Lantac

[AR15]

In the case of the AR15 Milspec is a series of requirements laid down by the US military when they purchased the rifle.
Its NOT just dimensions on a drawing, its a list of materials, finishes, and treatments.

Its not got a lot to do with parts being made cheaply or with large tolerances either.

In fact its so costly to reproduce the original Milspec, Carpenter Steel, Heat Treat to correct Case Depth, Oil Quench, Refrigerate, Re-Grind, Surface Finish, Hardness test & HPT/MPI Test, Bolt in an AR15, that most companies simply cannot do it and make it profitable.

Each one of the above has its own MIL document outlining exactly what must be done and how.

This extensive spec has CNC shops spitting tea at the phone when they hear it.
This is exactly why 7075T6 Alloy must be certified to contain the correct blend of materials in order to fullfill the 'Milspec' requirement.
Without the certificate there is absolutely no way of knowing what you have bought, what grade or what quality.
You have no way of knowing the % Silicone content for instance.

To meet the Milspec for surface finish of a receiver the anodise must be Type 3 Hardcoat Class2 Black.
That spec for the anodising is covered in MIL-A-8625, here is an excerpt from that document:

3.4.3 Type III coatings. Type III coatings shall be the result of treating
aluminum and aluminum alloys electrolytically to produce a uniform anodic
coating on the metal surface. Type III coatings shall be prepared by any
process operation to produce a heavy dense coating of specified thickness on
aluminum alloys (see 3.7.2.1). Unless otherwise specified in the contract,
purchase order or applicable drawing, Type III coatings shall not be applied to
aluminum alloys with a nominal copper content in excess of 5 percent or a
nominal silicon content in excess of 8.0 percent. Alloys with a nominal
silicon content higher than 8.0 percent may be anodized subject to approval of
the procuring activity. Heat treatable alloys shall be in a temper obtained by
heat treatment, such as -T4, -T6 or T73, prior to anodizing.

As you can clearly see in order to fullfill 3.4.3 there is a requirement to 'know' the material composition of the alloy being treated in order to conform to the spec, as well as its temper, in this case T6.
Without the certification you have no way of proving you are within the specification.

As for discussing quality that effects performance then that's down to the quality of the bolt used, design of the receiver (will it flex and fit properly) and material choice.
Most importantly how the barrel was made and how it fits the receiver and under what conditions it was chambered, what lubricant was used and the quality of the reamer etc etc....

So unless you machine your receivers from certificated 7075T6 with Type3 Hardcoat Class2 Anodising, you simply ain't milspec or following the original design of the rifle.

We strive to make the best we can and to me that's about doing things right.

Hope that helps.

[froggy]

Sounds very much like the Mc Donald cooking procedures book to ensure the same "quality" all over the world ...

From what I read/understand from Mil-Spec it is use for procurement, as you mentioned for conformity and quality but merely to specify the minimum acceptable level of quality and/or performance. Maybe you can tell us, in the case of the AR15, if it is true that those specifications are slightly out-dated and that with new technology/materials much better is achieve ?

From my experience, the French army was more concerned with the unit cost than the actual performance. In other word my weapons and equipments were not the best available but the best for the money the tax payer was willing to spend.

[AR15]

The specification is very good. Dressing it down as a 'minimum acceptable level of quality and/or performance' because you have another agenda wont alter the fact.

[froggy]

I never denied they were, that was not my question, and more than an "agenda" I was refering to this article:

What mil-specs aren’t are a guarantee a particular product is the absolute best that it can be in terms of materials used, processes for manufacturing, etc. In the case of the AR15/M16 many of the specs were established in the 1960’s and 1970’s long before various modern alloys were developed or even before CNC machining was in common use.... Better materials exist now, but the mil-spec standards haven’t been modified.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/0 ... p-it-real/

I was expecting from a professional the ability to answer a genuine question by putting aside personal feelings. If you can not, forget about it, it does not matter.

[AR15]

I don't believe your questions are genuine, you go out of your way to knock LANTAC but have never actually bought a thing from us.
The fact that we replaced the barrel on your CMMG rifle that you bought from another dealer free of charge, with free shipping is somehow not good enough for you.

As for the link:
Great another persons opinion who has a blog.
The one thing all those old materials have on their side is time, time tested. You know what you get and there are no surprises.
Of course there are new and improved materials coming out all the time.
Carpenter 158 is highly regarded, LMT don't like it and use something else that's fine. There are plenty of bigger manufacturers who do, LaRue, Colt, Warsport, JP etc....
Aermet as used by LMT is made by Carpenter too.
Have you considered that the manufacturing process may be cheaper for LMT with this other material?
We like 17-4 for some things and that's not Milspec, it is a modern advanced stainless that's very good for actions, you can cut it in a soft state and then harden it with very little dimensional change.

[froggy]

wtfwtf

Many I suggest Prozac ?

[BamBam]

wtfwtf

Many I suggest Prozac ?

Does this mean you were unhappy with the free barrel or that you were not the customer in question?

In the interest of fairness please answer.

[Rburro2]

wtfwtf

Many I suggest Prozac ?

Shall we be sensible if it goes silly all that will happen is the moderators will remove the post, if you wearnt happy with quality or service tell us all about it warts and all. I had a good experience with Paul.
Lets hear yours

[dromia]

OK this is going nowhere fast now.

If you are unhappy with a gun shop then read our rules and leave it at that, take any grief, either way, off the forum or the thread will be closed.

[Rburro2]

OK this is going nowhere fast now.

If you are unhappy with a gun shop then read our rules and leave it at that, take any grief, either way, off the forum or the thread will be closed.

Like I said last post I suspected you'd be along shortly