User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/30/2021 8:21:05 AM EDT
[#1]
A near net shape process requires machining to bring in the final dimensions.
. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/30/2021 9:43:41 AM EDT
[#2]
I think finding an older one on the secondary market is your best option.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2021 4:22:53 AM EDT
[#3]
The forged RE that I got from SAW was a greyish color. There are out of just the RE but available as a buttstock kit. See link for pictures.
Buttstock, fixed · Rifle |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2021 10:36:10 AM EDT
[#4]
B) don't like the extra *bling* of the shiny tube blinding me on the range. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2021 11:01:48 AM EDT
[#5]
Any buffer tube from a known manufacturer is good to go. Colt is not special.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2021 11:12:03 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Any buffer tube from a known manufacturer is good to go. Colt is not special. You're so wrong on this one. This is the one circumstance where you WANT a Colt branded product. Colt is one of only 2 sources where you can obtain a 7075 rifle receiver extension (notice the OP specified A2 and NOT m4 receiver extension). 99% of all the A2 rifle tubes available for sale on the commercial market are 6061. 7075 is roughly twice as strong as 6061 aluminum. If the receiver extension breaks or bends due to rough use (mortarting, hitters position, accidental fall, or buttstroke), the rifle is inoperative. This is a CRUCIAL part where strength can not be compromised IMHO. Brownells apparently also now sells a 7075 receiver extension, though I am not sure of the manufacturing process. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2021 1:01:57 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You're so wrong on this one. Colt is one of only 2 sources where you can obtain a 7075 rifle receiver extension Manufacturers stating that their A2 receiver extensions are 7075 T-6 material: PSA LuthAR JE Machine Tech AR-Stoner |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2021 1:30:09 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Manufacturers stating that their A2 receiver extensions are 7075 T-6 material: PSA LuthAR JE Machine Tech AR-Stoner Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: You're so wrong on this one. Colt is one of only 2 sources where you can obtain a 7075 rifle receiver extension Manufacturers stating that their A2 receiver extensions are 7075 T-6 material: PSA LuthAR JE Machine Tech AR-Stoner That's bullshit, source? I know for a fact that PSA doesn't use 7075 and I am 99.9% positive those other low end budget companies listed manufacturers don't as well. Also, most companies don't distinguish between A2 and M4 when you ask the customer service rep. A lot of times they just assume that it must be the same material as the M4 tube, even though I can assure you though that their A2 tubes are NOT 7075. The suppliers are simply not offering them other than Colt and brownells. If you do any real digging, you'll find that their A2 tubes are made out of 6061. Even LMT doesn't use 7075, and admitted to me that they use 6061 as just about everyone else does. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2021 1:36:51 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's bullshit, source? I know for a fact that PSA doesn't and I am 99.9% positive those other listed manufacturers don't as well. Also, most manufacturers don't distinguish between A2 and M4 when asked, I can assure you though that their A2 tubes are NOT 7075. From that super challenging Google thingy....: #1 #2 #3 As far as PSA, they have repeatedly stated 7075 T-6 across the board, both rifle and carbine REs. Now all you need to do is prove them liars. ETA: Show proof of your claim. ------------------------------------------- @PalmttoStateArmory Josiah, If you would please, what material are your A2 rifle receiver extensions manufactured from? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2021 1:44:46 PM EDT
[#10]
Like I said, a lot of time there is a confusion between the marketers. Here is a listing for the same product, listing it as 6061.
