AR Sponsor
Posted: 4/13/2012 3:15:20 PM EDT
|
I had never heard of, nor imagined I would find a polymer lower. I just looking at the AR maker list over on gunquester for billet lowers and saw that New Frontier made plastic lowers so I came here to get some more info. I searched and found the threads but I wanted to make a new thread to combine them for updates by the people who got one.
I agree with most of the doubters in the other threads, but all the same I am still really intrigued. When I first looked on their website I thought they were airsoft only. I have seen rifles get hot enough to make polymer mags lose some rigidity (temporarily at least). I see they are out of stock so I am dying for some updates. It would be worth it for me to spend the $100 just to try and break it. Has anyone that got one fired maybe 10+ mags very rapidly? Or even just 3-4? Thanks in advance |
| have one ruffly 1k rounds through it works well still nice crisp trigger. I have probably only dumped about 3 mags through it rapidly and consecutively and did just fine with that. I have a feeling someone from NFA will chime in eventually. With a lifetime warranty it's worth $100 and I think you would be hard pressed to break it. All that being said an aluminum lower and nice LPK is on my short list of upgrades and then the gf can play with the plastic one. |
| I have a polymer lower on one of my ARs and it works fine. I cant tell any difference while im shooting it compared to my metal lower. I have put few thousand rounds through it and it looks fine (no excessive wear marks or anything like that). I live in the middle of a hot, sunny desert and even when im firing as fast as i can pull the trigger and reload (only 3 or 4 USGI mags at a time) it never got hot or flimsy. I will eventually switch it out for a metal lower though just cause Im worried about it AND (probably more importantly) it will give me a reason for another build. haha Also a plus for it is weight; its super light compared to a standard milled lower. |
|
Quoted: This has been covered many times, but to reiterate.. You cannot compare a purpose built polymer firearm (Glock, S&W MP, Cav15, etc.) to a purpose built aluminum firearm that was built out of polymer. The Cav15 worked because it was a complete redesign, engineered to be built from polymer. Glocks were engineered to be built from polymer. Standard AR lowers were not, they were engineered to be built from aluminum. Replacing aluminum with polymer without any significant changes is not a good idea.Quoted: plastic lowers are good for .22's for the most part. i know i wouldn't trust my life to one shooting 5.56. This makes no sense how many people trust thier life to a glock pistol everyday! |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
This has been covered many times, but to reiterate.. You cannot compare a purpose built polymer firearm (Glock, S&W MP, Cav15, etc.) to a purpose built aluminum firearm that was built out of polymer. The Cav15 worked because it was a complete redesign, engineered to be built from polymer. Glocks were engineered to be built from polymer. Standard AR lowers were not, they were engineered to be built from aluminum. Replacing aluminum with polymer without any significant changes is not a good idea.
Quoted:
plastic lowers are good for .22's for the most part. i know i wouldn't trust my life to one shooting 5.56. This makes no sense how many people trust thier life to a glock pistol everyday! That is one of stupidest things I have ever heard. Since these new companies have actually done it, and tested them successfully, they have in fact built a PURPOSE BUILT POLYMER AR LOWER. It is very arguable that the only reason they were not made from plastic to begin with, is because the technology and material to do it was not available at that time. That means absolutely nothing when it comes to determining the suitability of the material now. The Glock is essentially not a different handgun design than metal guns are. They, and ever other polymer model which has flooded the market, has followed the same design concepts as previous guns. The difference is, the manufacturer's used a plastic, or form of it, that can withstand the forces required of the design. The AR polymer lower manufacturer has done the same thing. Car rims used to be made of steel only. Now they are made of aluminum and in some cases, carbon fiber. Does that mean aluminum and carbon fiber are unsuitable for making car wheels because they were originally designed from steel? That sounds pretty stupid doesn't it? |
|
Quoted: Pretty sure I'm going to say the same thing about what you just posted. There are numerous examples of both Vulcan and Plum Crazy lowers that failed, and not even from particularly strenuous use or abuse. Maybe NFA used polymer that's considerably stronger than their predecessors, but I doubt it. Look at aluminum rims compared to steel rims, the aluminum rim is considerably thicker, to maintain strength. Polymer pistols use steel inserts. You can't just swap a stronger material with a weaker one and expect it to perform the same. Take a 1911 frame and build it out of polymer with no steel inserts. I'd be willing to bet it doesn't hold up very long. I'm not saying things can't be made from polymer, just that you can't swap it one for one with steel or even aluminum and expect it to perform as well. That is one of stupidest things I have ever heard. Another example would be AR mags. Magpul refuses to make 6.8 mags for the standard AR magwell because they can't get enough polymer in there, the walls would be too thin to maintain integrity. It's easy enough to do with steel and aluminum though. Look at the standard 5.56 PMag, doesn't look much different than a GI mag on the surface, but if you look at the wall thickness, the PMag is considerably thicker. That's because one for one swaps just don't work. And that's what Hesse, then Plum Crazy, and now NFA have done. Taken an aluminum lower and did a one for one swap with polymer. There are no steel inserts, no thicker reinforced areas, no re-engineering at all. Cav Arms did it right, they significantly redesigned their lower to address the weak points. |
|
Just put mine together this afternoon. Mated it with a M&A Varmint upper. Works great and was perfect for my budget (aka broke). I'll be shooting instead of thinking about shooting. I'm looking forward to dialing the rig in. If it blows up I'll let you guys know. http://i493.photobucket.com/albums/rr296/caddlad/jezebelle.jpg Rick |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pretty sure I'm going to say the same thing about what you just posted. There are numerous examples of both Vulcan and Plum Crazy lowers that failed, and not even from particularly strenuous use or abuse. Maybe NFA used polymer that's considerably stronger than their predecessors, but I doubt it. Look at aluminum rims compared to steel rims, the aluminum rim is considerably thicker, to maintain strength. Polymer pistols use steel inserts. You can't just swap a stronger material with a weaker one and expect it to perform the same. Take a 1911 frame and build it out of polymer with no steel inserts. I'd be willing to bet it doesn't hold up very long. I'm not saying things can't be made from polymer, just that you can't swap it one for one with steel or even aluminum and expect it to perform as well.
