Brownell's WWSD

Status
Not open for further replies.
Judging by @Gtscotty pictures they didn't think about making them compatible with anti-rotation pins for the trigger. The two surfaces around the pin holes are at different elevations from one another, I guess one could space out the lower pin hole with a bushing/washer.

It would be a no brainer to me to include KNS pins on a polymer lower to prevent "egging" out the pin holes.

So much for attention to detail on the aftermarket parts for this.
 
kwg020 said:
I know that several of you are excited about the KE Arms lowers. I have several Tennessee Arms (TA) polymer lowers and they are made from the same nylon and glass stuff polymer. I did put on a standard milspec carbine tube and buffer and a light weight Del Ton 16" upper with a Magpul back up rear sight and I was just under 6 lbs. I wish I could share your excitement but I'll stick with the TA lowers. Although I do like the looks of the A1 butt stock.
kwg
Click to expand...

One reason that some of us are excited is the Colt/CavArms/GWACS/KE lowers are designed with more material (and strength) in the area where polymer lowers (that mimic alloy lowers) typically fail. If you watch that video that Gtscotty put up in post #37, even Colt knew to design a polymer lower different than an alloy lower.

View attachment 964343

View attachment 964344
 
Last edited:
BreechFace said:
Judging by @Gtscotty pictures they didn't think about making them compatible with anti-rotation pins for the trigger. The two surfaces around the pin holes are at different elevations from one another, I guess one could space out the lower pin hole with a bushing/washer.

It would be a no brainer to me to include KNS pins on a polymer lower to prevent "egging" out the pin holes.

So much for attention to detail on the aftermarket parts for this.
Click to expand...

I highly doubt they just didn't think about making the lowers compatible with anti-rotation pins... It seems to be a pretty obvious design trade-off area, they mention in the tech notes that the area around the hammer pin has been thickened for strength, and as such a longer hammer pin was included with the lower. You have to make lots of tradeoffs in any design, and that particular one doesn't bother me.

One thing I've noticed is that the safety detents aren't as firm at my other rifles. The safety isn't going to fall out of place, but a more authoritative detent would be nice.

Also, I found this video, the host does lots of unkind things to the lower and it seems to hold up pretty well:
 
Last edited:
The inrange discord server is chock full if updates on KE's progress. Russell Phagen is on there often. Covid delayed some of the the mfg process in getting complete rifles. Demand for parts remains high.

I can't speak to any other parts delays from other Mfg's shipping from Brownell's.
 
BreechFace said:
So what does everyone envision building theirs into if they ordered one?

Caliber
Barrel length
Profile
Etc?
Click to expand...

Gameplan with mine for some day is a 16" free float pencil upper in 5.56 and an RDS. Super KISS lightweight build. I don't have an exact dot in mind yet, so somebody feel free to sell me on one.

I'm not in a hurry to buy the lower, because A. I am out of gun money right now and B. the uppers I would need to finish it are sold out everywhere. But it is on the to-do list.
 
Last edited:
to the op talking about m1 carbine weight, I wanted an M1carbine, but the price was too high, so went with an AR in 300 AAC, thats handloaded to 30 carbine ballistics, and uses the same bullets. Weight is a little heavy at 6.2lb. A 223 would have been lighter. Its not flimsy, and uses mostly common parts. If interested I have a build list.
 
BreechFace said:
So what does everyone envision building theirs into if they ordered one?

Caliber
Barrel length
Profile
Etc?
Click to expand...
Good question. I've already got a 16" Faxon gunner profile in an Aero upper w/o the FA. The goal with that one was to have something that could handle both 193 and 855 ammo and also whatever .223 I could find if necessary. An idea I've been floating around is a 20" upper with a twist rate specifically for 77grain ammunition or anything in .223 or 5.56 that can handle a 70+ grain bullet. So, I think I may go that route and the longer barrel and scope weight will be offset by the lighter lower.

I was actually planning to buy two WWSD lowers because 2 is 1, 1 is none. IDK what I'd do with the other lower. I'm not a .300 BLK fan, if I wanted a 7.62x39 AR the PSA KS47 is the best option, no interest in a .22 LR AR.
 
