Lower Build Questions
- Thread starter ShrtRnd
- Start date
alberta tactical rifle
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- calgary alberta
Our latest generation of uppers are nearly the same as the last, the only real difference is that the tolerances and finish is even better, so they may not fit every milspec lower without minor fitting. The plan is to sell our uppers and lowers as a matched and fitted set.
tainted-demon My apologies for going off on you, no excuse but it was a bad day. I reread your post after the fact and I mis read it originally.
The real comedy of a forged lower or upper reciever is the fact that they need extensive machining! As far as them being superior in strength to a billet, you would have to have some fairly expensive machinery to answer that question with any definity. As soon as you touch a machine tool (in my professional opinion) to any forged upper or lower reciever, you create the same weaknesses as a billet. The advantages of a billet reciever (again in my opinion) are to the manufacture in cost and time. If you really need a good reason to go billet with ATRS, Cadex, etc... It should be that you are supporting your local "Canadian" gun shop/manufacturers. Instead of some American company that doesn't give a #### about their product after it crosses the boarder.
- Location
- 54°52'56"N 112°10'7"W Alpha Bravo
Actually there's way more machining done for a billet lower then there is a forged lower. A billet lower starts off as one big brick, forged lowers already have the outside shape done. That's one of the reasons forging is done, less machining... Lol
Also your blanket statement about US manufacturers not giving a s**t about us Canadians? Wow you couldn't be anymore out to lunch. I've personally dealt with a lot of US manufacturers and they care about our business, they stand behind their product no matter where the end user is...
As of recently Ive dealt directly with Noveske, Vltor, LMT and Daniel Defense, all of them went out of their way to help me and in some cases resolve a warranty issue...
To the first half of your reply 50cal.... thats basically exactly what I said. Thanks. To the second half, its a no win arguement, so I'm just really not interested. I've know of more bad occuances than good, but perhaps your right, I shouldn't "blanket" all American manufacturers.
- Location
- Fort St John BC
So rick what changes should we expect on your gen 4 lowers?
Yes and no. Some of the 6061 billet receivers out there are forged first and then machined to final shape to save on machining steps, but we all knew what you meant
- Location
- 54°52'56"N 112°10'7"W Alpha Bravo
Yes and no. Some of the 6061 billet receivers out there are forged first and then machined to final shape to save on machining steps, but we all knew what you meant
Who else besides NEA uses 6061 material?
- Location
- Fort St John BC
some of dpms lowers are 6061 and there are quite a few smaller companys using 6061 but most of the major companys use 7075
alberta tactical rifle
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- calgary alberta
Tighter on tolerances again. Ambi bolt release.
The problem with making the tolerances more true to spec is that our lowers may not fit all the milspec uppers without minor modification of the upper.
We are moving towards matched upper and lower sets that will eliminate any wiggle or daylight between the upper and lower.
I hate to dump cold water on all this but, unless you're buying a matched set, that are designed to be used together, and fitted to be used exclusively with each other, it doesn't really matter what type of lower you use in an AR pattern rifle. With the very odd notable exception, they all work - the AR lower, relatively speaking, is a low stress component. It's there to hold the interface and house the buffer, there are no truly destructive forces acting on the lower. I'd personally avoid the "carbon fibre" ones, but the fact that a lower can be made from "carbon fibre" (term used loosely) and still function without being blown to shards should suggest something. Bluntly, a Lower is a Lower - regardless.
Some of the VLTOR uppers were 6061,though I think they now use a 2-part MUR upper where the receiver is 7075 and the rail segment is 6061.
they do forge to approximate shape then machine as I understand it.
- Location
- 54°52'56"N 112°10'7"W Alpha Bravo
I agree about the rail material, almost all rail manufacturers use 6061, but the Vltor MuR upper reciever has always been forged 7075
I honestly don't know of any reputable manufacturer that use 6061 in recievers.. I still don't/won't buy into it either, 7075 IMO is the only way. That to me is the true foundation of a real AR15...
The beauty is that you can choose to buy whatever AR receiver you want and they are made with both alloys
As you likely know, the US Gov TDP used to specify 6061-T6 forged aluminum but it was changed to 7075-T6 after their experiences in Vietnam. A galvanic reaction accelerated corrosion of the pin holes in forged 6061-T6 lowers when the rifles were wet for long periods (i.e. Vietnamese rainy season). Unless you let your rifle stay wet for months on end, I doubt either alloy will let you down.
FWIW, all my AR15's at present have 7075-T6 forged lowers, and I typically buy the cheapest in-spec lowers I can find. Usually Aero Precision or Armalite.
