Chrome Lined Barrels and Chambers.....

R

Rule 303

Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
1,067
Reaction score
192
Location
Texas
The first few S&W M&P15 I bought had chrome lined barrels.

I've noticed lately that none of the barrels that S&W was putting out on the Civilian Models was chrome lined.

I won't have a AR that is not a Stainless Barrel or a Chrome Lined Barrel and Chamber. For me its a matter of ease of extraction on my guns.

Anybody else have any comments on this???

Rule 303
 
Register to hide this ad
To each his own. My Sport with a melonite barrel has been totally trouble free and seems to have an accuracy advantage over some of the rifles with chrome barrels.
 
I've heard nothing but good things about the melonite barrels. Mine is milspec chrome, but many feel the melonite is actually superior.
 
What do you want a comment on? You've all ready made up you mind and i'm pretty sure you have no knowledge of Melonite treating. While my M&P is chrome lined, I'd take a Melonite barrel with out hesitation. Melonite has proven it's self. I believe it's been around since the 50's or 60's. The following link may give you some understanding of nitrocarburizing.

Sent from my DROIDX
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Rule 303 said:
The first few S&W M&P15 I bought had chrome lined barrels.

I've noticed lately that none of the barrels that S&W was putting out on the Civilian Models was chrome lined.

I won't have a AR that is not a Stainless Barrel or a Chrome Lined Barrel and Chamber. For me its a matter of ease of extraction on my guns.

Anybody else have any comments on this???

Rule 303
Click to expand...

Don't know your time in the Army and when. On the early M-16's you COULDN'T leave a round in the barrel over night in V-N in the jungle heat and humidity. You had one heck of a time extracting it if you did. Chrome did help fix that problem...

Read up on the melonite. It will surprise you. THAT is what brought me back into the Modern Sporting Rifles along with S&W's reputation. I was a DEVOTED Colt pony hater until I came to the light and saw a whole new world and jumped in. :D That and all the fine people here in the know.
 
Rule 303 said:
The first few S&W M&P15 I bought had chrome lined barrels.

I've noticed lately that none of the barrels that S&W was putting out on the Civilian Models was chrome lined.

I won't have a AR that is not a Stainless Barrel or a Chrome Lined Barrel and Chamber. For me its a matter of ease of extraction on my guns.

Anybody else have any comments on this???

Rule 303
Click to expand...

I agree concerning chrome lining.

For my money an AR barrel will be chrome lined because I like the way chrome cleans, wears, and its mil-spec. Can't see any reason to change what has proven to work well, and after tens of thousands of rounds fired chrome has worked for me.

Would be surprised if melonite isn't cheaper to produce, hence its use in lower tier rifles.
 
In case you havent noticed. Mellonite or a Tennifer process is available on or standard production for many top tier companies. Chrome lining was good for its day and it is still better than plain steel barrels. But it is old technology. With the same line of thought that keeps some people locked into the chrome lining, I thought you would also expect them to be using a Commodore 64 to post threads and comments.
 
Last edited:
oneyeopn said:
In case you havent noticed. Mellonite or a Tennifer process is available on or standard production for many top tier companies. Chrome lining was good for its day and it is still better than plain steel barrels. But it is old technology. With the same line of thought that keeps some people locked into the chrome lining thought you would also expect them to be using a Commodore 64 to post threads and comments.
Click to expand...

Actually, what I have noticed is that the highest tech military in world history (ours) issues chrome lined barrels. To me, that makes chrome "top tier" and everything else less than mil-spec standard, even if someone on a web forum proclaims it to be "old technology".

Its still somewhat of a free country though. We can all buy what we want. :)
 
Actually "mil-spec" is just the lowest standard the DOD will accept. Ther is nothing "top tier" about it.
It's called the "mil-spec is better than everthing else" myth. Otherwise specops would be using issue 92's and M4's, instead of other "top tier" custom, mission specific equipment.

Sent from my DROIDX
 
Last edited:
Kodiakco said:
Actually "mil-spec" is just the lowest stand the DOD will accept. Ther is nothing "top tier" about it.
It's called the "mil-spec is better than everthing else" myth. Otherwise specops would be using issue 92's and M4's, other "top tier" custom, mission specific equipment.
Click to expand...

The mil-spec details everything from design drawings to materials, to inspection criteria, to performance standards. It is intended to provide a system that meets design standards for a particular use, in this case a reliable infantry combat carbine. To say the contract goes to the lowest bidder is a bit misleading. It goes to the lowest bidder that can meet the mil-spec standard that ensures a proper quality end product. As a taxpayer, that is the way I'd prefer the system to work. ;)

For more info: http://www.biggerhammer.net/ar15/milspec/MIL-C-71186_(AR).pdf

Interestingly, I believe S&W uses 4140 steel (spec is 4150) and my 811000 doesn't have the proper barrel markings for chrome lining (S&W says it is) or magnetic particle inspection. The "CMP" is markings are strangely missing. The bolt does have the "MP" markings denoting a magnaflux inspection. Go figure.
 
VMaxSplat said:
The mil-spec details everything from design drawings to materials, to inspection criteria, to performance standards. It is intended to provide a system that meets design standards for a particular use, in this case a reliable infantry combat carbine. I agree, as I stated, it is the LOWEST standard that the DOD will accept. To say the contract goes to the lowest bidder is a bit misleading. It goes to the lowest bidder that can meet the mil-spec standard that ensures a proper quality end product. You are doing two things. 1. You are attempting to put words in my mouth and 2. at the very least mischaracterizing my statements. As a taxpayer, that is the way I'd prefer the system to work. ;)

For more info: http://www.biggerhammer.net/ar15/milspec/MIL-C-71186_(AR).pdf

Interestingly, I believe S&W uses 4140 steel (spec is 4150) and my 811000 doesn't have the proper barrel markings for chrome lining (S&W says it is) or magnetic particle inspection. The "CMP" is markings are strangely missing. The bolt does have the "MP" markings denoting a magnaflux inspection. Go figure. Now you have gone from Melonite treating to mentioning barrel steel. This has not been mentioned before or is really part of the discussion. If you don't know about it, go find "the chart" it will be your specification wet dream.
Click to expand...
Oh BTW, the link you posted is NOT the whole ball of wax. What you really want is the Technical Data Package (TDP). It's proprietary, so it's unlikely you'll find it anywhere on the internet.

MIL-SPEC = A document that describes the essential technical requirements for purchased materiel that is military unique or substantially modified commercial items. MIL-STD-961 covers the content and format for defense specifications.

AND

However, the proliferation of standards also has some drawbacks. The main one is that they impose what is functionally equivalent to a regulatory burden upon the defense supply chain, both within the military and across its civilian suppliers. Almost nothing can be done according to sound case-by-case judgment, and almost everything requires constant, extensive study of the rules and verification that they are being followed "to a T". Workflows frequently pause (causing snowballing schedule delays) for reasons that are sometimes essentially trivial, and unit costs rise.
 
Last edited:
Kodiakco said:
and almost everything requires constant, extensive study of the rules and verification that they are being followed "to a T".
Click to expand...

Thanks for making this point. That is pretty much what is needed for the production of something as important as an issue combat carbine.
 
Kodiakco said:
Oh darn, I just realized, if only NASA was mil-spec we would NOT have had the Challenger disaster!
Click to expand...



Oh darn, I just realized, that is possibly the dumbest statement I've seen on a web forum in some time.
 
VMaxSplat said:
Thanks for making this point. That is pretty much what is needed for the production of something as important as an issue combat carbine.
Click to expand...
Your very welcome, just trying to help. It's to bad that out of all that I have expressed to you that that is the ONLY piece of information you have gleaned from it... :(

VMaxSplat said:
Oh darn, I just realized, that is possibly the dumbest statement I've seen on a web forum in some time.
Click to expand...
Really no more ignorant that your postings on "mil-spec". I believe that is termed the pot calling the kettle black. :D I take it you have no concepts of analogies or abstract examples.
 
Kodiakco said:
Really no more ignorant that your postings on "mil-spec". I believe that is termed the pot calling the kettle black. :D I take it you have no concepts of analogies or abstract examples.
Click to expand...

Yeah, your statement really was ignorant since it was: A/ totally out of context for the topic at hand, B/ chrome lining really is the spec for military rifle barrels.

You've earned you a spot on my ignore list. Time spent arguing with people like you is a waste of time. Adios.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

serger
Which M&P15's had Picitinny rail fwd gas Block and untreaded barrels?
Replies
2
Views
1K
JRD
J
B
Iron sights and LVPO
Replies
10
Views
946
DETROIT
D
stringpicker
Added optics and dialed them in...
Replies
4
Views
741
stringpicker
stringpicker
R
Generic AR 15 question. Handguards and barrel nuts
Replies
5
Views
1K
cd228
C
B
Gen I M&P15, 300 aac and OPTICS.
Replies
5
Views
544
Echo40
Echo40

Latest posts

Back
Top