View Full Version : New Frontier/ Polymer lowers?
huntswithweim
02-18-12, 00:38
Any of you guys running a polymer lower, such as a new frontier or plum crazy. The only reason I ask is one of the shops I go to is selling the new frontier lowers like crazy, even the fire control group is polymer, hammer and all. I just wondering if any has or had one or seen run hard. I tried the search but didn’t come up with anything.
SeriousStudent
02-18-12, 01:01
A brief search reveals this:
https://www.m4carbine.net/search.php?searchid=3995821
Plum Crazy and other polymer lowers are not well regarded, nor long-lived.
And no, I have never owned one.
To quote an Industry Professional amd Moderator on this site "I don't need to take a bite of a shit sandwich to know it tastes bad."
Coconut Pete
02-18-12, 01:01
https://www.m4carbine.net/archive/index.php/t-81081.html
There are also links to this topic in the thread above.
SeriousStudent
02-18-12, 01:04
Are you looking to save weight?
If so, there are other ways to do that. Robb Jensen and rob_s have several excellent threads on building a highly durable and lightweight carbine. You might search their posts.
Sadly, it's not a Glock. I'd save my polymer for my pistols, rather than my AR-family of carbines.
New Frontier has a thread at the THR site soliciting folks about their new lower which is supposed to sell for $99. They also said these lowers are for "casual" use. I sent them an email and told them I'd take a lower for $99 and would put it to honest use, that I would give them a chance to resolve any problems before posting about them on the internet and I would share my findings with them and post on M4carbine. While they said they'd be contacting certain members about getting lowers to test, I never got a response from them.
I figure I'd not worry about it and spend my time on other projects
JCPerson11
02-18-12, 10:31
I just ordered one. I'll be using it on a lightweight hunting rifle I'm building. Lifetime warranty, and there youtube video's seem pretty convincing if you ask me.
ForTehNguyen
02-18-12, 10:32
the Cavalry Arms lower with integrated stock is much better if you want to reduce weight
Lifetime warranty is great unless they go under. Let us know how it works out for you.
I just ordered one. I'll be using it on a lightweight hunting rifle I'm building. Lifetime warranty, and there youtube video's seem pretty convincing if you ask me.
I can see using it for a dedicated .22 upper maybe. But I think you can get a complete .22 AR for less than the cost of that lower and another upper.
huntswithweim
02-18-12, 10:55
I am not interested in them. I hadn’t even heard of such a thing, I guess I am behind the curve on this one. The weight of an AR is a non-issue to me at this point. I was just in the shop the other day looking around and I bet he sold three of the things and I hadn’t even heard of a polymer lower. Apparently I also need to brush up on my use of the search button
joeboboutfitters
02-23-12, 23:55
Lifetime warranty is great unless they go under. Let us know how it works out for you.
No offense, but are you familiar with New Frontier Armory? They're a pretty big gunshop in Vegas/online retailer as well as the manufacturer (they sub contract the injection molding, but do all assembly in-house) of these lowers so are pretty "stable". Their business model is quite a bit different than most AR "Manufacturers" these days. They're more along the lines of Palmetto State, rather than Plum Crazy.
I am not interested in them. I hadn’t even heard of such a thing, I guess I am behind the curve on this one. The weight of an AR is a non-issue to me at this point. I was just in the shop the other day looking around and I bet he sold three of the things and I hadn’t even heard of a polymer lower. Apparently I also need to brush up on my use of the search button
I'd bet I know what shop it was at :D. We've been moving hundreds out a week. You're more than welcome to come in and take a look at them sometime.
I am sorry but going to repeat what others have said on here. A lower built from polymer around a design/spec of a standard aluminum lower is just not good. When they design a lower meant to be made out of polymer then it might be worth looking at after extensive testing.
You just can't switch one material out with another.
Yes, I do know who they are and it still doesn't negate the fact that polymer lowers are good for building .22 trainers and not much else.
Again- lifetime warranty is great, if they are around to honor it.
No offense, but are you familiar with New Frontier Armory? They're a pretty big gunshop in Vegas/online retailer as well as the manufacturer (they sub contract the injection molding, but do all assembly in-house) of these lowers so are pretty "stable". Their business model is quite a bit different than most AR "Manufacturers" these days. They're more along the lines of Palmetto State, rather than Plum Crazy.
I'd bet I know what shop it was at :D. We've been moving hundreds out a week. You're more than welcome to come in and take a look at them sometime.
sinlessorrow
02-24-12, 10:06
According to the company they use a special proprietary polymer blend that is much stronger than aluminum.
