View Full Version : New manufacturer out of Idaho (lightweight junkies come in)
Not affiliated, find their upper and lower to be quite well thought out... the milled out set looks suitable for a lightweight build. (6.5 oz stripped lower / 5.85 oz stripped upper)
They also have standard sets...
Thoughts?
http://www.2a-arms.com/products
http://i.cubeupload.com/m4PROF.jpg
http://i.cubeupload.com/0iScP6.jpg
No matter how good it looks or how light it is, $530 is too much to pay for a stripped receiver set
Voodoo_Man
06-07-14, 14:59
No matter how good it looks or how light it is, $530 is too much to pay for a stripped receiver set
I have to agree $530 for an upper and lower, no matter how special seems like a lot to pay.
That's basically an extra 40 minutes of mill time for about 2oz in chips taken off. I'm sure there's a market for it, but that's a small one. It's pretty work, but the net performance (weight) gain for the time isn't a great tradeoff, so these are a better fit on no-expense-spared builds, otherwise there are much more cost efficient ways to trim mass.
Something is worth what someone will pay for it. That's all.
The set is about $480 from the only dealer that handles them for 2AA. If you're trying for a real lightweight and want to save 4 ounces without using polymer or cast magnesium alloy, this set makes sense. It is billet and it saves 1/4 pound. When trying to go lighteight, you look to save every ounce, in EVERY part possible. I have three sets of Aero Precision receivers to build with, but I chose 2AA for my lightweight build. It will always be lighter than any rifle I can build with my APs.
This set will not be for everyone, but if you want to build a true lightweight AND have billet receivers, the 2AA is an awesome option. I just received my set and the fit and finish are outstanding. I am going cheap with my pistol build, but my ligtweight, not so much.
So, are they worth it? Well, that's an individual choice that no one gets to make for you.
http://www.hawktecharms.com/SearchResults.asp?mfg=2A+Armament
It is kind of cool if you are into the whole "must cut weight" game. Price is not that bad. I have seen Noveske FFLs with a upper go for more than that. Billet set run in that area also. So it is competitive.
Would I get one....no way. I will stick with my $130 Aero Precision set any day....:haha:
http://aeroprecisionusa.com/combo-sets/ar15-stripped-receiver-set.html
jerrysimons
06-07-14, 17:53
Interesting. I would use those over plastic or magnesium receivers, neither of which I trust. These are probably stronger than those, but it is probably safe to say they wouldn't be as strong as non-lightened billet or forged. Probably a good option depending on the purpose of the rifle.
V7 weapon systems is not done yet, I'll wait to see what comes out.
It..............I will stick with my $130 Aero Precision set any day....:haha:
http://aeroprecisionusa.com/combo-sets/ar15-stripped-receiver-set.html
They were $115 when I bought two months ago, but you can still get a first run AP set for $120 with free shipping from DOA.
http://www.shop.doasales.net/AERO-PRECISION-STRIPPED-LOWER-UPPER-SET-AERO-RECEIVER-SET.htm
TacticalMark
06-07-14, 19:30
I agree they look great, $480 for a set is getting up there.
Obscenejesster
06-07-14, 20:20
I don't understand why nobody has done what BCM did with the KMR. Word has it, BCM tried manufacturing the KMR out of magnesium only and during testing, it just wasn't strong enough. They figured out that by doing a 92/8 Magnesium/Aluminum mix, it made the Magnesium alloy something like 80% stronger.
Regarding the Upper/Lower combo, I don't know that I'd pay that much for it but it does look like some nice work. I like the built in QD socket.
Why add a QD slot if you're trying to make the lightest possible lower?
The lightweight lower doesn't have QD...
Obscenejesster
06-07-14, 23:38
The lightweight lower doesn't have QD...
Oh OK...I see now.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
Boba Fett v2
06-07-14, 23:58
Why the KNS-like trigger pin retainer look?
Obscenejesster
06-08-14, 00:18
Why the KNS-like trigger pin retainer look?
Why not? I've always said there are 5 groups of people they effect.
1. They effect the guys who just want to use mil-spec and the last time I checked, KNS pins do not hold a mill spec.
2. The next guy who will never use them is because he has heard from others throughout the industry forums that they are not needed at all or only if you're going to run full auto.
3. These guys will use them because they look cool. They don't really understand how they work or when they're needed most.
4. These guys use them because they've had at least 2 pins start to walk. After checking to make sure everything was installed correctly. After conforming they feel that the next option would be KNS pins.
5. People who purchased 80%ers that came either anodized or coating with a color. After completing the 80%er, they figure their FCG holes are less likely to egg out if the don't have pins constantly rubbing against the bare aluminum.
Just use whatever you think gives you the best set up. Its your rifle and you can make the decision through research.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
ScatmanCrothers
06-08-14, 00:31
Why not? I've always said there are 5 groups of people they effect.
1. They effect the guys who just want to use mil-spec and the last time I checked, KNS pins do not hold a mill spec.
2. The next guy who will never use them is because he has heard from others throughout the industry forums that they are not needed at all or only if you're going to run full auto.
3. These guys will use them because they look cool. They don't really understand how they work or when they're needed most.
4. These guys use them because they've had at least 2 pins start to walk. After checking to make sure everything was installed correctly. After conforming they feel that the next option would be KNS pins.
5. People who purchased 80%ers that came either anodized or coating with a color. After completing the 80%er, they figure their FCG holes are less likely to egg out if the don't have pins constantly rubbing against the bare aluminum.
Just use whatever you think gives you the best set up. Its your rifle and you can make the decision through research.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
What's this got to do with these lowers being milled to look like it has a KNS pin setup?
jackblack73
06-08-14, 00:45
Why the KNS-like trigger pin retainer look?
My theory: to allow people to still use KNS trigger pins. If they milled out that area and someone still wanted to use KNS trigger pins, it would leave a gap.
Boba Fett v2
06-08-14, 13:32
My theory: to allow people to still use KNS trigger pins. If they milled out that area and someone still wanted to use KNS trigger pins, it would leave a gap.
Sounds like a reasonable answer. But I'm curious as to why they didn't go with a wider profile which would better accommodate both the thinner and wider KNS retainers.
Sent from my piece of s**t phone using Tapatalk2 (which can be equally unreliable when coupled with a junk phone)
Folks, I am affiliated with the company. I do not however have the ability to sell or conduct business on M4carbine yet. I don't know to what extent I am allowed to answer questions because of that, but I could answer any questions you may have if it is in fact allowed.
...if you want to build a true lightweight AND have billet receivers, the 2AA is an awesome option...
Paying extra for a billet receiver is bad economy. Forged receivers are stronger
Folks, I am affiliated with the company. I do not however have the ability to sell or conduct business on M4carbine yet. I don't know to what extent I am allowed to answer questions because of that, but I could answer any questions you may have if it is in fact allowed.
Welcome to the forums!
Put to whom and how your affiliated in your signature, give the mods a courtesy call which should allow you to answer questions. Then, put on your asbestos longjohns and strap in for a rollercoaster ride through Flaming Hell. It will be tough to sell most of the members of this forum on something just because it's new. The company and the product has to prove itself before it becomes accepted. The rule of thumb is "Shoot the Rifle" before passing judgement but the product has to offer something.
For example, the 2A lower is cut from a billet. It is known that AR receivers cut from a billet isn't as tough as a forged receiver. the billet piece has all it's grains running fore and aft and parallel to each other in the raw material. When the pockets for the magazine and trigger are machined out, the grain is interrupted, weakening the material.
A forging means the raw material is formed under pressure while in it's plastic state. The grains follow the new form. Yes, some are cut during the final machining process but more follow the form. Some of the grain is compressed, increasing the strength as long as the forging process does not create granular inclusions. (This is why AR receivers are forged from 7075 instead of 6061. Early receivers were forged from 6061 but that alloy is susceptible to granular inclusions which cause severe corrosion).
Hawking a product made using a process that produces a weaker part then weaken it further lightening cuts it and charge two to three times more than the stronger product to save just a few ounces is going to be tough job. Paying $480 for a billet upper & lower compared to roughly $200 for a quality forged upper & lower is bad economy
Paying extra for a billet receiver is bad economy. Forged receivers are stronger
Welcome to the forums!
Put to whom and how your affiliated in your signature, give the mods a courtesy call which should allow you to answer questions. Then, put on your asbestos longjohns and strap in for a rollercoaster ride through Flaming Hell. It will be tough to sell most of the members of this forum on something just because it's new. The company and the product has to prove itself before it becomes accepted. The rule of thumb is "Shoot the Rifle" before passing judgement but the product has to offer something.
For example, the 2A lower is cut from a billet. It is known that AR receivers cut from a billet isn't as tough as a forged receiver. the billet piece has all it's grains running fore and aft and parallel to each other in the raw material. When the pockets for the magazine and trigger are machined out, the grain is interrupted, weakening the material.
A forging means the raw material is formed under pressure while in it's plastic state. The grains follow the new form. Yes, some are cut during the final machining process but more follow the form. Some of the grain is compressed, increasing the strength as long as the forging process does not create granular inclusions. (This is why AR receivers are forged from 7075 instead of 6061. Early receivers were forged from 6061 but that alloy is susceptible to granular inclusions which cause severe corrosion).
Hawking a product made using a process that produces a weaker part then weaken it further lightening cuts it and charge two to three times more than the stronger product to save just a few ounces is going to be tough job. Paying $480 for a billet upper & lower compared to roughly $200 for a quality forged upper & lower is bad economy
Thank you, I have updated my signature.
Understood 100% on everything said above. We realize the set is not for everyone, and it was not produced as a product to compete in a strength competition with forged options. Our goal was to get as close to the magnesium lightweight sets on the market, but retain the strength advantage of 7075 over the magnesium sets. Doing so takes a lot of machine time, so the price is reflected as such. It might fit in that category if your goal is a lightweight build.
I better get some permission to talk about the set here by the powers that be, before I get myself into trouble.
Thanks gentlemen.
Paying extra for a billet receiver is bad economy. Forged receivers are stronger
True,...... for some. It's an individual choice about what is important and to each his own. Billet receivers are very popular with many people but they were never a product I was interested in. After running LMT, and then BCM factory rifles, I have a great appreciation for them. Now that I have started building my own rifles, I am buying high quality forged receivers for $60 to $120. When I was looking to build a lightweight rifle, this billet set made the most sense to me over polymer and cast magnesium alloy receivers. The Balios Lite will be very popular among lightweight builders, who already know that small weight savings cost more $$$$ than most would consider "worth it". This billet set will not make sense to many, especially many of the members here who are more about hard use, durable, and duty rifles. That's fine.
Worse economy is paying $250 for a very good forged lower when there are plenty of very good forged lower receivers available for 1/4 to 1/2 the price, but everybody gets to make their own choices. ;)
Hispanic_Hercules
06-09-14, 11:39
I agree with many above. Some of these new start up companies like this one want a crazy amount of $$$ for a upper and lower when I can get a well known brand for a third of the price.
Obscenejesster
06-09-14, 12:14
Really doesn't matter how minutely stronger a forged lower is over a billet lower.
Both options are plenty strong for what they're function is. 7075 T6 and T7 is already some very strong stuff and no amount of abuse should break them.
If you want to get technical, I've actually seen more broken forged lowers than billet lowers due to people not knowing how to properly install a trigger guard. Billet lowers are idiot proof in that regard because 99% of them have the trigger guard machined.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
Although I, personally would not buy this set, it is very interesting and innovative. This is, in part, what made America great (may she rest in peace). Regular people using their creativity and initiative to create new and innovative solutions. The market will weed out what products truly provide value and those that don't. I fully support any honest attempts to provide value to consumers. It might be a tough sell to many who frequent this site, but there are some who have and will continue to find that this set provides value to them. If you don't, then just don't buy it.
Really doesn't matter how minutely stronger a forged lower is over a billet lower.
Both options are plenty strong for what they're function is. 7075 T6 and T7 is already some very strong stuff and no amount of abuse should break them.
If you want to get technical, I've actually seen more broken forged lowers than billet lowers due to people not knowing how to properly install a trigger guard. Billet lowers are idiot proof in that regard because 99% of them have the trigger guard machined.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
That's a different thing. Don't forget most billet receivers are heavier than forged. I just don't know how folks can justify spending more for a weaker, heavier receiver as a good option. Billets don't shoot any better, they aren't any more reliable or durable, they don't run cooler or cleaner, they just run more money
I better get some permission to talk about the set here by the powers that be, before I get myself into trouble.
Per our PM traffic....
Having provided your affiliation with the company, you're good to go to answer any and all questions posed. We require disclosure as one among many ways to prevent shills who artificially create/inflate any traffic about any given thingamabob, is all.
Per our PM traffic....
Having provided your affiliation with the company, you're good to go to answer any and all questions posed. We require disclosure as one among many ways to prevent shills who artificially create/inflate any traffic about any given thingamabob, is all.
Understood sir,
I am happy to answer any questions anyone might have regarding anything from 2A, and to the best of my ability.
Thanks,
Ryan
Quiet Riot
06-09-14, 16:24
Understood sir,
I am happy to answer any questions anyone might have regarding anything from 2A, and to the best of my ability.
Thanks,
Ryan
Off topic a bit, but still relevant to the interest people have in your products... If nothing else, I am impressed with how you handled your presence in this thread. If you apply the same ethical standards to the rest of your business, you'll serve your customers very well.
It does look like a nice set compared to all the other gaudy billet lowers out there. Personally I'd stick to forged lowers.
I'll be the last one to complain about the cost. I do things few people are comfortable doing and am paid very well for my labor! No... I am not a whore but I have been called one! 2A doesn't have to justify the cost and the guys bitching about it don't have to buy it. For me it's all about the cost per oz saved vs the gain or loss of dependability. An example is the charging handle. My ultralight build will be sporting a standard GI CH. I love my BCM handle but the opportunity to save weight and money out weighs the advantages it offers. Another example is the barrel. I am not willing to give up the ease of changing parts to save the 1 1/2 oz a 14" saves me over a 16" but I am willing to gave up a little accuracy by using a .625 pencil profile. I might even give up some muzzle control and not run a comp. It all depends on how much you are willing to pay. GH
Cesiumsponge
06-09-14, 17:05
The forging process creates a stronger product, all else equal. All else isn't equal in the discussions comparing forged and billet units because billet receivers are made to whatever shape the company wants to create, not Colt's TDP. Seeing as billet tend to be much heavier due to various designs or features additional to the basic forged units, to differentiate them from other products, it has more material than the forged unit, which may or may not offset its weaker material properties. It might even be stronger. There no universal answer.
If someone machined a billet lower exactly to Colt TDP dimensionally, it should weigh a hair less because forging compacts the aluminum crystalline structure, resulting in greater density in the forged unit's metal. With identical volumetric dimensions, the forged unit would actually be heavier. With dimensionally identical units, one can say without a doubt the forged unit is stronger than a billet unit.
We don't forge anything here but I choose cold form taps when possible. It adds about 10-20% strength over using taps for the same reasons as forging or external thread rolling (grain orientation, work hardening, compaction of grain). It's usually the quickest way to get UNJF threads to MIL-S- 8879/ ASME B1.15.
If we retain specs for 75% thread engagement, we create a stronger mechanical joint. However we could drop thread engagement to 65% and still be identically strong to cut threads, but that nullifies any benefits of the strength gained. Where required, obviously we use UNJF but I often use cold form taps on commercial customer parts too because it's often faster and less troublesome than normal taps. I don't chose to use it because of the extra strength because the. engineers who send us things to manufacture designed them to work fine with standard threads.
Forging complex shapes is often cheaper than machining it from stock. There is less raw material cost in the form of chips and machine time. I'd like to know if Colt has ever stated they chose to forge for the specific purposes of strength benefits. I'm actually surprised no enterprising company has gone to thread rolling or cold form tapping, since you could factually use the selling points of 10-20% additional strength, increased fatigue resistance, and more durable threads due to work hardening, and reduced stress risers.
The best thing that can happen is watch this product get introduced into the market, and see how it shakes out. I'm not in the e,Tele gram counting club but I'd like.to see how these lighter-than-stock units hold up under abuse.
Off topic a bit, but still relevant to the interest people have in your products... If nothing else, I am impressed with how you handled your presence in this thread. If you apply the same ethical standards to the rest of your business, you'll serve your customers very well.
