Which AR stripped lower for an AR neophyte? Anderson? Spike? Ruger? F1?
- Thread starter MikeInOr
- Start date
- Status
Archibald Stanton
Member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2021
- Messages
- 144
Get an AERO... or 10! Also, why stop at 2?????
Charlie98
Member
I'll be curious to see what you think about the Anderson lower. Someone had them on sale this weekend... $40 (or $50, I forget) and I almost ordered 2, until I read the reviews. Saving $10 per isn't such a bargain if you have to fiddle with it to get it together.
Just FYI... I don't know if the Spikes 9mm upper is proprietary... if it is, you need to pick it up ASAP, too.
theotherwaldo
Member
My first was a Standard, the rest have been Andersons.
The Standard was excellent and I would have grabbed more - but the Andersons were a lot cheaper... .
The Standard was excellent and I would have grabbed more - but the Andersons were a lot cheaper... .
Skylerbone
Member
There are a few things beyond aesthetics that separate lowers.
SOLGW above, Anderson below.
SOLGW above, Anderson below.
Archibald Stanton
Member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2021
- Messages
- 144
Far more than that I would say would be the quality of material being used as well as how clean and aligned all of the milling is
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,250
I own over 100 strippped lowers. All Anderson, Aero milspec, Aero M4E1, Spikes, PSA, and BKF. They are basically all the same thing except for my BKF lowers have the "M16 pocket cut," Spikes has the "low shelf" cut, and the others are "high shelf" lowers. Other than that, no point in throwing away extra money for roll marks.
Spikes doesn't manufacture their own lowers FYI. They just put their roll marks on stripped lowers that are machined elsewhere.
Find the lower at the price point you like with the roll markings you like, and call it a day. My preference is Aero M4E1 lowers. They have the best features that make assemblely a LOT easier without a bunch of extra cost.
Get a 10% discount code. I think these better than Spikes. You'll thank me later.
https://www.aeroprecisionusa.com/m4e1-stripped-lower-receiver-anodized-black
[EDIT]
Aero M4E1 receiver on sale for $79.99. Over $40 off. The MSRP is $124.99. I've built using Spikes, PSA, Anderson Lowers, and BKF stripped lowers. Aero M4E1 is better.
If you want a 9mm lower, the Aero EPC-9...
Last edited:
You do realize that there are only a small few foundries that actually produce the raw forgings of AR receivers?
None of the firearm manufactures make their own raw receivers at all. And most receivers are made from 7075 aluminum. So the material will always be the same. What is different is the machining of the raw receivers and how tight tolerances are held. And even the Anderson receivers are machined to the proper specs.
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,250
Good luck with that. I seen it countless times in the U.S., Canada, and other countries. They'll say it's grandfathered in now, and people will stock up before the deadline. Then in a year or two after a mass shooting, they'll outright will ban them all, and will tell you to destroy them or turn them into your police department. Mark my words.
Archibald Stanton
Member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2021
- Messages
- 144
The material will always be the same? You must be joking. Compare an aero with an ati lower. Maybe 20% of it shares the same material. I know you did not mention them but you said the material will always be the same which is simply not true. An ati seems like it is almost plastic. Also you left out the rest of my quote where I stated that mill alignment and finishing is just as important.
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 14,855
Um… this is nonsense. Quality of finish or machining notwithstanding, both Aero and ATI use 7075-T6 aluminum forgings in their lowers. 100% exact same alloy.
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,250
@Archibald Stanton is trying to bring up polymer AR15 lowers to support his argument, when we all are clearly comparing milspec lowers from various manufacturers.
ATI has sold all aluminum receivers too. You are thinking of he ATI OMNI with is in fact polymer with metal inserts. And there are a few other manufacturers that sell AR lowers made form polymer too. But the greatest amount of polymer lowers you will see are 80% frames.
Again I said "MOST receivers are made from 7075". I never said all were. Now when it comes to aluminum lowers, YES they are all made from 7075 T6 aluminum and YES there are only a hand full of foundries that actually produce them. ALL of the firearm manufacturers buy the raw forgings from the foundries. None of the FFL manufacturers "make" their own aluminum receivers.
And no I did not leave the part out.
I stated:
And "mill alignment" that you pointed out is just one part of the whole machining precess. I do know a little about machining since I am a retired machinist/tool and die maker and know a little about firearms since I am also a retired gunsmith.
Now no one (myself included) are trying to say that the anodizing or removal of machining marks are going to be the same on an Anderson lower as they will be on a high dollar lower. And that is why Anderson can sell their lower receivers for less.
One thing we ALL are stating is that Anderson still machines their lowers to the MIL-SPECS/industry wide standards.
And as @Styx mentioned, the thread is about MIL-SPEC lowers which will always be made from 7075 T6 aluminum. Polymer lowers or polymer hybrid lowers do NOT meet MIL-SPEC standards.
I'll end with the following statement (that is not pointed at any single person):
People read to respond when they should be reading to comprehend.
AlexanderA
Member
Almost all lowers that I find now are marked "Multi" for the caliber. This bothers me. If I'm going to build a 5.56 mm gun, I want it to be marked "5.56 mm." Is this too much to ask?
Varminterror
Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 14,855
Most barrels are marked. Hence marking on the lower isn’t pertinent, but is a requirement by ATF.
Is it better if a lower is marked 5.56 but then has a 6 ARC upper installed - in a matter of seconds?
The only time having the correct caliber marked on the lower matters to me is if I am building a specific clone. Otherwise having the lower engraved "Multi" is just fine, especially since I have uppers in other calibers besides 5.56.
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,250
Being that an AR is modular, it doesn't make much sense to market the lower as a specific caliber when you can throw a .223/5.56, 300blk, 7.62x39, 22lr, 9mm, etc upper receiver on the same lower receiver. The lower is not caliber specific thus there's no reason to mark it as such. Also as @Varminterror pointed out, barrel are usually marked as well although the markings maybe covered by the handguard.
I seen some install dust covers that have the caliber engraved on them so they have a clear visual indication of what upper they have on the lower. That's a simple inexpensive solution to your problem.
Last edited:
AlexanderA
Member
This is another example of regulatory stupidity. "Multi" doesn't add any useful information. Why not just delete the caliber marking on lowers altogether?
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,250
It does add usefulness. It states that the receiver isn't tethered to any one caliber for record keeping purposes. It also denotes that the receiver is designed for multiple calibers. Don't think I've ever seen anyone make this big of a deal before.
Some manufacturers do engrave "5.56" on the lower receiver, so you have options.
A quick Google search, but I am sure there are dozens more to choose from.
https://www.dsarms.com/p-11691-dsarms-zm4-ar15-stripped-lower-receiver-semi-auto-marked-556mm.aspx
Here's another:
https://www.oowinc.com/exclusives/semi-auto/ar15a4-lower-receiver/
Last edited:
Skylerbone
Member
Rather than eating each other, consider the evidence:
Anyone wanna put up money on which of these 3 is most expensive? How about if they’re over or under $50?
Each is 6-Series aluminum, each functions perfectly fine. I was assured by a much smarter member than me that AR parts interchange because of tight tolerances, not “thanks to” sloppy ones. It will either be within tolerances and work, or it will not.
Don't assume Anderson innards are cobb rough or that Aero machines them better than anyone. If you’re buying for speculation, buy in bulk. If you’re buying for want, buy what you want. Nearly all are machined to similar shape, perhaps below is an example of a variation less common these days.
Anyone wanna put up money on which of these 3 is most expensive? How about if they’re over or under $50?
Each is 6-Series aluminum, each functions perfectly fine. I was assured by a much smarter member than me that AR parts interchange because of tight tolerances, not “thanks to” sloppy ones. It will either be within tolerances and work, or it will not.
Don't assume Anderson innards are cobb rough or that Aero machines them better than anyone. If you’re buying for speculation, buy in bulk. If you’re buying for want, buy what you want. Nearly all are machined to similar shape, perhaps below is an example of a variation less common these days.
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,250
Well which one was most expensive?
Sistema1927
Member
I have built using $200 stripped lowers, and I have built using Anderson and PSA stripped lowers. Before the recent craziness, I actually picked up a couple of Anderson lowers for $25 each.
No problems with any of them, the "poverty ponies" work just fine.
No problems with any of them, the "poverty ponies" work just fine.
Skylerbone
Member
Number 1. That’s an RRA, middle is an Aero, lower an SOLGW. In this case the Aero X15 was the cheapest of that particular lot.Well which one was most expensive?
Apart from the dust particles the only noticeable difference in person is the coating of the Sons of Liberty. My Andersons look the same as the above with no visible tool marks.
- Status
