Bolts Potentially Blowing Up All Over The Place!

I should go over there, and tell everyone how I put my M1 together.

A big Jet lathe.

A big enough wrench to fit the front of the receiver.

Two small bubble levels, to make sure the front sight base was square with the rear sight base.

An old green can of graphite grease.




I'm thinking I'd probably be crucified over there.:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timshufflin

http://m14forum.com/m14/100539-usgi-bolt-cracked.html

Here we have a USGI bolt that was lapped in on an M14, guess what, it was inspected before install and had no cracks. Guess what else, the bolt started cracking. Trying to blame a cracked bolt or a bolt that fails because you loaded bullseye into your reloads on lack of bolt lapping is inaccurate. If you lap your bolt, your bolt can still crack. If you don't lap your bolt, your bolt can still crack.

A couple more "kickers", the bolt was "inspected" by a fellow named "ripsaw", ripsaw is "M14", the OP of the bolt thread. Guess what else? according to the military manual you can shoot M14's with cracked bolts up to certain standards. This thread at the M14 forum also points out the ultimate danger of lapping bolts, sooner or later the cased hardness on either your bolt, Garand, or both will be gone. This isn't a big deal if you know you're starting out with a new in wrap USGI bolt but it might be a big deal for the next guy.

Oh, and did you know that the military allowed for cracks in the bolt lugs on M14's? I would think some lug offset would be far less dangerous, read not at all, then a cracked lug which the military allowed.

The Depot Overhaul Manual allows cracks in the bolt lugs up to 1/32" in depth along the maximum length of the lug from top to bottom of both lugs to be acceptable and servicable. This is at the point where the lug meets the body of the bolt.

---

Tim,...

I stole your link, and used it to demonstrate why bolt lapping may not be wise. Hope that is not something you will take offense to.

If M14, RT40, Amsdorf and Rokjoh were in a room....:)

This guy cannot be married, or have ever purchased anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M14

Thanks Orest. But that doesn't tell me much. It doesn't tell me who is doing it, and if they are qualified or certified, or if they are volunteers that were trained to do these tasks and began doing it. It doesn't answer the question of QC inspections afterwards from these workers. All I am asking, is how did these receivers get past all the old DCM regs. if they are followed so closely ?
Secondly, as you can see from all the hater posters in this thread, they all think they are Orest, they all sling mud in any direction they can to get away from the original questions and issues. I am not asking any of them questions, or answering any of theirs. My qualifications and certifications have nothing at all to do with the CMP's standard operating procedures. You would think that all these vehement posters would want total accountability for such an organization as the CMP. After all, it was our tax dollars that built and supported the entire operation from the word go with the DCM. And, all our tax dollars and hard work that bought and paid for every last single M1 in existence. Never mind we have to pay for them again when buying them from the CMP, they should be issued for free with lifetime armorer service at no charge, if we were talking fairness here. But I understand all that, life is not fair. I was just hoping for a fair shake from someone here at the CMP, since they have done so well from all our support. Without us, the public, there would be no CMP.

My questions come from the standpoint of a potential consumer of your goods and services, and I think I have every right to ask these questions, and more. You also have the right to deny to answer any of them. Inaction speaks as loud as action in many instances. The questions I asked are simple questions, and shouldn't take too long to answer in full. Maybe you could delegate the job to someone else there, who has time and access to the procedures and would take the time to answer some valid customer questions.

For your information, this all started because of me posting a notice thread for builders, and a safety announcement to try and help others out that are under the wrong impression about M1's standards and lug placements, it was not a mud slinging intent against the CMP, facts only. Here is what Gus Fisher had to say about the M1 and M14 receivers, and the main reason I posted all this to begin with. Please read my thread if you really want to know what is going on, and what the real issues are.

"Further, if a receiver was worn enough in the bolt lug area that they needed a longer bolt to get headspace, they scrapped the receiver."

"Now, M1 Garand bolts were made in different lengths over the years, but not M14 bolts to my knowledge."

"(It is correct we never worried about lapping bolts into real M1 or M14 receivers for NM rifles because they were held to such tight tolerances they did not need to be lapped.) And yet over the years on SAinc NM rifles, and especially NM rifles built by Glenn Nelson and his shop for SAinc. the bolt lugs fit the receiver lugs very well."

My contention, in response to the Master in this field of study, is that the examples I am seeing from the CMP, do not fit well, and furthermore, have no contact at all on the left lug in several cases. Now one of two things is happening here, either Gus and Glenn are full of BS, which I seriously doubt, or the receivers coming out of the CMP are not checked closely enough, or not at all, and are getting by the inspection processes you quoted. Which is it?

Here's the thread that let all the haters out of the closet.
http://forums.thecmp.org/showthread.php?t=86716

Here are the questions again:

Are the receivers checked with an ordnance receiver gage, and the bolt lug contact on builds, checked by lapping or other means ?

Can you post pictures for the members here, of the ordnance gages used for this procedure ?

When the CMP does these builds for sale, who builds them ?

Are the builders certified military or ex-military armorers ?

Are the gages used, if any, calibrated regularly ?

If checked and gaged, what happens to the ones that fail inspection ?

When a receiver locking lug or bridge is mislocated or worn out, and does not pass the inspection, where does it end up ?

If they were gaged, how did they get past any existing quality control, if any, to end up in the hands of a civilian ?

Does the CMP have any verifiable data on the percentile of inspection failures of M1 receivers, intended for sale, and the cause of those inspection failures.

---

Is this guy for real? He's interrogating Orest now. It seems to me the only one looking for the answers to these questions is him. No one else seems to be concerned or care for that matter. So what now is he after somekind of mass coverup on bolt safety. What a tool.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luvmym1 13

Is this guy for real? He's interrogating Orest now. It seems to me the only one looking for the answers to these questions is him. No one else seems to be concerned or care for that matter. So what now is he after somekind of mass coverup on bolt safety. What a tool.

---

I don't think he'll get far with all the, these rifles should be free talk. He should just ask his questions off line, or better yet....do the FOIA request on DCM rifle inspection procedures.

There are not too many businesses or non-profits that will just give you their operations manuals. Especially if you claim to be a rifle builder, it may be a conflict of interest. Not exactly intellectual property, but you know what I'm getting at.

I could care less Roadkingtracks if you posted that link. By the way, I just noticed someone said that a crack was acceptable if it was only .012" That's a lot less then what the person said the manual allowed and that would go clear through the surface hardening.

What the lappers are not taking into account;
You get a gun and lap your bolt
You sell the gun as complete or as a kit
Next guy swaps the bolt into another rifle and he laps
...
...
How long till you have lugs which are .020 lapped?

These guys are eating up bolts at some crazy rates. I saw one guy on that thread I posted where he said he only used NIW USGI bolts so that he got one where he knew nobody had ever lapped it!

What is next guys, are people supposed to have the bolts punch marked everytime they lap them so that people know? This is just getting nuts. Where does safety end? Sometimes, I really do dislike some people.

Oh, one more thing, I would MUCH rather fire a bolt that has one lug set back then fire a gun having a bolt which has been lapped .010" or more. Do you all know how fast headspace grows in such a bolt? You can grow .001" in just a hundred rounds once you go through the case. Now who's being safe.

The guy, M14 is a real piece of work for sure. If there is justice, someone will have their dog dump a pile of steaming excrement on his head. Oh yeah, and take a picture and post it on the CMP site........OK, we can always hope, right?

This aerospace top dog engineer started this crap over on CSP monday.
He did'nt get enough bites so he moved it to CMP....

http://www.jouster.com/forums/showth...Lugs-and-Myths


I feel so much safer now knowing what to look for when I build an M1. I guess I'll have to recall all the ones I've sold over the last 20 years, and deadline all the ones I still have. Yep, I do feel so much safer now.

I'm appalled at the lack of compassion for this poor soul,,he is probably a nice guy when he's actually taking his meds

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by deputy85

I'm appalled at the lack of compassion for this poor soul,,he is probably a nice guy when he's actually taking his meds

---

I have plenty of compassion for him. He's a man on a mission, a mission to save us all from ultimately blowing ourselves up. He saved my ass. I don't know how I survived all these past years of shooting such dangerous defective devices. He is our saviour. I kneel before thee.