenty strong enough NOT to twist during the firing cycle with any kind of reasonable ammo, it's a fitment issue most times, NOT the upper twisting during the firing cycle.

-------------

This is a 'Straight Tube' rifle.

The chamber locking lugs are attached to the chamber nut/barrel,
The bolt is in the upper receiver and it's lugs MUST align axially with the barrel/chamber nut or the lugs are NOT going to lock up square.

The barrel/chamber nut COCKED 0.035" off some goofy direction will put undue stress on the bolt locking lugs since only a couple are making contact with the chamber nut lugs,
The rest of the bolt lugs have an air gap between them and the chamber nut lugs...

Nothing like a COCKED CHAMBER in relationship to the bolt!
It's not only hard on the bolt/chamber nut, but it's going to kill any chance of accuracy and deform the head of the brass when fired...

I don't see how ANYONE could argue with lining up the barrel with the upper receiver,
And I don't know *Specifically* what to call anyone that would argue against getting the bolt locking lugs to lock up SOLIDLY, since it's also a SAFETY ISSUE having the recoil trying to remove the one or two lugs on the bolt that is retaining the bolt in the barrel nut...

What would YOU call someone that intentionally left the locking lugs out of contact?
Idiot is all I can come up with... So *IF* you have a specific word for someone that would do that, I'd like to know it.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

enough , both of you let go it will be ok this is a budget carbine built for less than 500 dollars including shipping and tools , I appreciate all the info and understanding of what makes what work , the upper was factory assembled , it is a short range gun not a 1000 yard competition gun 

If I have problems I will let you know but for now it seems to shoot just fine


----------



## JeepHammer

The issues discussed appear on 'Factory' assembled rifles the most.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu

First off I know that a weak shooter cannot work miracles with a high end gun it's mostly skill there. If you are zeroing a 308 at 600 you must be shooting 2500 yards or better. I have my 300 RUM dialed in at 300 and max adjust of 1600 because the limitations of the scope. Also you speak of using the center 10% of the scope, why have the other 90? That means 5% each way from you"zero". In some case that would be 5 clicks or less each direction by your standard. Your scope must be 5 MOA clicks in stead of .125 or .25. Before you bust out with your long range capabilities you should google at more than one place. Been long range shooting for many years and I think I may have met 1 person in South Dakota that had a rifle zeroed above 300 and he was trying to set records and had a monstrous base on his glass. Just food for thought. Good luck with your shooting amigo.


----------



## SamT

Dang! I'll never soot again. I've always been happy to hit within 4" of POA at 200yds, but I just can't compete against a guy who who strokes his barrel and hand laps his nuts to the receiver.


----------



## Dutch 106

Hey Guys,
I'm still working on the pair of bare receivers I bought ,slow as being retired and trying to zero the credit card at the same time slows fun projects a fair bit. I was hot to buy an everything but a stripped lower kit from CDNN in 300 blk. They had listed for 430$ out of stock of course rats!
I've been researching the 300blk round for brass construction and loading. Pretty impressive. overall and very efficient (lots of bang for the buck).
Uhh guys lets keep in mind we like and need information. Often I'm more interested in why you do something, before how so I can try and get inside your head to help me figure out different, but related problems down the road.
Also keep in mind retired people or other folk with more fiddle time than money look at projects that can be done cheap like building 300blk and making ammo from range picked up .223 brass, with cast bullets. Sound's like months of cheap entertainment, to me! I don't drink anymore, so I have to make my own entertainment in a small town.
I understand if your goal is to minimize errors and maximize accuracy I've played that game when I was making good money. I really have I can spend hours talking on the work to get a Ruger 1B in 7mag shot to sub min of angel at 600 yards with 140 -160 grain bullets. My gunsmith probably shudders every time he thinks of it! 

Dutch


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE

maybe this one dutch http://www.midwayusa.com/product/22...tour-1-in-8-twist-chrome-moly-melonite-coated


----------



## JeepHammer

I seem to have a post lost or deleted somewhere...

.300 Black Out is the 'Flavor Of The Week', that's for sure and for certain!
The .458 Socom was a couple of years ago, now they are few and far between, and the .300 Black Out is the 'Hot' round for an AR.