The goal here is to provide a nice product to the shooting community, and have some fun doing it... All the while trying to use our product to fill in some dips in our machining process. Although we are not new to making parts for the AR, and AR magnum platforms (We operate under six variances now) I realize that a name goes a long way in this business. But that name is earned... My hopes are more products that can translate to a well known and reliable manufacturer of firearms components in the industry. I can say, as new as our product is, it's exciting to see it out in the wild, and I can't wait to see people use it, and get some real feedback.
I have seen plenty of "Owners" of businesses come on these forums and absolutely crash and burn because they don't like seeing people criticize their product. It's all interpretive... Some will like it, some won't. I plan to use that as a data point for improving the product. Take it... and improve.
Ryan
Some of these new start up companies like this one want a crazy amount of $$$ for a upper and lower when I can get a well known brand for a third of the price.
What do you charge for machine time on your CNC(s)? If you are looking at this and comparing it to the cheaper forged receivers, you are missing the concept and idea behind it. When you call this a crazy amount of money, it makes me question whether you understand the machine time hours and how it equates to a price structure.
Not affiliated, find their upper and lower to be quite well thought out... the milled out set looks suitable for a lightweight build. (6.5 oz stripped lower / 5.85 oz stripped upper)
They also have standard sets...
Thoughts?
http://www.2a-arms.com/products
I think it is a good looking receiver set, and that people crying about price are missing the point that this isn't for them anyway.
I have neither desire nor can afford a 911 Porsche, that doesn't mean I can't still appreciate it for what it is.
Obscenejesster
06-09-14, 18:25
That's a different thing. Don't forget most billet receivers are heavier than forged. I just don't know how folks can justify spending more for a weaker, heavier receiver as a good option. Billets don't shoot any better, they aren't any more reliable or durable, they don't run cooler or cleaner, they just run more money
They aren't all weaker. Some have more material which actually makes them stronger. A tad heavier as well.
In my eyes, Billet lowers are appealing because they are easier to manufacture yourself.
What is the weight reduction, for a upper/lower set, over a standard set?
And I would be more concerned with proper surface anodizing / coating, of any receivers, than the forged vs billet debate.
On average it's about 1/4 of a pound weight savings over a standard forged upper and lower.
Or to put it into perspective, the BALIOS-lite upper, lower, and a BCM-KMR rail (minus nut) weighs the same as a stripped forged upper and lower.
On average it's about 1/4 of a pound weight savings over a standard forged upper and lower.
Or to put it into perspective, the BALIOS-lite upper, lower, and a BCM-KMR rail (minus nut) weighs the same as a stripped forged upper and lower.
That's impressive!
I will say you can tell allot of thought and R&D was put into both the upper and lower. There is just one thing that I absolutely HATE, and that is the clearance cut on the lower to assist in installation of the bolt catch roll pin without using the proper punch. If you happen to have any revisions in the future for lowers sans this cut, I would purchase it. Until then it just stands out as a "we made it easier for your aunt Marge to install your bolt catch roll pin for you" type of deal. While we are at it, dropping the P-mag lines is also a plus for me. In the meantime, thanks for joining and posting here, the info and interaction is appreciated.
http://i.cubeupload.com/VWsDXU.jpg
It doesn't use a roll pin or punch. The bolt catch retainer is threaded and requires an Allen wrench to install. Having just installed one today, I'm not sure how you could install it without the relieved cut.
On the Lite lower, the cut is much less obvious.
They aren't all weaker. Some have more material which actually makes them stronger. A tad heavier as well.
In my eyes, Billet lowers are appealing because they are easier to manufacture yourself.
Ounce for ounce, yes they are weaker which for the sake of brevity, I am guilty of not making clear earlier
I think it is a good looking receiver set, and that people crying about price are missing the point that this isn't for them anyway.
I have neither desire nor can afford a 911 Porsche, that doesn't mean I can't still appreciate it for what it is.
The one thing I was going to point out about the 2A Lite receivers is that you are not just paying for the lighter weight. You are paying for lighter weight that aesthetically pleasing. I do admit that the receiver set looks good and looks much better than the receiver set that had weight removed by a generous application of lightening holes.
Some dismiss a quarter pound of weight reduction as insignificant, but I find it's noticeable in an AR.
Stating that paying double the price for a billet receiver is poor economy, even one that's been lightened, isn't a complaint. It's an observation based on practical experience.
So let me do this- Wah! Redmist won't sell me his receiver set at half price even though billets are weaker!
Now you guys can tell me to "Quitcher bitchin!" :jester:
Red, I do give you kudos for being a class act and I'm curious to see how your endeavor shakes out. I honestly hope your receiver sets turn out to be good quality and hope they bring you success
ScatmanCrothers
06-09-14, 23:23
It doesn't use a roll pin or punch. The bolt catch retainer is threaded and requires an Allen wrench to install. Having just installed one today, I'm not sure how you could install it without the relieved cut.
On the Lite lower, the cut is much less obvious.
Making it capable of being installed from the right side would be ideal. If I remember correctly that's how the Seekins billet lower is set up.
I think it is a good looking receiver set, and that people crying about price are missing the point that this isn't for them anyway.
I have neither desire nor can afford a 911 Porsche, that doesn't mean I can't still appreciate it for what it is.
Exactly this - this is far and away the least retarded weight saving receiver set I've encountered, but the cost is still going to restrict it a little too badly for a larger type of market - perhaps as complete rifles that can be defrayed a bit (sell them as complete setups with KMR Rails, smart barrel contours), and maybe add some cerakote options since this is going to be a narrower market, if it's already really unique looking, the color is comparably cheap anyway.
At just 2oz per receiver the full set differential is the selling point, so the key is finding ways to make that weight savings seem more attractive, and the major difficulty is that very few folks are going to notice a difference measured in ounces so close to the center of mass for light carbines anyway, so that makes me thing well thought out complete builds might net better results (e.g. a super-light pistol lower setup with 1-pt Sling Mount, MOE Grip, and 11.5" LW CHF barrel and 9" KMR/NSR/Similar Keymod Handguard) as flagship models to demonstrate the net weight savings possible.
Making it capable of being installed from the right side would be ideal. If I remember correctly that's how the Seekins billet lower is set up.
We had to go from the front with the drill and tap because the QD is in the way on the standard BALIOS. However I think we could get it from the other side on the lite.
I will ask the guys, and see whats up with that.
I have a running list of stuff to change, we will for sure weigh the options and see if a revision would be worthwhile down the road. I will pass the word on to the guys at the shop about the thread over here. We have enjoyed all the feedback so far. I too hope that the brand takes off, we are going to give it one hell of a shot, I can tell you that.
https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/t1.0-9/10401393_744254615595370_7748829471773006393_n.jpg
Weight/ounce saving homos win against satan handers I see again....:)
Enhanced controls trumps saving a few ounces in my book all day long. That's just my 2cents for future lower mfg'rs.
The "cut" doesn't bother me at all. If they were to change anything for a differnt look (because looks is all it would be about, not function), I think it would be easier/better to just remove the small raised rib on the upper that makes the cut look like a channel on the standard set. On the Lite set, the "cut" fits right in with the other milled areas.
And about making it easier for Aunt Marge to install the bolt catch, changing the lower just for the look is like helping Aunt Marge coordinate her purse with her AR. Aunt Marge should choose another set if the Balios receiver set doesn't go with her outfit.
But what do I know, I only ponied up the cash and bought a set of the Balios Lite.
jerrysimons
06-10-14, 08:47
What is the weight reduction, for a upper/lower set, over a standard set?
And I would be more concerned with proper surface anodizing / coating, of any receivers, than the forged vs billet debate.
BALIOS-lite stripped lower specs w/ integral trigger guard: 6.50 oz stripped
Standard Noveske N4 lower: 8.85oz stripped
MOE trigger guard assembly: .22oz
together = 9.07oz
Rainier Arms RM15 lower (w/ .05oz tension screw; made by MEGA): 8oz stripped (not sure why it is .85oz lighter than the Noveske?)
