“Get the cheaper lower, they’re all the same”

11B CIB

11B CIB

Administrator
Staff member
Charter Life Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Joined
Dec 17, 2016
Messages
6,877
Location
Gilbert, SC
Rating - 100%
36   0   0
o87Jcs4.jpg



Two lowers from major manufacturers.

The one on the left has terrible de-burring/finishing and is SIGNIFICANTLY thinner than the one on the right.

I’ve been reading a lot about how “lowers are lowers, you pay for your favorite roll mark”. This is patently UNTRUE. There is a difference, and yes, sometimes higher price doesn’t always signify the better purchase, but it pays to be an educated consumer.

Food for thought.
 
Infamous1 said:
Yeah we need more info than this CNN report.
Click to expand...

Not really. People on here keep saying “a lower is a lower”. But they’re not. Obviously even identically marketed lowers aren’t the same
 
Thanks for pointing this out I'm convinced. What should I be doing differently?
 
Does the thin one not funtion?
 
Infamous1 said:
Does the thin one not funtion?
Click to expand...

I can make a functional wooden lower. Does it mean it’s the same quality as a metal one?

Catfish said:
Thanks for pointing this out I'm convinced. What should I be doing differently?
Click to expand...

Handling them before buying, basically. You can learn to spot the differences. From bad anodizing to buggered trigger/hammer/selector holes, to thin metal, etc, there’s a lot of differences in “identical” lowers.

The point is, “just as good” sometimes isn’t.
 
What would you charge? I will take at least one maybe more depending on cost.
 
Infamous1 said:
What would you charge? I will take at least one maybe more depending on cost.
Click to expand...

None of my lowers are for sale but there are plenty of quality ones on the market already. And plenty of not so quality lowers. The point is the education to make the decision between the two
 
I think the question still is “does the one on the left not work in some way.”

Yes, it looks thinner, less finished, and all that. But if it holds all the pieces and doesn’t break, then I’m not seeing the big deal.

What >would< be telling is if the one on the left was expensive and written up as the next greatest thing in AR lower technology. But if it’s an Anderson or something, then there is no surprise about it being the less expensive, less refined option.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
B00ger said:
I think the question still is “does the one on the left not work in some way.”

Yes, it looks thinner, less finished, and all that. But if it holds all the pieces and doesn’t break, then I’m not seeing the big deal.

What >would< be telling is if the one on the left was expensive and written up as the next greatest thing in AR lower technology. But if it’s an Anderson or something, then there is no surprise about it being the less expensive, less refined option.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The point is, they’re both marketed as identical milspec lowers, and with all the claims to them being the same aside from the rollmark, it’s simply not true.


concepthomes1 said:
The left one looks longer that the right.

So the takedown pins line up on the same upper?
Click to expand...

Yep they’re both AR15 5.56 lowers
 
there are so many torture tests on the Internet for handguns, are there any similar for AR parts?

i’d love to see a comparison between these two lowers with the rest of the build identical

i’m very ignorant when it comes to ARs, Are there any ARs on the planet that would pass those 25K or 50 K round tests without cleaning and only minor maintenance?

also when they fail is it the lower that fails? does the lower cause other parts to fail?

These are honest questions not trolling since I really don’t know anything about these platforms
 
vp9c said:
there are so many torture tests on the Internet for handguns, are there any similar for AR parts?

i’d love to see a comparison between these two lowers with the rest of the build identical

i’m very ignorant when it comes to ARs, Are there any ARs on the planet that would pass those 25K or 50 K round tests without cleaning and only minor maintenance?

also when they fail is it the lower that fails? does the lower cause other parts to fail?

These are honest questions not trolling since I really don’t know anything about these platforms
Click to expand...

It’s not just round count, because firing round after round simply tortures the barrel, bolt, and gas tube.

Those kind of tests don’t replicate being dropped, banged around, and the wear from thousands of unloading, loading, selector switching, etc etc.

My main point of this post isn’t really lifespan but the fact that there’s so much difference even with “identical” “milspec” equipment.
 
11B CIB said:
The point is, they’re both marketed as identical milspec lowers, and with all the claims to them being the same aside from the rollmark, it’s simply not true.




Yep they’re both AR15 5.56 lowers
Click to expand...

Trust me, I’m with you. I know Aero/BCM/Spikes whatever are better crafted than Anderson or something. You pay for that. And there are even upgrades those companies use (flares magwells and the like), thicker construction. But is the one on the left worse at holding an AR together? Quite possibly not.

