I've posted my explanation for 75-100 before but here it is again:

I tested snapping them on hand tight up through "way too much".

I could not get any zero shift or impact shift from day to day or when I whacked the barrel off something above 50 ftlbs with a 308 case head and 65 on a Win Mag. However, since lots of people don't have a torque wrench and "good enough" is a wild range depending on the person (farmers like shit TIIIIIIGHT) then our spec that I've published for years has been 75 for 223/308 and 100 for mags. This gives a specific value for folks and the consistency isn't an issue.

Ted says 100 because he asked me and I told him what my data was... so he used it.
Aaron from Zermatt asked me what I recommended when they were making up the insert cards that come with all their receivers and I told them too. So they used it.

Rubicon Precision said:

We talking something like an AWMC? If so, that thread is not loaded in tension. There would be a point load in compression on the side of the tenon.

Click to expand...

The AI system isn't a point load. It uses a cutout in the tenon thread that the screw closes up the effective pitch diameter and drives preload into the joint by closing down the thread in the receiver to create a normal force on the ramp which in turn creates tensile load in the joint. Point loads on thread suck... which brings me to:

TacosGigante said:

Apologies for the ignorance, but does the Terminus system not work?

Click to expand...

The Curtis system? No, it causes problems sometimes and we decline warranty of zero shift and groups when that system is used. Every single time that we've had an issue with a barrel and the set screws were installed it was fixed by removing those set screws and torquing the barrel in place. MPA ran into that years ago and quietly stopped recommending the use of the system even though their branded actions as the time from Curtis still had the features in the receiver.

Back in 2009 or so it was relative commonplace on this forum for someone to talk about having issues with groups and wandering zero or fliers in a freshly assembled Rem 700 build. One of the first things that was brought up was "check that your front action screw isn't too long and touching the bolt. Check that the front scope rail screw isn't too long and touching the top of the barrel threads."

In 2017 or so the powers that be in the market decided another quick change system was needed and since the systems on the market that created preload into the joint were already patented the set screw setup was adopted. This was about the time that the WTO lug was flashing into popularity and the "I can change barrels at the range" idea was all the rage.

up

up

MechanicGino said:

Because, over $5k! Can’t give free!

Click to expand...

Nevermind

Skeptic1 said:

Terry,

Why are you arguing with this piece of shit?
This guy is so far beneath you that it isn't worth your time.

Respectfully,

Click to expand...

I was eating breakfast at my desk and felt a keyboard Touretts attack coming on so I decided to blow it on him/her/it instead of boring the rest of the forum with some mundane bullshit.

Kinda like taking a good morning shit. I got that out of my system and feel better now. . .

JustSendit said:

Do you have a source for the GBs that got their asses kicked in Russia?

Have you been to Russia or any former Soviet country? Besides being white, they’re not that similar to the US, culturally.

Russia would never be Americas friend, under any circumstances. Not in this lifetime.

Click to expand...

No official source, but that type thing would never be allowed online or admitted to.
But I’ve heard it from multiple unofficial sources. This was like 2+ years ago, let me see what I can dig up.. it was when basically the entirety of Azov batt. got surrounded and destroyed in Mariupol.

As far them being a friend - We’ve never even attempted to treat them with some honesty and without hostility. They ain’t the USSR anymore despite boomers still clinging to that idea. If we actually honored our word with them, dropped all sanctions, etc I’m sure we could come to a mutual understanding at the least.

BurtG said:

It takes $2500 off 50 cal can

Click to expand...

oo didn't know that

Makinchips208 said:

That’s half the industry isn’t it?

Click to expand...

It depends. Some manufacturers keep it secret for proprietary reasons. Others are just trying to conceal cheap decisions.

Tokay444 said:

That’s a completely different type of connection, and not one I would waste time with.

Click to expand...

Apologies for the ignorance, but does the Terminus system not work?

I’ll take this per our pms

flogxal said:

The RUS govt has, through its public-facing personnel and channels, emphasized consistently since 2014 that this problem is a problem of national boundaries (historical, and near-term both) and of NATO's history of speaking with a forked tongue on what are its intentions adjacent to RUS.

A person only has to go look at their appropriate sources within RUS govt, and pay attention to the 3 main public-facing diplomats, Lavrov Medvedev and Zakharova. The message has been consistent since 2014. Same with RUS's statements and positions toward NATO.

I've watched the UKR scenario since 2014 as if it were a big piece of white collar litigation. And I see one side's position, and supporting statements, as being a clear winner on veracity & verifiability. The nations backing UKR, however, have not even come close to the same standards. Inconsistent and dishonest have been the two descriptors I'd use.

I don't like seeing it shaping up this way but it's what I've seen.

Click to expand...

Well said. It’s plain to see NATO is the bully. That’s the only conclusion one can come to if you actually think logically and objectively like a real man.

For people who try to rag on Russia for not stomping Ukraine out(which IMO they absolutely could if they went all out), bear in mind that Ukraine has the backing of the entire western world. Russia is backed up by who? NK and Iran? Lol they might as well be on their own.

The more combat vids I watch from over there… the more I come to the conclusion the powers that be are using it as a giant fckd up test ground and training ground for cutting edge tactics. Drone warfare is advancing so rapidly it’s hard to keep up with the advances and new ideas for use case coming out every month.

Bump

Bump

Ankeny said:

I bought a new Vortex Defender enclosed emitter last week. Flickering dot, on again off again, dead, in about 40 rounds. Returned it to store for a full refund. Not exactly confidence inspiring.

Click to expand...

Fuck that sucks.

