Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24

Thread: Idea for easier 80% lower

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    28
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Leonidas24 View Post
    Get off the idea of casting a receiver. Several large manufacturing companies at one point cast AR lowers with expensive machinery and it is viewed entirely as an abject failure. Cast lowers are the pariah of the 90s and early 2000s AR world. Besides this the complex process of heat treating 7075 aluminum alloy becomes a problem. Then after it's heat treated how are you going to correct deformities and warps that are a result of the heat treating process. Just stahp.
    I just want easy access in exercising my rights. I cant believe we once had the freedom to order Rifles, Machine Guns, hell even Mortars with HE rounds to our door steps....And sadly lost it.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wichita, KS
    Posts
    714
    Feedback Score
    9 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Groyper View Post
    I just want easy access in exercising my rights. I cant believe we once had the freedom to order Rifles, Machine Guns, hell even Mortars with HE rounds to our door steps....And sadly lost it.
    You're not going to get it with casting. If you have any ideas of casting a receiver at home put them out right now. Watch any video on YT about casting in sand and you'll see the cast comes out covered in grit, sand, and closer to a general shape of what the final product will be with absolutely zero functionality until it has had MASSIVE amounts of post cast work done. Casts still also require holes to be drilled, the magazine well machined out, the receiver extension threads cut, and the FCG pocket machined. The best and far easier method would be to invest in a variable speed mill and the appropriate end mills and drill bits. $1500 will get something more than capable of this and will produce a far cleaner result that will last years. Spend your time, effort, and energy focusing on something tangible that will prolong the life of your labor, like home type III anodizing.
    Certified Smith & Wesson M&P Armorer

    Certified Glock Armorer

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    1,531
    Feedback Score
    12 (93%)
    So, whats the legality of 80% lowers vs 95% lowers? Why 80%? is that law?

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    28
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Leonidas24 View Post
    You're not going to get it with casting. If you have any ideas of casting a receiver at home put them out right now. Watch any video on YT about casting in sand and you'll see the cast comes out covered in grit, sand, and closer to a general shape of what the final product will be with absolutely zero functionality until it has had MASSIVE amounts of post cast work done. Casts still also require holes to be drilled, the magazine well machined out, the receiver extension threads cut, and the FCG pocket machined. The best and far easier method would be to invest in a variable speed mill and the appropriate end mills and drill bits. $1500 will get something more than capable of this and will produce a far cleaner result that will last years. Spend your time, effort, and energy focusing on something tangible that will prolong the life of your labor, like home type III anodizing.
    I assume casting polymer receivers is also not possible?


    Quote Originally Posted by elephant View Post
    So, what's the legality of 80% lowers vs 95% lowers? Why 80%? is that law?
    I believe it's all just a series of mindless, irrational, arbatiery rules set by people who hate their job, or love to **** freedom over...Just an opinion..
    Last edited by Groyper; 04-10-20 at 02:47.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    17
    Feedback Score
    0
    What's your objection to just doing it the normal way with a jig kit? By far the easiest method to finish 80% lowers sans a mill is the jig and hand held router! Last year around my birthday me and my buddies had a "milling party" and cranked out 5 complete lowers in an evening (hell by the final one we had the process down and completed it start to finish in under an hour).

    By comparison my other buddy is in the hobby of casting aluminum ingots, it takes several hours just to melt enough aluminum cans in his small hobby crucible to cast one single cupcake pan sized ingot, never mind melting enough to cast a whole AR lower... I've never personally priced hobby grade aluminum casting equipment but said buddy was bragging at work how he picked up his new (again very small and hobby-only grade) crucible for $600 so it seems the typical jig/router/drill press route is probably the cheaper route as well (you could pickup the jig with some 80% blanks AND a router for under the price of JUST the crucible and then you'll still need to buy / build the molds and everything else involved with casting).

    There are no advantages to this idea...
    Last edited by Coyote bulldozer; 04-10-20 at 12:33.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    North TX
    Posts
    1,432
    Feedback Score
    9 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by elephant View Post
    So, whats the legality of 80% lowers vs 95% lowers? Why 80%? is that law?
    Current generation 80% lowers are as complete as the ATF will allow. Everything is done except for the fire control pocket.

    "95%" lowers are a marketing gimmick. They compare their lower to a previous generation 80% lower that didn't have the receiver extension threaded.

    There are multiple 80% options with varying levels of required patience/tooling already on the market. While more options and ideas are always good, I personally won't be liquifying any glass to release a cast lower from its bonds.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    955
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Leaveammoforme View Post
    Current generation 80% lowers are as complete as the ATF will allow. Everything is done except for the fire control pocket.

