Boutique parts for high end niche market or quality made parts to last a lifetime?
What are your thoughts and opinions?
The Highpower guys have demonstrated time and again that any ol forged upper and lower within spec is more than enough to make super accurate ARs.
I think it’s simply another quality option available to consumers. Same reason Baskin Robbins has 31 flavors. I don’t think they perform any better or worse than a good forged unit, but it’s nice to have variety in the market. I’ve thought about buying them solely for the aesthetics.
The problem with forgings (especially the upper receivers) is that the rail is almost impossible to get square and true. For mounting magnified optics, this is a must in my book.
The billet lowers just look nicer than anything else IMHO.
C4
The problem with upper receiver forgings is that the rail is almost impossible to get square and true. For mounting magnified optics, this is a must in my book.
The billet lowers just look nicer than anything else IMHO.
C4
All a billet upper/lower gets the end user is a lighter wallet.
Billet uppers are more precise and have less internal stress than a forging, but forgings have proven themselves beyond a doubt.
Either way it probably doesn’t matter, but the Vltor MUR is damn sexy looking.
The receivers in an AR are not stressed components as they are in other rifles (bolt guns, M14), therefore less internal stresses are a moot point.
And since the upper is not what determines barrel to bolt luckup, any higher level of precision is not going to help.
I am not a machinist, but I do have more than some passing knowledge in the technology. Material choice has little to do with the precision of machining. There factors far more important than material choice. Fixturing, selection of datum planes and datum cuts, machine precision, feed rates, spindle speed, insert or end mill choice, and many other factors.
I find that difficult to understand given my knowledge of fixturing and tooling.
I don’t know of anything that would make a billet inherently more “precise”. Just like it’s forged or cast counterparts that would depend on the quality of the machining done to it.
They do tend to be better finished than most though.
Not all of a forged AR upper is machined. IE; some areas are left as forged, which can leave/create areas of difference that may or may not be decisive in performance.
A billet is 100% machined in every dimension, meaning they are much more “precise”.
The receivers in an AR are not stressed components as they are in other rifles (bolt guns, M14), therefore less internal stresses are a moot point.
Internal stress as in stress in the material, not external stress on the receiver.
Like I said though, pound for pound it’s really no concern.
Sure, like the flash line under the trigger guard, but I don’t think that influences performance in any way. Only a few “manufacturers” leave those areas untouched.
I was talking more along the lines of critical dimensions, squareness, and critical tolerances.
I don’t see where one is inherently better or more “precise” than the other.
They sure do cost though, whoooooo boy.
IMO, the key things about billet and forgings is related to issues of manufacturing.
If a part is outside the dimensions of readily available forgings, because of features, or whatever, then it will require a special forging die or billet machining.
Depending upon the projected production needs, the manufacturer will determine whether the item would be more cost effective to make in smaller runs from billet, or for larger production from a new forging die.
In many cases, if it is a specialty item, with low production and modest market demand, it may make more financial sense to make billet parts instead of investing in a costly forging die which costs alot up front.
Making a forging die and the resulting forgings makes more sense if it is to be large number production.
In either case, assuming quality materials and good design and machining, you can get virtually equal perfformance from either type of manufacturing.
The reason that you see billet in alot of “boutique” products is that they are smaller production runs which do not show the need for the economies of scale that can be achieved with forging production methods.
As a manufacturer that uses both forgings and billet in various aspects of our products, we use the methods that will yield us what we feel is the best result for the numbers of products intended to be produced at the quality levels we want to provide.
We use the billets to make items for which there are no readily available forging dies, which will be made in relatively lower numbers. And we have forging dies made to produce forgings for the items that we’ll produce in larger numbers.
It’s not an issue of “which is better” for strength or any of that.
It’s based on what makes sense for production purposes.
Absolutely correct.
The makers of billet products are always happy for people to be under the impression that billet is better.
The reality is that billet was better for the MANUFACTURER.
You pay more for a billet made part simply because it costs more to make each unit.
One of the side effects of billet parts os that every surface is machined.
Of course this makes pretty parts and pretty parts sell.
Pretty parts don’t necessarily function any better though unless they have significant enough design changes made to them.
One BIG advantage of billet parts is that the design can be changed at ANY time without significant additional tooling costs.
It is really easy to understand. Receivers are mass produced items. They are also cheap items. I guestimate that a manufacturer has all of $35 in a finished upper receiver. Making sure the rail is square and true doesn’t seem to be all that important.
I remember talking to M. LaRue about a bunch of receivers they went out and bought. They were trying to find out which ones were the best. To his surprise, they were all off to some degree (even the Colt).
It appears that manufacturers that make billet items spend a lot more time making sure that everything is perfect.
C4
From a machining standpoint, billets while more time consuming because of the need for surfacing, require less set up time than forgings. The first thing you have to do with forgings is dimensionally sort them in to plus and minus groups, then the machine centers need to be calibrated to an initial datum point and the process continues from there. It is worth noting that all forgings “walk” while being machined, particularly when large amounts of material are removed from the inside.
With a billet, you already have a defined datum point which is identical on every piece, with less effort you end up with a much more accurate final product (in terms of manufacturing) although it will never be as cheap as a forged part.
Because the vast majority of stresses are contained within the barrel extension and bolt lock up, the internal strength issues of the two really don’t come in to play with AR type rifles.
One other benefit of the billet method of manufacture is that different styles, adaptations and configurations can be quickly produced without the need to create expensive forging dies.
So based on what I see here, it would stand to reason that there is some advantage (all be it slight) to a billet upper…and pretty much zero advantage to a billet lower.
If alignment of the billet uppers rail can be/is more precise for optics purposes, then there can be an argument made for that on some level…but a billet lower seems to only offer C.D.I. factors.
Stress occurs in the upper almost exclusively. What (if any) advantages do billet lowers offer?
I think the upper receiver issue is slight if your not running a magnified optic. I think it is more important if your running a magnified optic.
The advantage on the billet lower is that the fit with a billet upper is like a lego set. For those folks that don’t like a loose fit between their uppers and lowers, this is the best way to go.
The Fit/Finish on billet uppers and lowers is of course going to be much nicer. So again for folks that fixated on F/F, billet is the only way to go.
F/F isn’t a real concern of mine, but precision is so that is why I like billet. YMMV.
C4
Just out of curiosity how out of spec could a colt be? Weren’t they the ones who set the standard, and all others are just copies? I’m still very new to the AR-15 arena so if the question sounds stupid, my apologies.
This was done a couple years ago so I don’t remember how far off they all were. I do remember that it was a enough to be of concern though.
C4