Carbon 15

[Derek Zeanah]

I bought one of the original Carbon 15s and it wouldn't run reliably. Sent it back to the factory and it still wasn't reliable. Bushmaster bought the company and extended their lifetime warranty to it, and after going back to have the chamber replaced (!!!) it finally ran well.

It also bruised my shoulder more than any other rifle I've every fired. It was painful, and I'm not shy about shooting a few hundred rounds of .308 or 12GA in a day. Part of this was the weight, and part of it was probably the shape of the stock (which sucked, to be honest.)

I traded it, but it wasn't a bad gun once it was reliable. Painful to shoot though, and the muzzle break on the 16" barrel was pretty loud too.

I don't think I'd buy another. (Traded it off by the way, so no PMs about it please. )

 

[ping]

Holy mackeral - more than i intended. cool. now i am at least educated.

 

[ugaarguy]

I would rather have a carbon fiber than most of the MIM uppers and lowers on the market today.

First, you don't have a carbon fiber upper or lower. You have polymer receivers that have pulped carbon fibers to add some strength, wear resistance, and abrasion resistance. Taking continuous strands of carbon fibers and weaving them in a cross grain manner are where actual carbon fiber gains its tremendous strength.

MIM is typically used for small parts. The only cast lowers I'm aware of were the very early Olympics, and the Hesse/Vulcan/Blackthorn abominations. Everything else is forged aluminum that's finish machined.

Very few gun makers still do parts from solid blocks of metal, the CNC process is time consuming and expensive in labor, equipment and tooling.

You really don't understand CNC do you? The equipment is the tooling, and yes the initial outlay is expensive. However, the trade off is that it's very fast, and it enormously reduces labor costs because a computer controlled machine is doing almost all of the labor.

I'm glad your C15 is working for you, but you really should learn more about materials and manufacturing processes before you try to use them as a means to tell others how superior your chosen firearm is.

If someone want's to spend $1,500 or more on a all metal milled AR, good luck to them I don't since I use mine for fun and not war or zombies (insult intended). (LOL)

You can buy a Smith & Wesson M&P15 Sport with in house forged aluminum receivers for under $700. Many folks here are military veterans, LE, or just armed citizens who run their rifles hard in training and/or matches. Your C15 wouldn't last in those environments, and those are neither war nor zombie environments.

The end of that comment is very high road of you too.

The keyboard this is being typed on, my 32 inch TV, all the remote controls for the TV and recorders, the gateway that the ISP gave us, the monitor, printer, mouse, head set, X-Box and controllers, calculator, pill boxes, tape dispenser, CD's,& VHS's, storage bins, watch, pens, paper shredder, scanner, cigarette lighters, safety hard hat, tool boxes, rifle cleaning kits, my desk chair, waste basket, flash lights, the brand new dish washer we just got, my expensive camera, stocks for my hunting rifles, etc...... are all made from polimers (plastics or one kind or other.) And let's not forget my 12 fishing rods (Yes, they are carbon fiber).

But a plastic AR, heaven forbid. I think we are being a little old fashion on this.

None of those directly attached to, and supporting a tube that's supporting a piece of brass in containing a 60,000 PSI explosion. Even your plastic rifle stocks are attached to steel or aluminum receivers that support the bbl and chamber.

 

[Trent]

Some incorrect info here.

Bushmaster didn't originally make Carbon 15 pistols and rifles.

That started at a small firm called Professional Ordnance. They started out in Canada and moved to gun friendly AZ a couple years in to the venture.

From blue book of guns, about the only reference I could find since most references to Professional Ordnance have been scrubbed, excepting the few guns that still bear their marks;

"Previous manufacturer located in Lake Havasu City, AZ 1998-2003. Previously manufactured in Ontario, CA circa 1996-1997. Distributor sales only. During 2003, Bushmaster bought Professional Ordnance and the Carbon 15 trademark. Please refer to the Bushmaster section for currently manufactured Carbon 15 rifles and pistols (still manufactured in Lake Havasu City)."

I ran across this tidbit when my Carbon 15 blew up. I called Professional Ordnance's number in the manual and I got the Bushmaster folks. Was a confusing moment, until the helpful lady that I talked to said "Oh, we got bought out".

Bushmaster still makes the rifles and pistols at the old Professional Ordnance facility in AZ.

Anyway, that's the history lesson, carry on.

 

[jim243]

Bushmaster still makes the rifles and pistols at the old Professional Ordnance facility in AZ.

Trent,

Is this a recent develpment since Remington moved the Bushmaster operations?

This the address they are using now.

Address for all Mail:
Bushmaster Firearms International
P.O. Box 556
Madison, NC 27025

This is where the gun was made, or so I thought.



Jim

 

[helotaxi]

This is an interesting descussion. I was just looking around the room, and guess what?
The keyboard this is being typed on, my 32 inch TV, all the remote controls for the TV and recorders, the gateway that the ISP gave us, the monitor, printer, mouse, head set, X-Box and controllers, calculator, pill boxes, tape dispenser, CD's,& VHS's, storage bins, watch, pens, paper shredder, scanner, cigarette lighters, safety hard hat, tool boxes, rifle cleaning kits, my desk chair, waste basket, flash lights, the brand new dish washer we just got, my expensive camera, stocks for my hunting rifles, etc...... are all made from polimers (plastics or one kind or other.) And let's not forget my 12 fishing rods (Yes, they are carbon fiber).

But a plastic AR, heaven forbid. I think we are being a little old fashion on this.

Jim

Nice try at being flip, but it missed the mark and you missed the point.

Sure, people poo-pooed the Glock when it first came out and that was the Fudd in them talking. What they failed to grasp then and you're failing to grasp now is that a product or part must be engineered around the material that it is to be made from. The Glock was engineered around the grip-frame being made of polymer. The AR15 was engineered around the receivers being made of 7075-T6 aluminum. Simply taking a lower receiver and molding it in FRP (fiber reinforced plastic) without changing any dimensions or design features, makes for a receiver that is inadequate for moderate to hard use. FRP can make good parts, but the part has to be engineered with that material in mind.

One day we will see a good polymer AR receiver set but that day is not today. It will happen eventually, but it will not look exactly like an Al receiver set and will likely have a spring steel or titanium skeleton and steel bushings in all the pin holes. Until one is actually engineered around a material other than 7075-T6, they will not be up to snuff.

 

[meanmrmustard]

Nice try at being flip, but it missed the mark and you missed the point.

Sure, people poo-pooed the Glock when it first came out and that was the Fudd in them talking. What they failed to grasp then and you're failing to grasp now is that a product or part must be engineered around the material that it is to be made from. The Glock was engineered around the grip-frame being made of polymer. The AR15 was engineered around the receivers being made of 7075-T6 aluminum. Simply taking a lower receiver and molding it in FRP (fiber reinforced plastic) without changing any dimensions or design features, makes for a receiver that is inadequate for moderate to hard use. FRP can make good parts, but the part has to be engineered with that material in mind.

One day we will see a good polymer AR receiver set but that day is not today. It will happen eventually, but it will not look exactly like an Al receiver set and will likely have a spring steel or titanium skeleton and steel bushings in all the pin holes. Until one is actually engineered around a material other than 7075-T6, they will not be up to snuff.

And when they're made out of steel, they will be

 

[KansasSasquatch]

With all that has been negatively said about the Carbon 15's I'm sure the OP and his buddy will look elsewhere. Personallly I would have never bought one but my father bought one and it has proved reliable as long as the bolt is kept wet. It's only failures have been when the bolt isn't wet and it is being fed steel cased ammo. It doesn't seem to be as finicky about being dry if good brass cased ammo is used. I've put about 2500 rounds through it (no exaggeration) and it's only failed to feed on me about 5 times. I've stopped giving my dad the lecture about polymer being junk, his rifle has proven itself so far. I still won't buy one for anymore than $500. There's plenty of other options out there for $600 or more that are probably better. But if I found one in good shape for $500 I'd pick it up as a range toy.

 

[Trent]

Bushmaster bought Professional Ordnance sometime around 2002 or 2003.

Cerebus bought Remington.

Cerebus bought Bushmaster. (Remington didn't buy Bushmaster.)

Cerebus also bought DPMS.

All one big happy family now.

Various guns are made in different places but the place of final manufacture is where the stamp comes from.

The quality of Professional Ordnance and at LEAST early Bushmaster Carbon 15's was HORRIBLE. And man, I do indeed mean HORRIBLE.

They had over 300 *bolts* break in to pieces - verified by Bushmaster support to me, and others. This is a big deal, because those bolts, barrel extensions, and many other parts on the early guns were PROPRIETARY; not mil-spec.

Here's an article on ARFCOM - identical to what happened to mine:

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=66&t=399265

Trent,

Is this a recent develpment since Remington moved the Bushmaster operations?

This the address they are using now.

Address for all Mail:
Bushmaster Firearms International
P.O. Box 556
Madison, NC 27025

This is where the gun was made, or so I thought.



Jim

 

[helotaxi]

And when they're made out of steel, they will be

When made of steel, and some have been, they are needlessly heavy with no useable increase in strength. DPMS made some from stainless. Super heavy and incredibly expensive and difficult to produce. Other than being more effective if pressed into service as a door stop or boat anchor, they were no better than a standard aluminum receiver and cost somewhere around 3x as much.

 

[Numnuts]

Ok guys, newbie has a question. I was given a top load carbon 15 from my brother. Needless to say that we in Texas do not like restrictions. Anyways, is it as easy as changing the lower receiver to make it a mag feed platform? Thanks and God bless to all.

 

[jim243]

is it as easy as changing the lower receiver to make it a mag feed platform

Yes. Just make sure it is not a Colt lower, the holes are different. If you are going to replace just the lower and not all of the other parts in the lower, I believe you will also need to replace the tube for the stock as well.

Jim

 

[Numnuts]

Can someone answer a question for a newbie? I was recently given a top load carbon 15. It must be one of those California compliant models. It has fixed magazine that is sealed. Can it be as simple as to replace the lower receiver to make it accept standard mags. Thanks and God Bless.

 

[Derek Zeanah]

Hey, Numnuts:

You've asked the same question in something like 4-5 threads now.

Why don't you sit back, have a beer, relax a bit, and give people a chance to answer. It's Friday night after all -- lots of people are away from their computers right now...

 

[Numnuts]

Thanks Jim, much appreciated. I should have looked before I reposted.

 

[Numnuts]

Different people read different things. Didn't think I was offending anyone. Sorry for the inconvenience.

 

[Gordon]

Open up the bottom of the reciever with a Dremel very carefully following the outside of the castin marks. Finish with a file and sandpaper. BTW the insert magazine will release thru the bottom with the mag release button and a regular mag will now slide in. Use sand paper and a file so all kinds of mags will fit. Hint: Magpul mags are the biggest I've found. Old Nam era aluminum GI mags the smallest. I did this to a Cali one and put in a bullet button with a 10 round mag to be GTG here. MyCarbon 15 has had 500 trouble free rounds thru it with only half a dozen bobbles in the first 50. Then I cleaned it and greased it and it seems OK.

 

[Gordon]

Open up the bottom of the reciever with a Dremel very carefully following the outside of the castin marks. Finish with a file and sandpaper. BTW the insert magazine will release thru the bottom with the mag release button and a regular mag will now slide in. Use sand paper and a file so all kinds of mags will fit. Hint: Magpul mags are the biggest I've found. Old Nam era aluminum GI mags the smallest. I did this to a Cali one and put in a bullet button with a 10 round mag to be GTG here. MyCarbon 15 has had 500 trouble free rounds thru it with only half a dozen bobbles in the first 50. Then I cleaned it and greased it and it seems OK.

 

[Quentin]

Yes. Just make sure it is not a Colt lower, the holes are different. If you are going to replace just the lower and not all of the other parts in the lower, I believe you will also need to replace the tube for the stock as well.

Jim

My buddy replaced the original receiver extension in his 2008 Carbon-15 with another. He was changing the Bushmaster commercial diameter RE for a milspec diameter. Later he used that C-15 RE in a milspec lower so the threads are the same as the milspec lower.

Anyway, if you don't mind the commercial RE it will fit another lower. But BM loctites the RE in the C-15 which makes it hard to remove, we had a tough time breaking it loose without breaking the receiver. I'd be careful. Personally I would go with a milspec RE on the new lower which is what Jim said anyway.

Also, current Colt receivers use standard size holes.

 

[mtrmn]

A friend of mine was looking at AR's and asked me a question i could not answer. he was looking at the bushmaster model 90689 carbon 15. i know nothing about the carbon piece of this. what are they talking about. i only buy rock river and i am very conservative. i like the basic A2, anyway what does the carbon comment mean. is it something i should tell my friend to stay away from. they seem pretty cheap - maybe to cheap. so many manufacturers of AR stuff now. i pretty much stay with armalite, bushmaster, colt, dpms and rock river.

anyway any info on this would be great.

thanks

I didn't read all the thread, someone may have already pointed this out. I believe the word in red is mis-spelled.

 

[bowyer19]

I bought a BM carbon15 two years ago. 0 problems with the 5.56 upper after 2000 rnds. I put a 6.8 upper on it and had to go to the "H" buffer and titanium firing pin to solve a "slam fire" issue. It still works fine with the 5.56 upper without changing buffers. It now has about 500 rnds through it (6.8SPC) with no further problems and 2 bucks have fallen to it with one shot each.(SSA TAC ammo,110grn. Barnes TSX).

Bought a Chiappa .22 long rifle upper for it . It works fine. (Their magazines are kind of a pain in the neck to load.)

Shortly after I bought it,I removed the lower, de-greased the trigger group, put JB Bore polish on the engagement surfaces, cocked and clicked the hammer 40 times catching the hammer so it would not slam into the frame. I then carefully removed the bore polish and re-lubed the trigger group with Break Free. The result was a smooth 3.5LB trigger that has not changed so far. (Try this at your own risk.)

One of our local gun stores has sold "a lot of them" with no problems reported to him. ( I had already bought mine on a pre-Christmas sale from another source before we discussed them.)

I don't know how the Bush Master Carbon 15 compares with New Frontier's, but check out NF's torture test on You Tube.

 

[Hit_Factor]

A friend of mine had one of these carbon 15s and he asked me to help him sight it in. I really struggled with it until later I realized it was shooting 6 MOA. Obviously, the rifle flexed too much to hold a decent group.

 

[bowyer19]

Mine started out like that, but after about 100 rnd break in it settled down to 1.5" for 5 shots with Federal bulk ammo. I had previously read in one of these forums not to get excited about the accuracy of chrome lined bores until at least 100 rnds was fired through them.

I now have handloads for it that are sub MOA. I don't think I would expect long strings of fire to group well because the "pencil" barrel" heats up relatively rapidly.

Regarding the rifles blown in half- I believe those must have somehow fired with the bolt lugs not engaged as the locked up rifle would be steel to steel.

 

[Trent]

Regarding the rifles blown in half- I believe those must have somehow fired with the bolt lugs not engaged as the locked up rifle would be steel to steel.

The early Professional Ordinance carbon 15 bolts had either bad heat treating or bad metallurgy. When mine blew up, the front half of the bolt was still fully engaged in the lands. The back half of the bolt was... askew.

The problem with the early ones that Pro Ordinance used, is they were NOT standard AR-15 bolts, but rather, a modification. They used ROUNDED locking lugs as opposed to squared lugs. When Bushmaster bought them out they changed the design back to standard.

I haven't been able to find a replacement bolt for my Carbon 15 pistol. Bushmaster said they couldn't honor the warranty as they didn't have replacement costs, but offered a new barrel and bolt at cost with no labor.. still was a couple hundred bucks for the repair. I didn't elect to take it.

 

[hq]

A friend of mine had one of these carbon 15s and he asked me to help him sight it in. I really struggled with it until later I realized it was shooting 6 MOA. Obviously, the rifle flexed too much to hold a decent group.

That's the main reason I haven't replaced my backpack AR (Colt A2-based shorty) with one. Being able to hit a grouse-sized target at 150-200 yards requires 1-1½MOA accuracy and while shaving off another 1-2lbs of weight is tempting, an inaccurate rifle is pretty much useless to me. I've heard reports of some C15:s being able to hold a 2MOA group @100yd which would just suffice, but when I buy a rifle I much rather get one that works than one that just might work if I get lucky.