It is currently Wed Apr 23, 2014 11:55 am
Post a new topicPost a reply Page 1 of 14   [ 392 posts ]
Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 14  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Check your 556 for wear/damage to the carrier
PostPosted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 8:54 am 

Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:18 am
Posts: 211
So far, 35 members on here have discovered that the carrier in their newer build 556 rifle is hitting the receiver causing damage to the carrier. Please check to see if your rifle has the same issues so we can try to identify a problem batch.

This interference may be causing accuracy issues since it causes the carrier to bind just before coming all the way forward. But more importantly is that there is a defect causing damage that could compromise the longevity of a critical part that sees high stresses. I personally would like my 556 rifle to last me a long time, and I'm sure others here would as well.

Serial numbers with known carrier-to-receiver interference:

JS0228XX: Aaron (200 rounds) [mild]
JS023XXX: cufan99 (15 rounds) [mild]
JS0235XX: abrams_34 (800 rounds) [mild]
JS024XXX: dd0s (200 rounds) [moderate]
JS025XXX: bluecollarkid (300 rounds) [mild]
JS0250XX: fun2shoot (800-1000 rounds) [severe]
JS02500X: cheney (800 rounds) [moderate]
JS0255XX: jjksutton (120 rounds) [mild]
JS0259XX: tibim (800 rounds) [moderate]
JS0261XX: 762nato (50 rounds) [moderate]
JS0261XX: paxbnm (90 rounds) [mild]
JS0266XX: Parsley Charlie (200+ rounds) [mild]
JS0267XX: TwiztidKlownzTX (200 rounds) [mild]
JS027XXX: SigOhio (750-800 rounds) [severe]
JS0272XX: aaks38 (350 rounds) [severe]
JS0273XX: KB (cycled manually) [mild]
JS0277XX: 2Loud4You (200+ rounds) [mild]
JS028XXX: rioaguanegra (190 rounds) [mild]
JS028XXX: kylerudibaugh [mild]
JS0286XX: tangodown (hand cycled) [mild]
JS02963X: Mastoo (100 rounds) [moderate]
JS0300XX: Draco556 (1200 rounds) [mild]
JS0307XX: coffey (500 rounds) [Mild]
JS0309XX: hattaresguy (450 rounds) [mild]
JS0313XX: Sapper326 (360 rounds) [moderate]
JS0319XX: San Francisco SIG guy (600 rounds) [minor]
JS0320XX: TexRN (700 rounds) [Moderate]
JS032XXX: bravo5two (400 rounds) [moderate]
JS0332XX: anubismp (~700 rounds) [moderate]
JS034XXX: haiedras (125 rounds [mild]
JS0352XX: mlando (300 rounds) [Mild]
JS0378XX: bubbacop (200 rounds) [mild]
JT0004XX: Sam_SIG (200 rounds) [mild]
JT0012XX: bolt carrier (100 rounds) [moderate]
TP001XXX: EvilBlackGun (65 rounds) [mild]


Below is a list of serial numbers with NO wear or marking on their carrier at all, even though some have a quite high round count. Some have also indicated their upper receiver does not have the “humpâ€


Last edited by SigOhio on Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:58 am, edited 33 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 9:42 am 

Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 5:35 pm
Posts: 256
You should also post a picture where it grinds against in the upper receiver. I remember seeing it in an earlier thread.

_________________
I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it.

Colonel Jessup (Jack Nicholson) in "A Few Good Men"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 9:51 am 

Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:18 am
Posts: 211
Longrifle wrote:
You should also post a picture where it grinds against in the upper receiver. I remember seeing it in an earlier thread.


Good idea, edited my original post. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 10:02 am 

Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 5:35 pm
Posts: 256
I have a similar "hump" in my upper receiver, though not as high and don't have any grind marks. There is definitely machining quality control issue there. Mine is JS 0181XX (July 2008). The 3 SNs you posted are pretty close together, and like you said, may be a batch problem.

_________________
I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it.

Colonel Jessup (Jack Nicholson) in "A Few Good Men"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 11:45 am 

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 12:42 am
Posts: 50
Location: Maine
My Classic has those same wear marks on both the upper and the bolt carrier. My SN is JS0313XX made 4/22/2009. I really did not even notice it until reading this thread. I will try and get some pics but it looks very similar to the pics up above.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 12:05 pm 

Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:18 am
Posts: 211
Updated the list in the first post. If you have this issue could you also comment to how many rounds you have fired, and how your accuracy is?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 12:28 pm 

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 12:42 am
Posts: 50
Location: Maine
I have put roughly 360 rounds through the rifle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Accuracy not what I expected from my 556.
PostPosted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 5:16 pm 

Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 12:23 pm
Posts: 70
Location: Central Texas
JS0250XX I have it as well. About 800-1000 rounds through my Classic.
Any word on Sig about this issue? I do not like the idea of the Sig smiths "quick fix" one bit.

_________________
Glock 20
Sig 556 Classic


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Check Your 556 for wear/damage to carrier
PostPosted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 5:55 pm 

Joined: Sun May 31, 2009 9:17 am
Posts: 620
Location: St. Louis
I checked my two sigs compared carriers,commando-jso134xx-April 2008,its fine 400rds later,but the classic,JSO261XX-JAN.2009,50rds.fired.I can see where It's also starting to wear right on the corner just like yours.I need to shoot it more to see if it gets worse.But my commando does'nt have the slightest wear in those area's with eight times the ammo fired so far.Maybe your on to something here,My commando carrier is shaped alittle slimmer where they did the grinding on your carrier the radius is a little different,that's really hokey in my opinion how they did the grinding to cut corners .If any of you guys have access to different models,old/new,could you please compare the carriers to see if theres any difference in width/thickness,ect.Thank You,


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 6:37 pm 

Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 5:35 pm
Posts: 256
I wonder if this problem is inherent to the new style "classic" lower. None of the older (from last year and older) NATO Stanag style lowers seem to have this issue.

_________________
I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it.

Colonel Jessup (Jack Nicholson) in "A Few Good Men"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Check your 556 for wear/damage to the carrier
PostPosted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 6:59 pm 

Joined: Sun May 31, 2009 9:17 am
Posts: 620
Location: St. Louis
I'm not sure,It could possibly be the upper's out of spec,and or the carrier,but I seem to think the carrier is the culprit.The classic carrier is just alittle different than the commando carrier,less meat,and a little different radius on the carrier.If someone has the insturments to correctly measure these parts,that would tell us more about the different sizes and radiuses/angles of these carriers.You know the old verus's the new. That's maybe why there catching on the corner like they are.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 21, 2009 8:19 pm 

Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 2:08 pm
Posts: 24
I have seen similar stuff in other AK's. I would be more concerned if it were damaging the locking lugs, or the piston.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:24 am 

Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:18 am
Posts: 211
I have updated the original post again. Looks like we are up to 6 members with this issue now and we are seeing a trend with the serial numbers. Early builds seem to be problem free. If you have this damage, please also post a pic of your carrier as well. It will help document what we are finding. No word yet from Sig.

Also, please comment on what sort of accuracy you are getting out of the affected rifle.

Longrifle wrote:
I wonder if this problem is inherent to the new style "classic" lower. None of the older (from last year and older) NATO Stanag style lowers seem to have this issue.


My rifle is an ER with the M4 style buttstock, not a Classic. I can only think of 1 way the lower could affect this, and that is related to the "charging handle bind" threads we have seen here. When the carrier hits the hammer and binds as it is coming forward, that places an upward load on the carrier guide rails in the upper receiver. This could be causing some extra wear on both the carrier and the guide rails, causing a looser fit which leads to this interference. From looking at the bearing surface area of the carrier to guide rail fit, I'm not sure if the guide rails were designed to handle that sort of upward load.

tktm wrote:
I have seen similar stuff in other AK's. I would be more concerned if it were damaging the locking lugs, or the piston.


The affected area is where the piston rod applies loads to the carrier, it is indeed a high stress area and I am concerned over the longevity of the parts with the wear seen. If replacing the carrier with a new off-the-shelf part just starts this problem all over again, then I see that as product defect and an issue for long term reliability. Not too mention that my rifle shoots erratic groups, and that this interference appears to be mostly at fault since the ground off corner changed how the rifle performed.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 8:34 am 

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 12:42 am
Posts: 50
Location: Maine
How much different is the 556 upper from the 550/551 upper? I wounder if this is even an issue or not. I have not seen any adverse effects from the wear as I am still able to maintain 1.5" groups at 100 yrds (which is what I would expect from such a weapons platform). This could be normal wear that takes place with this type of a platform. Unfortunately I don't think there is many people who own a real 550/551 and shoot them a lot. If there is someone who has access to one maybe they could check to see if they see the wear.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 8:42 am 

Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:18 am
Posts: 211
Sapper326 wrote:
How much different is the 556 upper from the 550/551 upper? I wounder if this is even an issue or not. I have not seen any adverse effects from the wear as I am still able to maintain 1.5" groups at 100 yrds (which is what I would expect from such a weapons platform). This could be normal wear that takes place with this type of a platform. Unfortunately I don't think there is many people who own a real 550/551 and shoot them a lot. If there is someone who has access to one maybe they could check to see if they see the wear.


I'm sure there are varying degrees of severity, as this seems to be related to manufacturing tolerances. If yours doesn't look very severe and you are getting good groups, then yours very well could have essentially worn itself in and is now no longer hitting. If that's the case, then I say just keep shooting it and keep an eye on things. If you could post some pics it would help.

Unfortunately mine appears to be pretty severe because it began hitting again even after having the corner ground off. I would have been very happy if my rifle shot consistant 1.5" 100 yard groups.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:25 am 
Site Mod

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:51 am
Posts: 2251
Location: North Idaho
tktm wrote:
I have seen similar stuff in other AK's. I would be more concerned if it were damaging the locking lugs, or the piston.


...the pictures clearly show that the carrier is contacting the reciever...slamming into it where it "should not" be making contact...with enough force to scar the carrier... in time possibly fatiguing the reciever...which may lead to other issues...this is unacceptable and needs to be addressed by Sig...pretty much a no brainer...

_________________
Image

(\ __ /)
(=' . '=)
(") _ (")


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 5:27 pm 

Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:21 am
Posts: 62
Location: Tampa, FL
I have the same issue...JS0255XX (26 Jan 09)

Only 120 rounds (although I did hand cycle it a few hundred times). I can see a wear mark in the same spot. We'll see if it gets worse. I am going to the range Sunday.

I shot 2" groups at 100 yds with it which is more than good for me. We'll see if it keeps up.

Also, I had some issues with binding for about the first 30 or so rounds then it cleared up. I figured it "fixed" itself once. I don't know if one thing has anything to do with the other though.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 5:39 pm 

Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 2:00 pm
Posts: 421
Location: GA
JS 0277XX Feb 11 '09 birthdate.

I've hand cycled it probably 500+ times and put at least 200 - 300 rounds through it. It has a VERY faint nick there. I barely even saw it, I'll see how it looks after firing more rounds through it.

_________________
NRA Endowment Member
Sig 556 Holo


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 9:55 pm 

Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 2:08 pm
Posts: 24
ullie wrote:
tktm wrote:
I have seen similar stuff in other AK's. I would be more concerned if it were damaging the locking lugs, or the piston.


...the pictures clearly show that the carrier is contacting the reciever...slamming into it where it "should not" be making contact...with enough force to scar the carrier... in time possibly fatiguing the reciever...which may lead to other issues...this is unacceptable and needs to be addressed by Sig...pretty much a no brainer...


what exactly do you expect to stop the forward momentum of the carrier if it is not allowed to impact the receiver? Like I said, this is typical of AK's.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:08 pm 

Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 2:08 pm
Posts: 24
SigOhio wrote:
The affected area is where the piston rod applies loads to the carrier, it is indeed a high stress area and I am concerned over the longevity of the parts with the wear seen.


The piston loads are applied to the bolt carrier at the charging handle. The problem area is forward of that location. I would be more concerned about a potential binding / feeding aspect. As I said, issues like this are common in AK's but I would expect better in a high end AK.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 11:03 pm 

Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 9:22 pm
Posts: 74
ullie wrote:
tktm wrote:
I have seen similar stuff in other AK's. I would be more concerned if it were damaging the locking lugs, or the piston.


...the pictures clearly show that the carrier is contacting the reciever...slamming into it where it "should not" be making contact...with enough force to scar the carrier... in time possibly fatiguing the reciever...which may lead to other issues...this is unacceptable and needs to be addressed by Sig...pretty much a no brainer...


Has anyone actually contacted SIG customer service about this?

what was their response?

thanks


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:29 am 

Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:18 am
Posts: 211
tktm wrote:
Like I said, this is typical of AK's.


While the action may be similar, the Sig 556 is not an AK. 5"+ groups may also be typical of an AK, but that does not mean it is typical performance out of a properly functioning 556.