If thats true i have no idea and honestly their videos of torture tests are very sketchy with all the cutting they did
There's always a lot of doubt when something new comes out and people for whatever reason get uneasy.
To say that "Well it was designed with aluminum therefore it should never be anything else" is silly. Eugene Stoner didn't have polymer to work with when designing the first gun, and if he did maybe he'd have used it and we'd all be saying "Well it was made of polymer first so to make it out of aluminum is just dumb."
I think that there is definately the possibility of a polymer lower being equally as stable as an aluminum one someday, if that day isn't already here.
We have tons of handguns that are polymer, why can't an AR lower be the same? There isn't much for the lower to do other than keep the trigger, magazine, and buffer in place and none of that takes a ton of strength.
So let's all take the tinfoil hats off and open our minds to the possibility of making a better mousetrap.
According to the company they use a special proprietary polymer blend that is much stronger than aluminum.
BM says the same for their 'carbon 15'. I've handled one but never shot it. I've yet to really hear anything (from reliable sources) good about them.
http://www.bushmaster.com/catalog_carbon15_az-c1516m4FT.asp
Lightweight Carbon 15 Composite Receivers – 40% stronger and 40% lighter than comparable aircraft aluminum receivers
I am, by no means, an expert, but I'd still take all these claims of 'just as strong/durable as a forged aluminium receiver' with a grain of salt... until someone takes the time to thoroughly test one.
Tapatalked
I bought one from a local dealer recently.
$154.xx out the door.
The quality is alright--nothing to rave about, but for the price, you can't really bitch too much.
This is definitely NOT meant to end up as a fighting gun.
Here are a few thoughts:
- plastic FCG isn't as bad as I thought it would be. Haven't measured the trigger pull, but it feels pretty crisp.
- plastic take-down pins feel really flimsy. Fit was ok.
- lower does not like aluminum mags (at least the ones I have). A ton of friction. Swapping to a metal magazine catch would fix it. Works OK with PMAGs (surprisingly)
- OK: comes with 6-position buffer tube & standard M4 stock. NOT OK: Buffer tube is 'commercial' spec. Castle nut was not staked from factory.
Paired with a dedicated .22 upper or something like an entry-level carbine upper from Palmetto, and it's a great lightweight trainer/loaner gun.
If anybody wants pictures, speak up and I'll snap some tonight when I get home from work.
Heavy Metal
02-24-12, 10:45
I wonder how well the lower would take a lateral stress to the buffer tube like somebody using the rifle for a step-up?
That is the critical area IMO. The reciever ring where the buffer tube mounts. They are limited here because they cannot simply add material due to charging handle clearance.
Cav Arms got around this by integrating the buttstock.
Stronger is a weasel word. It doesn't have any relevant meaning.
There's always a lot of doubt when something new comes out and people for whatever reason get uneasy.
To say that "Well it was designed with aluminum therefore it should never be anything else" is silly. Eugene Stoner didn't have polymer to work with when designing the first gun, and if he did maybe he'd have used it and we'd all be saying "Well it was made of polymer first so to make it out of aluminum is just dumb."
I think that there is definately the possibility of a polymer lower being equally as stable as an aluminum one someday, if that day isn't already here.
We have tons of handguns that are polymer, why can't an AR lower be the same? There isn't much for the lower to do other than keep the trigger, magazine, and buffer in place and none of that takes a ton of strength.
So let's all take the tinfoil hats off and open our minds to the possibility of making a better mousetrap.
No one is saying it can't be made of polymer. They are saying you can't take a part designed around one material and switch it with another. You would have to design said part with polymer or any other material at that from the beginning. Meaning it would be different specs, reinforced in different areas etc. Point is the lower being made with just another material and not designing and testing where it might fail with that material is the wrong answer. You can't say ohh this weapon uses this material and it works just fine, that is because they DESIGNED IT to be made with that material so it would work.
I wonder how well the lower would take a lateral stress to the buffer tube like somebody using the rifle for a step-up?
That is the critical area IMO. The reciever ring where the buffer tube mounts. They are limited here because they cannot simply add material due to charging handle clearance.
Cav Arms got around this by integrating the buttstock.
If you go to YouTube and find their video's, in the third one they have two guys hold either end of it holding it horizontal to the ground and a third guy uses it as a step to get into a pickup truck. It held and fired immediately after.
No one is saying it can't be made of polymer. They are saying you can't take a part designed around one material and switch it with another. You would have to design said part with polymer or any other material at that from the beginning. Meaning it would be different specs, reinforced in different areas etc. Point is the lower being made with just another material and not designing and testing where it might fail with that material is the wrong answer. You can't say ohh this weapon uses this material and it works just fine, that is because they DESIGNED IT to be made with that material so it would work.
