Page 1 of 6
Lower
Posted:
Fri Jun 21, 2013 11:55 am
by assateague
I just sprang for an 80% lower. Hopefully, in about 4 months, I'll have a completed AR which doesn't exist. I'll try to remember to keep this updated as I go. I must say, I'm a little hesitant about milling the parts which need to be milled, but I did go with a polymer lower, not metal. Should make it easier, and was about 30% cheaper. I figure if polymer is good enough for my handguns, it's good enough for an AR.
Re: Lower
Posted:
Fri Jun 21, 2013 12:09 pm
by 3legged_lab
Details man! I too want a (cheap) non-existent ar.
Re: Lower
Posted:
Fri Jun 21, 2013 12:09 pm
by 3legged_lab
Details man! I too want a (cheap) non-existent ar.
Re: Lower
Posted:
Fri Jun 21, 2013 12:16 pm
by 3legged_lab
Uh oh, redbearded.
Re: Lower
Posted:
Fri Jun 21, 2013 12:56 pm
by assateague
Not sure how cheap it's gonna be. Probably a fuzz more than a "low-end" AR. But it won't exist, which could be worth millions. The polymer 80 lower was $100, shipped. Finding the other parts is a bit more of a challenge.
Re: Lower
Posted:
Fri Jun 21, 2013 1:04 pm
by DeadEye_Dan
I'm confused. The lower has no SN?
Re: Lower
Posted:
Fri Jun 21, 2013 1:06 pm
by 3legged_lab
assateague wrote:Not sure how cheap it's gonna be. Probably a fuzz more than a "low-end" AR. But it won't exist, which could be worth millions. The polymer 80 lower was $100, shipped. Finding the other parts is a bit more of a challenge.
Cheapest lower I can find around here is 200-250
Re: Lower
Posted:
Fri Jun 21, 2013 1:32 pm
by assateague
This is stripped. Which I guess wasn't really necessary to say, since it's only 80%, so obviously can't have a trigger or anything in it
Re: Lower
Posted:
Fri Jun 21, 2013 4:53 pm
by 3legged_lab
assateague wrote:This is stripped. Which I guess wasn't really necessary to say, since it's only 80%, so obviously can't have a trigger or anything in it
These are too.
Re: Lower
Posted:
Fri Jun 21, 2013 5:18 pm
by assateague
Holy shit. I've priced everything up, and gonna be a shade under $750, soup to nuts, no FFL. Could go cheaper, but I want 5.56, not .223, and I want a 20" barrel, not 16.
Re: Lower
Posted:
Fri Jun 21, 2013 5:28 pm
by jehler
assateague wrote:Holy shit. I've priced everything up, and gonna be a shade under $750, soup to nuts, no FFL. Could go cheaper, but I want 5.56, not .223, and I want a 20" barrel, not 16.
ive shot 5.56 and .223 out if mine, not suppose to?
Re: Lower
Posted:
Fri Jun 21, 2013 5:47 pm
by assateague
It's a pressure thing. I don't know much about guns, but a 5.56 barrel has a much bigger "forcing cone" (or whatever it's called in a rifle). Shooting 5.56 military out of a .223 barrel will spike the pressure. Not a lot, something like 20% more, but it's not recommended as a "regular" occurrence
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:31 am
by Feelin' Fowl
assateague wrote:It's a pressure thing. I don't know much about guns, but a 5.56 barrel has a much bigger "forcing cone" (or whatever it's called in a rifle). Shooting 5.56 military out of a .223 barrel will spike the pressure. Not a lot, something like 20% more, but it's not recommended as a "regular" occurrence
I don't know much about rifles, but I believe you can shoot .223 out of a 5.56, but not the other way around...
Could be wrong though. On second thought, it's probably best to goggle that shit.
I think this is where something clever about tapatalk should go.
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:38 am
by Flightstopper
Always thought one was just a smidge longer than the other which would affect feeding. Very well could be wrong.
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:41 am
by Feelin' Fowl
I know that you can find 5.56/.223 rifles for sale. Advertises that it will shoot both.
Just not sure if a regular .223 and/or 5.56 can interchange the rounds...
I think this is where something clever about tapatalk should go.
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sat Jun 22, 2013 3:03 pm
by assateague
You can, but you're not supposed to. A 5.56 is the "universal" barrel in this equation, which is why I'm getting that one.
Anyone know anything about sights? I want an A2 barrel with the front sight post, but am going to put a scope on it (no carrying handle). Will the front sight post duck up my scope picture?
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sat Jun 22, 2013 3:48 pm
by rebelp74
Ducks, you need a .17.
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sat Jun 22, 2013 4:55 pm
by capt1972
rebelp74 wrote:Ducks, you need a .17.
X2 on the .17 What an awesome little round!
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sat Jun 22, 2013 6:38 pm
by 3legged_lab
assateague wrote:You can, but you're not supposed to. A 5.56 is the "universal" barrel in this equation, which is why I'm getting that one.
Anyone know anything about sights? I want an A2 barrel with the front sight post, but am going to put a scope on it (no carrying handle). Will the front sight post duck up my scope picture?
My nephew has one of the M&Ps (in .22 of course) with fixed front sight and removed the rear sight to put a scope on it. The scope on that one sits pretty high so there is no interference
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sun Jun 23, 2013 12:14 am
by assateague
Apparently, these companies have a much different opinion about just what the phrase "In Stock" means than I do. To me, it means "I will pay you, and you will take it form your storage facility and put it in the mail at your earliest convenience". To them it means "we have most of the stuff, but might be waiting on some things; however, we will get it to you within 2 1/2 months. As soon as we put it together. With the parts which we may or may not have. Thank you."
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sun Jun 23, 2013 12:15 am
by assateague
However, what is meant by "In Stock" when it pertains to a $1,500 upper matches my definition. To a T. Go figure.
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sun Jun 23, 2013 12:16 am
by rebelp74
and you're just gonna take that? I see a dirty email in someone's future.
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sun Jun 23, 2013 12:18 am
by assateague
No way. I'm not pissing anybody off until I get the parts that go bang.
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sun Jun 23, 2013 12:18 am
by rebelp74
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sun Jun 23, 2013 12:20 am
by 3legged_lab
And somebody is gettin challenged to a fister out on hwy 130
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sun Jun 23, 2013 12:21 am
by rebelp74
say what?
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sun Jun 23, 2013 12:23 am
by 3legged_lab
rebelp74 wrote:say what?
Not what you're thinking. Short for fist fight.
I'm laffin so hard I can't type.
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sun Jun 23, 2013 12:25 am
by rebelp74
Oh! Gotcha.
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sun Jun 23, 2013 12:26 am
by assateague
3legged_lab wrote:And somebody is gettin challenged to a fister out on hwy 130
It was Rt. 50, dammit.
Re: Lower
Posted:
Sun Jun 23, 2013 12:26 am
by assateague
I very rarely spend money. And now I want to spend $600, and can't manage to do so. WTF.