I seeing 'Standard' loads from 1,695 FPS to 2,350 FPS. Not real impressive,
125 To 180 Grain Bullets, no major surprises there,
The average groupings I'm seeing most guys post, aren't very impressive either, about like any other .30 short action round on market...

The question begs to be ask,
With the rounds being SO EXPENSIVE to buy, or with the specialized sizing dies and annealing to do to blow out .223 cases to .30 Cal.

Why not just go with a 7.62 (.310" dia) bullet in the 7.62x39mm Russian round top end?
Everyone makes them, they are as cheap as .223 tops,
And the ammo is EVERYWHERE and dirt cheap, no need to buy expensive brass or blow out .223 cases to get there?

Average muzzle velocity of 2,300 FPS, same weight of bullets,
Common brass to hand load, if you are into that,
Plinking ammo/brass is DIRT CHEAP,
Same relative energy at the target...
Virtually identical ballistic tables.

Did I mention there are 4 or 5 places that make AR lowers that will accept AK mags,
Making mags AND ammo dirt cheap? (even drums are still reasonable price)

Just wondering why people are jumping on a round that was designed from the ground up to be SUPPRESSED/SUBSONIC if they have no intentions of screwing a can to the front of the barrel?

A guy a while back dragged in a lower that accepted AK mags and a 7.62x39mm barrel/bolt (Colt) and left it.
I wasn't too interested in it, when I called him he said he didn't want it anymore, so I'm plinking for cheap with it.
Does OK, slightly over MOA with good ammo at 100 yards, but the usual 3.62x39 trajectory like a rainbow, it's not what I'd call a long range hitter...










Having new 30 rd. mags for $5 and 75 round drums available is kind of cool, if impractical...
Mostly an ammo waster for the guys that like drums and big banana mags.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu

Check palmetto state armory as well they usually have good deals on upper assemblies. Hornady build hydraulic forming dies as well, call them and they may be able to help. I would say with the 300 blk gaining steam it may be cheaper to just buy the ammo and then reload. Diamond k brass has once fired brass and they charge $95 for 500 polished and you will probably get 4-7 pumps from them if you keep them around the factory loads and check every case during the loading process. Full length sizing every time will eventually wear the case out if it expanding a lot when fired in a looser chamber so attention needs to be paid there. I used to reload 223 cases 6 times and never had an issue I just color coded the cases with colored primer sealer. Good luck with your rifle.


----------



## JeepHammer

Optics basics?


I learned to zero at 600, made it easier to dial down or up since we rarely shot below 300 and up to 1,000 where we hit the limits of the 10x Unertl optics.

The ballistics tables we memorized were from 600 with 168 grain Serria Match King BTHP rounds that were rolled for our specific rifles...

Past 1,000 it was 'Kentucky Windage' & 'Tennessee Elevation' were facilitated by a Mil-Dot reticle, but you run out of everything at about 1,200 yards,
Then its SWAG time.

The 30mm tubes gives you a larger 10% in the center of he optics, and more total adjustment.
Top shelf optics with matched lens sets are costly, but they also extend the percentage of the field of adjustment without the optical illusion problems.

Variable Magnification Optics cause issues, the optics might have to change focal plane 6 times, all perfectly in line with no deviation, to produce a objective sight picture that is correctly aligned with the objective sight picture.
Again, getting a variable that is dead on and doesn't shift 'Zero' is costly.

Mass produced optics with mis-matched lens sets are cheap,
But with computer quality control they have come a long way in a short period of time.
The guy that shoots 4" or 5" groups at 200 yards won't notice,
The guy that shoots one hole at 100 yards, or shoots MOA a any range would notice...


----------



## Texaspredatorhu

Because it's what they want much like a 50 cal Barrett that is pointless to hunt with and too expensive to shoot, it's what they want. I agree with it being pointless without a can but if it's what someone wants who cares.


----------



## JeepHammer

Texas, I'm APPLICATION driven.

If it doesn't fit the APPLICATION I might have at hand, what's the point?
(Most) Of my firearms are tools, they get used for specific applications...

If it's a 'Toy' then by all means, have at it.
My 'Toys' have 4 wheels and say 'Jeep' on the side! 

