Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

voodoo low mass bcg


sheepdog566

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I have not tried the Voodoo, but TK told me the contact surface area is more than mil-spec. If you can get that confirmed and it is sufficient, then it would be worth a try. The RCA is not even okay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which surface are you referring to Mark? The sides, or where is touches the channel? Thanks in advance .

Yes, basically the rails. The JP and Young's have increased the area of the rails that contact the receiver. There is more to a properly designed low mass carrier than just reducing the weight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not tried the Voodoo, but TK told me the contact surface area is more than mil-spec. If you can get that confirmed and it is sufficient, then it would be worth a try. The RCA is not even okay.

I'm also looking a the Voodoo BCG. Can you explain why a lightened carrier group would need more bearing surface than a standard weight carrier? I've seen you mention this a couple times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

F=ma

The less slop between carrier and receiver, the less important. But low mass systems do have a higher velocity, even when tuned at the edge, than full mass carriers. I have seen several trashed upper receivers using both "produced" and home-made lightened carriers that were not sufficient for the task.

When we increase the HP on vehicles, why do we also upgrade the brakes? Same principle, and yes, we are racing, not motoring down the freeway.

I am really not trying to be a jerk, but some of these systems should actually be modeled and evaluated using FEA, FMEA techniques that, frankly, are being ignored by a lot of companies. When 50Kpsi+ is running the system under your jaw and in front of your face, don't cut corners!

Edited by MarkCO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

F=ma

The less slop between carrier and receiver, the less important. But low mass systems do have a higher velocity, even when tuned at the edge, than full mass carriers. I have seen several trashed upper receivers using both "produced" and home-made lightened carriers that were not sufficient for the task.

When we increase the HP on vehicles, why do we also upgrade the brakes? Same principle, and yes, we are racing, not motoring down the freeway.

I am really not trying to be a jerk, but some of these systems should actually be modeled and evaluated using FEA, FMEA techniques that, frankly, are being ignored by a lot of companies. When 50Kpsi+ is running the system under your jaw and in front of your face, don't cut corners!

The last sentence says a lot! Do they widen the surface area? I have not had a chance to look at one. Edited by bmiller
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone have any experience with the voodoo low mass bcg. Priced at 130.00 its a steal.

So far, so good, only a little over 300 rounds (xm193f), but with no hiccups (AA COR rifle)

Edited by rc2125
Link to comment
Share on other sites

F=ma

The less slop between carrier and receiver, the less important. But low mass systems do have a higher velocity, even when tuned at the edge, than full mass carriers. I have seen several trashed upper receivers using both "produced" and home-made lightened carriers that were not sufficient for the task.

When we increase the HP on vehicles, why do we also upgrade the brakes? Same principle, and yes, we are racing, not motoring down the freeway.

I am really not trying to be a jerk, but some of these systems should actually be modeled and evaluated using FEA, FMEA techniques that, frankly, are being ignored by a lot of companies. When 50Kpsi+ is running the system under your jaw and in front of your face, don't cut corners!

I'm not trying to be a physics nazi, but I don't think F=ma applies here.

There is a general correlation with inertia, but complex systems don't follow mathematically at all.

Newton's first applies only to systems with constant acceleration, which can be visualized as something like a mass falling under gravity in a vacuum or gravity in space between masses.

F=ma might loosely apply for the tiny interval that the gas key is attached to the gas tube, but even then there is already the forward force of the buffer spring against the rearward moving carrier, and the expanding force of the gas is not linear.

Ignoring the spring aspect, the carrier key interface is akin to a bullet accelerating down a barrel. The instant the key is separated from the tube the forward acceleration is zero, just as a bullet's forward acceleration is zero the instant it clears the crown of a barrel.

If you ignored the gas aspect, buffer spring force increases proportionally with it's displacement, so the force against the carrier on it's rearward path is increasing with path distance. It is not constant, so the negative acceleration (deceleration) of the BCG is not constant.

Ignoring neither, the HP/brakes analogy is somewhat misguiding.

Increasing a car's HP would be akin to increasing gas volume/temperature/pressure, and the "brakes" could be the buffer spring rate, (though even then the mathematics of braking forces are not cleanly analogous to spring force).

Lightening the bcg may increase velocity for a given gas volume for a variety of reasons, but F=ma may be an inaccurate explanation as to why the effect is achieved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not tried the Voodoo, but TK told me the contact surface area is more than mil-spec. If you can get that confirmed and it is sufficient, then it would be worth a try. The RCA is not even okay.

Don't say that !!! Do you know how much i love the idea of the adjustable gas being on the BCG rather then the F'N gas block. You're playing with my emotions. Me and Tim Ubl have been talking for so long about how we'd lighten the recoil systems in ARs . One i'm building right now actually. He didn't have a particular gripe with the RCA low mass .

Enlighten me , both of you are two of my favorite engineers and shooters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just ordered one to finish up my first dedicated 3 gun rifle. Should be here tomorrow. Hopefully, I'll get to shoot it some this weekend to get the adjustable gas set and zero the scope, so I'll post feedback next week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I checked out TK's rifle last month at a match, and shot Tim's rifle (also with AA) with the low mass carrier in it last Sunday. They both have tons of rounds through them. I am actually considering an AA rifle length piston conversion for my rifle now. I like the Jet Comp they have to, just don't like ROing someone with it. Concussion on it is as bad as my SJC Titan, but it's effective. There shop is right down the road from me and we shoot a lot of the same local 3gun matches together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was going to order one but it looks like dsgarms is out of stock.

They don't have the complete BCGs in stock, but they have all the parts in stock. I ordered the carrier, bolt, cam pin and firing pin all separately. It's probably a little more expensive that way, but I wanted to get it in time to shoot the gun this weekend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...