Do aluminum firing pins really have faster lock time, seems like the spring would drag on the aluminum? what is the locktime difference between steel and alumium or the difference in just replacing with a stronger spring. also how often should the spring be replaced.
Gunsmithing Firing pins aluminum or steel.
- Thread starter hesco
- Start date
Re: Firing pins aluminum or steel.
Aluminum pins seem to break more often. Steel is stronger. If you are talking about Remington actions, the difference is in the microseconds. I doubt you can tell the difference in tactical work. JMHO
Aluminum pins seem to break more often. Steel is stronger. If you are talking about Remington actions, the difference is in the microseconds. I doubt you can tell the difference in tactical work. JMHO
Re: Firing pins aluminum or steel.
1. Are AL strikers faster than steel ones?
Simple answer: Yes. Aluminum has less mass than steel therefore it'll accelerate quicker with the same given force acting on it.
Complicated answer: It'd be real easy to whittle this down to assuming that every action manufacturer out there is cooky for not using a lighter material. Right? Why aren't there carbon fiber pins or titanium pin on every action produced?
Cause steel works better. . .
A primer needs to be "shocked" at the moment of impact. This shock and compression force between the cup and the anvil inside the primer ignites the boiler. An aluminum pin will more than likely smack the primer at a higher rate of acceleration than a steel one. However the impact energy (hint, hint) is now in question. The next conclusion might be why not just make a spring with more snort? At some point a guy will discover that all he's done is transfer the mass from the pin to making a spring that will drive it adequately. That spring has to accelerate along with the striker. Mass is mass whether its the pin or the spring. Point is it doesn't really get you that far ahead of the game.
Nevermind also that a true all aluminum striker is going to enjoy a very short life span. The hardest aluminum out there isn't going to tolerate being driven into a primer cup very long before it deforms the tip and seizes up in the bolt. One would still need a steel striker. Just the stem of the striker would work in AL.
Julian Hatcher (deceased) wrote a book called Hatcher's Notebook that details the forces at work regarding primers. Basically, it takes a certain amount of kinetic energy to generate reliable, repeatable ignition in a firearm. I believe its around 40lbs of force for an "all fire" condition. (I'd need to look it up to be sure)
Basically, the steel striker with a good spring delivers the "one/two" punch needed to get things moving inside the chamber. A lighter pin will reduce the locktime, but reliable ignition may (not saying always, but the risk is certainly elevated) suffer for the reduction in time. Lock time is important, however I think it is BOLDLY overstated by many trying to sell products. A tactical rifle 9/10 times is shot from either prone or a supported position. If a guy can't hold position long enough to produce a good shot one can be 99.99999% sure that it's not due to excessive locktime. There are just too many hard hitters using old 1903 Springfields that shoot very well at 1K matches to argue this. FWIW an 03 springfield's locktime can be measured with a sun dial.
Friction coefficients also come into play but that would be an easy solution for an AL striker. Just hard anodize it. Hard anodized AL (properly done) has a surface hardness of about 90HRC. That's pretty dern hard. The "hard candy shell" makes for reduced friction. This would be why AR upper receivers can go for thousands of rounds without the bolt wearing off the anodized finish inside.
I say replace a spring once a year. That's excessive to many, but it's what I advise to my customers. Especially agencies and/or serious competitive shooters.
Hope this helped.
C
1. Are AL strikers faster than steel ones?
Simple answer: Yes. Aluminum has less mass than steel therefore it'll accelerate quicker with the same given force acting on it.
Complicated answer: It'd be real easy to whittle this down to assuming that every action manufacturer out there is cooky for not using a lighter material. Right? Why aren't there carbon fiber pins or titanium pin on every action produced?
Cause steel works better. . .
A primer needs to be "shocked" at the moment of impact. This shock and compression force between the cup and the anvil inside the primer ignites the boiler. An aluminum pin will more than likely smack the primer at a higher rate of acceleration than a steel one. However the impact energy (hint, hint) is now in question. The next conclusion might be why not just make a spring with more snort? At some point a guy will discover that all he's done is transfer the mass from the pin to making a spring that will drive it adequately. That spring has to accelerate along with the striker. Mass is mass whether its the pin or the spring. Point is it doesn't really get you that far ahead of the game.
Nevermind also that a true all aluminum striker is going to enjoy a very short life span. The hardest aluminum out there isn't going to tolerate being driven into a primer cup very long before it deforms the tip and seizes up in the bolt. One would still need a steel striker. Just the stem of the striker would work in AL.
Julian Hatcher (deceased) wrote a book called Hatcher's Notebook that details the forces at work regarding primers. Basically, it takes a certain amount of kinetic energy to generate reliable, repeatable ignition in a firearm. I believe its around 40lbs of force for an "all fire" condition. (I'd need to look it up to be sure)
Basically, the steel striker with a good spring delivers the "one/two" punch needed to get things moving inside the chamber. A lighter pin will reduce the locktime, but reliable ignition may (not saying always, but the risk is certainly elevated) suffer for the reduction in time. Lock time is important, however I think it is BOLDLY overstated by many trying to sell products. A tactical rifle 9/10 times is shot from either prone or a supported position. If a guy can't hold position long enough to produce a good shot one can be 99.99999% sure that it's not due to excessive locktime. There are just too many hard hitters using old 1903 Springfields that shoot very well at 1K matches to argue this. FWIW an 03 springfield's locktime can be measured with a sun dial.
Friction coefficients also come into play but that would be an easy solution for an AL striker. Just hard anodize it. Hard anodized AL (properly done) has a surface hardness of about 90HRC. That's pretty dern hard. The "hard candy shell" makes for reduced friction. This would be why AR upper receivers can go for thousands of rounds without the bolt wearing off the anodized finish inside.
I say replace a spring once a year. That's excessive to many, but it's what I advise to my customers. Especially agencies and/or serious competitive shooters.
Hope this helped.
C
Re: Firing pins aluminum or steel.
Remingtons have pretty fast lock times, but an aluminum assembly will shave a few milliseconds. This would only be important for offhand shooting: otherwise not too important. Tubb makes a properly made aluminum pin. It has a steel tip and uses a stronger spring to make sure you still have enough force to reliably ignite the primer. A lot of people more experienced than I don't like aluminum firing pins. So, I dunno.
Remingtons have pretty fast lock times, but an aluminum assembly will shave a few milliseconds. This would only be important for offhand shooting: otherwise not too important. Tubb makes a properly made aluminum pin. It has a steel tip and uses a stronger spring to make sure you still have enough force to reliably ignite the primer. A lot of people more experienced than I don't like aluminum firing pins. So, I dunno.