I've owned a couple of .50 BMGs and you are correct, they are USELESS for anything other than bragging rights and the 'WOW!' factor when they go off.

I had a Ferret .50, upper that went on an AR lower, WAY TO ABUSIVE TO SHOOT!
Short barrel completely defeated the point of a .50 BMG, way to light to absorb the recoil, and the overpressure was CRIMINAL!
I haven't owed that top end in 15 years, and I just got over the headache yesterday!

Laid hands on a Barret .50 just like the XM 82s we had in the military.
I have NO IDEA what I was thinking other than reliving 'Glory Days' before the torn rotator cuffs, the broken collar bone, the fused vertebra in the neck, ect., and when I was 50 pounds lighter & had 80 pounds more muscle...
Again, totally pointless other than to impress people that didn't know any better.
Sold it and bought another Jeep... Which finished cleaning out my bank account to fix up... 
TOYS! Can't live without them...


----------



## Texaspredatorhu

I get that I am as well but sometimes I just want something that bad like a 454 Casull lever gun!


----------



## JeepHammer

I'm always dumbfounded by what guys post...
One idiot posted that M.O.A. (Minute Of Angle), MIL-Dot & Milliradian were all the same thing...
The guys that argue reciever and barrel/bolt don't have to line up.

I mean come on! 
Its 6th grade geometry and they miss the point...


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl

Who said that MOA/MIL were the same thing?
I didn't see it, but I'd be willing to bet that, if you consider the context, they were saying that they were convertible and/or just telling someone who asked that they could go with either system and achieve the same ends.

And I didn't see anyone argue that a barrel and receiver don't "have to line up." If you're referring to my response, then I was pretty clear that I was pointing out that your claim about alignment being "absolutely MANDATORY" was clearly in-context about lapping and facing an upper to ensure perfect alignment. 

You were stating, again, in a "budget carbine build" thread that it was "absolutely mandatory" to do a custom operation that is probably done on less than 0.001% of the carbines ever built, and that anyone who doesn't is an idiot (including, explicitly, later) the manufacturers who built most of the carbines sitting in the membership's collection. 

I think if you dialed back the opinionation a little, and took the time to read, consider, and, dare I say, value, other posters' words, you'd find that this conflict you constantly seem to find yourself in would evaporate immediately.


----------



## JeepHammer

OK,
Try this,
In the early days of AR style top ends, the uppers were all lathe cut on an arbor.
(If you don't know about an arbor, ask. Its a machinest thing, not common knowledge.)

That process made for a square front to the reciever.

CNC MILLING came along,
Turning the upper reciever was an extra machining process,
The upper had to be dismounted from the milling machine,
Mounted in a turning machine (lathe),
So the process was dropped in favor of simply sticking the nose of the reciever in a threading die to cut barrel nut threads.

That threading die warps/pulls threads that don't allow for the barrel/chamber nut to align with the BORE of the upper reciever,
Off set barrel face means cocked barrel in the upper reciever,
And since the chamber nut screws onto the barrel, 
And the chamber nut has half the bolt locking lugs inside it,
The bolt has ZERO chance of locking up squarely in the chamber nut lugs.

Normally, if the barrel/chamber isn't so far out of alignment with the upper it doesn't fail to feed, its shipped out the door.
-----

The original AR used an acid/electrical process to 'Anodize' the upper/lower,
An anti-corrosion process that produces a hard shell on the aluminum.

Today's ARs, Especally the 'Economy' versions, use a coating.

Pieces are dipped in the coating, hanging from wire hooks,
Hung up and are either baked or air dried.

The excess coating usually runs to the 'Down' end of the reciever, and dries there UNEVENLY, on the barrel alignment face.
-----

REMOVING THAT EXCESS COATING,
Squaring up that barrel alignment face,
Will give your barrel/chamber/locking lugs a fighting chance of being square.

A square/aligned barrel with the upper is a mechanical issue. Period.
Accuracy shooters have long since determined that a square bolt face, relative to the barrel center line increases accuracy.

Accuracy shooters have long established locking lugs fully engauged SQUARELY with chamber lugs increase accuracy.

