[ARCHIVED THREAD] - KE Arms KP-15 (Page 3 of 5)
|
Attached File Attached File Aluminum GWACS pins on the left, KE Arms OEM steel pins for the KP-15 w/ larger ball bearing detents on the right: Attached File Attached File |
| This thread makes me want to buy 1 of each color. Even though I have two stripped and two partially assembled lowers in a box. I wonder how it would hold up to a 16" .458 SOCOM? I haven't matched a lower to that upper as the lower I was going to use is now being used for one of my clonish builds. |
|
Well, my FDE model is in the safe tonight. It looks good. Now, that trigger and other parts I ordered in early February....still waiting.... I put my black one together with a pencil barrel I had in inventory with a 2.5x Primary Arms reflex sight and it made one very sweet, light and accurate carbine. Like! Now the FDE one...ummmm.....I have a nice M-4 upper with a 3x Burris reflex on it. I think they will go together well and make another nice well balanced, light upper. These are nice lowers. Well made and thought out. My only nit pik is that 8.5 pound trigger they come with...that has to go! |
|
Quoted: This thread makes me want to buy 1 of each color. Even though I have two stripped and two partially assembled lowers in a box. I wonder how it would hold up to a 16" .458 SOCOM? I haven't matched a lower to that upper as the lower I was going to use is now being used for one of my clonish builds. Quoted: This thread makes me want to buy 1 of each color. Even though I have two stripped and two partially assembled lowers in a box. I wonder how it would hold up to a 16" .458 SOCOM? I haven't matched a lower to that upper as the lower I was going to use is now being used for one of my clonish builds. From their website: Big Bores: .450 Bushmaster, .458 SOCOM, .50 Beowulf, .50 BMG: We will never test these calibers enough to guarantee function and durability over time; use at your own risk. I can assure you it won't be a lot of fun to shoot unless you put a lead slug in the buttstock - why use a lightweight polymer lower when you're just going to add weight to it? ETA: They have FDE blems in stock right now for $82.46, almost a 30% discount. That is barely more than what I was paying for Cav Arms Mk 2s from Trinity Ordnance back in the day - bought my first Sabre from them for $75 + tax. |
|
The wife unit, displaying a KISS carbine build. Attached File Will report back after the required range session. |
|
LOL I was thinking about getting one because of the weight. Till I added it up. It weighs 1.7 lbs and that is with a KE Carbine buffer. A Colt complete M4 lower with a H buffer weighs 2.08 lbs. On the Colt lower if you replace the H buffer with a carbine buffer and then replace the M4 stock with a fiberlite stock the complete lower weighs about the same as the KE. The KE is not as light as you think. In fact, the KE has zero advantage over my above example and has a dozen disadvantages. |
|
Quoted: LOL I was thinking about getting one because of the weight. Till I added it up. It weighs 1.7 lbs and that is with a KE Carbine buffer. A Colt complete M4 lower with a H buffer weighs 2.08 lbs. On the Colt lower if you replace the H buffer with a carbine buffer and then replace the M4 stock with a fiberlite stock the complete lower weighs about the same as the KE. The KE is not as light as you think. In fact, the KE has zero advantage over my above example and has a dozen disadvantages. What are the dozen disadvantages? |
|
Quoted: What are the dozen disadvantages? Quoted: Quoted: LOL I was thinking about getting one because of the weight. Till I added it up. It weighs 1.7 lbs and that is with a KE Carbine buffer. A Colt complete M4 lower with a H buffer weighs 2.08 lbs. On the Colt lower if you replace the H buffer with a carbine buffer and then replace the M4 stock with a fiberlite stock the complete lower weighs about the same as the KE. The KE is not as light as you think. In fact, the KE has zero advantage over my above example and has a dozen disadvantages. What are the dozen disadvantages? Nonsense he made up. |
|
