Noveske lowers: Gen 2 vs. current Gen 3

[Stickman]

I just ordered a Gen 1 rogue hunter 300blk. Gen 3’s are just too crazy priced imo.

As far as I know they just sell gen 1’s and 3’s now.

Correct, there are no Gen 3 John Noveske weapons, John wanted, designed, and used forged components. The Gen 3 models are cheaper than their Gen 2 cousins.

[Hammer_Man]

This. SMOS uppers and lowers are tighter than hell! Great stuff! I use VLTOR MUR uppers, SMOS, Noveske Gen 3 upper on my Gen 3 noveske lower. I did discover that a surefire 60 round mag would not fit in my gen 3.

I absolutely love the way my SMOS receivers fit. If you buy from SMOS directly, let them know you like a really tight fit, and they will make that happen for you. In regards to the Surefire 60 round magazine not fitting, I have never tried one in my lower and cannot comment. However, I do have a couple Magpul M3 Pmags joined via a maglink that fit my Gen 3, and SMOS lowers just fine.

[Hammer_Man]

Correct, there are no Gen 3 John Noveske weapons, John wanted, designed, and used forged components. The Gen 3 models are cheaper than their Gen 2 cousins.

Were the Gen 2 lowers manufactured by SMOS? I was under the impression that they were, I'm just trying to clarify information I put out in a previous post.

[Jonnyt16]

I need to check the forums more often lol....have a Noveske lower that can't take Gen3 Pmags. No biggie, I just ever so slightly sand down the tab on the Pmags and problem solved. But I always thought I bought the one Noveske lower with a "faulty" magwell until I read this thread lol.

[Armadillo]

I need to check the forums more often lol....have a Noveske lower that can't take Gen3 Pmags. No biggie, I just ever so slightly sand down the tab on the Pmags and problem solved. But I always thought I bought the one Noveske lower with a "faulty" magwell until I read this thread lol.

Noveske had an option to return the "faulty" magwell back to them for machining to correct the problem. You could also dremel it (not recommended). I decided to keep mine as is since I prefer USGI mags. If I ever chose to use pmags, I'd rather sand down the tab on the mags.

One month after ordering the 1st Gen 2 lowers, I ordered some more and they were not "faulty". I never confirmed it myself but my newer lowers were out of numerical range of the "faulty" lowers.

I use the "faulty" loosely as it is not a big deal and a believe technically, the lowers are still mil spec in all regards besides the "flare" in the "FFL" - flared forged lower. Flare meaning that the mag well has the insertion opening more "open" if you will.

[Stickman]

Noveske had an option to return the "faulty" magwell back to them for machining to correct the problem. You could also dremel it (not recommended). I decided to keep mine as is since I prefer USGI mags. If I ever chose to use pmags, I'd rather sand down the tab on the mags.

One month after ordering the 1st Gen 2 lowers, I ordered some more and they were not "faulty". I never confirmed it myself but my newer lowers were out of numerical range of the "faulty" lowers.

I use the "faulty" loosely as it is not a big deal and a believe technically, the lowers are still mil spec in all regards besides the "flare" in the "FFL" - flared forged lower. Flare meaning that the mag well has the insertion opening more "open" if you will.

I can help clarify some of the above. First, they weren’t faulty. They were developed before Magpul released their over insertion stop equipped magazines.

Secondly, I’m the one who named the Gen 2 receivers as the “Flared Forged Lowers”. It all came about at a SHOT Show where I was kicking back on a couch while writing for Army Times / Military Times and was over at the AAC booth iirc. I was probably busy telling lies to girls or something unimportant when Johnny came over with Sheri and dropped in the couch next to me. He said, Stick, I got something for you to take a look at, I haven’t shown anyone yet. We made some obscene comments back and forth, and then he pulled the lower receiver out of his back pack.

I shot pictures of it while we talked, he explained that he wanted a forging even though there were cheaper ways to go. I asked him what the name for it was, and he replied he hadn’t thought about it yet. I told him I would write it up as the Noveske Flared Forged Lower (FFL), and so I did.

Later on John mentioned to me that the FFL name that I labeled it was a colossal pain, because too many people would get confused when they were asked for a Noveske FFL. It was relabeled, but as with many things, the catchy nick name it was given stuck with it.

[Armadillo]

I can help clarify some of the above. First, they weren’t faulty. They were developed before Magpul released their over insertion stop equipped magazines.

Secondly, I’m the one who named the Gen 2 receivers as the “Flared Forged Lowers”. It all came about at a SHOT Show where I was kicking back on a couch while writing for Army Times / Military Times and was over at the AAC booth iirc. I was probably busy telling lies to girls or something unimportant when Johnny came over with Sheri and dropped in the couch next to me. He said, Stick, I got something for you to take a look at, I haven’t shown anyone yet. We made some obscene comments back and forth, and then he pulled the lower receiver out of his back pack.

I shot pictures of it while we talked, he explained that he wanted a forging even though there were cheaper ways to go. I asked him what the name for it was, and he replied he hadn’t thought about it yet. I told him I would write it up as the Noveske Flared Forged Lower (FFL), and so I did.

Later on John mentioned to me that the FFL name that I labeled it was a colossal pain, because too many people would get confused when they were asked for a Noveske FFL. It was relabeled, but as with many things, the catchy nick name it was given stuck with it.

That was the rest of the story!