I'd like to see proof from PSA that they use 7075 for A2 RIFLE receiver extensions (they wouldn't be listing for $19.99, I can tell you that right now). The AR extreme duty might be 7075 since it is listed as more expensive, and also since they list their standard $20 tubes as 6061. Must be using the same supplier as brownells. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2021 1:52:38 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Like I said, a lot of time there is a confusion between the marketers. Here is a listing for the same product, listing it as 6061. I'd like to see proof from PSA that they use 7075 for A2 RIFLE receiver extensions (they wouldn't be listing for $19.99, I can tell you that right now). The AR extreme duty might be 7075 since it is listed as more expensive, and also since they list their standard $20 tubes as 6061. Must be using the same supplier as brownells. You post your guessology as if fact too often. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2021 2:07:46 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You post your guessology as if fact too often. Like you just did? I actually call into the companies and speak with the builders / people in the know vs. taking as gospel the incorrectly assumed information that some PR product rep posts on this site. Or information listed on a 3rd party sellers website. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2021 2:16:18 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Like you just did? I actually call into the companies and speak with the builders / people in the know vs. taking as gospel the incorrectly assumed information that some PR product rep posts on this site. Or information listed on a 3rd party sellers website. I stated nothing as fact other than what mfgrs's descriptions state. Without having samples of each from each source neither of us can say for certain. Although you repeatedly do such. An item description is about as reliable as a CS rep's word. Trust it or not. But in reality you have no clue and obviously no factual documentation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2021 2:23:18 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Manufacturers stating that their A2 receiver extensions are 7075 T-6 material: PSA LuthAR JE Machine Tech AR-Stoner Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: You're so wrong on this one. Colt is one of only 2 sources where you can obtain a 7075 rifle receiver extension Manufacturers stating that their A2 receiver extensions are 7075 T-6 material: PSA LuthAR JE Machine Tech AR-Stoner Buyer beware. They "Manufacture" a lot of products that are actually made in china/stamped "Made in USA" |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2021 2:40:02 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Buyer beware. They "Manufacture" a lot of products that are actually made in china/stamped "Made in USA" Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: You're so wrong on this one. Colt is one of only 2 sources where you can obtain a 7075 rifle receiver extension Manufacturers stating that their A2 receiver extensions are 7075 T-6 material: PSA LuthAR JE Machine Tech AR-Stoner Buyer beware. They "Manufacture" a lot of products that are actually made in china/stamped "Made in USA" For the record, not advocating for any of the mentioned vendors/mfgrs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2021 2:44:44 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I stated nothing as fact other than what mfgrs's descriptions state. Without having samples of each from each source neither of us can say for certain. Although you repeatedly do such. An item description is about as reliable as a CS rep's word. Trust it or not. But in reality you have no clue and obviously no factual documentation. If you think that all of those low end unreputable manufacturers, with the exception of the twice as costly "extreme duty" tube, are offering 7075 A2 tubes, then you have no clue. And YOU were the one who first listed those manufacturers as "offering" 7075 RE, as if they were viable options. If you weren't sure, why did you list them to counter my Colt / Bronwells claim (which are both documented to be 7075). |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2021 3:04:06 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And YOU were the one who first listed those manufacturers as "offering" 7075 RE, as if they were viable options. If you weren't sure, why did you list them to counter my Colt / Bronwells claim (which are both documented to be 7075). Quote HistoryQuoted: And YOU were the one who first listed those manufacturers as "offering" 7075 RE, as if they were viable options. If you weren't sure, why did you list them to counter my Colt / Bronwells claim (which are both documented to be 7075). Quoted: Colt is one of only 2 sources You continually post statements as fact when , in actuality, you reach at guesses. How could you possibly know what others are manufacturing/selling without any firsthand knowledge? You cannot. Am saying with certainty that those few listed above claiming 7075 are ????? No. However, you are flat out calling bullshit with zero evidence. Either way, I'm tired of dancing around the same figure 8 with you. Let us know when you have actual data to back your claims. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/12/2021 5:42:28 PM EDT
[#18]
Don't want to interrupt the dance, but how about the RE in FN A2 buttstock assemblies? I recently ordered one, and would be curious if there's a known spec on their RE.
Next, is there an easy way to tell one type of Al from another with the parts in hand without an expensive hardness tester, or destroying the part? I don't plan on butt-stroking anyone with my semi-A4 clone (I have other gear for that!), but having spent a bit extra on FN parts, it's always nice to know if there's a difference. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/12/2021 7:25:10 PM EDT
[#19]
No idea about FN.
What adds to the " what " is saying 7075 in an ad for a product. That is not the same as saying 7075 T6. So who knows what the strength of the material is. If I was looking for a spec tube I would look for one advertised as 7075 T6 or one of the old Colt tubes made to spec. Just for general info. There are 6061 tubes out there that are too long and stop the stock and rear plate from seating correctly. I still have one I saved to use for measuring new tubes against. The other one I trashed because I was mad about getting a second one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/12/2021 7:58:22 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Don't want to interrupt the dance, but how about the RE in FN A2 buttstock assemblies? I recently ordered one, and would be curious if there's a known spec on their RE. Next, is there an easy way to tell one type of Al from another with the parts in hand without an expensive hardness tester, or destroying the part? I don't plan on butt-stroking anyone with my semi-A4 clone (I have other gear for that!), but having spent a bit extra on FN parts, it's always nice to know if there's a difference. XRF analyzer. Most any scrap yard /recycling center will shoot it for you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2021 8:30:05 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Don't want to interrupt the dance, but how about the RE in FN A2 buttstock assemblies? I recently ordered one, and would be curious if there's a known spec on their RE. Next, is there an easy way to tell one type of Al from another with the parts in hand without an expensive hardness tester, or destroying the part? I don't plan on butt-stroking anyone with my semi-A4 clone (I have other gear for that!), but having spent a bit extra on FN parts, it's always nice to know if there's a difference. Depends what you mean by FN. Military collector series, Shark Arms, other? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2021 8:57:35 AM EDT
[#22]
Per the TDP, a mil spec receiver extension is supposed to have the same Type III anodized finish (black to dark gray) as the upper/lower receivers. It's also supposed to have a dry lube coating over the finish (inside and out for A1/A2; inside only for the M4...unless you're LMT and put it on both sides).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2021 1:30:58 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Per the TDP, a mil spec receiver extension is supposed to have the same Type III anodized finish (black to dark gray) as the upper/lower receivers. It's also supposed to have a dry lube coating over the finish (inside and out for A1/A2; inside only for the M4...unless you're LMT and put it on both sides). Quote HistoryQuoted: Per the TDP, a mil spec receiver extension is supposed to have the same Type III anodized finish (black to dark gray) as the upper/lower receivers. It's also supposed to have a dry lube coating over the finish (inside and out for A1/A2; inside only for the M4...unless you're LMT and put it on both sides). This Quoted: No idea about FN. What adds to the " what " is saying 7075 in an ad for a product. That is not the same as saying 7075 T6. So who knows what the strength of the material is. If I was looking for a spec tube I would look for one advertised as 7075 T6 or one of the old Colt tubes made to spec. And this. Which is why this is IMHO the part where it makes the biggest difference if you buy a Colt or not. Brownells' rifle receiver extensions are listed as 7075 but are they T6??? Are they made to the same standards as the Colt??? They are cheaper. It's your money and your gamble to make. All of the colt receiver extensions I've bought (including the ones from Brownells) have a darker grey colored coating to them vs. just being black, which I assume is the dry lube finish. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2021 1:54:31 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Which is why this is IMHO the part where it makes the biggest difference if you buy a Colt or not. Brownells' rifle receiver extensions are listed as 7075 but are they T6??? Are they made to the same standards as the Colt??? They are cheaper. It's your money and your gamble to make. All of the colt receiver extensions I've bought (including the ones from Brownells) have a darker grey colored coating to them vs. just being black, which I assume is the dry lube finish. Quote HistoryQuoted: Which is why this is IMHO the part where it makes the biggest difference if you buy a Colt or not. Brownells' rifle receiver extensions are listed as 7075 but are they T6??? Are they made to the same standards as the Colt??? They are cheaper. It's your money and your gamble to make. All of the colt receiver extensions I've bought (including the ones from Brownells) have a darker grey colored coating to them vs. just being black, which I assume is the dry lube finish. And yet the OP states: Quoted: >ordered a milspec Colt manufacture buffer tube (receiver extension, RE) from Brownells. It came yesterday but had a very shiny black finish with fine but apparent lathe marks. Much like the "True milspec Colt M4" REs from RTB look nothing like the Colt components of yesteryear, inside/out. Although guaranteed "Colt subcontractor sourced". Colt is far from predictable and too many assume. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2021 8:17:46 PM EDT
[#25]
Quoted: XRF analyzer. Most any scrap yard /recycling center will shoot it for you. Thanks - I'm not sure I care that much, but good to know. We have an XRF at work, but they're more than a little skittish about anything weapon related. Quoted: Depends what you mean by FN. Military collector series, Shark Arms, other? Shark Arms. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2021 8:21:36 PM EDT
[#26]
Even the much (unfairly IMO) maligned Anderson uses impact extruded 7075-T6 aluminum on their milspec CAR extensions, and they are only $20. I cannot find any specs on their A2 receiver extensions.
"The Anderson Manufacturing MIL-SPEC Carbine AR15 buffer tube is machined from impact extruded 7075-T6 aluminum with a durable hardcoat anodized finish. The extended bottom lip of this buffer tube is designed to prevent carrier tilt. This buffer tube has been finish machined to MIL-SPEC diameter to fit your favorite carbine stocks. Features: 6-position tube MIL-SPEC Hardcoat anodized Anderson Manufacturing builds rifles, pistols, and parts utilizing the latest in computerized manufacturing. By keeping manufacturing in house, Anderson can offer quality, American-made products at an affordable price, backed by a limited lifetime warranty. Specifications BrandAnderson Manufacturing FinishHardcoat Anodized FitmentMIL-SPEC - 1.14 in Manufacturer.Anderson Manufacturing MaterialAluminum - 7075-T6 PlatformAR-15/AR-308 Position6 Weight3.6 Oz" |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2021 8:22:22 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Thanks - I'm not sure I care that much, but good to know. We have an XRF at work, but they're more than a little skittish about anything weapon related. I hear you man. I'm in the same boat with management. Far from 2A friendly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2021 8:23:39 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Even the much (unfairly IMO) maligned Anderson uses impact extruded 7075-T6 aluminum on their milspec CAR extensions, and they are only $20. I cannot find any specs on their A2 receiver extensions. "The Anderson Manufacturing MIL-SPEC Carbine AR15 buffer tube is machined from impact extruded 7075-T6 aluminum with a durable hardcoat anodized finish. The extended bottom lip of this buffer tube is designed to prevent carrier tilt. This buffer tube has been finish machined to MIL-SPEC diameter to fit your favorite carbine stocks. Features: 6-position tube MIL-SPEC Hardcoat anodized Anderson Manufacturing builds rifles, pistols, and parts utilizing the latest in computerized manufacturing. By keeping manufacturing in house, Anderson can offer quality, American-made products at an affordable price, backed by a limited lifetime warranty. Specifications BrandAnderson Manufacturing FinishHardcoat Anodized FitmentMIL-SPEC - 1.14 in Manufacturer.Anderson Manufacturing MaterialAluminum - 7075-T6 PlatformAR-15/AR-308 Position6 Weight3.6 Oz" Anderson REs are among my favorites. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2021 9:12:06 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And yet the OP states: Much like the "True milspec Colt M4" REs from RTB look nothing like the Colt components of yesteryear, inside/out. Although guaranteed "Colt subcontractor sourced". Colt is far from predictable and too many assume. Yep. Got a Colt A2 receiver extension from Brownell's and it is shiny dark black on the outside. Mass was the same as my GI receiver extension though if that's worth anything. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2021 9:12:47 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Thanks - I'm not sure I care that much, but good to know. We have an XRF at work, but they're more than a little skittish about anything weapon related. Shark Arms. The "FN" stock set I got from Shark appeared to be commercial junk but YMMV. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2021 11:24:04 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The "FN" stock set I got from Shark appeared to be commercial junk but YMMV. Well, the order request is in limbo - Shark's not exactly the most modern online store - and I went that way after a lot of time trying to find a solid A2 stock full assembly for an A4 build. Reviews have been mixed, but it's a roll of the dice. I had good luck with the KAC M5 rail from them. Maybe I'll just go for the Colt, for even more money. This has been a pricey build, so what's another few jacksons? I'll take this to the A2 stock thread in the A2 Build forum... |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2021 11:42:21 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well, the order request is in limbo - Shark's not exactly the most modern online store - and I went that way after a lot of time trying to find a solid A2 stock full assembly for an A4 build. Reviews have been mixed, but it's a roll of the dice. I had good luck with the KAC M5 rail from them. Maybe I'll just go for the Colt, for even more money. This has been a pricey build, so what's another few jacksons? I'll take this to the A2 stock thread in the A2 Build forum... I think I posted already in this thread but it seems the best place to find a USGI A2 receiver extension is on Gunbroker. I have seen a couple on the EE but they aren't common. You might be able to find one at a gun show but you need to know what you are looking for. I posted about the FN stock in the A2 forum. There's pictures and comments in there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2021 12:47:42 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think I posted already in this thread but it seems the best place to find a USGI A2 receiver extension is on Gunbroker. I have seen a couple on the EE but they aren't common. You might be able to find one at a gun show but you need to know what you are looking for. I posted about the FN stock in the A2 forum. There's pictures and comments in there. Yes, I've been through the A2 forum posts and archives multiple times, and am still confused about the Shark stock and whether it's legit or not - some people had good luck (mostly older posts, before they went out of stock), while the newer ones (back in stock) are iffy. I don't actually care about the RE that much, just want a good quality A2 stock assy (the whole thing). I have a decent one on an old JT build from 2005 (in my avatar pic), and am thinking I'll just use that for now while I get it sorted out. I'm looking forward to when this bubble bursts and things get back to normal on parts availability. There are some signs it's starting, but too early to tell. |
|
|
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.