Quoted: From their website: I can assure you it won't be a lot of fun to shoot unless you put a lead slug in the buttstock - why use a lightweight polymer lower when you're just going to add weight to it? ETA: They have FDE blems in stock right now for $82.46, almost a 30% discount. That is barely more than what I was paying for Cav Arms Mk 2s from Trinity Ordnance back in the day - bought my first Sabre from them for $75 + tax. Quoted: Quoted: This thread makes me want to buy 1 of each color. Even though I have two stripped and two partially assembled lowers in a box. I wonder how it would hold up to a 16" .458 SOCOM? I haven't matched a lower to that upper as the lower I was going to use is now being used for one of my clonish builds. From their website: Big Bores: .450 Bushmaster, .458 SOCOM, .50 Beowulf, .50 BMG: We will never test these calibers enough to guarantee function and durability over time; use at your own risk. I can assure you it won't be a lot of fun to shoot unless you put a lead slug in the buttstock - why use a lightweight polymer lower when you're just going to add weight to it? ETA: They have FDE blems in stock right now for $82.46, almost a 30% discount. That is barely more than what I was paying for Cav Arms Mk 2s from Trinity Ordnance back in the day - bought my first Sabre from them for $75 + tax. I found a lower for the .458. I have a lightweight 5.56 pencil upper and a 300blk 16" upper that I will be using on both FDE blem lowers. Why use a .458 on a lightweight build? Hunting. You are only shooting once or twice and the weight matters if you are packing it around all day. If I were putting a lot of rounds through the upper then I would defiantly want more weight. |
|
Quoted: I found a lower for the .458. I have a lightweight 5.56 pencil upper and a 300blk 16" upper that I will be using on both FDE blem lowers. Why use a .458 on a lightweight build? Hunting. You are only shooting once or twice and the weight matters if you are packing it around all day. If I were putting a lot of rounds through the upper then I would defiantly want more weight. Get you a lead insert for the buttstock while sighting in. And dental insurance for your fillings. |
|
I saw one post that said "mindblowing" at how light it is. No, It is not. This is a Colt M4 and I put a carbine buffer in it so it is the same buffer the KE uses. The Colt lower is a tad heavier than a basic lower due to the web/sear block not milled out. The KE is 1.7 lbs. The Colt as shown is 1.97lbs. Throw a fiberlite telstock on the Colt and it drops to almost equal to the KE. I like the KE lower, but it is not mindblowing for lightweight. If one of those M16 cut lowers were used with a fiberlite stock and a carbine buffer also, it would weigh equal to a KE. 
|
|
Quoted: I saw one post that said "mindblowing" at how light it is. No, It is not. This is a Colt M4 and I put a carbine buffer in it so it is the same buffer the KE uses. The Colt lower is a tad heavier than a basic lower due to the web/sear block not milled out. The KE is 1.7 lbs. The Colt as shown is 1.97lbs. Throw a fiberlite telstock on the Colt and it drops to almost equal to the KE. I like the KE lower, but it is not mindblowing for lightweight. https://imgur.com/Aif4OyN.jpg factually it is four ounces lighter. While I agree with you, it is not a "mindblowing" difference to me either (completely subjective to others BTW), it is lighter... |
|
Quoted: factually it is four ounces lighter. While I agree with you, it is not a "mindblowing" difference to me either (completely subjective to others BTW), it is lighter... As shown yes, but as described NO. Using a lower other than my Colt(M16 pocket cut) and the telstock would drop it down to a difference of basically nothing. A fiberlite telstock is about 2.8 oz less than a M4 A M16 cut lower is about 1 oz less than a Colt that is sear blocked. |
|
Quoted: As shown yes, but as described NO. Using a lower other than my Colt(M16 pocket cut) and the telstock would drop it down to a difference of basically nothing. A fiberlite telstock is about 2.8 oz less than a M4 A M16 cut lower is about 1 oz less than a Colt that is sear blocked. So at worst case we get a same-weight lower that is stronger and much faster to produce? Neat! |
|
Quoted: I saw one post that said "mindblowing" at how light it is. No, It is not. This is a Colt M4 and I put a carbine buffer in it so it is the same buffer the KE uses. The Colt lower is a tad heavier than a basic lower due to the web/sear block not milled out. The KE is 1.7 lbs. The Colt as shown is 1.97lbs. Throw a fiberlite telstock on the Colt and it drops to almost equal to the KE. I like the KE lower, but it is not mindblowing for lightweight. If one of those M16 cut lowers were used with a fiberlite stock and a carbine buffer also, it would weigh equal to a KE. https://imgur.com/Aif4OyN.jpg I agree, it is not mind-blowingly lightweight. I asked what the dozen disadvantages are though. I don't even care if they are subjective or opinions - I genuinely would like to know what the disadvantages you believe there are. |
