AR Sponsor
Posted: 8/20/2010 5:00:45 PM EDT
|
I have used A2 lowers on all of the different AR's that I've had over the past few years. I am contemplating building an ultra light weight AR on a NoDak Spud "retro" (A1 style) lower, which doesn't come with the reinforcements that the A2 does (near receiver extension tube and front pivot pin). There is a possibility that I might be running uppers chambered in more powerful cartridges than 5.56mm on this lower in addition to the usual 5.56mm upper. My question is if I will notice a difference in long-term durability between the standard A2 style lower and the NoDak Spud retro A1 style lower. This includes wear and tear from consistently running uppers chambered for more powerful cartridges than 5.56mm (6.8, possibly even .50 Beowulf). Also, it would include things like rough use and handling, the rifle accidentally getting stepped on, etc. What do you all think on this matter? |
|
I thought max pressures were lower on the cases of the bigger caliber uppers that would fit on a standard ar lower. Since the pressures are lower would the recoil be any worse?
I would guess since they came out with a reinforced type lower the old style must have had some type of rough use probblem they were trying to reduce. |
|
Quoted: I thought max pressures were lower on the cases of the bigger caliber uppers that would fit on a standard ar lower. Since the pressures are lower would the recoil be any worse? I would guess since they came out with a reinforced type lower the old style must have had some type of rough use probblem they were trying to reduce. Thats what prompted my question in regards to durability. However, it seems that there are plenty of NFA and surplus M16A1 lowers still running around the globe with thousands of rounds through them. So because of that I'm not quite sure what to think  |
|
Quoted:
I thought max pressures were lower on the cases of the bigger caliber uppers that would fit on a standard ar lower. Since the pressures are lower would the recoil be any worse? I would guess since they came out with a reinforced type lower the old style must have had some type of rough use probblem they were trying to reduce. In the case of the 50Beowulf. Damn right the recoil is worse. I would say it is comparable to getting kicked in the shoulder. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I thought max pressures were lower on the cases of the bigger caliber uppers that would fit on a standard ar lower. Since the pressures are lower would the recoil be any worse? I would guess since they came out with a reinforced type lower the old style must have had some type of rough use probblem they were trying to reduce. In the case of the 50Beowulf. Damn right the recoil is worse. I would say it is comparable to getting kicked in the shoulder. I was thinking incorrectly of the internal action from firing and not enough about it being a larger caliber heavier bullet. 
|
If it breaks we will replace it.  and reimburse your return shipping.
That being said, our front pin bosses are thicker than many A2 lowers on the market. When we were designing our forging dies I specified a thicker dimension in that area. Here's a comparison between our forging on the left, and an "early" NDS lower cut from an A2 forging. The only part that was removed was the web on the underside. 
The rear is "A1" style, but again, slightly thicker than the old stuff. (at least the Colt receiver chunks I have) I believe one of the guys in the retro forum has a "thumper" build in one of those heavy calibers and has had no issues. |
AR Sponsor