User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/11/2015 12:21:48 AM EDT
[#1]
......
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2015 12:54:04 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That reinforcement web on yours is still much too pronounced, as is the diameter around the extension tube. Originally these things weren't very thick, so you need to cut these areas down to where there is no step-down to the original forging thicknesses. Unless this receiver is really out of spec, it should end up as in the photo I've posted which is a RRA A2 receiver that I re-worked. There should be no need for any welding whatsoever, and I've never heard of one that needed to be. However if after thinning these areas, should there be a very slight 'step', this can easily be filled with JB Weld, since you aren't planning to anodize the piece anyway. Since this is your first re-contour, I think it's turned into something more complicated than it actually needs to be, which is understandable. It can be a bit nerve wracking. Any questions, just ask. http://pic100.picturetrail.com/VOL372/10723236/24640416/411561052.jpg Ive tried to match the contour of the lower with the upper and the butt stock. I dont doubt that Im making this more complicated than needs to be... Happy to hear your opinion Oh and I cant see your photo. Id very much like to view it. Edit!! Wow found the photo. Looks fantastic. I can remove more material. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2015 9:13:30 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Damn Stoner25... I thought I was almost done with this thing! LOL Im in luck. This lower still has the forge line. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Great work. I do, however, have one suggestion - a low temp aluminum brazing rod would fill in that gap at the back of the receiver. Then it would look PERFECT. Oh Reeeally ???? Im listening..... Can you tell me what the width of the web should be? What gap are we talking about.........behind the reinforcing ribs? I'll add that any welding I've done on any of the 7075 forged receivers was done with Tig, using 40XX (I think) filler rod. I'd have to check over at the shop what filler I have tagged for AR use. The thing about welding on 7075 is without the correct filler the anodizing will be different on that weld. Edit: survivor, one other thing, OK, two things. On an A1 lower, the area between the front ears (for the front pin) should be cut differently than what the A2 80%'ers are. If you look at the tooling marks on your lower you will notice that it was cut with a straight endmill. You can see the circular cut marks. The old ones were milled with a milling cutter, not an end mill. I have a couple front halves from M16A1's......I'll snap a couple pics and post them up. Two......the 80% lowers today have the forge line machined off, or nearly machined off. Old A1's did not have the forge line cut at all. They were left very pronounced. NoDaks 80% lowers are left with the forge line intact. That alone makes them worth the extra cost to me. Oh...........three things. Old A1 lowers have much different bosses for the bolt catch pin. They are very rounded. I'll try to get a pic of those too. Stoner Damn Stoner25... I thought I was almost done with this thing! LOL Im in luck. This lower still has the forge line. You have the forge line, but it probably has been lightly machined, correct? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2015 9:22:26 AM EDT
[#4]
Stoner25
Well yes I guess it has |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2015 9:59:43 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Stoner25 Well yes I guess it has I'm damned slow at getting pics posted up, so it will take a while to get them all here.........but here goes....First, I'll show the forge lines. The rough forge line in this pic is a NoDak A1 80% lower. It is EXACTLY like one of my old SP1's, and it is a main reason I'll pay the price of their 80%'ers. The lower on the right is an Ares Armor and you can see where the forge line has been machined. Probably typical of most 80% lowers. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2015 10:02:41 AM EDT
[#6]
Next up, we'll see the differences in the "ears" that take the bolt catch roll pin.
The top pic shows a later M16A1 on the left. The ears by this period of time got beefed up a little compared to the one on the right, which is an XM16E1 lower 
This lower pic shows the NoDak lower, as the top lower in the pic, after I massaged the ears a little.......still need to round them off some more......closer to what the XM in the upper pic is. The lower receiver in this pic is the Ares lower, and is pretty typical of what A2 80%ers are going to have. I should note that the NoDak lower, even though it is an A1 will have these ears the size of A2.s, which is why I reduced them is size on my 177 lower. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2015 10:09:29 AM EDT
[#7]
OK, next up is how the machining is done on the front of the receiver, in between the frt pivot pin ears. The one on the left is the later M16A1. You can see that it was cut with a milling cutter about half the width of the finished cut, as it has been done in two cuts. The middle one is the XM lower, and has been cut with a milling cutter of the approx. width of the finished cut. Appears to have been done in one cut. The one on the right is the Ares lower, and you can see that it has been cut with an ENDMILL.