Mag Tactical Systems magnesium lower w/ integral trigger guard: 5.875oz stripped
Gen 2 Noveske stripped lower w/ integral trigger guard and flared mag well: 9.75oz stripped
BALIOS-lite upper minus forward assist: 5.85 oz stripped
standard mil-spec forged upper: 8.6oz with .7oz mil-spec port door assembly & .75oz forward assist assembly. 7.15oz stripped
V7 Weapon Systems M4 forged upper: 6.9oz stripped
Vltor MUR 1a (Noveske/old style): 9.6oz w/ mil-spec port door & f/a. 8.15oz stripped
Rainier Arm's mil-spec profile, forged upper minus f/a: 7.3oz w/ mil-spec port door assembly. 6.6oz stripped
https://www.rainierarms.com/?page=sh...roduct_id=2940
Vltor MUR 1s w/o FA : 8.4oz w/ mil-spec port door assembly. 7.65oz stripped
V7 Weapon Systems basic, mil-spec profile, forged upper minus f/a & minus port door mounts: 6.4oz
(It is probably more like 6.3oz, they usually add a tenth to cover themselves. They also plan on making an additional cut on future uppers that might shave some more off).
http://www.v7weaponsystems.com/collections/frontpage/products/v7-ar-15-basic-upper-receiver
Mag Tactical Systems magnesium upper: 4.8oz stripped
V7 has some more tricks up their sleeve with uppers I am eagerly awaiting.
Cesiumsponge
06-10-14, 10:27
One factor in the reduced mass at the receiver is it will make receiver-forward parts selection a bit more critical so you don't lose the snappy feel of a rifle that isn't nose-heavy. Anyone done a paper build to check out the total weight of a lightweight-oriented build using this receiver set?
We live in a market with $450 barrels, and $2500+ turnkey AR rifles. The receiver will be with you for the life of the rifle while $300+ rails and top end optics packages come and go as the uswer tweaks and tries new things. If sales are lukewarm, pricing tweaks can always be done.
.........
Anyone done a paper build to check out the total weight of a lightweight-oriented build using this receiver set?......
My assembled lower weighs 1 lb. 11.6 oz. I loosely assembled my upper except the dust cover (.4 oz.) and the small bolts for the KMR -10 and it weighs 2 lb. 15 oz. That is with a DD 14.5" lightweight, mid - length .625 barrel, SLR .625 adjustable gas block, and BCM Mod 1 comp.
Yeah, this has me thinking if custom specced barrels (e.g. taking CHF FN blanks, turning them to mid-LW taper profiles and running custom undersized gas ports might be the rest of the answer), low mass reciprocating components (buy semiauto bolt carriers in the white and mill a bit more mass off, like the FA cuts; lightweight buffers) and really focusing on complete rifles might be the better answer so this quarter pound can be turned into a full pound of savings while benchmarking against a 6920 for performance/accuracy. Couple that with some cute weight savings options (Rosch SLM-1 Light/Front Sight, Aimpoint T-1 on DD Mount, Minimalist Stock) and maybe bundle that a bit as complete rifle kit offerings (at least as proof of concept setups) to show off what's really possible there.
Freedoooom
06-10-14, 14:04
Paying extra for a billet receiver is bad economy. Forged receivers are stronger
They are? I guess the tried and true fact that billet cranks are stronger than forged cranks in the automotive industry doesn't apply?
MorphCross
06-10-14, 15:13
They are? I guess the tried and true fact that billet cranks are stronger than forged cranks in the automotive industry doesn't apply?
If by forged you actually mean cast than yes the "forged" part is weaker than a billet. :sarcastic:
All things being equal (weight, heat treat and materials) forged components are stronger than machined billet. The extra you are paying for in billet components is the additional machining and material lost in the process of machining.
Freedoooom
06-10-14, 16:23
If by forged you actually mean cast than yes the "forged" part is weaker than a billet. :sarcastic:
All things being equal (weight, heat treat and materials) forged components are stronger than machined billet. The extra you are paying for in billet components is the additional machining and material lost in the process of machining.
Oh yes, people within the automotive industry don't know the difference between forged and casting. What a bunch of rubes!
Don't be ridiculous, they use billet over forged from Formula 1 to NASCAR to endurance racing.
MorphCross
06-10-14, 16:46
Oh yes, people within the automotive industry don't know the difference between forged and casting. What a bunch of rubes!
Don't be ridiculous, they use billet over forged from Formula 1 to NASCAR to endurance racing.
Economy of scale, not strength, is what drive high performance component manufacturing. These racing teams are not ordering thousands of a highly specialized crankshaft so it is more economical for them to machine the components out of billet. You don't get a huge variety in design with forgings, the dies are relatively fixed to produce a rough shape. So for performance vehicle parts for extracting as much power as possible for as little initial start up cost, billet is the way they go.
jerrysimons, thanks for the post with data that was actually pertinent to the topic. :happy:
*hint, hint, hint
MorphCross
06-10-14, 17:52
jerrysimons, thanks for the post with data that was actually pertinent to the topic. :happy:
*hint, hint, hint
My apologies for throwing this topic further off track. From here on I'll respectfully stay out of the thread until I have something pertinent to the main topic.
They are? I guess the tried and true fact that billet cranks are stronger than forged cranks in the automotive industry doesn't apply?
http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/tt91/n_parker_2009/6061vs7075_zps71fb9591.jpg
I received my BALIOS-Lite set last week. The machine work is simply perfect, as is the anodizing.
The plan is to build a lightweight 300BLK using a thin profile barrel and a BCM KMR forend. I will likely stay with conventional bolt and carrier parts to help maintain reliability.
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/05/qude4y3y.jpg
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/05/huqy2una.jpg
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/05/4y3e2yzu.jpg
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/05/3ynyva6u.jpg
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/05/baturyty.jpg
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
The "cut" doesn't bother me at all. If they were to change anything for a differnt look (because looks is all it would be about, not function), I think it would be easier/better to just remove the small raised rib on the upper that makes the cut look like a channel on the standard set. On the Lite set, the "cut" fits right in with the other milled areas.
And about making it easier for Aunt Marge to install the bolt catch, changing the lower just for the look is like helping Aunt Marge coordinate her purse with her AR. Aunt Marge should choose another set if the Balios receiver set doesn't go with her outfit.
But what do I know, I only ponied up the cash and bought a set of the Balios Lite.
I wouldn't worry about his comment. It stems from complete irrationality and is just his ego talking. It makes absolutely no sense to not like a feature that causes no functionality problems and makes a task easier to do.
I didn't realize the uppers had that level of detailed machine work. That tells me even more that the target should be complete weapon systems (if access to a 4-axis mill which I'm assuming is there, golf ball milling some intermediate contour barrels would be attractive) that would bring overall weight savings closer to 12oz over equivalent setups (lighter reciprocating weight setups, maybe make an adjustable GB a standard item, Lightweight Keymod rails, minimalist stocks) and see if the market will bear 5.5lb complete rifles (Rosch SLM, AP Micro on lightened mount).
Hell, a dedicated hunting model (carbon fiber free float handguard only, maybe set up a demo with a light 2-7x scope on API Superlight 30mm mount as a proof of concept) would probably be fairly awesome, since that could take advantage of a simple hydro-transfer and look pretty slick (advertising rifle) and be a sub-6lb hunting rifle; it wouldn't even have to be in 5.56, but anything that can show off cumulative effect of weight savings.
What I'm getting at is it's going to be tricky in this market to justify the cost difference for this receiver set when advancements in handguard design are making comparable gains for small cost difference to the end user, and smarter barrel profile choices can save at least that - this is better than the titanium BCG's I've seen as far as weight savings per cost, but this is still coming in at over $600/lb of weight savings, which is where I suspect the breakpoint is for a viable mass market weapon system.
We have two Makino A51-nx Horizontals on a 24 pallet MMC, as well as two 8-Axis Nakamura-Tome WT-150 Turn-mills. A Makino PS-95, and a Hass VF-3SS Verticals with 4th's
We will work our way part by part to a complete gun, or perhaps a builders bundle.
Your machining work looks excellent. The Balios-Lite does interest me personally and also in regards to a niche that I fulfill.
Your machining work looks excellent. The Balios-Lite does interest me personally and also in regards to a niche that I fulfill.
Thank you, I will pass the compliment to the guys out in the shop.
Thank you, I will pass the compliment to the guys out in the shop.