Except that really doesn't hold true. You can always replace one material with another if it's equally as strong/tough/durable/equal in value. You could take an AR lower and build it out of steel or titanium couldn't you? That's replacing one material for another isnt' it? It would work wouldn't it?
You're just assuming that because something is plastic that it can't be strong, but that's just not true anymore.
joeboboutfitters
02-24-12, 11:46
I agree that one component can't always be swapped out for a different material without re-engineering and still be sufficiently strong. However, unless you use the rifle as a club it would be hard to stress the lower enough to cause any issue as indicated in the New Frontier testing videos.
PMAG's seem to work well. The original AR15 mags were all aluminum?
If you go to YouTube and find their video's, in the third one they have two guys hold either end of it holding it horizontal to the ground and a third guy uses it as a step to get into a pickup truck. It held and fired immediately after.
Except that really doesn't hold true. You can always replace one material with another if it's equally as strong/tough/durable/equal in value. You could take an AR lower and build it out of steel or titanium couldn't you? That's replacing one material for another isnt' it? It would work wouldn't it?
You're just assuming that because something is plastic that it can't be strong, but that's just not true anymore.
Build it out of steel and see how heavy it is. It will be stronger than aluminum but heavier because it is a stronger metal. If they designed it around using steel it wouldn't be as heavy as just changing the material because they designed it using steel so they could cut down on areas that don't need as much steel. In the end it would probably look different and be just as strong and slightly heavier but if you just changed the material it would be a lot heavier and unnecessarly bulky.
Case and point proven with the other poster saying pmags. Pmags are thicker than than the aluminum mags and reinforced in other areas. They didn't just replace material.
Endur, you stated that you can't take something designed for one material and make it out of another. I gave an example of using steel. Sure it would be heavier but it made your "fact" just not true.
Why can't it be possible that an AR lower built out of polymer has as much strength as an aluminum lower? Aluminum isn't known as the strongest material in the world, it's pretty light duty as is. Keep in mind that while the lower is the "firearm" part of an AR that doesn't mean that it takes the most abuse. In fact, lowers take very little abuse.
And don't discount the strength of polymers and synthetics. I trust my life every day I go to work on a synthetic material ballistic vest. It's not steel but it still stops bullets doesn't it? Synthetics and polymers aren't just the plastic in your kids toys anymore.
Polymer can be a stronger material then aluminum or steel in certain cases http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=2307&page=109
The question is not "is polymer a good material for a firearm?" the question is " is polymer durable enough for an AR15 lower?" Maybe, maybe not. Just because others have failed at polymer lower receivers certainly doesn't mean it's a bad idea. I think it is possible to make a good polymer lower, it just needs time and R&D. Polymer certainly does have advantages to aluminum in many cases. It will not corrode/rust,it's cheaper to fabricate,strength, and has self lubricating properties.
No offense, but are you familiar with New Frontier Armory? They're a pretty big gunshop in Vegas/online retailer as well as the manufacturer (they sub contract the injection molding, but do all assembly in-house) of these lowers so are pretty "stable". Their business model is quite a bit different than most AR "Manufacturers" these days. They're more along the lines of Palmetto State, rather than Plum Crazy.
I'd bet I know what shop it was at :D. We've been moving hundreds out a week. You're more than welcome to come in and take a look at them sometime.
Nice to see you over here JoeBob :D
Why anybody who does anything more than look at their rifle is totally beyond me. Enjoy your plastic.
Endur, you stated that you can't take something designed for one material and make it out of another. I gave an example of using steel. Sure it would be heavier but it made your "fact" just not true.
Why can't it be possible that an AR lower built out of polymer has as much strength as an aluminum lower? Aluminum isn't known as the strongest material in the world, it's pretty light duty as is. Keep in mind that while the lower is the "firearm" part of an AR that doesn't mean that it takes the most abuse. In fact, lowers take very little abuse.
And don't discount the strength of polymers and synthetics. I trust my life every day I go to work on a synthetic material ballistic vest. It's not steel but it still stops bullets doesn't it? Synthetics and polymers aren't just the plastic in your kids toys anymore.
Obviously you are not getting the point. No one is arguing the strength of polymer. The point is you can't just make something that was designed with one specific material in mind and make it with another. You have to redesign it with the material you want to make out of from the get go. Again I reference pmags, glocks and now the scar. All designed before hand with polymer in mind. Not something remade with another material.
These guys are local to me, and they do have a nice store and are nice folks. I haven't tried their polymer lower, but do have a few of their roll-marked aluminum ones. I am still not sold on the polymer parts; and I am not sure that the weight savings are really worth it, might get one down the road but I am not in the market for a range toy/plinker.
Obviously you are not getting the point. No one is arguing the strength of polymer. The point is you can't just make something that was designed with one specific material in mind and make it with another. You have to redesign it with the material you want to make out of from the get go. Again I reference pmags, glocks and now the scar. All designed before hand with polymer in mind. Not something remade with another material.
Who's to say they didn't slightly redesign the AR lower to accommodate polymer? I don't know the specifics, but I imagine the geometry of the receiver is a bit different.
So you agree that polymer is strong, and perhaps even as strong or stronger than aluminum but you're not willing to admit that it's possible to build an AR lower out of polymer that is as 100% reliable and strong as an aluminum one?
These are obviously working and surviving. Doing an internet search I found only 2 images of broken Plum Crazy lowers, one was likely due to operator error and the other may be a legitimate breakage. This is a different company than Plum Crazy and maybe better.
I see no reason to not take a chance on something like this. They are inexpensive and could one day be a game changer with AR's. Just because someone calls it polymer doesn't mean it is weak. I think there's a great chance that one day there are very strong AR lowers made of polymer that are more durable than aluminum, and maybe that day is already here.
Endur, I don't think anything will sway you, but to the OP and others keep your mind open that science is amazing and polymers may take over the world someday.
So you agree that polymer is strong, and perhaps even as strong or stronger than aluminum but you're not willing to admit that it's possible to build an AR lower out of polymer that is as 100% reliable and strong as an aluminum one?
These are obviously working and surviving. Doing an internet search I found only 2 images of broken Plum Crazy lowers, one was likely due to operator error and the other may be a legitimate breakage. This is a different company than Plum Crazy and maybe better.
I see no reason to not take a chance on something like this. They are inexpensive and could one day be a game changer with AR's. Just because someone calls it polymer doesn't mean it is weak. I think there's a great chance that one day there are very strong AR lowers made of polymer that are more durable than aluminum, and maybe that day is already here.
Endur, I don't think anything will sway you, but to the OP and others keep your mind open that science is amazing and polymers may take over the world someday.
Man you still are not reading properly. Knowhere did I say they can't make an ar lower out of polymer that is reliable.. if it was designed from the ground up with polymer as the material and not just replaced with polymer. Key words there replaced with polymer and not designed with it in mind.
Man I can understand if someone doesn't understand when words are exchanged but not when it is clearly in text right in front of you. RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU. How can you read the words and think they read otherwise. It's like trying to reason with women (most).. selective hearing, in this case selective reading.
To the poster who asked how do I know if they didn't design it with polymer in mind. I don't but from the pics I have seen it doesn't look so.
I hear what you're writing but it isn't true.
I can say "You CAN'T put chunky peanut butter on a peanut butter and jelly sandwich" but that doesn't make it true does it?
There's no disagreement that a polymer AR lower can be built, and that it can be sturdy. Your disagreement is that you can't use the same dimensions for an aluminum lower vs a polymer lower. But it is possible if you have a polymer that is equal to aluminum in it's properties. And who's to say that isn't possible and isn't the case with these new lowers without seeing them and testing them?
I hear what you're writing but it isn't true.
I can say "You CAN'T put chunky peanut butter on a peanut butter and jelly sandwich" but that doesn't make it true does it?
There's no disagreement that a polymer AR lower can be built, and that it can be sturdy. Your disagreement is that you can't use the same dimensions for an aluminum lower vs a polymer lower. But it is possible if you have a polymer that is equal to aluminum in it's properties. And who's to say that isn't possible and isn't the case with these new lowers without seeing them and testing them?
Time will tell on these lowers and I'm betting it won't pass.. Your comment about chunky pb on pb&j just shows me you still are not getting the point.
My last response as I get enough dumb arguing from my wife.
No thanks I don't waste money on crap parts.
the Cavalry Arms lower with integrated stock is much better if you want to reduce weight
I had one of those.. fell hard on it a couple times. (ice)
good tough lowers. The standard AR15 lower with screw in stock extension just isn't suitable for making out of plastic. that area has a big moment arm on it and is pretty thin. Works fine when made of forged aluminum, not so much with plastic. The cav arms with the integral stock dispenses with this issue.
philipeggo
03-11-12, 23:52
I actually came across this lower while on facebook. I was thinking about building a truck gun with it or maybe a gun for the GF . I asked them a few questions and im waiting to hear back now . Otherwise i dont see a problem using one for a loaner/range gun . The lower doesnt really go through much stress anyways .As i recall the PCF lowers had problems with wear around the buffer tube area (getting chewed up and what not) if these are made of a different polymer maybe they solved that problem ?
According to the company they use a special proprietary polymer blend that is much stronger than aluminum.
If thats true i have no idea and honestly their videos of torture tests are very sketchy with all the cutting they did
I didn't see where they designated what they mean by "stronger" - hardness? Modulus of elasticity?
Also, from their site, their "lifetime warranty" contains the dreaded words "Lifetime warranty against any manufacturer defects when used as directed". I have to wonder what company policy determines what a "manufaacturers defect" is and what "used as directed" involves, other than just shooting.
Given the fact that I can get a $50 stripped lower, and a decent LPK with a 4-pos stock for another $100, for MY money, I will stick with aluminum. YMMV.
Desert Fanatic
03-23-12, 18:50
I was going to buy one to make a .22 out of for my grandson. They are sold out as of today. That said there are going to be hundreds of happy customers or hundreds of dissapointed ones. I am still going to get one on backorder. I hope it's not a mistake. lol =/
I ordered one a few weeks ago and it arrived today. From the first impression it looks great but I will not get to shoot it for a few weeks because I am waiting for the DD m-l upper to arrive. I am looking to achieve a 5.75 lb rifle with higher end performance and am confident in the new poly lowers capabilities, I plan to put this through the wringer. This will be a scout type rifle and will try several caliber uppers with it as well as stocks, later I will try to get my aar up. Savage :big_boss:
I pick mine up Friday, I still plan to buy a alum lower and parts kit down the road and replace the lw15 lower. Then turn this in to a gun for the wife.
elchupanibre
06-02-12, 23:32
[QUOTE=#sand;1256199]I didn't see where they designated what they mean by "stronger" - hardness? Modulus of elasticity?
Also, from their site, their "lifetime warranty" contains the dreaded words "Lifetime warranty against any manufacturer defects when used as directed". I have to wonder what company policy determines what a "manufaacturers defect" is and what "used as directed" involves, other than just shooting.
I agree with your statement, but i'll play a little devil's advocate here:
You own the company that makes these polymer receivers, and your warranty just states "lifetime warranty", no question asked. Someone brings one receiver back, broken in pieces, and says "well, i was prying some landscaping boulders with it, and it broke, so I want my new one. " you would probably ask "are you serious???" and the person would say -"yep, lifetime warranty, pal".
I am sure they can turn around and find "unauthorized use" in any incident, but I guess it's how you determine the integrity of the company, and reputation will spread. I just purchased one myself, seems to be pretty solid for a polymer, but IF it fails, it will probably be around the receiver extension threads, as it appears to be the weakest part.
New Frontier came on The High Road looking for folks to test their new polymer lower
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=628545
I sent them a PM and told them I'd be willing to test one out and even pay for the lower myself. I also told them I'd run it next to my PSA carbine, would give it an honest shake down and report the results good & bad and if any problems did crop up, I'd give them a chance to fix it before making a public posting. I let them know I'd also be sharing what I found here on this site.
New Frontier put out the word they'd be contacting those they felt would fit the profile of the customer they were looking for. The kind of customer the wanted was the casual shooter, but they also maitained that their polymer lowers would be as durable as a 7075 forging. I heard nothing from them, not that I expected to.
Can anyone post actual pictures of broken NF polymer lowers?
victor3ranger
06-03-12, 14:45
Is there a reason they are using polymer internals?? Other than weight savings I am not sure I would want the working parts inside the lower to be made if these.
If the insides were normal trigger parts I might be interested in playing with one.:cool:
joeboboutfitters
06-03-12, 16:30
Is there a reason they are using polymer internals?? Other than weight savings I am not sure I would want the working parts inside the lower to be made if these.
If the insides were normal trigger parts I might be interested in playing with one.:cool:
This is due to cost and weight. It'd be near impossible to get a complete 6pos lower for $100 retail unless the company was literally 100% vertically integrated and made 100% of the product in-house, insanely efficient. Most standard LPK's retail for ~$55-$65 and butt stock kits for ~$45-$60, not including the lower receiver cost.
There are stripped polymer lowers of course, which one could build up however one wanted.
justin_247
06-03-12, 19:09
I think I'm going to buy one of these. All of my lowers are on the other side of the country and it's cheaper for me to just get a cheap lower like this than fly over there to get them.
victor3ranger
06-03-12, 20:42
I guess my next question is this, if someone had one of these and already had a standard small parts kit and internals would they fit in one of these lowers??
joeboboutfitters
06-03-12, 20:46
I guess my next question is this, if someone had one of these and already had a standard small parts kit and internals would they fit in one of these lowers??
The lowers are identical to a standard mil spec forged lower except for material and integral trigger guard. The fire control group & safety is proprietary and will only work with their own parts. If you swap out the FCG for an aftermarket FCG then you'd need to swap the safety as well. Otherwise, the safety, bolt catch, mag release, etc is interchangeable with any other.
New Frontier came on The High Road looking for folks to test their new polymer lower
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=628545
I sent them a PM and told them I'd be willing to test one out and even pay for the lower myself. I also told them I'd run it next to my PSA carbine, would give it an honest shake down and report the results good & bad and if any problems did crop up, I'd give them a chance to fix it before making a public posting. I let them know I'd also be sharing what I found here on this site.
New Frontier put out the word they'd be contacting those they felt would fit the profile of the customer they were looking for. The kind of customer the wanted was the casual shooter, but they also maitained that their polymer lowers would be as durable as a 7075 forging. I heard nothing from them, not that I expected to.
Can anyone post actual pictures of broken NF polymer lowers?
I doubt they will ever get back to you either. I would be interested in your findings. Though I don't think they would fare well..
joeboboutfitters
06-03-12, 21:15
I doubt they will ever get back to you either. I would be interested in your findings. Though I don't think they would fare well..
There are over 10,000 of them already produced and in the hands of consumers in just a handful of months. There are quite a few of them out there being tested now, and reviews are generally very positive. One of our customers from AK left this review:
Withstood cold well. Spent 3 hrs laying in snow at -3, had to break all the moving parts free of ice, twisted it, banged it against a pole, tried to crack anything I could(including fcg) and nothing broke. PMAGS, DPMS and m16 aluminum mags fit no problem.You can FEEL the difference in weight compared to forged.
Trigger is crisp, almost no creep. I'll be adding a few more of these to my winter arsenal over metal to keep from getting the wet tongue to frozen pole effect.
Only metal are pins(minus take down pins), springs, buffer tube, buffer, plate and castle nut. Stock has some wobble in it, 2mm side to side and 2 mm front to back. Trigger guard is integrated. JP reduced power springs gives it a consistent 3lb 15oz-4lb pull. Careful not to deform the pin holes, you can create a rim of not lined up perfectly when installing.
Rear hole will need some wiggling. Give it a light tap first few times and then it'll work itself in. Not perfect but for the price, it's a nice tight fit.
elchupanibre
06-03-12, 21:41
To the above post-USGI aluminum mags fit, but do not frop free. I was told that a mag release button change would fix it, if it is an issue.
JoeBobOutfitters-just purchased one from you-great service, communication with your associate was very helpful.
merder inc
06-09-12, 19:04
I've had a New Frontier lower from Joe Bob's for awhile now. Definitely was skeptical when I ordered but for $99 I gave it a shot. I started to think about where the stresses are on an AR (years of highpower service rifle Master experience). There's not much difference between a pistol frame, the stress is all up top. Many 1911 makers have changed framer materials whether it be to aluminum or whatever. If you have any plastics mfg. experience you know that some polymers can withstand some crazy things, uhmw for example.
Next off some cons: trigger group is in my opinion trash; even a change to a mil-spec DPMS setup or what have you is a step up. Some of my PMAGS dropped free and some did not...also the case on my service rifle so no big shocker there. Every other mag I had, AR-stoner, USGI, colt 20s/30s dropped out no problem. Receiver fit is very tight, and a punch is almost needed to takedown. Bolt catch, hammer/trigger pins are metal and the rest of the parts are pretty standard. I did notice the safety detent is plastic and will be replaced also.
I was concerned because the pivot pins, mag catch, and selector were polymer too. I've been running an 223 M4 contour upper for a couple months now with anything from 52-53 sierras to M855 and have seen no evidence that would case me to think the polymer is not going to hold up for my use. Having said that, I am not in the military or LE business. If I were, I would be hesitant.
victor3ranger
06-09-12, 23:19
I would really be interested in seeing what you thought after all the plastic parts are changed out.
merder inc, if you do change out the parts please let us know how it works out.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
06-10-12, 02:25
For the life of me, I can not figure out why I would ever switch to an ALL polymer lower. What if I need to mortar the rifle to clear a malf?
I suppose I could see something like this taking off if they used standard metal internals, sort of like a Glock frame, but an all plastic FCG doesnt sit well with me at all. Besides, how much weight are we really shaving off here, and where do we cross the line between weight loss and structural integrity. Rifles are heavy, the more you carry it the easier it gets. If you feel your 8lb AR is too heavy, dont put it on a diet, just get used to having it in your hands.
