I durability tested laser, plasma, and waterjet cut AR500.

[Tyler Kemp]

Folks seem to have widely varying opinions on whether the cutting method of AR500 matters. I took some of our waterjet cut targets and then had smaller targets laser and plasma cut from that steel for the most even test possible. Although this test is far from the most scientific thing out there, you can DEFINITELY see that laser and plasma cut targets are significantly less durable on the cut surface. I was surprised to see plasma cut targets perform better than laser cut ones, this wasn't a submerged plasma cutter, and the laser was supposedly an expensive unit offering a minimal heat affected zone.


As a bonus, I've also attached a 12" gridded target hung on our t-post mount. I'm certain gridding with other methods won't be as durable...but I have some to test anyway! These make for easy group measuring, and the mount lets them ring super loudly.:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziSdnnW3snE

 

[steve123]

Thanks for sharing that test! Waterjet cut from now on.

 

[Sogan]

100% waterjet from now on. Thanks for taking the time to do this as it’s pretty obvious which one came out on top.

 

[strikeeagle1]

Thank you for your time and expense to demonstrate the differences.

 

[Tyler Kemp]

Much appreciated guys! I look forward to doing some more testing to see what else we find.

 

[Guy Montag]

Thanks Tyler, appreciate the info.