AR lowers

[Howler]

Been thinking about building an AR. I've done some research and it seems that there are a ton of lower options. A few brand names keep popping up. Is there that big of a difference between a Spikes lower, a Bravo Co lower, or a Stag lower? Or are all of them the same with just different logos? I've never been able to just pick up different lowers to compare the quality. I'm not looking to build a 2k dollar rifle, but I don't want to skimp on certain things and the lower is one of them.

Done some reading on AR15.com and the guys tend to lose me. I'm not lost with the jargon, but with the attitudes that sometimes slips through.

[Caster]

Tactical Innovations has some features well worth looking into. They have a set screw for removing the play between upper and lower receivers. The rear plunger is also held captive by a set screw. Fit is snug and finish is good.

[Guest BMcCoy]

I'm by no means an expert, but from what I understand there are about 4 actual manufactures that do the lowers. Then they just engrave whatever company name on them. So essentially, they are all pretty much the same aside from the finish on them.

Ben

[Backon4]

The stag is a nicer quality. Tactical innovations lowers are more gimick than anything else. If the lower is made properly and the upper is proper there should be no play. I have a stag, a couple plum crazies and a few palmetto state. For the money you can not beat a palmetto state. I had a couple of spikes and didn't like either because of play when mated. A friend had a tactical innovations and had the same issue, when adjusted out the bolt catch wouldn't hold the bolt back.

[Guest ukhayes]

I'm by no means an expert, but from what I understand there are about 4 actual manufactures that do the lowers. Then they just engrave whatever company name on them. So essentially, they are all pretty much the same aside from the finish on them.

Ben

This is pretty much it. There is the difference of forged or milled, but essentially the color variation is the biggest thing.

[Caster]

A friend had a tactical innovations and had the same issue, when adjusted out the bolt catch wouldn't hold the bolt back.

That sounds more like a crap upper receiver to me.

[Il Duce]

If i could do my SBR all over again I would use this lower

http://www.gandrtactical.com/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=LWR-BCM

[Backon4]

Upper on his RRA, my stag, my pcf's, and my palmettos was fine. Either way he sold the lower and hasn't looked back. Plus for the money of a tactical innovations you could get two PSA's.

[bigwakes]

I am using exclusively Spikes for my AR lowers. The finish is perfect, price is right, and I see no reason to have a lower without a really cool spider logo. My next one will likely be the skull and cross bones lower from Spikes.

[R1100R]

Palmetto State Armory are great lowers for the money. When they are on sale for 49.00 they are hard to beat. I have used a few different brands of lowers. Another thing about PSA is their lower build kits are hard to beat quality or price.

Edited December 5, 2011 by R1100R

[Guest colombianito1021]

I am buying a lower soon to SBR. It will probably be the new Gen 2 Noveske or a KAC IWS E3. I am leaning more towards the KAC since it is already complete and ambi.

[Dolomite_supafly]

As far as lowers go there are a few options.

Forged, billet and cast.

Forged lowers tend to be the most durable because there is some inherent hardening involved with the forging process. With today's CNC finishing there are no longer the tolerance issues of past with some forged lowers. I would consider a forged lower the best option for a lightweight, durable lower. Most forged lowers are forged and machined according to milspec standards.

Billet lowers are milled from a single block of aluminum so they tend to have features not found on forged or cast lowers. They also tend to be heavier because of the extra features as well. They can have milspec features like annodizing but a true billet lower does not meet the standards to be called milspec. Because some billet lowers are not machined from forge blocks they may not be as durable as forged lowers or billet lowers machined from forged blocks of aluminum. Billet lowers are not milspec because milspec calls for a forged lower.

Then there is cast. Avoid cast lowers as they are made by pouring aluminum into a mold. Their tolerances can be way off and the aluminum tends to be of lower quality. I haven't seen any new cast lowers in over a decade so the odds of finding one is remote. Cast is not milspec and is generally made from very soft aluminum because soft aluminum casts better than the bettew alloys.

When talking about lowers make sure they are annodized according to milspec. Some makers, even major ones, have started coating their lowers rather than annodizing. I assume for cost savings but it does very little for the durability of the lower. Annodizing adds a great amount of surface hardness to the aluminum that coating alone cannot do. And if a billet lower is annodized it will have the same surface hardness as a forged lower that is annodized.

And as far as milspec goes it is the minimum standard, not the highest standard. Kind of like a "D" on a test. Enough to pass but far from the best. And just because something isn't milspec doesn't mean it is junk it just means it isn't part of the milspec standard. Boron nitride coatings are far better than the phosphate coatings currently being used but even though they are better the boron nitride coatings are not part of the milspec standards.

The forges are the ones who actually forge the lowers. Those rough forgings, without serial numbers, are then sent to the makers who finish the machining processes and add serial numbers. It is those makers who then engrave them according to their customer's needs. There are a lot more "makers" than "forgers", if that makes sense.

