Accuwedge

boomerang

boomerang

Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Messages
947
Likes
43
Feedback: 1 / 0 / 0
I'm having trouble fitting an Accuwedge in my AR. What part of it do you trim to make the upper able to seat in the lower?
Sides or bottom?

I also installed a one piece gas ring which is very tight but fits. It may need to be broken in.

On another topic, I bought some Smith & Wesson Peformance lube a few days ago.
It seems really really good.
 
boomerang said:
I'm having trouble fitting an Accuwedge in my AR. What part of it do you trim to make the upper able to seat in the lower?
Sides or bottom?

I also installed a one piece gas ring which is very tight but fits. It may need to be broken in.

On another topic, I bought some Smith & Wesson Peformance lube a few days ago.
It seems really really good.
Click to expand...

I'm not even going there!

Ed
 
I believe you just want to trim it enough so it just clears the rear takedown pin. I need to do this myself with a build I am working on. It seems they drop right in to older Colt receivers or others with a lower rear cut in them but something like the Stag lower I am working on seems to have a more shallow cut in the receiver.
 
I've never trimmed any of mine. I squeeze the upper and lowers together untill the pin goes in. Yes, one is a very tight fit. The upper and lower have to be squeezed together to get the pin out, but I like the fact there is no play between them.
 
Accuwedges are a scam. They should be called Tightwedges, or we suckered people in with the name wedges... All the stupid thing does is make an AR harder to take apart. It does absolutely nothing to improve accuracy. When ever I work on an AR, and it has one in it, I refuse to reinstall them.

--EasyD
 
I agree that they have nothing to do with accuracy; however they take the rattle out of upper and lower fit. This is more for aesthetics and doesn’t cause any problems with the gun. They are inexpensive and I believe they have their place.
 
The Accuwedge is easy to install, relatively cheap and takes that annoying rattle out of a loose upper/lower combination, which is exactly what I expect from it. The name is misleading but the part does do its job.
 
EasyD said:
Accuwedges are a scam. They should be called Tightwedges, or we suckered people in with the name wedges... All the stupid thing does is make an AR harder to take apart. It does absolutely nothing to improve accuracy. When ever I work on an AR, and it has one in it, I refuse to reinstall them.

--EasyD
Click to expand...

Yeah, but it keeps the thing from rattling/clunking. That's the only reason I have one in my colt. Actually, before I had an actual "accu wedge" I had a pencil eriaser that I had cut to the appropriate dimensions stuffed down in there, worked almost as well. [laugh]

-Mike
 
The debate about these things is well established - much like the recoil buffer in an M1A/M14. Some say it's a solution looking for a problem, (why aren't they added at the factory?), the other side says they are a progressive part which addresses an overlooked issue. I take the middle road. If an Accuwedge makes you happy, then trim it a bit and have a nice life. I have a recoil buffer on my M1A and noticed a softening of the "clank" of the weapon, but little else. It remains on my rifle to this very second and I have a spare for when this one falls apart. I'll likely buy an Accuwedge if my upper and lower have so much play as to be annoying, though I realize it will have no effect on accuracy and that any claims for MOA improvement are likely a farce...
 
My Colt had a tiny bit of movement between the receivers. To me it just didn't feel 'right' regardless of the knowledge that it didn't cause any issues. The little wedge tightened it right up. I have no problems pushing out the takedown pin.

Maybe it just matters how tight or loose the receiver fit is to start.

I have no plans to get one for the NES lower unless it shows the same annoying looseness.

It's only a couple of bucks. If you think you might like to tighten things up, try it. If it doesn't work for you, no big loss.

Don't get caught up in a name. Marketing companies spend a long time creating names to sell to the uninformed. Look at what the product does and decide for yourself if that is something you need.

It's the same deal with the dust cover for my Beowulf upper. Alexander Arms doesn't include one as the standard size doesn't fit the larger ejection port. The claim is it isn't needed and would increase the cost to have a specialized part made. He's right. But, in my mind the receiver doesn't look 'finished' without that cover, so I found one built to the proper size and installed it. Does absolutely nothing functionally, but to me it makes the gun more 'complete'.
 
Last edited:
Maybe back when Al Zitta came up with the Accuwedge (1982) ARs weren't as consistent in their fit as they are now. I wasn't shooting them back then (or anything else since I was 4) but maybe more of rattle between the upper and lower was common then. Dan S might know about that. I like how it takes that little movement out from between my RR upper and BM lower. It might not make the gun more accurate, but if it feels more comfortable to me, it might make me more accurate.

Accuwedge is a good, catchy name, what else would you called it? "Red Rubber Rattle Reducer" is a bit long.
 
vellnueve said:
Enough movement could cause an MOA shift, but you'd have to be way, way, way out of spec.
Click to expand...


I still have yet to find somebody who can tell me how play between the upper and lower can effect accuracy. I just don't see it.
 
GTOShootr said:
Maybe back when Al Zitta came up with the Accuwedge (1982) ARs weren't as consistent in their fit as they are now. I wasn't shooting them back then (or anything else since I was 4) but maybe more of rattle between the upper and lower was common then. Dan S might know about that. I like how it takes that little movement out from between my RR upper and BM lower. It might not make the gun more accurate, but if it feels more comfortable to me, it might make me more accurate.

Accuwedge is a good, catchy name, what else would you called it? "Red Rubber Rattle Reducer" is a bit long.
Click to expand...
not to mention a great tongue twister[rofl][rofl][rofl]
 
PatMcD said:
I still have yet to find somebody who can tell me how play between the upper and lower can effect accuracy. I just don't see it.
Click to expand...

If the hammer strike can cause the upper to move from where it was as the trigger was pulled that could alter the direction of the bullet, but as was stated above, you'd need a lot of movement, or a fairly long range shot.

Frankly, I'd look at that much movement as a defect. But, the lower is aluminum and the pins are steel, so if you open and close the gun a lot, I could see the pins move more and more over time, just like the trigger group pins can get loose.

I'll go back to my "use it if you like it" recommendation. I like the way it tightens up my Colt. I'm not buying one for my NES AR unless I feel it is needed.
 
Chris said:
If the hammer strike can cause the upper to move from where it was as the trigger was pulled that could alter the direction of the bullet, but as was stated above, you'd need a lot of movement, or a fairly long range shot.

Frankly, I'd look at that much movement as a defect.
Click to expand...


I think that kind of movement would show up as a reliabilty/FTF issue way before it ever effected accuracy (if it ever could).
 
PatMcD said:
I still have yet to find somebody who can tell me how play between the upper and lower can effect accuracy. I just don't see it.
Click to expand...

OK, I have no practical experience with it but look at it this way:

1) suppose there is .005" play (maybe a little high?), and assume the pins are 6" apart (don't have my AR in front of me, so that's a guess).

2) Also suppose that when the gun is at rest before firing that the barrel sags down the whole 0.005".

3) Now, you fire the gun. The impulse tilts the barrel back to take up the 0.005" before the projectile leaves the barrel.

So, if all of the above happens, the bullet theoretically will land 9" high at 300yds.

Theoretically...
 
matt said:
OK, I have no practical experience with it but look at it this way:

1) suppose there is .005" play (maybe a little high?), and assume the pins are 6" apart (don't have my AR in front of me, so that's a guess).

2) Also suppose that when the gun is at rest before firing that the barrel sags down the whole 0.005".

3) Now, you fire the gun. The impulse tilts the barrel back to take up the 0.005" before the projectile leaves the barrel.

So, if all of the above happens, the bullet theoretically will land 9" high at 300yds.

Theoretically...
Click to expand...

Well, that is ceratinly a theory.
 
I'd have to agree I would expect a modern rifle design to fit together a bit more accurately. On the other hand it probably doesn't do much to it's accuracy. I can see the slop being a problem if it created some noise when you didn't want to be heard though!
 
Back
Top Bottom