|
Quoted: As shown yes, but as described NO. Using a lower other than my Colt(M16 pocket cut) and the telstock would drop it down to a difference of basically nothing. A fiberlite telstock is about 2.8 oz less than a M4 A M16 cut lower is about 1 oz less than a Colt that is sear blocked. So, it is still lighter, not by much, but still lighter. Remember, there are guys that will run hollow take down pins and skeletonized bolt carriers to shave grams. I understand you don't like it, that is fine. You stick with aluminum, no worries. |
|
Quoted: I'm surprised that the weight difference is so small, but acknowledge that it is. Is it me, or do the CAV-15 / KP-15 polymer lower receivers feel MUCH lighter vs. OEM than the actual weights would indicate? When one picks up an assembled lower, it is probably by the pistol grip without an upper. A lower with a 50/50 distribution will feel different than a 70/30 distribution. |
|
Quoted: The one down at my gun store has a pretty stiff trigger. For shits and giggles I would buy one if I could drop in one of my extra MBT triggers but it doesn't look like I could. I think this is the biggest issue with these. I am hesitant on just how rigid and precise the hammer/trigger/sear interface will be with a polymer lower if there is flex, even slight, in the walls of the receiver. I know the pocket on the KP-15 is rounded and not squared off for strength and molding considerations, so you will most likely have to modify the trigger if it is not on their "approved" list. A cartridge type hammer/trigger fitted to the pocket might give the greatest longevity since it does not rely on the plastic sidewalls of the receiver for pin support... |
|
Quoted: I think this is the biggest issue with these. I am hesitant on just how rigid and precise the hammer/trigger/sear interface will be with a polymer lower if there is flex, even slight, in the walls of the receiver. I know the pocket on the KP-15 is rounded and not squared off for strength and molding considerations, so you will most likely have to modify the trigger if it is not on their "approved" list. A cartridge type hammer/trigger fitted to the pocket might give the greatest longevity since it does not rely on the plastic sidewalls of the receiver for pin support... Quoted: Quoted: The one down at my gun store has a pretty stiff trigger. For shits and giggles I would buy one if I could drop in one of my extra MBT triggers but it doesn't look like I could. I think this is the biggest issue with these. I am hesitant on just how rigid and precise the hammer/trigger/sear interface will be with a polymer lower if there is flex, even slight, in the walls of the receiver. I know the pocket on the KP-15 is rounded and not squared off for strength and molding considerations, so you will most likely have to modify the trigger if it is not on their "approved" list. A cartridge type hammer/trigger fitted to the pocket might give the greatest longevity since it does not rely on the plastic sidewalls of the receiver for pin support... I know KE ran a prototype with a milspec semi fcg with no issues and their post sample MG that has exponentially more rounds through it is using a mil spec auto fcg. Realistically fears of flex affecting the trigger are overstated. |
|
Quoted: As shown yes, but as described NO. Using a lower other than my Colt(M16 pocket cut) and the telstock would drop it down to a difference of basically nothing. A fiberlite telstock is about 2.8 oz less than a M4 A M16 cut lower is about 1 oz less than a Colt that is sear blocked. Quoted: Quoted: factually it is four ounces lighter. While I agree with you, it is not a "mindblowing" difference to me either (completely subjective to others BTW), it is lighter... As shown yes, but as described NO. Using a lower other than my Colt(M16 pocket cut) and the telstock would drop it down to a difference of basically nothing. A fiberlite telstock is about 2.8 oz less than a M4 A M16 cut lower is about 1 oz less than a Colt that is sear blocked. Ya dude, we get it. You don't like it, but can't be bothered to articulate the supposedly "dozen disadvantages." |
|
Quoted: I agree, it is not mind-blowingly lightweight. I asked what the dozen disadvantages are though. I don't even care if they are subjective or opinions - I genuinely would like to know what the disadvantages you believe there are. The only two that I see are fixed LOP and carbine buffer system- and those are "no factors" for a great many of us. |
|
