Original Receiver Specs versus DSA, FAC Imbel?

[cold steel hot lead]

Just curious - how do the various receivers stack up against the original FAL military specs? My frame of reference is the AR with well published specs that manufacturers can say they meet. I dont know if any clear cut specs exist for FALs. It is even possible there are various specs for STGs, Inch guns, south african - etc.

I am thinking about hardness, strength, toughness, durability, whatever. I think dimensional tolerance is a given since people on this forum have built on all of these successfully.

Net: Do the IMBELs, FACs and DSAs meet mil spec for an "original" FAL receiver. The kits out there are Mil spec - how about the receiver choices? Would any of them meet or exceed the grade?

[Brian S]

Imbel's ARE military therefore they meet the same spec as the original ones I would guess. The others, I do not know. None of them explode though so I guess they are just fine.

[EMDII]

Only IMBEL makes 'spec' receivers. DSA makes very good to excellent receivers, and other manufactures do too. None are 'MilSpec', only FN and IMBEL have 'the specs'.

MilSpec usually addresses reliability, durability, accuracy, training, etc. HOW the manufacturer gets there is immaterial so long as he/she meets the performance specs. A known mechanical property addresses durability, yadayada. That's how you get your contract.

[xcpd69]

Imbel is an FN licensee. The only one currently still producing, AFAIK.

DSA manufactures theirs from original Steyr blueprints, (Another former FN licensee)

As for the others, I believe they are reverse engineered from samples, with changes due to production requirements to reduce costs.

I understand the Imbels are the only ones still forged, instead of cast, if that is an issue. (The FN Type III receivers, their last production, were cast also.)

I'm no expert, this is just stuff I have picked up over the years on The Files. But the info here has been repeated consistantly from multiple sources.

HTH

[EMDII]

And DSA forges a billet, then mills from billet. They do not forge the receiver blank.

[Wadman]

Just how 'spec' are the licensed manufacturers? Just because someone or some company is granted a license doesn't necessarily mean they're making it quite the same way or from the highest grade of materials. Keep in mind that you all hold certain manufacturers in higher regard than others and it has nothing to do with usage prior to becoming a kit.

Someone else just posted his experience with variations among steels from various 'licensed' arsenals. Since Imbel is held up as a model for meeting specifications, just what specs were they using? Since becoming available, I've acquired several Imbel kits and noticed variations on the upper receiver from the stubs I've collected. I've not even sure what "type" they are.

As long as quality steel is used and critical areas are heat treated to optimum hardness, and as long as all the components attach without difficulty, that's all I care about.

With regard to licensing: what exactly does it buy you? Does it mean that Fabrique Nationale comes out, helps you set up your tooling, gives you blueprints, then dictates and holds you to steel specifications and machining tolerances? Or does it mean they come out, help you get set up for manufacturing, and then fly back to Belgium leaving you to your own devices?

[rwwje]

Ted:

Why would anyone manufacture a die, heat up a hunk of steel, and forge a billet?

[Aifwikir]

From my limited knowledge Entreprise 'Inch' receivers USED to by milled from forgings but not anymore.
Imbel 'IS' milspec, as they are a licensed FN manufacturer. The rest of the makers are under the "all others" catagory (no FN license).


Aif

[Hootbro]

Imbel 'IS' milspec, as they are a licensed FN manufacturer

Is this not a misnomer now? I thought someone brought up that FN does no more developement for the 7.62 FAL and therefore has no reason to "License" its production.

Hootbro

[G_FAL]

My Imbel group buy bolt carrier would not fit into an Imbel GL receiver , but it fit the original Imbel receiver stub.
Go figure.
One or the other is gonna have to lose some metal.
It will probably be the carrier , since a G1 carrier will slide in just fine.

[Blag]

Originally posted by rwwje
Why would anyone manufacture a die, heat up a hunk of steel, and forge a billet?

So they won't need a long series of rollers, I believe. Rollers take a lot of floor space.

A billet could conceivably be cast, I guess, but it's more likely to be rolled or forged, from an ingot that was poured. If the ingot was rolled down to the desired height and width, the billet that results is called "rolled," naturally. If the ingot was pressed to the desired h & w, the resulting billet is called "forged."

In addition to not taking up as much space, I think the press gives better control over the resulting product than rollers do. But I wouldn't really know, personally; my education is only what Google tells me.

