Pro's and Con's of cast receivers (if any?)

AR-15 » AR Discussions

AR Sponsor:

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Pro's and Con's of cast receivers (if any?) (Page 1 of 2)

Posted: 1/8/2004 3:47:43 PM EDT

My shop teacher was talking to me today about his buddies new Wilson AR, and asked if receivers were better forged or cast. I forgot which was which, but did remember that one was bad.

After some searching, I was set straight, and now remember that cast is a no-no. But why? I realize they're not very strong, and they're prone to cracking, but is there any other reason? Are they brittle? Do they bend or warp? Just curious. I won't buy one, but he'd like to know specifics. If think he'd go forged if he bought one once he knew which was better, but he asked, so I'm looking for specifics for him. Thanks.

Posted: 1/8/2004 5:02:55 PM EDT

[#1]

If hit hard enough, a cast receiver would shatter or crack, not bend like a forged receiver. If you hit your lower with a sledge hammer (not suggesting that you would) a cast lower might shatter, but a forged receiver would dent, which is probably repairable. Tell your shop teacher to get the forged receiver. TwoTwentyThree said so.

Posted: 1/8/2004 5:07:49 PM EDT

[#2]

The "badness" of cast receivers is, in my opinion, exaggerated to the point of nonsense. I fully believe that a cast receiver will stand up to 99% of what a forged one will.

Forged receivers are made of 7075-T6 aluminum, which has a minimum Ultimate Tensile Strength of 78000 psi. Cast receivers are generally of A356-T6 aluminum, which has a minimum UTS of 33000 psi. How much strength is required for an AR-15 receiver to last tens of thousands of rounds? Beats me, but it's probably a lot less than 33ksi.
People will also wax on about casting flaws, brittleness, etc., but I think these are things that happen maybe 1 time in 1000 with forgings, 1 time in 100 with castings. Are the forgings theoretically better? Sure. Are you likely to notice the difference? No.
Forgings are a better product, all other things being equal, but that does not make castings unacceptable, and I would not pass on one if the price was right.

Posted: 1/8/2004 5:28:28 PM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
The "badness" of cast receivers is, in my opinion, exaggerated to the point of nonsense. I fully believe that a cast receiver will stand up to 99% of what a forged one will.

Forged receivers are made of 7075-T6 aluminum, which has a minimum Ultimate Tensile Strength of 78000 psi. Cast receivers are generally of A356-T6 aluminum, which has a minimum UTS of 33000 psi. How much strength is required for an AR-15 receiver to last tens of thousands of rounds? Beats me, but it's probably a lot less than 33ksi.
People will also wax on about casting flaws, brittleness, etc., but I think these are things that happen maybe 1 time in 1000 with forgings, 1 time in 100 with castings. Are the forgings theoretically better? Sure. Are you likely to notice the difference? No.
Forgings are a better product, all other things being equal, but that does not make castings unacceptable, and I would not pass on one if the price was right.

View Quote

IIRC This is 100% correct until you start talking about Hesse receivers. Though few, very few hesse receiver are acctually in spec.
In the end, both forged, and cast may screw up at one point and time, however it's more likely to happen with a cast receiver.

Posted: 1/9/2004 5:05:54 AM EDT

[#4]

My DPMS receiver was cast and one day I just picked it up and the damn thing snapped in 2.

Just kidding it works fine and has taken some nasty spills without showing any weakness. Although if anyone wants to do the cast vs forged test that would be much appreciated by the site. Take 2 of the same AR only difference being cast and forged receivers(unloaded of course). Throw them both down concrete stairs, block a strike from a baseball bat with them both, and have a mid sized car run them both over.

The findings from this could settle this debate once and for all. To bad I don't have spare ARs lying around waiting for me to abuse them.

Posted: 1/9/2004 5:42:16 AM EDT

[#5]

Casting is cheaper and knowing how the military likes to stretch a buck if they were stronger they would be specifying it themselves.Forged for me,I know some castings can be just as strong but I would rather have forged.Seen to many cracked lowers on this site with the rears of the receivers breaking off.Of course forged is no guaruntee it was machined right but I still thing forged is stronger.I have a norinco M14 that although its hardness is a liitle less"so Im told"and some steel parts softer it has nevr had a problem compared to my buddies springfield M1A you would think I had the reliability of a real 14.The commie model forged and springfield cast.So far the rifle is 8 months old and its already thrown 2 extractors and a bolt roller.He is in the process now of having GI parts fit to the rifle.

Posted: 1/9/2004 7:15:45 AM EDT

[#6]

When it comes to shooting, you don't have to worry too much between the two. The difference comes in when your rifle accompanies you past the range. Cast becomes an issue when your weapon is exposed to the possibility of impact. Not all rifles are created equal, cast or forged and cheap cast of course are the worst. for the money, i cannot fathom a reason why somebody wouldn't opt for forged. It just makes more sense.

Posted: 1/10/2004 2:39:19 PM EDT

[#7]

I'd go out on a limb and say, if this guy is your metal shop teacher, you should't have ANY problem passing.

Mike

Posted: 1/10/2004 2:58:10 PM EDT

[#8]

I'm trying to purchase a pre ban cast lower made by Essential.(they stopped making lowers in "93)I called the company and talked to the owner.he told me his "cast" lowers were better than forged,he said that his are known to bend when "kaboomed" and not shatter like some Colts have.He told me he's done alot of LEO sales and they've had great sucsess with them.It's the 1st I've heard of it beind this way,who knows???

Posted: 1/10/2004 3:09:13 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
I'm trying to purchase a pre ban cast lower made by Essential.(they stopped making lowers in "93)I called the company and talked to the owner.he told me his "cast" lowers were better than forged,he said that his are known to bend when "kaboomed" and not shatter like some Colts have.He told me he's done alot of LEO sales and they've had great sucsess with them.It's the 1st I've heard of it beind this way,who knows???

View Quote

He (the owner)is an idiot trying to make a sale.

Posted: 1/10/2004 3:28:06 PM EDT

[#10]

Mike,

He's my auto teacher. Real nice guy who likes to shoot. One of the few teachers out there that does. We get along pretty good due to similar interests. [:D]

I'm convinced forged is better. Now since I'm thinking of build an AR later this year, I have an LEO friend (SWAT) who's taking an armorer's class, so I'll ask him what they suggest in regards to brand. He trusts his AR every day when his life in on the line, so I'll see who he trusts. Most guys building AR's in his squad us Bushy uppers, but he didn't mention lowers. I'll ask him. Thanks for the responses so far, guys.

Posted: 1/10/2004 4:03:30 PM EDT

[#11]

I have seen posts and pics of 2 broken cast receivers, a Hesse and an Olyarms. The break seems to happen back where the rear takedown pin hole is drilled.

Posted: 1/10/2004 4:49:56 PM EDT

[#12]

No DECENT manufacturer sells CAST lowers.

End of Story.

Posted: 1/10/2004 5:39:09 PM EDT

[#13]

just curios,are you saying Olympic and DPMS are junk?

Posted: 1/10/2004 5:49:22 PM EDT

[#14]

Forged is stronger ,for all those who don't beleive it there are plenty of cast receivers and uppers that are cheaper and in good supply .the money they save will buy some wolf ammo or a nice after market mag .the diff in price is so small ,why chance it?

Posted: 1/10/2004 6:24:00 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
just curios,are you saying Olympic and DPMS are junk?

View Quote

Both DPMS and Oly sell both cast and forged. IMHO, the castings are done in order to compete with the big boys re: price. There are ARs for the range guys, and ARs for the tactical guys.

For the range, cast is fine. DPMS specializes in SS barreled rifles for accuracy. In this arena, cast is fine, and helps bring down the cost.

I have had both cast and forged DPMS lowers. The forged is much, much nicer.

I think model927 had a very good point:

Casting is cheaper and knowing how the military likes to stretch a buck if they [cast lower receivers] were stronger they would be specifying it [for] themselves.

View Quote

Posted: 1/10/2004 6:52:24 PM EDT

[#16]

I had to crush an Oly Cast preban back in November because the court ordered it.[red][url=http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=174501&w=searchPop]Crushed an AR link[/url][/red]. Now I realize that it would be unlikely that you would accidentally strike your lower with a hammer but, there are other accidental incidents that could be comparable. After seeing how the lower cracked and crumbled after one blow of the hammer, I would not purchase one for the long term. I have crushed forged AR lowers in the past [>(]and it took considerably more effort to destroy them. They didn't crack or crumble, just dented.
I destroy AK's and SKS's on a regular basis because of California laws. Even the stamped receivers are much more durable than a cast AR lower. And the forged AK's are tougher than hell!
I have pic's of the crumbled cast AR if anyone is interested in seeing the difference.
[red][url]http://ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=178675[/url][/red]

Any whiny[:K]'s that responded to my original thread last time, let it go please.

Posted: 1/10/2004 6:55:48 PM EDT

[#17]

I saw a fellow student break part of his cast DPMS lower in a Bushmaster armorer class last year. We were taking the rear pins out of the trigger guards. Right after the instructor told us to be very careful because this was a relatively weak area to be wackin' with a hammer, I heard the "oh s**t".
I hadn't paid much attention to "forged vs. cast" until then.
I do now.

Posted: 1/10/2004 7:07:39 PM EDT

[#18]

I have pic's of the crumbled cast AR if anyone is interested in seeing the difference.

View Quote

I would enjoy seeing them and one of a forged one also if you have it.

I hadn't paid much attention to "forged vs. cast" until then.
I do now.

View Quote

There was a fellow that posted he broke the trigger guard tab off his forged lower not to long ago.

Posted: 1/11/2004 7:26:24 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
just curios,are you saying Olympic and DPMS are junk?

View Quote

[size=6][b]JYEAH![/b][/size=6]

Posted: 1/11/2004 8:07:34 AM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
No DECENT manufacturer sells CAST lowers.

End of Story.

View Quote

[:K][:K][:K][:K][:K][:K][:K][:K][:K][:K][:K]

Posted: 1/11/2004 11:48:23 AM EDT

[#21]

Wardog, sorry to hear that. Kali could make quite a bit by selling "illegal" guns to other states that allow useful tools like that to be used. [:D]

Posted: 1/11/2004 3:14:19 PM EDT

[#22]

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=164318

-Troy

Posted: 1/11/2004 8:04:28 PM EDT

[#23]

I realize that this is apples to oranges, but EVERY Springfield Armory M-1A receiver is cast. Steel is stronger than alluminum, but then again the 7.62x51 packs a whole lot more recoil force than the 5.56x45. Properly made, you are not going to see a performance difference in the AR.

Posted: 1/15/2004 8:27:35 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
I realize that this is apples to oranges, but EVERY Springfield Armory M-1A receiver is cast. Steel is stronger than alluminum, but then again the 7.62x51 packs a whole lot more recoil force than the 5.56x45. Properly made, you are not going to see a performance difference in the AR.

View Quote

?

Posted: 1/15/2004 9:02:57 AM EDT

[#25]

After seeing enough evidence of obliterated Cast recievers, as well as myself snapping cheap cast tools in half and throwing many,many die cast metal fighter planes at the wall as a kid and watching them break into many pieces... I will never buy a cast AR reciever.

Cast will NEVER be as durable as a forged receiver.

For those guys who will argue about being budget minded,
I don't have much to spend on guns but I will SAVE and SAVE untill I can buy quality.

Posted: 1/15/2004 9:08:18 AM EDT

[#26]

The cost difference between a cast and a forged receiver is so small there is no justification in buying the cast.

As for the 7.62 generating more force than the 5.56, (in a later comment) this is wrong. It is the force as applied to the surface and the M16 stresses the chamber of the barrel as much as the M14 if not more.

I cannot think of a single case of something being better for being cast when it could be forged.

Posted: 1/15/2004 9:21:11 AM EDT

[#27]

There is nothing wrong with cast,provided its done correctly. There isn't any compromise in strength either.

The problem with investment casting,is manufactureres cast parts to tight of tolerance,or to the finished size.They do this so they can cut down on the amount of machining they have to do. Fewer procedures mean more profit. The problem is,you can't be that exact with casting. Ideally you want a cast part to be a rough shape of the finished product and then machine the part down to exact tolerances.

Ruger has more then proven,that investment casting is up to par with forged parts. Their firearms reliable and hell for strong. Their investment casting is the best and they sub contract out their castings in jet motors among other things. In the case of jet motors,the F16 uses cast parts in its motor and has more stress then any .223 is putting on an AR.

Posted: 1/15/2004 10:19:00 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
There is nothing wrong with cast,provided its done correctly. There isn't any compromise in strength either.

The problem with investment casting,is manufactureres cast parts to tight of tolerance,or to the finished size.They do this so they can cut down on the amount of machining they have to do. Fewer procedures mean more profit. The problem is,you can't be that exact with casting. Ideally you want a cast part to be a rough shape of the finished product and then machine the part down to exact tolerances.

Ruger has more then proven,that investment casting is up to par with forged parts. Their firearms reliable and hell for strong. Their investment casting is the best and they sub contract out their castings in jet motors among other things. In the case of jet motors,the F16 uses cast parts in its motor and has more stress then any .223 is putting on an AR.

View Quote

?

Posted: 1/15/2004 2:25:06 PM EDT

[#29]

So what is your question? Or are you factless and you know it.

Posted: 1/15/2004 3:21:33 PM EDT

[#30]

Is that why DPMS calls them INVESTMENT CAST LOWER Receivers'...#LR-05UA for $149.95 stripped. Their Forged #LR-05FF for $179.95.

So far I have assembled 4 Cast from DPMS for people who bought them to save. I have not got any calls from them about problems.

$30.00 in price isn't that much guess all the bad mouth about cast has caused this to be the case or the price might be the same. I think a Cast will never be has strong has a Forged. It shows in tools you buy also. I have snapped more cast tools than forged tools.

From the time I bought my first AR I listened to the advice from here. Stay away from cast so I did. I still only use forged for my own AR's

Look at WARDOG7366 pictures he just posted on the subject

Posted: 1/15/2004 6:34:51 PM EDT

[#31]

Those pictures answer the question once in for all as far as ruger I had my nephew drop my 10/22 while carrying "unloaded"down a flight of stairs and the barrel broke off from the receiver.

Posted: 1/15/2004 8:12:23 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
So what is your question? Or are you factless and you know it.

View Quote

Yea, good one Potsy! You stick with cast parts genius.

Posted: 1/15/2004 11:10:43 PM EDT

[#33]

Might I suggest the pertinent sections of the Troubleshooting FAQ?

ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=66&t=187139

Posted: 1/16/2004 8:24:31 AM EDT

[#34]

So it's Queermanager,"Your source for Factless statements and Fairy Tales".

Posted: 1/16/2004 4:34:37 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:
So it's Queermanager,"Your source for Factless statements and Fairy Tales".

View Quote

Man Potsy, that’s good. You must wow them at school. Someday, when you are older and do not have to depend on your dad for guidance, you may have a chance to work in manufacturing and realize the errors of your ways. Until then, let the adults talk about manufacturing processes and you can go back to reading about it in school.

Posted: 1/16/2004 5:32:25 PM EDT

[#36]

The major difference between a casting and forging are the way the metals are molded. A cast receiver is melted aluminum poured into a mold then machined. A forging is tons of small BB's ( some are cold forged others hot forged) that are compressed into a mold, meaning that there are no real grain to the metal, both are then heat treated. Forging flex great, casting crack along the lines of the way it was poured. A 7075 T6 reciever is the heat treat (hardness) T6 has basically the same strength of mild stee, bad thing is it is extremely brittle. T3 is a mild heat treating and slow cooling but still lets the metal flex without cracking as easily as T6. Go with a forged receiver. I have a M4 DPMS forged rifle that I have no problems with. I also had an oly that was nothing but problems. Have a buddy that has a preban Bushy that was basicaly a bolt action (junk) he bought a preban Oly that shoots like a champ. Basicaly all Armalites, DPMS,Colts,Bushmasters, and Rock River are about the same quality. I bought the DPMS over a Colt because the DPMS's were so much tighter than the Colts I looked at.Plus the finish was better on the DPMS. All were new. I just ordered a bushmaster type 97 pistol. I dont think you can go wrong with any forged rifle, but everyone has a lemon.

Posted: 1/16/2004 5:43:01 PM EDT

[#37]

QCMGR;

It's past his bed time, don't waste a worthy response on a worthless reply.

Mike

Posted: 1/17/2004 11:38:05 AM EDT

[#38]

So what you're saying queermanager,is at your job with taco bell. You get to see alot of manafacturing.

Posted: 1/17/2004 4:14:44 PM EDT

[#39]

RMK,

If you persist in ad-hom namecalling, you will not persist here.

Posted: 1/17/2004 5:43:05 PM EDT

[#40]

ITs your money! do whatever you wish. I buy eather Colt/Bushmaster/RRA's I know I cannot really go wrong with these Ar's. has for the army using cast! to save a buck is total nonsense. I believe a cast rec would not stand up to there test, Ive seen what they do to them no way a cast rec would pass. I had seen them throw a colt M4 against some big rocks I mean very hard, then pick the m4 up and start shooting it, fired flawlessly. no way a cast could handle this.

Posted: 1/17/2004 6:19:40 PM EDT

[#41]

RMK, per the board Code of Conduct, personal attackes are NOT allowed. Please refrain from such if you wish to continue this discussion.

Posted: 7/25/2004 11:03:27 PM EDT

[#42]

GI spec = forged. End of discussion.

Posted: 7/25/2004 11:57:06 PM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
GI spec = forged. End of discussion.

Forged is better, no doubts.

I have a cast DPMS prebe(The reason for purchase of a cast reciever)
That and it was the only pre94 lower I could afford at the time.
It functions flawlessly, and I abuse it.
I've thrown it around and let it bounce around the inside of my blazer to no ill effect, yet.
If/when it snaps in 2 or shatters like glass, I'll offer pics.
Until then I suggest getting the forged anyway, the risk is not worth the $10 to $30 difference in price.

My .02

Posted: 7/26/2004 1:45:56 AM EDT

[#44]

Not all castings are created equal and neither are forgings. A properly done casting of a part originally designed to be cast will be very strong. A casting of a part originally designed to be forged will be weaker than a forged version of the same part.

Some forgings cost less, that is usually due to bad heat treating or dimensional problems.

Posted: 7/26/2004 4:23:40 AM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
just curios,are you saying Olympic and DPMS are junk?

Yes, I believe he is.......

Posted: 7/26/2004 4:26:07 AM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
So it's Queermanager,"Your source for Factless statements and Fairy Tales".

Posted: 7/26/2004 6:33:23 AM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:
No DECENT manufacturer sells CAST lowers.

End of Story.

You have got to be one of the most inflammatory posters I've run across on this forum. Congratulations.

Posted: 7/26/2004 6:45:32 AM EDT

[#48]

If you are building a performance engine that is expected to last and endure, are you going to use CAST pistons, crank and connecting rods? NO, of course not, you are going to spend the extra cash and buy FORGED because your know it will save you money in the long run and do what you need it to do.

Most Cast lower receivers I have seen are only $10 to $20 dollars cheaper than their forged counterparts. It is crazy to compromise strength and structural integrity for such a small amount of savings.