I can openly confirm that this release was completely an effort to get lower consumer cost KAC receivers to those that would be happy with TDP type lowers. The decision to initiate a forging purchase, with parts on shelf in time for SHOT was well before the election, and the worst case scenario was that Clinton would be elected and a buying frenzy would catch us with insufficient product on shelf to meet demand. The quantity of forgings planned for this is well in excess of anything we would stock or "overrun". New production started with the "KM017###X" serial number range, based on a traditional TDP type drawing that was in-house from something years ago. I cannot comment as to what those were for, but when the initial demand hit, it was remembered that we had "matching" product stored away in sufficient quantity to relieve the pressure from SHOT. It was later discovered that while those parts had gone through a QC process, that process was not the same as what is currently applied to 5.56 lowers or rifles.
It is entirely reasonable that a buyer would want to install the KAC triggerguard.
The forward protrusion of the ears that block installation of the KAC triggerguard is a result of forging dimension. When that drawing was created a different forging was used, and a different dimensional confirmation protocol than our "standard" ambi lower was used post-machining, which was rolled into the first "17" lower run. These also featured the counter-bored take-down and pivot pin holes. The same final QC process was applied to the first "17" run as was called for on the "8" run, which was TDP/mil-spec functionality driven.
These were mistakes, as it allowed a product to reach commercial customers with a significantly higher probability of minor cosmetic blemishes (they are still type II class 3) and forging dings, or show longer "ear" protrusion that could block installation of the new KAC triggerguard without minor fitting. We knew that there would be primarily two types of customers that would buy these lowers; folks that wanted a KAC lower for guns that would be shot, and folks that wanted a neat piece of KAC history at a monumental time in US history.
Yes, we are taking a beating here and over at other similar forums over these. However, for all of the gnashing of teeth, we currently have less than 10 returns here ever since the release began. Even if that number increases to 500%, the return rate is low enough for me to know that the vast majority of customers are happy with their purchase. Believe me, every RMA, every customer complaint pains us, and initiates a process and QA review to ensure that we are delivering to expectation. That said, it is indeed true that we are a military/government oriented company, so the QA procedures reflect MIL-STD/MIL-PRF acceptance requirements, and since we do not run separate manufacturing lines for product, sometimes items that are just inside the mil/gov acceptance range get out to commercial buyers. Some customers are ok with that, some are not. For those that are not happy, as always, let us know and we will do everything within reason to meet reasonable expectation.
Even with the criticism that we have faced over these, I am still happy that we did it.
Jack