System48 said:

Still available? I'm new so can't DM yet.

Click to expand...

It says “SOLD” twice (once with the thread header and once in the ad itself), so you tell me…

Edit: just realized your post is from late Sunday and my edit was yesterday, though how I’d have missed your post, I don’t know. My apologies for the brash reply, but it did sell over the weekend. Welcome to the Hide (where some of us are assholes sometimes lol)!

Up

Short-bus said:

Kid was very lucky, the engine exhaust was fortunately not blowing on him cause it kept running after the crash, you can briefly see the main rotor shaft is still spinning away. VERY lucky there was no fire, that would have been a lousy way to go.

Pilot pulled up hard on the collective, putting a hell of a load on the engines, you can see condensation forming on the trailing edge of the main rotor blades, along with some smoke from the engines from the high loads, not thick like rolling coal, but it's there, he was climbing hard.

I'm not a pilot, no formal training, I have watched several youtube videos, but I would have thought that the procedure for a tail rotor failure when you're that close to the ground would be to preferably get on the ground as controlled as you can, rather than gain altitude. Hopefully someone that's an actual helo pilot can come in here and tell me i'm a dumb dumb and command me to sit in the corner and think about my stupid thoughts.

Click to expand...

Heli pilot (well, kinda former) here. You’re not a dumb dumb, nor are you wrong. It’s somewhat complex to describe in detail here, but the short version is that in the event of a tail rotor failure, the proper response is to enter an autorotation. The reason for this is fairly straightforward: entering an auto removes power from the main rotor system, eliminating torque and the need for tail rotor control to counteract said torque.

The issue in this case is that entering an auto at that altitude and that airspeed (low/slow) makes for an incredibly difficult maneuver to pull off successfully. In something like the Bell 222 in the video, you’d still have a decent amount of inertia in the rotor system (those blades are hella big/heavy), but he appeared to still be over trees when it happened and he would have settled very quickly. Chances are they would have come straight down into the trees, destroying the rotors and therefore eliminating any chance of cushioning the landing by pulling collective. In a vertical orientation like that, that would likely have meant severe spinal compression for all involved, likely fatal.

So while him pulling collective to gain altitude made the situation “worse” by adding MORE torque and thus causing the total tail rotor failure and hard right spin shown, in a weird way it may have saved their lives as a crash-landing on their side was probably less damaging to them than a near vertical one.

But you’re correct. In most (all?) helicopters, a total tail rotor failure would involve a full-down autorotation as essentially no torque is needed when the rotor is unpowered. Again, very difficult to do at that altitude/airspeed combo (I don’t know the Bell 222’s performance charts, but he’s very likely within the shaded “avoid” area of the height/velocity diagram), but that’s helicopters for you. Sometimes you have to learn to fight what seems like a natural/correct response as they’re inherently unstable machines. Absolutely amazing when they work properly, and devastating when they don’t.

Brass $ drop

oldrifleman said:

Without providing proof or having others collaborate your statements it sounds like sour grapes. If you can prove it, please do so, otherwise STFU.

Click to expand...

Oh look, another guy on the internet playing tough guy and telling people to STFU from behind a keyboard... Boring...

fireforebellum said:

Thank you for the feedback. I bought my first receiver set about 4 yrs ago, and the 2nd whole rifle 2nd hand, just. Owner said they had 2k rounds through it.

It's always the head of the snake the ruins what could be a great product isn't it? Im sorry they didnt heed your advice.

If you would be so patient with me, Im trying to figure out who OEMd the barrel on this rifle and if it will shoot out suddenly with no warninf like the previous 3 BA Hanson "premium" barrels on the riflles built for youth and women. I have since used Criterion barrels, but even with such a good reputation they also have had flaws. Major ones.

If I posted a picture of the barrel, would you be able to know the maker? It has the BAD name and 1/8T on it in addition to the logo by the muzzle. I did test it and it does shoot well. My worry is that in 1k rounds itll go to 10moa like the other BA premium barrels.

TIA

Click to expand...

Thanks, brother, and yes, it's usually a top-down issue in my experience. I'm happy to help in any way I can.

Keep in mind that ARs are like adult legos. What sets them apart, besides features, are aspects like materials, quality control, machining, and the choice of components not manufactured in-house, typically barrel and BCG. In BAD's case, they have even more components manufactured by 3rd parties. Sometimes it is a good thing, because those machine shops are much better than what BAD can do in-house. The only worry then becomes tolerance stacking when this amalgamation of parts all comes together, not to mention the design, which is the responsibility of the manufacturer, not the machine shop. Garbage in, garbage out type thing.

All that being said, if the rifle shoots well, groups well, and doesn't have reliability problems, I would run a bore scope, confirm everything looks good. If it does, you may not have anything at all to worry about. I would just keep an eye on wear patterns in the upper receiver and BCG. My gripes do not mean in any way that you won't get a functional gun that works. I just find that too many ARs claim to be superior in one way or another in order to inflate their margins.

If you're buying a Workhorse rifle, for example, I'd much rather save the money and buy something from Radical. Similar, if not better quality, but you're going to spend a lot less, even if you do add a Radian safety and charging handle, which are better components in my opinion.

I'm not even going to get into the billet guns, and I don't want to talk in depth about what I've seen. I just won't do those at all from BAD. When they're good, it's an AR... When they are not...

Then take companies like BCM. They don't claim this or that. They acknowledge that they assemble rather than manufacture. But their QC process in choosing components and assembly is world-class. Makes all the difference in the world. Most of the time, the devil is in the details and the pride put into the work.