Mil Spec Vs Commercial Spec Buffer Tubes

Palmetto-Pride · November 24, 2009, 09:39 PM

I was wondering why the difference in the two different size tubes? I know the commercial spec is slightly larger, but I don't understand why it was ever made just a little bigger in the first place. This identification card explains the size difference http://www.magpul.com/pdfs/technotes...ffertubeid.pdf

NSO_w/_SIG · November 24, 2009, 09:58 PM

It is a bit cheaper to produce from what I've read. One less step in it's production or something along those lines.

RockyMtnTactical · November 25, 2009, 02:02 AM

Yep, cheaper to make it with extruded aluminum than Forged. Not sure why the size difference. Could be to strengthen the part due to the weaker construction, but more likely that the construction process simply lends itself to the different size better. Not sure though.

Bartholomew Roberts · November 25, 2009, 07:34 AM

My understanding is the same as Rocky Mountain Tacticals - because the extrusion process is cheaper than forging, it was used to produce commercial stocks and the stocks ended up being slightly larger in diameter - either because it was necessary to give it the same strength or because of the process.

Perhaps someone who is more familiar with those processes can explain it better to us?

madcratebuilder · November 25, 2009, 10:18 AM

There is a difference of .024. That is very little, so I don't think it has anything to do with the structural strength. Possibly the size of the raw material they start with??

FALPhil · November 25, 2009, 11:51 AM

Quote:

There is a difference of .024. That is very little, so I don't think it has anything to do with the structural strength. Possibly the size of the raw material they start with??

That would be my guess. I have done a couple of subcontracts for DoD prime contractors. The military comes up with specs that sometimes make you step back and scratch your head. When you start digging, sometimes you find that the spec is completely arbitrary and there is no justification. Sometimes, the reason is an academic in nature (there are a lot of tenured professor wannabes working for DoD contractors). The other reason is that DoD contractors make more money when they don't use off-the-shelf components; they can pad their costs on a cost plus contract and that translates to bottom line profit.

Technosavant · November 25, 2009, 12:21 PM

With milspec tubes, the threads are rolled from the tube. This results in the thread diameter being slightly larger than that of the tube itself. With "commercial" tubes, the threads are cut into the tube- since both have the same thread diameter, you need to start with a slightly larger diameter tube.

In theory, milspec tubes (properly made) have a slightly stronger connection into the receiver due to the fit of the threads, but in practice, there's really no difference. If you're out there breaking commercial tubes, I kinda doubt that a milspec one (or the rest of your rifle, come to think of it) will last all that long with you anyway.

The only real concern is you need to remember which you have in case you decide to swap out stocks.

Jimro · November 25, 2009, 12:54 PM

never seen a commercial buffer tube broken, but I have seen a couple "milspec" tubes fail. Although one was broken because a soldier fell on it and the other crushed by the ramp of a Stryker.

Jimro

Palmetto-Pride · November 25, 2009, 09:36 PM

So what came first the commercial size or the mil spec?

RockyMtnTactical · November 25, 2009, 10:06 PM

Mil-spec had to have come first.

GaryM&P · November 25, 2009, 10:54 PM

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the use of different grades of aluminum alloy used in the tubes yet.

The majority of commercial tubes are made from 6061. The "better" mil-spec dimension tubes (not the $20 ones) are made from 7075-T6.

Tensile strength of 6061 = 45000psi
Tensile strength of 7075-T6 = 83000psi

That is a substantial difference the way I see it.

RockyMtnTactical · November 25, 2009, 11:00 PM

Good point Gary. You are correct.

Palmetto-Pride · November 25, 2009, 11:09 PM

I appreciate all the input guys, but I still don't see why the need for two different sizes.

Quote:

With "commercial" tubes, the threads are cut into the tube- since both have the same thread diameter, you need to start with a slightly larger diameter tube.

Oh wait I overlooked this. So the threads are actually the same size, so there is no difference in the receiver just the tube?

RockyMtnTactical · November 25, 2009, 11:34 PM

If there was a difference in the threads than you would have receiver compatibility issues...

Technosavant · November 26, 2009, 11:45 AM

Quote:

So the threads are actually the same size, so there is no difference in the receiver just the tube?

That's it exactly. The commercial tube production method of cutting the threads from a slightly larger diameter tube is cheaper, hence its use on those intended for the civilian market.

