-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
- Thread starter Carlos0311B4
- Start date
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Yeah they are. I think USO had a similar ring back in the day. Has any one used either?
Yeah they are. I think USO had a similar ring back in the day. Has any one used either?
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1581894
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1581894
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Ouch $200.00, I'll pass. Got a lapping bar. Never had crushing problems.
Ouch $200.00, I'll pass. Got a lapping bar. Never had crushing problems.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
I met the owner of the company at the range a while back. The rings looked very high quality and well made in person.
I met the owner of the company at the range a while back. The rings looked very high quality and well made in person.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Well... they never did follow through with the pics....
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...005#Post1597005
Well... they never did follow through with the pics....
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...005#Post1597005
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
They look pretty impressive. I am not an engineer but i have never seen a scope ring and base company with so many diagrams etc to prove their point. I dont think $200 should be a turn off. It would be similar to any of the top rings such as Seekins etc. I definitely would not mind trying them for my next setup. I just bought a set of NF Ultralites for my NF 2.5-10x32 or i would have definitely given this a try.
Anyone with experience with the Barrett ZeroGap rings? That was another great idea but not sure how it pans out in real world.
They look pretty impressive. I am not an engineer but i have never seen a scope ring and base company with so many diagrams etc to prove their point. I dont think $200 should be a turn off. It would be similar to any of the top rings such as Seekins etc. I definitely would not mind trying them for my next setup. I just bought a set of NF Ultralites for my NF 2.5-10x32 or i would have definitely given this a try.
Anyone with experience with the Barrett ZeroGap rings? That was another great idea but not sure how it pans out in real world.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Its not similer in my opinion. Seekins, Ops2, etc etc will not allow a tube to deform under clamping. To me it looks like theirs will.....
Its not similer in my opinion. Seekins, Ops2, etc etc will not allow a tube to deform under clamping. To me it looks like theirs will.....
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
It looks like STR did a build using them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lqb0V-87GjY&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
It looks like STR did a build using them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lqb0V-87GjY&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Where are you guys finding these rings for $200?
I plan on getting these rings and I see them for $160 new... Not far off of any typical premium rings.
Here's another link from an actual user on the forum.
American Rifle Co.
Where are you guys finding these rings for $200?
I plan on getting these rings and I see them for $160 new... Not far off of any typical premium rings.
Here's another link from an actual user on the forum.
American Rifle Co.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
$200 is the MSRP on them, I know that EuroOptic is carrying them for $180, as well as SWFA and Short Action Customs carry them for less than MSRP as well.
I've got several pairs of them, they do exactly what they claim.
Exceptional grip on the scope, no marks, no degredation in performance of the scope internals, and they return to zero GREAT.
Here's my new Razor HD with some 35mm ARC rings on 'em. According to Vortex that scope is $2500, but no dealer is selling them for that.
$200 is the MSRP on them, I know that EuroOptic is carrying them for $180, as well as SWFA and Short Action Customs carry them for less than MSRP as well.
I've got several pairs of them, they do exactly what they claim.
Exceptional grip on the scope, no marks, no degredation in performance of the scope internals, and they return to zero GREAT.
Here's my new Razor HD with some 35mm ARC rings on 'em. According to Vortex that scope is $2500, but no dealer is selling them for that.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
What advantage do rings like those have over, say TPS rings?
What advantage do rings like those have over, say TPS rings?
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Check out their web site, the rings features are very impressive. I ordered a pair yesterday and will post my thoughts on them when they arrive.
Check out their web site, the rings features are very impressive. I ordered a pair yesterday and will post my thoughts on them when they arrive.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pc3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What spec should these rings be torqued to the rail at and what about to the scope ? </div></div>
Scope - 25 to 30 in-lbs
Rail - 35 to 40 in-lbs
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pc3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What spec should these rings be torqued to the rail at and what about to the scope ? </div></div>
Scope - 25 to 30 in-lbs
Rail - 35 to 40 in-lbs
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Yet another badass item I have to tag... This site is going to keep me in the broke as f..k house
Yet another badass item I have to tag... This site is going to keep me in the broke as f..k house
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BCP</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What advantage do rings like those have over, say TPS rings? </div></div>
Materials:
American Rifle Company M3 Scope Rings use 7075 aluminum. They are 60% lighter than steel rings and 150% stronger.
Design:
Where to begin?! The strap over design means the rings form to the scope rather than deforming the scope to the rings as the traditional ring designs do. The grip surface on these rings means phenomenal grip without absurd pressures on the scope. Also the low profile means no obstruction of turrets when you're in your shooting position.
The rail clamps have tiny crowns on them which means on even out of spec rails you get consistent return to zero when removing/remounting the rings.
Finish:
I've had Leupold, Seekins, etc and these are the best machined rings I've seen. The anodizing is perfect and Mil-A-8625 Type 3 Class 2, black hard coat anodized.
Give Alex at EuroOptics a call for a price that's better than on americanrifle.com
I have two pairs. One for the Hensoldt and the other for my CZ. I'll not be looking to buy rings from anywhere else.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BCP</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What advantage do rings like those have over, say TPS rings? </div></div>
Materials:
American Rifle Company M3 Scope Rings use 7075 aluminum. They are 60% lighter than steel rings and 150% stronger.
Design:
Where to begin?! The strap over design means the rings form to the scope rather than deforming the scope to the rings as the traditional ring designs do. The grip surface on these rings means phenomenal grip without absurd pressures on the scope. Also the low profile means no obstruction of turrets when you're in your shooting position.
The rail clamps have tiny crowns on them which means on even out of spec rails you get consistent return to zero when removing/remounting the rings.
Finish:
I've had Leupold, Seekins, etc and these are the best machined rings I've seen. The anodizing is perfect and Mil-A-8625 Type 3 Class 2, black hard coat anodized.
Give Alex at EuroOptics a call for a price that's better than on americanrifle.com
I have two pairs. One for the Hensoldt and the other for my CZ. I'll not be looking to buy rings from anywhere else.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CD0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">http://americanrifle.com/scope_rings/default.asp?d=2 </div></div>
I haven't used them, I checked them out at the SHOT Show and have seen them on a couple of rifles at the range and - they are beautifully machined and impeccably finished. They look like a solid, very efficient design.
Keith
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CD0311</div><div class="ubbcode-body">http://americanrifle.com/scope_rings/default.asp?d=2 </div></div>
I haven't used them, I checked them out at the SHOT Show and have seen them on a couple of rifles at the range and - they are beautifully machined and impeccably finished. They look like a solid, very efficient design.