This is my 177 lower that I;m working on and it still needs to be cut with a milling cutter to give it the correct look. It originally looked more like the Ares lower, although it was a cleaner looking cut than what is on the Ares. I actually wish it had been rougher, like the Ares, because there would have been more material left to cut with the milling cutter. I will say though, that if you're gong to leave it "as bought", that the NoDak is machined nicely in that area. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2015 10:19:26 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
OK, next up is how the machining is done on the front of the receiver, in between the frt pivot pin ears. The one on the left is the later M16A1. You can see that it was cut with a milling cutter about half the width of the finished cut, as it has been done in two cuts. The middle one is the XM lower, and has been cut with a milling cutter of the approx. width of the finished cut. Appears to have been done in one cut. The one on the right is the Ares lower, and you can see that it has been cut with an ENDMILL. http://i840.photobucket.com/albums/zz327/T00lmanii/P8110095_zpsqowoyegd.jpg This is my 177 lower that I;m working on and it still needs to be cut with a milling cutter to give it the correct look. It originally looked more like the Ares lower, although it was a cleaner looking cut than what is on the Ares. I actually wish it had been rougher, like the Ares, because there would have been more material left to cut with the milling cutter. I will say though, that if you're gong to leave it "as bought", that the NoDak is machined nicely in that area. http://i840.photobucket.com/albums/zz327/T00lmanii/P8110101_zpsrogextik.jpg That's odd. I have several XM receivers, and the machining looks like this: 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2015 10:22:58 AM EDT
[#9]
Survivor, about welding in behind the rib. I don't know about that. Here's what I just did while taking the pics of the various lowers in the posts above. If I hold the NoDak lower back to back with the other 80% lower, here is what I see. If you were to trim your rib down to the plane of the area behind your rib, then it would be about right. When I hold the NoDak lower back to back with the other lower, the periphery of the NoDak matches up with the area that is behind your rib. So, it doesn't look like that area on yours needs to be filled in, but the rib needs to be lowered to THAT lower plane. Does that makes sense to you, or am I being clear as mud?
EDIT......just as Shotgun said up at the top of this page. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2015 10:27:11 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's odd. I have several XM receivers, and the machining looks like this: http://i302.photobucket.com/albums/nn115/kkrad_photo/b98ccd7054725daaaac8ebd2e09f6dc4.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
OK, next up is how the machining is done on the front of the receiver, in between the frt pivot pin ears. The one on the left is the later M16A1. You can see that it was cut with a milling cutter about half the width of the finished cut, as it has been done in two cuts. The middle one is the XM lower, and has been cut with a milling cutter of the approx. width of the finished cut. Appears to have been done in one cut. The one on the right is the Ares lower, and you can see that it has been cut with an ENDMILL. http://i840.photobucket.com/albums/zz327/T00lmanii/P8110095_zpsqowoyegd.jpg This is my 177 lower that I;m working on and it still needs to be cut with a milling cutter to give it the correct look. It originally looked more like the Ares lower, although it was a cleaner looking cut than what is on the Ares. I actually wish it had been rougher, like the Ares, because there would have been more material left to cut with the milling cutter. I will say though, that if you're gong to leave it "as bought", that the NoDak is machined nicely in that area. http://i840.photobucket.com/albums/zz327/T00lmanii/P8110101_zpsrogextik.jpg That's odd. I have several XM receivers, and the machining looks like this: http://i302.photobucket.com/albums/nn115/kkrad_photo/b98ccd7054725daaaac8ebd2e09f6dc4.jpg M16, what's odd about it? Your pic also shows that the cut was made with a milling cutter, and NOT an endmill. See how the cut is lower than the surface between the cut and the bottom of the magwell, with a radius coming up from the cut to meet the original unmachined surface. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2015 10:38:23 AM EDT
[#11]
M16, what's odd about it? Your pic also shows that the cut was made with a milling cutter, and NOT an endmill. See how the cut is lower than the surface between the cut and the bottom of the magwell, with a radius coming up from the cut to meet the original unmachined surface. The cuts on mine end well before the plane of the bottom of the ears, while the cut on yours extends well beyond the ears. I think mine would be much easier to duplicate on a NoDak OR an 80% receiver. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2015 10:40:27 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Survivor, about welding in behind the rib. I don't know about that. Here's what I just did while taking the pics of the various lowers in the posts above. If I hold the NoDak lower back to back with the other 80% lower, here is what I see. If you were to trim your rib down to the plane of the area behind your rib, then it would be about right. When I hold the NoDak lower back to back with the other lower, the periphery of the NoDak matches up with the area that is behind your rib. So, it doesn't look like that area on yours needs to be filled in, but the rib needs to be lowered to THAT lower plane. Does that makes sense to you, or am I being clear as mud? EDIT......just as Shotgun said up at the top of this page. Thanks for taking the time to put up these photos. I will absolutely look into making all of these changes. All your discriptions have been fantastic. I understand everything. The one thing that has held me back from removing more material behind that rib. It the fact that it will Make that part of the recever smaller than the butt stock. It just seems like the two should be flush with each other. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2015 10:55:06 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thanks for taking the time to put up these photos. I will absolutely look into making all of these changes. All your discriptions have been fantastic. I understand everything. The one thing that has held me back from removing more material behind that rib. It the fact that it will Make that part of the recever smaller than the butt stock. It just seems like the two should be flush with each other. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Survivor, about welding in behind the rib. I don't know about that. Here's what I just did while taking the pics of the various lowers in the posts above. If I hold the NoDak lower back to back with the other 80% lower, here is what I see. If you were to trim your rib down to the plane of the area behind your rib, then it would be about right. When I hold the NoDak lower back to back with the other lower, the periphery of the NoDak matches up with the area that is behind your rib. So, it doesn't look like that area on yours needs to be filled in, but the rib needs to be lowered to THAT lower plane. Does that makes sense to you, or am I being clear as mud? EDIT......just as Shotgun said up at the top of this page. Thanks for taking the time to put up these photos. I will absolutely look into making all of these changes. All your discriptions have been fantastic. I understand everything. The one thing that has held me back from removing more material behind that rib. It the fact that it will Make that part of the recever smaller than the butt stock. It just seems like the two should be flush with each other. You don't want to remove more material from behind the rib, you want to remove material FROM THE RIB, to take it down to the plane of the area behind the rib as it is now. If you hold the receiver to a stock now isn't the area behind your rib about the same contour as the stock? M16........whether it is easier or more difficult doesn't matter. If someone were wanting to duplicate the milling cutter tool marks he would have to make the cut with a milling cutter to the point of cleaning up the end mill tooling marks............wherever that may be. Could be just to the bottom fo the ears, like on yours, or lower if that is how it was received. I've got 80%ers from various sources, and that area can be machined differently from one receiver to another. Different in how far down the front they machined it. The same in that all of the lowers (80%ers) that I have seen have been cut with an endmill, not a milling cutter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2015 10:59:43 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You don't want to remove more material from behind the rib, you want to remove material FROM THE RIB, to take it down to the plane of the area behind the rib as it is now. If you hold the receiver to a stock now isn't the area behind your rib about the same contour as the stock? M16........whether it is easier or more difficult doesn't matter. If someone were wanting to duplicate the milling cutter tool marks he would have to make the cut with a milling cutter to the point of cleaning up the end mill tooling marks............wherever that may be. Could be just to the bottom fo the ears, like on yours, or lower if that is how it was received. I've got 80%ers from various sources, and that area can be machined differently from one receiver to another. Different in how far down the front they machined it. The same in that all of the lowers (80%ers) that I have seen have been cut with an endmill, not a milling cutter. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Survivor, about welding in behind the rib. I don't know about that. Here's what I just did while taking the pics of the various lowers in the posts above. If I hold the NoDak lower back to back with the other 80% lower, here is what I see. If you were to trim your rib down to the plane of the area behind your rib, then it would be about right. When I hold the NoDak lower back to back with the other lower, the periphery of the NoDak matches up with the area that is behind your rib. So, it doesn't look like that area on yours needs to be filled in, but the rib needs to be lowered to THAT lower plane. Does that makes sense to you, or am I being clear as mud? EDIT......just as Shotgun said up at the top of this page. Thanks for taking the time to put up these photos. I will absolutely look into making all of these changes. All your discriptions have been fantastic. I understand everything. The one thing that has held me back from removing more material behind that rib. It the fact that it will Make that part of the recever smaller than the butt stock. It just seems like the two should be flush with each other. You don't want to remove more material from behind the rib, you want to remove material FROM THE RIB, to take it down to the plane of the area behind the rib as it is now. If you hold the receiver to a stock now isn't the area behind your rib about the same contour as the stock? M16........whether it is easier or more difficult doesn't matter. If someone were wanting to duplicate the milling cutter tool marks he would have to make the cut with a milling cutter to the point of cleaning up the end mill tooling marks............wherever that may be. Could be just to the bottom fo the ears, like on yours, or lower if that is how it was received. I've got 80%ers from various sources, and that area can be machined differently from one receiver to another. Different in how far down the front they machined it. The same in that all of the lowers (80%ers) that I have seen have been cut with an endmill, not a milling cutter. Not everyone has access to an end mill. If you want the look, it is much easier to use sand paper/files/Dremel above the ears, than below the ears. Just sayin |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2015 11:02:23 AM EDT
