BCL 102 catastrophic failure
- Thread starter slash547
- Start date
I do the same. Every round, even my pistol rounds. One still should be using small base dies though in this application imo.
Also, keep in mind chamber gauges can vary. Just because a round fits in a chamber gauge doesn't mean it will always still chamber in a tight match chamber. It depends on the reamer used to make the gauge & barrel. The best chamber gauge is the chamber of the firearm the rounds are built for.
Last edited:
BattleRife
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- of No Fixed Address
You are suggesting that the use of regular, full-length sizing dies could have caused a catastrophic event that destroyed a firearm? As far as theories go, that is somewhere between highly improbable and completely wacked
out.Farris Bueller
CGN Regular
- Location
- Kingston, Ontario
You are suggesting that the use of regular, full-length sizing dies could have caused a catastrophic event that destroyed a firearm? As far as theories go, that is somewhere between highly improbable and completely wacked
It wouldn’t be the first time it happened. I’m not saying this is the cause here! But it is a possibility in some semi automatic firearms. I guess I’m whacked out lol.
Farris Bueller
CGN Regular
- Location
- Kingston, Ontario
So let me explain. As the case starts to extract, the chamber pressure is still pretty high (relatively speaking). The case moves back say 0.125". The case diameter at the head is larger than it is 0.125" forward of the head. The chamber pressure will push the case outward into the chamber wall - increasing the OD of the case. If you try to rechamber this case in your semi-auto, your rifle will not go into battery.
In bolt guns, you don't have this problem. The case doesn't move until you operate the bolt - which is well after the barrel pressure has dropped. This is why they invented small based dies to return the entire case back to spec. Not to mention they only make small based dies in semi-automatic calibers is another hint to.
In bolt guns, you don't have this problem. The case doesn't move until you operate the bolt - which is well after the barrel pressure has dropped. This is why they invented small based dies to return the entire case back to spec. Not to mention they only make small based dies in semi-automatic calibers is another hint to.
Except the way an ar platform rifle is designed it wont allow you to fire around unless the bolt is completely locked up. And unless your upper is completely wrecked and the cam pin slot is so gouged out that it will let the bolt rotate before it's in the barrel extension you CAN NOT fire a round. There is no way what you are suggesting is possible without the upper having a hole worn right through it 3/8" behind the little protrusion on the left side. And the stars aligning. The firing pin DOES NOT protrude far enough through the bolt without it being rotated and slid back into the bolt carrier. As for small base dies that's something that isnt need unless your chamber is very very sloppy. I bump size my brass 4 thou and then neck size with no crimp and in 600 rounds I haven't had any problems chambering or extracting a round.
The cause of this rifles catastrophic failure is due to the combination of the barrel nut having a hole in the wrong spot allowing the barrel to rotate in the upper and not fully engaging the bolt in the barrel extension (look at the pictures it's clearly visible the barrel is rotated out of align ment.) That couple with the bolt being beat against the barrel extension chipping and grinding the corners off the bolt further reducing the contact surface of the bolt that it finally failed to engage enough the withstand the bolt thrust generated when the round was fired. Look at the pictures the bolt is missing both corners off each lug. If the barrel isnt aligned the bolt will still rotate like it's supposed to but not lock like it should. This is bcl fault for using a piss poor barrel nut with a stupidly placed hole directly above the index pin.
The cause of this rifles catastrophic failure is due to the combination of the barrel nut having a hole in the wrong spot allowing the barrel to rotate in the upper and not fully engaging the bolt in the barrel extension (look at the pictures it's clearly visible the barrel is rotated out of align ment.) That couple with the bolt being beat against the barrel extension chipping and grinding the corners off the bolt further reducing the contact surface of the bolt that it finally failed to engage enough the withstand the bolt thrust generated when the round was fired. Look at the pictures the bolt is missing both corners off each lug. If the barrel isnt aligned the bolt will still rotate like it's supposed to but not lock like it should. This is bcl fault for using a piss poor barrel nut with a stupidly placed hole directly above the index pin.
Regarding semi-automatics, while I don't doubt the case size is changed, I don't think it's caused by the barrel gas pressure during the first stages of the extraction process. I think the high-speed videos (M1, AR15) show that the bolt carrier doesn't move significantly until the bullet is out of the barrel and shouldn't be extracting under significant gas pressure. I think the deformation comes from the brass being smaller than the chamber, the case being very hot, and the jerk imparted by the extraction.
The reloading discussion is muddying the waters here. Can we get back on point?
Has anyone established if this was a part used in all generations of the rifle or isolated to the latest "generation"?
If I'm understanding this correctly, the problem should be noticeable out of the box as you can see that the barrel extension is misaligned when examining the chamber? But then this could also occur years later if someone were to change their barrel, or remove their barrel for other maintenance, and then re-use the stock hand guard and nut?
Judging from my own experience assembling my Stag 10, it should be immediately obvious to the person doing the assembling that this has occurred... Not only should the person assembling have noticed but shouldn't whoever was doing a final quality inspection have noticed it after a quick visual inspection of the chamber? How is it possible, with the sheer number of lightening holes on that barrel nut, that BCL did not know that this issue was occurring before a single rifle left the factory? They must have noticed it happening and decided to continue to use the barrel nuts they had and gambled that QC would catch them all.
Since Troy is supposedly using a TDP provided by NEA/BCL to manufacture their version of this rifle, I hope for the sake of all you people on the pre-order list that they don't follow the design religiously lol
Has anyone established if this was a part used in all generations of the rifle or isolated to the latest "generation"?
If I'm understanding this correctly, the problem should be noticeable out of the box as you can see that the barrel extension is misaligned when examining the chamber? But then this could also occur years later if someone were to change their barrel, or remove their barrel for other maintenance, and then re-use the stock hand guard and nut?
Judging from my own experience assembling my Stag 10, it should be immediately obvious to the person doing the assembling that this has occurred... Not only should the person assembling have noticed but shouldn't whoever was doing a final quality inspection have noticed it after a quick visual inspection of the chamber? How is it possible, with the sheer number of lightening holes on that barrel nut, that BCL did not know that this issue was occurring before a single rifle left the factory? They must have noticed it happening and decided to continue to use the barrel nuts they had and gambled that QC would catch them all.
Since Troy is supposedly using a TDP provided by NEA/BCL to manufacture their version of this rifle, I hope for the sake of all you people on the pre-order list that they don't follow the design religiously lol
BattleRife
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- of No Fixed Address
In a locked breech semi-auto, by the time the case starts to extract pressure has dropped to almost zero. Extraction under pressure only occurs with blowback guns.
In the Stoner type action of the BCL-102, the bolt to bolt carrier relationship will prevent the firing pin from reaching the primer until the bolt is fully locked into the barrel, unless the parts are poorly dimensioned or improperly assembled.
Resizing technique did not cause this accident.
Some history with my BCL 102:
I bought new last March 11 and it has a 2018 stamp on the lower
Finally shot it first time mid May. I could not shoot more then 5 rounds without a stovepipe. Shot about 25 rounds total
Found this article https://www.huntinggearguy.com/rifle-reviews/bcl102-review/ and realized there is a systemic issue with stove pipes on the BCL 102.
Then discovered BCL recall notice: https://blackcreeklabs.com/recall-notice/ and I entered a warranty claim May 22
BCL emailed me May 27 with two options, send me the bolt parts or send them the riffle to fix. Then no contact until June 4 when they called me. I asked for a new BCG rather then parts which they complied with.
New BCG arrived June 17 and it was supposed to have been tested at BCL
July 5 I finally shoot with the new BCG and got the KB on the 25th round. I also got two stove pipes before the KB
The reloading is a non-issue in my case. My buddy at work just bought a BCL 102 with an 2019 stamp on it. He has not shot it yet. I’ll get pictures of the bolt lugs (chamfered or chipped question will be answered) and see if the barrel extension is misaligned.
I bought new last March 11 and it has a 2018 stamp on the lower
Finally shot it first time mid May. I could not shoot more then 5 rounds without a stovepipe. Shot about 25 rounds total
Found this article https://www.huntinggearguy.com/rifle-reviews/bcl102-review/ and realized there is a systemic issue with stove pipes on the BCL 102.
Then discovered BCL recall notice: https://blackcreeklabs.com/recall-notice/ and I entered a warranty claim May 22
BCL emailed me May 27 with two options, send me the bolt parts or send them the riffle to fix. Then no contact until June 4 when they called me. I asked for a new BCG rather then parts which they complied with.
New BCG arrived June 17 and it was supposed to have been tested at BCL
July 5 I finally shoot with the new BCG and got the KB on the 25th round. I also got two stove pipes before the KB
The reloading is a non-issue in my case. My buddy at work just bought a BCL 102 with an 2019 stamp on it. He has not shot it yet. I’ll get pictures of the bolt lugs (chamfered or chipped question will be answered) and see if the barrel extension is misaligned.
Last edited:
What happened here is something that is a result of complete negligence on the manufacturers part. I've never heard of anything like this reported in the US that makes and sells 1000 times more AR rifles. In the 60 year history of the rifle I've never heard of this as a "warning" to watch out for from any manufacturer or any home builds. It's truly a unique and absolutely unacceptable failure on the manufacturer part. Especially when it's so obvious visually, we aren't even talking about things being "out of spec" which NEA/BCL are notorious for, this is something visually off...no tools required, that anyone with minimal knowledge of the platform would notice and say "that don't look right, the bolt ain't gonna lock in battery".
What kind of ####show are they running where they have the people making these with no knowledge of what they are doing, and the QC people...if there are any, also have no knowledge of what they are looking it.
If this happened in the US they would be sued and out of business for this. Instead, us polite and slightly ignorant Canadians will be perfectly happy getting a new rifle in return for almost loosing body parts and possibly your life. No bigger picture here, no social conscience or awareness required, just hook me up and I'll be happy with my toy.
What kind of ####show are they running where they have the people making these with no knowledge of what they are doing, and the QC people...if there are any, also have no knowledge of what they are looking it.
If this happened in the US they would be sued and out of business for this. Instead, us polite and slightly ignorant Canadians will be perfectly happy getting a new rifle in return for almost loosing body parts and possibly your life. No bigger picture here, no social conscience or awareness required, just hook me up and I'll be happy with my toy.
Just got BCL reply. They acknowledge the OOB is due to the “barrel was out of alignment by a very significant amount.” They are sending me a BNIB riffle. At least they are admitting to the issue, honouring the warranty and not blaming my reloads.
Thanks you Grapeshot for your July 14 observations. I sent those to BCL to point out it was due to manufactures defects, not my reloads.
Thanks you Grapeshot for your July 14 observations. I sent those to BCL to point out it was due to manufactures defects, not my reloads.
let us know when you get it. I'm patiently waiting for my replacement, 2 weeks after getting the RMA label and a week after their having received my lemon rifle (and I've been chasing this for months prior to getting even this far)
Have been resisting wading in, but I completely agree with the manufacturer's assessment of the issue. I also suspect the issue was likely done at their factory when they assembled the rifle - if it stovepiped on Day 1, it was likely out of index from the start.
Interesting, I sent my 102 back with a prepaid shipping label (to much movement between the Upper and lower receivers) on July 8, they received it on July 15 and they shipped me out a new rifle on July 18. It's supposed to arrive to me via UPS on July,24. I sure can't complain about the service.
