Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 10/3/2003 10:14:40 AM EDT
How can you tell if a receiver is cast or forged.

I know someone that has a stripped receiver for sale.
He say's it's forged, is there some way to verify that?
Link Posted: 10/3/2003 12:41:13 PM EDT
You can let us know who the manufacturer is as some manufacturers only made forged receivers. Also, look at this site by Olympic Arms for visual differences: [url]http://www.olyarms.com/castorforged.html[/url].
Link Posted: 10/3/2003 3:03:44 PM EDT
Originally Posted By maxxx93: How can you tell if a receiver is cast or forged. I know someone that has a stripped receiver for sale. He say's it's forged, is there some way to verify that?
View Quote
The whole Cast v. Forged debate is actually pretty pointless. First, we're talking about aluminum, and forging doesn't make nearly the difference that it does in steel. Second, AR receivers are not stressed members. Firms like Cavalry Arms, Professional Ordnance, and now Bushmaster make AR receivers out of plastic!!! And these plastic ARs are not flying apart. So this is kind of like arguing whether your car's hood ornament is cast or forged - it really doesn't matter. What does matter is the quality of manufacture that went into the lower. I've had forged Olympics that nothing fit or worked right, and were so out of spec they were unusable. OTOH, I have a cast EA Co. lower that is beautiful - fit and finish are flawless, every part I've tried in it works with no problems, and all upper receivers I have drop right on and function perfectly. So give up on this whole pointless Cast v. Forged debate. You shouldn't be asking how it was made because who made it is far more important.
Link Posted: 10/3/2003 3:32:22 PM EDT
If I'm not mistaken, cast receivers will have raised lettering and forged won't.
Link Posted: 10/3/2003 3:59:16 PM EDT
I smell misinformation. Don't let anyone tell you it doesn't make a difference. Forged 7075 T6 aluminum is SUBSTANTIALLY stronger than cast aluminum as found in cast receivers. There have been threads posted here that have shown cast receivers that had broken in half in ways you've never seen on a forged receiver due to casting flaws...casting flaws that don't exist in forgings! Plastic receivers: how much service history do they have, anyway? Seen any that have been around for thirty years or more? How about twenty? How about just TEN or even FIVE? Forged receivers are not much more expensive than cast, and to me, it's worth the difference. I am not about to buy a cast receiver, period. CJ
Link Posted: 10/3/2003 5:00:07 PM EDT
Engineer, Since it is a Oly receiver, I should have been smart enough to find that on my own. Thank You. It's forged, still in the sealed bag. I bought it. I have not assembled it yet. (I just got home) But I put my upper on it and the take down and pivot pins fit perfectly, The selector, mag release and mag well are all also a perfect fit. It's dated 2003. from what I've read, it was the early Oly stuff that had problems. I'll follow up after assembly.
Link Posted: 10/3/2003 7:42:55 PM EDT
You can pretty much bet that these days, any manufacturer that's making AR lower receivers is almost sure to be using CNC milling centers to machine them out, and probably is basing their machining operations on the de facto standard print, the one that's available here in the archives. Unless there's something wrong with the setup of the CNC machinery or the tooling is broken or damaged or misaligned in some way, you're pretty much assured that all makers are making parts that are for all intents and purposes, identical. These days, I would be surprised to find that any maker was putting out lowers that weren't completely to spec in all critical areas. CJ
Link Posted: 10/3/2003 11:34:58 PM EDT
A real Bushmaster will be spelled "Bushmaster". A forged Bushmaster will say something like, "Wushmaster", "Kushmaster", "Pushmaster", and so on... [:D]
Link Posted: 10/4/2003 5:32:12 AM EDT
cmjohnson, I agree with you 100% Although I'm new to AR's, I'm not new to home builds. I've done 4 AK's from bent metal blanks, along with some Mauser's, 10/22s etc. And I'm certainly not new to the whole cast vs forged aluminum thing. I have 30 years of experience with that, but as it pertains to automobile racing not AR receivers. But it doesn't matter if you are talking about pistons, rocker arms or receivers a forged part is always going to be stronger than a cast part. Now, as to if it's necessary for a receiver to be forged. Who cares? at the difference in price, Why would anyone use cast? Everything on the receiver, is dead nuts. However, I seem to have a problem with my trigger (model 1) the disconnecter seems to be hanging up in the trigger. It takes quite a bit of force on the hammer to get it to catch. I don't think it would cycle. I'm going to take it back apart, and see whats going on. I saw a thread here mentioning a 15 min. trigger job tutorial, does anybody have a link to it? Thanks
Link Posted: 10/4/2003 8:55:57 PM EDT
Originally Posted By cmjohnson: Don't let anyone tell you it doesn't make a difference. Forged 7075 T6 aluminum is SUBSTANTIALLY stronger than cast aluminum as found in cast receivers.
