I recently had the opportunity to purchase two stripped lowers, one DPMS and one CMMG (Pistol). Both lowers are forged.
Upon request I recieved a factory letter stating the following from CMMG.Serial #
This reciever is manufactured as a
It was shipped from the manufacturer
designated as a
I was also informed that CMMG would now include the letters with their pistol lowers. Recently there was a pretty good thread going on about lowers and how you can have one considered a pistol lower, however, I just prefer to take the safe route and get proof from the manufacturer.
Both Lowers were nicely finished in the same type of finish with the DPMS having a slightly thicker coating. I don't see that as an advantage since both finishes are adequate.
Here are some pics and some differences that I noticed between the two. For identification purposes, the DPMS lower has the trigger guard installed.
On the above picture, both lowers look identical except for the buffer tube area. The CMMG lower lacks the extra machining/forging in that area. The identification stampings on both lowers are clean and sharp with the exception of a letter "K" prefix on the DPMS lower. This seemed to have been added as an afterthought. Both logos are nice with DPMS having a panther and the CMMG having an AR.
On this second picture I can't tell if the finish on the CMMG(Top) is slightly thinner in the trigger housing area or if this is just reflective glare. I suspect the finish is a little thicker on the DPMS due to the lack of final machining marks. These can barely be seen on the CMMG. Both lowers have an identical shelf below the rear takedown pin area.
Picture #3. This is a closer view of the buffer tube area and differences.
Picture #4. DPMS left, CMMG Right.
You can see the line on the DPMS. The CMMG lower looks as though they tried to machine off that area to touch it up a bit.
Picture #5. DPMS bottom, CMMG top. The line is present in the web area on both lowers.
In conclusion, I'm satisfied with the quality of both lowers. I initially suspected that CMMG used the same folks as the supplier of the DPMS lower, but after looking at the slight differences between the two, I decided I was wrong. Both lowers had clean holes with no visible burrs. No defects were noted as well. Both lowers are similar in quality to my Bushmaster lower with the exception of the front of the magazine well. In this area the Bushy is very nicely finished with no noticeable line.
Would I buy another DPMS or CMMG Lower? Yes...but then I haven't built on them yet! That will be another post.
Thanks for the interesting review. I think the differences in the buffer area pretty much guarantee these are at least from different forging dies, and almost certainly different suppliers. The thickness of the ground area on the parting lines is another indicator.
I built my latest AR on a DPMS lower and it seems to be working fine, with absolutely no assembly problems...
LAR is the one manufacturing the DPMS and some of the Bushmasters hence they are similar.
CMMG, I dunno but I don't think it's LAR because of the forgings differences.
thanks for the pics.
Two of the lowers I purchased recently have the beefier receiver extension area similar to your CMMG lower. One is an L-prefix Bushmaster (reportedly made by LAR) and the other is a Rock River (CMT made). Seems like there's a new forging available. Didn't know what to think about it at first, but now I like the idea of a receiver with more strength in that area.
Originally Posted By Redleg155:
The identification stampings on both lowers are clean and sharp with the exception of a letter "K" prefix on the DPMS lower. This seemed to have been added as an afterthought.
Per Dillon Jennings , Internet Sales at DPMS, the K suffix is added to designate stripped lowers and lower assemblies, rather than a lower sold as part of a whole rifle.