Keith
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
I'm thinking of using a set of these with my next USO. I haven't found any negative reviews about them and the design seems solid. The lowest price I've found is $180, probably get them from SWFA.
I'm thinking of using a set of these with my next USO. I haven't found any negative reviews about them and the design seems solid. The lowest price I've found is $180, probably get them from SWFA.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TonyAngel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are the screws hex or torx heads? </div></div>
3mm Hex.
From talking to the owner, he designed the screw heads to strip the hex before any damage happens to the rings/base/scope and the screws can still be removed from overtorquing with vice grips, they don't necessarily need to be machined out.
The heads don't break off before the hex strips because this way the ring is still functional in the field and will serve a user until they can be brought back to a shop or place with minor tools to replace the damaged screws.
He said he'd rather have someone over-torque them to stripping (apparently it's over 60 in-lbs to strip the head) and replace the screws under warranty than to have someone angry that the ring failed or damaged the scope or something along those lines.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TonyAngel</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are the screws hex or torx heads? </div></div>
3mm Hex.
From talking to the owner, he designed the screw heads to strip the hex before any damage happens to the rings/base/scope and the screws can still be removed from overtorquing with vice grips, they don't necessarily need to be machined out.
The heads don't break off before the hex strips because this way the ring is still functional in the field and will serve a user until they can be brought back to a shop or place with minor tools to replace the damaged screws.
He said he'd rather have someone over-torque them to stripping (apparently it's over 60 in-lbs to strip the head) and replace the screws under warranty than to have someone angry that the ring failed or damaged the scope or something along those lines.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Here is a pic of my ARC rings. They are holding my NF 5.5-22x56 on top of DPMS LR-260. I am very pleased with the rings. My favorite feature is the return to zero. Every time I have to take the scope off the rifle for some reason, I have never had more than a 0.25 MOA shift in 100 yard zero. I did not believe it when I first heard that, but I was real impressed when it happened.
Here is a pic of my ARC rings. They are holding my NF 5.5-22x56 on top of DPMS LR-260. I am very pleased with the rings. My favorite feature is the return to zero. Every time I have to take the scope off the rifle for some reason, I have never had more than a 0.25 MOA shift in 100 yard zero. I did not believe it when I first heard that, but I was real impressed when it happened.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Also have a set holding my Razor HD, love them so far, as stated the machining and finish is top notch. The design is well thought out no lapping required. Also they weigh .25lbs less than the Vortex 35mm rings I was previously using.
Also have a set holding my Razor HD, love them so far, as stated the machining and finish is top notch. The design is well thought out no lapping required. Also they weigh .25lbs less than the Vortex 35mm rings I was previously using.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
I looked at the install instructions last night on Alex's web-site. The instructions made it look difficult...was it...even for the mechanicaly (and spelling) challenged??
I looked at the install instructions last night on Alex's web-site. The instructions made it look difficult...was it...even for the mechanicaly (and spelling) challenged??
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Lighter and stronger than steel? Sounds like the stuff we should build tanks with. No lapping? Why not? I'd be concerned over the rotating pin, if it has any wear, how does one tighten the set up, and is the rotating pin made from the same stronger steel Al? If not,would the expansion/contraction due to Outside Air Temp have any effect due to the two dissimilar metals?
Lighter and stronger than steel? Sounds like the stuff we should build tanks with. No lapping? Why not? I'd be concerned over the rotating pin, if it has any wear, how does one tighten the set up, and is the rotating pin made from the same stronger steel Al? If not,would the expansion/contraction due to Outside Air Temp have any effect due to the two dissimilar metals?
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
The hinge pin is steel. Something like scope rings its always baffled me why they need to be made out of steel, if a scope is made out of aluminum, why would you think you need something as strong as chromoly steel to hold it down?
These rings also incorporate two recoil lugs for the rail mount compared to only one on 99% of rings.
Installation is as easy or easier as any other set of rings, especially since you dont have to worry about clamping both sides equally like on normal rings.
Im surprised to see someone label these as "expensive" with all the other rings out there over $200 with a LOT less thought put into them. Down to the little things he thought about with these like the slight crown on the bottom to keep the entire bottom surface from touching the rail to aid in re-zero. Everybody else just overprices their rings and says theyre super strong, yet theyre the same antiquated design as rings have been for however long scope rings have been around.
The hinge pin is steel. Something like scope rings its always baffled me why they need to be made out of steel, if a scope is made out of aluminum, why would you think you need something as strong as chromoly steel to hold it down?
These rings also incorporate two recoil lugs for the rail mount compared to only one on 99% of rings.
Installation is as easy or easier as any other set of rings, especially since you dont have to worry about clamping both sides equally like on normal rings.
Im surprised to see someone label these as "expensive" with all the other rings out there over $200 with a LOT less thought put into them. Down to the little things he thought about with these like the slight crown on the bottom to keep the entire bottom surface from touching the rail to aid in re-zero. Everybody else just overprices their rings and says theyre super strong, yet theyre the same antiquated design as rings have been for however long scope rings have been around.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jonaddis84</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Also have a set holding my Razor HD, love them so far, as stated the machining and finish is top notch. The design is well thought out no lapping required. Also they weigh .25lbs less than the Vortex 35mm rings I was previously using. </div></div>
Why isn't there any lapping required? I've missed that part of the design. Could you explain this, it sounds great.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jonaddis84</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Also have a set holding my Razor HD, love them so far, as stated the machining and finish is top notch. The design is well thought out no lapping required. Also they weigh .25lbs less than the Vortex 35mm rings I was previously using. </div></div>
Why isn't there any lapping required? I've missed that part of the design. Could you explain this, it sounds great.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jonaddis84</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The hinge pin is steel. Something like scope rings its always baffled me why they need to be made out of steel, if a scope is made out of aluminum, why would you think you need something as strong as chromoly steel to hold it down?
These rings also incorporate two recoil lugs for the rail mount compared to only one on 99% of rings.
Installation is as easy or easier as any other set of rings, especially since you dont have to worry about clamping both sides equally like on normal rings.
