ArizonaShooting.com

"The #1 Resource for Shooters in Arizona!"
It is currently January 18th, 2018, 2:38 pm


All times are UTC - 7 hours


Custom Search





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: EBRs with carbon fiber receivers, yea or nay?
New postPosted: January 10th, 2018, 7:29 am 
Offline
AZS Addict
AZS Addict
User avatar

Joined: November 12th, 2009, 1:57 pm
Posts: 907
Location: N.PHX near Ben Avery Range
chrisandclauida2 wrote:
harleypower69 wrote:
I ran a Bushmaster Carbon AR in .223 and put thousands of Mil-Surp rounds through it and never a problem. Carbon done right is as strong or stronger than many metal alloys. They build jets with carbon. I have zero experience with a carbon .308 yet I would suggest that .308 ammo will increase your weight as far as carrying or shouldering the weapon. Interested if a magazine full of .308 negates the weight savings? I believe the best weight savings would come from a forend unadorned with rails and gadgets and a light barrel profile if you are shooting unsupported.


My point was that the 3 ounces you save in weight is easily saved elsewhere without giving up quality.

There really is no comparison between a carbon fiber airplane wing and an AR lower except they both contain carbon fiber. There are many reports of them breaking. They aren't wound woven impregnated with resin and baked under vacuums in an Autoclave. They have carbon fiber as a reinforcement in the polymer.

Glocks have metal in the polymer.

P-Mags don't have to endure the stress that a lower does.

Magnesium and polymer lowers were intended as weight savers. They most certainly aren't stronger than milspec lowers. There might have been a cost savings due to construction methods in the beginning but not any more. So if you can get milspec lowers cheap enough and can save those few ounces elsewhere then the question is why. If you want to build or own one then go for it, that's good enough reason but the others aren't really valid or relevant anymore.

Sure some will last for ever for some folks but the breaking issues in the buffer tube area, trigger pins or take down pins remain. Some manufacturers are adding metal subframe to their lowers to fight this. Again you adding weight and expense when you do so. Benefit?

Cav Arms gen 2 lowers are pretty stout but still not milspec stout. Guys were using them for 50bmg lowers and some were great but others had weld separation issues.

If you want to do great. Enjoy it that's all the reason you should need. If you're trying to justify doing one because of advantages, I don't think there really are any pluses anymore.


^ Actually the Carbon15 is a CRFP receiver, read more about this polymer here, despite my distaste for WIKI.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_fi ... ed_polymer

_________________
[b][b]Sheep dogs welcome.[/b and an extreme distaste for "thread locker"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EBRs with carbon fiber receivers, yea or nay?
New postPosted: January 10th, 2018, 8:25 am 
Offline
AZS is my home
AZS is my home

Joined: May 28th, 2011, 9:02 am
Posts: 6715
Interesting.

Is there anybody out there who:

- has a stripped metal lower and a stripped carbon fiber lower lying around, and

- has an accurate scale,

and will tell us the weight of each of them, to see if the difference is 2 ounces or 2 pounds?

_________________
Guns don't kill people.
Gun-free zones kill people.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EBRs with carbon fiber receivers, yea or nay?
New postPosted: January 10th, 2018, 8:55 am 
Offline
AZS is my home
AZS is my home
User avatar

Joined: September 8th, 2005, 2:43 pm
Posts: 9375
Location: Phuk roof top voting machines. My radical right wing extreemists and I are moving on to Guillotines
milquetoast wrote:
Interesting.

Is there anybody out there who:

- has a stripped metal lower and a stripped carbon fiber lower lying around, and

- has an accurate scale,

and will tell us the weight of each of them, to see if the difference is 2 ounces or 2 pounds?

The info is widely available. The various carbon fiber reinforced receivers all weigh between 3.5 and 3.75 ounces.the magnesium lower is about 2 more ounces and a aluminum lowers range from 6.5 ounces for the "light" models to 8.5 ounces. I think I've seen a a spikes design that was 10 ounces.