[#15]
Stoner25
I got ya. Maybe I'll post some more photos later tonight. Righ now I need to get to work. To make money to pay for that cutter. For the pivot area. : ) |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2015 11:05:49 AM EDT
[#16]
M16indiana
Thanks for your input also. And I do have access to end mills and milling machines 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2015 11:26:41 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
j Not everyone has access to an end mill. If you want the look, it is much easier to use sand paper/files/Dremel above the ears, than below the ears. Just sayin Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Survivor, about welding in behind the rib. I don't know about that. Here's what I just did while taking the pics of the various lowers in the posts above. If I hold the NoDak lower back to back with the other 80% lower, here is what I see. If you were to trim your rib down to the plane of the area behind your rib, then it would be about right. When I hold the NoDak lower back to back with the other lower, the periphery of the NoDak matches up with the area that is behind your rib. So, it doesn't look like that area on yours needs to be filled in, but the rib needs to be lowered to THAT lower plane. Does that makes sense to you, or am I being clear as mud? EDIT......just as Shotgun said up at the top of this page. Thanks for taking the time to put up these photos. I will absolutely look into making all of these changes. All your discriptions have been fantastic. I understand everything. The one thing that has held me back from removing more material behind that rib. It the fact that it will Make that part of the recever smaller than the butt stock. It just seems like the two should be flush with each other. You don't want to remove more material from behind the rib, you want to remove material FROM THE RIB, to take it down to the plane of the area behind the rib as it is now. If you hold the receiver to a stock now isn't the area behind your rib about the same contour as the stock? M16........whether it is easier or more difficult doesn't matter. If someone were wanting to duplicate the milling cutter tool marks he would have to make the cut with a milling cutter to the point of cleaning up the end mill tooling marks............wherever that may be. Could be just to the bottom fo the ears, like on yours, or lower if that is how it was received. I've got 80%ers from various sources, and that area can be machined differently from one receiver to another. Different in how far down the front they machined it. The same in that all of the lowers (80%ers) that I have seen have been cut with an endmill, not a milling cutter. Not everyone has access to an end mill. If you want the look, it is much easier to use sand paper/files/Dremel above the ears, than below the ears. Just sayin If someone is trying to duplicate that look using handtools, then you are correct........the shorter the cut the easier the job. It appears that survivor does have a milling machine, or access to one anyway, and I directed my comments/methods towards his situation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2015 3:11:54 PM EDT
[#18]
I forgot what a pain a2 to a1 is by hand.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2015 4:22:48 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I forgot what a pain a2 to a1 is by hand. <a href="http://s745.photobucket.com/user/sergio762/media/20150820_135411_zps9vlyd5ll.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i745.photobucket.com/albums/xx96/sergio762/20150820_135411_zps9vlyd5ll.jpg</a> Thank you very much ! I'll have a few minor updates to post when I get home today. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2015 9:01:19 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Survivor, about welding in behind the rib. I don't know about that. Here's what I just did while taking the pics of the various lowers in the posts above. If I hold the NoDak lower back to back with the other 80% lower, here is what I see. If you were to trim your rib down to the plane of the area behind your rib, then it would be about right. When I hold the NoDak lower back to back with the other lower, the periphery of the NoDak matches up with the area that is behind your rib. So, it doesn't look like that area on yours needs to be filled in, but the rib needs to be lowered to THAT lower plane. Does that makes sense to you, or am I being clear as mud? EDIT......just as Shotgun said up at the top of this page. So where we last left off. I have a new photo showing how the receiver meets up to the butt stock. I have not yet, but will remove more material around the buffer tube extension. But as far as that "rib" area. Right now it is flush with the butt stock. If I flatten the rib completely the receiver will be under flush. So your saying thats ok? . 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2015 9:20:41 PM EDT
[#21]
Today I tackled making machine marks in between the front pivot pin ears. Two things I need to change.
Like you stated on yours, my machine cuts are "too clean" ! Thats what happens when you use a brand new, sharp tool. : ( And after taking another look at your photos I see I did not go deep enough. I used a .250" Key seat cutter. So I made two passes. I think if I were to lightly round over the sharp corners on the Brand New Cutter it would leave that machine line down the center. Ok going to get overly technical here...What is the approximate thickness. From inside the mag well to outside pivot pin area? Mine right now is .100" Ill have to remove close to .015" to get it to look like your "early M16A1" Here are the before and after photos. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2015 9:23:31 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I forgot what a pain a2 to a1 is by hand. <a href="http://s745.photobucket.com/user/sergio762/media/20150820_135411_zps9vlyd5ll.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i745.photobucket.com/albums/xx96/sergio762/20150820_135411_zps9vlyd5ll.jpg</a> HKILLER Get in on this convo !!! How far down are you going to take those ribs on your lower? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2015 9:57:16 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
HKILLER Get in on this convo !!! How far down are you going to take those ribs on your lower? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I forgot what a pain a2 to a1 is by hand. <a href="http://s745.photobucket.com/user/sergio762/media/20150820_135411_zps9vlyd5ll.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i745.photobucket.com/albums/xx96/sergio762/20150820_135411_zps9vlyd5ll.jpg</a> HKILLER Get in on this convo !!! How far down are you going to take those ribs on your lower? If ur talking about the flash inbetween the stock and grip im leaving that part alone. This project it taking too long.lol and will soon be selling more retro and non retro to fund my own mill. As soon as i mill the front i will blast and anodize black. Maybe try the nds artificial finish wear. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2015 10:09:28 PM EDT
[#24]
This "rib" here!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2015 10:38:19 PM EDT
[#25]
Oh that, no i think bead blast will blend some. Not going for exact look on tthis one.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2015 11:39:06 PM EDT
[#26]
Survivor, I think your cut between the frt pivot pin ears looks just fine. They all seem to vary just a little, and the later A1's tended to be sloppier in their machined surfaces........hence the obvious two cut passes on my late A1. The early xm16e1 I showed looks to have been cut in one pass and looks more like yours.......so I'd probably be happy with what you have. I'll have to get those lowers out and measure the thickness for you.
About the "void" behind your rib............hmmmmmmm............what forge produced your forging? Do you know? All of mine have been Keyhole forgings and they don't have that void.........least I don't think they do. I'll have to check that too for you. Stoner |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2015 11:55:08 PM EDT
[#27]
First I have no idea who forged this receiver. This is my first 80%. I bought it at a local gun show.
It is not a keyhole. And Im almost certain its a factory second/blemished. I did however just buy a second 80%. Its the anodized version. It is a keyhole forge. Its a lot nicer than this one. Im not trying to be supper critical nor am I trying to make this 100% authentic . Im just having fun fiddle farting around with this and learning a bit of firearm history. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2015 8:06:15 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thanks, I actually spent a few hours today polishing with 1500 grt sand paper. So it looks better but Im sure paint is not going to stick LOL. I found some info on prep work for a finish on here today so a media blast is in the near future. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Tremendous file and detail work. Our compliments. Thanks, I actually spent a few hours today polishing with 1500 grt sand paper. So it looks better but Im sure paint is not going to stick LOL. I found some info on prep work for a finish on here today so a media blast is in the near future. i used a automotive DA sander and 320 grit to smooth out the slab side i made.. then i glass beaded the entire lower to "Blend" all the surfaces and give the paint some "Tooth" to adhere to.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2015 9:27:51 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
First I have no idea who forged this receiver. This is my first 80%. I bought it at a local gun show. It is not a keyhole. And Im almost certain its a factory second/blemished. I did however just buy a second 80%. Its the anodized version. It is a keyhole forge. Its a lot nicer than this one. Im not trying to be supper critical nor am I trying to make this 100% authentic . Im just having fun fiddle farting around with this and learning a bit of firearm history. I hear you on that. I see nothing wrong with going the extra 10 miles on trying to make one as correct as you can. It's what drives me, and it sometimes drives me nuts when someone posts a "no where close" reprofile and calls it "good". That's just my opinion and I know others don't see it that way, which is OK too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2015 6:09:12 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Today I tackled making machine marks in between the front pivot pin ears. Two things I need to change. Like you stated on yours, my machine cuts are "too clean" ! Thats what happens when you use a brand new, sharp tool. : ( And after taking another look at your photos I see I did not go deep enough. I used a .250" Key seat cutter. So I made two passes. I think if I were to lightly round over the sharp corners on the Brand New Cutter it would leave that machine line down the center. Ok going to get overly technical here...What is the approximate thickness. From inside the mag well to outside pivot pin area? Mine right now is .100" Ill have to remove close to .015" to get it to look like your "early M16A1" Here are the before and after photos. <a href="http://s1283.photobucket.com/user/andyd_7/media/IMG_0466_zps6c655d24.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i1283.photobucket.com/albums/a553/andyd_7/IMG_0466_zps6c655d24.jpg</a> <a href="http://s1283.photobucket.com/user/andyd_7/media/IMG_0470_zps7181a9a3.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i1283.photobucket.com/albums/a553/andyd_7/IMG_0470_zps7181a9a3.jpg</a> The two I have measure .096 and .105. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
