SOCOM Mfg Diamond Series AR lowers

[ScottsGT]

well in which case he would have gone bankrupt anyway. if he doesn't know what it costs him to make a lower, or more importantly what it costs for him to make the order of properly spec lowers he wasn't gunna make it anyway.

lots and lots of people are getting very fat on gov weapon contracts. the money is there.

BINGO!!! Not all people are cut out to be businessmen! He may be a great machanist, but not good with the big picture of running a business. Who knows what all is required of a business as far as expenses go once you have to start gearing up for a govt. contract

 

[feedthehogs]

Unless my reading comprehension skills went south, I think one poster privy to some info posted about the BATFE and the maker in court battles over machine gun issues.

It pays to read the entire thread. Just a suggestion.

 

[jpatterson]

All the praise for these lowers are from guys with very low post counts. Always worth taking into consideration..

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

If he's selling all of his production, how does the name of the customer matter?

This sounds bogus.

Amen to that.

Besides, the appropriate response to the government telling a private person that he must stop selling to the public, should and would contain the phrases "pound", "sand", "get", "bent", "long walk", and "short pier". Not buyin it.

 

[Owen]

i'm pretty skeptical too.

The story screams BS to me.

 

[orthodoxy001]

I can't speak to the story, but the lowers (at least mine) are fantastic. Mine sits underneath a JP CTR-UA upper and contains a Jewell trigger. .3" 5-shot groups as possible, and it does under .4" all day if I do my part.

And of course the lower matters for accuracy. A poor stock on a bolt-action hurts accuracy, and the lower on an AR is essentially the stock. You just won't see the difference with a regular upper and factory ammo.

Ernie was very helpful when I talked to him - then the company disappeared.

 

[ny32182]

Hmm... I drive through Seneca SC every day. I wonder if there is a facility I could check out.

 

[Kenati]

Orthodoxy001: I too have had similar accuracy results. And yes, of course the lower makes a significant contribution to the accuracy of the rifle. To state otherwise shows lack of first hand experience and common knowledge shared by all AR-15 / M-16 armorers. If it all boiled down to a barreled action and receiver only, why would rifle makers bother with pillar bedding, aluminum bedding blocks, glass bedding, etc. on precision rifles?

Below is an image of the first 15 shots through my rifle. They were fired during break-in using 3 different bullets in front of the same charge of 26 gr. of H335. The groups are so-so for a custom rifle, but considering all of the gymnastics required to disassemble, swab the barrel, and reassemble with each shot, the groups aren't that bad either. Since then, I have shot many of the itsy bitsy cloverleaf groups that Orthodoxy001 speaks of. (Not using the junk Winchester FMJ stuff, or course)



And to you, Mr. Patterson: I normally don't respond to such jabs, but your quote stating, "All the praise for these lowers are from guys with very low post counts. Always worth taking into consideration.." really rubbed me the wrong way.

Is the number of posts one makes the basis of validity here on The High Road? If so, I am unfortunately spending my time and sharing my real-world experiences in the wrong place. I do not feel the necessity to post nonsense for the sole purpose of rasing my "post counts". I do notice, however, that the overall tone of THR is more argumentative and counter productive than other forums. You, sir, are contributing to that impression.

 

[hags]

Quote:
That's a broad statement since you have no idea at what this gentleman placed his bid at. Just because he won a military contract doesn't mean that he knew how to bid for it properly.

well in which case he would have gone bankrupt anyway. if he doesn't know what it costs him to make a lower, or more importantly what it costs for him to make the order of properly spec lowers he wasn't gunna make it anyway.

lots and lots of people are getting very fat on gov weapon contracts. the money is there.

I gotta agree with that. Everyone knows that after you get the government contract you cut the quality and drop the QC.

$300 for a stripped lower? You can get 3 Stag/CMT lowers for that and still get change back.

I build varmint/target rifles all day long with Stag/CMT matched upper and lowers that'll shoot in the low.3s and better all day long. Of course you have to use premium barrels and correctly headspaced bolts.
All things being equal, I could care less who manufactures the lower on an AR, as long as it fits correctly to the upper and the holes are in the right place.

 

[bigshot]

socom upper

looking for a socom side charging upper if anybody has one of has lead i would like to buy
thanks bruce

 

[husker]

DennisH87 says it looks like a high school job. you dont no what the h e double hockey sticks your talking about. its excellent machine work and if you dont think i no what im talking about your wrong again.

