Polymer Lower Receivers? Final Verdict.

[Dr. Bullseye]

1. California is going to impose restrictions on 80% lowers.

2. The "what would Stoner have done" crowd likes to say he would have used the most modern materials if building today and so the polymer lower.

Companies make these now with jigs as a package. Obviously, people in that great western communist state are looking for at least one more lower, just to be safe.

https://www.polymer80.com/arreceivers

I checked the search feature and this discussion last happened in 2015. So, with five more years experience, what say you about polymer lowers?

[just a scout]

They are out of stock on everything


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Renegade04]

Personally, I would not even bother with a polymer lower. Unless you are building a dedicated .22LR rifle, stick with aluminum.

[RUTGERS95]

Personally, I would not even bother with a polymer lower. Unless you are building a dedicated .22LR rifle, stick with aluminum.

agree, desperate people do desperate things but this absolutely the last thing I'd do

[Dr. Bullseye]

Personally, I would not even bother with a polymer lower. Unless you are building a dedicated .22LR rifle, stick with aluminum.

Well, since you have built so many, this is about 2 1/2 strikes against polymer lowers.

[PrarieDog]

Waste of time if on anything bigger than a 22. Had two break at the rear pin/buffer tube area after a few shots. The design does not support the use of such a weak material compared to aluminum.

[Dr. Bullseye]

Waste of time if on anything bigger than a 22. Had two break at the rear pin/buffer tube area after a few shots. The design does not support the use of such a weak material compared to aluminum.

I don't like hearing the word "break". That is pretty much the other 1/2 strike for me. I will go with aluminium.

Thank you everyone.

[Diamondback]

Personally, I would not even bother with a polymer lower. Unless you are building a dedicated .22LR rifle, stick with aluminum.

They do have a niche, but not so much in builds... they're great for cheap, disposable practice pieces learning to hog out a trigger pocket if you don't have prior machining experience.

[vicious_cb]

1. California is going to impose restrictions on 80% lowers.

2. The "what would Stoner have done" crowd likes to say he would have used the most modern materials if building today and so the polymer lower.

Companies make these now with jigs as a package. Obviously, people in that great western communist state are looking for at least one more lower, just to be safe.

https://www.polymer80.com/arreceivers

I checked the search feature and this discussion last happened in 2015. So, with five more years experience, what say you about polymer lowers?

http://www.kearms.com/KP-15-polymer-receiver.aspx

You would probably have to talk to KE arms about getting a 80% though.

[TED]

http://www.kearms.com/KP-15-polymer-receiver.aspx

You would probably have to talk to KE arms about getting a 80% though.

KE Arms has specifically said they will not be doing 80% versions.

I did prototype testing for Cav Arms back in the day and still have prototype # 6.

The Cav Arms aka GWACS and now the KE Arms updated versions are the only polymer lowers that I would trust for serious use. This is because they were purposely designed from the ground up to be made from polymer and the one piece design diminishes or eliminates some weak points such as the receiver extension mounting point. That last part is where most of the breaks on polymer lower occurs.

TED