View Full Version : What lowers fail: prone to fail
I do not build so my knowledge is limited to the opinion of gunsmiths who put my stuff together. I do keep round counts and run my weapons hard.
I got no issues with my LMT M4 nor my old CAR 15 COLT SP1 carbine. I can see no
flaws with my S&W lower with LMT internals and a Armalite M4 upper and I can see no problems with my DPMS complete lower with Tactical Solutions M4 22LR dedicated upper.
I did not buy for the cheapest solution , rather bought the best I could find in the bare market conditions of the last year and thus I own a S&W and DPMS lower which I would never have considered in any other time as I am a Colt addict. So far, I can see no degradation in quality with DPMS or S&W compared to my LMT or Colt lower. Everything fits well and functions.
So I am not seeing anything fail using other than Colt lowers and I run a ton of ammo weekly thru my weapons. Do I expect something on a M4 to fail at 10K mark, ...well yes I do and machines do wear so that is expected.
I doubt any of the non Colt lowers will wear out. I am a Colt kind of guy but does it make any difference if the lower is not Colt? Probably not. I think it is
hit or miss if a civilian lower is in spec or not. I think LMT and other high end makers do a better job of QC and pass that cost to the buyer. I think DPMS and Rock River are good Chevy level hard use well made totally satisfactory receivers. I think if you go to Oly, and the cheaper selling lowers: you risk the tolerances being all over the map.
If the logo on the lower is the sole thing that bothers you, then just buy whatever makes you feel good. If your lower works well for you, just go to the range and wear it out.
Complete lowers are cheap enough to replace but I have yet to read of anyone wearing a lower out. Now if you went to the gun show and bought internals in the blind , you might have failures so I will not discount that happening.
So..........what lowers fail and are prone to fail: where is the data and list of these? Seems to be that most lower receivers function just fine, there are tens of thousands of them out there running along and you know, if they did not, the sniveling would be all over this forum.
Its all name brand bias. In a pinch a blond will do but are red heads better? I married a brunette so what the hell am I to do?
So..........what lowers fail and are prone to fail: where is the data and list of these?
Lowers don't really wear out. There is no list.
Either a lower is in spec (FCG hole placement, mag well broach, machining, etc) or it isn't.
There are anecdotal accounts of FCG hole "egging" out. But I've read more valid replies from Military Armorers who've seen guns older than they are that are still fine.
Lower damage might be caused by bad pistol caliber conversions and stuff. But other than that worrying about lower wear is a waste of time.
Belmont31R
10-18-09, 11:47
The parts in the lower matter more than the actual lower as long as the lower was machined correctly and with the right materials.
Ill buy any good lower as long as the roll mark isnt heinous looking. If its clean looking I dont care if its a deer, a horse, an oval, or a kights head.
One lower receiver a person might want to steer clear of for serious usage, would be a cast lower receiver.
Don’t know of any current manufacturers that still use cast receivers, so the only way you might stumble into one would be through a used firearms purchase.
I built up two AR15s on Vulcan arms lowers because they were the first to be legal in Kalifornia for an OLL. Vulcan arms is probably the worst of all AR manufactures. They both work fine.
There are just a handful of forgers making upper/lowers. Either they or others machine, most use CNC because I seriously doubt anyone could do it by hand and still be in business.
In FAQs on lowers here and elsewhere, the individual brands are mentioned as specifying their "blueprint" and tolerance. Obviously, some have in the past missed it. Or played with it - Colt for instance with pin diameters.
But no one has suggested they don't buy each others to research and improve theirs. As they are in the business to get more from the other guy, I'd say theres a nice plateau right now where junk has been pushed out of the market and the players are all good.
CNC has leveled the playing field. If the hole location is +/- .015, and the CNC holds to .003 or better, it's hard to make junk.
Makes the cool logo and website all the more important to support the price.
It also means marketing new concepts. Billet, calibers, colors, accessories, whatever to attract attention and make repeat sales. Now, assemble your own is growing.
Maybe just collecting stripped lowers for the art.
As someone else mentioned, and from my experience, it is only the cast lowers that tend to show premature wear, particularly in the take down pin holes, although some, but not as significant, premature wear in the hammer pin holes can be expected. The old Essential Arms cast lowers come to mind from my experience.
I have a Stag and an LMT. I have to use a punch to drive out the rear takedown pin in the Stag, the LMT just pushes right out. Everything else in the lower is equivalant to the eye. If I had the tools and know-how to measure the lowers, I would probably find more differences. Looking at other things about the rifles like the buffer tube and the bolt lugs tells me more attention to detail was paid on the LMT than the Stag.
da_shotcaller
10-26-09, 17:13
I built up two AR15s on Vulcan arms lowers because they were the first to be legal in Kalifornia for an OLL. Vulcan arms is probably the worst of all AR manufactures. They both work fine.
