Cast vs Forged vs Billet

TRG-42

Regular
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
After reading the Larue Billet Lower thread I thought I would clear up some confusion

First off, you must be carefull making blanket statements that "forged is stronger than billet" bla bla bla. As the saying goes , a little bit of knowledge is dangerous, and this is the general result of reading this statement on the internet and passing it off as gospel

Forging vs Billet in GENERAL :

This debate stared years ago with crankshafts / pistons etc . First off cast cranks are nowhere in the performance range because of the material used in CAST IRON / STEEL is drastically different. Therefore cast cranks are weaker due to the metallurgy of a cast steel / iron. This is due to the fact that the steel / iron is optimized so it flows through the mold

Forged is generally stronger because because the grain structure is more continous along the throws ( the zig zag of the crank the connecting rods attatche to for you non gear heads )

Billet is not necessarily bad if done right but the grain structure is less continous across the throws. The reason that billet is used is to make a non standard profile ( throw distance etc ) because it is very expensive to make now forging dies

Having said that, THIS IS ALL IN THEORY because a crappy forging is less desirable than a perfect billet. I have broken a forged crank, but never a billet . Does this mean a forged is not as good...of course not ! A good billet crank is not a BAD thing

Billet vs Forging in Aluminum

Forget what you know about forged / billet ferrous materials because it does not necessarily apply to aluminum

First off, as someone already mentioned a billet can be made from a forged ingot. Generally the term billet LOOSLEY refers to a part that has been machined on all surfaces. So if you you can have a billet forging

Billet however is often made from a solid chunk of wrought aluminum ( rectangular block in the case of an ar upper) . Least desirable is a billet made from a rough aluminum casting (again the alloys are optimized for flowing into the mold )

Strength of Aluminum

The reason that the argument of forged vs billet for aluminum is just academic ( give guys on the internet somthing to do ) is this : UNLIKE most other materials ( ferrous and non ferrous ) aluminums strength is from heat treatment

For reference a 7075 that a typical mi spec forging is made from, AND a billet upper such as the Larue Stealth has the following tensile strength

7075 in "O" Temper TS = 33 ksi
7075 in "T-6" Temper TS = 88 ksi

As you can see the in non heat treated condition its not as strong as typical A36 structural steel. After heat treatment it is FAR stronger

Billet vs Forged Aluminum

Soooooo, back to the old argument, aluminum does not exhibit the benefits for grain alignment as much as ferrous materials as it undergoes the forging process. A forged aluminum might have a slightly better grain structure ( strain hardening - H1 temper ) than a wrought block but this is FAR OUTWEIGHED by the increase in strength that the T-6 heat treatment process provides

BTW - T-6 requries a solution heat treat ( think of it as you put too much sugar in your coffee that it percipitates out to the bottom at room temperature, but is in solution when hot. After that, it goes through artifical aging. A work hardening ( ie, pounding it with a die / hammer ) temper for non heat treatable alloys such as "H-1" does not impart nearly the strength improvement

Conclusion, a forged alumium is not necessarily appreciably stronger than a good billet

Conclusion 2 - unless you are using your AR as a club to beat someone with, even if one was stronger than the other its all achedemic


Why billet AR parts

The forging dies are very expensive ( which is why many AR mfg buy from the same forging houses ) so to make a non standard dimensioned part its much easier

So you can beef up a part by easily using a wrought billet

You can beat the billet vs forged horse to death but you can't argue that from the pictures below most billet uppers are far heavier in certain areas

Top is a Sun Devil Billet, middle a RRA std, bottom is a Vltor MUR ( FORGING ..new MURs are made from a forging )

3bottomview.jpg


As you can see the walll thickness is much heavier ( you can see the notch to clear the bolt release ). The Larue Stealth is also much heavier. I will post pics later

sideview2.jpg


sideview1.jpg


So, why do I have billet ( Sun Devil, Larue ) and forged billet style ( Vltor ) uppers. Because for the extra $50 - $100 why not. I won't hesitatate to spend insane amounts of money on good glass, why would I care about $50 over the total cost of a build
 
Last edited:
I'm of the same camp for these receivers.

I too own a Vltor upper - awesome quality - not just the wow factor either.

The way you explained it as well is very good for the average person to understand - not just a metalurgist or an engineer either.

Whats a few dollars in the total price as you put - nothing!

All the best, Carl
 
So for billet to be as strong as forged you just make it thicker? Hmmm


Where do I say that. For 7075-T6 forging vs a wrought billet , the Tensile and Yields are very similar. This is because the difference in work hardening from the forging process imparts much less improvement than the T6 solution heat treat does. Want proof, this is why you don't see 6### and 7### series alloys in H Tempers ( work hardening )

So why would a forged upper be stronger than a billet upper ? As an engineer who has spend 15 years in metallurgy of ferrous and non ferrous I would love to hear the argument.

Although the common idea that the forging squeezes out porosity etc sounds reasonable its simply not true. The common idea that forging alignes the grain structure better to make it appreciably stronger again is not true (for aluminum ). What is true is that 7### series aluminum's strength comes from heat treatment ( a forging can be heat treated, as well as wrought from ( block for billet )
 
Last edited:
following that discipline of thinking tissue paper could be as strong as forged steel.. just make it thicker! :p

If someone came up to you with a solid meter thick slab of tissue paper and a 5 mm thick sheet of steel and told you they'd give you a hundred dollars if you could bend one of the two, which do you think you'd end up making the money off of? :p

Just because tissue paper has a much lower strength per volume than steel doesn't mean you can't get the same effective amount of strength if you use enough material.

And this isn't even two totally different materials; it's two types of steel. :D
 
So why did you start another thread and talk about Crankshafts??
What confusion did you actually clear up?

Read the Larue lower thread. Its obvious that lots of people think that a billet upper is not as strong as a forging because forging makes things stronger. Apparently all the billet upper mfg as offering an inferior product for more money according to the info in the thread

This is not the case for 7###, 8###, 6### and 2### series aluminum. The dominating factor for strength level in these alloys is the heat treatment

Heat treatment can vary from a T1, T2, T3 etc all the way to a T10

In the case of AR uppers, this is typically the common T-6 solution heat treat followed by artificial aging.
 
it could, just that you need so many sheets of the stuff, and that as long as damaged sheets are replaced asap (so you don't get to chop at it for 100 x and break it and claim its worse than steel)
 
Thats what all of the Aluminum S&J Hardware products we make are CNC milled from "real" billet 6061 and 7075 T6 heat treated stock, not a casting or forging.
bbb
 
Thanks for the elaboration, TRG.

I certainly should have added a "generally" rider to my blanket statements about forged vs. billet. You are correct.

I think you've understated the benefits of aligning flaw lines and lines of "stress flux" (forgive the old, outdated theory of transport of stress in solids... I love it, from a conceptual standpoint). An AR is not a cylindrical test sample, after all.

It is further important to bear in mind that one must compare one ideal with another. Comparing a flawed forging with a perfect billet machined part doesn't reveal much at all. Better to compare the performance of 350 parts tested to failure, and use the figures from the bottom edge of the 95th percentile confidence.

Regardless, people throw the word "billet" around as a marketing tool (badboybeeson, in this very thread!), rather too much.

I'm a big fan of investment casting, in spite of it not being on the same plane, performance wise. The solution is, clearly, make it beefier. Further, since the manufacturing method for an investment casting can permit amazingly detailed geometry with very regular material properties, one can optimize with FEA. I love that.

All that said, I'd NEVER buy an investment cast AR.

The biggest benefit to billet machining remains the low cost of entry.
 
Oh man... what a thread...
How come I didn't see this before?...
I'll camp here for a while ;)



So, what kind of crank did you break? What engine?




Conclusion, a forged alumium is not necessarily
appreciably stronger than a good billet
From your statement, can someone safely assume
that forged it’s only “stronger” (just a tiny bit)
(but of course, as you say, not “appreciably stronger”)?
 
I will buy a case of cheap beer to whomever takes a day climbing and rappelling with a billet carabiner of the same dimensions/size of a forged carabiner.
 
I will buy a case of cheap beer to whomever takes a day climbing and rappelling with a billet carabiner of the same dimensions/size of a forged carabiner.


You are making very general conclusions by citing one example. If you think that material science is that clear cut and simple then please don't design any planes.

We are talking specifically, 7075 in T-6 condtion. Again, I ask for engineering data that supports that a wrought 7075 with T-6 ( solution heat treat and artificial aging after maching ) and a forged 7075 with T-6 after forging has significant performance differences.

REASON : the majority of the strength of these alloys comes form the T-6 solution heat treating and aging. Any strength change from the forging for 7075 is irrelavent compared to the additional strength the T-6 adds

Fact : any addition strength is irrelavent compared to the variation in TS and YS when many samples are pulled


GENERALLY SPEAKING : forging in alloy alloy materials can increase mechanical properties ( impact fatigue life, tensie and yeild to a lesser degree etc ). This is accomplished IF the grain flow pattern is oriented in the optimal direction


Fact : as mentioned above, this is only helpful if the grain flow pattern is oriented in the optimal direction. The best example of this is chain links ( its part of the die and blank designing process

So knowing this forging is better because is stronger.......( your carabiner example )

A Little bit of knowledge is dangerous ! - what is not taken into account is not all alloys of aluminum exhibit the same advatanges in after forging

Fact : some materials exhibit grain flow directional sensitivity . This is reflected in the isotropy ( uniform in all directions )of the material being forged .

Materials that don't have this sensitivity most single phase aluminums, pure metals etc

Materials that have moderate sensitivity are stainlesses, carbon steels etc

Materials that have a high sensitivity are high strength aluminum alloys such as 7075

Well, doesn't that kinda suck for purposes of our discussion ( poping the ballon here )

This means that 7075 ( before heat treating ) is sensitive to the direction of grain flow when forging. So that means even though it may be stronger after forging in one direction, it will not be stronger when pulled in a different direction. Again, this is before the T-6 that will impart the strength we need

This is easy to predict in a chain link ( direction of loading ) . I wouldn't even want to figure out how multidirectional the loading on a AR platform would be.

One of the reasons is 7075 does not behave like "other aluminums" and other ferrous materials when forged. Here is a picture that illustrates this

Picture is macroetch of aluminum billets that has gone through a 50% upset forge

As you can see ever popular 6061 exhibits noticable change in grain structure ( dark regions ) . This is perfect example of "forged is stronger" argument. Please note that 2000 series exhibits grain changes to a lesser degree where its been squished down. You can see that these alloys are "lined up better" after forging

Interestingly the 7075 does not seem to exhibit this change in grain structure.

GrainStructureAluminum.png


Its easy to make general statments from limited info. As mentioned earlier, material science is far more complicated that you can imagine to make blanket statements that forging is stronger than billet.

Fact : this whole argument is begining to waste everyones time. I just hope I don't need to use my Larue Stealth billet upper to beat someone to death because it will break since its not forged
 
Last edited:
It doesn't really matter much anyway in the application for Ar receivers. Hell I haven't even seen a plastic Cavalry receiver break yet.
 
brrrrrrrrrr.............

Oh, come on, man... you are getting aggressive here.
All I did was to ask a couple of innocent questions and
you started swinging that eutectic above your head
like you want to scare the peaceful by-standers or sumpin.

It’s actually a very interesting thread.

The simple answer to my questions
could have been a couple of words for each.
We’ll get to the hysteresis later on
(and to other theoretical considerations),
don't worry about it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom