AR Sponsor
Posted: 3/22/2015 1:27:13 PM EDT
|
What are pros and cons of polymer lower receivers?
Any first hand experience with them and good brands for them? |
|
New Frontier Armory complete lowers are selling pretty well, seem to be free of any recurring issues, and reasonably reliable. At $110 otd, a decent price.
Flame suit on! for the polymer haters. 95% of ARFCOM will never wear out a poly lower in their lifetime, much less a barrel. Just my personal observation. 
|
|
Can't think of any pros besides polymer lowers being a tad lighter.
It's all about peace of mind. Shooting a rifle, knowing it could break, doesn't sit well with many shooters. Quoted:
95% of ARFCOM will never wear out a poly lower in their lifetime, much less a barrel. Just my personal observation. Polymer lowers don't wear out; they break in an instant. |
|
I went out my to build a lightweight stick using a poly lower.
James Madison, the owner is an ex aircraft engineer with loads of experience in plastic extrusions. My second one I own. I would say they are equally strong or even stronger......yes I said it. Especially the gen 2 model. And much lighter. The gen 2 looks like a billet lower. Real nice like. My first rifle with the gen 1 fell off the top of a farm silo. About 65'. The buffer tube bent but the threaded receiver side held just fine and is still in use. That rifle is a working rifle on a farm. It's commonly left in the back of the farm truck, which is uncovered and exposed to the elements. It slides around and bounce off the bed walls. Shoot, that rifle has accidently had a 1 ton bed load of cow crap loaded on top of it twice. Thank goodness for the dust cover, otherwise I'd be sending turds otherwise. Lol. The Frontier ruined folks mind out the gate but ploy lowers down right have the potential to be just fine for the common ar enthusiast. James madison all the way. They fully support the 2nd amendment because they only offer 80% with jigs, which we all know are untraceable and therefore, a 2nd amendment protection. |
|
Quoted:
I would say they are equally strong or even stronger......yes I said it. This ^ If done right composites can be as strong or stronger than aluminum. I plan to do a carbon slurry lower at some point. First I need to make a chunk of carbon slurry and get time on a mill or access to a CNC machine. Should be lighter and at worst as strong as an aluminum lower. Wear will be different though. |
|
My first AR sat on a new frontier polymer lower. Not a single issue to report. No problems whatsoever. One positive was the fact that several uppers fit very snugly, with absolutely no play. Interestingly, everything about that thing was plastic. The lower, the trigger, the hammer, the pins. And yet it kept on trucking.
The issue is the area by the castle nut. Where the buffer tube screws in. If not reinforced properly, that's the part that will break first. That's where all the beating happens. Another issue is purely cosmetic, the trigger guard is moulded in, it's just a straight bar under the trigger, no pins, nothing is replaceable there. Can't think of any other issues... |
|
Quoted:
Can't think of any pros besides polymer lowers being a tad lighter. It's all about peace of mind. Shooting a rifle, knowing it could break, doesn't sit well with many shooters. Polymer lowers don't wear out; they break in an instant. Quoted:
Can't think of any pros besides polymer lowers being a tad lighter. It's all about peace of mind. Shooting a rifle, knowing it could break, doesn't sit well with many shooters. Quoted:
95% of ARFCOM will never wear out a poly lower in their lifetime, much less a barrel. Just my personal observation. Polymer lowers don't wear out; they break in an instant. Yeah I guess so if you are using them for a fucking sledge hammer, crowbar, or a ladder.............. |
|
Quoted:
James madison all the way. They fully support the 2nd amendment because they only offer 80% with jigs, which we all know are untraceable and therefore, a 2nd amendment protection. Unless you show up in person with cash it is not untraceable, just saying. |
|
Quoted:
Yeah I guess so if you are using them for a fucking sledge hammer, crowbar, or a ladder.............. Quoted:
Quoted:
Can't think of any pros besides polymer lowers being a tad lighter. It's all about peace of mind. Shooting a rifle, knowing it could break, doesn't sit well with many shooters. Quoted:
95% of ARFCOM will never wear out a poly lower in their lifetime, much less a barrel. Just my personal observation. Polymer lowers don't wear out; they break in an instant. Yeah I guess so if you are using them for a fucking sledge hammer, crowbar, or a ladder.............. So your point is, people would need to harshly use their polymer lowers for it to break? Poly lowers are notorious for cracking under normal use due to recoil not due to dropping or any other harsh use. |
|
Quoted: Yeah I guess so if you are using them for a fucking sledge hammer, crowbar, or a ladder.............. Quoted: Quoted: Can't think of any pros besides polymer lowers being a tad lighter. It's all about peace of mind. Shooting a rifle, knowing it could break, doesn't sit well with many shooters. Quoted: 95% of ARFCOM will never wear out a poly lower in their lifetime, much less a barrel. Just my personal observation. Polymer lowers don't wear out; they break in an instant. Yeah I guess so if you are using them for a fucking sledge hammer, crowbar, or a ladder.............. |
|
I have several ARs with poly lowers from New Frontier Armory and EP Armory. I've got about 3000 rounds downrange between them so far with zero problems.
If the polymer is done right, it's actually much less likely to break than aluminum, because aluminum is not as strong as polymer and polymer is not as brittle as aluminum. Most of the anti-polymer rhetoric you hear is just a rehash of the unfounded crap people were saying about Glock pistols 20 years ago, and just as stupid, dumb, and wrong. Also you can get polymer 80% lowers for about $31 each ($400 + shipping for 13) in bulk: http://www.eparmory.com/Buy-10-Get-3-Free-Black-p/buy10.htm Note that these are the new & improved ATF-approved ones. |
|
Quoted:
Can't think of any pros besides polymer lowers being a tad lighter. It's all about peace of mind. Shooting a rifle, knowing it could break, doesn't sit well with many shooters. Polymer lowers don't wear out; they break in an instant. Quoted:
Can't think of any pros besides polymer lowers being a tad lighter. It's all about peace of mind. Shooting a rifle, knowing it could break, doesn't sit well with many shooters. Quoted:
95% of ARFCOM will never wear out a poly lower in their lifetime, much less a barrel. Just my personal observation. Polymer lowers don't wear out; they break in an instant. The weight reduction with most poly lowers is very little. There's more weight in the buffer tube and stock. If you go with a GWACS Cav15mkII lower, you can shave off even more weight. |
|
If done right composites can be as strong or stronger than aluminum. If comparing the strongest of polymers to 99.99% 1199 aluminum or pot metal, yeah. Otherwise, not so. Polymers can be made with certain properties that exceed aluminum (and other alloys), but on the whole, no, polymers-even high impact, long chain, glass filled resins, cannot hold a candle to 7075-T6 aluminum. There is a reason "polymer guns" still have many metal parts, and the expired untraceable firearms act isn't it. |
|
A poly lower may not be less strong than forged aluminum, and could likely be just as durable.
When the poly lower makers demonstrate that the carbine can lift a fully loaded soldier into a high first story window - same application as a forged gun is required to perform - then they can establish credibility they can do the job. At that stage they need to sell at the same price OR LESS because it only takes pennies to mold polymer. Forging dies and molding dies are both expensive and require high volume production to justify. The difference is that polymer is dirt cheap and aluminum is relatively more expensive. Glock, S&W, Ruger, etc etc are making poly guns - not forged aluminum - because it's cheaper leaving a much larger profit margin in the bank. Price a contract Glock vs an LCP. $250 difference in price, yet to move up to aluminum frames takes another $100. Paying double or more for products which have yet proven they can perform at the same level as forged milspec parts is up to the buyer. Despite unfounded support for them and anecdotal reports they are improving, they are entirely a purchase as a leading edge part - yet to be proofed or trusted. They could very well turn out pretty good - even better - but the shooting community is extremely conservative and trust is hard to gain. If you want to trust a poly lower treat it like a forged one - get a 180 pound male dressed in 85 pounds of regulation kit, and team hoist him up to a window standing on a carbine. That's not abuse, that is a standard task for urban warfare, and darn near required to get a semi injured team mate in the back of a 5 ton. If you never plan to do that and won't attempt to stress the gun to it's design limit, OK. For half the money, others prefer to use forged aluminum and avoid the hassle if the lower does fail. Those pics are genuine, sometime in the future we will look back and see the time when we could start trusting poly lowers. Hoist a team mate and post pics, we'd love to be convinced. |
|
lets all be honest here folks. I am will to bet 95% of user on this forum are not soldiers.
If you do not foresee your self at war then a poly lower will be just fine. Lets be honest again. How many people are busting open windows and smacking terrorist with the butt and of your stock? Huh-uh probably none. This poly lower debate is just a product of being an alternative to a aluminum lower that has been around for 60 years. Just wait. In 20 years, the poly debate will be obsolete but the poly lower wont be. Mark my words. ITS JUST A MENTAL BARRIER which only requires a different mindset. |
|
Quoted:
That is some super spy business right there. Okay I can play. I could have used cash, but forgot to block my IP addy.........darn NSA. You forgot to quote. Anyways its not hard to look at a database of customers sitting in front of seized servers, and its not the NSA you need to worry about, its the ATF. |
|
I had a poly ATI lower and it had fitment issues as well as a problem wit the back of the carrier making contact with the base of the receiver where the end of the receiver extension was. I had to file very slight "ramps" to get it to cycle reliably.
Sold it during the panic. I will more than likely NEVER buy another one. For those exclaiming the virtue of polymers via Glock, keep in mind the Glock was designed around the fact Polymer was being used. Quite a few of these poly Ar15 are using the same design meant for aluminum but using poly in it's place. Cav arms design was more correct, build your lower around the material used and it will be strong enough. |
|
OP - at the end of the day it is your decision. AR polymer lowers are not as strong as a forged aluminum lower. That is science, not opinion. Polymer might be good enough for you or others, that is a subjective question.
Others have wisely suggested that if weight is your main concern, then there are other areas to get the same benefit (barrel, stock, handguards) with less risk. Let us know how your build turns out. |
AR Sponsor