|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
November 24, 2009, 09:39 PM | #1 |
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 24, 2009, 09:58 PM | #2 |
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, 02:02 AM | #3 |
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, 07:34 AM | #4 |
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 |
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, 11:51 AM | #6 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 10, 2007
Location: Racoon City
Posts: 934
|
Quote:
|
|
November 25, 2009, 12:21 PM | #7 |
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, 12:54 PM | #8 |
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 |
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 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2006
Location: Western US
Posts: 1,961
|
Mil-spec had to have come first.
__________________
https://battlebornreview.com/ |
November 25, 2009, 10:54 PM | #11 |
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 |
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, 11:09 PM | #13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 31, 2009
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 2,071
|
I appreciate all the input guys, but I still don't see why the need for two different sizes.
Quote:
__________________
“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.” -Margaret Thatcher- Last edited by Palmetto-Pride; November 25, 2009 at 11:14 PM. |
|
November 25, 2009, 11:34 PM | #14 |
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/ |
November 26, 2009, 11:45 AM | #15 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 29, 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO area
Posts: 4,040
|
Quote:
|
|
October 22, 2010, 08:29 AM | #16 |
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 |
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 |
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 |
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 |
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 |
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 |
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 |
|
|