I looked at a complete KE lower briefly today. It had all their odd parts in it and such and was remarkably light. As in it did not "feel" real. Reminded me weight wise of my old MMC plastic Model CAR15 from back in the Japanese fake gun craze... only a lot sturdier.

too bad pencil barrel mid length uppers are just not to be had.

Oh and $199.

-kBob
 
As someone who followed the 2017 WWSD project, I am very excited to hopefully be able to get my hands on the KP15 lower to start building my 2nd AR. I like my basic PSA carbine lower, but going even lighter would be nice and having one of each (one full stock lower, one with a buffer tube) seems to cover a lot of bases for many possible uses of the platform.

I think those in this thread who don’t see the point must not have watched the Inrange and Forgotten Weapons videos on the subject. Anyone can hang a more or less useful assortment of gizmos on their AR and feel like they have the pinnacle of a modern firearm, but to make a rifle that can do 99.9% of what the most tricked out AR is capable of, and yet weighs less than 7 pounds is a real step forward from a practical perspective.
 
For my stripped lower I have a few ideas on ways to go with the upper.

1. 20" 5.56 - always loved the idea of 3,300+ fps 55gr
2. 16" 6.8 SPC - lightweight compact hunter

So of course the answer will be both.
 
CapnMac said:
Well, the original concept also embraced midpoint balance as well as light weight; so that was a carbine "pencil" barrel in a carbonfibre free float tube.

Which might be a very interesting build in 6arc.
Click to expand...

I've had some similar thoughts on how to set up my lower. For now I think I'll leave it on my lightweight .223 upper, together they come out to 5.5lbs naked. The thought has crossed my mind that one of the 65grendel group buy Lilja 16" 6mm ARC barrels in a lightweight upper on that lower would make a really handy general purpose and medium game hunting rifle.

For now with the .223 upper, my astigmatism is giving me an annoying starburst dot, so I'm thinking about trying a PA SLX prism 1x22 with the ACSS reticle. Curious what other folks with astigmatism but no corrective lenses are doing for lightweight AR optics?
 
Last edited:
CapnMac said:
So, is anyone else excited for this?

Me, I'm like "here take my money, now!" [:)]

That KE Arms is involved, and that they have product improved the Cav Arms/GWACS lower, which is a good thing. They also will have neary three years of other product improvements to add in, too.

The "magic" for want of a better term of an AR at M-1 carbine weight is a bit of a grail; and, with GWACS going functionally defunct, a bit of a unicorn. The various 6# ARs out there tease at this end; and I have plenty of "heavy" AR as is.

For those not in the know, Karl, Ian, and Russel explain it here:
Link: https://www.brownells.com/guntech/wwsd2020/detail.htm?lid=17958
Video (InRange):


Color me excited, and already feelign denied for having to wait a couple months [:)]
Click to expand...


Looks like they now have a slightly different version in addition to the first one. A more budget friendly "Civil Defense Rifle".

 
CapnMac said:
Mine is not "starburst" so much as 'fuzzy.' My reflex choice has been for "horseshoe" reticules, as it's a bit like an aperture sight picture.
But, your mileage may vary (eyesight is fickle that way).
Click to expand...

That has been my experience as well. The fuzziness is a bit better with my prescription glasses. I like the horse shoe type reticles for quickly getting on target. It is also why I prefer circle dot reticles on my reflex sights for speed shooting.

I'm glad to see these lowers are finally getting shipped. It is a solid design in my opinion with the stock and receiver all one piece.

Now as far as using one with a pistol caliber blow back upper, I would be cautious. I have seen blow back 9mm uppers break the FCG pins in aluminum receivers and have seen them either egg out the pins holes or flat break polymer lowers at the pin holes. Pistol caliber blow back uppers are harder on the lowers than rifle caliber direct impingement uppers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

General Geoff
  • Locked
Brownells / KE Arms WWSD 2020 rifle review
Replies
8
Views
1K
someguy2800
someguy2800
Back
Top