Palmetto State Armory CZ2008 sale....

[gunzz]

ordered mine 10/20 it shipped today so not sure how they do it.
all i know is a have a vz problem!

[taceto]

Where do you see how many of these rifles PSA has left in stock at any given time?

Just keep putting larger quantities in until it says "The requested quantity is not available".

Well, that explains something....If someone checking how many are left in inventory by adding a high number of rifles to their cart, then don't clear their cart those rifles may not be available for a period of time...hence the instances where inventory goes from a couple of hundred to non available...maybe I'm wrong tho...

Nope. Inventory is never deducted until the sale is confirmed. That is why you can have something in your cart and by the time you fill out the credit card info the sale is voided as "Out of Stock"

I stand corrected!

[sirosisofliver]

Received my non bayonet VZ today from PSA.  Great finish on the rifle.  The mag pouch was well used, which is cool.  The sling is a bit corroded and has some mildew, but not a concern as Im not going for an original look.  Overall looks great!  Cant wait to fire it tomorrow....:-)

[gunzz]

How are the magazines?
Mine should be here soon, all three carriers going to forced march for tab soon after.

[wolfhollow]

How are the magazines?
Mine should be here soon, all three carriers going to forced march for tab soon after.

I think the tab is a waste of money the current vz's are not having any issues. I bought 8 from PSA and have zero issues on any of them with multiple shooters. As for the magazines most of them are perfect. Of my last 8 purchases 5 of them were band new un issued pouches with the magazine still plastic wrapped and grease covered.

[machinegunnertim]

Thanks for the advice. I'm fully aware of the Melonite, Nitride, or whatever you want to call it and have actually sourced an affordable place to treat guns for me. But I figured that If I can just re-barrel for cheap in the future I wouldn't worry about it.

The lower velocities is a point I hadn't considered. But, I've been going off the test done here - http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/brass-vs-steel-cased-ammo/  The bore was gone on the rifles that fired Wolf and Brown Bear before they reached 6,000 rounds. And those were hard chrome lined barrels! I really wonder how long it would have taken if the barrels were not lined or nitrided.  Even though 7.62x39 is slower it can't be so far behind that low velocities alone will avert the barrel wear.

Here is what I see happening, buy tons of Wolf (because it's the cheapest right now) shoot 5 to 8,000 rounds out of it and totally wear out the barrel. At that point the gun will need to re-barreled or sold for parts. Might work for very short range blasting. That's just my speculation though.

And as for the throat or gas port erosion, that can be averted or at least prolonged significantly by a treatment of Dyna-Bore coat.

Did you watch the video in that review?  They were rapid firing throughout, to the extent of battlefield/combat conditions.  On the 2nd Tula rifle, they set the handguards on fire and cooled it in a mud puddle... Not in the original link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6cwh4IxXSc

To say this is equivalent to how most American's shoot mag after mag would be a vast exaggeration...

Also of note -- 5.56 wears barrel throats faster than 7.62x39 due to its larger case capacity to neck diameter ratio. 
Without getting into all the science, rate of fire matters far more than bullet jackets (basically, fissures develop and heat causes small bits of molten metal at the throat to get pushed down the barrel with each bullet or follows the bullet as unburnt powder, etc, abrades the hot and softened -- more rapid fire=hotter and softer barrel=more molten barrel removed w/ each shot and deeper fissures which just further exacerbates).

The ability of barrel to absorb heat also matters more than bullet jackets (this goes to surface area of throat, overall metal quantity of barrel, etc -- how rapidly you can fire/how much damage each shot automatically penalizes the barrel). 

Good read: http://www.fieldandstream.com/blogs/gun-nuts/2012/08/how-rifle-barrels-die

If you shoot like they do in the gun test, maybe you'll have 5k accurate barrel life...  You can kill a barrel in 1000 rounds I'm sure if you really wanted to...  No barrel coating/treatment would add significantly more like if you're purposely doing everything you can to kill your barrel and get it to those temps... 

Just ask the target guys/hunters shooting .22-243, .220 Swift, and .22-250 and other overbore -- shooting copper jackets, target guys are lucky to get 1k rounds out of those calibers' barrels whereas hunters are lucky to get 4k (minute of animal accuracy) no matter how slow they shoot. 

Ultimately, heat in its various forms is what kills barrels, not jackets.  A structurally weakened barrel due to overheat may wear faster with steel jackets than copper when overheated, but again, the heat is the primary cause of wear, not the jackets. 

Further, I'd say the standard post-range trip cleaning will do more to degrade your accuracy than will steel jacketed ammo... 

The 7.62x39 round was specifically designed for extremely long barrel life.  I'd think the VZ2008's barrel would be sufficient for a decade+ of most American's shooting patterns no matter what ammo you choose to shoot.

Well, the Tula was removed from the test for the most part and the 3 remaining bushmaster carbines were not pushed until the hanguards burned nor were they tossed in muddy water to cool. So what they did to that Spikes Tactical gun is irrelevant.

Although you are correct that all of the guns were run hard, the gun firing Federal ammo was fired the same and the pictures show a lot of erosion.

Here is a direct quote form the test, " As indicated by accuracy testing, the steel cased/bimetal jacketed ammunition caused accelerated wear to the inside of their respective bores. While the barrel of the Federal carbine had plenty of life left, even after 10,000 rounds at extremely high rates of fire, the Wolf and Brown Bear barrels were subjected to the same rates of fire and were completely ?shot out? by 6,000 rounds.

At the end of the test, the chrome lining of the Wolf and Brown Bear barrels was almost gone from the throat forward, and the barrels had effectively become smooth bores, with the rifling near the muzzles acting only as a mild suggestion on the projectiles. A throat erosion gauge could be dropped into the bore from the muzzle end with absolutely no resistance.

The bottom line is that for both Brown Bear and Wolf, the lands had been completely ground down to the diameter of the grooves. What?s still visible is the differences in material, for the grooves have some chrome lining left. Longitudinal scratches are visible inside the bore, and it is believed that they were caused by the projectiles meandering their way down the bore in a casual manner before exiting and tumbling in a fairly random direction."

The gun firing Federal showed acceptable accuracy beyond 10,000 rounds, but the guns with steel jacketed ammo showed significant accuracy loss by the 6,000 round mark.

So to re-cap! All 3 guns were fired the same way. All 3 had a great deal of erosion, (The Federal gun looked even worse) yet the steel jacketed ammo guns lost accuracy very quick compared to the copper jacket ammo gun. Basically the steel jacket wore down the rifling and was the largest contributor to the accuracy loss. Not so much the erosion.

This seems to be contrary to what you stated. It appears that bullet jacket material is more harmful than rates of fire or ability to absorb heat.

7.62x39 can't be immune to this effect. Though it may be reduced a little and much of the erosion reduced as well. We still have steel on steel down the barrel.

[RSR]

No, you're ignoring the primary substance of what I said. 

Point 1: The rifles were shot at rapid rates of fire as you can see from the video in the link (the Tula rifle treatment replicated the treatment that test rifles had so it is relevant) and if you read the article:

Why Did The Barrels Wear The Way They Did?

The first answer to this question is, ?Because we shot them until they got hot, and then we kept shooting them.?

A saw cuts into the barrel of an AR-15 during the steel vs. brass test.
Due to the position of the front taper pin and the effects of extreme heat over time, the front sight base of the Brown Bear carbine had to be cut off before the barrel could be removed from the upper receiver and sectioned.

The rate of fire definitely contributed to rapid barrel wear. Still, there were other factors which played a major role.

Point 2: When barrels are extremely hot is when bimetal jacket wear will significantly outpace copper as the surface of the bore heats (which means it also softens) which leads to expedited wear.

Point 3: The primary cause of barrel wear is heat.  Rapid fire is the single biggest contributor that we can control that expedites barrel wear.