Quoted: To save more weight, echo9three sells them chopped a few inches , they can be safely modified Now that's interesting, I hadn't heard that was possible. Really KE approved or just we think it works so far? https://www.echo93.com/lower-receivers I do like having the trapdoor storage though. I have a CavArms Mk2 that has been shortened in the same way, never built on it so far. And somewhere in one of these threads or videos it was mentioned that it would eventually break. |
|
Quoted: Now that's interesting, I hadn't heard that was possible. Really KE approved or just we think it works so far? https://www.echo93.com/lower-receivers I do like having the trapdoor storage though. I have a CavArms Mk2 that has been shortened in the same way, never built on it so far. And somewhere in one of these threads or videos it was mentioned that it would eventually break. No, KE Arms announced it, so it should be good. I cut up a Sabre lower (CA Mk 2) and there is a good bit of reinforcement behind the carbine buffer tube. By shortening you're chopping that roughly in half. The problem arose on the early Mk 1 receivers, w/o much reinforcement @ all @ the end of the buffer tube. Buffers were battering into the buttplate. Thus later Mk 1s were slightly longer than A2 stocks, IIRC. Hence to remain @ A1 length, the Mk 2 used carbine length buffers. |
|
Quoted: LOL I was thinking about getting one because of the weight. Till I added it up. It weighs 1.7 lbs and that is with a KE Carbine buffer. A Colt complete M4 lower with a H buffer weighs 2.08 lbs. On the Colt lower if you replace the H buffer with a carbine buffer and then replace the M4 stock with a fiberlite stock the complete lower weighs about the same as the KE. The KE is not as light as you think. In fact, the KE has zero advantage over my above example and has a dozen disadvantages. @BRN-180 |
|
Quoted: Still waiting on the "dozen disadvantages" @BRN-180 Let me try: 1) It's available, so all the hoi polloi willl buy them - ergo, it's not exclusive. 2) It's available in the two most popular colors, so no need to drop more coin on Ceracoating - even less exclusive. 3) It's different. 4) It's polymer, so low-information ARFCOMers automatically hate it, w/o realizing it's specifically engineered to overcome the prior common shortfalls of previous polymer lowers. 5) It doesn't have an A5 buffer system that 8.7% of the ARFCOM members of the Vltor fan club use. 6) It doesn't take all 87 AR chassis triggers w/o a little file or Dremel work. 7) It's not as rigid as a welded steel Flat Spot lower with welded 1" pipe for a rifle buffer tube that less than .087% of ARFCOM has ever even attempted building. 8) It's almost 20X times more expensive than the incredibly cheap $5 Sabre rollmarked Cav Arms Mk 2 lowers we got out of Trinity Ordnance 4 years ago, so never mind the KP-15 comes w/ an actual warranty, is better engineered, and has a much better pistol grip. 9) It won't take M3 Grease Gun mags like the Cav Arms Mk 2. 10) Sinistral Rifleman toyed with our emotions on April Fool's Day and teased us w/ an 80% lower, and we're still mad. 11) Sinistral Rifleman knows Karl Kasarda, so even though Karl gets a royalty only from Brownell's on WWSD 2020 complete rifles & nothing from KE Arms, any purchase of a KP-15 directly contributes to the rise of Satanism. 12) I'm still butthurt that the owner of Cav Arms didn't go down w/ his ship when the BATFE screwed them, so even though the KP-15 is a clean sheet design and has nothing to do w/ Cav Arms, Sabre, Armalite, or GWACS, I'm going to turn my nose up at it. Does that cover it? |
|
Quoted: Let me try: 1) It's available, so all the hoi polloi willl buy them - ergo, it's not exclusive. 2) It's available in the two most popular colors, so no need to drop more coin on Ceracoating - even less exclusive. 3) It's different. 4) It's polymer, so low-information ARFCOMers automatically hate it, w/o realizing it's specifically engineered to overcome the prior common shortfalls of previous polymer lowers. 5) It doesn't have an A5 buffer system that 8.7% of the ARFCOM members of the Vltor fan club use. 6) It doesn't take all 87 AR chassis triggers w/o a little file or Dremel work. 7) It's not as rigid as a welded steel Flat Spot lower with welded 1" pipe for a rifle buffer tube that less than .087% of ARFCOM has ever even attempted building. 8) It's almost 20X times more expensive than the incredibly cheap $5 Sabre rollmarked Cav Arms Mk 2 lowers we got out of Trinity Ordnance 4 years ago, so never mind the KP-15 comes w/ an actual warranty, is better engineered, and has a much better pistol grip. 9) It won't take M3 Grease Gun mags like the Cav Arms Mk 2. 10) Sinistral Rifleman toyed with our emotions on April Fool's Day and teased us w/ an 80% lower, and we're still mad. 11) Sinistral Rifleman knows Karl Kasarda, so even though Karl gets a royalty only from Brownell's on WWSD 2020 complete rifles & nothing from KE Arms, any purchase of a KP-15 directly contributes to the rise of Satanism. 12) I'm still butthurt that the owner of Cav Arms didn't go down w/ his ship when the BATFE screwed them, so even though the KP-15 is a clean sheet design and has nothing to do w/ Cav Arms, Sabre, Armalite, or GWACS, I'm going to turn my nose up at it. Does that cover it? He said "dozens", not "a dozen". You need to make up a few more. The satanism angle is hilarious. Considering that I am a Christian who is friends with a few Wiccans, and several more Poly. And then the other Christians I know (well, Catholics, so they don't really count....) also know lots of pagans / gays / poly / etc. It is almost like we don't have to be the asshole stereotype of a Chirstian, and can still have a moral compass despite that. Weird. |
|
Quoted: A cartridge type hammer/trigger fitted to the pocket might give the greatest longevity since it does not rely on the plastic sidewalls of the receiver for pin support... Doesn't the website say don't even think about a drop in trigger? CMC triggers are great and I have an extra one but it doesn't look like I could put one in. Maybe with a little help from my friend Mr Dremel but who wants to mess with that and take the chance on screwing everything up? |
|
Quoted: He said "dozens", not "a dozen". You need to make up a few more. The satanism angle is hilarious. Considering that I am a Christian who is friends with a few Wiccans, and several more Poly. And then the other Christians I know (well, Catholics, so they don't really count....) also know lots of pagans / gays / poly / etc. It is almost like we don't have to be the asshole stereotype of a Chirstian, and can still have a moral compass despite that. Weird. No, I checked the quote tree - he only said a dozen. My favorite bit is that Brownells is the company paying the royalties to Karl, and Brownells parent company owns ARFCOM, so by posting on ARFCOM, you personally are engendering the rise of Satanism by directly funding it. 
|
|
Quoted: Doesn't the website say don't even think about a drop in trigger? CMC triggers are great and I have an extra one but it doesn't look like I could put one in. Maybe with a little help from my friend Mr Dremel but who wants to mess with that and take the chance on screwing everything up? Quoted: Doesn't the website say don't even think about a drop in trigger? CMC triggers are great and I have an extra one but it doesn't look like I could put one in. Maybe with a little help from my friend Mr Dremel but who wants to mess with that and take the chance on screwing everything up? KE Arms has a list of triggers they've found compatible, and if you over Dremel, there's JB Weld. If you're afraid of Dremeling plastic, I would suggest getting your husband to assemble your rifle. http://www.kearms.com/KP-15-polymer-receiver.aspx *Match Trigger Compatibility. The front lower portion of the KP-15 fire control area has a radius. This is a fact of plastic design for mold release and strength. Some cassette style triggers with large housings that fill the entire fire control group may not fit. Do not force a cassette trigger into place; you may damage your receiver doing so. Known Compatible Match Triggers KE Arms DMR KE Arms SLT-1 KE Arms SLT-2 Fits But needs new hardware: Rise Armament RA-535 Fits into the fire control pocket, but will need a longer captured hammer pin. Known Incompatible Triggers Triggertech- Does not fit in fire control pocket; holes do not line up due to housing size. CMC- Does not fit in fire control pocket; holes do not line up due to housing size. |
|
Quoted: No, I checked the quote tree - he only said a dozen. My favorite bit is that Brownells is the company paying the royalties to Karl, and Brownells parent company owns ARFCOM, so by posting on ARFCOM, you personally are engendering the rise of Satanism by directly funding it. I saw that thread, and the guy who's response was that he needed to reconsider whether to renew his arfcom membership. Dumbass. Does he check every employee at the grocery store and all their suppliers? And I forgot: all those double plus ungood people I know? If the balloon went up they would be on our side. Probably *more* on our side than the average conservative, because they don't have the authority fetishes. |