98Z5V

Very dramatic, IMHO... Much drama...

And Tequila accelerates all of that...

DAMN!!!

This is a true Dissipator, right? Rifle gas on a 16" barrel? This is a gas issue. Like, not enough gas, from a small gas port diameter. But, what do I know, since I'm not a real Gunsmith...

We've seen plenty - PLENTY - of evidence here of guys that show up (on this board) with a gun that doesn't run, after they've been "fixed" by their local "gunsmith." We've had people right here on this board with issues that we caught instantly - WAY wrong gas tube, right off the bat, comes to mind. They come back later talking about how their "gunsmith" was soooo sorry, he didn't even know there was a difference between the DPMS-based platform, and the Armalite AR-10 platform... Gunsmith, I'll remind you. I kid you not. Just because you're a "gunsmith" doesn't automatically mean you know EVERYTHING. I'd ask any gunsmith, "How much experience do you have on the basic AR platform, and how much experience on the large-frame AR platform(s) - because there are several. Just because the guy can make an AK out of rivets and sheetmetal,doesn't mean he can work on an AR and fix it. Just because a guy can make an entire 1911 from blocks of steel, with handtools, and it turns out to be a true competition gun - doesn't mean he can fix an AR with a problem. I've been to a SIG pistol armorer's course - and I have a Ruger LC9 kicking my ass right now. It took me 10 minutes to learn everything I every needed to know about every single Glock Gen that's out there... Just because a guy might be ASE Certified as a "true mechanic" doesn't mean he can put a larger turbo on your racecar, larger injectors, and tune it - through custom EFI software... You might find a guy that's a certified Porsche technician - that doesn't mean he can fix his neighbor's broke-down Saturn... These are just machines, nothing more. They can't out think us. But, familiarity with ONE machine, or 20 machines - doesn't mean you know everything about every machine... I fixed a diesel tractor, and a NIssan-powered forklift, from basic engine knowledge (well, not so "basic,", but training). I couldn't rebuilt a single-cylinder trash pump, and make that POS pump water - it kicked my ass. I hope that makes sense...

1907 slings and cheapass web slings with the two buckles - HAD their place, WAY back in the day. You old fuckers seem like you want to say that the technology and change is unnecessary, and BS. Well, that mentality is BS... You can bag on shiit all you want, talk about your web slings and 1907s all you want. Some of the options of the modern slings make one hell of a difference over the old shiit- and some are far, far superior nowadays. Go ahead, though - adjust the rabbit ears on top of your TV as night falls, and the signal changes - just because it was starting to get fuzzy. Or, just rotate that click-knob to the next channel... My 1907 sling belongs on my M1904A4 rifle. The skinny-ass little 1" wide green cotton web sling belongs on my M1 Carbine. I wouldn't put either one of those on any of my M4s, though.

Mine shipped free several weeks ago, brother - which was a nice surprise. It was the only thing I ordered then, too.

They're including an adjustable gas block, so you can tame down that "over-gassed rifle" that actually has a gas port that's too small in the first place... You now have an adjustable gas block and a too-small gas port, so you can "tame down" your rifle that is "under-recoiled" with a weak recoil system. They're still using an H1 buffer, which is too light. They're saying "AR-10 spring" which it probably isn't, unless they're getting the Armalite EA1095 spring FROM Armalite... I'll BET that receiver extension isn't 7 5/8" internal depth, either - but who cares? They clearanced the lower to you won't see the evidence of the BCG hitting it!...

RIGHT?!!? I think that pic was the recessed target crown...

Holy Shat. They clearanced the lower receiver, where BCG contact happens when the recoil system isn't correct, and you beat up your lower... Is that so you can't tell that the recoil system isn't right?...

I'll bet they finally unfucked it. That's why it's Gen 3. They probably fixed all the issues.

This is why I try to stick to nitrided BCGs now. NLA put that bolt in a gun and I'm sure is headpsaced correctly - but it's chamber depth wasn't the same as yours, I'll guarantee. Pretty brave to guarantee something like that, when I'm not even a gunsmith, right?...

DId you save these rounds, by chance? The ones you had to mortar out? If so, can you get a good picture of them,all line up. Need to see the bodies, shoulders and the necks.

Here's when you stated the barrel...

Damn. That Go Gauge and just the bolt (no BCG)... no way that's happening?... Criterion will send you a new barrel. You hit the barrel from DVOR, last October.

Will that BCG go all the way into battery, and the bolt rotate - with nothing in the chamber?

@Peachey, thought about you guys when I read this report this morning...

Exactly so. Using their logic, we can definitely say that the amount of US spending on space, science and technology directly correlates with the amount of Suicides by hanging, strangulation and suffocation...

Damnit! They're FAKE?!@!?

https://forum.308ar.com/forum/135-palmetto-state-armory/

It only needs to rotate enough to catch the back of the bolt lugs directly behind the front of the lugs in the extension - that's all the rotation a bolt does, ever. It rotates exactly as much as the cam pin slot makes it rotate. Look at the bolt face, extended - push it into the BCG and watch the rotation - that's all it ever does. It's not much.