As far as brands go most milspec forged lowers are going work well. The ones you listed are great to build off of.

I will say stay away from HESSEE, VULCAN or BLACKTHORNE products. They are junk and the company itself uses shady business practices.

Dolomite

[Glock30]

You can't go wrong with most lowers on the market today. Ignore name plates, unless that company literally produced the product themselves. Look for quality of machining, proper finish quality, and threading for a set screw at the takedown pin spring.

Retailers will take all the money you're willing to give them, but a good quality lower is within reach of ANY budget these days. Buy a couple and have fun building your dream gun.

[Dolomite_supafly]

You can't go wrong with most lowers on the market today. Ignore name plates, unless that company literally produced the product themselves. Look for quality of machining, proper finish quality, and threading for a set screw at the takedown pin spring.

Retailers will take all the money you're willing to give them, but a good quality lower is within reach of ANY budget these days. Buy a couple and have fun building your dream gun.

Very few manufacturers do this and it shouldn't be one of the criteria in determining a good lower. Anyone can thread their lower to do the same thing. It does make swapping buffer tubes or slings plates easier but other than that it serves no real purpose. I do like the idea and have done it myself but for most people it is not needed.

Dolomite

[1gewehr]

There is nothing wrong with some of the less-expensive lowers. Some are cast, and some are machined from a block of aluminum. There has been a lot of hype about forging. It's just that as far as an AR lower is concerned. The lower takes no major stresses in an AR. It just holds stuff together. Many years ago (1984), there was a company that started making inexpensive cast lowers (EA, Essential Arms). Many folks disparaged the product as it was not milspec. I have yet to see one that has failed. Many were made into machineguns before the ban and have had many thousands of rounds fired through them. I have one that was used to build a semi-AR-15 and had at least 10,000 rounds through it with no issues. I then used the same receiver for my Ferret 50, .50 BMG rifle. I have over 500 rds of .50BMG through it and no sign of any issues.

I currently have a Surplus Arms & Ammo lower that looks very nice ($79 ea.). I've known several folks who built on Palmetto Armory receivers ($59 ea on sale) and have been very pleased. You can pay more money, but unless you really want a special appearance, you won't get an added functionality, durability, or reliability with more expensive receivers. Unless YOU are capable of shooting well under 1moa, there is no pointing getting the special target features.

[rgaper]

The last few replies did a decent job of summarizing some of the factual information. With respect to the internet/gun rag/gun store mythology about almost all of the lowers in the world being produced by one manufacturer and "they're all the same except for the name on the side", my suggestion is ignore this information. There are a handful of manufacturering & machining companies that historically, have been rumored to be manufacturing the bulk of the lowers on the market. CMT, LAR and JVP are a few of the companies most commonly quoted. I use the word rumor because these companies have NDAs in place so that you'll never find out who does what. Even if you do find out who was making the lowers, there's no way to confirm it (unless they say they're making the lowers themselves - example, LMT) or if they have a known connection in business together (example CMT/Stag). As I'll point out in a second though, none of this matters.

Even if every single lower was manufactered by the same machine shop, it would mean nothing. Each company provides THEIR spec to the manufacturing company and they produce the lower based on that spec. That means that you could have wildly different lowers coming out of the same shop based on top quality specifications and bottom quality specifications.

Last, but certainly not least, "fit and finish" are not indicators of a quality, in-spec lower receiver, and I constantly see guys getting stuck on this. A tight-fitting receiver does nothing but make it hard to remove the upper. A "pretty" lower is just that. Some of the worst receivers I've seen, from manufacturers that I wouldn't recommend have tight-fitting uppers/lowers, with seemingly beautiful finishes... If you're a shooter, all that should matter to you is that it's in-spec, and there are manufacturers you can rely on for this.

[Glock30]

Very few manufacturers do this and it shouldn't be one of the criteria in determining a good lower. Anyone can thread their lower to do the same thing. It does make swapping buffer tubes or slings plates easier but other than that it serves no real purpose. I do like the idea and have done it myself but for most people it is not needed.

Dolomite

It's a nice extra and it's something that is on the lowers I've been using to build. Now that I'm spoiled on it, and can build without having the buttstock assembly in hand, I don't want to go without it.

I respect your statement that it's not a bona fide criteria for a quality lower and I agree with you. It's just nice to have.

As far as finish quality (and I don't know if this even happens), you should have an anodized lower, as opposed to painted. I don't know if paint is used by anyone in the AR market these days. I saw an episode of Sons of Guns where that shop painted a weapon, as opposed to other types of finish (anodize, parkerize, chrome plate, etc).

[Dolomite_supafly]

It's a nice extra and it's something that is on the lowers I've been using to build. Now that I'm spoiled on it, and can build without having the buttstock assembly in hand, I don't want to go without it.

I respect your statement that it's not a bona fide criteria for a quality lower and I agree with you. It's just nice to have.

As far as finish quality (and I don't know if this even happens), you should have an anodized lower, as opposed to painted. I don't know if paint is used by anyone in the AR market these days. I saw an episode of Sons of Guns where that shop painted a weapon, as opposed to other types of finish (anodize, parkerize, chrome plate, etc).

It is actually used a lot more than you might think. I have seen a couple of lowers sent away for engraving come back missing paint chips. They were factory lowers that had never been assembled.

Annodizing is cheap in bulk, generally under $10 per lower and some even cheaper. But painting is a even cheaper than that. Painting also requires very little specialized equipment.

To expound on what rgaper has said. The fit between parts has nothing to do with quality. When parts are made they are made to a set of tolerances set by the customer. And those tolerances can stack for or against you depending on what you want. I have assembled lowers from the same lot using parts kits from the same lot and had trigger pulls vary from miserable to something I would pay for. It all has to do with tolerance stacking. Now some makers minimize the tolerances while others are not that worried about it.

The biggest asset to durability is annodizing as it adds hardness to the surface layer. Once you get below that surface layer though most lowers are going to wear the same. Even cast lowers are durable if they are annodized but because of how they are made they can have tolerance issues if they are used straight out of mold.

Dolomite

[Glock30]

Dolomite,

Which brands are painting their lowers? I sure don't want 'em in my hands.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I have one Armalite, 6 Essential Arms, a DPMS, and have had a couple EA's. I can't tell a dime's

worth of difference. They all do their job. Buying a lower with something cute on the side only

raises the price. Some people like that, I guess. Nothing wrong with that, but I just want mine

to work right.

[Dolomite_supafly]

I have one Armalite, 6 Essential Arms, a DPMS, and have had a couple EA's. I can't tell a dime's

worth of difference. They all do their job. Buying a lower with something cute on the side only

raises the price. Some people like that, I guess. Nothing wrong with that, but I just want mine

to work right.

+1,000

The majority of people will never wear out a lower regardless of how it is made or how it is protected.

Dolomite

[TMF]

Dolomite,

Which brands are painting their lowers? I sure don't want 'em in my hands.

I have an Olympic Arms lower that is coated. It is the bastard stepkid of my collection, but I bought it a very long time ago and it was my first AR. I traded off the upper years ago and was going to get rid of the lower when I came by some parts and made it into a retro build. This lower gets the coating chipped just by looking at it. I don't know if Oly Arms does this still or if this particular model was produced that way, but I don't like it. I've been thinking, after reading this and other threads, of getting a stripped PSA lower and trading off the the Oly Arms for lickies and chewies, or maybe some wheat snack bread.

[Troutburger]

The whole spec thing can be an issue. I have a double star lower that was just sitting around. Came into a $44 Del-Ton LPK. Was not a good fit at all. There are several pins that you can almost shake out they are so loose.

[rgaper]

I have one Armalite, 6 Essential Arms, a DPMS, and have had a couple EA's. I can't tell a dime's

worth of difference. They all do their job. Buying a lower with something cute on the side only

raises the price. Some people like that, I guess. Nothing wrong with that, but I just want mine

to work right.

You said a mouthful. Whether it will "work right" for you depends on the job that you give it. As stated elsewhere, the majority of owners will never know the difference.

Take a guy who has a hobby gun manufacturer lower that runs fine for him in his monthly 3-gun shoot and throw him into a 1000-1500 round carbine course and the wheels start coming off. I've seen plenty of guys who have had a gun "for years" show up at a course where the round count and tempo of shooting is different and find out that their lower is doubling, that their pin holes are drilled out of spec, etc. Uppers/BCGs are more common see problems in, but lowers/LPKs are not immune.

So, my rhetorical question is - if we all agree that buying top quality parts is the safest way to ensure that you'll get a trouble-free long life out of it regardless of how you use it, why not just buy a known, top-quality lower and then just not worry about it, especially when the price difference (lower vs. lower) is so minimal?

[Guest]

So, my rhetorical question is - if we all agree that buying top quality parts is the safest way to ensure that you'll get a trouble-free long life out of it regardless of how you use it, why not just buy a known, top-quality lower and then just not worry about it, especially when the price difference (lower vs. lower) is so minimal?

I was looking at the Armalite lower at $150 due to the same thinking. Then it was suggested that I look at the PSA lower. Based on the overwhelmingly positive reviews and reports of good quality, for 1/3 the price (yes $49.95 vs $150) I am willing to buy one and give it a shot. As simple as it is, just a machined hunk of metal, I'm sure PSA will do fine. I could be wrong, but again I'm willing to take a risk to find out.