Have a question on your muzzle brake. Why does it have that section right behind the business end that doesn't seem to be doing anything? It's seems without it, it would be closer to an A2 size. Thanks.
justin_247
07-07-14, 17:22
I received my BALIOS-Lite set last week. The machine work is simply perfect, as is the anodizing.
The plan is to build a lightweight 300BLK using a thin profile barrel and a BCM KMR forend. I will likely stay with conventional bolt and carrier parts to help maintain reliability.
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/07/05/qude4y3y.jpg
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
Using the KMR rail, a lightweight profile barrel, a lightweight stock assembly, and some small parts from V7, you should be able to get the rifle down to just over 5 lbs, including an Aimpoint Micro on a DD mount, without needing to go with a lightweight BCG or buffer system.
Using the KMR rail, a lightweight profile barrel, a lightweight stock assembly, and some small parts from V7, you should be able to get the rifle down to just over 5 lbs, including an Aimpoint Micro on a DD mount, without needing to go with a lightweight BCG or buffer system.
I had been eyeballing all kinds of lightweight parts to include a carbon fiber wrapped barrel from Proof Research but now my plan is to build a rifle using commonly available and/or more affordable parts.
I ordered a factory AAC barrel this morning and will start gathering a few other odds and ends before sending it all off to V7 for assembly. The AAC barrel was more than I wanted to spend but it is the profile, material and twist rate I want.
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
justin_247
07-07-14, 17:45
I ordered a factory AAC barrel this morning and will start gathering a few other odds and ends before sending it all off to V7 for assembly. The AAC barrel was more than I wanted to spend but it is the profile, material and twist rate I want.
That barrel is the smart choice. Not only is the profile pretty nice, but it also comes straight from the folks who developed the 300 BLK, so it should be optimal for the caliber.
That barrel is the smart choice. Not only is the profile pretty nice, but it also comes straight from the folks who developed the 300 BLK, so it should be optimal for the caliber.
Well, the only barrels I can find in a lighter profile are the AAC, a Noveske CHF (hard to pass on but also more money), a Wilson Combat (out of stock anyways) and an AR Stoner from Midway.
Noveske is certainly a known quantity. Honestly I probably would have gone this route had Brownell's not been running their $50 off promotion.
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
Have a question on your muzzle brake. Why does it have that section right behind the business end that doesn't seem to be doing anything? It's seems without it, it would be closer to an A2 size. Thanks.
I would need some clarification on where you are looking.
While I'm accumulating parts for my build; what can you recommend for BUIS? Troys aren't heavy but I would like to look at other options. Are the Spikes sights still about the lightest thing out there? What about something like the plastic sights from Diamondhead USA?
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
While I'm accumulating parts for my build; what can you recommend for BUIS? Troys aren't heavy but I would like to look at other options. Are the Spikes sights still about the lightest thing out there? What about something like the plastic sights from Diamondhead USA?
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
The MBUS Gen 2 set is .3oz lighter than the Diamondhead polymer sights. The front sights are the same weight and the rear Diamondhead polymer sight is .3oz heavier.
MorphCross
07-07-14, 23:32
While I'm accumulating parts for my build; what can you recommend for BUIS? Troys aren't heavy but I would like to look at other options. Are the Spikes sights still about the lightest thing out there? What about something like the plastic sights from Diamondhead USA?
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
Why not the Magpul MBUS (polymer version)? The fact that Spikes doesn't even list the weight of their BUIS as a guarantee of their claim that it is the lightest BUIS on the market is troubling.
One thing to look out for when you receive your AAC barrel is for left over salts from the nitride in the extension area. While they won't affect the material that was a serious WTF moment when I received my barrel back in 2012. It may be a non-issue, so this is just a heads up.
I would need some clarification on where you are looking.
The section between where the ports and baffles begin and the wrench flats for mounting.
The section between where the ports and baffles begin and the wrench flats for mounting.
That "void" area will accommodate some updated suppressor attachment down the road. It's a blank area for us to work with as of now. Right now the muzzle device will work with the classic GEM-TECH HALO. We were also wanting to keep the part longer to accommodate pinning. (Length overall)
jerrysimons
07-10-14, 13:21
is the Balios-lite upper reciever compatible with V7 weapon Systems aluminum tapered port door rod?
Thanks
is the Balios-lite upper reciever compatible with V7 weapon Systems aluminum tapered port door rod?
Thanks
From what I understand, it is not directly compatible. The V7 rod must be modified to work. I need to get one in my hands and see where people are modifying them to work.
justin_247
07-10-14, 14:06
This is pretty cool. With a combination of 2A-Armament, V7, BCM, Magpul, DD, LWRC, ALG, Aimpoint, and a few others parts, you can build-up a 5.5 lb rifle without any compromises...
Below you can see a rifle that uses a non-pinned 16" barrel with a good profile and mid-length gas system, a full auto BCG, normal carbine buffer system, a free-float rail, BUIS, Aimpoint optic, and still have an ergonomic stock, pistol grip, and charging handle. All of this weighs 5.5 lbs. Amazing.
If you want a little less ergonomic, you can cut it down to 5.2 lbs.
Now if I just had the cash to buy all of these parts.
27053
BufordTJustice
07-10-14, 18:05
This is pretty cool. With a combination of 2A-Armament, V7, BCM, Magpul, DD, LWRC, ALG, Aimpoint, and a few others parts, you can build-up a 5.5 lb rifle without any compromises...
Below you can see a rifle that uses a non-pinned 16" barrel with a good profile and mid-length gas system, a full auto BCG, normal carbine buffer system, a free-float rail, BUIS, Aimpoint optic, and still have an ergonomic stock, pistol grip, and charging handle. All of this weighs 5.5 lbs. Amazing.
If you want a little less ergonomic, you can cut it down to 5.2 lbs.
Now if I just had the cash to buy all of these parts.
27053
Your list alone needs to be a sticky.
Holding out for the BCM LW Stock, swapping in a Geissele G2S, and running an A2 as a placeholder muzzle device would actually put that final price right in the range of other high end complete carbines and come in lower than that right column dream rifle (albeit a touch less awesome, but something really worth looking into). I'm so glad I just wasted all my disposable income on another mountain bike, otherwise I would explain how much distaste I have for you, Justin, just for compiling a list that tempting.
What is Bravo Company planning for a lightweight stock?
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
jerrysimons
07-10-14, 18:40
From what I understand, it is not directly compatible. The V7 rod must be modified to work. I need to get one in my hands and see where people are modifying them to work.
Ok, please update the thread when you find out. I am guessing a file? Thank You
MorphCross
07-10-14, 20:31
What is Bravo Company planning for a lightweight stock?
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
I believe he is referring to this: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?151670-New-BCM-stock-in-the-works
justin_247
07-10-14, 20:43
Holding out for the BCM LW Stock, swapping in a Geissele G2S, and running an A2 as a placeholder muzzle device would actually put that final price right in the range of other high end complete carbines and come in lower than that right column dream rifle (albeit a touch less awesome, but something really worth looking into). I'm so glad I just wasted all my disposable income on another mountain bike, otherwise I would explain how much distaste I have for you, Justin, just for compiling a list that tempting.
Thanks!
I, too, am interested in how the BCM stock will turn out regarding weight. The design looks superb.
The A2 flash hider only adds about 1.4 oz to the weight, so it's not very significant.
And I consider any trigger group from ALG/Geissele/G&R/Colt to be interchangeable on the parts list with no impact upon reliability, and which hold weight differences measured in tenths of an ounce. Not a big deal, really.
justin_247
07-10-14, 22:06
I totaled up the costs on my list and, if you exclude the Aimpoint Micro and the DD mount for it, the rifle totals about $2,100 in parts.
Not as bad as I thought it would be.
Ok, please update the thread when you find out. I am guessing a file? Thank You
You would be correct, the V7 rod is crimped flat on one end to prevent it from falling out towards the rear of the upper receiver. The space utilized for this crimp is open on a standard forging, but it is closed on our BALIOS-lite upper. A standard "Mil-Spec" rod could be used, or the V7 rod could be reduced at the crimp to fit the BALIOS-lite. If you were to modify the V7 rod, the modification would go hidden completely by the BALIOS-lite upper.
Thanks!
I, too, am interested in how the BCM stock will turn out regarding weight. The design looks superb.
The A2 flash hider only adds about 1.4 oz to the weight, so it's not very significant.
And I consider any trigger group from ALG/Geissele/G&R/Colt to be interchangeable on the parts list with no impact upon reliability, and which hold weight differences measured in tenths of an ounce. Not a big deal, really.
I'm more along the lines of whether Redmist wants to leverage your hard work to roll out one demo proof of concept rifle (or somebody else like-minded) and see if there some areas where little bits of weight gain are offset by a bit price cut. The G2S is the best value in top end triggers out there; moving to an H1 aimpoint saves another little bit of cash, the rest of the V7 stuff all makes sense along the line of $$ spent for weight savings. The ELW/KMR uppers are already ridiculously svelte, but the end product there would be a 5.5# stick with a solid optic and good enough trigger/barrel setup to be a 1.5MOA rifle with match ammo and rock the house out to 400yd.
I'm more along the lines of whether Redmist wants to leverage your hard work to roll out one demo proof of concept rifle (or somebody else like-minded) and see if there some areas where little bits of weight gain are offset by a bit price cut. The G2S is the best value in top end triggers out there; moving to an H1 aimpoint saves another little bit of cash, the rest of the V7 stuff all makes sense along the line of $$ spent for weight savings. The ELW/KMR uppers are already ridiculously svelte, but the end product there would be a 5.5# stick with a solid optic and good enough trigger/barrel setup to be a 1.5MOA rifle with match ammo and rock the house out to 400yd.
Hmm....
That does sound interesting. I will review the list tomorrow with the guys at the shop, and see if we have it in the budget to possibly recreate something like the above. Most of these parts are slowly being acquired for test fit, form, function anyhow. I can't promise anything, but it makes sense all the way around to at least have a demo rifle with the weight savings to back up the product.
You have my attention....
Another weight saving option would be to use something like a Trijicon RMR instead of a T1/H1. This would take an ounce or two off the overall package and might work well for those wishing to run some back-up irons in addition to a red dot.
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
justin_247
07-11-14, 09:33
Another weight saving option would be to use something like a Trijicon RMR instead of a T1/H1. This would take an ounce or two off the overall package and might work well for those wishing to run some back-up irons in addition to a red dot.
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
My personal preference is the T-1, since it is very, very rugged.
The RMR is very light... 1.2 oz. So what is the lightest 1913 mount for it?
Now if I just had the cash to buy all of these parts.
27053
Just curious, did you mean to put the 14.5" ELW-F in this list? The weight you quoted is for the 14.5" ELW-F (1.292lbs or 20.7oz per MM). The 16" ELW-F is 1.388lbs (22.21oz).
I was planning on a build with an 16" ELW-F, but decided to try IG's Sionics 16" LW melonite barrel instead. I weighed it yesterday and it came out to 1.363lbs (21.8oz).
BufordTJustice
07-11-14, 09:41
When weight goes down, recoil increases on a one-to-one basis. I say consider an SLR Sentry 6 (.625 diameter) gas block. It's another .2 or .3 oz, but it could easily be worth it.
My Sentry 7 (.750") set screw gas block weighs right at 1oz.
justin_247
07-11-14, 09:58
Just curious, did you mean to put the 14.5" ELW-F in this list? The weight you quoted is for the 14.5" ELW-F (1.292lbs or 20.7oz per MM). The 16" ELW-F is 1.388lbs (22.21oz).
I was planning on a build with an 16" ELW-F, but decided to try IG's Sionics 16" LW melonite barrel instead. I weighed it yesterday and it came out to 1.363lbs (21.8oz).
Thank you, I have adjusted the numbers.
I intended for the rifle to have a 16" barrel, to avoid needing to pin the muzzle device.
When weight goes down, recoil increases on a one-to-one basis. I say consider an SLR Sentry 6 (.625 diameter) gas block. It's another .2 or .3 oz, but it could easily be worth it.
My Sentry 7 (.750") set screw gas block weighs right at 1oz.
It looks promising, but I can't find any numbers for a Sentry 6.
If recoil is a concern (I think we need to build it first to find out just how significant it is compared to a rifle 1.5 lbs heavier), a compromise may be to go with a VLTOR A5 system, which would add 1.8 oz to the weight.
justin_247
07-11-14, 10:09
decided to try IG's Sionics 16" LW melonite barrel instead. I weighed it yesterday and it came out to 1.363lbs (21.8oz).
The advantage of going with that barrel (it's from IG, so I'm sure it's awesome) is that it saves .3 oz but is also $80 cheaper. Definitely something to consider.
For now, I'm going to stick to the BCM ELW-F barrel since it is receiving rave reviews, but I did add it to the "Ultra Lightweight" column since I'm sure it's a great barrel and it suits the requirement for a lighter barrel without needing to go with one requiring a pinned muzzle device.
justin_247
07-11-14, 10:25
Updated chart:
27066
BufordTJustice
07-11-14, 11:29
Thank you, I have adjusted the numbers.
I intended for the rifle to have a 16" barrel, to avoid needing to pin the muzzle device.
It looks promising, but I can't find any numbers for a Sentry 6.
If recoil is a concern (I think we need to build it first to find out just how significant it is compared to a rifle 1.5 lbs heavier), a compromise may be to go with a VLTOR A5 system, which would add 1.8 oz to the weight.
Well, I'd estimate .8 oz to 1 oz since my .750 Sentry 7 is 1oz. The weight increase delivers a disproportionate decrease in recoil as compared to the A5 system. And I am definitely an A5 fanboy.
justin_247
07-11-14, 12:59
Of note, the VDI Manimal flash hider weighs only 1.472 oz., yet cost $45 less than the V7 flash hider which weighs .022 oz. less. May be a good area for cost reduction.
You could also add the TN Arms Co. (http://www.tnarmsco.com/single-hybrid-nylon-6-6-brass-stripped-receivers-starting-at-40-00/) hybrid poly lower (5.6oz) to the "ultra lightweight" column. I have two of them and will be building my LW rifle with one in a week or two. I'll confirm the advertised weight on my scale late this weekend.
justin_247
07-11-14, 14:26
You could also add the TN Arms Co. (http://www.tnarmsco.com/single-hybrid-nylon-6-6-brass-stripped-receivers-starting-at-40-00/) hybrid poly lower (5.6oz) to the "ultra lightweight" column. I have two of them and will be building my LW rifle with one in a week or two. I'll confirm the advertised weight on my scale late this weekend.
Negative. The point of this whole exercise is to assemble the lightest weight rifle possible without significant compromise with regards to parts reliability (polymer receivers, polymer fire control groups and other lower parts, pinned flash hiders, low mass operating systems, etc.) or needing to go the NFA route (such as reducing barrel length).
I will be creating a list that uses the JP LMOS and SLR Sentry 6 adjustable gas block when I get a chance.
I have ordered a host of V7 parts as described on the list, as well as a BCM-KMR 13" Rail. I will most likely substitute the Aimpoint for a SPARC, as well as an Odin Works Ultralite 16" Mid-length barrel. I already have these parts on hand, and will see how close they come to the listed parts....
The exercise will remain the same though in theory.
jerrysimons
07-11-14, 21:16
My uberlight build should be completed soon, waiting on a Ti brake from V7. I'll be using your lower and possibly upper. It is going o come in at close to 5lbs hopefully, maybe, less.
justin_247
07-11-14, 21:40
I have ordered a host of V7 parts as described on the list, as well as a BCM-KMR 13" Rail. I will most likely substitute the Aimpoint for a SPARC, as well as an Odin Works Ultralite 16" Mid-length barrel. I already have these parts on hand, and will see how close they come to the listed parts....
The exercise will remain the same though in theory.
Sounds good! I'm eager to see the results, since I plan to do this build sometime this fall.
Just for reference--if anyone is planning a 300BLK build--the 16" factory AAC barrel weighs 25.2 ounces naked.
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
justin_247
07-12-14, 10:35
Updated chart:
27081
Since it was asked of me, using a JP LMOS with an SLR Sentry 6 adjustable gas block and carbine buffer system reduces the weight of the rifle in the "Ultra Lightweight" category by about 5 oz, and adds about $200 to the cost.
That being said, I do not believe the LMOS is suitable for any kind of hard use rifle.