Im surprised to see someone label these as "expensive" with all the other rings out there over $200 with a LOT less thought put into them. Down to the little things he thought about with these like the slight crown on the bottom to keep the entire bottom surface from touching the rail to aid in re-zero. Everybody else just overprices their rings and says theyre super strong, yet theyre the same antiquated design as rings have been for however long scope rings have been around. </div></div>Regarding Steel Rings, I've always thought the torque to base was the reason. For example: Leupolds MK4 Steel rings suggest 65lbs of torque (lower ring to base). But it was earlier stated by someone that the Aluminum (I think it is a special super secret type) used in these rings is much lighter and stronger than steel, the question then has to be, why would they go to all the trouble of using this super special Aluminum (much stronger and lighter than steel type), they could have just used normal aluminum?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jonaddis84</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The hinge pin is steel. Something like scope rings its always baffled me why they need to be made out of steel, if a scope is made out of aluminum, why would you think you need something as strong as chromoly steel to hold it down?
These rings also incorporate two recoil lugs for the rail mount compared to only one on 99% of rings.
Installation is as easy or easier as any other set of rings, especially since you dont have to worry about clamping both sides equally like on normal rings.
Im surprised to see someone label these as "expensive" with all the other rings out there over $200 with a LOT less thought put into them. Down to the little things he thought about with these like the slight crown on the bottom to keep the entire bottom surface from touching the rail to aid in re-zero. Everybody else just overprices their rings and says theyre super strong, yet theyre the same antiquated design as rings have been for however long scope rings have been around. </div></div>Regarding Steel Rings, I've always thought the torque to base was the reason. For example: Leupolds MK4 Steel rings suggest 65lbs of torque (lower ring to base). But it was earlier stated by someone that the Aluminum (I think it is a special super secret type) used in these rings is much lighter and stronger than steel, the question then has to be, why would they go to all the trouble of using this super special Aluminum (much stronger and lighter than steel type), they could have just used normal aluminum?
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Just because some alloys of steel are stronger than AL and some alloys of AL are butter soft doesn't mean that "Steel is stronger than Aluminium" in every case. It is very dependent upon the steel alloy, the heat treat process and likewise the AL alloy and solution process and surface treatment.
A top quality aluminum alloy (in this case, 7075) will have exceptionally strong behavior compared to low alloy steels. FWIW, 7xxx is the lifeblood of conventional aircraft structure, not the skins necessarily, but the primary loadpath structure is very often made from solution treated 7000 series aluminum.
These rings handle being torqued to steel bases because they have a thick, hard anno coat on them. This brings up the surface contact stress allowables quite a bit.
Lapping isn't required because the cap of the ring is designed to be compliant. Not meaning weak, but meaning that it is flexible so that it conforms to the tube easier, not the other way around (which is one of the ways that ring marks are created). This isn't to say that if an irregular rail or a misaligned 2 piece base is used that lapping is negated, there's only so much that can be done to handle out of spec parts. The pair I posted above on my Skunkworks action with the Razor were torqued down and the rifle was less than 5 MOA off zero from the optical windage center. (I was pretty pleased for a self-built rifle to be honest).
To the point of what alloy aluminum is used, you might be able to get away with something like hard coated 2024 or 6061 of an acceptable Tx series, but then the weight needs to go up from the reduction in material allowables.
For the same reason that the 787 is being made from CFRP, race cars are made out of CFRP and Titanium, etc. the lightweight ring makes sense to cut it from 7075 or a similiar 70xx series.
Just because some alloys of steel are stronger than AL and some alloys of AL are butter soft doesn't mean that "Steel is stronger than Aluminium" in every case. It is very dependent upon the steel alloy, the heat treat process and likewise the AL alloy and solution process and surface treatment.
A top quality aluminum alloy (in this case, 7075) will have exceptionally strong behavior compared to low alloy steels. FWIW, 7xxx is the lifeblood of conventional aircraft structure, not the skins necessarily, but the primary loadpath structure is very often made from solution treated 7000 series aluminum.
These rings handle being torqued to steel bases because they have a thick, hard anno coat on them. This brings up the surface contact stress allowables quite a bit.
Lapping isn't required because the cap of the ring is designed to be compliant. Not meaning weak, but meaning that it is flexible so that it conforms to the tube easier, not the other way around (which is one of the ways that ring marks are created). This isn't to say that if an irregular rail or a misaligned 2 piece base is used that lapping is negated, there's only so much that can be done to handle out of spec parts. The pair I posted above on my Skunkworks action with the Razor were torqued down and the rifle was less than 5 MOA off zero from the optical windage center. (I was pretty pleased for a self-built rifle to be honest).
To the point of what alloy aluminum is used, you might be able to get away with something like hard coated 2024 or 6061 of an acceptable Tx series, but then the weight needs to go up from the reduction in material allowables.
For the same reason that the 787 is being made from CFRP, race cars are made out of CFRP and Titanium, etc. the lightweight ring makes sense to cut it from 7075 or a similiar 70xx series.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Regarding Al being as strong or stronger than Steel I thought the following chart may help:
Steel vs. Aluminum: Mechanical Properties
Grade Yield Strength, as received
MPa - (ksi) Yield Strength, on Vehicle
MPa - (ksi) Tensile Strength
MPa - (ksi) %EL n-value R-value
Steel Grades
Mild Steel 170 (25) 187 (27) 300 (44) 42 0.22 1.9
Dr 210 220 (32) 242 (35) 360 (52) 40 0.2 1.8
BH210 220 (32) 264 (38) 360 (52) 36 0.18 1.7
BH250 260 (38) 312 (45) 384 (56) 34 0.17 1.5
HSLA340 360 (52) 400 (58) 440 (64) 26 0.16 1.2
DP600 360 (52) 468 (68) 610 (89) 27 0.16 1
TRIP 400 (58) 592 (86) 610 (89) 35 0.23 1
DP780 400 (58) 520 (76) 790 (115) 24 0.14 1
DP980 560 (82) 730 (106) 990 (144) 21 0.12 1
Aluminum Grades
5754-O 90 (12) 120 (16) 205 (30) 26 0.26 0.75
5182-O 135 (20) 150 (22) 250 (36) 28 0.3 0.79
6111-T4 165 (23) 241 (35) 295 (43) 26 0.25 0.73
Note: These example properties are used only for general design guidelines..
