Lynx 180B Upper Receiver Info Thread

[Ustauk]

Once you've finished the Lynx upper and DI 180 BCG, would a Lynx 308/Creedmore upcalibre be a possible project? Semi-auto big bore options are slim in Canada. You could call it the Cougar, to keep with the Canadian cat theme :-)

[45C]

Once you've finished the Lynx upper and DI 180 BCG, would a Lynx 308/Creedmore upcalibre be a possible project? Semi-auto big bore options are slim in Canada. You could call it the Cougar, to keep with the Canadian cat theme :-)

Lol

[SpectreBallistics]

Just a quick update:

We're starting on the final machining operation for the first batch.

[GlowInTheDark]

Any teaser pics?

[SpectreBallistics]

Any teaser pics?

Nothing really to show yet. We'll have something later this week.

[SpectreBallistics]

Here's some photos of the first upper:





A as I'm sure many of you know our main design goals are weight and function driven. This upper is as light as possible while offering proper 1913 rail (it works with all optics). One key difference between our lower and others is our bottom plate, this allows us to remove more material from inside the receiver while making sure it's as stiff as possible. The bottom plate also has the added benefit of reducing dirt ingress into the lower a bit.

Key features:

• Light weight
• Rigid design
• True mil-spec 1913 rail
• Self-lubricating Oilite piston bushing
• Billet aluminum, not an extrusion

[xdmer]

Looking very nice, but was really hoping for takedown pins. (I knew from earlier posts that would not be the case). Do you have any opinions on the changes made for gen 2's. Waiting to see your bolt carrier and di options, it's great to see the innovation.

[SpectreBallistics]

Looking very nice, but was really hoping for takedown pins. (I knew from earlier posts that would not be the case). Do you have any opinions on the changes made for gen 2's. Waiting to see your bolt carrier and di options, it's great to see the innovation.

Stoner et al. got it right. No extra take down pins are needed. They'd be nothing more than a marketing gimmick adding weight, cost, and complexity.

Non-reciprocating charging handles mean you'd loose positive bolt control, including the ability to use the knob as a forward assist or slowly push a round into the chamber. So we're not doing that.

[xdmer]

I like the idea of changing uppers quickly. You make very good points, thank you.

Stoner et al. got it right. No extra take down pins are needed. They'd be nothing more than a marketing gimmick adding weight, cost, and complexity.

Non-reciprocating charging handles mean you'd loose positive bolt control, including the ability to use the knob as a forward assist or slowly push a round into the chamber. So we're not doing that.

[Drift117]

Here's some photos of the first upper:





A as I'm sure many of you know our main design goals are weight and function driven. This upper is as light as possible while offering proper 1913 rail (it works with all optics). One key difference between our lower and others is our bottom plate, this allows us to remove more material from inside the receiver while making sure it's as stiff as possible. The bottom plate also has the added benefit of reducing dirt ingress into the lower a bit.

Key features:

• Light weight
• Rigid design
• True mil-spec 1913 rail
• Self-lubricating Oilite piston bushing
• Billet aluminum, not an extrusion

Sweet, when will it be available for order?