View Quote
True, a cast part [b]can[/b] have the same strength as a forged one only if the design of the part is changed. Look at Ruger's auto pistols for instance. A properly designed cast lower would be larger, thicker, and have fewer sharp corners than the standard designed forged one. It's not that casting can't be used just that they can't be used without compromising strength without changing the design.
Link Posted: 10/4/2003 9:07:26 PM EDT
Originally Posted By cmjohnson: These days, I would be surprised to find that any maker was putting out lowers that weren't completely to spec in all critical areas.
View Quote
Assuming due diligence is given to QA/QC yes. But that isn't always the case.
Link Posted: 10/5/2003 7:46:47 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Tweak: It's not that casting can't be used just that they can't be used without compromising strength without changing the design.
View Quote
A true statement, but you guys are totally missing the point. AR receivers are not stressed members, and don't need to be made from exotic alloys or complicated manufacturing techniques. You could machine a set out of a solid billet of titanium and it would work just as well as one of the Bushmaster plastic receiver sets. Or a cast aluminum pair. Any preference you have in AR receiver construction or materials is purely aesthetic and not functional.
Link Posted: 10/5/2003 8:00:52 AM EDT
You claim the AR type lower receiver isn't a stressed member, but in fact, it DOES take some stresses. Not firing chamber class stresses, but other stresses. The front takedown pin area can be subjected to a great deal of abuse. If you had your rifle opened for cleaning with the upper still attached via the front pin and you were to drop it or bang the barrel side on something, the leverage amplified stress could easily damage the lower's takedown pin section, even break it completely off. I have been told by reputable sources that this is the number one breakage point on AR type lower receivers. The rest SHOULD be under minimal stresses, if all is well with the rifle, but in general, I believe that there is real benefit to having a stronger than cast receiver. CJ
Link Posted: 10/5/2003 8:53:18 AM EDT
I agree. Just because a casting will handle normal stresses doesn't mean that they'll stand up as long because of the grain structure, inclusions, voids, and other evils. I've always figured that the company that sells you a cast receiver will dump on you other ways too and I've dropped them from my list of trusted sellers.
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 9:18:02 AM EDT
Originally Posted By cmjohnson: You claim the AR type lower receiver isn't a stressed member, but in fact, it DOES take some stresses. Not firing chamber class stresses, but other stresses.
View Quote
Well, let's see - there's the stress of gravity. And we can't forget the tidal pull of the moon. And then there's always the subspace stresses imparted by the warp engines... Yes, I was talking about firing stresses. The reason I bring this point up is it shows the absolute genius of the Stoner designed weapons that most people don't understand. The fact that you can even use materials like aluminum in .308 rifles is testament to this. You can tell the AR shooters who don't understand the basics of their rifles by the way they get fixated on things like barrel nut torque and receiver materials.
The front takedown pin area can be subjected to a great deal of abuse. If you had your rifle opened for cleaning with the upper still attached via the front pin and you were to drop it or bang the barrel side on something, the leverage amplified stress could easily damage the lower's takedown pin section, even break it completely off. I have been told by reputable sources that this is the number one breakage point on AR type lower receivers.
View Quote
Now you're talking about third-hand reports of strange abuse scenarios. Until I hear a first hand report or see the pictures, I discount these tales like I do all FOAF stories. Even first-hand reports aren't reliable - I've seen first-hand reports posted here where the poster swore his M16 in Vietnam was made by Mattel. If this is indeed the "number one breakage point on AR type lower receivers" then post the pictures of this all-to-common event. I haven't seen any, and I've seen images of all sorts of weird, uncommon failures like total kaBOOMS caused by the odd, poorly loaded ammo. I don't think type of failure is as nearly as frequent as you claim. In fact, I challange you to find one example.
The rest SHOULD be under minimal stresses, if all is well with the rifle, but in general, I believe that there is real benefit to having a stronger than cast receiver.
View Quote
In almost all cases stronger is better. If I had bought a VCR made out of cast iron instead of polystyrene, it would've survived the last hurricane a little better. Then again, this type of abuse is very uncommon and the original designers didn't take into account flying across the room and smashing through a window and landing on the pavement in the original design specs.
Originally Posted By T2: I've always figured that the company that sells you a cast receiver will dump on you other ways too and I've dropped them from my list of trusted sellers.
View Quote
Another one who doesn't understand the Stoner design. Cast receivers are not evil, and neither are the manufacturers who make then. Some, like EA, Co., made cast receivers exclusively, and after more than 20 years are still holding up just fine with no failures predicted by these guys. There's a big difference between idle speculation and real world experience. Unfortunately, many on this board excel in the former and are sorely lacking in the latter.
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 10:50:37 AM EDT
Originally Posted By T2: I agree. Just because a casting will handle normal stresses doesn't mean that they'll stand up as long because of the grain structure, inclusions, voids, and other evils. I've always figured that the company that sells you a cast receiver will dump on you other ways too and I've dropped them from my list of trusted sellers.
View Quote
I would warn you against being too rash in regards to this last statement. DPMS, for example, makes both cast and forged receivers. In fact, I believe that many of the complete rifles they sell are made with cast lowers. I assume that this is done to cut overall cost. Both the cast and forged DPMS lowers work flawlessly (I have owned both). But the forged are nicer, and are what the military use. So I sold the cast and bought the forged for strength, asthetics, and for mil-spec purposes (the forging, not the actual specs).
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 6:49:05 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Homo_Erectus: A true statement, but you guys are totally missing the point.
View Quote
I'm not missing your point H_E. I've had this discussion thousands of times in the short time I've been doing this. The USGI lower has gone through at least 3 reinforcement programs since its inception. The lowers do get damaged, that lesson was learned during VN. We have seen pictures of cast lowers broke in half. There was one recently in the Troubleshooting Forum. This is not idle speculation or undue abuse. In the case of the rifle on the Tshooting Forum the owner was firing it and the lower cracked. The lower, especially in military use, does need to be strong. If Sam thought he could get the rifle cheaper and lose nothing he wouldn't specify forged parts. Casting is faster hence cheaper. As for the plastic lowers (PO) we've had at least two reports of the rear of the buffer tube being broken off. Doubtful these rifles were ever used for rifle bayonet drill or as a step up in MOUT. I doubt they were even shot much. Once again, it's not that plastic and cast Al [b]can't be used[/b]. They can't be used without modifying the design ala CavArms.
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 8:59:42 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Tweak: We have seen pictures of cast lowers broke in half. There was one recently in the Troubleshooting Forum. This is not idle speculation or undue abuse. In the case of the rifle on the Tshooting Forum the owner was firing it and the lower cracked.
View Quote
Now that's something I'd like to see. Would you mind posting a link to the thread? I never said that a lower breaking was impossible or never happened. I was taking issue with cmjohnson's statement that "this is the number one breakage point on AR type lower receivers." I found it odd that in the 25+ years I've been working on ARs and the 130+ guns I've personally built, plus the other couple hundred that I've repaired, I've never seen a lower break. Except for the 3 or 4 that had the mag wells blown out when the uppers kaBOOMed, but you can't really blame that on the lower. My point was - while this may have happened sometime to someone, it seems to be so rare that pictures of a broken front receiver pin boss are difficult or impossible to find. Note: cmjohnson made the statement "The front takedown pin area can be subjected to a great deal of abuse. If you had your rifle opened for cleaning with the upper still attached via the front pin and you were to drop it or bang the barrel side on something, the leverage amplified stress could easily damage the lower's takedown pin section, even break it completely off." Of course, the take-down pin is in the rear. The front one he's talking about is the pivot pin. Dropping an "open" AR wouldn't do any damage around the take-down pin.
As for the plastic lowers (PO) we've had at least two reports of the rear of the buffer tube being broken off. Doubtful these rifles were ever used for rifle bayonet drill or as a step up in MOUT. I doubt they were even shot much.
View Quote
The buffer tube is not the receiver, which is what we're talking about here. But you're right, the buffer tube is stressed during firing when the end of the buffer slams into to the back end of it, and needs to be robust. Maybe all the Torque Weenies should forget about the unstressed barrel nut and shift their attention to the buffer tube. [:D]
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 10:05:13 PM EDT
Wow! I am truly humbled by the abundance of real experts that frequent this site. The guy that asked the original question has now probably taken a renewed interest in AK's or Glocks or something else after reading all these bits of wisdom.
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 11:16:15 PM EDT
just wondering if there are any weight differences between the forged and cast lowers. i know in the automotive field, forged aluminum wheels, pistons and connecting rods are preferred because of the weight savings and added strength. anyone ever weigh a cast and forged lower side by side?
Link Posted: 10/6/2003 11:24:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/6/2003 11:30:42 PM EDT by DevilsAdvocate]
Originally Posted By Homo_Erectus:
Originally Posted By maxxx93: How can you tell if a receiver is cast or forged. I know someone that has a stripped receiver for sale. He say's it's forged, is there some way to verify that?
View Quote
The whole Cast v. Forged debate is actually pretty pointless. First, we're talking about aluminum, and forging doesn't make nearly the difference that it does in steel. Second, AR receivers are not stressed members. Firms like Cavalry Arms, Professional Ordnance, and now Bushmaster make AR receivers out of plastic!!! And these plastic ARs are not flying apart. So this is kind of like arguing whether your car's hood ornament is cast or forged - it really doesn't matter. What does matter is the quality of manufacture that went into the lower. I've had forged Olympics that nothing fit or worked right, and were so out of spec they were unusable. OTOH, I have a cast EA Co. lower that is beautiful - fit and finish are flawless, every part I've tried in it works with no problems, and all upper receivers I have drop right on and function perfectly. So give up on this whole pointless Cast v. Forged debate. You shouldn't be asking how it was made because who made it is far more important.
View Quote
You don't know shit. In fact, I probably LOST IQ points just for reading that. An easy way to tell cast from forged is that on a forged receiver, the grain of the metal is much tighter/smaller. Also, there is usually a small ridge running around the inside of the trigger-area on the receiver. BTW...There are QUITE a few stress-points on a lower, the worst one is from the safety down to the 7 O'clock postionat the top of the grip....This is where 90% of the cast lowers break.
Link Posted: 10/7/2003 3:01:09 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Homo_Erectus: Now that's something I'd like to see. Would you mind posting a link to the thread?
View Quote
Not a problem but only if you promise not to laugh at the owners fix for it. [rolleyes] I _think_ I linked it to the FAQ there under "Big Problems." Damn, nope and I can't look back further than 30 days. Lemme ask Staph to have a look in the Archives.
I was taking issue with cmjohnson's statement that "this is the number one breakage point on AR type lower receivers."
View Quote
Well, I can't say that it's the "number one breakage point" but it one area of the lower that was significantly reinforced in the A2 lower.
I found it odd that in the 25+ years I've been working on ARs and the 130+ guns I've personally built, plus the other couple hundred that I've repaired, I've never seen a lower break.
View Quote
While I was in the Army I saw M16s driven over by M113s, caught in ramps while they were coming up, dropped from rappelling towers, jumped on by 9 heavily laden full size grunts in succession, and bashed against steel pipes full force. Your customers do that? Wow. [shock] Just messin with ya, [;D] but the majority of civilians will NEVER use their rifles hard enough to even wear them out let alone break them. Esp not at the prices pre AWB guns are going for.
Except for the 3 or 4 that had the mag wells blown out when the uppers kaBOOMed, but you can't really blame that on the lower.
View Quote
No, you can't blame the lower but I've seen too many kBed rifles and all but one came through with, at the worst, bent mag well walls. The one that didn't bend cracked and broke. It was a cast lower.
The buffer tube is not the receiver, which is what we're talking about here.
View Quote
Quite true, but if the rear of the buffer tube is strengthened enough to resist the force where is the force transferred to? As for cmjohnson's "takedown pin" comment, I'm sure that was a brain fart on his part. I see it all the time, and even suffer myself from it sometimes, with extractor and ejector. [b]DevilsAdvocate[/b], Settled down man, H_E is merely stating what he knows based on what he has seen. Others of us have seen different things and had different experiences. As a means of example: If I had _no_ experience with the AR and you handing me some gun show special AR that couldn't run two full mags without choking I'd be a diehard AK fan. Fortunately for me, Sam gave me my first AR. I never had a bit of trouble with them. Before that time I had shot Leaders, H&K91s, SPASs, FALs, etc and thought they were the shiznit. It's a matter of perspective.