You could also add the TN Arms Co. (http://www.tnarmsco.com/single-hybrid-nylon-6-6-brass-stripped-receivers-starting-at-40-00/) hybrid poly lower (5.6oz) to the "ultra lightweight" column. I have two of them and will be building my LW rifle with one in a week or two. I'll confirm the advertised weight on my scale late this weekend.
I have a LW barreled upper coming right now to put on my Tennessee Arms polymer lower, as well. I'm looking for a rifle my 7 year old grand daughter can carry. kwg
The Trijicon RM01 with ADM QD co-witness mount is 4.2 ounces.
I wouldn't compare the RMR to the T-1 in terms of durability but I assume it will stand up to reasonable abuse. Pat McNamara has been using one of these for several years and has generally been happy with it.
If we're talking about building a lightweight rifle that's to be used for serious social interaction, I would like to suggest BUIS be added to the list. Anything that takes batteries can fail at the wrong time, etc etc
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
justin_247
07-12-14, 12:14
The Trijicon RM01 with ADM QD co-witness mount is 4.2 ounces.
I wouldn't compare the RMR to the T-1 in terms of durability but I assume it will stand up to reasonable abuse. Pat McNamara has been using one of these for several years and has generally been happy with it.
Thanks for the info. I have added it to the "Ultra Lightweight" category.
If we're talking about building a lightweight rifle that's to be used for serious social interaction, I would like to suggest BUIS be added to the list. Anything that takes batteries can fail at the wrong time, etc etc
DD Fixed Sights are already listed near the bottom.
DD Fixed Sights are already listed near the bottom.
I missed these earlier. Sorry about that.
Got any weight specs for the Spike's folding sights? They're supposed to be the lightest thing around, from what I've read. Too bad they have the big logos plastered on.
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
justin_247
07-12-14, 13:07
Got any weight specs for the Spike's folding sights? They're supposed to be the lightest thing around, from what I've read. Too bad they have the big logos plastered on.
Great call! According to RECOIL, they are, "a mere 1 ounce for the rear and 0.8 ounces for the front."
http://www.recoilweb.com/spikes-tactical-micro-folding-backup-iron-sights-41179.html
I have added them to the "Ultra Lightweight" list since many are still unsure about their durability.
They are probably the lightest flip-up BUIS out there, though. The KAC Micros total 3.2 oz for the front and rear, for example.
Updated chart:
27087
Maybe some of the plastic sights like the Diamondhead or even the ARMS are light enough to add to the list?
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
justin_247
07-12-14, 13:55
Maybe some of the plastic sights like the Diamondhead or even the ARMS are light enough to add to the list?
I have durability concerns about them.
NOTE: I should probably note that the Diamondhead sights weigh a total of 2.7 oz, so they're the same weight as the DD fixed sights, and the ARMS sights weigh 2.3 oz, so just slightly less.
A few more weights to add to the chart, if anyone is interested.
VTAC padded sling 6.6 ounces.
VTAC bungee sling 5.2 ounces
VLTOR QD swivel 0.8 ounces
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
I have a set of the Spikes BUIS on one of our Demo rifles.... They are amazingly nice. I am honestly surprised they can sell them at that price point. I will add those to the test build since they are on the list.
My 2A Balios-lite build
27108
27109
27110
27111
27112
27116
27113
27114
4lbs 13.3 ounces
Balios lite upper and lower receiver set
BCM MOD 4 charging handle
BCM KMR 13
BCM ELW-F 16" barrel
Rainier Arms Mini comp
Boomfab BCG with RCA adjustable gas key
Naroh handstop
Aimpoint T-1 with Fortis mount
MFT stock
SSA trigger
V7 titanium gas block, buffer tube spring and buffer (weights removed), port door and rod, endplate/castle nut, safety selector, take down pins
Magpul K grip w/ aluminum grip screw
Over 1000 rounds mostly reloads with out any issues. Upper and lower fit together perfect and have developed no slop. Thanks for the great receiver set!!!
You could also add the TN Arms Co. (http://www.tnarmsco.com/single-hybrid-nylon-6-6-brass-stripped-receivers-starting-at-40-00/) hybrid poly lower (5.6oz) to the "ultra lightweight" column. I have two of them and will be building my LW rifle with one in a week or two. I'll confirm the advertised weight on my scale late this weekend.
No. Just No. This went from a botique lightweight aluminum receiver thread, to the mentioning of a poly lower. *facepalm*
I have ordered a host of V7 parts as described on the list, as well as a BCM-KMR 13" Rail. I will most likely substitute the Aimpoint for a SPARC, as well as an Odin Works Ultralite 16" Mid-length barrel. I already have these parts on hand, and will see how close they come to the listed parts....
The exercise will remain the same though in theory.
Check out ... https://www.primaryarms.com/Holosun_Paralow_HS403A_Parallax_Free_Red_Dot_p/hs403a.htm
Unfortunately the mount is just a tad higher than a 1/3 lower co, but IMO this makes the SPARC now fully obsolete. Closer to a t1 with the water proofness, weight, emitter, but much lower costing :) Maybe make a nice addition to your build for only a bit more coin. Markm has put some words in about these over on another forum.
No. Just No. This went from a botique lightweight aluminum receiver thread, to the mentioning of a poly lower. *facepalm*
That's actually surprisingly relevant - I'd argue that there are tons of people who aren't mechanical engineer types that look at the poly lowers out there right now and think of that as a viable way of saving weight on a capable carbine. We know it's not, but they don't, and usually there isn't a super-obvious answer on 'how to save weight intelligently'. After slimming down the barrel profile, selecting a light but functional handguard and doing likewise with the furniture and accessories, something like the Balios-Lite and V7 components is the next step for making weight gains without compromising utility.
Grahats - that thing is seriously gorgeous, and I still cannot wrap my mind around the 4lb 13.3oz figure. That is absolutely phenomenal.
justin_247
07-13-14, 08:39
27116
27113
27114
4lbs 13.3 ounces
Balios lite upper and lower receiver set
BCM MOD 4 charging handle
BCM KMR 13
BCM ELW-F 16" barrel
Rainier Arms Mini comp
Boomfab BCG with RCA adjustable gas key
Naroh handstop
Aimpoint T-1 with Fortis mount
MFT stock
SSA trigger
V7 titanium gas block, buffer tube spring and buffer (weights removed), port door and rod, endplate/castle nut, safety selector, take down pins
Magpul K grip w/ aluminum grip screw
Over 1000 rounds mostly reloads with out any issues. Upper and lower fit together perfect and have developed no slop. Thanks for the great receiver set!!!
WOW! That's lighter than I anticipated.
I rounded up a lot of the numbers that I had on my chart since I didn't want to give anybody too high of an expectation, but I think I may have rounded up too many ounces. This confirms it.
BufordTJustice
07-13-14, 11:41
27116
27113
27114
4lbs 13.3 ounces
Balios lite upper and lower receiver set
BCM MOD 4 charging handle
BCM KMR 13
BCM ELW-F 16" barrel
Rainier Arms Mini comp
Boomfab BCG with RCA adjustable gas key
Naroh handstop
Aimpoint T-1 with Fortis mount
MFT stock
SSA trigger
V7 titanium gas block, buffer tube spring and buffer (weights removed), port door and rod, endplate/castle nut, safety selector, take down pins
Magpul K grip w/ aluminum grip screw
Over 1000 rounds mostly reloads with out any issues. Upper and lower fit together perfect and have developed no slop. Thanks for the great receiver set!!!
That's impressive! Though you'll likely want and enjoy an h buffer better than an empty carbine buffer shell.
Beaver2334
07-13-14, 16:44
27116
27113
27114
4lbs 13.3 ounces
Balios lite upper and lower receiver set
BCM MOD 4 charging handle
BCM KMR 13
BCM ELW-F 16" barrel
Rainier Arms Mini comp
Boomfab BCG with RCA adjustable gas key
Naroh handstop
Aimpoint T-1 with Fortis mount
MFT stock
SSA trigger
V7 titanium gas block, buffer tube spring and buffer (weights removed), port door and rod, endplate/castle nut, safety selector, take down pins
Magpul K grip w/ aluminum grip screw
Over 1000 rounds mostly reloads with out any issues. Upper and lower fit together perfect and have developed no slop. Thanks for the great receiver set!!!
Wow! Looks great
jerrysimons
07-13-14, 19:54
WOW! That's lighter than I anticipated.