There is a reason 'Custom Shops' pull the barrel, square he reciever/barrel/bolt,
And lap the locking lugs so the produce as close to 100% engaugment as possible.
That reason is so the bolt FACE doesn't deflect under the chamber pressure when fired.

A $20 lapping tool is hardly out of reach of a 'Home' builder...
And increases the chances of the upper/sights being on plane with the barrel bore.
It also increases the chances of the bolt being able to engauge the barrel nut locking lugs,
Which will *Usually* produce in tolerance head spacing for the round in the chamber.

A cocked bolt relative to the chamber nut/chamber REDUCES headspacing,
A major safety issue, along with the safety issue of NOT having all the locking lugs in contact with each other when the rifle is fired.

Is that politically correct enough?


----------



## JeepHammer

If it wasn't for everyone wanting that thick, flat black 'Tactical' look,
The manufacturers could go back to a true anodized finish,
Which case hardens the aluminum, creating a longer wearing finish, and a longer lived rifle.

Stretched and worn pin holes for the hammer were never an issue with hard coat annodizing, and a common problem with the flat black lowers.
Galling of the aluminum was never an issue with hard coat annodizing, and a constant problem with flat black coatings...

The lapping bar will also remove the excess coating from the inside of the upper,
Smoothing down the abrasive coatings,
This allows for smoother operation of the bolt carrier, and longer life of the bolt carrier.

Getting the bolt aligned with the barrel/barrel nut/locking lugs keeps the bolt from side loading in the bolt carrier,
Reducing galling & wear on both the bolt & carrier.
It also means the bolt & carrier work smoother in operational service life.

ARs are *Supposed* to be about Speed/Accuracy,
Banging, clanging, scraping, galling misaligned parts reduce all of the above,
And the service life/reliability of the rifle.

If you want a lot of improperly fitted, mis-aligned parts that you can't hit anything with past 200 yards, buy an AK made in 'China'.
They make 'Noise' when they go off too.

If you want something that will hit any midrange target FIRST ROUND, and is smooth/quick on the next target,
Then consider a little tuning of your AR so it does what its capable of...


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl

So, a bit like pulling teeth, but we finally got from hand-truing the upper nose being "absolutely MANDATORY" and something only "idiots" don't do, to it being something that is a good idea to do if you're looking to squeeze optimum performance out of your rifle.

It's not about being "politically correct", Jeep, it's just about being correct. Multi-volume pontification aside, I would have not taken issue with anything you said (except, perhaps, the things that are just blatantly wrong) if you'd just added that hand-truing was "good idea", "best practice", whatever. There was no need to mislead the reader into thinking that it was mandatory, or call anyone who's built a rifle without it an idiot.

There's actually some good information hiding in your opinionated, long-winded posts answering questions that no one asked. For someone who cares to take the time to read what you're writing, they're bound to find something in it that they didn't know. The problem is, though, that these self-aggrandizing dissertations often carry a lot of opinions stated as fact, some mischaracterizations of scope, and plenty of downright false information.

In just the post above, you rail on the current commonality of "coated" receivers, in a way that would make someone who came here to learn about building a budget carbine believe that a MIL-STD Type III hard-coat anodized receiver is going to be hard to find. I don't know ANYBODY that is "dip coating" their receiver with _anything_. Pretty much everyone is using Type III ano. The only coatings being _commonly_ used that I am aware of are Teflon (usually used to defeat the color-matching that can be problematic with Type III, Class 2 dyed ano), and Cerakote - both of which are carefully sprayed on finishes, normally masked of from dimension-critical areas, and are STILL exceptions to the rule of TIII ano being the most common finish. 

In fact, to the exact point of this thread, both the upper and lower that the OP sourced were Type III anodized. Would you actually take the time to read others' posts and place any value on what they add, you would have seen that. Anderson and PSA are going to be two of the most likely sources for anyone building a "budget carbine". Both products are MIL-STD compliant, CNC machined 7075-T6 forgings finished in a Type III Class 2 hardcoat ano - same as Colt, FN, Bushmaster, S&W, Remington, RIA, and anyone else that makes a QUALITY carbine. 

