Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 7/10/2005 4:54:50 PM EDT
Hi guys my ffl dealer can get me a dpms lower brand new for a good price. It will have a A2 stock. What is the quality of their lowers?
Link Posted: 7/10/2005 5:12:01 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/11/2005 3:56:13 AM EDT by WalkerTexasRanger]
The DPMS lowers I have are better finished and have significantly less machining marks than either my Bushys or RRAs, and have all functioned 100%.

Link Posted: 7/10/2005 5:31:02 PM EDT
good for the money!



i paid $90ea.

i would go as far to say that they are better finish&fit than my bushies but they are worth the money.
Link Posted: 7/10/2005 5:43:28 PM EDT
A few weeks ago I was at a local gun shop that sells AR parts, I had gone there to check out the Stag lowers I heard they had. I looked at the Stag and then noticed there was also A DPMS lower in the case. I asked to see it also and I was extremely impressed with how well the lower looked. The finish was absolutely perfect and far better than any lower I have ever seen or owned.
Link Posted: 7/10/2005 10:31:49 PM EDT
Have em used em loved em. Good lowers for the price.
Link Posted: 7/10/2005 10:37:59 PM EDT
They are gtg.
Link Posted: 7/10/2005 10:40:01 PM EDT
Great lowers usually selling for really good prices. Nice fit and finish. I would buy another without a second thought.
Link Posted: 7/11/2005 4:09:19 AM EDT
You will be fine. I've about 4K rounds throgh my DPMS 16"er and not a hiccup, ever. Only mod was SEI bolt carrier and Vortex. Clearly a reliable weapon. BTW, very accurate.
Link Posted: 7/11/2005 4:14:57 AM EDT

Originally Posted By WalkerTexasRanger:
The DPMS lowers I have are better finished and have significantly less machining marks than either my Bushys or RRAs, and have all functioned 100%.




That's because they have a teflon coating over them that covers up any machining marks.
Link Posted: 7/11/2005 5:40:43 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/11/2005 5:52:16 AM EDT

Originally Posted By WalkerTexasRanger:
The DPMS lowers I have are better finished and have significantly less machining marks than either my Bushys or RRAs,




They have a teflon coating that makes them look pretty. It does nothing as far as protection or function. It is not spec either.
Link Posted: 7/11/2005 6:23:19 AM EDT
I have a DPMS lower my friends have multipul DPMS lowes. They work and fit better than expected. For the $99 they are the cat's ass.

Link Posted: 7/11/2005 6:44:29 AM EDT

Originally Posted By scottryan:

Originally Posted By WalkerTexasRanger:
The DPMS lowers I have are better finished and have significantly less machining marks than either my Bushys or RRAs,




They have a teflon coating that makes them look pretty. It does nothing as far as protection or function. It is not spec either.



Yep.
Link Posted: 7/11/2005 9:11:02 AM EDT
Link Posted: 7/11/2005 11:35:22 AM EDT

Originally Posted By new-arguy:
Trust me on the whole avoiding a cast receiver thing.

img234.imageshack.us/img234/6896/gprifle0333al.jpg



The DPMS lowers with the "F" prefix are now forged.
Link Posted: 7/11/2005 3:50:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By scottryan:

Originally Posted By WalkerTexasRanger:
The DPMS lowers I have are better finished and have significantly less machining marks than either my Bushys or RRAs,




They have a teflon coating that makes them look pretty. It does nothing as far as protection or function. It is not spec either.



OMG, not to spec...

Well if the teflon does nothing to help function then I guess they just function 100% because they are made well.

They are hard coat anadozied (spec) then teflon coated IIRC.

The machining marks I was referring to were just like the past Bushy thread that showed all the material left on the front of the magwell etc. They are not something that a coating, any coating, would cover up.





Link Posted: 7/11/2005 4:24:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By WalkerTexasRanger:

Originally Posted By scottryan:

Originally Posted By WalkerTexasRanger:
The DPMS lowers I have are better finished and have significantly less machining marks than either my Bushys or RRAs,




They have a teflon coating that makes them look pretty. It does nothing as far as protection or function. It is not spec either.



OMG, not to spec...

Well if the teflon does nothing to help function then I guess they just function 100% because they are made well.

They are hard coat anadozied (spec) then teflon coated IIRC.

The machining marks I was referring to were just like the past Bushy thread that showed all the material left on the front of the magwell etc. They are not something that a coating, any coating, would cover up.








The teflon coating does nothing for the funtioning of the durablity of the finish on the lower. It is there to look pretty.

One may have thought teflon was a durable finish. It is, but it is not as tough as Type III anodizing. Any impact that will scratch, ding, or damage the anodzing will go right through the teflon as it is less hard than the anodizing.

Anodizing is really aluminum oxide, the stuff sandpaper is made from.
Link Posted: 7/11/2005 5:00:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By scottryan:

The teflon coating does nothing for the funtioning of the durablity of the finish on the lower. It is there to look pretty.

One may have thought teflon was a durable finish. It is, but it is not as tough as Type III anodizing. Any impact that will scratch, ding, or damage the anodzing will go right through the teflon as it is less hard than the anodizing.

Anodizing is really aluminum oxide, the stuff sandpaper is made from.



Understood, but if the teflon coating goes over the hard coat anodizing, how is this a bad thing?? Seems like even extra protection...
Link Posted: 7/11/2005 6:08:27 PM EDT
Link Posted: 7/11/2005 6:13:31 PM EDT
Whaddaya mean "not to spec"?

I just mounted my LMT upper to my DPMS lower, and it mounts fine.


Is my upper out of spec too?
Link Posted: 7/11/2005 6:16:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/11/2005 6:16:44 PM EDT by mongo001]

Originally Posted By Chuckles5492:
Whaddaya mean "not to spec"?

