Talk about Capitals hockey & more! > General Discusion Anything But Hockey
Guns and Blowin Shit Up!
alta:
just found my notes, ASC mags for 7.62x39 in an AR are also recommended
https://www.ammosc.com/762x39-Magazines/
richkrt99:
--- Quote from: alta on Wednesday September 08, 2021, 01:27:51 AM Eastern ---just found my notes, ASC mags for 7.62x39 in an AR are also recommended
https://www.ammosc.com/762x39-Magazines/
--- End quote ---
I got the advanced firing pin Friday. Swapped it in there and solved the light strikes on the Tula steel ammo. Fired 50 rounds flawlessly. No light strikes, no jambs, no misfeeds. I was a bit shocked actually.
The one and only mag I currently have is an AR Stoner 30 round mag, but I don't actually know who makes if. I would think Stoner just puts there name on someone else's but who knows.
I do have a couple others (C products) on the way.
I ordered the pin and a heavier hammer spring, but I didn't change out the spring as it was just a temporary "borrowed" lower and not the one I intend for this gun. I used one of my PSA standard lowers for the test and everything worked just fine.
This lower has basic magpul M-4 stock, and you can definitely feel the difference in the kick with the 7.62x39. Also rocks the steel a good bit more on impact (1/2" AR500 steel)
I have an Aero stripped lower on the way for this gun, and I like the Hogue over-molded stock I have on my .223 Wylde gun, so I'm going to put one of those on this gun.
richkrt99:
This is my .223 Wylde gun...
I like this stock alot; Hogue over-molded stock, grip.
Put a cheap budget bipod on front for target fun. (UTG Recon flex mlok). Works well for my purposes for $52
I love the Vortex strike eagle scope for this gun. 1-6x24. Very clear, good adjustment and the 1x is a true 1x and functions just like a red dot (with adjustable lighted reticle) at any magnification.
Pretty perfect for this gun. I'm not shooting 1000 yds so the 6x performs actually better than expected for me.
Also replaced trigger with Hiperfire SS trigger. Very crisp, short reset, 3.5lb. Like it very much.
alta:
The two I've set up for hunting have 20" barrels and magpul PRS stocks on them with rifle length reciever extensions. Those are the only two I've mounted a bipod to.
A reciever extension is the technical name for the buffer tube. Either term is understood in the industry. It's like calling mags clips to a of people though. I could care less, I just use whichever depending on who I'm talking to, what I think their level of experience in the industry is.
but don't call a magazine a clip, they are two distinct items with different uses.
richkrt99:
--- Quote from: alta on Monday September 13, 2021, 06:06:48 PM Eastern ---The two I've set up for hunting have 20" barrels and magpul PRS stocks on them with rifle length reciever extensions. Those are the only two I've mounted a bipod to.
A reciever extension is the technical name for the buffer tube. Either term is understood in the industry. It's like calling mags clips to a of people though. I could care less, I just use whichever depending on who I'm talking to, what I think their level of experience in the industry is.
but don't call a magazine a clip, they are two distinct items with different uses.
--- End quote ---
Gotcha.
Agree on the "clips" I hear that all the time...usually from youngins or cultural diverse individuals.
PRS...nice!, but um...I'm on a budget here (yeah like you haven't been buying so much gun shit) :huh:
AND since it's not hockey season and you are bored....get ready for a LONG POST....
Question: This is a 18" barrel with rifle length gas tube, and this is the "first" lower I "assembled" from scratch. I used a carbine length extension tube (which came as a set with the Hogue grip & stock). It has standard spring and buffer weight. Irrelevant, but I temporarily threw in an ARMASPEC "stealth recoil spring" in there to play with. I do like it - get's rid of that spring twang. Also "supposed to even out the recoil and such, but that is not really an issue in this rifle. I plan to put the stealth spring in my 'standard" slightly upgraded 16" mid-length AR....eventually when I ever build it.
Anyway, the question is...should I have put a rifle length extension tube on this 18" rifle"? It functions just fine with all ammo so far with the standard spring/weight in this carbine length extension (same goes using the Stealth spring) except for of course my light load shit which I can't get to cycle in ANY gun.
I do like this Hogue stock as it is very tight on the extension tube and has ZERO wobble or rattle. Also like the shape with cheek weld as it does not rip the hair out of my beard (which is why I bought it originally)
Now I grab one of the others with the standard Magpul M-4 stock and those rattle like crazy.
Lastly, and back to my biggest current issue....
what is the best option/combination that is most likely going to give me success with these light loads? I have a light (carbine) buffer kit with 1.7, 2,2, 2.4, etc oz weights and also a lighter "yellow" spring. Will I have better luck throwing those in my 16" mid length setup OR in the 18" rifle length setup (knowing both have carbine length extensions)?
I did throw the 2.2oz buffer/yellow spring in this 18" wylde and it didn't work (any better). I didn't really have time to mess around with it (as I was playing with the 7.62x39 lately) so only fired a few rounds with it.
So if I am grasping correctly....a longer barrel (rifle length gas) sends gas back more....slowly...or slightly less pressure due to the length of barrel/gas tube - compared to mid length - basically because the gas port is further down the barrel? So...that ultimately gives a worse chance to cycle the light loads? My logic tells me that would be worse because we are already short on gas with the light load, and a longer gas tube would mean less gas?
So I should rather try and play with the mid-length gun and put the lightest buffer in there I've got? Which I have not tried yet.
Or am I just wrong on the difference in barrel length and gas tube length? I mean shorter cycles faster so harder? Or is it not actually harder, just faster? Maybe a longer barrel/tube distributes gas over a longer period so a smoother/slower cycle would work better for a light load?
Basically....which gun should I play with to have a better shot at cycling these "light" loads? Maybe the longer barrel is better because the powder is too fast anyway? I mean, I have three guns and NONE of them like this load.
What I really don't get is why this published data works for some folks and not for others when "stock" guns are almost always over gassed anyway....although the more I research, the more I find many folks have issues with the 4198 cycling in their AR's
Some numbskull loaded 300+ rounds of this load without testing it, so .... want to use it up.
Although, at the rate I'm "testing", I'm down to around 200 of those, but my ultimate goal is to find a solution with this powder that works since I have 15 pounds of the powder. I've loaded it hotter than what the "newest" data says. (The older data from my old source states higher loads using this powder than the newer Hornady 2020/2021 data)
I DID find some 7.62x39 load data with this powder....so I am happy about that and will eventually try that as well. Although....I will shoot WAY more of .223, and I HAVE a ton of .223 loading supplies already (and nothing for 7.62x39 yet)
Sorry for the long post.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version