- Posts: 5847
- Thank you received: 0
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
OleCowboy wrote: Here is my challenge:
Going roller over just round or square provides increased, better, keener, faster, jump higher, ______ and _______, ______ etc. On that I am sold
This brings on 2 questions:
1) Is the increase in overall performance factor(s) significant (this would be measured on an order of magnitude)?
2) If the answer is yes to the above then why has this not become a standard modification in high use weaponry such as military?
Don't anyone get me wrong I am not saying NAY on this mod and in fact I thinking of doing it myself, why, cause I think its better, not sure how much, but I like it...
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
I CANNOT argue with you thinking and certainly jives with mine. There is an old saying: 'if it ain't broke don't fix it'. While I believe in that I also firmly believe that it has to be balanced with performance factors that lend to longer lifecycle, increased reliability, lowered maintenance requirements and finally superior operation.SEMPERFIDOC wrote:
OleCowboy wrote: Here is my challenge:
Going roller over just round or square provides increased, better, keener, faster, jump higher, ______ and _______, ______ etc. On that I am sold
This brings on 2 questions:
1) Is the increase in overall performance factor(s) significant (this would be measured on an order of magnitude)?
2) If the answer is yes to the above then why has this not become a standard modification in high use weaponry such as military?
Don't anyone get me wrong I am not saying NAY on this mod and in fact I thinking of doing it myself, why, cause I think its better, not sure how much, but I like it...
:busted:
I think the increased efficiency of the bolt carrier would be a very difficult measurement. Given the fact that the original system isn't really an issue, makes warranting the upgrade more of a personal desire, rather than a necessity. BUT, ever since the original "Eugene Stoner" AR platform has been greatly modified from the 20" down to smaller barrel lengths, the gas pressures have significantly gone up, creating a ripple effect of new stresses and hot spots within the AR that weren't originally there. This doesn't apply to the Piston operated systems, but rather the DI systems. So I personally think, for good measure, that on any 18" and below DI-AR system could benefit from the Roller Cam upgrade.
DOC Jr
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
OleCowboy wrote:
I CANNOT argue with you thinking and certainly jives with mine. There is an old saying: 'if it ain't broke don't fix it'. While I believe in that I also firmly believe that it has to be balanced with performance factors that lend to longer lifecycle, increased reliability, lowered maintenance requirements and finally superior operation.SEMPERFIDOC wrote:
OleCowboy wrote: Here is my challenge:
Going roller over just round or square provides increased, better, keener, faster, jump higher, ______ and _______, ______ etc. On that I am sold
This brings on 2 questions:
1) Is the increase in overall performance factor(s) significant (this would be measured on an order of magnitude)?
2) If the answer is yes to the above then why has this not become a standard modification in high use weaponry such as military?
Don't anyone get me wrong I am not saying NAY on this mod and in fact I thinking of doing it myself, why, cause I think its better, not sure how much, but I like it...
:busted:
I think the increased efficiency of the bolt carrier would be a very difficult measurement. Given the fact that the original system isn't really an issue, makes warranting the upgrade more of a personal desire, rather than a necessity. BUT, ever since the original "Eugene Stoner" AR platform has been greatly modified from the 20" down to smaller barrel lengths, the gas pressures have significantly gone up, creating a ripple effect of new stresses and hot spots within the AR that weren't originally there. This doesn't apply to the Piston operated systems, but rather the DI systems. So I personally think, for good measure, that on any 18" and below DI-AR system could benefit from the Roller Cam upgrade.
DOC Jr
I think the value and thinking behind the roller cam pin warrants its use at first view. I would sure like to see some test results that reflect a long use cycle, up in the 25,000 round area.
Sorry, its just the ole engineer in me...
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
All content of this site is copyright 2003 - 2017
AR-10(T)™, AR-10™, are trademarks of ArmaLite, Inc.®
AR10T.com is NOT endorsed or affiliated with ArmaLite, Inc.®