Was it the Vulcan? I thought it was Ameteec that was the first one. Anyway as long as we got it now in CA who cares who's first :D. Hopefully someday we can get rid of that bullet button and be like the rest of the country.
I could be wrong about the Vulcan. When I bought it, the magazine was "permanently" fixed in place with a pin.
I was able to remove the "permanent" magazine and installed a bullet button and 10 round Bushmaster magazine.
After the Supreme's give us the incorporation decision, it will be just a matter of time until our AR15s can run free of bullet buttons and other gimicks. On the day of the decision, I will probably just make the conversion and let the cards fall where they may.
da_shotcaller
10-27-09, 11:34
I believe Vulcan was sold as a complete rifle at the time along with bushmaster will welded magwell and the famous FAB10. When I mentioned Ameteec I was talking about OLL stripped lower. But I could be wrong all I know is we got the AR's (nuetered version) back in CA. and that's good enough for me for know. :D
I could be wrong about the Vulcan. When I bought it, the magazine was "permanently" fixed in place with a pin.
I was able to remove the "permanent" magazine and installed a bullet button and 10 round Bushmaster magazine.
After the Supreme's give us the incorporation decision, it will be just a matter of time until our AR15s can run free of bullet buttons and other gimicks. On the day of the decision, I will probably just make the conversion and let the cards fall where they may.
I bought my Vulcan as a stripped lower (with the pinned in magazine). I am glad we have them back in California even with the goofy bullet buttons. I will be real glad when we get incorporation and overturn the Cali AWB law.
da_shotcaller
10-27-09, 12:01
I'm hoping also. At this point I would gladly trade in my collapsible/ folding stock, flash hider/ muzzle brake if they say "we'll only give you a regular mag release and pistol grip for you AR to be CA compliant."
As someone else mentioned, and from my experience, it is only the cast lowers that tend to show premature wear, particularly in the take down pin holes, although some, but not as significant, premature wear in the hammer pin holes can be expected. The old Essential Arms cast lowers come to mind from my experience.
I have an old Essential Arms investment cast lower. It cannot be compared with other cast lowers. It has been through a lot of use and is still in great condition. However, I also have an Oly cast lower (Plinker Model) which I bought when I had no money right after the AWB expired for $62. It has not been used. But it is a piece of junk. I bought it basically just in case they quickly tried to re-enact the ban... Investment cast receivers, at least the Essential, are leagues beyond other cast receivers. I also saw a DPMS cast receiver from the 2004 timeframe, and while better than the Oly by far, it also paled in comparison to the old Essential Arms investment cast receivers.
I'm hoping also. At this point I would gladly trade in my collapsible/ folding stock, flash hider/ muzzle brake if they say "we'll only give you a regular mag release and pistol grip for you AR to be CA compliant."
da shotcaller, don't take this the wrong way. But, I am not willing to trade jack sh*t. Come June, it is a whole new ballgame. They need to give us our FULL rights and get off our backs. The days of pleading and begging are over.
I do Brazilian Jiu Jitsu. The first principle is that you fight for position first. Then, you go for submission. In gun rights terms, after incorporation, it will be as if we are mounted on their chest and are raining blows down on their pathetic governmental faces. It won't be over. They will put up a fight. But, in the end, they will tap.
In June, we own them.
mkmckinley
10-27-09, 22:46
I just inspected an ancient M16A1 receiver rebuilt into an SPR in the arms room today. I think it had an actual bakelite pistol grip, all shiny and hard. Anyway that thing had no deficiencies or "egging". I think your chances of getting an out-of-spec lower from any of the reputable manufacturers is minimal.
da_shotcaller
10-28-09, 18:10
Can't be too aggressive at this point. You got to be patient at this time. You're already thinking ahead but your not at the best position yet. Thinking to far ahead and too aggressively can lead to a disastrous mistakes. You got to slowly take what they give you and don't let go until you get what you want.
My earlier post is just a scenario "If" that's what they give us for the moment. You take that and then get ready for the next round. Once they give it to you they can't just take it back.
da shotcaller, don't take this the wrong way. But, I am not willing to trade jack sh*t. Come June, it is a whole new ballgame. They need to give us our FULL rights and get off our backs. The days of pleading and begging are over.
I do Brazilian Jiu Jitsu. The first principle is that you fight for position first. Then, you go for submission. In gun rights terms, after incorporation, it will be as if we are mounted on their chest and are raining blows down on their pathetic governmental faces. It won't be over. They will put up a fight. But, in the end, they will tap.
In June, we own them.
Stay away from DPMS lower parts kits, and I would also stay away from LMT MIM gas keys. Why get MIM when you don't have to?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.