 

[freakshow10mm]

And yes, of course the lower makes a significant contribution to the accuracy of the rifle. To state otherwise shows lack of first hand experience and common knowledge shared by all AR-15 / M-16 armorers.

I've been building AR15s for 10 years now. The lower receiver does not have a significant effect on accuracy. You can't tell me otherwise because I do have first hand knowledge of this.

If it all boiled down to a barreled action and receiver only, why would rifle makers bother with pillar bedding, aluminum bedding blocks, glass bedding, etc. on precision rifles?

A bolt action rifle is very different from a semi auto AR15 rifle. Comparing the two is foolish.

 

[gvnwst]

To me, this smells like BS. The lowers look cool, but if they are sooo good, why don't we see a lot of 3-Gun guys using them, and the entire story sounds mall ninja'ish...

 

[Kenati]

Freakshow-

I don't feel like getting into a pissing contest over this, but I will respond anyway.

First, "significant effect" is a slippery slope. What might not make a difference to one shooter may be the all the difference to another.

Let me ask you this, if the quality of the lower receiver doesn't make a difference, then why would you make a significant financial investment to manufacture MACHINED lowers from a solid forging in-house when it would be much easier and cheaper to machine them out of cast receivers?

From your website:

http://www.freakshowbullets.com/product_info.php?cPath=52_87&products_id=260

"These are bare lower receivers completely machined in house by Freakshow Mfg. These receivers are machined from a solid forging of 7075 Aluminum and hand finished to remove machining marks and burrs."

According to other posters on here, buying a cheap ol' Stag receiver is just as good as yours.

By the way, yours look very nice.

 

[freakshow10mm]

Let me ask you this, if the quality of the lower receiver doesn't make a difference, then why would you make a significant financial investment to manufacture MACHINED lowers from a solid forging in-house when it would be much easier and cheaper to machine them out of cast receivers?

The industry standard is forged receivers. If I want any chance at a possible military contract or LE contract, I must meet their specified criteria which is that it is made from either a solid forged billet or 7075T6 aluminum or a solid forging of 7076T6 aluminum and then Type III anodized, among other things.

When I buy forgings, I get them for $7.50 a piece. I have no clue how much more or less castings would be. I can call Ruger's Pine Tree division and find out, but I'm quite satisfied with my forgings from my supplier. As I said before, military and LE will not buy cast receivers, so that ends there.

 

[Kenati]

Thanks for the clarification. So you're shooting for a military contract? I see that you stopped building rifles since the parts supplies are down.

You must be swamped cranking out those receivers with such high demand these days. Good luck.

So in summary, you and many others on here would be apt to agree that a match grade precision upper receiver will perform to the same accuracy level on a SOCOM or similar precision lower as it will on one that is, for argument's sake, carved out of wet balsa wood? Hell, let's even go with expertly machined cured red oak.

 

[freakshow10mm]

In my opinion, the only component other than a quality upper receiver group that matters in the performance of the AR15/M16 weapon system is the fire control group. If you are going to dump money on an AR, get the best trigger group and upper assembly/barrel/BCG you can. That is where the accuracy and reliability sits.

People that think they are getting a superior product by buying a Sun Devil lower or a LMT lower are mistaken, in my opinion. If you market the hell out of something as being higher quality and sell it at a higher price, they will buy the hype. Nike shoe company is doing fabulous at illustrating this. Their shoes are no better than New Balance or Sketchers, yet they sell for $80-150.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Stock Bushmaster lower receiver with stock Bushmaster trigger group. 5rd group at 100yds from bench using Black Hills Blue 75gr Moly. Grids are 1".

If there is a significant difference between that five round group and the one Kenati posted, I sure don't see it. What little differences I do see could be more easily explained by the 3.5x TA11 ACOG I used to sight it or the stock trigger group than the lower receiver - and if anything else, it gives you a pretty good idea how much practical difference there is between a stock Bushmaster lower and the lower in question.

 

[12131]

got a socom upper and lower up for grabs

Gee, first post on the first day of joining the site.

 

[browningguy]

I really don't have a dog in this hunt, but there is so much misinformation going on here I have to say something.

i dont think, ever in the history of the United States has any company "almost gone bankrupt" by getting a government weapons contract.