I realize that 99% of these lowers are going to be used for recreational plinkers, but that isnt what this site is geared towards.
LowSpeed_HighDrag
06-10-12, 02:35
I've had a New Frontier lower from Joe Bob's for awhile now. Definitely was skeptical when I ordered but for $99 I gave it a shot. I started to think about where the stresses are on an AR (years of highpower service rifle Master experience). There's not much difference between a pistol frame, the stress is all up top. Many 1911 makers have changed framer materials whether it be to aluminum or whatever. If you have any plastics mfg. experience you know that some polymers can withstand some crazy things, uhmw for example.
.
While I will agree that static/bench shooting doesnt tend to put a lot of stress on the lower, I'd like to point out that anything dynamic or kinetic will tend to stress certain areas of the lower more. Also, there is alot more stress put on a field/working rifle through abuse than there is shooting. Like you said, for a mil/le/defense/ranch rifle, this is most likely not a viable option.
merder inc
06-10-12, 04:39
Trigger group will be changed out in the next week or so will let you know.
I agree on weight savings, I don't think that mattered as much as the fact that it was a complete lower assembly for $99 and I saw a shorter path to getting another AR. After all, isn't that what it's all about every time?
LowSpeed_HighDrag
06-10-12, 05:14
I agree on weight savings, I don't think that mattered as much as the fact that it was a complete lower assembly for $99 and I saw a shorter path to getting another AR. After all, isn't that what it's all about every time?
No, no its not. 99% of the membership here would glady have one quality rifle than 5 lesser quality rifles. Its not snobbery or elitism, its a sense of getting what you pay for and demandng the best at every price point.
HackerF15E
06-10-12, 07:36
t an all plastic FCG doesnt sit well with me at all. Besides, how much weight are we really shaving off here, and where do we cross the line between weight loss and structural integrity
In posts that NFA has made over at The High Road, they've said that use of the polymer internals has to do with cost, not weight.
They had a hard-on to offer a complete lower at $99, and to do that they used polymer parts.
I saw a shorter path to getting another AR. After all, isn't that what it's all about every time?
God, I hope not.
I'd like to see simple posts from the owners of these things stating length of time owned, number of rounds fired, and type of event/use (classes, matches, bench, plinking, etc.).
Saying someone has sold 10,000 of something in the firearms market is utterly meaningless in a segment where purchasers:users is on the order of 100:1.
When they make a poly lower that has proven to be as strong as Alum. Then it will be beneficial.
So far, it hasn't. In fact, the opposite.
Seems pretty simple to me.
I saw a shorter path to getting another AR. After all, isn't that what it's all about every time?:nono:
It is about buying a reliable, durable carbine...every time.
God, I hope not.
I'd like to see simple posts from the owners of these things stating length of time owned, number of rounds fired, and type of event/use (classes, matches, bench, plinking, etc.).
Saying someone has sold 10,000 of something in the firearms market is utterly meaningless in a segment where purchasers:users is on the order of 100:1.
I concur.
merder inc
06-11-12, 16:48
Ok, ok. To be honest I was intrigued both by the material and the cost. And having a new infant kind of dictates what's available in the old gun fund these days. After having a couple of custom guns built I swore I would never buy a factory rifle again. There's something to be said about shooting a 1972 mfg action custom Remington 700 .308 heavy barrel in F-Class and whipping the guy next to you who's shooting a Tub 2000.
But I took a shot on this one and we'll see what happens. I've really enjoyed this forum so far and the members both acknowledging my opinion and giving me plenty too. Very glad I joined.
merder inc
06-11-12, 21:35
I actually found a G&A review of the Plum Crazy from 2010 in their Book of the AR15. It does appear to be from the same mold as the trigger group, selector, serial number placement etc. seems to be identical. I'm not sure what happened to PCF but I can't find much past 2010 and most sites seem to have their product out of stock and my browser won't let me into their website.
The G&A review talks about how good the trigger is compared to most stock (I call BS on that one) and how it holds up on any lower up to the 450/458. Again, casual shooter sure. But I wouldn't put it on my service rifle and expect the same results in full season of highpower matches. The polymer trigger group is supposed to "break in" but mine at least had plenty of creep in it to warrant an immediate change. I have a lengthy email into New Frontier regarding some questions about the wear properties of their lowers as well as some other topics. I can post whatever reply I get back.
merder inc
06-11-12, 21:52
For the life of me, I can not figure out why I would ever switch to an ALL polymer lower. What if I need to mortar the rifle to clear a malf?
I suppose I could see something like this taking off if they used standard metal internals, sort of like a Glock frame, but an all plastic FCG doesnt sit well with me at all. Besides, how much weight are we really shaving off here, and where do we cross the line between weight loss and structural integrity. Rifles are heavy, the more you carry it the easier it gets. If you feel your 8lb AR is too heavy, dont put it on a diet, just get used to having it in your hands.
I realize that 99% of these lowers are going to be used for recreational plinkers, but that isnt what this site is geared towards.
I'm replacing all small parts back to metal. Mag catch...wear part. Pivot pins...wear part. Selector/trigger group...wear parts. How many mag changes are you going to get in with metal mags before the edge on the mag catch is shaved off from contact wear? A lot can be said about the strength of polymers but you're not going to have the same wear properties as the metal components.
merder inc
06-11-12, 22:12
I actually found a G&A review of the Plum Crazy from 2010 in their Book of the AR15. It does appear to be from the same mold as the trigger group, selector, serial number placement etc. seems to be identical. I'm not sure what happened to PCF but I can't find much past 2010 and most sites seem to have their product out of stock and my browser won't let me into their website.
The G&A review talks about how good the trigger is compared to most stock (I call BS on that one) and how it holds up on any lower up to the 450/458. Again, casual shooter sure. But I wouldn't put it on my service rifle and expect the same results in full season of highpower matches. The polymer trigger group is supposed to "break in" but mine at least had plenty of creep in it to warrant an immediate change. I have a lengthy email into New Frontier regarding some questions about the wear properties of their lowers as well as some other topics. I can post whatever reply I get back.
Well that reply from NFA didn't take long. Said no warranty issues with replacing components with mil-spec but some minor fitting may be required. I should not expect any wear problems and the warranty will still cover any receiver issues. We'll see.
victor3ranger
06-14-12, 15:15
Got to handle one of these for the first time today, a friend ordered one.
I am waiting for him to test it out to see what he thinks about it.
I love mine I do have some issues with my P mag dropping out though, I did change out the Mag well catch to a metal one. that helped some but i dont like the fact that my metal mags drop free with no issue and the pmags dont drop out.
I used one for my first build and am happy so far.
Check out the torture tests on their site. http://www.lw15.com/
It truly helped me make my decision while also factoring price.
merder inc
07-03-12, 17:18
I love mine I do have some issues with my P mag dropping out though, I did change out the Mag well catch to a metal one. that helped some but i dont like the fact that my metal mags drop free with no issue and the pmags dont drop out.
I'm on the fence with pmags anyway. I have 6; one rifle will drop 2 but not the other 4. Another AR of mine won't drop any. I've had them change whether they do or not in different weather conditions too. Considering the criticism I've gotten on the polymer lower, I'm tempted to make the argument that the original mags were metal and weren't meant to ever be plastic. I like the Brownells mags or the older Colts if they aren't trashed. The brownells rebuild kits are nice too.
merder inc
07-03-12, 17:20
I guess my next question is this, if someone had one of these and already had a standard small parts kit and internals would they fit in one of these lowers??
I have changed the mag release and button, all the detents, trigger group, and safety all with minor fitting. NO issues whatsoever. Fitting was done with a flat and round needle file.
merder inc
07-03-12, 17:27
Obviously you are not getting the point. No one is arguing the strength of polymer. The point is you can't just make something that was designed with one specific material in mind and make it with another. You have to redesign it with the material you want to make out of from the get go. Again I reference pmags, glocks and now the scar. All designed before hand with polymer in mind. Not something remade with another material.
Totally agree. Look at Stoner, designed the AR with aerospace materials and went up against the military hierarchy at Springfield. Doesn't mean that he wouldn't have used polymer today, just what he was used to working with at Fairchild. Everybody is so in love with Colt but their own M4 testing showed a barrel failure after less than 600 rounds...and they testing because of extended firefights in Afghanistan were causing catastrophic failures with M4s. For every pmag/scar type evolution to the AR line there are hundreds that were disasters. God willing we'll be talking about the AR-15 for another 40 years! Or lasers...
merder inc
07-03-12, 17:32
Is there a reason they are using polymer internals?? Other than weight savings I am not sure I would want the working parts inside the lower to be made if these.
If the insides were normal trigger parts I might be interested in playing with one.:cool:
I would assume but the internals are not the best. Went all mil-spec parts except pivot pins and replaced trigger with ALG single stage. Really nice trigger, no creep. Just a tad bit of stoning but all the edges were very clean. about 5 1/2lbs. NOT a match trigger, but for $45, a nice balance between a factory trigger and a triple digit match unit. Save the Jewell for a match rifle.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.