Link Posted: 10/7/2003 5:04:38 AM EDT
As for the pivot pin/takedown pin issue, I'm not so anally retentive that I'd give someone any grief over calling the front pivot pin the takedown pin, because if you don't have a Colt with a screw instead of a pin in there, it IS a takedown pin, which happens to double as a pivot pin. It's a minor semantic issue, and if you'd use THAT to try to bust my shoes, you're as much as acknowledging that your argument is on very thin ice. Back to the broken receiver issue: working on a few dozen or even a couple of hundred AR's in civilian hands is NOTHING like working on thousands in a Marine Corps or Army armory. I'm SURE the armorers who work in there can tell you what breaks first when a rifle is abused to the point that the lower receiver fails. Why don't you find a few of those armorers and ask them? CJ
Link Posted: 10/7/2003 11:47:17 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Homo_Erectus: Would you mind posting a link to the thread?
View Quote
I got some great guys over there, [url=http://ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=66&t=171523&page=1]this[/url] from oldguy. [img]http://jcrisp.home.mindspring.com/_images/HesseAlumRcvr.jpg[/img]
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 12:56:31 AM EDT
That picture is of a Hesse Arms cast lower, if I'm not mistaken. That picture is somewhat famous. It is the first time I ever saw proof of the Hesse Arms lack of quality, and motivated me to never buy anything of theirs. Ever. Not just because of that, but because of the scathing report of lack of customer service on their part afterwards. Everyone I talk to, both here on the boards and in person (I have a buddy who is a Class 3 dealer and he gets some pretty well-heeled AND knowledgeable people coming through his shop), and I do mean EVERYONE...dumps on Hesse arms. I have yet to find someone say something good about them. Some say different things about different aspects...but none of it good. IIRC, the pictured receiver broke like this after only two rounds being fired, according to the post. Panz [bounce]
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 7:29:35 PM EDT
Hesse DOES offer a very nice AK receiver. But I sure as hell wouldnt want them to assemble it for me.
Link Posted: 10/8/2003 7:52:56 PM EDT
Notice in the picture above where the carrier key collided with the back of the receiver. The idiot that built this gun put a carbine buffer into a full length extension tube. No receiver, cast or forged, is going to survive this pounding.
Link Posted: 10/9/2003 6:30:25 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Russ4777: Notice in the picture above where the carrier key collided with the back of the receiver. The idiot that built this gun put a carbine buffer into a full length extension tube. No receiver, cast or forged, is going to survive this pounding.
View Quote
Those marks can also be caused by normal wear, where the upper might rub against the lower. Look at the machining on your upper if you don't think so. Forged is the only way to go, no matter what.
Link Posted: 10/9/2003 10:28:21 PM EDT
Yeah, I repaired one horribly FU'd AR. The owner had put quite few rounds through it, 5K or so, with constant malf. I test fired it on receipt going through 200 rounds as fast as I could reload and fire. Without a malf, natch. He couldn't describe the malf well enough for me to get a handle on it so I was trying to recreate it. On disassembly the buffer spring was found to be half its normal length. It had been clipped in half. Then someone had hacksawed the back 3 inches off of a rifle buffer and reinserted the bumper into the end, minus all but one of the weights. Several other deficiencies were found (HS, FCG, etc.) On correction of defs the rifle wouldn't run more than 5 rounds without a malf, double natch. Gas port was entirely too large for a 16" at .125". Lower didn't crack.
Link Posted: 10/10/2003 12:49:55 AM EDT
Hey hey, found the [url=http://ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=66&t=162993&]original[/url] post I was thinking of. The "as long as you don't laugh at his fix" one.
Link Posted: 10/10/2003 1:05:22 AM EDT
Its been discussed and argued to the end, i havent even been on these boards that long but its obvious. Basically it all comes down to this Forged is GENERALLY Lighter, stronger, and more expensive than Cast. Cast has more inherent weaknesses, but very well could last a lifetime without a problem. The lower is not a high stress area unless something bad happens (kaboom) or you do something stupid with the front pivot. This fact allows the use of plastic for the lowers. Now what this all comes down to is what you want, I personally have never seen a weapon explode in person... Nor do i want to from the pictures ive seen, however i know how much stronger forged is, and have seen what happens to mag wells when the AR's let loose in a bad KB. My choice? Forged and i absolutely will not consider purchasing an AR style rifle made from anything less. i wouldnt care if it cost twice as much, i would either go forged or spend my money on something else. /shrug i guess it all depends on whats important to you.