RichMac · October 22, 2010, 08:29 AM

There is a $1 little gage for sale on Amazon that lets you tell which kind of tube you have. The gage is made by Tactical Intent, a company that is making buttstocks and rail covers. The gage is dirt easy, cheap and eliminates any question.

You can find it at:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/browse.html...A36ZAOEPX7I0P8

demigod · October 22, 2010, 08:41 AM

There's no excuse to run a commercial RE in my opinion.... unless you have an AR that's 100 percent recreational, and you'll never use it for serious stuff.

Any RE can be broken under the right circumstances, but the strength difference between the 6000 series and 7000 series aluminums is reason enough to get the right part. Let alone that the threads don't engage the receiver as good on an aftermarket piece.

Fatelvis · December 4, 2010, 09:19 AM

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=153618

Post#4 will give you the dimentions and "slanted back" properties.

pythagorean · December 4, 2010, 10:35 AM

Perhaps it may seem arbitrary to line "in line pockets" but I disagree.

One thing about the Army is vast paperwork for anything to the point of deforestation. It can get pretty barren and meaningless but it is one of those things Soldiers have to put up with like boot camp (or officer's basic course).

It's as silly as push ups, sit-ups and the two mile run at times.

Look at what they did to the .30-06 to get to the 7.62 or the .222 to get to the .223--it all seems so arbitrary!

Buried underneath the Charles Dickens guillotine carts of paperwork there is a reason more than likely to end up justifying the difference.

shogan191 · January 29, 2013, 01:59 PM

MilSpec 1.148 vs Com 1.168 OD of the buffer tube.

sigshepardo · January 29, 2013, 08:55 PM

If I remember right, the easiest way to tell is that commercial tubes have a slanted end. Whereas mil spec tubes have a flat end.

CharlieDeltaJuliet · January 29, 2013, 10:20 PM

Well sig, that used to be the case but now not as much... Some commercial now have a straight end...

November 24, 2009, 09:39 PM	#1
Palmetto-Pride Senior Member Join Date: May 31, 2009 Location: Charleston, SC Posts: 2,071	Mil Spec Vs Commercial Spec Buffer Tubes I was wondering why the difference in the two different size tubes? I know the commercial spec is slightly larger, but I don't understand why it was ever made just a little bigger in the first place. This identification card explains the size difference http://www.magpul.com/pdfs/technotes...ffertubeid.pdf __________________ “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” -Margaret Thatcher- Last edited by Palmetto-Pride; November 24, 2009 at 10:17 PM.

November 25, 2009, 02:02 AM	#3
RockyMtnTactical Senior Member Join Date: October 21, 2006 Location: Western US Posts: 1,961	Yep, cheaper to make it with extruded aluminum than Forged. Not sure why the size difference. Could be to strengthen the part due to the weaker construction, but more likely that the construction process simply lends itself to the different size better. Not sure though. __________________ https://battlebornreview.com/

November 25, 2009, 12:54 PM	#8
Jimro Senior Member Join Date: October 18, 2006 Posts: 7,097	never seen a commercial buffer tube broken, but I have seen a couple "milspec" tubes fail. Although one was broken because a soldier fell on it and the other crushed by the ramp of a Stryker. Jimro __________________ Machine guns are awesome until you have to carry one.

November 25, 2009, 09:36 PM	#9
Palmetto-Pride Senior Member Join Date: May 31, 2009 Location: Charleston, SC Posts: 2,071	So what came first the commercial size or the mil spec? __________________ “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” -Margaret Thatcher-

November 25, 2009, 10:06 PM	#10
RockyMtnTactical Senior Member Join Date: October 21, 2006 Location: Western US Posts: 1,961	Mil-spec had to have come first. __________________ https://battlebornreview.com/

November 24, 2009, 09:58 PM	#2
NSO_w/_SIG Senior Member Join Date: December 4, 2004 Posts: 553	It is a bit cheaper to produce from what I've read. One less step in it's production or something along those lines.

November 25, 2009, 07:34 AM	#4
Bartholomew Roberts member Join Date: June 12, 2000 Location: Texas and Oklahoma area Posts: 8,462	My understanding is the same as Rocky Mountain Tacticals - because the extrusion process is cheaper than forging, it was used to produce commercial stocks and the stocks ended up being slightly larger in diameter - either because it was necessary to give it the same strength or because of the process. Perhaps someone who is more familiar with those processes can explain it better to us?

November 25, 2009, 10:18 AM	#5
madcratebuilder Senior Member Join Date: November 2, 2007 Location: Northern Orygun Posts: 4,923	There is a difference of .024. That is very little, so I don't think it has anything to do with the structural strength. Possibly the size of the raw material they start with??