And, despite being built on modern, more cost-effective machine procedures, both of these components are built to a higher level of precision than the design could have been when adopted. CNC is a good thing. When they "simply stick... the nose of the reciever (sic) in a threading die to cut barrel nut threads", this is not the same set-up as a guy cutting pipe threads with the tap/die kit in his toolbox. The "threading die" is a multi-point cutter that achieves the same end as an old-school single-point threading operation WITHOUT the asymmetrical stresses of a single-point, mounted in a rigid machine aligned to the same level of precision as any dedicated-purpose lathe. The OP's Palmetto State upper was machined for them by Aero, the same guys who have manufactured tens of thousands for successful military contracts, and most of the rest of industry, to boot. It's a quality product, and, for the purpose stated by the OP, perfectly suitable "off the rack".

Like I said previously, you do seem to have a lot of knowledge on various firearms topics, and could add a lot of value to the board, but there is OBVIOUSLY a lot that you donât know â but that doesnât seem to prevent you from saying it anyway. Should you lose sight of that, Iâll remind you that you typed this, and clicked âsendâ:


JeepHammer said:


> Although I suppose someone *Could* ignore the 35 Ft.Lbs. +/- 5 Ft.lbs. recommended by most manufacturers...


----------



## JeepHammer

Well! 
Long and wrong post...

OK Lucy, 'splane the resin/fiber uppers & lowers out there on 'Budget' rifles...

And while you are at it, how about explaining the CAST uppers that were going around during the 'Assult Weapons' ban...

Explain the 'Coatings' that rub off with bore cleaner...

And while you are pontificating/prevaricating,
How about explaining how you STOP an electro-chemical process from intruding into the upper bolt carrier/barrel nut bore as the acids eat into/corrode the aluminum...
Why an EXACT size gauge bar won't fit into the upper, without lapping/reaming the coating off so the carrier will even fit into the upper...


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl

What?



JeepHammer said:


> Well!
> Long and wrong post...
> 
> OK Lucy, 'splane the resin/fiber uppers & lowers out there on 'Budget' rifles...


I never said anything about receivers other than 7075T6 NOT existing. I just pointed out that the OP's receiver and upper were. But I guess I don't need to point that out, since anybody else reading this thread will have caught that, so my mentioning it here is only trying to explain it to you, which is like...well..




JeepHammer said:


> And while you are at it, how about explaining the CAST uppers that were going around during the 'Assult Weapons' ban...


They cast them.
Is that the explanation you're looking for?




JeepHammer said:


> Explain the 'Coatings' that rub off with bore cleaner...


Right turn, Clyde.



JeepHammer said:


> And while you are pontificating/prevaricating,
> How about explaining how you STOP an electro-chemical process from intruding into the upper bolt carrier/barrel nut bore as the acids eat into/corrode the aluminum...


Left turn, Clyde.



JeepHammer said:


> Why an EXACT size gauge bar won't fit into the upper, without lapping/reaming the coating off so the carrier will even fit into the upper...


Right turn, Clyde.


Bro, it's pretty clear to anyone reading your posts that your entire purpose for being here is to stir things up. Nobody could be wrong about so many things, be so eager to argue about things that always end up making them look dumb, and not just be trolling for heat.

I've begun to suspect that you are one of the CMG plants. If not, you're obviously "protected" somehow. Anyone one of the rest of us who said they'd shoot another member to prove themselves would have bought themselves an instant lifetime-ban. Yet, you're still here.

Bear pointed out, in the last thread you made yourself look stupid, that he had seen you repeat the same trick in other forums. I wonder if those forums were CMG-affiliated?


----------



## JeepHammer

Don't know a thing about CMG, and don't care.
(Someone from CMG call BS on your crap too, is that why you think anyone that calls out your crap a 'Troll' from CMG?)

Never threatened to shoot anyone, or any other kind of threat.
I said since you think everything I post is crap, then stand in front of a long range target.
You should be perfectly safe since you think its all crap and I have no idea how to lay hands on a firearm of any kind or how to use one.
Its a put your money where your mouth is thing, something you wouldn't know anything about...

Don't know which forum anyone else might be talking about,
I'm only on some Jeep forums and a couple reloading forums,
And the manufacturers guild, but that's not a 'Forum'.

*So, that pretty much takes care of your last round of lies.*

-----

Since you made an issue of it,
Colt produced the M-16 manual for the military (blue cover) all branches.
Barrel nut torque specification, 35 Ft.Lbs., addendum says +/- 5 Ft.Lbs. for gas tube alignment.
I'm perfectly aware that *Some* people recommend 70 or 80 Ft.Lbs,
I'm also equally aware that its pretty easy to strip the aluminum threads off the receiver,
And since Colt recommends no more than 40 Ft.Lbs., and I can shoot dime size 10 shot groups at 100 yards, shoot MOA at 500 yards with 35 Ft.Lbs, 
I see no gain, or even any sense to crank down on those aluminum threads anymore.

Facing off the upper is a common practice to align gas tube with barrel nut,
So is shimming.
I said 'Common Practice' before your pink thong rides up again, 
I'm not recommending taking any more off the receiver than is needed to get the barrel face square with the bore of said upper.

I don't see a huge issue with either method, other than removing material from the barrel face moves the chamber back a few thousands...
(Something else you wouldn't understand)

Personally, I lap the barrel nut flange/chamber nut to get a precise fit without shims or removing any more stock than I have to from the upper,
But I'm sure either you invented that, or you will say it can't be done...

Just like you disagree with getting the upper receiver aligned with the barrel,
You argue with getting the locking lugs to actually make contact,
You argue having the bolt/carrier forced sideways is fine...

Never seen that 'Slip Knot' chamber you are so fond of,
Every builder I know of wants the locking lugs in full contact.
Every builder I know of wants the barrel pointing the same direction as the barrel.
Every builder I know of wants rounds to chamber...

I'm sure *You* can shoot around corners in *Your* world,
But everyone on planet earth I deal with wants something that works and is at the very least safe to shoot...

You claimed to work, or did work in a shop,
That would scare the crap out of me to have a potato gun from 'Your' shop!


----------



## Texaspredatorhu

Congrats on your shooting abilities. I built a [email protected] bull barreled AR and I have shot praire dogs at 850 with it and my point of aim was still in line, that means no wind age adjustments. I DID NOT lap your beloved barrel but flange. Next thing is your version of MOA is flawed like there's no tomorrow. You said something about 323 MOA at 1300 which equates out to 4199 inches or 350 feet. I reckon someone said that would be missing a 25 story luxury hotel. i also showed the manual where the army clearly sights in the M24 at 100, but you lied there too. Finally, while all your practices may prove to be stellar and accuracy enhancing, there are too many people that have proved your theories to NOT be mandatory as you claim and probably more on here that have proven your theories unecessary. Your long winded and rude comments are not required and have done nothing more than destroy your credibility. Much like you reloading thread, I did not know you had to do a full length size and a SAAMI sizing because that isn't real. All the die manufacturers build their dies off thebSAAMI specs. Second, hornady, federal, Nosler, ect.... Spend millions annually to produce the best stuff they can. I'll take their published data and procedures before I take any of your belittling ways. Last bit for you, if you are what you say you are then you should re read you honor-courage-commitment card, might do you some good to be humbled, if not, God bless.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu

I forgot, you said stand in front of MY target, not A target, so yes that would be a threat no matter how you meant it.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu

Right there at the bottom.


----------



## Bearfootfarm

> Don't know which forum anyone else might be talking about,
> 
> *I'm only on some Jeep forums and a couple reloading forums*,
> 
> And the manufacturers guild, but that's not a 'Forum'.
> 
> So, that pretty much takes care of your last round of* lies.*


Are you sure you want to continue calling people liars when they can show proof of what they have stated?

If you like, I can show you a thread you started to "instruct" everyone on the 
"proper "way to seat bullets, and you argued with this guy:



> Krieger barrels put an ad in Precision Shooting Magazine saying that with one of their barrels, *Bart Bobbitt* had shot a 3.325" 20 shot group at 800 yards with a 308.
> 
> We asked how he did it, and he said:
> I used a .308 Win. with Sierra's 155-gr. Palma bullet with 45.3gr. of IMR4895 and RWS Primers in full-length sized WCC60 match cases. Had a 20X scope on the English Paramount action and shot prone with a bag under my front hand to steady the rifle. It was about 6AM in dead-calm wind conditions.


http://www.sniperforums.com/forum/cartridges-calibers/12007-bart-bobbitt-2.html


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl

JeepHammer said:


> Don't know a thing about CMG, and don't care.
> ...
> *So, that pretty much takes care of your last round of lies.*


I didn't say that you WERE a CMG plant. I said that I was beginning to suspect that you were, because of your obvious protection.

That wasn't a lie. My statement came with the explicit caveat that it was something that I suspect. But, that is just one of the (many) differences between you and me; I don't state my opinions and suspicions as fact, and then argue with anyone that disagrees. 

So this is now the THIRD time you've called me a liar, when I wasn't lying. 
I've stopped counting the number of times you've called me and other members idiots for not agreeing with your opinions and mis-comprehensions. 



JeepHammer said:


> Never threatened to shoot anyone, or any other kind of threat.
> I said since you think everything I post is crap, then stand in front of a long range target.
> You should be perfectly safe since you think its all crap and I have no idea how to lay hands on a firearm of any kind or how to use one.


And, see, that is yet another difference between us. I believe in holding myself (and others) accountable for what I (they) do or say. 

I never said that "everything you post is crap" or that you "have no idea how to lay hands on a firearm". Quite the opposite, actually, if you read any of my several posts trying to talk you back in from the ledge you've painted yourself onto. But, if you can quote my post saying either of the things in your quotes, I'll own it. 

This started when you called me a liar, I posted hard data to prove that what I said was true, and you refused to walk it back. Now, right here, you're restating your threat, and saying you never threatened anyone. Anyone reading that can see that you're saying that, to prove your long-range shooting ability, I should go stand in front of your target. If I am still alive after one minute, you'll apologize. 

That's a threat by anyone's measure, and "but, nuh-uh" is not a legitimate dodge.


----------



## JeepHammer

Show me where it says 'Still alive after one minute'...

Implying that I'd murder someone over an Internet crap fight is insane.
My point was, if you actually believe its all Internet fiction,
Then you would be perfectly safe.

I've reciever a 'Warning' from the forum,
So by all means, continue to post up now that I'm not allowed to.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu

Amigo, it's a screen shot there for the whole world to see! You said that!!!


----------



## HTAdmin

GunMonkeyIntl said:


> I've begun to suspect that you are one of the CMG plants. If not, you're obviously "protected" somehow. Anyone one of the rest of us who said they'd shoot another member to prove themselves would have bought themselves an instant lifetime-ban. Yet, you're still here.
> 
> Bear pointed out, in the last thread you made yourself look stupid, that he had seen you repeat the same trick in other forums. I wonder if those forums were CMG-affiliated?


There are no CMG plants. It's just me. We're reviewing the issue now, but we often discuss actions and that can make it take longer.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl

JeepHammer said:


> ...
> Implying that I'd murder someone over an Internet crap fight is insane.
> My point was, if you actually believe its all Internet fiction,
> Then you would be perfectly safe.


You know what I think is _insane_? Someone stating something very explicitly in one moment, and then failing to recognize that they did a moment later, even when someone shows them their own words.

You did say that, if I was right, I'd be safe and then you'd apologize. The part you seem to be ignoring is the "what if" you were right - then I wouldn't "be safe" and you wouldn't apologize. It doesn't take rhetorical algebra to see that you were saying you would shoot me to prove yourself right. 

It's there, for anyone to see. It doesn't go away just because you choose to ignore it. 

That seems to be a favored tactic of yours, and I've got to tell you, buddy, it's not working. You routinely say things, as they pop into your head, state them as fact, and then go on to argue as if you said something totally different, end up still being wrong in the end, and then take a hard right in the conversation as if the thing that got you there never happened.

For example:


JeepHammer said:


> Although I suppose someone *Could* ignore the 35 Ft.Lbs. +/- 5 Ft.lbs. recommended by most manufacturers...


Became:


JeepHammer said:


> ...
> Colt produced the M-16 manual for the military (blue cover) all branches.
> Barrel nut torque specification, 35 Ft.Lbs., addendum says +/- 5 Ft.Lbs. for gas tube alignment.
> I'm perfectly aware that *Some* people recommend 70 or 80 Ft.Lbs,
> I'm also equally aware that its pretty easy to strip the aluminum threads off the receiver,
> And since Colt recommends no more than 40 Ft.Lbs., and I can shoot dime size 10 shot groups at 100 yards, shoot MOA at 500 yards with 35 Ft.Lbs,
> I see no gain, or even any sense to crank down on those aluminum threads anymore...


Your hard-right turn adds more incorrect info to the mix, and does nothing to change the fact that you were wrong in the first place.

The Army and AF TM (9-1005-319-23&P), the USMC TM (05538/10021-IN), the Colt, Bushmaster, FN, Remington, DPMS, S&W, Knightâs Armament, and Rock River armorer programs, all of which I have copies of, all echo the MIL-STD 35 ft/lbs minimum, ânot to exceed 80 ft lbs to align for gas tubeâ. Thatâs 35-80 ft. lbs.

I would post the scans from all of them here, but most of them were given to me by friends/colleagues, and itâs poor form to go around posting your competitionâs documents. I wouldnât expect you to bear any credence for the other one, since I wrote it. And the Army and USMC ones are easy enough for anyone with a browser window open to find. 

So, besides the Army, USMC, Colt, Bushmaster, FN, Remington, DPMS, S&W, Knightâs Armament, and Rock River, who are these â most of manufacturersâ that youâre talking about?

Caveating that â*Some* people recommend 70 or 80 Ft.Lbsâ (_which Iâve never actually seen â always 35-80_), or that 35 Ft Lbs. works on one of your rifles (_donât see why it wouldnât; itâs within the spec that *we all *recommend_), doesnât change the basis of the argument:

You stated that âmost manufacturersâ recommend 30-40, but, really, that was just your preference/goal. Adding âmost manufacturersâ to it did not add gravitas to your statement. It made it wrong.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl

Austin said:


> There are no CMG plants. It's just me. We're reviewing the issue now, but we often discuss actions and that can make it take longer.


Yeah. 
Sorry: "Plants" probably made it seem more conspiracy-theory than was necessary.

My bad.


----------



## JeepHammer

Where, EXACTLY do the words *'STILL ALIVE'* appear anywhere than in your post?
No death threat.

It's old school, you complain about someone else's shooting,
You get stuck in the parapet marking his targets, catching the splinters and spalling.

Like I said, I'm restricted from further 'Argument' on anything that can be construed as 'Un-Friendly', 
So by all means, keep posting... Have a nice day now that you are the 'Protected' you accused me of being.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl

Oh....
I see. You were saying that we should go to the range together, and I could work the pits to see that you know how to shoot.
My mista...

Oh, wait. No.
You said:


JeepHammer said:


> Just stand in front of my 600 yard target for about 1 minute and I'll apologize.
> If you are right, you would be perfectly safe and I'll apologize.


Yeah, that's how I thought I remembered it. I was to stand *in front* of your target, *and if you didn't know what you were doing, I would be safe*. 

Pits are BELOW the target, normally behind them and also behind a thick berm. If I was in the pit, my safety wouldn't depend on whether or not you knew what you were doing. 

No. Nice try, though.
You really will say ANYTHING to try to weasel out of having to own what you've already said, won't you?
You should consider politics.



JeepHammer said:


> ...It's old school, you complain about someone else's shooting,


And, hey, while we're on the topic of "old-school". Remember, back in the day, when one man called another man a liar, and that man proved he was telling the truth, and the first man would _own it_ and apologize.

See, some of us- those of us with a sense of honor- refer to those olden ways as "current-school".


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl

JeepHammer said:


> ...Like I said, I'm restricted from further 'Argument' on anything that can be construed as 'Un-Friendly'..


Guess what, bro. We all are. 
That's why the rest of us keep it honorable - no name calling, threats, etc. - you know, the stuff children do when they argue.

The rest of us come here and discuss guns, with facts, data, and an open mind to what the rest of the membership might have to add.

Odd that you find that problematic or, somehow, a punishment.


----------