Regarding Al being as strong or stronger than Steel I thought the following chart may help:
Steel vs. Aluminum: Mechanical Properties
Grade Yield Strength, as received
MPa - (ksi) Yield Strength, on Vehicle
MPa - (ksi) Tensile Strength
MPa - (ksi) %EL n-value R-value
Steel Grades
Mild Steel 170 (25) 187 (27) 300 (44) 42 0.22 1.9
Dr 210 220 (32) 242 (35) 360 (52) 40 0.2 1.8
BH210 220 (32) 264 (38) 360 (52) 36 0.18 1.7
BH250 260 (38) 312 (45) 384 (56) 34 0.17 1.5
HSLA340 360 (52) 400 (58) 440 (64) 26 0.16 1.2
DP600 360 (52) 468 (68) 610 (89) 27 0.16 1
TRIP 400 (58) 592 (86) 610 (89) 35 0.23 1
DP780 400 (58) 520 (76) 790 (115) 24 0.14 1
DP980 560 (82) 730 (106) 990 (144) 21 0.12 1
Aluminum Grades
5754-O 90 (12) 120 (16) 205 (30) 26 0.26 0.75
5182-O 135 (20) 150 (22) 250 (36) 28 0.3 0.79
6111-T4 165 (23) 241 (35) 295 (43) 26 0.25 0.73
Note: These example properties are used only for general design guidelines..
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Thanks Bohem, you explained it much better than I wouldve!
Thanks Bohem, you explained it much better than I wouldve!
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Do you have any data for 7075 T6 or 2024 T3? I found some data but to be honest I'm not sure what I'm looking at.
Do you have any data for 7075 T6 or 2024 T3? I found some data but to be honest I'm not sure what I'm looking at.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Thanks John.
NE- What data are you looking at? Perhaps I can provide some guidance.
Thanks John.
NE- What data are you looking at? Perhaps I can provide some guidance.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
7075 T6: T6 temper 7075 has an ultimate tensile strength of 510 - 538 MPa and yield strength of at least 434-476 MPa. It has failure elongation of 5-8%
2024 T3: T3 temper 2024 sheet has an ultimate tensile strength of 58-62 ksi (400-427 MPa) and yield strength of at least 39-40 ksi (269-276 MPa). It has elongation of 10-15%
How would this compare to the above steels?
7075 T6: T6 temper 7075 has an ultimate tensile strength of 510 - 538 MPa and yield strength of at least 434-476 MPa. It has failure elongation of 5-8%
2024 T3: T3 temper 2024 sheet has an ultimate tensile strength of 58-62 ksi (400-427 MPa) and yield strength of at least 39-40 ksi (269-276 MPa). It has elongation of 10-15%
How would this compare to the above steels?
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
For an equally shaped part and testing only upon failure (be it yield or ultimate) the steel part isn't necessarily going to lose to those 2 very high strength AL alloys.
However, when you look at what the equal shape weighs in comparison, the specific strength of the AL is higher, and the specific stiffnesses are practically identical when higher alloy steels are considered.
I'm having a little bit of a time decoding what PP posted on the steels, but what looks like (ksi) values I think the first probably 5 of them are on par strength-wise to the AL but they're significantly more dense, therefore equal volumes (and equal shape designs) will be significantly heavier for the same net strength. This means that the strength/weight (or specific strength) is much lower with the first string of steels vs. the high alloy aluminum.
The contact points are of concern where the ring mates to the rail, which is where hard anno on 7075 is awesome. It takes bearing stress (contact stress) in excess of 160ksi but retains the softer core material to help flow the load into the rest of the structure. This is the same reason that the carburized and case hardened Mauser receivers are very strong, they're not prone to brittle failure like a super hard, but low elongation to failure bearing of tool steel would be. They're tough.
For an equally shaped part and testing only upon failure (be it yield or ultimate) the steel part isn't necessarily going to lose to those 2 very high strength AL alloys.
However, when you look at what the equal shape weighs in comparison, the specific strength of the AL is higher, and the specific stiffnesses are practically identical when higher alloy steels are considered.
I'm having a little bit of a time decoding what PP posted on the steels, but what looks like (ksi) values I think the first probably 5 of them are on par strength-wise to the AL but they're significantly more dense, therefore equal volumes (and equal shape designs) will be significantly heavier for the same net strength. This means that the strength/weight (or specific strength) is much lower with the first string of steels vs. the high alloy aluminum.
The contact points are of concern where the ring mates to the rail, which is where hard anno on 7075 is awesome. It takes bearing stress (contact stress) in excess of 160ksi but retains the softer core material to help flow the load into the rest of the structure. This is the same reason that the carburized and case hardened Mauser receivers are very strong, they're not prone to brittle failure like a super hard, but low elongation to failure bearing of tool steel would be. They're tough.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Here is an authoratative post:
Search | Site Feedback | Careers | SteelTrack® | Automotive Home
Automotive Steel Technology | Commercial/Sales | Automotive Lab. | What's New
Steel vs. Aluminum | Publications | Luge Project | References | Contact Us | Site Map
Introduction
Cost Comparison
The Basic Facts
Material Selection
Mechanical Properties
Crash Worthiness
Repairability
Closure Design
Steel vs. Al Hood
Al Intensive Design
A-Class Case Study
High Performance Vehicles
Four-Door Sedans
The Future
UltraLight Steel Auto Body
Advanced Vehicle Concepts
UltraLight Steel Auto Closure
ULSAC Executive Summary
Steel vs. Aluminum: The Basic Facts
Elastic modulus
Steel at 210 GPa, has three times the elastic modulus compared to aluminum's 70 GPa. Steel has three times the elastic modulus as aluminum. Related to stamping performance, aluminum will possess higher springback than mild steels. Even compared to high strength steels, strength level to strength level, aluminum will still possess higher springback.
Advantage: Steel
Density
Aluminum is approximately 1/3 the density of steel, 2.72 Mg/m3 versus steel's 7.85 Mg/m3.
Criterion
Stiffness Relation Comments
Bending Specific Stiffness of Hollow Sections
Steel with a specific stiffness value of 26.75 vs. aluminum at 25.64 places steel at a slight advantage for structures such as front crash rails, b-pillars, etc, or virtually any hollow section.
Bending Specific Stiffness of flat plates
This relation pertains to surfaces such as hood outer applications. Aluminum will have an advantage for outer skin surfaces if only elastic material properties are considered. When dynamic material effects are taken into consideration, steel often shows an advantage.
Advantage: Application Dependent
Strain rate sensitivity
Steel is strain rate sensitive, many aluminum structural grades are not. It is well known that steel displays positive strain rate performance. That is, at the higher rates of strain typically associated with crash events, steel has higher strength increases and consequently higher energy absorption at a given part weight. The figure bellow show's results from a study conducted at the University of Michigan and the Ford Scientific Research Lab on the effects of high speeds on aluminum 5754-O, DQSK (Mild Steel), Dual Phase 600, and TRIP 600 Materials; grades that are proposed for tomorrow's body structures.