That is one of stupidest things I have ever heard. There is a hell of a lot more that goes into engineering than just how strong a material is. Some stuff is rigid in one direction while flexible in another. Some is simply more flexible, but actually stronger. If they can make airplanes, and helicopters, and their respective hybrids, and their engines and engine fan blades out of synthetics, I am sure a gun manufacturer can make a successful lower out of polymer. And Bushmaster is also selling synthetic lowers anyway. The lowers are not the major load bearing part of an AR. Most of its shape come from the need to contain or hold parts, not because of design load. Concrete can be made multiple of times stronger by simply mixing fibers into it, instead of steel rebar. It is stronger, lighter, and more cost effective. There are countless examples of this all over in our daily lives. |
|
Quoted:
If they can make airplanes, and helicopters, and their respective hybrids, and their engines and engine fan blades out of synthetics, I am sure a gun manufacturer can make a successful lower out of polymer. And when that successful lower is made, I am sure it won't merely be a plastic replica of the aluminum original... |
| pull the rear push pin and let the upper just flop forward a time or two. come back and show us your cracked upper. I'm sure Bushmaster and Plum Crazy will show you pictures of theirs that this happened to. the polymer lacks strength without metal inserts. but continue to play away with your plastic lowers that save you what ? 4 ounces, maybe 5 ? |
|
Quoted: I am sure a gun manufacturer can make a successful lower out of polymer. And Bushmaster is also selling synthetic lowers anyway. The lowers are not the major load bearing part of an AR. Most of its shape come from the need to contain or hold parts, not because of design load.     Maybe NFA is using a strong enough polymer to prevent the above, we'll see. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg405/scaled.php?server=405&filename=plumcrazydamage.jpg&res=landing
I am sure a gun manufacturer can make a successful lower out of polymer. And Bushmaster is also selling synthetic lowers anyway. The lowers are not the major load bearing part of an AR. Most of its shape come from the need to contain or hold parts, not because of design load. http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg51/scaled.php?server=51&filename=cimg0033f.jpg&res=landing http://i804.photobucket.com/albums/yy324/recon013/DSCN0312.jpg http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k294/technoweenie/i2yh52i3y6gi2y3g6/pcbuild/pclfailure1.jpg Maybe NFA is using a strong enough polymer to prevent the above, we'll see. It DOESN'T have to be strong "enough". The solution could actually have been to make the plastic mixture more flexible. Even if you use the wrong grade or mixture of aluminum, the same thing could happen. |
|
I had one of the Bushmaster "Carbon Fiber" series chambered in 9mm about 6 years ago. I got it BNIB, cleaned it and took it to the range. On the 26th round of Speer Gold Dot, it blew up in my face and separated at the rear of the lower receiver, at the take down pin, as illustrated by JoshAston's third picture in the line up above. Enjoy your plastic ARs folks, but mine will be made of aluminum, as they should be.
Edited for spelling. |
|
Well this thread took a different turn to what I anticipated. Thanks for the replies and info, and thanks for the pics of the plum crazy lower.
Seeing as it has gone this way, I will add to the argument on plastics as a 1-1 replacement for aluminum. I will get one when they come available again but I have no idea if the polymer is strong enough to survive the test I plan on putting it through. What I can say, with certainty, is that many of the guys against the plastic lower in this thread are absolutely right. There is no polymer with properties that exactly match aluminum, so using is at such is poor engineering at best. Yes, aircraft are using composites more and more but they don't just replace aluminum with plastic, as guys tried to say, they completely re-design and test the component for the properties of the new material. The polymer may more more or less rigid, ductile, resistant to heat, UV, compressible, have more strength under tension, or strength under compression, impact resistance etc etc. But it won't be the exact same (or better) in all categories. Just as aluminum is better than steel alloys for some roles, it does not make for a good barrel. My guess is that it has less rigidity and strength under tension that 7075 or 6061. I think if I run 10 mags fast through it the heat will make able to flex enough that it will fail to hold the buffer tube dead straight. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This has been covered many times, but to reiterate.. You cannot compare a purpose built polymer firearm (Glock, S&W MP, Cav15, etc.) to a purpose built aluminum firearm that was built out of polymer. The Cav15 worked because it was a complete redesign, engineered to be built from polymer. Glocks were engineered to be built from polymer. Standard AR lowers were not, they were engineered to be built from aluminum. Replacing aluminum with polymer without any significant changes is not a good idea.
Quoted:
plastic lowers are good for .22's for the most part. i know i wouldn't trust my life to one shooting 5.56. This makes no sense how many people trust thier life to a glock pistol everyday! That is one of stupidest things I have ever heard. Since these new companies have actually done it, and tested them successfully, they have in fact built a PURPOSE BUILT POLYMER AR LOWER. It is very arguable that the only reason they were not made from plastic to begin with, is because the technology and material to do it was not available at that time. That means absolutely nothing when it comes to determining the suitability of the material now. The Glock is essentially not a different handgun design than metal guns are. They, and ever other polymer model which has flooded the market, has followed the same design concepts as previous guns. The difference is, the manufacturer's used a plastic, or form of it, that can withstand the forces required of the design. The AR polymer lower manufacturer has done the same thing. Car rims used to be made of steel only. Now they are made of aluminum and in some cases, carbon fiber. Does that mean aluminum and carbon fiber are unsuitable for making car wheels because they were originally designed from steel? That sounds pretty stupid doesn't it? Yeah, this makes a lot of sense especially since they did not have plastic when Eugene designed the ar-15. |
|
No disrespect intended but...
1. I see no significant savings in $$ buying a polymer lower 2. If the weight of an aluminum lower is too much more than polymer, then you really need to go to the gym more. 3. The pics that Josh posted should be evidence enough to stay away. 4. I value my life too much to take unneccesary chances like that. |
|
Quoted:
No disrespect intended but... 1. I see no significant savings in $$ buying a polymer lower 2. If the weight of an aluminum lower is too much more than polymer, then you really need to go to the gym more. 3. The pics that Josh posted should be evidence enough to stay away. 4. I value my life too much to take unneccesary chances like that. Well 4. is pure (and silly) hyperbole, as your life's not going to be in danger unless you're using a polymer bolt carrier, bolt, barrel extension, barrel or gas tube. The "boom" is entirely contained within the bolt carrier, bolt, barrel extension, barrel and gas tube, and those are still made of steel. |
| Since a failure of the lower could could stop your weapon from functioning...I will stick with my comment. Everyone has a right to their opinion and everyone has right to build whatever they feel comfortable with. I simply would not feel comfortable trusting my life to a polymer lower when there is no good reason to use one. If you are not worried about the quality of a polymer lower then by all means use one. I wish you the best of luck.. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
No disrespect intended but... 1. I see no significant savings in $$ buying a polymer lower 2. If the weight of an aluminum lower is too much more than polymer, then you really need to go to the gym more. 3. The pics that Josh posted should be evidence enough to stay away. 4. I value my life too much to take unneccesary chances like that. Well 4. is pure (and silly) hyperbole, as your life's not going to be in danger unless you're using a polymer bolt carrier, bolt, barrel extension, barrel or gas tube. The "boom" is entirely contained within the bolt carrier, bolt, barrel extension, barrel and gas tube, and those are still made of steel. I had two different bushmaster poly pistols crack the receiver and hit me in the face. I would say that is a safety concern. Also a gun that breaks is a danger to it's owner by leaving them unprotected |
| One observation I have made after reading most of these posts ( I am rooting for the hometown company) ....Nobody ever questions the durability or the metal ones. Sure, someone will occasionally break an ear on a trigger gaurd ( due to poor assemby practices), but thats about it. |
|
Quoted: They break occassionally, but it's usually due to extreme abuse.One observation I have made after reading most of these posts ( I am rooting for the hometown company) ....Nobody ever questions the durability or the metal ones. Sure, someone will occasionally break an ear on a trigger gaurd ( due to poor assemby practices), but thats about it. ETA: Or like you said, screwing up the trigger guard install |
|
Quoted:My guess is that it has less rigidity and strength under tension that 7075 or 6061. I think if I run 10 mags fast through it the heat will make able to flex enough that it will fail to hold the buffer tube dead straight.
Your guess is dead nuts wrong. However, if by some chance you're able to make it fail doing this, rest assured that we'll replace it under warranty at no cost to you. |
AR Sponsor