Jump to content

TGO Lowers "what your going to build" "how to build" General discussion thread

Luke E.

By Luke E.
in General Chat

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 527
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

TripleDigitRide
TripleDigitRide

I thought the 4473 lists receivers as "other." They are neither pistols nor rifles. is that not correct?

TripleDigitRide
TripleDigitRide

You didn't get yours yet?

Garufa
Garufa

I'm putting mine together right now.

gregintenn Postus Maximus

gregintenn

Posted
Posted (edited)

x2 what Mike said^ the lines on these uppers and lowers aren't going to lend themselves well to building an A2 rifle. If I was going to build an A2 and had another AR in the safe, I would move the billets over to that rifle and use the forged for the A2 build. Of course that's my opinion and I have nothing concrete to base that on, plus a "retro meets modern" rifle might be cool..

 

I don't know if you'll be happy with that. It's not going to look true to form with a billet lower. Not that there's anything wrong with retro. I finished an A2 not long ago. No way I would have used a billet lower, even if I had one sitting in the safe.

 

 

May I ask why?

 

I understand it isn't going to be correct, or even look correct, but I like the looks of the triangle handguard, the thin 20" barrel, and the early M16 stock. I don't mind that the carry handle will be detachable.

 

Are you saying I will have some problems assembling the parts, or that it just won't look correct? Will the stock not fit the receiver correctly for example?

 

I expected all the AR receivers had the same basic profile except for the flatop versus the non detachable carry handle. Perhaps I need to rethink what I intend to do with this receiver.

 

Thanks for your help, as my knowledge on these is very limited.

Edited by gregintenn
TripleDigitRide Postus Maximus

TripleDigitRide

Posted
Posted

May I ask why?

I understand it isn't going to be correct, or even look correct, but I like the looks of the triangle handguard, the thin 20" barrel, and the early M16 stock. I don't mind that the carry handle will be detachable.

Are you saying I will have some problems assembling the parts, or that it just won't look correct? Will the stock not fit the receiver correctly for example?

I expected all the AR receivers had the same basic profile except for the flatop versus the non detachable carry handle. Perhaps I need to rethink what I intend to do with this receiver.

Thanks for your help, as my knowledge on these is very limited.


Not only will it not look correct, but it will look weird, like it was just thrown together with whatever parts were available.

In the end, it's your build. Whatever floats your boat.
tnguy Prolific Contributor

tnguy

Posted
Posted

I have an Estwing hatchet. That should work.


I figure I'll just whip out the ol' handgun and beat the pins in with the butt.
gregintenn Postus Maximus

gregintenn

Posted
Posted

Not only will it not look correct, but it will look weird, like it was just thrown together with whatever parts were available.

In the end, it's your build. Whatever floats your boat.

Thanks a lot for taking the time to answer. Could you expound a bit upon what will make it look weird? I apologize, but I just can't picture in my head why it will be so hideous. I'm glad to know this before I purchased a lot of parts and then found this out after attempting to put them together.

mikegideon Postus Maximus

mikegideon

Posted
Posted (edited)

Thanks a lot for taking the time to answer. Could you expound a bit upon what will make it look weird? I apologize, but I just can't picture in my head why it will be so hideous. I'm glad to know this before I purchased a lot of parts and then found this out after attempting to put them together.

 

Gonna be like putting 2013 quarter panels on a '57 Chevy. It will work just fine. If you're not worried about being period accurate, go for it. A forged lower is 100 bucks and change. You can't go real wrong here

 

And by the way, since these lowers have no roll pins, moving a parts kit from one to another lower will be a piece of cake. Just hang on to the roll pins and trigger guard after you build it. 

Edited by mikegideon
  • Like 1
TripleDigitRide Postus Maximus

TripleDigitRide

Posted
Posted

Thanks a lot for taking the time to answer. Could you expound a bit upon what will make it look weird? I apologize, but I just can't picture in my head why it will be so hideous. I'm glad to know this before I purchased a lot of parts and then found this out after attempting to put them together.


If you look at the way the CMT uppers and lowers are designed, you'll notice the lines and angles are sharper and modern looking. The other parts you are thinking about getting are rounded. I'm having a difficult time imagining them meshing together.
mikegideon Postus Maximus

mikegideon

Posted
Posted

If you look at the way the CMT uppers and lowers are designed, you'll notice the lines and angles are sharper and modern looking. The other parts you are thinking about getting are rounded. I'm having a difficult time imagining them meshing together.

 

If you look at the final numbers, several folks seem to be planning on forged upper receivers. I bought receiver sets. I would be as concerned about clashing finishes as the lines on the upper receiver. You can almost hide that in most cases. Greg's case ain't one of them.

TripleDigitRide Postus Maximus

TripleDigitRide

Posted
Posted

If you look at the final numbers, several folks seem to be planning on forged upper receivers. I bought receiver sets. I would be as concerned about clashing finishes as the lines on the upper receiver. You can almost hide that in most cases. Greg's case ain't one of them.


I agree. The CMT upper was designed to compliment their lower. I was surprised to see so many buying only lowers.
  • Like 1
gregintenn Postus Maximus

gregintenn

Posted
Posted

Thanks guys! I did buy the trifecta of upper, lower, and bolt control group. I guess I need to rethink my build. I'm disappointed, but not nearly as disappointed as I'd have been after buying all that stuff and then finding out it wouldn't look right.

 

Now what? :shrug:  :D

TMF Postus Maximus

TMF

Posted
Posted

I agree. The CMT upper was designed to compliment their lower. I was surprised to see so many buying only lowers.


This is why I was so adamant originally to make sure the upper was a billet as well. I didn't want to mix it, wouldn't look right.
mikegideon Postus Maximus

mikegideon

Posted
Posted

Thanks guys! I did buy the trifecta of upper, lower, and bolt control group. I guess I need to rethink my build. I'm disappointed, but not nearly as disappointed as I'd have been after buying all that stuff and then finding out it wouldn't look right.

 

Now what? :shrug:  :D

 

If you're gonna do a retro (not with these receivers), look at the A2. You can still get all new parts. AFIK, you can't get new triangular handguards. They're all milsurp

TripleDigitRide Postus Maximus

TripleDigitRide

Posted
Posted

Thanks guys! I did buy the trifecta of upper, lower, and bolt control group. I guess I need to rethink my build. I'm disappointed, but not nearly as disappointed as I'd have been after buying all that stuff and then finding out it wouldn't look right.

Now what? :shrug: :D


Find someone who's good with Photoshop and have the put you one together.
GuitaRx Established Contributor

GuitaRx

Posted
Posted

well, I think I'm on the 6.5 Grendel bandwagon again.. It's what I really want to build, so I'm just gonna go for it.. :up:

mikegideon Postus Maximus

mikegideon

Posted
Posted

well, I think I'm on the 6.5 Grendel bandwagon again.. It's what I really want to build, so I'm just gonna go for it.. :up:

 

I figured you might come around to the bright side :). Upper receiver block shows up today, BTW

  • Like 1
SmokyBaer Established Contributor

SmokyBaer

Posted
Posted (edited)

well, I think I'm on the 6.5 Grendel bandwagon again.. It's what I really want to build, so I'm just gonna go for it.. :up:

 

Yep, me too.  Just has too many advantages not to go for it.  My 1st choice is a 6.5 side charger but I cannot find the web page to see the details.  Looking at that first page, you'd think Alexander Arms had that option available but all I could find is the standard flattop slingshot charger.  Maybe just me but I think the side charger would look great on top of our TGO lower.

 

The CMT lower I have now doesn't make my Rock 458 look bad.  Just a bit of color difference but for the most part the billet cut lines and the forging curves do not conflict with each other.  Maybe I just don't see an ugly baby.  Check it out...

 

CMTandRRA458withLeupold2-7.jpg

Edited by SmokyBaer
  • Like 1
Luke E. Prolific Contributor

Luke E.

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Yep, me too. Just has too many advantages not to go for it. My 1st choice is a 6.5 side charger but I cannot find the web page to see the details. Looking at that first page, you'd think Alexander Arms had that option available but all I could find is the standard flattop slingshot charger. Maybe just me but I think the side charger would look great on top of our TGO lower.

The CMT lower I have now doesn't make my Rock 458 look bad. Just a bit of color difference but for the most part the billet cut lines and the forging curves do not conflict with each other. Maybe I just don't see an ugly baby. Check it out...

CMTandRRA458withLeupold2-7.jpg


To me it would be the upper that would cause the most weirdness when sandwiched between a slew of retro M16 parts. Every billet upper I've seen is thicker in strategic areas in order to stiffen it up.
gregintenn Postus Maximus

gregintenn

Posted
Posted

To me it would be the upper that would cause the most weirdness when sandwiched between a slew of retro M16 parts. Every billet upper I've seen is thicker in strategic areas in order to stiffen it up.
 

  •  

 

I'd be forever grateful if anyone would be willing to create a photoshop rendering of the TGO receivers used in M16 or even A2 20" form. :x:

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Go to topic listing

TGO HELPFUL LINKS

Outside of TGO...

TRADING POST NOTICE

Before engaging in any transaction of goods or services on TGO, all parties involved must know and follow the local, state and Federal laws regarding those transactions.

TGO makes no claims, guarantees or assurances regarding any such transactions.

THE FINE PRINT

Tennessee Gun Owners (TNGunOwners.com) is the premier Community and Discussion Forum for gun owners, firearm enthusiasts, sportsmen and Second Amendment proponents in the state of Tennessee and surrounding region.

TNGunOwners.com (TGO) is a presentation of Enthusiast Productions. The TGO state flag logo and the TGO tri-hole "icon" logo are trademarks of Tennessee Gun Owners. The TGO logos and all content presented on this site may not be reproduced in any form without express written permission. The opinions expressed on TGO are those of their authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the site's owners or staff.

TNGunOwners.com (TGO) is not a lobbying organization and has no affiliation with any lobbying organizations.  Beware of scammers using the Tennessee Gun Owners name, purporting to be Pro-2A lobbying organizations!

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to the following.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines
 
We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.