_________________
***disclaimer*** The preceding post may contain humor and or sarcasm or was manufactured in a brain where humor and sarcasm are known to be present so some cross contamination may have occurred.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EBRs with carbon fiber receivers, yea or nay?
New postPosted: January 10th, 2018, 9:12 am 
Offline
AZS is my home
AZS is my home
User avatar

Joined: September 8th, 2005, 2:43 pm
Posts: 9375
Location: Phuk roof top voting machines. My radical right wing extreemists and I are moving on to Guillotines
harleypower69 wrote:
chrisandclauida2 wrote:
harleypower69 wrote:
I ran a Bushmaster Carbon AR in .223 and put thousands of Mil-Surp rounds through it and never a problem. Carbon done right is as strong or stronger than many metal alloys. They build jets with carbon. I have zero experience with a carbon .308 yet I would suggest that .308 ammo will increase your weight as far as carrying or shouldering the weapon. Interested if a magazine full of .308 negates the weight savings? I believe the best weight savings would come from a forend unadorned with rails and gadgets and a light barrel profile if you are shooting unsupported.


My point was that the 3 ounces you save in weight is easily saved elsewhere without giving up quality.

There really is no comparison between a carbon fiber airplane wing and an AR lower except they both contain carbon fiber. There are many reports of them breaking. They aren't wound woven impregnated with resin and baked under vacuums in an Autoclave. They have carbon fiber as a reinforcement in the polymer.

Glocks have metal in the polymer.

P-Mags don't have to endure the stress that a lower does.

Magnesium and polymer lowers were intended as weight savers. They most certainly aren't stronger than milspec lowers. There might have been a cost savings due to construction methods in the beginning but not any more. So if you can get milspec lowers cheap enough and can save those few ounces elsewhere then the question is why. If you want to build or own one then go for it, that's good enough reason but the others aren't really valid or relevant anymore.

Sure some will last for ever for some folks but the breaking issues in the buffer tube area, trigger pins or take down pins remain. Some manufacturers are adding metal subframe to their lowers to fight this. Again you adding weight and expense when you do so. Benefit?

Cav Arms gen 2 lowers are pretty stout but still not milspec stout. Guys were using them for 50bmg lowers and some were great but others had weld separation issues.

If you want to do great. Enjoy it that's all the reason you should need. If you're trying to justify doing one because of advantages, I don't think there really are any pluses anymore.


^ Actually the Carbon15 is a CRFP receiver, read more about this polymer here, despite my distaste for WIKI.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_fi ... ed_polymer


I might be misunderstanding what you're saying, if so sorry.

The fact they have carbon fiber in them as reinforcement doesn't mean they are strong like carbon fiber aerospace or automotive parts that are all carbon fiber. Those parts have a specific layering and winding process in several directions and then are put into an Autoclave under vacuums and heat so the resin will completely penetrate the fiber and cure.

Carbon fiber lowers aren't anywhere near that strength. They are strong and flexible and probably good enough for most people's applications. I just don't think the few ounces saved is worth the loss in strength when you can easily save those ounces elsewhere. There's no real cost advantage anymor either.

If someone made a real complete carbon fiber lower like they make airplane wings or high end race car monocoques then they may very well out preform aluminum lowers.

_________________
***disclaimer*** The preceding post may contain humor and or sarcasm or was manufactured in a brain where humor and sarcasm are known to be present so some cross contamination may have occurred.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EBRs with carbon fiber receivers, yea or nay?
New postPosted: January 10th, 2018, 2:21 pm 
Offline
AZS is my home
AZS is my home
User avatar

Joined: June 5th, 2006, 2:29 am
Posts: 6900
Location: N. Messico aka. Tucson, AZ
I have a CAV lower on my .50 Beowulf as well as a couple in 5.56, and have had zero issues

_________________
when the devil whispers to you that you will not withstand the storm, gently whisper back: I AM the storm!




Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EBRs with carbon fiber receivers, yea or nay?
New postPosted: January 11th, 2018, 5:20 pm 
Offline
AZS is my home
AZS is my home

Joined: March 11th, 2007, 8:14 pm
Posts: 5982
Location: Phoenix - AZ
Cavarms lowers are awesome. I have one GWACS lower gun that I absolutely love. Total weight is 5lbs 5oz.

http://www.gwacsarmory.com/

Article from SinistralRifleman regarding the history of Cavarms and GWACS - https://sinistralrifleman.com/2013/01/2 ... -receiver/

_________________
Ryan
Glendale, AZ
1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EBRs with carbon fiber receivers, yea or nay?
New postPosted: January 12th, 2018, 12:05 pm 
Offline
AZS is my home
AZS is my home
User avatar

Joined: February 27th, 2009, 3:40 pm
Posts: 3071
Location: Work Tempe / Home Gilbert
If it is a shooter, go for it, they are cheaper and as long as you get it from a quality manufacturer with a good design and reputation, why not?