And from my understanding “milspec” is a set of acceptable ranges. Not a specific single number. So if the one on the left is marketed as “milspec” and doesn’t fall within those parameters, then let’s get on the class action lawsuit train.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
B00ger said:
Trust me, I’m with you. I know Aero/BCM/Spikes whatever are better crafted than Anderson or something. You pay for that. And there are even upgrades those companies use (flares magwells and the like), thicker construction. But is the one on the left worse at holding an AR together? Quite possibly not.

And from my understanding “milspec” is a set of acceptable ranges. Not a specific single number. So if the one on the left is marketed as “milspec” and doesn’t fall within those parameters, then let’s get on the class action lawsuit train.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You’re sort of on the right track but going in a different direction after a certain point

If all you need is to “hold an AR together”, this likely isn’t the right thread

What if the one on the left is the more expensive one?
 
One of my pet peeves. Drives me nuts!
 
NKD said:
One of my pet peeves. Drives me nuts!
Click to expand...

Yup. If I recall, it was you who kinda helped me see the light. I still have some Anderson’s, but accept them for what they are. Functional. Nothing more, nothing less. And not “just as good”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: NKD
vp9c said:
there are so many torture tests on the Internet for handguns, are there any similar for AR parts?

i’d love to see a comparison between these two lowers with the rest of the build identical

i’m very ignorant when it comes to ARs, Are there any ARs on the planet that would pass those 25K or 50 K round tests without cleaning and only minor maintenance?

also when they fail is it the lower that fails? does the lower cause other parts to fail?

These are honest questions not trolling since I really don’t know anything about these platforms
Click to expand...

Not in DI. No way to get rid of the carbon fouling.
A high end piston gun should be able to do that (POF, LWRC etc) but they are also NiB BCG’s and you will LT a hefty fee for them
 
B00ger said:
Yup. If I recall, it was you who kinda helped me see the light. I still have some Anderson’s, but accept them for what they are. Functional. Nothing more, nothing less. And not “just as good”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yes!!! I made a difference!

For the record: I got some Anderson parts. They work fine. After a little filing!
 
NKD said:
Yes!!! I made a difference!

For the record: I got some Anderson parts. They work fine. After a little filing!
Click to expand...

Well, the main thing I learned is paying $20-40 more for even a PSA or Aero really isn’t that big a deal, and you completely avoid discussions with both gear snobs and “poors”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
11B CIB said:
It’s not just round count, because firing round after round simply tortures the barrel, bolt, and gas tube.

My main point of this post isn’t really lifespan but the fact that there’s so much difference even with “identical” “milspec” equipment.
Click to expand...

So we all agree the slam bang happens in the bolt/carrier group, the barrel and gas port.

Where I see the "beefier" lowers being needed is in a true military scenario where weapons can and do take a beating that would make a civy cringe. Face it, not too many bayonet charges on the average range.

As for milspec, I hope you understand that's nothing more than a minimum criteria for manufacturers to meet to insure interchangeability of parts and a method of minimum QC insurance.

I'm not getting wrapped around the axles on this. Best place to put the bucks for a civilian rifle is still the upper. Lower can be considered a wear item and therefore disposable.
 
Dave951 said:
So we all agree the slam bang happens in the bolt/carrier group, the barrel and gas port.

Where I see the "beefier" lowers being needed is in a true military scenario where weapons can and do take a beating that would make a civy cringe. Face it, not too many bayonet charges on the average range.

As for milspec, I hope you understand that's nothing more than a minimum criteria for manufacturers to meet to insure interchangeability of parts and a method of minimum QC insurance.

I'm not getting wrapped around the axles on this. Best place to put the bucks for a civilian rifle is still the upper. Lower can be considered a wear item and therefore disposable.
Click to expand...

Some people like to buy items that will be useful for a life time. There may come a point where these rifles aren’t able to be purchased anymore or aren’t replaceable due to supply issues, overall cost, bans, etc etc. Buying something that is the better piece of equipment in this regard may be something certain folks are interested in.
 
11B CIB said:
Some people like to buy items that will be useful for a life time. There may come a point where these rifles aren’t able to be purchased anymore or aren’t replaceable due to supply issues, overall cost, bans, etc etc. Buying something that is the better piece of equipment in this regard may be something certain folks are interested in.
Click to expand...

So let's then define "lifetime". Life time of hard combat? Life time of range trips? Life time of carbine classes? Life time of safe queen? Will you actually wear out a barrel/upper before that lesser lower?

Not available any more? How many 80% lowers are floating around out there? Lots of AK stuff is in "kit" form. With the proliferation of AR parts vendors, just how much AR stuff is floating around out in the wild? My guess is that there will be plenty of parts for a very looonnng time to come.

The beefier lowers may well last longer in hard and constant use but realistically, who really is living that life? For the cost of one beefier lower, average Joe can get 2-3 of the others. Now let's revisit that "life time" idea with that in mind. There is no discussion on accuracy since that's a function of the upper. Point is, you can buy whatever you like. Some folks buy a seriously bad a$$ 4x4 that never sees any harder terrain than the mall. Just being devils advocate here since the vast, vast majority of shooters will never, ever gain any advantage with the beefier lower other than a status symbol.

Milspec- again, is a minimum set of parameters to which the lowest bidder has to adhere to for gvt contracts.
 
My $50.00 Anderson lower looks like the right one
 
Last edited:
Dave951 said:
So let's then define "lifetime". Life time of hard combat? Life time of range trips? Life time of carbine classes? Life time of safe queen? Will you actually wear out a barrel/upper before that lesser lower?

Not available any more? How many 80% lowers are floating around out there? Lots of AK stuff is in "kit" form. With the proliferation of AR parts vendors, just how much AR stuff is floating around out in the wild? My guess is that there will be plenty of parts for a very looonnng time to come.

The beefier lowers may well last longer in hard and constant use but realistically, who really is living that life? For the cost of one beefier lower, average Joe can get 2-3 of the others. Now let's revisit that "life time" idea with that in mind. There is no discussion on accuracy since that's a function of the upper. Point is, you can buy whatever you like. Some folks buy a seriously bad a$$ 4x4 that never sees any harder terrain than the mall. Just being devils advocate here since the vast, vast majority of shooters will never, ever gain any advantage with the beefier lower other than a status symbol.

Milspec- again, is a minimum set of parameters to which the lowest bidder has to adhere to for gvt contracts.
Click to expand...

If you don’t think this applies to you, then don’t worry about this thread. But this forum has entire sections dedicated to the “what if’s” and long term planning, survival etc. If someone has the desire to buy an AR and test fire one mag through it and put it away forever, then this isn’t for them. If someone wants to really learn more, has a desire for the long term, then this is educational.

You don’t have to define milspec to me. I’m the one in the threads about lowers saying that it means nothing as far as this goes it’s just a marketing tool that inspires confidence in consumers when it really shouldn’t. I only mention it because these lowers are marketed as such, so people THINK it makes them all the same when they’re not.


@Mike Overlay My Anderson lower (bought it since it’s my son’s name and I am going to build him a .22 AR when he’s older with his name) measured to be one of the thicker, heavier built lowers that I’ve got.



The funny part about this thread is people think I’m talking about cheap vs expensive rifles. That thin lower up there is probably one of the more expensive ones out there (saw a stripped one go for $450) since they generally only come as complete rifles and have to be parted out. This thread is meant to be educational, a “buyer beware” or more aptly “buyer be informed”. Putting hands on and understanding what makes something quality, regardless of cost high or low, and what makes something a better investment FOR THEM personally. That’s what this is about
 
Can someone pull the print so we can measure these and see if they are within spec or not? The tolerances on a modular gun are not exactly tight. I can see a number of differences beyond just the wall thickness. I'm not 100% sure if there just visual or actual differences in the parts.
 
Last edited:
I’m also interested in knowing the manufacturers of these 2 lowers. I mainly use Aero, but have a few from PSA too. The Aero lowers are imo the best balance between quality and budget friendly.
 
11B CIB said:
My Anderson lower (bought it since it’s my son’s name and I am going to build him a .22 AR when he’s older with his name) measured to be one of the thicker, heavier built lowers that I’ve got.
Click to expand...

Refresh my memory. Is that the closed ear design or open?
 
So we’ve gone almost 2.5 days and nearly 40 posts yet the OP has yet to share the 2 manufacturers.

I realize @11B CIB is just trying to get a certain message across but why not inform others at the same time? Seems pretty silly to hide the brands.
 
Jerzsubbie said:
So we’ve gone almost 2.5 days and nearly 40 posts yet the OP has yet to share the 2 manufacturers.

I realize @11B CIB is just trying to get a certain message across but why not inform others at the same time? Seems pretty silly to hide the brands.
Click to expand...

It’s not about the brands, that was the point. It’s about knowing how to recognize quality REGARDLESS of the brand

For the record,

FN on the left, Colt on the right
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom