number9xd
02-07-09, 22:32
Well, as I posted in another thread, a few weeks ago I ordered 3 EA lowers to build identical AR's for myself and my two toddler sons. I figure by the time they get grown (and they won't get them until the are grown) the AR could very likely be long since banned and it'd be cool for them to have a piece of firearms history. I think all 3 of us having identical AR's with sequential serial #'s would be extra special, cool, sentimental, whatever.
I recently bought a new Double Star DS-4 carbine and really like the VERY nice roll marks on the lower and they are only 25min from where we live so seeing the Winchester, KY on the side makes a good ol' KY boy proud too. I tried to find DSC lowers, but they weren't out there - at a reasonable price or time frame with the sequential serial #'s - that I could find anyway. I seen many good reports on several forums about the EA lowers and their good availability so I ordered 3 in the Tough Coat finish, which is baked on over top of the hard anodizing from what I understand.
The lowers came in this week and I was pleased to see they look very nice. They are absent of any mold flash. They don't have the molding ridge along the center line of the trigger housing like my DSC has, but they do have some light tooling marks in there but the finish hides them well and you have to get right down on the area to notice. They have a nice smooth radius on the underside of the buffer extension and only a minimal trace of a tool chatter mark on the underside of the front take down pin bosses. The roll marks text is a little light on a letter here and there and the FIRE and SAFE on the right side of the lower is not as deep as the left side of the lower - this is common on all 3 of the lowers I got. The roll marks don't look bad by any means, just don't look as good as the VERY nice, deep, sharp text on the DSC lower.
I have some background in machining, CNC programming and CMM programming so I understand a little bit about how to layout and measure a part for dimensional accuracy. Having said that, I only have a set of digital calipers and micrometer at home - a surface plate and height gauge or even a small CMM in the garage would be sweet, but not very practical for me. The calipers work good enough to make due.
Going off a lower blueprint I found online, I checked every dimension I could with the tools I have and found the lowers to be in spec. The exception being the trigger slot width being .002" over spec, the width between the front takedown bosses .002" over spec, the rear takedown detent hole .004" over spec, on 2 of the lowers the distance from the front takedown pin hole to the hammer pin hole was .0007" under spec and on the other lower the distance from the trigger pin hole to the fire selector hole was .001" under spec. These measurements between holes were taken using the standard pins that come in a LPK, so that really doesn't concern me a great deal since the pin/hole fit is not a press fit and has some "slop" or tolerance built in.
***EDITED*** To better explain what I mean by the hole locations being "out of spec" as I measured them. I re-read my post this morning and can see how someone could be left with misunderstanding what I meant by saying the the hole locations being out of spec by .0007" and .001" didn't concern me a great deal. (when measuring with calipers and LPK pins)
The Trigger and Hammer pin holes have a spec of .156" +/-.0015".
These holes in the lowers I have measured .1565" on 2 lowers and .157" on the other lower.
The Trigger and Hammer pins that I was using out of a Double Star LPK measure .154".
**So, with the .154" pin in the holes .157" in diameter, the pin would have been pulled off-center in the hole .0015" while I was "pulling" on it and the front takedown pin with the calipers to measure the distance between them. Factoring in the true pin size and true hole size and adding that difference back on top of the measured distance between the two pins, the true center-center hole measurement would be "in-spec" per the lower print. I guess it is my fault for not explaining this in the begining, or I should have just said they are in-spec and could have avoided some possible confusion.
Now I am not saying these are "top-shelf" or "THE" best lowers on the market or anything remotely like that. Just that, IMO, they appear to be very well made lowers. Having said that, understand that at this point these EA lowers and my DSC lower are the only ones I have ever had in my hands and my eyeballs on. So, take that and these pics with that in mind.
Now I just gotta pick up some BCM middies to put on these suckers :D
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee238/number9st/Guns/EA_009.jpg
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee238/number9st/Guns/EA_008.jpg
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee238/number9st/Guns/EA_005.jpg
Left side
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee238/number9st/Guns/EA_006.jpg
Right side
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee238/number9st/Guns/EA_007.jpg
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee238/number9st/Guns/EA_013.jpg
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee238/number9st/Guns/EA_010.jpg
....
I recently bought a new Double Star DS-4 carbine and really like the VERY nice roll marks on the lower and they are only 25min from where we live so seeing the Winchester, KY on the side makes a good ol' KY boy proud too. I tried to find DSC lowers, but they weren't out there - at a reasonable price or time frame with the sequential serial #'s - that I could find anyway. I seen many good reports on several forums about the EA lowers and their good availability so I ordered 3 in the Tough Coat finish, which is baked on over top of the hard anodizing from what I understand.
The lowers came in this week and I was pleased to see they look very nice. They are absent of any mold flash. They don't have the molding ridge along the center line of the trigger housing like my DSC has, but they do have some light tooling marks in there but the finish hides them well and you have to get right down on the area to notice. They have a nice smooth radius on the underside of the buffer extension and only a minimal trace of a tool chatter mark on the underside of the front take down pin bosses. The roll marks text is a little light on a letter here and there and the FIRE and SAFE on the right side of the lower is not as deep as the left side of the lower - this is common on all 3 of the lowers I got. The roll marks don't look bad by any means, just don't look as good as the VERY nice, deep, sharp text on the DSC lower.
I have some background in machining, CNC programming and CMM programming so I understand a little bit about how to layout and measure a part for dimensional accuracy. Having said that, I only have a set of digital calipers and micrometer at home - a surface plate and height gauge or even a small CMM in the garage would be sweet, but not very practical for me. The calipers work good enough to make due.
Going off a lower blueprint I found online, I checked every dimension I could with the tools I have and found the lowers to be in spec. The exception being the trigger slot width being .002" over spec, the width between the front takedown bosses .002" over spec, the rear takedown detent hole .004" over spec, on 2 of the lowers the distance from the front takedown pin hole to the hammer pin hole was .0007" under spec and on the other lower the distance from the trigger pin hole to the fire selector hole was .001" under spec. These measurements between holes were taken using the standard pins that come in a LPK, so that really doesn't concern me a great deal since the pin/hole fit is not a press fit and has some "slop" or tolerance built in.
***EDITED*** To better explain what I mean by the hole locations being "out of spec" as I measured them. I re-read my post this morning and can see how someone could be left with misunderstanding what I meant by saying the the hole locations being out of spec by .0007" and .001" didn't concern me a great deal. (when measuring with calipers and LPK pins)
The Trigger and Hammer pin holes have a spec of .156" +/-.0015".
These holes in the lowers I have measured .1565" on 2 lowers and .157" on the other lower.
The Trigger and Hammer pins that I was using out of a Double Star LPK measure .154".
**So, with the .154" pin in the holes .157" in diameter, the pin would have been pulled off-center in the hole .0015" while I was "pulling" on it and the front takedown pin with the calipers to measure the distance between them. Factoring in the true pin size and true hole size and adding that difference back on top of the measured distance between the two pins, the true center-center hole measurement would be "in-spec" per the lower print. I guess it is my fault for not explaining this in the begining, or I should have just said they are in-spec and could have avoided some possible confusion.
Now I am not saying these are "top-shelf" or "THE" best lowers on the market or anything remotely like that. Just that, IMO, they appear to be very well made lowers. Having said that, understand that at this point these EA lowers and my DSC lower are the only ones I have ever had in my hands and my eyeballs on. So, take that and these pics with that in mind.
Now I just gotta pick up some BCM middies to put on these suckers :D
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee238/number9st/Guns/EA_009.jpg
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee238/number9st/Guns/EA_008.jpg
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee238/number9st/Guns/EA_005.jpg
Left side
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee238/number9st/Guns/EA_006.jpg
Right side
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee238/number9st/Guns/EA_007.jpg
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee238/number9st/Guns/EA_013.jpg
http://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee238/number9st/Guns/EA_010.jpg
....