Even metal firearms have examples of cheap designs / bad / shady manufacture that fail. Even known manufacturers have had hiccups with metal firearms.

Do not be the first one on the block with one... get one from a line that has been out for a few years.
Also do not expect to get any good resale value from them.

Glock has polymer, but their reputation for YEARS is the reason that they can resell for a reasonable price.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EBRs with carbon fiber receivers, yea or nay?
New postPosted: January 12th, 2018, 1:33 pm 
Offline
AZS Addict
AZS Addict
User avatar

Joined: November 20th, 2011, 11:23 am
Posts: 804
I have no issue with properly designed poly/fiber components.

They key here is properly designed. Just copying the design/structure from metal receivers won't work as the materials have different behaviors. This was the issue with many "first gen" poly/composite AR lowers - they just made copies from the aluminum lowers. After they figured out where they needed to make changes they are 100% as reliable as an aluminum lower. The Bushmaster Carbons are a prime example.

Manufacturers now make vehicle wheels out of carbon fiber. Aerospace has been using it for decades. If that material can hold up to those applications then a firearm is no issue as long as the material's properties are taken into account.

_________________
Paul.
Character & Class > Attitude and Crass.
"A man's character may be learned by the adjectives he habitually uses in conversation."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EBRs with carbon fiber receivers, yea or nay?
New postPosted: January 12th, 2018, 2:14 pm 
Offline
AZS is my home
AZS is my home
User avatar

Joined: September 8th, 2005, 2:43 pm
Posts: 9375
Location: Phuk roof top voting machines. My radical right wing extreemists and I are moving on to Guillotines
If an AR lower were made like aerospace and automotive carbon fiber parts, properly layed layerd and wound if needed then vacume/autoclave resined and cured I have no doubt it would out preform amuminium. No one is doing that. They all use it like other fillers in polymers. Thus why they fail at trigger pin holes, take down pin holes or the buffer tube. Ive seen a ckuple that look like they were welded and failed at the sonic weld joint. They may fail much less than before but they still fail under normal Intended use. I dont think you can say that about a milspec aluminum from a forging.

_________________
***disclaimer*** The preceding post may contain humor and or sarcasm or was manufactured in a brain where humor and sarcasm are known to be present so some cross contamination may have occurred.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EBRs with carbon fiber receivers, yea or nay?
New postPosted: January 12th, 2018, 3:28 pm 
Offline
AZS; Woohoo!
AZS; Woohoo!
User avatar

Joined: June 2nd, 2008, 1:14 pm
Posts: 2182
paulgt2164 wrote:
Manufacturers now make vehicle wheels out of carbon fiber. Aerospace has been using it for decades. If that material can hold up to those applications then a firearm is no issue as long as the material's properties are taken into account.


I think the word "proper" is the key here.

I doubt any current manufacturer of AR lowers is laying up carbon fiber like they do for aircraft or automotive wheels. The process is time consuming unless you are making hundreds of thousands, watch the YouTube video on Ford magnesium and Carbon fiber wheels for an example. At the current quantities, of carbon AR lowers in the market they would have to run North of $300 if they were made correctly. At that price point the market would shrink raising the cost even further.

_________________
"Peace Is A Dream Only Achieved When Good Men Are Willing To Commit Great Violence Upon Evil Men


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: EBRs with carbon fiber receivers, yea or nay?
New postPosted: January 13th, 2018, 10:31 am 
Offline
AZS is my home
AZS is my home

Joined: March 11th, 2007, 8:14 pm
Posts: 5982
Location: Phoenix - AZ
milquetoast wrote:
Interesting.

Is there anybody out there who:

- has a stripped metal lower and a stripped carbon fiber lower lying around, and

- has an accurate scale,

and will tell us the weight of each of them, to see if the difference is 2 ounces or 2 pounds?

I don't have precisely what you're requesting, but I do think this is a fairly apples to apples comparison.

Colt 2960

Lightweight trigger makes up for the bad lever in weight, I guess. Roger's stock, pretty lightweight stock. Nothing in the pistol grip

2lbs 3.5oz

Image

GWACS

No frills LPK. Sling mount on the back end is probably a couple ounces. Nothing else extra.

1lb 13.4oz

Image

Lowers have 6oz difference, built out.

Complete, with sling, 6lbs 1.9oz

Image

_________________
Ryan
Glendale, AZ
1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2


All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group