I wouldn’t worry about it, I’d think it would look that way after a few hundred rounds anyways.
Just think, you got a battle worn finish at no extra charge
Who is the manufacturer?
It's ok. Don't let it bother you.
Nice BCG. Building a retro AR?
I'll see if i can polish it up a bit. May make me feel better lol
Yep, just getting around to building one of the Nodak trigger upper and lower combos Engage was selling last year.
What do you think about chrome as a BCG coating? I know that was used early on in the design.It's ok. Don't let it bother you.
Nice BCG. Building a retro AR?
What do you think about chrome as a BCG coating? I know that was used early on in the design.
To the OP: seems fine to me. I have a Stag chrome bcg in my competition AR that looked pretty similar when I got it. It's been fine and I've seen no evidence of the finish chipping off into the chamber.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, as always. I went with chrome on that particular rifle because I tend to put 300-400 rounds through it at a time when I use it. Somewhere in the 800-1000 round range is where I prefer to clean my rifles, so it works out pretty well for me. I don't really mess with the barrel until I start seeing groups open up when I confirm zero prior to matches, classes, shenanigans, etc. Then I'll typically strip the barrel down and refoul/reconfirm zero once I'm able to.I have a few.
If an AR owner likes to clean his gun after shooting it's great. The chrome often prevents people from doing damage because the finish is so hard and its generally easier to clean them too.
The down side is they can have short headspace issues on some barrels and the coating tends to shed lube faster than phosphate which means you have to keep a closer eye on it.
From my understanding, they dumped the original chroming due to embrittlement issues, but who knows for sure? There are so many false stories surrounding the AR and M16 it's hard to distinguish fact from for tion. My sense is it was probably dumped as a cost thing.