November 25, 2009, 12:21 PM	#7
Technosavant Senior Member Join Date: May 29, 2007 Location: St. Louis, MO area Posts: 4,040	With milspec tubes, the threads are rolled from the tube. This results in the thread diameter being slightly larger than that of the tube itself. With "commercial" tubes, the threads are cut into the tube- since both have the same thread diameter, you need to start with a slightly larger diameter tube. In theory, milspec tubes (properly made) have a slightly stronger connection into the receiver due to the fit of the threads, but in practice, there's really no difference. If you're out there breaking commercial tubes, I kinda doubt that a milspec one (or the rest of your rifle, come to think of it) will last all that long with you anyway. The only real concern is you need to remember which you have in case you decide to swap out stocks.

November 25, 2009, 10:54 PM	#11
GaryM&P Senior Member Join Date: November 2, 2009 Location: Corvette City Posts: 104	I'm surprised no one has mentioned the use of different grades of aluminum alloy used in the tubes yet. The majority of commercial tubes are made from 6061. The "better" mil-spec dimension tubes (not the $20 ones) are made from 7075-T6. Tensile strength of 6061 = 45000psi Tensile strength of 7075-T6 = 83000psi That is a substantial difference the way I see it.

November 25, 2009, 11:00 PM	#12
RockyMtnTactical Senior Member Join Date: October 21, 2006 Location: Western US Posts: 1,961	Good point Gary. You are correct. __________________ https://battlebornreview.com/

November 25, 2009, 11:34 PM	#14
RockyMtnTactical Senior Member Join Date: October 21, 2006 Location: Western US Posts: 1,961	If there was a difference in the threads than you would have receiver compatibility issues... __________________ https://battlebornreview.com/

October 22, 2010, 08:29 AM	#16
RichMac Junior Member Join Date: October 22, 2010 Posts: 1	mil-spec vs commercial -- not a problem There is a $1 little gage for sale on Amazon that lets you tell which kind of tube you have. The gage is made by Tactical Intent, a company that is making buttstocks and rail covers. The gage is dirt easy, cheap and eliminates any question. You can find it at: http://www.amazon.com/gp/browse.html...A36ZAOEPX7I0P8

October 22, 2010, 08:41 AM	#17
demigod Junior member Join Date: March 13, 2008 Location: AZ Posts: 1,129	There's no excuse to run a commercial RE in my opinion.... unless you have an AR that's 100 percent recreational, and you'll never use it for serious stuff. Any RE can be broken under the right circumstances, but the strength difference between the 6000 series and 7000 series aluminums is reason enough to get the right part. Let alone that the threads don't engage the receiver as good on an aftermarket piece.

December 4, 2010, 09:19 AM	#18
Fatelvis Senior Member Join Date: June 10, 2001 Location: Lockport, IL Posts: 490	http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=153618 Post#4 will give you the dimentions and "slanted back" properties. __________________ Gun control isn't about guns....It's about CONTROL

December 4, 2010, 10:35 AM	#19
pythagorean Junior member Join Date: January 27, 2008 Posts: 970	Perhaps it may seem arbitrary to line "in line pockets" but I disagree. One thing about the Army is vast paperwork for anything to the point of deforestation. It can get pretty barren and meaningless but it is one of those things Soldiers have to put up with like boot camp (or officer's basic course). It's as silly as push ups, sit-ups and the two mile run at times. Look at what they did to the .30-06 to get to the 7.62 or the .222 to get to the .223--it all seems so arbitrary! Buried underneath the Charles Dickens guillotine carts of paperwork there is a reason more than likely to end up justifying the difference.

January 29, 2013, 01:59 PM	#20
shogan191 Member Join Date: July 28, 2010 Posts: 27	MilSpec 1.148 vs Com 1.168 OD of the buffer tube.

January 29, 2013, 08:55 PM	#21
sigshepardo Senior Member Join Date: July 18, 2011 Location: Indiana Posts: 150	If I remember right, the easiest way to tell is that commercial tubes have a slanted end. Whereas mil spec tubes have a flat end.

January 29, 2013, 10:20 PM	#22
CharlieDeltaJuliet Senior Member Join Date: July 25, 2012 Posts: 755	Well sig, that used to be the case but now not as much... Some commercial now have a straight end... __________________ " The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in Government...." - Thomas Jefferson

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search