I rounded up a lot of the numbers that I had on my chart since I didn't want to give anybody too high of an expectation, but I think I may have rounded up too many ounces. This confirms it.
Light indeed! There are weight savings still if he used a 14.5" ELW-F barrel w/ V7 ti pinned muzzle device, 10" KMR, Colt N1 CAR stock, like 4 or 5oz still. This confirms ill have no problem getting under 5lbs.
That boomfab bolt carrier is $500! If one were not going to run a carbine buffer it would be money wasted, since it would offset the extremely lightweight carrier with buffer weight.
We started our build here at the shop.
So far we have:
BALIOS-lite lower
V7 Back plate and castle nut
V7 Receiver Extension
V7 Take-down pins
V7 Mag catch and button
V7 Safety Selector
Magpul K-grip
Magpul Gen-3 PMAG
and with sticking to the functional aspect of the build
USGI
Hammer
Trigger
Pins
Bolt catch
Buffer detent
We plan to run all the hard use internals as standard USGI "Mil-Spec" parts, and see where we end up weight wise.
But right now we are at 1lb 5.75oz
27301
That lower looks great but is out of my price range. Very cool design Red!
That boomfab bolt carrier is $500! If one were not going to run a carbine buffer it would be money wasted, since it would offset the extremely lightweight carrier with buffer weight.
That is correct. A lightweight carrier makes best advantage of a reduced weight buffer and an adjustable gas block. An H buffer would be counter productive.
grahats, let us know how it continues to run with a non-adjustable gas block.
That is correct. A lightweight carrier makes best advantage of a reduced weight buffer and an adjustable gas block. An H buffer would be counter productive.
grahats, let us know how it continues to run with a non-adjustable gas block.
I am using a adjustable gas key. I don't recommend my setup without using a
Adjustable key or gas block.
Ok, here is a final rundown.
The idea here is lightweight where you can, without using light weight carriers, buffers, or anything internal that deviates from a known working standard. the hard use stuff stays "Mil-Spec" or the likes.
The lightwight stuff:
BALIOS-lite upper
BALIOS-lite lower
V7 Takedown pins
V7 Backplate and castle nut
V7 receiver extension
V7 port door and rod
V7 safety selector
V7 Muzzle device
BCM-KMR 13"
Odin-Works ULTRAlite 16" Mid-length barrel
Standard Stuff:
Standard CMMG Fire control group. (Hammer, trigger, pins etc.)
Standard Buffer detent
Standard Buffer, and spring
Standard bolt catch
Standard FA Bolt and carrier group
Standard crush washer
2A-Armament Gas Block
Standard mid-length gas tube
Common popular stuff on hand:
BCM Charging handle MOD-4
MAGPUL CTR Stock
MAGPUL P-MAG
MAGPUL K-Grip
LaRue Tactical LT-660 mount
Vortex SPARC Optic
You end up with a 6 pound rifle.
With a GEM-TECH Ti HALO, you would have a suppressed carbine that weighs 6lb, 12.2oz...
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-JSKJUPqLNrc/U8lXYfEallI/AAAAAAAABOg/eQm3fP2ADWw/w1280-h853-no/IMG_3765.JPG
I think I remembered everything.
jerrysimons
07-18-14, 19:48
Ok, here is a final rundown.
The idea here is lightweight where you can, without using light weight carriers, buffers, or anything internal that deviates from a known working standard. the hard use stuff stays "Mil-Spec" or the likes.
The lightwight stuff:
BALIOS-lite upper
BALIOS-lite lower
V7 Takedown pins
V7 Backplate and castle nut
V7 receiver extension
V7 port door and rod
V7 safety selector
V7 Muzzle device
BCM-KMR 13"
Odin-Works ULTRAlite 16" Mid-length barrel
Standard Stuff:
Standard CMMG Fire control group. (Hammer, trigger, pins etc.)
Standard Buffer detent
Standard Buffer, and spring
Standard bolt catch
Standard FA Bolt and carrier group
Standard crush washer
2A-Armament Gas Block
Standard mid-length gas tube
Common popular stuff on hand:
BCM Charging handle MOD-4
MAGPUL CTR Stock
MAGPUL P-MAG
MAGPUL K-Grip
LaRue Tactical LT-660 mount
Vortex SPARC Optic
You end up with a 6 pound rifle.
With a GEM-TECH Ti HALO, you would have a suppressed carbine that weighs 6lb, 12.2oz...
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-JSKJUPqLNrc/U8lXYfEallI/AAAAAAAABOg/eQm3fP2ADWw/w1280-h853-no/IMG_3765.JPG
I think I remembered everything.
Nice rifle! The idea reminds me of my ultralight HD build. Using standard receivers, auto BCG, and 11" NSR it is 95.65oz with light, sights, and RDS. https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?146386-Noveske-Ultralight-(Update)
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a24/accidentprone86/BAB7E482-D106-4A94-AD9D-FB66AE4D37B0-1391-000001E4DA30D265_zps96445480.jpg
Can't say as though I would use the Balios-lite receivers for a HD/duty gun. I suppose I still have concerns over comparative strength to standard forged receivers. The set of Balios-lite recievers coming to me are going into a crazy, most-lightweight-as-possible build.
Excellent...
If you have any questions about the product, let me know...
Ryan
Ready.Fire.Aim
07-18-14, 22:08
It is nice to have new companies getting innovative in the AR business.
justin_247
07-18-14, 23:19
Ok, here is a final rundown.
The idea here is lightweight where you can, without using light weight carriers, buffers, or anything internal that deviates from a known working standard. the hard use stuff stays "Mil-Spec" or the likes.
...
I think I remembered everything.
Beautiful rifle! Definitely looking at procuring some of these receivers later this year.
What do you think about that Odin Works barrel? There aren't many reviews out there of it, so I am curious. It came with a gas block, right? Was it already mounted to the barrel? If so, did they use a set screw or a pin? If not, did the barrel have a dimple on it?
So far I have only shot the Odin-Works ULTRAlite into our bullet bunker for function testing.
I got it right from Tom Hines, Probably owe him some jerky or something now. We used our own gas block on it, but he does ship them with a gas block if you purchase one. no dimple on the one I have. I am going to run it through a couple three-gun comps ( I am new to that! Never done it!) and we will see how it does. If I can get some bench time, I can put some good optics on a rifle and ring it out some.
It matches the function of a lightweight build perfectly.... If it performs as well, it's a winner!
FYSA,
The USGI-pattern M4 stock without a sling swivel or screw is 5.77 ounces.
New Ti gas block:
http://www.2a-arms.com/content/2a-ti-gas-block
Sent from my GT-P3113 using Tapatalk
jerrysimons
07-30-14, 11:11
I received a matched Balios-lite receiver set. These things are machined to perfection! Good job 2A-arms.
My only grip assembling was that the trigger and hammer pin holes were to tight to fit Geissele pins (the included slave pin would slide through). I rolled up some 400grit sand paper and twisted it in the holes a little bit. The pins then slid in tightly and snugly but without having to force them.
I also filed down the tapered portion of V7 Weapon Systems aluminum port door rod so it could be slid through the hole on the Balios-lite upper. I used Alumablack to re-blacken the metal since part of what was the tapered portion sticks past the hole and shiny bare metal could be seen in the gap between the port door and the receiver.
Hammer and trigger pins were very tight in my lower as well. I went through the parts box until I found some used pins that fit okay.
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
Hammer and trigger pins were very tight in my lower as well. I went through the parts box until I found some used pins that fit okay.
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
Are these on standard triggers guys??
Thanks,
Ryan
Are these on standard triggers guys??
Thanks,
Ryan
Mine is the Geissele 2 Stage.
Sent from my Torque using Tapatalk
jerrysimons
07-31-14, 12:24
Are these on standard triggers guys??
Thanks,
Ryan
Geissele SD3G. Their small pin size is a hair bigger in diameter than mil-spec, IIRC.
Geissele SD3G. Their small pin size is a hair bigger in diameter than mil-spec, IIRC.
Perfect, that makes sense. If it becomes an issue in any way, please contact me at ryan@2a-arms.com
Thanks,
Ryan
I heard you were going to update your lower soon. I was wondering how big the update would be and if it would add or subtract weight from the lower? Thanks!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.