Point 4: 7.62x39 and 5.56 are not equal -- 5.56 has a higher case/powder capacity to bullet diameter ratio which means significantly more throat wear than 7.62x39.  Throat wear is a cancer sort of like rust where a small spot just keeps creeping out and expediting overall barrel wear.  Also (didn't mention before but), by 16" nearly all 7.62x39 powder has burned, but that's not the case with most 5.56 ammo -- that unburnt powder exacerbates muzzle wear.  Further, you need to take into account what type of ammo you're shooting -- most AK ammo is Basically, lessons learned from a different caliber and weapon systems are not direct connections. 

And since it was a bunch gun reviewers and an ammo retailer doing this test, not a barrel maker or metallurgist, one should be skeptical of assuming it's 100% accurate and directly applies to your needs.  Ammo retailers in particular make more money from higher priced ammo than cheaper...

Feel free to draw what conclusions you wish.  I still expect these VZ2008s to be accurate to 10k rounds of moderate use regardless of ammo and hit 20k before losing minute of man.  But if you're worried about spend the money to chrome line or nitride it.  Your rifle, your call.

[RSR]

This is about cases, but the same principles apply to the jackets.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/08/28/debunking-myth-steel-harder-brass/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBAh_8usXBI

Also: https://www.facebook.com/militaryarms/posts/516101628401641

I get asked all the time "will bi-metal bullets harm my bore". The answer is no, they won't. Here's why.

Hardened tool steel has a rockwell hardness of 650/700 Brinell. Mild steel has a hardness of 120/130. Bi-metal jackets are made from very soft mild steel. Bores/barrels are at least as hard as tool steel and when chrome plated are even harder.

Steel jacketed bullets are nothing new. The US had steel jacketed bullets in WWII chambered in 30-06 and 45 ACP. The M1 ball and M2 AP rounds of the era used steel jackets over a lead core with a copper wash over the steel -- just like Wolf bi-metal bullets.

Frankford Arsenal conducted a test with steel jacketed 30-06 rounds around 1946 to determine if the rumors that steel jacketed bullets damaged the barrels more than copper jacketed bullets were true. In their testing they found that steel jacketed bullets not only didn't accelerate wear but they also discovered for the first 1000 rounds steel jacketed rounds were actually more accurate! After 1000 rounds the accuracy leveled off to be comparable to the copper jacketed bullets but no evidence of accelerated wear was discovered through 8,000 rounds of testing on their samples.

In short, bi-metal bullets do not do any more damage to your firearms than conventional copper jacketed rounds do. All the claims of chamber wear, throat erosion and barrel wear are unsubstantiated wives tales.

And finally: http://blog.cheaperthandirt.com/to-chrome-or-not-to-chrome-myths-and-facts-of-chrome-lined-barrels/

Nowadays, almost all military rifles are universally chrome-lined to protect the rifle barrel from excess erosion. AR-15 rifles are particularly prone to erosion when fired rapidly, in part due to the high velocity of the round, and in part due to the high pressures generated by the cartridge. While it?s not uncommon for military rifles to experience high rates of sustained fire, it?s also not difficult to fire a semiautomatic AR-15 at rates exceeding 100 RPM. Under sustained fully automatic gunfire, or rapid semiautomatic fire, an enormous amount of heat is generated. That heat is what can quickly ruin a barrel.

The leade (the unrifled portion of the barrel just forward of the chamber), as well as the first few inches of rifling, is subject to temperatures hotter than the surface of the sun and pressures exceeding 50,000 PSI. Under slow fire conditions this area is able to cool a sufficient amount in between strings of fire. Under sustained rapid fire however, there is no time for the heat to dissipate and temperatures soar into the thousands of degrees Fahrenheit. This can quickly cause damage by eating away at the rifling, ?burning up the barrel? with the combination of extremely high heat and pressure. Hard chrome-lining the bore protects the leade and rifling with a thin coat of heat and pressure resistant chrome. This greatly extends barrel life in rifles that are fired for prolonged periods in full-auto or rapid fire semiautomatic modes by preventing damage to the leade and rifling.