So far we haven’t seen any serial numbers outside of 25,000-31,300 with this issue. If this were normal wear ALL 556 owners would be seeing the same thing. Several other 556 owners on this site with higher round counts then mine do not have this wear.

tktm wrote:
The piston loads are applied to the bolt carrier at the charging handle.


There are more then just 1 dimensional axial loads applied to the carrier by the piston rod, so your assumption that the area in front of the charging handle is irrelevant and sees no stress is incorrect. Rather then explain how buckling stresses and off-axis loads apply to the system we are looking at, I will just refer you to any basic undergraduate Mechanics of Materials book.

This thread is to document other Sig 556 owners who have seen this problem. If you want to argue what is considered “normalâ€


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 10:34 am 
Site Mod

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:51 am
Posts: 2251
Location: North Idaho
tktm wrote:
ullie wrote:

...the pictures clearly show that the carrier is contacting the reciever...slamming into it where it "should not" be making contact...with enough force to scar the carrier...


what exactly do you expect to stop the forward momentum of the carrier if it is not allowed to impact the receiver? Like I said, this is typical of AK's.


...tktm

...i guess you missed this part...

..."slamming into it where it "should not" be making contact"


[quote="SigOhio"]This thread is to document other Sig 556 owners who have seen this problem. If you want to argue what is considered “normalâ€

_________________
Image

(\ __ /)
(=' . '=)
(") _ (")


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 11:19 am 

Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 4:28 pm
Posts: 186
Location: SE Texas
Just checked mine. No damage.

JS 0188XX

Hope this helps.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 11:21 am 

Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 1:42 pm
Posts: 71
Location: Eugene, Oregon
I have a non-classic SWAT model with serial number JS027320. I have yet to fire the weapon but have done the initial cleaning and manual cycling and my bolt carrier is showing wear in this spot.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 11:36 am 

Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:18 am
Posts: 211
a80ndrn8 wrote:
Just checked mine. No damage.

JS 0188XX

Hope this helps.


It does, thanks!


KB wrote:
I have a non-classic SWAT model with serial number JS027320. I have yet to fire the weapon but have done the initial cleaning and manual cycling and my bolt carrier is showing wear in this spot.


Added you to the list.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 12:32 pm 

Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 8:10 pm
Posts: 93
Location: Central Florida
2Loud4You wrote:
JS 0277XX Feb 11 '09 birthdate.

I've hand cycled it probably 500+ times and put at least 200 - 300 rounds through it. It has a VERY faint nick there. I barely even saw it, I'll see how it looks after firing more rounds through it.


'Bout the same round count, birthday (13th JS0266XX), and result. The only thing I can see is a VERY minute bit of wear. Completely smooth though.

_________________
"When the clear tip of the front sight post is half way up and centered between the rear sight aperture".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:58 pm 
Site Mod

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:51 am
Posts: 2251
Location: North Idaho
...SigOhio

...SN JS0034XX...no scaring or marks of any kind

...SN JS0061XX...no scaring or marks of any kind

...both shoot ~ 1MOA with the heavier stuff...and i'm not the best shot anymore... :cry:

_________________
Image

(\ __ /)
(=' . '=)
(") _ (")


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 2:24 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:39 am
Posts: 136
Location: Under your bed
Parsley Charlie wrote:
2Loud4You wrote:
JS 0277XX Feb 11 '09 birthdate.

I've hand cycled it probably 500+ times and put at least 200 - 300 rounds through it. It has a VERY faint nick there. I barely even saw it, I'll see how it looks after firing more rounds through it.


'Bout the same round count, birthday (13th JS0266XX), and result. The only thing I can see is a VERY minute bit of wear. Completely smooth though.



Same here.
Rifle has been cycled several hundred times by hand and has 200 rounds through it. Very, very faint wear and completely smooth.
Non-classic SWAT Birthday 02/07/09 JS0267XX

_________________
If guns kill people then I can blame misspelled words on my pencil. -Larry the Cable Guy


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2009 2:40 pm 

Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:18 am
Posts: 211
ullie wrote:
...SigOhio

...SN JS0034XX...no scaring or marks of any kind

...SN JS0061XX...no scaring or marks of any kind

...both shoot ~ 1MOA with the heavier stuff...and i'm not the best shot anymore... :cry:


Can I buy one? :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post a new topicPost a reply Page 1 of 14   [ 392 posts ]
Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 14  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dr751, yj4x4 and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: