Freak Inserts - stainless vs Aluminum

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sottyman
    commented on 's reply
    I went ahead and picked up a new stainless set off ANS as well as the smaller single ones, so I have .675-.693 I think. Not that I expect to ever shoot anything over .687 from the sounds of how paint is these days...

  • Chuck E Ducky
    replied
    Stainless are more durable. I have aluminum, stainless and brass they all shoot the same. I like the brass ones best because they are smaller more usable sizes. But there is no difference in how they shoot. The stainless and brass seem way more durable tho. Freak inserts are very inconsistent in size. They rarely match the the labeled sizes. Overseas cheap manufacturing technology can’t keep the tolerance that they label. (Im sure they can but not for what you buy them for) However the brass ones are spot on because smart parts/ GOG didn’t manufacture them.

    Leave a comment:


  • Magmoormaster
    replied
    Yeah, I'll echo what everyone else has said. Even if the only reason is just that they're much harder to damage, I'd say they're worth it. I want to say my kit (which is an older one) goes up all the way to .697, which I've augmented down to .675. IMO the stainless inserts are the only way to go. They are heavier but it's pretty negligible. Not to mention, you don't have to worry about the color-coded aluminum inserts clashing with fancy anos.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cdn_Cuda
    replied
    Only bad side about the kit is that it’s got a lot of large bore sizes 695 being the biggest, 684 being the smallest. I have several smaller inserts. Guess I’ll keep the stainless, sell the aluminum and keep the smaller sizes. I can always pick up a few smaller stainless inserts as well. — actually looks like it’s hard to find stainless freak inserts in Canada.

    Leave a comment:


  • Siress
    replied
    Yes, the SS are worth keeping over the Al inserts. They will not damage as easily, and it's been reported by numerous people that they are bored more accurately - both in nominal diameter and roundness. The only drawback is that the marking is not as easy to see. I used a sharpie to write the bore sizes onto mine. Problem solved.

    Leave a comment:


  • Alexndl
    replied
    They are worthless, let me get them out of your hand
    I will take everything lower than 687 and will let you the good one 693 and other

    Serious note, stainless is harder material and will stay in beter shape over time. But in term of acuracy I did not saw a notable difference between alu and SS

    Leave a comment:


  • Sottyman
    replied
    I think the SS go down to .675, and up to the .693 range? I got a set recently myself, and only keep up to .689 in my gear box. General consensus seems to be they're a little more accurate on the bore sizes, and are a little tougher. Not that I ever wore out an aluminum insert...

    Leave a comment:


  • Ecapnation
    replied
    I've found the stainless ones to be more accurate to their advertised bore size

    Leave a comment:


  • Cdn_Cuda
    started a topic Freak Inserts - stainless vs Aluminum

    Freak Inserts - stainless vs Aluminum

    Quick question on Freak inserts. Ended up getting a stainless kit with some gear. Are the stainless ones worth keeping over the standard kit? I need to compare the barrel bores to make sure keep most the small sizes.
Working...