Mega side charge upper

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • keystone183
    Warrior
    • Mar 2013
    • 590

    #46
    Did somebody say group buy.........

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by keystone183 View Post
      Did somebody say group buy.........
      NO DAMMIT. A group buy now that I finally got my side-charge upper? Salt in the wound, man.

      Comment


      • #48
        Does it matter if the upper has or does not have Feed ramps if your barrel has them?
        From what I recall, the Mega or AA does not have them.

        Comment

        • Keep The Change
          Warrior
          • Mar 2013
          • 590

          #49
          Group Buy Group Buy Group Buy!!

          I think Ridgerider just needs to send me a left side charge upper so I can take a good look at and do some stress analysis on it. By "stress analysis" I mean break in my barrel and sight it in. Haha!

          Comment

          • Keep The Change
            Warrior
            • Mar 2013
            • 590

            #50
            warthog,
            it seems like for the Grendel it would be very beneficial to have the M4 ramps in the upper. I've heard this brought up before concerning Mega's, but I believe they make them both ways.
            Last edited by Keep The Change; 11-26-2013, 09:10 PM.

            Comment

            • Tedward
              Banned
              • Feb 2013
              • 1717

              #51
              Originally posted by Keep The Change View Post
              Group Buy Group Buy Group Buy!!

              I think Ridgerider just needs to send me a left side charge upper so I can take a good look at and do some stress analysis on it. By "stress analysis" I mean break in my barrel and sight it in. Haha!
              He will send you one, $475 I think... I think your stress analysis is not needed. I really wonder how a "Engineer Degree" has anything to do with the strength of the upper receiver and barrel weight. Think of the trick when you were a kid before you went to collage and spent all that money to get your piece of paper. Put an egg in the palm of your hand a squeeze as hard as possible, it wont break. the upper and lower part of the receiver will soak up any rearward energy and it isn't that much, you have a tinny buffer spring throwing it back and forth into the bolt lugs and barrel extension. Those are the two points where the energy is transferred. As for whip in the barrel, come on, support over and under is what is needed. I have never had a gun kick off to the side, mine kicks backward.

              Not to knock the engineer thing but I get all these new employees with 4.0 GPA out of these ivy league schools with Mechanical and Structural Engineering Master Degrees and and have no common sense. Book smart but no life attributions to reality. It's raining, come out of the rain or you'll get wet. Degree over common sense? I'll take common sense all life long.....

              Comment

              • RAM2940
                Bloodstained
                • May 2013
                • 79

                #52
                There was a topic on this on ar15.com someone had pictures of the barrel extension with and without feed ramps. There conclusion, Barrel extension with feed ramps and upper without is okay, but not the other way around, then barrel extension without/ upper without and extension with ramps, upper with ramps. If this makes sense.

                Comment

                • RAM2940
                  Bloodstained
                  • May 2013
                  • 79

                  #53
                  Also i just got the young NM Side charge BCG in the mail, thats one nice looking carrier, also this carrier does not have the serrations mentioned in the quality arms post above.

                  Comment

                  • Ridgerider

                    #54
                    Originally posted by Keep The Change View Post
                    Ridgerider,
                    My only concern with the large amount of material removed on a left hand side charger is that you remove a lot of "meat" where load is typically transferred through........... Also with the beefier front end of the upper, it should have to transfer less load to the back than a forged, mil-spec upper.

                    I just brought it up because it is a lot of removed material and that just catches my eye as an engineer. Keep up the good work. .
                    Ok I take your point now dont know your back ground but I know mine and like most people who think if you remove material then it has to be weaker and that would be a wrong assumption. I have held mil spec uppers in my hands and have witnessed flexing with hand pressure applied to the upper cant do that with mine. Now take a fabricated I beam made from wood, it is stronger, lighter, can bridge further than the same equivalent beam from solid wood. Oh and bye the way the Scar, the Tavor, have openings both sides they just choose to place covers over them and they are thinner material than mine

                    Comment

                    • Tedward
                      Banned
                      • Feb 2013
                      • 1717

                      #55
                      Beating a dead horse here RR. Also good ol carpentry analogy too, I liked the egg trick but that worked too.