[rwwje]

Blag:

I don't know the steel industry either, but I always thought that steel (and all other common metals alloys) were manufactured by melting/mixing/blending the components is a crucible and then pouring into ingot molds. The ingots are then distributed for further processing to be hot rolled, cold rolled, extruded, etc., into round stock, bar stock, plate, flat stock, coils, I-beams, channel , tube, and whatever. I was just wondering why someone would take bar stock, cut it to size, heat to forging temps, and pound it into a die to produce a forged piece of bar stock or billet. Forging is generally used to produce a hunk of steel that is closer to it final shape than a piece of steel stock, so that less machining is required to produce the part.

When you order alloy steel, it usually is available in certain standard sizes of bar stack, round stock, plate, etc. You then cut the stock to the size required to produce the part and machine it to its final configuration. I was just wondering why a "forged" billet would be used, since it wouldn't seem to have any better properties for constructing a receiver than bar stock, while adding extra cost for the material.

[capman]

AIFWIKIR & xcpd,

Imbel WAS a licensee, they are no longer a licensee. This means they still have all the correct specs, but whether or not they adhere to them or hold strict quality standards is only up to them (Imbel).

DSA also has the correct FN specs, they got them from Steyr (who was a licensee), I have seen them there. DSA also does not have a license - no one does anymore. Whether or not DSA adheres to the specs is only up to them (DSA), just like Imbel.

At this time, no one is operating under license from FN. All the receiver manufacturers set their own quality standards.

cap

[FWRA]

Wadman said---

Just how 'spec' are the licensed manufacturers?

Well, here's the staight poop:

This from South American Ordnance's web site: (IMBEL)

South America Ordnance S/A is a joint-venture company wholly owned by Indústria de Material Bélico do Brasil (IMBEL) - attached to the Brazilian Army; Royal Ordnance plc (RO) - subsidiary of British Aerospace Defence Group; and Schahin Participações Ltda.
The Company has an office in Juiz de Fora/MG-Brasil and offers support to both IMBEL and RO with its co-manufacture of artillery and tank ammunition. Further above, the company is an agent of IMBEL´s products.

IMBEL and Royal Ordnance have teamed together to supply the full range of 105mm howitzer and 90mm antitank ammunition required for the Cockerill MK I, MK II, MK III and Engesa EC-90 guns, recognised by their excellence and security, co-manufactured in accordance with all NATO specifications and ISO 9002 - (IMBEL) and BS EN ISO 9001 - Royal).

HEAT-T, HESH-T, APFSDS constitute the main combat rounds for attack of armour fully supported by HE-T, SMOKE-T and CANISTER natures. There is also the HEAT-TP-T as an option for a low price training round. Produced only by IMBEL, we dispose of cutlery, light armaments, communication and electronic equipments, and explosives for military and civilian use.

Regarding IMBEL being licensed:

The rifle 7,62 M964 made by IMBEL is a true copy of the famous belgium FAL-FN known all over the world, made according to strict military specifications to be used in any operation situation.

made according to strict military specifications is the key here. Nowhere is there made any mention of "licensed by FN".
I'm thinking FN's license must have expired years ago.

Also, when Springfield Armory, Kimber, etc., build 1911's they sure don't mention "licensed Browning manufacturer". We all know that one expired years ago if there ever was a license at all?

I'm sure the current breed of US FAL receivers (DSA, Coonan etc.) are just as good as "the real thing". (whatever that really means.)

That's my take on it.
(for whatever that's worth!)

FWRA

PS: Here's the website for SAO:
http://www.southamerica.com.br/eng/princ.html

Click around and check 'em out! Very cool.

[Blag]

Originally posted by rwwje
... but I always thought that steel (and all other common metals alloys) were manufactured by melting/mixing/blending the components is a crucible and then pouring into ingot molds. The ingots are then distributed for further processing to be hot rolled, cold rolled, extruded, etc., into round stock, bar stock, ...

That's my understanding, too. The ingot is reduced in height & width by either rolling or extrusion (pressing.) If it's pressed, they call the result "forged."

It appears the term "forged" is a general term that means a piece has been pressed / hammered / crushed / squashed down to size, or to shape, rather than being rolled or cast.

A billet is bar stock - big bar stock. Well, it's big in normal human terms; to a steel mill it's a small item, only a foot thick or less. Ho-hum.

I believe the term "forged billet" means the steel mill produced the billet from an ingot by pressing rather than rolling. When DSA talks about using forged billet, it means they're using raw material pieces which were pressed into that height & width at the mill, rather than rolled or cast to that size. I think.