And just throwing this out there:
Yugoslavia, who makes some of the finest AKs, do not chrome line most of their 7.62x39 rifles, but do chrome line their 5.56 rifles (all AKs/variants).
Chrome is great for protecting from corrosion, both corrosive ammo and environmental rust/moisture.  It makes cleaning easier.  But for most guns, it has negligible (less than a couple thousand rounds) affect on serviceable life.  And if you're wanting maximum accuracy, you'll nitride over chrome anyways (chrome negatively affects barrels inherent accuracy).
(Yes, most Yugo 7.62x39 is copper jacketed and brass case, but is also corrosive...  But one can assume they're making their 5.56 w/ the same premium NATO specs.)  IMO, this speaks more to the cartridge difference in barrel wear (7.62x39 being much gentler) than anything else, but YMMV.

[taceto]

How are the magazines?
Mine should be here soon, all three carriers going to forced march for tab soon after.

I think the tab is a waste of money the current vz's are not having any issues. I bought 8 from PSA and have zero issues on any of them with multiple shooters. As for the magazines most of them are perfect. Of my last 8 purchases 5 of them were band new un issued pouches with the magazine still plastic wrapped and grease covered.

What's been done differently on the current vz's that have addressed the problem that requires the tab job on previous iterations of the rifle?

[sirosisofliver]

How are the magazines?
Mine should be here soon, all three carriers going to forced march for tab soon after.

1 magazine looks unissued, the other four have a bit of wear, but look fine! 

[Brasky]

How are the magazines?
Mine should be here soon, all three carriers going to forced march for tab soon after.

I think the tab is a waste of money the current vz's are not having any issues. I bought 8 from PSA and have zero issues on any of them with multiple shooters. As for the magazines most of them are perfect. Of my last 8 purchases 5 of them were band new un issued pouches with the magazine still plastic wrapped and grease covered.

What's been done differently on the current vz's that have addressed the problem that requires the tab job on previous iterations of the rifle?

The disconnector has been modified. I had a "gremlin" problem with mine, but only shooting Wolf Military. Don't know if it was the ammo, magazine, rifle, or me, but I sent the carrier off just so I could eliminate any chance of the problem

[taceto]

How are the magazines?
Mine should be here soon, all three carriers going to forced march for tab soon after.

I think the tab is a waste of money the current vz's are not having any issues. I bought 8 from PSA and have zero issues on any of them with multiple shooters. As for the magazines most of them are perfect. Of my last 8 purchases 5 of them were band new un issued pouches with the magazine still plastic wrapped and grease covered.

What's been done differently on the current vz's that have addressed the problem that requires the tab job on previous iterations of the rifle?

The disconnector has been modified. I had a "gremlin" problem with mine, but only shooting Wolf Military. Don't know if it was the ammo, magazine, rifle, or me, but I sent the carrier off just so I could eliminate any chance of the problem

I've got two coming from PSA.  May I ask, and would you know, how I can tell by looking at the disconnectors if my rifles have the most recent modification?

[sirosisofliver]

Put 100 rds through it today at the range.  All mags fed great, no gremlin, and decent group considering the 30 mph crosswind I was dealing with..

[Brasky]

How are the magazines?
Mine should be here soon, all three carriers going to forced march for tab soon after.

I think the tab is a waste of money the current vz's are not having any issues. I bought 8 from PSA and have zero issues on any of them with multiple shooters. As for the magazines most of them are perfect. Of my last 8 purchases 5 of them were band new un issued pouches with the magazine still plastic wrapped and grease covered.

What's been done differently on the current vz's that have addressed the problem that requires the tab job on previous iterations of the rifle?

The disconnector has been modified. I had a "gremlin" problem with mine, but only shooting Wolf Military. Don't know if it was the ammo, magazine, rifle, or me, but I sent the carrier off just so I could eliminate any chance of the problem

I've got two coming from PSA.  May I ask, and would you know, how I can tell by looking at the disconnectors if my rifles have the most recent modification?

There are many threads debating this, but the disconnector is more angled instead of round

[taceto]

OK, thanks