Link Posted: 10/10/2003 1:37:26 AM EDT
Originally Posted By maxxx93: I saw a thread here mentioning a 15 min. trigger job tutorial, does anybody have a link to it? Thanks
View Quote
[url=http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=6&f=2&t=150423]Home Trigger Job...see text (thanks to AFreeMan[/url]
Link Posted: 10/10/2003 9:59:58 AM EDT
Originally Posted By cmjohnson: As for the pivot pin/takedown pin issue, I'm not so anally retentive that I'd give someone any grief over calling the front pivot pin the takedown pin, because if you don't have a Colt with a screw instead of a pin in there, it IS a takedown pin, which happens to double as a pivot pin.
View Quote
I'm not here to bust anybody's shoes or give them grief, just keep people honest. The problem is the bull$hit flies fast and furious on this board, and when people pull statements out of their ass like "this is the number one breakage point on AR type lower receivers," others parrot this crap and repost it over and over until it becomes gospel. And then the next time I have to argue against these phantom "reputable sources" yet again. The main reason I got into this discussion is after three decades of working on hundreds of ARs, I thought it was odd that I had never seen an AR receiver actually break at the "number one breakage point" and asked to see an example. But, of course, cmjohnson could not produce one. He's just parroting the same unsubstantiated crap over and over again. All I'm saying is - if you're going to argue and make statements of fact, be prepared to back them up.
It's a minor semantic issue, and if you'd use THAT to try to bust my shoes, you're as much as acknowledging that your argument is on very thin ice.
View Quote
You may think it's trivial or "anal" to use correct nomenclature, but I don't. In fact, I find it a very accurate indicator of just how knowledgeable that person really is, and how much stock I should put in their opinions. For instance, you go to the range and see another AR shooter who claims to be an expert. He then holds up a magazine and says "this clip holds 20 bullets." Well, you can pretty much ignore everything that guy has to say. I even see this in people who buy expensive machine guns. Like the guy who came up to my table and asked for .308 ammo on M60 links. I told him I had some .308 ammo on M13 links, would he like that instead? He said no, he wanted ammo for his M60. Do you think I'm going to go ask this guy for machine gun advice? I don't think so. You seemed to be confused between the takedown pin and pivot pin. I just pointed that out. Semantics? No. Anal? Maybe. Accurate indicator of experience? Yes.
Back to the broken receiver issue: working on a few dozen or even a couple of hundred AR's in civilian hands is NOTHING like working on thousands in a Marine Corps or Army armory. I'm SURE the armorers who work in there can tell you what breaks first when a rifle is abused to the point that the lower receiver fails. Why don't you find a few of those armorers and ask them?
View Quote
I don't have to ask anybody - you made the statement, you back it up. If you can't, at least quit whining about it. Now, I have seen failures like in the picture Tweak posted, so my previous statement was misleading. What I meant was I've never seen an AR receiver break at the pivot pin boss. And if you look at the marks on that receiver where the bolt carrier key was slamming into the receiver ring, you can plainly see this guy used a shorty buffer in a full length buffer tube. I think someone identified this as a Hesse lower receiver. Of course, this gets back to my original point - if you start out with crap parts, there's no limit to the odd failures you may see regardless of how they're constructed. Hesse is crap. Hesse AR receivers were crap. Hesse FAL receivers were crap. Hesse's work was crap. Bob Hesse is an arrogant prick who believes first and foremost in his own superiority, but does not have the knowledge or experience to back that up. That's why when you go to the [url=http://hessearms.com/]Hesse Arms website[/url], it's not there anymore. Good riddance. So please people - don't make up statements of fact out of thin air. Opinions are great, like who makes the most accurate barrels, which optics you like best. That stuff is all fine. But if you're going to start quoting hard statistics like "the number one..." anything, you might want to check your facts first and prepare to back up your statements if you want us to give any credibility to anything you have to say.
Link Posted: 10/10/2003 5:08:06 PM EDT
I buy forged regardless or pointless it is!
Top Top