(click for bigger picture)
(source: J. McGuire & E. Wilson, 2001)
Advantage: Steel
Fatigue
Aluminum fatigue performance is less than ½ that of steel. This is a very important advantage for steel in terms of vehicle life durability. Automotive steel grades also possess an endurance limit. From testing, it was found that structural aluminum grades (5XXX series) will not reach an endurance limit, but continually degrade at higher cycles. The following figure indicates this pictorially:
Source: Autosteel Partnership, Dofasco Co.
Advantage: Steel
Formability
Aluminum's Formability is approximately 2/3 that of steel (less forming range). This is a very important advantage for steel for vehicle styling and overall manufacturing robustness.
Advantage: Steel
Hardness
Aluminum's hardness is lower than steel's. Stone chips and surface quality are harder to maintain for an aluminum body over a vehicle's lifecycle.
Advantage: Steel
Damping
Noise, Vibration, and Harshness (NVH). The ability of any material to attenuate airborne noise is directly proportional to its mass. Regarding airborne noise, steel clearly has an advantage in most cases.
Advantage: Steel
Magnetic
Steel is magnetic, aluminum is not; very important in recycling end of life vehicles. Steel is easily recycled because of its magnetic properties versus other nonferrous materials such as lead, copper, zinc, and aluminum. Thus, Steel separates extremely efficiently, but the nonferous scrap will possess all the unwanted residual materials as well (polymers, glass, adhesive, ceramics, etc.).
Advantage: Steel
Galvanic potential
Aluminum's galvanic potential is high, while steel's is low. On an auto body, when aluminum and steel are in direct contact, accelerated corrosion is evident. There are barrier technologies available to help with this condition when mixing metals, but at a significant cost impact.
Advantage: Steel
I realize this is mostly in the context of automotive, however; the sources are each given, aluminum vs steel is quite easy to look up, and the strengths are well know, and have been for decades, 60% lighter and 150% stronger is the claim, I still don't see it anywhere. Where can I find this material, 60% lighter and 150% stronger?
Back | Top | Next
Here is an authoratative post:
Search | Site Feedback | Careers | SteelTrack® | Automotive Home
Automotive Steel Technology | Commercial/Sales | Automotive Lab. | What's New
Steel vs. Aluminum | Publications | Luge Project | References | Contact Us | Site Map
Introduction
Cost Comparison
The Basic Facts
Material Selection
Mechanical Properties
Crash Worthiness
Repairability
Closure Design
Steel vs. Al Hood
Al Intensive Design
A-Class Case Study
High Performance Vehicles
Four-Door Sedans
The Future
UltraLight Steel Auto Body
Advanced Vehicle Concepts
UltraLight Steel Auto Closure
ULSAC Executive Summary
Steel vs. Aluminum: The Basic Facts
Elastic modulus
Steel at 210 GPa, has three times the elastic modulus compared to aluminum's 70 GPa. Steel has three times the elastic modulus as aluminum. Related to stamping performance, aluminum will possess higher springback than mild steels. Even compared to high strength steels, strength level to strength level, aluminum will still possess higher springback.
Advantage: Steel
Density
Aluminum is approximately 1/3 the density of steel, 2.72 Mg/m3 versus steel's 7.85 Mg/m3.
Criterion
Stiffness Relation Comments
Bending Specific Stiffness of Hollow Sections
Steel with a specific stiffness value of 26.75 vs. aluminum at 25.64 places steel at a slight advantage for structures such as front crash rails, b-pillars, etc, or virtually any hollow section.
Bending Specific Stiffness of flat plates
This relation pertains to surfaces such as hood outer applications. Aluminum will have an advantage for outer skin surfaces if only elastic material properties are considered. When dynamic material effects are taken into consideration, steel often shows an advantage.
Advantage: Application Dependent
Strain rate sensitivity
Steel is strain rate sensitive, many aluminum structural grades are not. It is well known that steel displays positive strain rate performance. That is, at the higher rates of strain typically associated with crash events, steel has higher strength increases and consequently higher energy absorption at a given part weight. The figure bellow show's results from a study conducted at the University of Michigan and the Ford Scientific Research Lab on the effects of high speeds on aluminum 5754-O, DQSK (Mild Steel), Dual Phase 600, and TRIP 600 Materials; grades that are proposed for tomorrow's body structures.
(click for bigger picture)
(source: J. McGuire & E. Wilson, 2001)
Advantage: Steel
Fatigue
Aluminum fatigue performance is less than ½ that of steel. This is a very important advantage for steel in terms of vehicle life durability. Automotive steel grades also possess an endurance limit. From testing, it was found that structural aluminum grades (5XXX series) will not reach an endurance limit, but continually degrade at higher cycles. The following figure indicates this pictorially:
Source: Autosteel Partnership, Dofasco Co.
Advantage: Steel
Formability
Aluminum's Formability is approximately 2/3 that of steel (less forming range). This is a very important advantage for steel for vehicle styling and overall manufacturing robustness.
Advantage: Steel
Hardness
Aluminum's hardness is lower than steel's. Stone chips and surface quality are harder to maintain for an aluminum body over a vehicle's lifecycle.
Advantage: Steel
Damping
Noise, Vibration, and Harshness (NVH). The ability of any material to attenuate airborne noise is directly proportional to its mass. Regarding airborne noise, steel clearly has an advantage in most cases.
Advantage: Steel
Magnetic
Steel is magnetic, aluminum is not; very important in recycling end of life vehicles. Steel is easily recycled because of its magnetic properties versus other nonferrous materials such as lead, copper, zinc, and aluminum. Thus, Steel separates extremely efficiently, but the nonferous scrap will possess all the unwanted residual materials as well (polymers, glass, adhesive, ceramics, etc.).
Advantage: Steel
Galvanic potential
Aluminum's galvanic potential is high, while steel's is low. On an auto body, when aluminum and steel are in direct contact, accelerated corrosion is evident. There are barrier technologies available to help with this condition when mixing metals, but at a significant cost impact.
Advantage: Steel
I realize this is mostly in the context of automotive, however; the sources are each given, aluminum vs steel is quite easy to look up, and the strengths are well know, and have been for decades, 60% lighter and 150% stronger is the claim, I still don't see it anywhere. Where can I find this material, 60% lighter and 150% stronger?
Back | Top | Next
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bohem</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For an equally shaped part and testing only upon failure (be it yield or ultimate) the steel part isn't necessarily going to lose to those 2 very high strength AL alloys.