You have no idea how happy I am that you used "correlation" in here. I've been sitting on this article for a few weeks, waiting to work it into a real discussion. Correlation and Causation… again: “Children” Edition By Keith Finch - July 17, 2019 https://gatdaily.com/correlation-and-causation-again-children-edition/?trk_msg=JD7G10GKUTFK17MMQCDA07JVCS&trk_contact=8V0L65B89JG3CKL2PPP2IG35AC&trk_module=new&trk_sid=7SVM9CRTIVQGB47G51LMMF4N2S Do gun safety laws decrease child deaths? Children in states with strict gun laws less likely to die, study says Correlation. Does. Not. Equal. Causation. A study released on Monday has led to a flurry of headlines stating the latest study of gun control has found that states with Universal Background Check laws (UBC’s) had lower child mortality rates due to firearms. Most of those headlines read like the second one above, if not even more emphatically linking the mortality rate to UBC’s But the first headline, from PBS, is the most accurate inquiry into the data. In the first paragraph they answer that question. There may be a connection between tougher gun laws and fewer child fatalities from firearms, a new study suggested Monday. The study, published in the journal Pediatrics, says states with universal background checks report fewer children’s deaths due to gun incidents. However, more data is needed to understand the relationship between firearms and public health, and to conclude whether such laws save lives, the study maintains. [emphasis mine] They don’t know. But they don’t want to say that. Not too loudly at least. They found a correlative link but do not have causative break downs. Anyone inside statistical analysis will tell you highlighting a single input, like UBC’s, and then projecting them as the assumed causative (as the headlines do) is simple lying with statistics. Reading into the various pieces further they are very careful with their language. They are attempting every possible linguistic method to keep UBC’s as the assumed causative because it was the correlative they found to push the narrative. According to the study, 21,241 children died due to firearm use between 2011 and 2015, based on federal data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That produces a firearm-related fatality rate of 4.65 per 100,000 U.S. children. -PBS The key terms are children and died. “Died” will include suicides, homicides, and accidents, all of which have very different causative circumstances but ending in the same result. The study generalized all of these factors to try and forward the idea that a UBC is the common solution in the reduced rate of mortality. Precisely how, or even a blind shot in the dark as to a reason, a UBC would influence suicide or accident rates is not expressed. Among states with universal background checks, Goyal said the study suggests a 35-percent drop in child firearm fatality rates compared to states without those laws. Suggests. Another careful word choice that doesn’t tie them into verifying the causative relations to their premise. The publishers want you to believe this is why (the UBC’s) it works without deep delving into the how or why that could possibly be the case. Also their numbers seem to include a very interesting extension of “children”… The study also grouped in young people between the ages of 18 and 21 into its accounting of child fatalities, which critics say painted a disingenuous picture for a study focused on child deaths. Considering these “children” can vote, smoke, drink (21), and enlist for war, yeah I’d go with pretty disingenuous. My 21st birthday was after the start of my 4th year of service… Children evokes an emotive response in us. It’s supposed too, we are wired to defend our offspring on a macro level. So using the term children in the headlines is to evoke that image of a child, 0-12 years of age. But including teens and young adults, who are developmentally and functionally at or near an autonomous adult level, are used too heavily pad the number. What would the rate look like if we take the 18-21 year old “children” out? Age group 0-17, 2012-2014 National Vital Statistics System via AAP News & Journals By excluding the legal adult, voting age, military age male and female portion of the study the mortality rate drops to only 37.8% of what the study claims. From 4.65 to only 1.76 per 100,000. By including the young adults the study is able to nearly triple their mortality rate. I’m not saying these deaths aren’t of note. They are. What I am saying is that equating these deaths to that of a 6 year old is back to using statistics to lie. What about actual children? Excluding both teens and young adults? What is the danger to the truly and fully dependant age ranges? Age group 0-12 NVSS Less than 1/10th of the deaths are children. Over 90% of the 21,241 are over the age of 12. Over 60% are over the age of 18! So why isn’t this study correlating that UBC’s have a 35% reductive effect on firearms deaths among young adults? Why use the term children? Simple. Dead children evoke an emotive response. But when placed in perspective things change. CDC Childhood Injury Report: Patterns of Unintentional Injuries among 0-19 year olds in the United States, 2000-2006. Drowning rates varied by age group with the highest rates among children 1-4 years of age at 3.0 per 100,000; among this group, drowning represented 27% of all unintentional injury deaths. The unintentional drowning rate is six times higher for children age 1-4 than all firearm related deaths of children age 0-12. Granted these are different studies, different year ranges, and only some overlapping age ranges not direct data point to data point. The point, however, is that when we break down the data into useable pieces the headline presumption completely falls apart. The headlines are deliberately shaping a correlation causation relationship that has no substantiation and is, in point of practical analysis, a farce. The conclusion the study wanted was that a gun control measure, UBC’s in the case, reduced gun deaths. What they produced was a piece of misconstrued data to fit their message, and evoked the emotive “dead children” card. When we break down the data we can draw some conclusions. Crime among young adult, especially male, results in the majority of homicide gun deaths Suicide among young adults is also a massive contributing factor to gun deaths Young adults are the majority contributor to all of these stat blocks The UBC might have a peripheral influence on criminal homicide and suicide deaths with a number of attached suppositions. Supposition A. That a transfer that was blocked was the only method for the person committing suicide or committing homicide to get the weapon. Supposition B. That the firearm was the only method that person had considered to complete the action of suicide or homicide and that they will not commit otherwise by any other method. Supposition C. The person looking to commit suicide or homicide is unwilling to break the UBC law. Supposition D. The person looking to commit the suicide or homicide is already properly flagged by background as prohibited. Conclusions Well… conclusion, singular. This is just another massaged set of data where they’ve shucked away the useable bits and burned the credibility for the sake of promoting a message. *le sigh* Correlation AND causation folks… they matter. They really do if you genuinely want to improve on these problems.

Did you read what I wrote earlier about that company? Have you researched that company? Why don't you get down to the details, here, once and for all. Tell the exact problem with the exact gun, the combination of parts on that gun - by the manufacturers (not just half-assed partial names of companies)... So, now, we're not dealing with the 24" gun, at all? Why was it even brought up in the first place then?