AR Rookie Needs Guidance

beltfed said:
It isn't the block you should be worried about, but the upper receiver. 65 ft/lbs is a lot on the receiver, especially if it isn't supported. The clamshell and the Insert are designed to support the receiver walls from becoming distorted from the torque being applied to the barrel.
Click to expand...

I works perfectly fine. I've built a good amount of rifles and carbines using the Delrin Block. The proper amount of torque will not damage anything. The Brownell's block works well too, but will not work for odd ball receivers (Vltor, LaRue Etc.) as well as certain rail systems (LaRue for sure).

Regardless of what block you choose, it is important that you have an understanding of what you are doing. As always, this is the internet, so you can take the advise to heart or leave it.
 
Hilo71 said:
It takes barrel nut installs fine. I torqued one to 65 and it didn't budge. Maybe if you were doing 10 barrels a day I would use a receiver block.
**gun techs and armorers use them all the time for barrel work
Click to expand...

Weapons techs in the CF are issued the Brownells receiver clamp only...
 
Hilo71 said:
True, the clamshell would offer more support.
using the minimum 35 foot pounds to finish a barrel nut with alignment is rare, getting the next hole to line up usually pushes it up to 55-65.
80 is the max foot pounds....
Click to expand...

Yeah, the whole issue with a starting torque of 35lbs and then jamming more on is nuts. It simply isn't needed. If the extension is fully seated, I tighten by hand until tight, and then align to the next hole...
I would never jam 50 lbs in a block that is holding the upper's pins alone, never mind 80.
 
I am going to run with what the armouers from both the US AMU and US NGMTU showed me to do. And that is to use the proper Brownells clamshell with insert, Dow Moly Kote as thread lube and torque to 30 ft lbs 5 times before final torque with a never exceed of 60ft lbs.
 
5 times? Their SOP used to be three to ensure the extension was fully seated.
I guess as with anything, procedures change and evolve. Some with rational thought behind it and some maybe not so much.
 
Hilo71 said:
Thats because the CF doesnt issue any nice rails :D

some rails, and or uppers ( mainly VLTOR or other billet ) do not leave any choice but to use a DPMS type claw.
Click to expand...


I've modified my block over time to accept different uppers, so it is possible.
 
A little bit of Dremel work was all that was required to fit the NEA billet upper in the Brownells upper receiver block. It still works just fine for traditional uppers.
 
What's UFI?

Or alternately, I could point out you actually advocated no lube until I set you straight and you reversed yourself to slamming me for not saying to use "very little if any" but that yes, thread lube is needed ;)

Is it so hard to admit you were dead wrong?

We use thread lube in the CF too...
 
I wasn't advocating the use of no lube.
I only pointed out that with little torque, theoretically, you can get away without it.
I was and do advocate the use of an anti-seize compound over a generic grease, however.



The only thing you've set me straight on is confirmation that anyone with a bit of googlefu can come off looking like they've been there, done that'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom