"Match Grade"

[justdave]

Exactly what is "match grade?" What, if any, industry standards exist? I'm on a quest...Over the last 20 years I have put my money into many products which have the term "match" incorporated in the nomenclature. Many of these products have been a miserable disappointment. I'm asking because, as I start digging, I'm finding manufacturers have arbitrary standards. Minute of Angle accuracy is one of the best claims to print on a box yet, no standard for how that claim is derived. My quest? Truth in labeling and advertising!! I am all for allowing such claims but, the methodology should be included. Yes, that could lead to merch not leaving the shelf, it could also lead to better product on the shelf. I'm curious about others" opinions. I would enjoy a factory rep point of view.

 

[308pirate]

Exactly what is "match grade?" What, if any, industry standards exist? I'm on a quest...Over the last 20 years I have put my money into many products which have the term "match" incorporated in the nomenclature. Many of these products have been a miserable disappointment. I'm asking because, as I start digging, I'm finding manufacturers have arbitrary standards. Minute of Angle accuracy is one of the best claims to print on a box yet, no standard for how that claim is derived.

There is no standard as to what constitutes match grade or sub moa.

My quest? Truth in labeling and advertising!! I am all for allowing such claims but, the methodology should be included. Yes, that could lead to merch not leaving the shelf, it could also lead to better product on the shelf. I'm curious about others" opinions. I would enjoy a factory rep point of view.

Pissing into the wind will be much more productive.

I strongly suggest you direct your efforts elsewhere. No one is going to care about your quest.

 

[sinister]

The National Matches at Camp Perry are the apex of service rifle and service pistol competition. Starting in 1903, National Match ammunition precision standards were posted by the Army at Springfield Armory, along with authorized modifications (like "Star" or asterisk stamping on Springfield rifle crowns, or "NM" [or "T" for Target] stamps on M1911s, and Garand and M14 operating rods and sights). National Match specifications for 30-06, 7.62, .45, and .38 are still in the books.

This is a GI National Match pistol:

This is a commercial Colt, authorized for Camp Perry:

In the 60s the Army passed out annual handbooks showing the latest approved "Match" alterations and standards. This practice ended in 1968 when the Army stopped supporting the National Matches due to the JFK, RFK, and Martin Luther king assassinations.

There are no Army-wide National Match standards for the M16 or 5.56mm ammunition, nor for M9, M11, or M17 pistols and 9mm ammunition. Those are now set by the Civilian Marksmanship Program in their annual rule books for the National Matches. You can shoot these at Camp Perry:

A civilian manufacturer or marketer can advertise whatever he wants as "Match-grade," like Young Manufacturing's "National Match AR Bolt Carrier."

Kinda like how fishing lures aren't marketed to fish, but to gullible fishermen.

 

[Feniks Technologies]

Do some simple research into what is allowed for manufacturers to claim in most any industry.

You’ll see that this one is no different than any other. Marketing via semantics.

You’ll lose your mind trying to change it.

 

[sinister]

I think the closest I've seen is barrel makers' definition when it comes to air-gauging. A good barrel maker may specifically state his barrel holds within .0001 - .0002 bore uniformity throughout its length -- but that doesn't tell you if it's straight or not.

 

[Manning5R]

Marketers will push claims to the point it's lies. I have to deal with this daily in my line of work and it's maddening. But nobody can do anything about it.

"Match" is meaningless.

 

[Baron23]

Exactly what is "match grade?"

What ever they want it to mean.

 

[308pirate]

I think the closest I've seen is barrel makers' definition when it comes to air-gauging. A good barrel maker may specifically state his barrel holds within .0001 - .0002 bore uniformity throughout its length -- but that doesn't tell you if it's straight or not.

If only people here knew all that goes into properly defining something as simple as a hole through a cylinder....................ASME Y14.5

No wonder so much BS gets thrown around by those who don't know what they don't know.

 

[RTH1800]

Well it would be had he used a smaller number in his data set but, as I understand his explanation, he used the entire set which constitutes 100% of the samples which in this case is the population.
In any case, you do not need a huge sample number to show a gaussian distribution because it presents as a 1st order postulate & is not inferred.

There is no standard as to what constitutes match grade or sub moa.



Pissing into the wind will be much more productive.

I strongly suggest you direct your efforts elsewhere. No one is going to care about your quest.

Nice to see you have not not mellowed with time.

 

[roostercogburn98]

So match grade and milspec must be fraternal twins

 

[sinister]

Maybe cousins, but NOT twins.

The mil-standard tells you what the government (Army) expects when it tests for acceptance. it passes or fails.

Government "Match" technical data and drawings specify dimensions, tolerances, and performance standards.

 

[308pirate]

So match grade and milspec must be fraternal twins

Not at all.

Most military standards and specifications are freely available online if you know where to look, including the M-16 rifle technical data package.

You can check things if you know what you're doing (who here knows how to check true position, or even knows what it is) and ask for metallurgical, NDT, and process (heat treat, plating, etc) certifications from vendors.

 

[huntnh]

It means your going to pay more

 

[Barelstroker]

Nice to see you have not not mellowed with time.

How the fuck did my comment from a different thread get dragged into this?

 

[roostercogburn98]

Not at all.

Most military standards and specifications are freely available online if you know where to look, including the M-16 rifle technical data package.

You can check things if you know what you're doing (who here knows how to check true position, or even knows what it is) and ask for metallurgical, NDT, and process (heat treat, plating, etc) certifications from vendors.

Sorry I’ll lay the sarcasm on thicker next time. Was simply referring how EVERYONE says milspec milspec milspec. Seems to be term thrown around like match grade is in my opinion. I’m no scientist, just a hillbilly though

 

[lariat]

Mil-spec is a meaningless term without context. The number of specifications are legion. There are specs for materials (DFAR compliant, allowable composition, grain direction (yes, its a thing)), manufacturing processes (painting, etching, anodizing, etc), tolerances of the specific part, testing (salt spray, fatigue, etc), tolerances of specific holes that refer back to the specified fixture (with its own series of mil-specs) that should be place in said specific hole, surface finish, and all the way down to how to package the part. And of course the "approved drawing", which is what a lot of people assume is what everyone is crowing about when they use the term, but once that hits this civilian market that gets changed up too, so usually not really mil spec.

Milspec doesn't equal performance. Never assume it does.

If I told you the number of specifications to produce the nut of a 1/2-13 threaded turnbuckle for a helicopter you would lose your mind. The number of specs for a completely finished firearm for sale to the USG can also be huge. Remember, those are the minimal acceptable standards. MRE's are mil-spec.

 

[308pirate]

Mil-spec is a meaningless term without context. The number of specifications are legion. There are specs for materials (DFAR compliant, allowable composition, grain direction (yes, its a thing)), manufacturing processes (painting, etching, anodizing, etc), tolerances of the specific part, testing (salt spray, fatigue, etc), tolerances of specific holes that refer back to the specified fixture (with its own series of mil-specs) that should be place in said specific hole, surface finish, and all the way down to how to package the part. And of course the "approved drawing", which is what a lot of people assume is what everyone is crowing about when they use the term, but once that hits this civilian market that gets changed up too, so usually not really mil spec.

Milspec doesn't equal performance. Never assume it does.

If I told you the number of specifications to produce the nut of a 1/2-13 threaded turnbuckle for a helicopter you would lose your mind. The number of specs for a completely finished firearm for sale to the USG can also be huge. Remember, those are the minimal acceptable standards. MRE's are mil-spec.

Absolutely

And for those who don't know how, every specification has a list of reference specifications in it. Guess what, you have to comply with all of them too.....

 

[clcustom1911]

It means your going to pay more

Like a "tactical" shotgun. Which consists of replacing the likely more expensive wood furniture of a Remmy 870 with cheap, black, plastic bullshit, and charging +$150 for it, because tactical. Because muh 12 gauge is bEsT fOr HoME dEFensE

 

[Baron23]

Absolutely

And for those who don't know how, every specification has a list of reference specifications in it. Guess what, you have to comply with all of them too.....

After the USAF, I was working for an engineering company (not my best decision) on some aquisition projects with one being to write a spec and SOW for a replacement for the ABCCC command/control capsule that went into the back of a C-130.

At this time the military was still into very prescriptive, mil-spec, fixed price contracts so everything needed to be defined.

I was very proud when I found in our library a slash sheet for a mil-spec soda can holder. We liked it so much that we actually did put it in the spec.

This acquisition never went forward but we joked about mil-spec cup holders for quite some time.

 

[308pirate]

After the USAF, I was working for an engineering company (not my best decision) on some aquisition projects with one being to write a spec and SOW for a replacement for the ABCCC command/control capsule that went into the back of a C-130.

At this time the military was still into very prescriptive, mil-spec, fixed price contracts so everything needed to be defined.

I was very proud when I found in our library a slash sheet for a mil-spec soda can holder. We liked it so much that we actually did put it in the spec.

This acquisition never went forward but we joked about mil-spec cup holders for quite some time.

There is no limit to what the .gov will pay when it needs something and not very many are willing or able to do it.

 

[Ledzep]

How the fuck did my comment from a different thread get dragged into this?

You can create a cache of "multi quotes" and if you don't use them they stick around until you "insert quotes" then if you're not watching to remove the unwanted ones they all pile in.

 

[Baron23]

There is no limit to what the .gov will pay when it needs something and not very many are willing or able to do it.

Well that...and I'm sure you know this already....but the enormous cost of some items (like a hammer or toilet seat) that makes the news is not all that it seems to be.

They MUST (well, in the past they must) be documented with everything from Level 3 re-procurement drawings to endless logistics sheets, acceptance test plans/procedures, etc...all of which must be created and submitted by professionals working for a manf company with typical high overhead rates. Not to even mention all of the non-line item costs that has to be distributed to priced line items (which depends highly on how the contract was structured).

A smarter move is to separately price data item submittals (the CDRL) and program wide costs (like, program management or scheduling, for example) and the last time I was involved in a federal procurement (for the FAA) it was structured as such.

Yes, the hammer didn't really cost $600...but the cost of the hammer, documentation, testing, stocking, prog mng costs, whatever, that got loaded on it did.

The myth of the $600 hammer

The myth of the $600 hammer

www.govexec.com

 

[308pirate]

Well that...and I'm sure you know this already....but the enormous cost of some items (like a hammer or toilet seat) that makes the news is not all that it seems to be.

They MUST (well, in the past they must) be documented with everything from Level 3 re-procurement drawings to endless logistics sheets, acceptance test plans/procedures, etc...all of which must be created and submitted by professionals working for a manf company with typical high overhead rates. Not to even mention all of the non-line item costs that has to be distributed to priced line items (which depends highly on how the contract was structured).

A smarter move is to separately price data item submittals (the CDRL) and program wide costs (like, program management or scheduling, for example) and the last time I was involved in a federal procurement (for the FAA) it was structured as such.

Yes, the hammer didn't really cost $600...but the cost of the hammer, documentation, testing, stocking, prog mng costs, whatever, that got loaded on it did.

The myth of the $600 hammer

The myth of the $600 hammer

www.govexec.com

I leave govt contract compliance to the people at the corporate office. I don't know and don't want to know....LOL

 

[forthehunt]

Best. Precision. High performance. Heavy duty. Engineered. Hand ground.

Match grade.

It's all weaponry related industry buzzwords. They exist in every industry. The only things that matter outside of actually picking up and inspecting is quantifiable figures.

 

[Frgood]

Not too long ago, I was contracted by a large Defense contractor to bring in "modern" software design architecture to the company as I came from a large consulting firm that bring software products to market. The amount of paperwork the defense dept. was used to is a consultants cash flow wet dream.
They wanted 100% of the design artifacts where we typically use less than 10%. That is because we work from a framework, which means you take the parts you need to be productive. It was never intended for 100% usage on a single project. At the end, we delivered the product in 10 months instead of the planned 18 and exceeded the feature list by more than 25%.

Ironically, this pissed off a lot of people and I was out of a job. Despite the quality and timeliness of the delivery.

 

[Superjet]

It’s a marketing term. The definition varies from company to company.

 

[bax]

What ever they want it to mean.

"Match grade" has a meaning - it means that whatever "it" is will cost more money.