                      Wonder how light weight car parts these days are made lighter and stronger and fast but seem to be safer too these days compared to the old 1970 lead sleds..

                      Comment

                      • Ridgerider

                        #56
                        Too right Tedward

                        Comment

                        • Keep The Change
                          Warrior
                          • Mar 2013
                          • 590

                          #57
                          Originally posted by Tedward View Post
                          He will send you one, $475 I think... I think your stress analysis is not needed. I really wonder how a "Engineer Degree" has anything to do with the strength of the upper receiver and barrel weight. .
                          Well, this was all tongue in cheek and sarcasm. Sorry it didn't translate. As far as my degree and knocking my education and experience, think about it next time when you fly on a Boeing 787, watching the wing flex, Airbus A350 watching the engine move around on the pylon and how it is attached to the wing, or the F-35 & F-16 pulling a 9g turn with wings flexing under tremendous load. But what do I know. Any concern or issue I raise in regards to strength is ridiculous I guess. Not to mention my machining experience while I put myself through college. I will definitely agree that common sense is missing in many engineering grads because they don't have real life experiences or work on anything.

                          It's a mere conversation and discussion not a pissing contest. Relax a little.

                          The load from the bolt is nothing, my concern was barrel whip after seeing some slo mo shots of barrel whip in an AR. The whipping action is transferred into the receiver and it has to be absorbed at the front of the upper and that load is transferred back through the upper. Sort of like an I-beam the whipping action is coupled out across the top and bottom portion of the upper receiver. My point initially was to discuss the effects of the missing marterial in the left charge upper.

                          I will contend that QA's/Ridgeriders upper is very stout at the front and even all the way back. It looks very substantial around the cutouts as well once I took time to look at some up close shots of the upper.

                          Any concern I had has been put at ease after getting a closer look. I was just wanting to discuss a little bit about a concern I had. Didn't mean for this to diverge into something else.

                          Comment

                          • Keep The Change
                            Warrior
                            • Mar 2013
                            • 590

                            #58
                            Originally posted by Ridgerider View Post
                            Ok I take your point now dont know your back ground but I know mine and like most people who think if you remove material then it has to be weaker and that would be a wrong assumption. I have held mil spec uppers in my hands and have witnessed flexing with hand pressure applied to the upper cant do that with mine. Now take a fabricated I beam made from wood, it is stronger, lighter, can bridge further than the same equivalent beam from solid wood. Oh and bye the way the Scar, the Tavor, have openings both sides they just choose to place covers over them and they are thinner material than mine
                            Thanks for the response. I was able to get a good close up look on the upper and it looks very stout. Yes the SCAR, Tavor, and I think the new Beretta has cutouts on bothsides. Good point. I think the front your receiver is substantial and even aroundt he cutout is appears to be really heavy duty upon closer inspection. My concern was unwarranted I see now that I got a better view of it.

                            I also like the way you didn't mill the old charging handle location and just put an insert in there like I've seen before. Very nice looking receiver, wish I could get one right now.

                            Comment

                            • Keep The Change
                              Warrior
                              • Mar 2013
                              • 590

                              #59
                              Delete
                              Last edited by Keep The Change; 11-27-2013, 02:25 PM. Reason: Double Post

                              Comment

                              • Keep The Change
                                Warrior
                                • Mar 2013
                                • 590

                                #60
                                Originally posted by Tedward View Post
                                Beating a dead horse here RR. Also good ol carpentry analogy too, I liked the egg trick but that worked too.

                                Wonder how light weight car parts these days are made lighter and stronger and fast but seem to be safer too these days compared to the old 1970 lead sleds..
                                I completely understand how this is done. It's all geometry and inertia of the cross section. As mentioned above, I'm in the aircraft industry and designing and analyzing parts to get them as light as possible is what I do.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X