Jgun

I know your comparing two different guns with different internal components, so it's not like the only variable is the different cal. I don't even know if both of your guns have the same type stocks or barrel length. I was just curious what your impressions were firing impulse and recoil wise and between .223 and 300.

So, how do you like shooting 300 compared to .223 ?

As far as I know it's a heat treating process where they use a salt bath solution, at high temperature to do the heat treating. I have heard good things about it, and as I said, I found it to be very hard to cut through, which leads me to believe it might be effective at reducing wear and increasing barrel life. Might even make the barrel easier to clean. I'm trying to figure out something to build just for the purpose of testing a QPQ coated barrel .

if your referring to the Lancer, I'd guess that in order to make it strong enough to mount rail sections too, they have to make it thicker than the aluminum Apex. If choosing between those two, I think your dealing more with the aesthetics, and the octagonal vs round shape than anything else. I doubt you could even feel the 4 tenths of an oz. weight difference. I have the Apex on my 300 and really like the way it's machined on the outside for a nonslip grip. I'm not really a fan of the round shape and prefer the way a handguard with flat surfaces feels,(like a Daniel Defense rail) but I'm not sure how slippery the CF Lancer is. I may try it on my .458 upper. I think if you really want the lightest, you have to go with the round tubes like the Clark, but then all you get is a tube with no rails. I guess you can't have your cake and eat it too.

The other place where the two piece setup is nice is if you favor the carbon fiber handguards like the Chtistensen, PRI, or the Lancer systems for the 15 platform. www.lancer-systems.com/LCH.html

I'm not sure how the nickel boron compares to titanium nitrate but I have a 1911 barrel on my SV that is TIN coated, and it's got thousands of rds through it without showing any wear at all on the outside where it fits into the slide, the way a normal blued barrel would. I also want to try some of these coatings. I;m especially interested in trying the salt bath heat treating on one of my barrels. Yes it does look like a good find. If any of you guys try any of this stuff, we will expect a review.

If you don't already have one you should have it for reloading anyway. I'm partial to the Starrett stuff, made in Massachusetts I think.

I have no personal experience with the IRA receivers, but, if it were me, and I didn't want to sell it to someone with the caveat that they were on their own if they ran into problems, I'd start by getting some emery cloth of different grits, and hand fit the pins and bolt catch. I'm assuming you don't have a matched upper/lower set, because that should include the pivot and takedown pins. Look at it this way, If you polish the pins and bolt catch to fit. You should be able to get them to fit perfectly, with no slop but no drag either. I routinely use the oversize Armalite pins and polish them to fit when I'm assembling an AR-15 using an upper and lower from different Mfg, That way I can get a perfect, no slop fit between the upper and lower without having to resort to using one of this rubber wedges.

Matt, if as Drew says, there is an issue with the Pact hammer being "taller" or the Young BC sitting lower, maybe you could take the upper off the lower, flip it over and measure the distance from the bottom of the upper to the bottom of the BC, and then swap in the Other BC and see if there's a measurable difference. If so, you would then have to determine if the difference is in the BC or the upper. If you find no difference there, maybe the difference is between the two different hammers/triggers?

I'm intrigued here. First let me ask if I have your components correct. You have a Fulton chromed DPMS style receiver that works in both you Mega Monolithic upper and the other upper(don't know what that one is) and one of the new Young Mfg chromed stainless .308 BCG's that only work in the other, not in the Mega, is that correct? Have you taken any measurements of the two BCG's to see if there are any dimensional differences? I was planning to go with a Young .308 bolt carrier for my next build, because I like their AR 15 carriers so much. Do you think there might be something out of tolerance on the Young BCG? You don't have any bolt/barrel extension issues with the Young, do you?

I'm still on the fence about the monolithic uppers. I know that they're more rigid and the alignment of the receiver and handguard rails is perfect since it's one in the same. The Mega Mono upper is really beautiful, but I like the idea that I can switch around my parts if I should decide to change the barrel configuration on the gun, I also see that so far all of the ones I know of are at least a little heavier than I can assemble a two piece upper setup. I also like the idea that I'd be able to replace a damaged rail if I wanted without having to go for a whole new upper. I'm probably just making excuses because it's easier for me to buy the parts one at a time instead of dropping so much at one time on the monolithic upper.

I was taking a look at their web site this week and noticed that they've got a 7.62 lower receiver listed as coming soon. I contacted them and was told that they're working on a matched upper/lower set and hope to have it available sometime this year. Looks pretty nice, but, based on the price of their 5.56 lowers, I expect it to be expensive. axtsweapons.com/products/AX762

I don't undestand why DPMS would go out and change the height of the upper, after several aftermarket companies went to the effort to design products that would fit their rail height and barrel nut thread. The only thing that I can come up with is that they're trying to force people to use their accessories if they buy a DPMS rifle. If that is in fact the reason, I hope that Dpms actually loses loses business instead of gaining business because of it.

The comp's very light. I like that, some of the comps have enough mass that I can actually (or think I can) feel the added weight when swinging the gun, which has a very thin and light barrel. I also found that when I cut the back of it to index the comp, the melonite coating was hard to cut through. I guess the things they say about the QPQ treatment are true. I'm thinking that I'd like to try out a QPQ treated barrel next, just wondering if the treatment effects accuracy?

Good luck with it. I think a range report is called for, with it mounted on your POF!

If the stated range between the two gauges is supposed to be .004" and, assuming you measurements are correct, they actually only differ by .002", I think that would qualify as being a set of out of tolerance gauges. If, as you say, the no go barely fit's, the likelyhood is that if it were .002" longer, it wouldn't. You know, your measurements are only as accurate as the gauges/measuring devices used to check them, That's why machine shops doing military work have all their gauges calibrated periodically. I've heard that the PTG gauges are very good in this regard.

You did strip the bolt first right? Is it possible that you've got bad gauges on your hands? Have you tried the gauges in any of your other 7.62 rifles with matched barrels/bolts? Checking with a stripped bolt.

Some of us have discussed this on the forum before, so my apologies ahead of time to those of you that are sick of hearing about it. The proponents claim that a carbon wrapped barrel is more rigid and less susceptible to harmonics, along with (depending on which material and process is used) dissipating heat much faster, which is supposed to equate to double the accurate lifespan of a conventional steel barrel. One thing that is not in dispute is that carbon wrapped barrels are much lighter than steel barrels. This can result in a significant weight saving for the complete weapon depending on the barrel caliber, length and contour.

I wasn't sure if I should put this in the .308 parts section instead of the 300 BLK section, but since I picked it up to use on my 300, here it is. I picked up one of the new (I think) .30 cal Dyna comps from Spikes tactical. It looks somewhat Battlecompish, allthough less expensive. If I can ever find the time to get back to the range to test my third run of test loads, I plan to try this out as well (as soon as I time it).

Yeah, Robo, When i heard that ABS was gone, I kind of figured that if I ever got to that place where I actually had shot out the .308 barrel, I'd start by contacting the company that had bought the rights to ABS's wrapping process. Since Mike at ABS assured me that I would be likely to get double the accurate lifespan of a normal stainless barrel, I'm hoping that I won't have to think about doing it for a few years to come. At that point I'll consider the price vs going with a brand new barrel, also, I'll decide at that point if I actually want a .338 federal AR. I'm presently considering different caliber options for my next large platform AR build using the POF receiver set. Since I already have a couple of .308 AR's and I've ordered a .458 SOCOM barrel for my next small platform build, I'm thinking either go for big bore or go for one of the benchrest calibers. I'm not in any hurry, because I've finally come to realize that as soon as I finish one, I immediately start thinking about the next, if not sooner. I don't know what turn around time you were promised, but mine took like 10 months from the time I placed the order, so hopefully yours will be coming soon, and I'm sure it will be worth the wait.

I originally was told of the feasibility of going to .338 by the owner of ABS when I had them make my carbon fiber wrapped stainless .308 barrel. He told me that if i ever shot out the barrel, he could take it to .338 federal. Of course now that ABS is no longer in business, I'll have to see if anyone else is willing to take that project on should I ever need it. (I've got maybe 100 rds through the barrel so far) but if i ever get around to buying a good optic for it, I will most likely start shooting it more regularly. Thanks for sharing your knowledge.

I guess I should have checked this before my first post, I looked on Wikapedia and see that they list the .338 federal as using a .338 bullet in a .308 case. So I guess that your right about the entire barrel having to be opened up .030". Can that actually be done accurately enough to end up with a match quality barrel?

Unless I was misinformed, I was led to understand that the .338 federal shoots the same projectile as the .308, and all that is require is that a .338 federal chamber reamer be run into the old chamber and that the slightly longer length .338 reamer will remove the throat erosion and give you a second life from the barrel. I'm going to see if I can get some kind of definitive confirmation of the accuracy of what I was told.

I'm guessing that a 7.62 AR would be a pretty rare gun to own in Ukraine. I bet you'd be the center of attention if you ever pulled one out at the range.

I think I'm staying on topic with this. When comparing companies in my other post, I was just trying to bring up the point that, unlike PWS which isn't likely to close up shop any time soon, the thor, even if it turns out to be a high quality product, could end up being a gun without factory support if the company were to close. I may be 100% wrong here because I don't know anything about the company. Just saying that a lifetime guarantee isn't worth much if the company no longer exists. I brought this up thinking that the original poster should also take that possibility into consideration when going with a smaller, less well known company, and would be well advised to take a look at the company as well as the gun.