Before getting into the oil and gas business I was in the defense industry for 15 years as a lead engineer and site manager for missile systems. Plenty of companies have gone bankrupt working for the government. They are notoriously slow in paying, and defense procurement agents can find all kinds of reasons not to pay if they don't like a company.

As for lowers not affecting accuracy, you have got to be kidding. The best upper in the world sitting on a wobbly lower with a $15 Tapco 6 position stock won't shoot it's best. Without a good fit between the upper and lower the upper is free to vibrate slightly differently each time you pull the trigger. It's really elementary physics, the connection between you and the gun is the lower. It's why we do bedding on bolt action rifles, to keep the barelled action from moving around or vibrating inconsistantly in the stock. it may not matter if all you need is 1-2 MOA accuracy, but if you are trying to shoot tiny groups it will certainly matter.

 

[Gryffydd]

For everybody saying how these things would needlessly add weight....The "BR" in the model number does stand for Bench Rest...

That said...they kind of look cheap. Whatever the craftsmanship and precision happens to be, they just don't look quite right. All the 1 and 2 posters popping up to praise them are rather interesting though...

 

[GREGABINGO]

BR-15 Billit Machined Receivers

Interesting reading! I am the original manufacturer of these receivers. I designed, did the R&D (including structural testing to failure), wrote the CNC programs and manufactured them. Ernie at SOCOM was the distributor as he had a great business with lots of contacts and we've known each other for decades. My company went bust in the severe economic downturn of 2001 just before and after the 911 debacle. The upper receivers were made by another source known only to Ernie as he would not share his source with me. I was designing an upper but it did not come to fruition due to the closing of my business. The "BR" designation stood for "Billit Receiver" I love the uneducated meanderings of the unenlightened as far as material and design of these receivers (a shop class project, give me a break!). We left some of the machine marks in so people could see they were actually a machined item and not an inferior casting. The receivers were specifically designed to be more rigid and have tighter tolerances than others on the market. We were also working on a much better bolt hold open system and an updated magazine release design. The receiver had features to stabilize the upper receiver assembly and limit creep as well as over travel of the trigger mechanism. We manufactured about 500 total. Most were actually purchased by a dealer in Florida after Ernie's unfortunate BATF issues began. He was not able to continue with our arrangement at that time. I am not involved in the firearms industry at this time but I do have a couple receivers available that I will be glad to sell. If you are interested, you can find my e-mail address on my profile for this sight. I will ship to FFL holders only. Happy New Year!

 

[bacl2000]

I saw this post while I was researching these receivers. I brought a couple about a year ago and I am now working on building them so I would be very interest in the size of the set screws for the trigger creep and over travel as will as the bolt catch abd rear takedown pin hold. ALso would be interested if anyone has a line on a socom upper.

 

[Zartada]

I was lucky enough to get one of these. We all know how opinions go but I don't think you can get a better lower for an AR. Mine is sitting under an 18" RR varmint A4 upper. I still have Ernies hunters orange card in my planner. He is a great guy to deal with, I only wish I could have bought more of them.

 

[Tirod]

Interesting retro thread.

If there are lessons learned here, part of the problem in marketing to the public is choosing a name and how the business is conducted. That often has nothing to do with how the actual shop floor is organized, or even the quality of the product.

Too many new makers reach out for a name that appeals to who they think are their customers, but go too far. Case in point : SOCOM. It's a title for a government agency that controls a number of separate spec ops units. How it got to have a cool meaning is largely a result of people who know just enough to get in trouble. Adopting names like that for marketing purposes actually offends the professional community - who are the buyers where real word of mouth comes from. Please note the trade names of companies actually supplying the community and take note. They are who they are, not an adopted wannabe name.

How the business is conducted is obviously more important. If you make firearms, and actually have all your ducks in a row, you work with any Authority Having Jurisdiction and take care of their concerns. After all, you are a small business, they are likely a large government agency, they have more resources and nothing better to do.

If anything, what is here is a history lesson of what to do wrong - mall ninja name, tick off the BATF. It's not what the goal was, and the loss of a interesting design is now a footnote in the AR Archives. Others now get the business.

ASA makes side charging uppers, there are plenty of billet lowers and uppers out there, and other posts have explored whether forged or "billet" is better. On a dollars per pound basis, they are expensive for the return, which is largely looks, not documented superior function.