I just mounted my LMT upper to my DPMS lower, and it mounts fine.


Is my upper out of spec too?



A milspec receiver will be Type III, hardcoat anodized, nothing else. It does not call for any coating over that. DPMS receivers are "in spec" as far as physical dimensions go, but the teflon coating is "above and beyond" what the spec calls for.
Link Posted: 7/11/2005 6:19:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Chuckles5492:
Whaddaya mean "not to spec"?

I just mounted my LMT upper to my DPMS lower, and it mounts fine.


Is my upper out of spec too?



He means that the teflon coating is not to spec. However, as the DPMS lowers are hard coat anodized (per mil spec) then teflon coated, I still don't get the problem....
Link Posted: 7/11/2005 6:25:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/11/2005 6:27:42 PM EDT by mongo001]

Originally Posted By WalkerTexasRanger:

Originally Posted By Chuckles5492:
Whaddaya mean "not to spec"?

I just mounted my LMT upper to my DPMS lower, and it mounts fine.


Is my upper out of spec too?



He means that the teflon coating is not to spec. However, as the DPMS lowers are hard coat anodized (per mil spec) then teflon coated, I still don't get the problem....



No real problem, but here's my one and only experience with a ding on a teflon coated receiver - the receiver on the left experienced an inadvertent hammer drop on the receiver while building the lower. The receiver on the right is a Bushmaster, which is Type III hardcoat anodized and due to my bullheadness in an argument, I intentionally dropped the hammer on that receiver twice, yes twice. Notice any difference? It is my belief that coated receivers are prone to larger chipping at sharp corners when they take a hit. YMMV.



Link Posted: 7/11/2005 6:29:35 PM EDT
I have eleven DPMS ARs in various configurations, and am very satisfied. Any functioning problems have been traced to operator error or ammunition. hy.gifhippie.gif[h.gifhug.gif
Link Posted: 7/11/2005 6:35:57 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/11/2005 6:37:15 PM EDT by WalkerTexasRanger]

Originally Posted By mongo001:

No real problem, but here's my one and only experience with a ding on a teflon coated receiver - the receiver on the left experienced an inadvertent hammer drop on the receiver while building the lower. The receiver on the right is a Bushmaster, which is Type III hardcoat anodized and due to my bullheadness in an argument, I intentionally dropped the hammer on that receiver twice, yes twice. Notice any difference? It is my belief that coated receivers are prone to larger chipping at sharp corners when they take a hit. YMMV.



Interesting. Curious how the teflon coming off would pull the anodizing underneath off, or cause a worse chip in the actual aluminum? Any experience with DPMS uppers showing the same results on the brass deflector? Seems they would be much more prone to chip there as well then? I have had DPMS, Bushy, CMT uppers all chip there, but none noticably worse than others.

Link Posted: 7/11/2005 6:43:03 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/11/2005 6:44:00 PM EDT by mongo001]

Originally Posted By WalkerTexasRanger:

Originally Posted By mongo001:

No real problem, but here's my one and only experience with a ding on a teflon coated receiver - the receiver on the left experienced an inadvertent hammer drop on the receiver while building the lower. The receiver on the right is a Bushmaster, which is Type III hardcoat anodized and due to my bullheadness in an argument, I intentionally dropped the hammer on that receiver twice, yes twice. Notice any difference? It is my belief that coated receivers are prone to larger chipping at sharp corners when they take a hit. YMMV.



Interesting. Curious how the teflon coming off would pull the anodizing underneath off, or cause a worse chip in the actual aluminum? Any experience with DPMS uppers showing the same results on the brass deflector? Seems they would be much more prone to chip there as well then? I have had DPMS, Bushy, CMT uppers all chip there, but none noticably worse than others.




It could very well be that I had a bad batch of either anodizing and/or the teflon coating over the top. All I know is that I never saw a finish like there is on the MEGA receiver, all sparkley-like and I never saw such a large chip come off on a one time strike. The Bushmaster didn't chip at all. The metal and anodizing just dented. That MEGA receiver is now Norrell's tan.
Link Posted: 7/11/2005 6:46:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mongo001:

It could very well be that I had a bad batch of either anodizing and/or the teflon coating over the top. All I know is that I never saw a finish like there is on the MEGA receiver, all sparkley-like and I never saw such a large chip come off on a one time strike. The Bushmaster didn't chip at all. The metal and anodizing just dented. That MEGA receiver is now Norrell's tan.



I wonder if Mega actually does the anodizing first like DPMS, or if they just skip straight to the teflon?
Link Posted: 7/12/2005 2:45:56 AM EDT

Originally Posted By WalkerTexasRanger:

Originally Posted By mongo001:

It could very well be that I had a bad batch of either anodizing and/or the teflon coating over the top. All I know is that I never saw a finish like there is on the MEGA receiver, all sparkley-like and I never saw such a large chip come off on a one time strike. The Bushmaster didn't chip at all. The metal and anodizing just dented. That MEGA receiver is now Norrell's tan.



I wonder if Mega actually does the anodizing first like DPMS, or if they just skip straight to the teflon?



I'd bet they anodize. They say they do.
Link Posted: 8/6/2005 2:29:48 PM EDT
Who sells the DPMS lowers for the best price? I've been looking and cant find them for the $90 - $100 range others spoke of.
Link Posted: 8/6/2005 4:03:29 PM EDT

Originally Posted By oufree:
Who sells the DPMS lowers for the best price? I've been looking and cant find them for the $90 - $100 range others spoke of.



+1
Link Posted: 8/6/2005 4:15:23 PM EDT
I got one from CMMG a while back for $105, plus shipping. Add FFL fee and I was well above that.
Top Top