BCL 102 wear marks

Ordered my roller cam. If you're thinking of the roller cam pin upgrade talk to Patriot Ordnance, Will is amazing to deal with! Lots of stuff is on sale including the roller cams.
They will ship USPS so no FedEx brokerage dicking.I warned him there might be a few Canadians bugging him soon. His contact is:
Will Milazzo
Patriot Ordnance
Phone: (623) 561-9572 x 104
Email: will@pof-usa.com
 
lwhyt said:
Ordered my roller cam. If you're thinking of the roller cam pin upgrade talk to Patriot Ordnance, Will is amazing to deal with! Lots of stuff is on sale including the roller cams.
They will ship USPS so no FedEx brokerage dicking.I warned him there might be a few Canadians bugging him soon. His contact is:
Will Milazzo
Patriot Ordnance
Phone: (623) 561-9572 x 104
Email: will@pof-usa.com
Click to expand...

Interesting because I tried to order one off their site but cant ship to Canada and when I emailed him I was told I had to order through korth group. I've emailed them and haven't heard back yet.
 
I spoke with a Canadian dealer and they are going to try to get some in. I won't say the name but they will probably chime in here if they can import some.
 
If the cam pin is in fact contacting the receiver and the rifle shows some wear starting and you believe it is causing some reliability issues during break in there is no need to frustrate yourself until it has enough wore off to work. Likewise there is no need to spend money on a roller pin. Simply file or dremmel some material from the receiver (but not too much) where the contact is until there is enough off to eliminate contact. The contact would eventually wear it off anyways so why not remove some yourself first and skip the frustration. It won't take much.
But people always seem to think that they have to spend money to "fix" something.
 
jiffx2781 said:
If the cam pin is in fact contacting the receiver and the rifle shows some wear starting and you believe it is causing some reliability issues during break in there is no need to frustrate yourself until it has enough wore off to work. Likewise there is no need to spend money on a roller pin. Simply file or dremmel some material from the receiver (but not too much) where the contact is until there is enough off to eliminate contact. The contact would eventually wear it off anyways so why not remove some yourself first and skip the frustration. It won't take much.
Click to expand...

The question or issue I have is, this is 2017 not the 1800s where everything was custom fit. Rifles of this type have been made for decades. With modern machinery and all the technology that goes into manufacturing things, R&D and such. There should be no need for break in periods, filing or any of this crap. The rifle should function without any issues or excessive wear or anything.
 
SSG69 said:
The question or issue I have is, this is 2017 not the 1800s where everything was custom fit. Rifles of this type have been made for decades. With modern machinery and all the technology that goes into manufacturing things, R&D and such. There should be no need for break in periods, filing or any of this crap. The rifle should function without any issues or excessive wear or anything.
Click to expand...

Agreed 1000%. All a new gun should need is some oil and your good to go. But if a simple to fix issue does arise it doesn't always have to become a big ordeal. A few minutes to fix it and you're back to having enjoyment instead of frustration.
 
jiffx2781 said:
Agreed 1000%. All a new gun should need is some oil and your good to go. But if a simple to fix issue does arise it doesn't always have to become a big ordeal. A few minutes to fix it and you're back to having enjoyment instead of frustration.
Click to expand...

Agreed!

And on my first trip out with my BCL102 I had two issues. First, the XCR-M mags I had were out of spec in the rear spine area & required the left edge to be filed to allow the bolt release to be used. That was an easy fix. Second, and I don't know why, but the NATO FNM ball ammo I tried had 3 jams in 2 five round mags. I stopped using it and the rifle ran.

My second range trip I tried Norinco surplus & on the first shot it fed/fired/extracted/ejected but failed to properly feed a round all the way into the chamber. I fired 19 more Norinco surplus rounds with no issue BUT discontinued using it when another member posted a pic of the rim ripped off a round he fired. I don't want to damage my BCL102...

My third range trip was perfect, printing good groups with 168 grain Norma Match & 150 grain Barnes TSX.

I love my BCL102!!!

Cheers
Jay
 
Last edited:
Suck it up guys, this wear is normal for this type of rifle.

I have 100rds of Norc and 100 of hurt through mine that worked fine minus the xcr mags not wanting to work with the Norc ammo.
 
driller212 said:
Suck it up guys, this wear is normal for this type of rifle.
Click to expand...

Exactly!! And if a couple minutes of effort can help you to bypass the period required for the rifle to self wear why not do it and get back to having some enjoyment. Life isn't complicated, people are.
 
To me I think BCL had to stick to the original dimensions in the receiver as much as possible to keep it associated with the AR102. They made proprietary changes where they could but I think they didn't want to mess with the dimensions of the receiver internals so as to keep that connection and leave as little room as possible for the "Lab" to say it is not close enough to the 102, therefore restricted. The original AR102 would have had the same wearin or break in. Thus this one does. That is how I view it, others opinion may vary as I have very limited exposure to this platform. Take it for what it's worth.
 
ljones said:
To me I think BCL had to stick to the original dimensions in the receiver as much as possible to keep it associated with the AR102. They made proprietary changes where they could but I think they didn't want to mess with the dimensions of the receiver internals so as to keep that connection and leave as little room as possible for the "Lab" to say it is not close enough to the 102, therefore restricted. The original AR102 would have had the same wearin or break in. Thus this one does. That is how I view it, others opinion may vary as I have very limited exposure to this platform. Take it for what it's worth.
Click to expand...

Logic would say that makes sense. Now google AR102 and look at the BCL. I can tell at a glance that a BCL upper won't even fit on an AR102 lower.
 
Leg said:
Logic would say that makes sense. Now google AR102 and look at the BCL. I can tell at a glance that a BCL upper won't even fit on an AR102 lower.
Click to expand...

Yeah I was just going by the claims. I will crawl back under my rock and let those with more knowledge on the subject speak.
 
Don't do that. I believe that most have the same assumption as you. And rightly so as we've been clearly led to believe that this rifle is based off of the AR102 from the 50s.
 
Are you talking to me? Get over what?

It is a non-restricted .308 semi. I think that the platform holds great potential. Not to sure what you're trying to say.

I am over it though.:d
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom