My first post here too! Been reading a bit on the subject, and finally had a chance to get to the range. Got about 1000 rounds thru a Commando, serial # js0118XX. No little tit on the trunion and no bolt carrier damage. Shoots great, accurate with 55gr or 62gr rounds.

Same problem here...

JS 0302XX, made 23MAR09

I'm in the Army and just got my 556 back, only had about 50-100 rounds through it, a nice chip right on the lip/ridge/edge, like so many others pics I've seen on here. Frustrating.

I'll get a pic up soon

got my classic last week and found this thread. so before i fired it i took a file and emery cloth to the sharo edge of the bolt carrier. removed about 0.010" of the pointed edge. fired 30rds & found a small dent in middle of filed area. removed another 0.005" from same area. fired 50rds & checked again; found small scratch. removed same with 400grit paper. and expect no further trace of contact. hope this helps.

Is this same wear occurring on any 556 pistols?

I'd like to add my weapon to the list of those with no damage. I've runn apprx 2500-3000 rounds through mine, and there is just a light buff on the horiz edge. If I had not seen these very good pics, I would not even have noticed it. After my last range sessions (no cleaning), there was a decent coat of poweder residue indicating that this is probably as bad as it is going to get.

Shoot lots, shoot safe

Doc

One last item to add to this string - my s/n is JS0103xx

Doc

fired another 65rds for of total about150. showing no further wear.

Good afternoon.

My SIG 556 DMR doesn't have any rounds through it yet (except, perhaps, whatever Sig fired through it for testing.) The date-of-manufacture for my DMR is 22 July 2009.

Here are pictures of the bolt carrier and breech:


Figure 1: Bolt carrier macro of the affected region for peening.

There doesn't seem to be much wear to the bolt carrier. At least this photograph provides a baseline against which future comparisons can be made after the DMR has seen some action.



Figure 2: First breech interior macro depicting protruding metal, which may be contributing to peening of the bolt carrier.



Figure 3: Second breech interior macro depicting protruding metal, which may be contributing to peening of the bolt carrier.
NOTE: 90° rotation of perspective from Figure 2!

I'm not sure whether the protruding metal in this photograph would be considered with the hump or without the hump. I'll leave it for the reader to decide based on the original poster's definition.



Figure 4: My SIG 556 DMR serial number.

In case anyone is still tracking the serial numbers, here's mine.

My question is why doesn't a rep from Sig come on line and explain this situation? This post is old and there are many questions being presented here!

I love my 556 Classic and called Sig about the bolt issue. They sounded dumb about the issue and didn't even know what I was talking about with the denting on the carrier and bulg or dimple in the receiver.

I just wonder why they don't come on board and settle this issue once and for all?

My Sig 556 Classic is fine and shows some bolt wear although it shoots fine. Grouping would be like others at 13 inches at 100 yards with a Eotech. I don't think these examples are capable of MOE at 100 yards but also don't think many combat style rifles are.

I like my Sig and am planning to get the 22 model for more fun with cheap ammo. I like the Sig line instead of the AR line.

I just wonder why Sig doesn't consider this popular web site?

Add me to the list. Probably 500-600 Rds, classic

JS0330XX

My scm has a very slight ding on the carrier but no hump on the trunion . I'm not going to lose sleep over it . It shoots great and if a shtf scenario happens my 556 will be My primary weapon . Oh , serial # is JS 28xxx born in Feb 09

I'm new to this forum and this is my first post. I purchased my 556 classic back in August and have only fired it once in October.
I'm not sure when my Sig was born, but it appears to have a serial # which fits in with the rest of the bad apples: JS 0275XX. I've hand cycled it plenty and put about 60 rounds into it and was experiencing lots of jamming where the carrier/bolt would get hung up and not completely close when cycling in the next round. Even when hand cycling it, the carrier does not travel as smoothly as I would expect, as it is well lubricated. When I have the upper receiver detached from the lower it seems to cycle much more smoothly. Is this something that others with this carrier issue experienced?

When I was firing it, I was just plinking and did not test for accuracy. I have not fired it since then, but plan to get out to the range tomorrow. Upon seeing this thread I checked my carrier and noticed some minor wear in the aforementioned location on the carrier (see pics below). Also, the pictures I took didn't turn out very good, but it looks like I have the hump that everyone was talking about, as well. What should I do? It sounds like Sig isn't being very helpful.

I too am wondering why Sig doesn't just open this discussion up and explain whats going on.

I called them about bolt carrier wear and the Tech was like he had never heard of this situation.

The reason I'm not calling it a problem is I'm not sure if the carrier wear is causing problems. Mine cycles well and shoots reliably. Accuracy is typical for many rifles of this design lately in the 5 inch range at 100 yards.

Kinda like a Ruger Mini.

I like the overall rifle and am even thinking of getting a 522. They seem well build and I'm thinking at 100 yards may group better than the 556.

It amazes me that all the lack of quality SIG trashing going on folks in management and sales at SIG do not respond to us simple ignorant consumers of their products.

Feeling invincible and not responding to the people will bury them!

Maybe they are looking for the Obama administration to bail them out!

What you guys have to realize, is that you are worrying and complaining over nothing. This is the reason SIG is not taking the problem seriously. It's because they feel it is NOT a problem. As far as causing accuracy issues, I do not believe that is possible either, regardless of what was posted here.

This is a normal wear and tear issue for this particular weapon. I have never seen a weapon system nitpicked like I have the SIG 556 series.

No offense to anyone, but this is my opinion on the matter, and the opinion of most 556 owners, to include SIG themselves. A small minority complaining about a tiny wear mark on the bolt carrier that in no way shape or form effects function will never be taken seriously by SIG.

As far as accuracy....3-4 inches at 100M is AWESOME for a combat rifle. Even 4-5 inches is acceptable. I crack up when I hear people complain about their 3-4 inch 100M groups out of a combat rifle.

Yes, but what grabs my ass is those in the community/forum that insist that theirs will shoot 1 MOA and less.

Any of these piston guns are like the AK. They do the job but arn't going to be found at Camp Perry in competition at 500 yards doing anything!

These makers want you to think you are buying a sniper/competitive carbine capable of sub MOA at 100 yards.

If you want MOA buy a accurized M1A, most 308"s of many bolt action rifles, any Kimber, Browning T-bolt and others.

My $1700 purchase of a piston driven LWRC was my worst experience for a lousy shooting rifle. It couldn't hold 10 inch paper at 100 yards. There was no such thing as a group.

I sent it back 3 times and they never got it right! Ended up selling it on Gb as a great gun designed for what it was for. Combat shooting meaning 5 plus inches at 100 yards. The company never disagreed with me although they have banned me from their site!

They will never reveal a real accuracy contest in their ad's. Their guns are are simply not accurate as many other makes of these Ar types so beware!

I agree with everything you said, very well put. And as you mentioned...if one wants the super great accuracy, then they should stick with the AR platform, but they must keep in mind they will give up a certain degree of reliability that the SIG 556 provides with it's AK like action.

There are a great deal of whiners when it comes to this great rifle, and it turns my stomach. I think these people should have kept there rifle NIB and unfired so it will not exhibit any wear.

Well said.

With good ammo (77 grain BTHP) and a good optic on a bench or sandbag, you will get close to or dead on MOA with the 556. I've seen too many do it to dispute it even as a generality. I've even seen 55 grain FMJ deliver MOA at 100 yards. Mine doesn't, but that's because I'm not a sub MOA shooter. I've seen acceptable grouping at 100, 200 and 300 yards from several 556's, with and without magnification. Like someone said, it won't be winning any awards at 500m for super accuracy, but that's not what it was designed for. Hitting what it was designed to hit, up to 300m is what it was designed for, and it will do that very well.

Theres no mark on my carrier,

its an early model JS0017xx. My brother and I have fired 1500-2000 rounds through it. I don't know the manufacturing date because the sticker on the case was rubbed off...

#JS-0178XX..... 2,000+ rounds (Honestly, I lost count after 2,500 rounds) and absolutely no problems with anything!

Mine was doing that wear stuff that everyone is dreading, so I simply ground it down and rechecked it. It is not doing it now. I have no further problem with that condition. My suggestion for those of you who have this problem and are concerned about it is to either sell the weapon or grind it down a bit, and shoot it.

If it were a significant or major product reliability issue, I think SIG would do something about it before a weapon blows up or falls apart and they get sued.

New to the forum, and thanks to whoever put it up!

I just purchased a 556 CLASSIC used from a local ad, the guy I bought it from claimed he only shot about 50 rounds through it, I added around 50 of my own, and countless manual cycles with no wear on the carrier.
Serial # JT0055XX

I have at least 2,000 rounds, probably closer to 3,000 through my 556.

SN: JS 005XXX

No wear to the bolt carrier.

Ok guys I am brand new to the forum and to the 556 but not to firearms. I am asking these questions because I truly dont understand why some of the issues are being brought up so please do not jump on my throat first thing.
I have ordered the Sig because I could not get the gas piston gun that I ordered so I got a great deal on a Sig Classic instead. I could have gotten anything I wanted and chose this rifle to try. The rifle has the diopter sights which I like from my MP5 days, they seem similar, and also got a couple of the Sig mags just to couple together and play with along with a bunch of P Mags.
I will tell you now have never seen one, held one, or shot one and will not see this one for a few more months but have read every article and post that I could find and it is worse than a roller coaster ride in Jersey during winter.What is going on with these rifles? Ok some of my questions.
Hand cycling the action 1-300 times before firing? The first 500 rounds fired out of a semi auto anything is the break in period. Unless a malfunction occurs over and over again it is not even counted until the weapon is broken in.
I do not understand questions of the marks on the bolt carrier, if that is the right term, is it not normal wear? If it is causing malfunctions then Sig should fix it as it would be a manufacturing problem but I agree they have dismissed it so shoot on.
I understand that everyone wants to upgrade there weapons with different stuff but, IMO only, some of the complaints are getting weird. Replacing the front sight it was tight, I forced it and it broke now the company wont fix it. Yeah and...... this is obviously a rifle that was intended to use optics and Sigs attempt at offering them is low budget option to say the least. Shoot it first with what is on it then make upgrades or changes as needed. My rifle is coming with the Sig diopter sights and it is to big/high will get taller mounts, or platform for a EOtech.
Anyways I have to agree with something said earlier that I have never seen anything picked apart as much as this rifle has been. I do not know who Ullie is but hats off to you brother you have answered every question known to man about stuff that had me scratching my head, you have the patience of a monk please keep on going. Again not trying to offend anyone just dont know about these rifles. If mine doesnt work it gets sold and get something else but until then when I get home will shoot it until it breaks.

Here's the wear on my bolt carrier. I have about 800 rounds through the rifle. I've never put the rifle on a rest to see what kind of groups it shoots at 100 yards, but for all practical purposes, this rifle is accurate enough for me. I would consider the little bit of wear on my bolt carrier normal wear. I probably wouldn't have even noticed it if it weren't for this thread directin' my attention to that specific little area. Serial # is JT 0059XX

New to the forum - serial JS0351XX Classic SWAT.

I've only put a few hundred rds through it.

My carrier is not showing any wear on the trouble spot.

My trunion does have the "hump" as shown.

The hump does not show any wear either.

Once I find the cash for a 3X magnifier for the EOTech I'll do a good bench test of accuracy at 100 yds.

ser # 228xx

Sorry I'm late to report. I have 800 rds thru mine. I have the hump and some minor wear.

Larrh

You are entitled to your opinion, but these are the facts: some users report no carrier wear and sub 3-inch groups. Other users report various degrees of wear and can't break 4-inch groups. I can shoot 3 inch groups with my well-used S&W M&P all day long, but I can't break 5 inches with my 556 (w/ carrier wear) no matter how hard I try. I think there is more to this issue than you think. I'm just saying.

I am thinking about buying a SIG 556. All the ones in my neighborhood have serial numbers in the JT range. Are these good to go? I have seen a few guys post that they have no wear, but I am still hesitant. Has SIG got these problems ironed out yet? Thanks for your time.

I think a lot of folks are panicking about accuracy issues when the accuracy of the firearm is not the problem. Even a good shooter from a bench is not going to shoot their 556 as well as the AR they have been shooting for years or some bolt gun they are familiar with. I believe some of the people expressing concerns over accuracy after getting a new 556 with an unfamiliar trigger and not enough trigger time with it to be as accurate as they would like. I know some people will be ready to lash out at me for saying that, and that's fine, but speaking as a guy who shoots only a few times a month, I can admit that theres always room for improvement. Unless you have serious problems with wear or malfunctioning, the 2-3 MOA guns are probably not the gun IMHO. I think this is a bandwagon issue now more than a QC issue.

I wrote to Ron Cohen about the folding stock hinge pin on my 2 different Sig 556's falling out and he never answered my letter. I then called and spoke with Diana when the first Sig had the pin fall out due to faulty machining of the recess in the pin where a clip goes into the pin to hold it in place. She said she never heard of this problem before when I knew several other members at Sigforums.com had the same problem and also returned their Sig"s to the factory. When the second Sig 556 of mine had the same problem I called and spoke to Diana again and when I told her I was having the same problem with another Sig 556 she made it sound like I was doing something wrong. She still never heard of any problems with this happening with any other Sig. She is the head of QC (?) and never heard of this?? When several other Sigforum members contacted Sig about the same problem??
I think Sig is too busy to care about their customers (business is going very well for them) and also they feel their customers do not know what they are talking about. I will never buy another Sig product, especially now that they are starting to use cheap MIM parts in their pistols. Sig's motto, "to hell and back" has taken on a new meaning to me, it now means their customers have to go "to hell and back" to have decent customer service, to even have a letter responded to.