Hodge Defense Systems.
- Thread starter jim hodge
- Start date
Unobtanium
Regular Member
Is there a difference in the thickness or rockwell hardness or resistance to chipping/abrasion of the anodize layer of AlLi and 7075?
jim hodge
Newbie
I see a small difference between the two, the surface scratches a little more in the way of the anodizing. Its not going into the substrate, seems just a little softer. Its probably me being OCD, its seems different, but the same....weird I know. We have carbines with thousands of rounds down them, they still look brand new. For Rockwell, I put the question out there to see what is the difference if any. Will let you know. We anodize in type 3 HC, to some degree its over kill on this alloy, frankly AlLi oxidation and corrosion properties far exceed 6061, and 7075. I have also experimented in plating with black NiB. Looks great, though pricey to do uppers, lowers and rails. Still playing with NiB.
William Kadar
Newbie
How robust is this rifle?
Unobtanium
Regular Member
Uppers and lowers, typically, are very durable. The Hodge Defense upper and lower are made of stronger material...what this means to me, as an end-user, is that in the event of a KB, I have added protection. I spoke with Kino Davis of VLTOR years ago about this, and he sent me several pictures of MUR's that had been "blown up". They were all in one piece. considering that this material AlLi is significantly stronger than 7075, I would expect even greater resistance to fragging from the HDSI MOD 2 carbine. The lower, if broken, will break in the buffer tube area. Again, it seems like HDSI has beefed this area up not only through the use of stronger material, but larger dimension, as well.
Then we get to the other things that wear out.
The barrel. As far as I know, the barrel used by Hodge Defense is the most durable one available at this time, short of a stellite lined affair. The large barrel nut should be a decent heat-sink, as well. I can't think of a more durable barrel setup. I have used barrels similar to what he will be using, and was very pleased with how well they cleaned up. Several hundred rounds and then foaming bore cleaner, and it came out clear. The hammer forging process simply doesn't provide a lot of imperfection for copper to accumulate in. (This goes for every CHF barrel I've used, not just the one HDSI will use). Accuracy from my CHF barrels hovers at around 0.75 and 1.25 MOA, depending on the ammo I use. I would expect similar from MOD 2. The gas port on these barrels is going to be correctly sized, as well. You won't be running a Sprinco Blue and H3 buffer to "calm them down".
Then we have the BCG. Nothing, really, is going to make a gas-ring more than a gas-ring, and the same for an extractor spring, so obviously there are wear items. However, the QPQ BCG's I have used in the past are all VERY slick internally, which theoretically should cut down on wear to the rings. That said, QPQ cam-pins show a lot less wear in my experience than Chrome lined, or regular Phosphate cam-pins. Further, QPQ on steel when dry, is more lubricious than non-QPQ steel on steel action. One thing learned during NSW/DEVGRU testing is that a properly lubed bolt lasts longer. Why? Because the axial forces between the bolt lugs and the receiver extension are lessened secondary to a lower coefficient of friction on the parts if you run the gunwet instead of dry. Thus, theoretically, a QPQ bolt is less likely to shear lugs than is a non-QPQ bolt, all other things being equal, as the coefficient of friction between QPQ and Steel lubed or dry, respectively, is lower than steel/steel lubed, or dry, respectively. Now I fully grant that this is theory, but it does have science to back it up. Same for the cam-pin wear situation. Wear creates slop. Cam-pins have a +- 0.0015" OD tolerance, IIRC, for a reason. The more slop, the more shock, and when you have wear, you get slop. Stop the wear, stop the slop. The cam-pin not wearing should preserve the interface between the cam-pin hole and the cam-pin, and prevent shock loading of the bolt at that critical junction, later in the BCG's lifecycle where typical cam-pins will have worn. Again, this is theory, but I personally know of several QPQ BCG's with thousands and thousands (well past 10K) of suppressed, full auto, etc. type rounds on them, and they are fine. Underlying heat-treat and proper dimensional specs are THE KEY to these types of components, though, to be fair.
Next up is the rail, and we will include the upper receiver in this. Dimensionally, the components are very precise. The shop cutting them holds them to incredible standards. It's no secret at this point, that MEGA is who cuts the metal, considering their public announcement of the Wedgelock and their collaboration with Hodge Defense, so I'll go there...I'll also drag another company into this mix. AR Performance. The company who makes the "Superbolt". They will ONLY WARRANTY THEIR BOLT if you use a MEGA upper, or send them your upper for them to true. Why is this? Why does it matter on a build that is not a DMR? Well, this brings us back to NSW/DEVGRU and their findings. The FF rail system was shown to enhance bolt life. but how? Well, flex. When you flex the rail, you flex the barrel (on a NON-FF design), and this leads to minute changes in how the bolt locks up in the extension, which places un-even stress on the bolt. It was actually shown that this did shorten bolt life. Of course, FF rails have sortof become "the standard" at this point, so I won't go there, but further investigation to the matter will show that the same off-center forces are encountered when the face of the upper is not machined perfectly. MEGA can accomplish this, and holds tolerances conducive to it. This, in my opinion, is why some guns "eat bolts". The bolts don't always come from a bad batch, and the user isn't extra harsh, it's just tolerance stacking, potentially, and loading of the bolt un-evenly. MEGA machined uppers (and a few others, probably, ones that are trued, etc.) avoid this phenomenon. This brings us further back to the use of AlLi. It has a much higher modulus of elasticity than 7075, which is nerd-speak for "it took a bunch of Viagra". The stuff is STIFF! This means that it is even more resistant to flex from natural firing cycle, force on the rail from the end-user, etc. and will further preserve the geometry of the interface of the bolt and barrel extension on the tens of thousandths of an inch scale. All of this contributes to the life of the operating system, as well as precision and reliability. Friction and un-even bearing surfaces are bad, M'kay? The precision and properties of the materials involved in the upper, bolt, and rail system minimize them.
This brings us to the wee little giblets. They are pretty much all barstock. That about says that. Have you ever seen a broken bolt-stop? Well, you won't see one with the HDSI carbines. Is this a "real concern"? Not to me, but better...is better, so I won't talk much about that.
In short, to answer your question...every single angle that I can think of, and many I have not, was taken into account with the development of the AU MOD 2 to make it a brick shit house...oh...and it still weighs around 6.5 pounds with a 13.58" rail...
Then we get to the other things that wear out.
The barrel. As far as I know, the barrel used by Hodge Defense is the most durable one available at this time, short of a stellite lined affair. The large barrel nut should be a decent heat-sink, as well. I can't think of a more durable barrel setup. I have used barrels similar to what he will be using, and was very pleased with how well they cleaned up. Several hundred rounds and then foaming bore cleaner, and it came out clear. The hammer forging process simply doesn't provide a lot of imperfection for copper to accumulate in. (This goes for every CHF barrel I've used, not just the one HDSI will use). Accuracy from my CHF barrels hovers at around 0.75 and 1.25 MOA, depending on the ammo I use. I would expect similar from MOD 2. The gas port on these barrels is going to be correctly sized, as well. You won't be running a Sprinco Blue and H3 buffer to "calm them down".
Then we have the BCG. Nothing, really, is going to make a gas-ring more than a gas-ring, and the same for an extractor spring, so obviously there are wear items. However, the QPQ BCG's I have used in the past are all VERY slick internally, which theoretically should cut down on wear to the rings. That said, QPQ cam-pins show a lot less wear in my experience than Chrome lined, or regular Phosphate cam-pins. Further, QPQ on steel when dry, is more lubricious than non-QPQ steel on steel action. One thing learned during NSW/DEVGRU testing is that a properly lubed bolt lasts longer. Why? Because the axial forces between the bolt lugs and the receiver extension are lessened secondary to a lower coefficient of friction on the parts if you run the gunwet instead of dry. Thus, theoretically, a QPQ bolt is less likely to shear lugs than is a non-QPQ bolt, all other things being equal, as the coefficient of friction between QPQ and Steel lubed or dry, respectively, is lower than steel/steel lubed, or dry, respectively. Now I fully grant that this is theory, but it does have science to back it up. Same for the cam-pin wear situation. Wear creates slop. Cam-pins have a +- 0.0015" OD tolerance, IIRC, for a reason. The more slop, the more shock, and when you have wear, you get slop. Stop the wear, stop the slop. The cam-pin not wearing should preserve the interface between the cam-pin hole and the cam-pin, and prevent shock loading of the bolt at that critical junction, later in the BCG's lifecycle where typical cam-pins will have worn. Again, this is theory, but I personally know of several QPQ BCG's with thousands and thousands (well past 10K) of suppressed, full auto, etc. type rounds on them, and they are fine. Underlying heat-treat and proper dimensional specs are THE KEY to these types of components, though, to be fair.
Next up is the rail, and we will include the upper receiver in this. Dimensionally, the components are very precise. The shop cutting them holds them to incredible standards. It's no secret at this point, that MEGA is who cuts the metal, considering their public announcement of the Wedgelock and their collaboration with Hodge Defense, so I'll go there...I'll also drag another company into this mix. AR Performance. The company who makes the "Superbolt". They will ONLY WARRANTY THEIR BOLT if you use a MEGA upper, or send them your upper for them to true. Why is this? Why does it matter on a build that is not a DMR? Well, this brings us back to NSW/DEVGRU and their findings. The FF rail system was shown to enhance bolt life. but how? Well, flex. When you flex the rail, you flex the barrel (on a NON-FF design), and this leads to minute changes in how the bolt locks up in the extension, which places un-even stress on the bolt. It was actually shown that this did shorten bolt life. Of course, FF rails have sortof become "the standard" at this point, so I won't go there, but further investigation to the matter will show that the same off-center forces are encountered when the face of the upper is not machined perfectly. MEGA can accomplish this, and holds tolerances conducive to it. This, in my opinion, is why some guns "eat bolts". The bolts don't always come from a bad batch, and the user isn't extra harsh, it's just tolerance stacking, potentially, and loading of the bolt un-evenly. MEGA machined uppers (and a few others, probably, ones that are trued, etc.) avoid this phenomenon. This brings us further back to the use of AlLi. It has a much higher modulus of elasticity than 7075, which is nerd-speak for "it took a bunch of Viagra". The stuff is STIFF! This means that it is even more resistant to flex from natural firing cycle, force on the rail from the end-user, etc. and will further preserve the geometry of the interface of the bolt and barrel extension on the tens of thousandths of an inch scale. All of this contributes to the life of the operating system, as well as precision and reliability. Friction and un-even bearing surfaces are bad, M'kay? The precision and properties of the materials involved in the upper, bolt, and rail system minimize them.
This brings us to the wee little giblets. They are pretty much all barstock. That about says that. Have you ever seen a broken bolt-stop? Well, you won't see one with the HDSI carbines. Is this a "real concern"? Not to me, but better...is better, so I won't talk much about that.
In short, to answer your question...every single angle that I can think of, and many I have not, was taken into account with the development of the AU MOD 2 to make it a brick shit house...oh...and it still weighs around 6.5 pounds with a 13.58" rail...
William Kadar
Newbie
I meant how much damage can it take?
Unobtanium
Regular Member
Is this in reference to the Warsport rails taking damage?
Unobtanium
Regular Member
Just getting back to this thread for a second, saw some wear-surfaces (internals of upper where skids of BCG interface) on a MOD-2 that had just under 2K rounds through it. Compared to my DDM4 with a similar round count, I saw less wear on the ano. of the MOD 2. Very subjective datapoint, and still curious about the RC hardness on a technical note, but in the real world, it doesn't look like the ano has an issue at all.
Hey Jim. Great looking rifle! Since you have the gas port sized to run in combination with a spec carbine spring and H buffer, how will it run with a suppressor attached? Do you recommend an adjustable gas block or will the effects of attaching a suppressor not be significant enough for concern?
Unobtanium
Regular Member
Not Jim Hodge, but I run suppressors on weapons with the same port specs he uses and have never had an issue.
William Kadar
Newbie
I meant damage like the one from the Daniel Defense torture test from TACTV.
Interesting. I'm glad you're here because I've read a lot of praise for your rifles, but haven't really seen a good explanation why and thought for a while that it was just a parts gun. This kind of attention to detail blows that idea out of the water. Thanks for answering questions about your rifle, dig the philosophy behind it.
Unobtanium
Regular Member
That is very subjective. Theoretically, it should take more to deadline it. However, things like falls from height, dragging behind vehicles, and explosions are dynamic events. Think of it like being in a fight. Or like a football game. Just because the first round or first 5 minutes goes one way, doesn't mean an ankle can't randomly twist, or a duck can't be substituted for a bob and a weave at the wrong moment. Lady Luck has a LOT to do with dynamic events.
jim hodge
Newbie
Lee... I build all my carbines as if they were to be suppressed....they run happy suppressed.
KevinB
Member
Key thing to understand is that the DI system is much more tolerant of ammunition and pressure changes - thus a well built DI gun can run unsuppressed and suppressed reliably without altering parts or settings.
Piston guns are much more sensitive to variations, and really need adjustable gas systems, if your changing ammo types greatly - or going back and forth between suppressed and unsuppressed.
Piston guns are much more sensitive to variations, and really need adjustable gas systems, if your changing ammo types greatly - or going back and forth between suppressed and unsuppressed.