However, when you look at what the equal shape weighs in comparison, the specific strength of the AL is higher, and the specific stiffnesses are practically identical when higher alloy steels are considered.
I'm having a little bit of a time decoding what PP posted on the steels, but what looks like (ksi) values I think the first probably 5 of them are on par strength-wise to the AL but they're significantly more dense, therefore equal volumes (and equal shape designs) will be significantly heavier for the same net strength. This means that the strength/weight (or specific strength) is much lower with the first string of steels vs. the high alloy aluminum.
The contact points are of concern where the ring mates to the rail, which is where hard anno on 7075 is awesome. It takes bearing stress (contact stress) in excess of 160ksi but retains the softer core material to help flow the load into the rest of the structure. This is the same reason that the carburized and case hardened Mauser receivers are very strong, they're not prone to brittle failure like a super hard, but low elongation to failure bearing of tool steel would be. They're tough. </div></div>I'm sorry you had trouble sorting out the earlier post.
I believe that Young's Modulus of Elasticity is the engineering tool that is at play here, ASME 31.1 should cover it. I believe you'll find that steel is far stronger than Al.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bohem</div><div class="ubbcode-body">For an equally shaped part and testing only upon failure (be it yield or ultimate) the steel part isn't necessarily going to lose to those 2 very high strength AL alloys.
However, when you look at what the equal shape weighs in comparison, the specific strength of the AL is higher, and the specific stiffnesses are practically identical when higher alloy steels are considered.
I'm having a little bit of a time decoding what PP posted on the steels, but what looks like (ksi) values I think the first probably 5 of them are on par strength-wise to the AL but they're significantly more dense, therefore equal volumes (and equal shape designs) will be significantly heavier for the same net strength. This means that the strength/weight (or specific strength) is much lower with the first string of steels vs. the high alloy aluminum.
The contact points are of concern where the ring mates to the rail, which is where hard anno on 7075 is awesome. It takes bearing stress (contact stress) in excess of 160ksi but retains the softer core material to help flow the load into the rest of the structure. This is the same reason that the carburized and case hardened Mauser receivers are very strong, they're not prone to brittle failure like a super hard, but low elongation to failure bearing of tool steel would be. They're tough. </div></div>I'm sorry you had trouble sorting out the earlier post.
I believe that Young's Modulus of Elasticity is the engineering tool that is at play here, ASME 31.1 should cover it. I believe you'll find that steel is far stronger than Al.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Can you post a reference to your 2nd to last post? How are the galvanic properties of uncoated AL and steel in any way applicable to annodized AL and the various forms of coatings applied to steel rings? The annodizing is generally impervious to weather exposure and galvanic reaction does not take place when a protective layer of oxidation is present at the interface.
This is why cast iron sewer pipes are built with a sacrificial annode and also why CFRP structures with Titanium and Aluminum directly attached have protective plies of e-glass and sealant between the two surfaces.
You appear to be using strength interchangeably with stiffness. They are not interchangeable. If steel is far stronger than Aluminum for a given mass of material, how is it that the aerospace industry has missed that fact for the past 90 years?
Specific strength and specific stiffness (with each being applied to the density of the material) are a more applicable way to approach "design efficiency".
ASME 31.1 is allowables for "power piping" and not aircraft grade alloys. While the alloy content may be similar the certification of "aerospace grade" material is higher than general construction materials. Not only is the alloy content important but the raw material processing method is important as well. Contrary to popular belief, Aluminum is not a homogeneous material. The analysis that I handle for aircraft structures takes into account the orientation of the aluminum billet used and the internal grain structure of the part being analyzed.
Perhaps your disbelief/issue is best addressed by the owner of ARC, who is a member here. He's been receptive to questions by me in the past when I first stumbled across his first generation of rings.
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showprofile&User=34219
Can you post a reference to your 2nd to last post? How are the galvanic properties of uncoated AL and steel in any way applicable to annodized AL and the various forms of coatings applied to steel rings? The annodizing is generally impervious to weather exposure and galvanic reaction does not take place when a protective layer of oxidation is present at the interface.
This is why cast iron sewer pipes are built with a sacrificial annode and also why CFRP structures with Titanium and Aluminum directly attached have protective plies of e-glass and sealant between the two surfaces.
You appear to be using strength interchangeably with stiffness. They are not interchangeable. If steel is far stronger than Aluminum for a given mass of material, how is it that the aerospace industry has missed that fact for the past 90 years?
Specific strength and specific stiffness (with each being applied to the density of the material) are a more applicable way to approach "design efficiency".
ASME 31.1 is allowables for "power piping" and not aircraft grade alloys. While the alloy content may be similar the certification of "aerospace grade" material is higher than general construction materials. Not only is the alloy content important but the raw material processing method is important as well. Contrary to popular belief, Aluminum is not a homogeneous material. The analysis that I handle for aircraft structures takes into account the orientation of the aluminum billet used and the internal grain structure of the part being analyzed.
Perhaps your disbelief/issue is best addressed by the owner of ARC, who is a member here. He's been receptive to questions by me in the past when I first stumbled across his first generation of rings.
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showprofile&User=34219
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
I have no trouble admitting I am mistaken if this is the case, however; you have missed something rather large, time and again, I'm sure it was an oversight-40% lighter, 150% stronger! I'm sorry, I can't seem to find this material listed anywhere, can you help me out with a authoratative reference? Aircraft mfgs- use of al, or Ti, or any other material to include composits has to do with strength needed to specs(along with all other environmental, change in temp etc requirements)build ability etc. etc., not ultimate strength(this is why tanks aren't given wings). Lycoming is not making their turbines from AL, why? Not strong enough. The claim of 40% lighter and 150% STRONGER is a little bit hard to believe.
I have no trouble admitting I am mistaken if this is the case, however; you have missed something rather large, time and again, I'm sure it was an oversight-40% lighter, 150% stronger! I'm sorry, I can't seem to find this material listed anywhere, can you help me out with a authoratative reference? Aircraft mfgs- use of al, or Ti, or any other material to include composits has to do with strength needed to specs(along with all other environmental, change in temp etc requirements)build ability etc. etc., not ultimate strength(this is why tanks aren't given wings). Lycoming is not making their turbines from AL, why? Not strong enough. The claim of 40% lighter and 150% STRONGER is a little bit hard to believe.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Giving away proprietary data from my company with regards to how we apply it in an aircraft structure isn't going to happen. You can use www.matweb.com to get reasonable allowables for all of the materials in the thread. If you can't figure out how to find an allowable for 7075-Txxx you're not searching hard enough.
Lighter and stronger is based on being compared for an identical shape to a low to medium alloy steel I suspect. You still haven't addressed specific strength and specific stiffness.
Non-dimensionalize the material properties and you'll see what I'm talking about and what every other aerospace structures engineer understands about how to apply aluminum, steel, CRES, Ti, etc.
Steel has its places, as does Aluminum, in this case compared to the other steel products on the market the AL is stronger for the given shape/weight. Nobody makes rings from 4340AQ 300M or PH 17-7. Either of those materials have allowables in excess of Ftu>200ksi. Both of them are 3x's "stronger" than 7075 with Ftu~70-80ksi, however both of them are also about 3x's the density. Net effect? A 4oz set of rings is no stronger but much more expensive to manufacture.
This is also not a marketable apples to apples comparison as nobody makes rings from that level of material.
What you've had to do there, in order to get something with a comparable specific strength is to drive production costs way up just to get a reasonably close strength to weight ratio.
Another easy reference to look up is simply read a machine design/analysis handbook. There's a great book that will teach you more than you care to know. Bruhn is the compiling editor, I don't have it in front of me at the moment or I'd simply give you the ISBN number.
Giving away proprietary data from my company with regards to how we apply it in an aircraft structure isn't going to happen. You can use www.matweb.com to get reasonable allowables for all of the materials in the thread. If you can't figure out how to find an allowable for 7075-Txxx you're not searching hard enough.
Lighter and stronger is based on being compared for an identical shape to a low to medium alloy steel I suspect. You still haven't addressed specific strength and specific stiffness.
Non-dimensionalize the material properties and you'll see what I'm talking about and what every other aerospace structures engineer understands about how to apply aluminum, steel, CRES, Ti, etc.
Steel has its places, as does Aluminum, in this case compared to the other steel products on the market the AL is stronger for the given shape/weight. Nobody makes rings from 4340AQ 300M or PH 17-7. Either of those materials have allowables in excess of Ftu>200ksi. Both of them are 3x's "stronger" than 7075 with Ftu~70-80ksi, however both of them are also about 3x's the density. Net effect? A 4oz set of rings is no stronger but much more expensive to manufacture.
This is also not a marketable apples to apples comparison as nobody makes rings from that level of material.
What you've had to do there, in order to get something with a comparable specific strength is to drive production costs way up just to get a reasonably close strength to weight ratio.
Another easy reference to look up is simply read a machine design/analysis handbook. There's a great book that will teach you more than you care to know. Bruhn is the compiling editor, I don't have it in front of me at the moment or I'd simply give you the ISBN number.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
I don't have the mil-spec for the USMC rings currently being produced by Badger Ord, but will post when I get a copy. If operating in a Salt Water type enviroment, such as the SEALs, they may spec Al rings, for corrosion resistance. Badger makes bottom metal from steel-maybe they should go to Al, if it is 40% lighter and 150% stonger. I'm using Badger mfg, as my example, as they are the contractor for the current Mil-Spec Rings, they also make Al rings, I'm sure if asked, they would be the first to tell you, both are very good, but their steel rings are stronger than their Al rings. For some reason, the 40% lighter and 150% stronger claim keeps eluding discussion, if it is actually only 39% lighter and 149% stronger, I can live with that, but where can we find this info? BTW Badger also makes steel mounts-also really strong, and really good-are they missing something?
I don't have the mil-spec for the USMC rings currently being produced by Badger Ord, but will post when I get a copy. If operating in a Salt Water type enviroment, such as the SEALs, they may spec Al rings, for corrosion resistance. Badger makes bottom metal from steel-maybe they should go to Al, if it is 40% lighter and 150% stonger. I'm using Badger mfg, as my example, as they are the contractor for the current Mil-Spec Rings, they also make Al rings, I'm sure if asked, they would be the first to tell you, both are very good, but their steel rings are stronger than their Al rings. For some reason, the 40% lighter and 150% stronger claim keeps eluding discussion, if it is actually only 39% lighter and 149% stronger, I can live with that, but where can we find this info? BTW Badger also makes steel mounts-also really strong, and really good-are they missing something?
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
The AL alloy rings that Badger produces are also hard annodized, so in the realm of environmental exposure it does not appear that they've missed something.
1) I've explained to you the reasons that specific AL alloys are a better application than certain steel alloys for a litany of reasons.
2) You're harping after me on a quoted number that I didn't even come up with, yet after explaining where it most likely comes from you still either can't grasp the concept or you refuse to acknowledge it. The exact reason matters little to me. You've also been given the tools to go find the reasons and do the math for yourself.
3) Now you're onto changing the numbers and misquoting them again to demand a response but yet again, you don't appear to grasp the concept of "same shape, less weight, stronger depending on alloys used".
If you want engineering lessons then you can send me $2775 via certified check (3 credits at $925/credit) and I will provide a rubric and lecture a 40 hour course in the Fundamentals of Mechanics of Materials. Don't forget to budget for the $250 that the textbooks will cost.
I'm not going to get into a drag out, knock down contest of badmouthing other products.
The AL alloy rings that Badger produces are also hard annodized, so in the realm of environmental exposure it does not appear that they've missed something.
1) I've explained to you the reasons that specific AL alloys are a better application than certain steel alloys for a litany of reasons.
2) You're harping after me on a quoted number that I didn't even come up with, yet after explaining where it most likely comes from you still either can't grasp the concept or you refuse to acknowledge it. The exact reason matters little to me. You've also been given the tools to go find the reasons and do the math for yourself.
3) Now you're onto changing the numbers and misquoting them again to demand a response but yet again, you don't appear to grasp the concept of "same shape, less weight, stronger depending on alloys used".
If you want engineering lessons then you can send me $2775 via certified check (3 credits at $925/credit) and I will provide a rubric and lecture a 40 hour course in the Fundamentals of Mechanics of Materials. Don't forget to budget for the $250 that the textbooks will cost.
I'm not going to get into a drag out, knock down contest of badmouthing other products.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Don't need a lesson, in fact I'd like to help, you stated, "
Steel has its places, as does Aluminum, in this case compared to the other steel products on the market the AL is stronger for the given shape/weight. Nobody makes rings from 4340AQ 300M or PH 17-7. Either of those materials have allowables in excess of Ftu>200ksi. Both of them are 3x's "stronger" than 7075 with Ftu~70-80ksi, however both of them are also about 3x's the density. Net effect? A 4oz set of rings is no stronger but much more expensive to manufacture."
FN does in fact make their rings out of heat treated 4140!!! and as we are going to compare, I believe the standard is 4140 tempered @600 F yields 225KSI. I am not knocking someones product, just the idea that these rings do not ever need lapping, and that they are 40% lighter and 150% stronger-just doesn't add up. If questioning hard factual presentation is knocking a product, I'm guilty, I'm sorry. If on the other hand, seeing (reading)something that strikes me as just way off, in fact strikes me as just BS, calling it out, seems American. I realize in some parts of the world (some types of govt.) it is wrong to ever question anything. Thankfully, we haven't gotten there yet. Those FN rings sure seem strong, I wonder what Badger and others are using-I really don't know, if you do, please post.
Now if you would like to send some money to a vet charity, that would be fine, I'm not charging for this factual presentation.
Don't need a lesson, in fact I'd like to help, you stated, "
Steel has its places, as does Aluminum, in this case compared to the other steel products on the market the AL is stronger for the given shape/weight. Nobody makes rings from 4340AQ 300M or PH 17-7. Either of those materials have allowables in excess of Ftu>200ksi. Both of them are 3x's "stronger" than 7075 with Ftu~70-80ksi, however both of them are also about 3x's the density. Net effect? A 4oz set of rings is no stronger but much more expensive to manufacture."
FN does in fact make their rings out of heat treated 4140!!! and as we are going to compare, I believe the standard is 4140 tempered @600 F yields 225KSI. I am not knocking someones product, just the idea that these rings do not ever need lapping, and that they are 40% lighter and 150% stronger-just doesn't add up. If questioning hard factual presentation is knocking a product, I'm guilty, I'm sorry. If on the other hand, seeing (reading)something that strikes me as just way off, in fact strikes me as just BS, calling it out, seems American. I realize in some parts of the world (some types of govt.) it is wrong to ever question anything. Thankfully, we haven't gotten there yet. Those FN rings sure seem strong, I wonder what Badger and others are using-I really don't know, if you do, please post.
Now if you would like to send some money to a vet charity, that would be fine, I'm not charging for this factual presentation.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
Lets just call the 150% thing marketing and leave it at that. Everybody does it, it sells product, it has nothing to do with whether or not the rings are good.
Maybe others have seen rings fail under normal circumstances, but I feel like building them out of 41 or 4340 is quite excessive. If an airplane wing can stay on a plane whilst travelling 700mph with 250 people and thousands of pounds more cargo and weight, I think my aluminum rings can hold my 31oz scope down!
Lets just call the 150% thing marketing and leave it at that. Everybody does it, it sells product, it has nothing to do with whether or not the rings are good.
Maybe others have seen rings fail under normal circumstances, but I feel like building them out of 41 or 4340 is quite excessive. If an airplane wing can stay on a plane whilst travelling 700mph with 250 people and thousands of pounds more cargo and weight, I think my aluminum rings can hold my 31oz scope down!
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
"I don't understand it so it must be BS" the repetitive expression of incredulity doesn't mean you're right. Just means you don't get it or you have an ulterior motive. False statements about products aren't just the tools of vendors...
Regardless, Bohems many answers were enlightening enough even for a Luddite to grasp the argument and in this regards I speak for myself. Once I decide on which scope I want for FTR comps it will be mounted on a TacOps via the ARC scope rings. Percentages be damned!
"I don't understand it so it must be BS" the repetitive expression of incredulity doesn't mean you're right. Just means you don't get it or you have an ulterior motive. False statements about products aren't just the tools of vendors...
Regardless, Bohems many answers were enlightening enough even for a Luddite to grasp the argument and in this regards I speak for myself. Once I decide on which scope I want for FTR comps it will be mounted on a TacOps via the ARC scope rings. Percentages be damned!
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EventHorizon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"I don't understand it so it must be BS" the repetitive expression of incredulity doesn't mean you're right. Just means you don't get it or you have an ulterior motive. False statements about products aren't just the tools of vendors...
Regardless, Bohems many answers were enlightening enough even for a Luddite to grasp the argument and in this regards I speak for myself. Once I decide on which scope I want for FTR comps it will be mounted on a TacOps via the ARC scope rings. Percentages be damned! </div></div>
You basic reading skills are lacking, try it again. I was never "enlightened" as when I brought forward an honest comparison, FN Herstal Steel Rings as an example, we find that the BS of 7075Al being 40% lighter and 150% stronger is just that BS. I hope you love you new scope, Wow a new scope! This has nothing at all to do with 40% lighter and 150% stronger than FN's steel rings. Even one suffering with basic reading skills should realize, when you make a Big Claim, such as 40% lighter and 150% stronger, you should be willing to back it up. I'm still waiting for the actual comparison, what brand of steel rings are they talking about? Maybe $20.00 China Inc?, It would only be fair to compare to some steel rings such as leupold, or Badger, or FN otherwise you are making the same kind of claims that appeal only to those suffering from basic reading skill problems.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: EventHorizon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"I don't understand it so it must be BS" the repetitive expression of incredulity doesn't mean you're right. Just means you don't get it or you have an ulterior motive. False statements about products aren't just the tools of vendors...
Regardless, Bohems many answers were enlightening enough even for a Luddite to grasp the argument and in this regards I speak for myself. Once I decide on which scope I want for FTR comps it will be mounted on a TacOps via the ARC scope rings. Percentages be damned! </div></div>
You basic reading skills are lacking, try it again. I was never "enlightened" as when I brought forward an honest comparison, FN Herstal Steel Rings as an example, we find that the BS of 7075Al being 40% lighter and 150% stronger is just that BS. I hope you love you new scope, Wow a new scope! This has nothing at all to do with 40% lighter and 150% stronger than FN's steel rings. Even one suffering with basic reading skills should realize, when you make a Big Claim, such as 40% lighter and 150% stronger, you should be willing to back it up. I'm still waiting for the actual comparison, what brand of steel rings are they talking about? Maybe $20.00 China Inc?, It would only be fair to compare to some steel rings such as leupold, or Badger, or FN otherwise you are making the same kind of claims that appeal only to those suffering from basic reading skill problems.
Re: Any one use or herd of American rifle co?
perhaps they mean 150% stronger than steel rings of the same weight. If they weighed the same, the steel rings would have to be much small in some dimension and thus weaker.
perhaps they mean 150% stronger than steel rings of the same weight. If they weighed the same, the steel rings would have to be much small in some dimension and thus weaker.
Similar threads
Night Vision
Is the Armasight CO-Mini the poor man’s UNS-SR?