    "95%" lowers are a marketing gimmick. They compare their lower to a previous generation 80% lower that didn't have the receiver extension threaded.

    There are multiple 80% options with varying levels of required patience/tooling already on the market. While more options and ideas are always good, I personally won't be liquifying any glass to release a cast lower from its bonds.
    However, assuming the casting things worked, the idea put forward would not be an 80% receiver, as the FCG pocket would be formed when cast. Someone did a similar thing with plastic, hard for the receiver, and soft for the FCG pocket, and the ATF nixed the idea.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    North TX
    Posts
    1,432
    Feedback Score
    9 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by lysander View Post
    However, assuming the casting things worked, the idea put forward would not be an 80% receiver, as the FCG pocket would be formed when cast. Someone did a similar thing with plastic, hard for the receiver, and soft for the FCG pocket, and the ATF nixed the idea.
    I seem to recall that the argument was "Which came first? The fire control pocket or the pocket plug?"

    Company claimed plug came first. Therefore, a FCG pocket never existed.

    ATF claimed FCG pocket came first (making a complete lower) then pocket was filled.

    I believe the company ultimately got all the lowers back.

    The only thing I remember for sure was the super sweet single point slings the ATF was rocking. Because, you know...There's a high percentage of having to flip the kill switch on employees of a store front....

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    28
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Coyote bulldozer View Post
    What's your objection to just doing it the normal way with a jig kit? By far the easiest method to finish 80% lowers sans a mill is the jig and hand held router! Last year around my birthday me and my buddies had a "milling party" and cranked out 5 complete lowers in an evening (hell by the final one we had the process down and completed it start to finish in under an hour).

    By comparison my other buddy is in the hobby of casting aluminum ingots, it takes several hours just to melt enough aluminum cans in his small hobby crucible to cast one single cupcake pan sized ingot, never mind melting enough to cast a whole AR lower... I've never personally priced hobby grade aluminum casting equipment but said buddy was bragging at work how he picked up his new (again very small and hobby-only grade) crucible for $600 so it seems the typical jig/router/drill press route is probably the cheaper route as well (you could pickup the jig with some 80% blanks AND a router for under the price of JUST the crucible and then you'll still need to buy / build the molds and everything else involved with casting).

    There are no advantages to this idea...

    Yeah, a few basic google searches kind of showed the flaws of the idea...

    Quote Originally Posted by Leaveammoforme View Post
    Current generation 80% lowers are as complete as the ATF will allow. Everything is done except for the fire control pocket.

    "95%" lowers are a marketing gimmick. They compare their lower to a previous generation 80% lower that didn't have the receiver extension threaded.

    There are multiple 80% options with varying levels of required patience/tooling already on the market. While more options and ideas are always good, I personally won't be liquifying any glass to release a cast lower from its bonds.
    Well I have thought about about the same method, only using glass around a limestone "plug" but that just seems a bit nuts...

    Quote Originally Posted by lysander View Post
    However, assuming the casting things worked, the idea put forward would not be an 80% receiver, as the FCG pocket would be formed when cast. Someone did a similar thing with plastic, hard for the receiver, and soft for the FCG pocket, and the ATF nixed the idea.
    Of course they would, why would they not ruin great ideas and stifle small business and entrepreneurs.


    Have you ever felt like everything you want to do is illegal or violates the laws of physics?

    Quote Originally Posted by Leaveammoforme View Post
    I seem to recall that the argument was "Which came first? The fire control pocket or the pocket plug?"

    Company claimed plug came first. Therefore, a FCG pocket never existed.

    ATF claimed FCG pocket came first (making a complete lower) then pocket was filled.

    I believe the company ultimately got all the lowers back.

    The only thing I remember for sure was the super sweet single point slings the ATF was rocking. Because, you know...There's a high percentage of having to flip the kill switch on employees of a store front....
    So I assume a basic video of them showing the plug existed before, and the "Non-receiver" was created around it would have been enough?

    Any way that someone else could fight them in court for making false claims?

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    2,952
    Feedback Score
    94 (100%)
    I just want easy access in exercising my rights...
    Buawhaaahahahahahaaa!!
    Easy??? Either the OP’s “Easimeter” is made in Transylvania or he lives in opposite world. There are pretty easy ways to exercise our 2nd Amendment responsibilities certainly metric tons easier than the casting lower/melting glass with Draino or Liquid Plumber.

    This isn’t the first time we would have been saved by an OP doing a Google search before posting.
    "Texas has yet to learn submission to any oppression, come from what source it may."
    ~ Sam Houston

    “The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil constitution, are worth defending against all hazards: And it is our duty to defend them against all attacks.”
    ~ Sam Adams

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •