Polymer receivers?

Ad hoc · 04-01-2008, 04:01 PM

A friend of mine who works for a custom AR company was talking to me the other day about new product ideas, and one of the things they were thinking of trying out were AR's with all polymer receivers. Now, I was a little hesitant at first after seeing what happened to Bushmasters Carbon brainchilds, but after a while it made a lot of sense. Not only do you decrease the weight, but as long as the composition of the polymer is correct it would actually be more durable than metal. In essence it would sort of be like a the GLOCK version of the AR-15. Not to mention it would be cheaper.

I know Kel-tech has done this a bunch, but until now I haven't heard of it on AR's, was just wondering what everyone though about it.

ArkansasHunter · 04-01-2008, 04:10 PM

As long as they used steel or brass bushings at all metal contact points it might go over with some.
But I'll never buy one though.
Thank you for shareing the idea and lets see what others think...A.H

Cyrano · 04-01-2008, 04:22 PM

In my opinion the best thing to do with the AR platform is take it back to what Eugene Stoner envisioned, 7.62 NATO or better. The only AR that has ever tempted me is the new one Bushmaster is making that uses the Hornaday cartridge Jeff Cooper envisioned to handle and sort of African hunting, a .45 caliber round nearly as big as the old .45-70 Government. His name for that project rifle was "Thumper." Don't recall what Hornaday calls the cartridge, but I feel that would finally fix most of the problems I associate with the AR design.

That said, I'd be interested in seeing tests run on a polymer receivered AR as against other of the same caliber in metal or metals for reliability in all sorts of weather and conditions of weapons cleanliness. It could be a good idea, and not just for AR rifles.

Ad hoc · 04-01-2008, 05:55 PM

I guess theyre going to prototype it using an AK first. It's interesting because it's a lot cheaper than milling the reciever, but you can still use the milling rivets which makes it easier to switch out parts, etc etc. If that works out then they'll move on to AR's. If they combined a functional polymer reciever with their new full-stroke piston in a caliber like....6.8 spc...well I think that'd be pretty interesting. Thanks for the replies, its nice to see what other people are thinking.

RMTactical · 04-02-2008, 01:54 AM

All polymer lower would probably be fine. I like the Aluminum upper though.

Rambo · 04-02-2008, 07:08 AM

As for making it lighter, huh? Who can't carry a typical AR now? They're all pretty light. And cheaper? I doubt they'll pass the savings on to the consumer. Just the C.E.O.'s. Look at all the trucks made in Mexico with real cheap labor and how much has that lowered the price of the trucks.

at4rxj · 04-02-2008, 12:41 PM

The lowers would be fine for a lightweight setup or plinking gun. I wouldn't use it for something that's going to be a very high round count gun or a duty gun of any kind.

GlockMeister · 04-02-2008, 01:09 PM

Only thing I'd personally like to see done with the AR platform is to make it gas piston operated. I know some have done similar with there versions, is Sig and a couple other manufacturers.

As for a polymer AR, like AH suggests, metal bushing/sleeves or other where contact and stress points will be or are.

Mostly, I totally agree with RMTactical. An AR lower only in polymer is a great idea. But keep the upper aluminum as that's where the chamber is. Can't have a polymer chamber anyhow. But definately a polymer lower. But with metal bushings and or sleeves as AH suggests.

Orlando · 04-02-2008, 02:37 PM

There is someone already making them, read about them a year or so ago

at4rxj · 04-02-2008, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orlando

There is someone already making them, read about them a year or so ago

Cavalry Arms...
Cavalry Arms

Supposedly good stuff, but the buttstock is integrated. That's the only drawback. I can understand why (stress at the point where the tube attaches to the lower), but wish they offered a collapsible option.

I'd like to see someone make something that resembled more of a stripped lower (with no buttstock)

Darkfront · 04-02-2008, 03:08 PM

I'd feel better about a polymer lower if it were a piston operated system. Less heat stress on the polymer. I also agree in that I'd rather see a buttstock that's not integrally molded into the lower. Makes it feel like a toy gun or something.

I think people would appreciate the weight savings especially if they're like me and love to hang every possible gadget off the gun. Double stacked mags, BUIS, optics, laser designator, flashlights and vertical grips that store batteries all start to add up the pounds. Also frees up weight for heavier barrels for heat management.

Ad hoc · 04-02-2008, 04:32 PM

Thanks for the replies, nice to hear some broader consumer input.

I wasn't aware cavalry made one, looks pretty nice. Definetly would like to see a more traditional 6-pos stock, but I'm not sure what the local guys here plan on doing. What I do know is they've just put the patent on their full-stroke piston and would integrate that into it, and it's a pretty nice setup.

As for the weight of an AR not really being substantial in the first place, well that's true but I can't think of a reason not to try and make it lighter anyway. That's just my 2 cents, though.

Touching on the other point Rambo brought up about the prices, since this is a small operation they keep the prices low on everything else, so I see no reason why it would change. Hooray for small buisness and good people

at4rxj · 04-02-2008, 05:01 PM

I'd be interested in seeing what they end up offering.

The AR in itself isn't that heavy... but when it starts growing lights/lasers/scopes/mags with ammo/bipods/grips/slings it starts to get pretty hefty. Any bit helps as far as I'm concerned...

Ad hoc · 04-02-2008, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by at4rxj

I'd be interested in seeing what they end up offering.

The AR in itself isn't that heavy... but when it starts growing lights/lasers/scopes/mags with ammo/bipods/grips/slings it starts to get pretty hefty. Any bit helps as far as I'm concerned...

Yah I agree. I've got an EOTech, a surefire clone, a egro foregrip and a redimag...wouldn't object to a lighter reciever at all as long as it's durable.

04-01-2008, 04:01 PM	#1
Ad hoc Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Southern AZ Posts: 19 Trader Rating: (0)	Polymer receivers? A friend of mine who works for a custom AR company was talking to me the other day about new product ideas, and one of the things they were thinking of trying out were AR's with all polymer receivers. Now, I was a little hesitant at first after seeing what happened to Bushmasters Carbon brainchilds, but after a while it made a lot of sense. Not only do you decrease the weight, but as long as the composition of the polymer is correct it would actually be more durable than metal. In essence it would sort of be like a the GLOCK version of the AR-15. Not to mention it would be cheaper. I know Kel-tech has done this a bunch, but until now I haven't heard of it on AR's, was just wondering what everyone though about it.

04-02-2008, 01:54 AM	#5
RMTactical Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Rocky Mountains Posts: 167 Trader Rating: (0)	All polymer lower would probably be fine. I like the Aluminum upper though. __________________ rockymountaintactical.net

04-02-2008, 01:09 PM	#8
GlockMeister Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Northern Illinois Posts: 4,952 Trader Rating: (0)	Only thing I'd personally like to see done with the AR platform is to make it gas piston operated. I know some have done similar with there versions, is Sig and a couple other manufacturers. As for a polymer AR, like AH suggests, metal bushing/sleeves or other where contact and stress points will be or are. Mostly, I totally agree with RMTactical. An AR lower only in polymer is a great idea. But keep the upper aluminum as that's where the chamber is. Can't have a polymer chamber anyhow. But definately a polymer lower. But with metal bushings and or sleeves as AH suggests. __________________ I'd rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6!

04-02-2008, 04:32 PM	#12
Ad hoc Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Southern AZ Posts: 19 Trader Rating: (0)	Thanks for the replies, nice to hear some broader consumer input. I wasn't aware cavalry made one, looks pretty nice. Definetly would like to see a more traditional 6-pos stock, but I'm not sure what the local guys here plan on doing. What I do know is they've just put the patent on their full-stroke piston and would integrate that into it, and it's a pretty nice setup. As for the weight of an AR not really being substantial in the first place, well that's true but I can't think of a reason not to try and make it lighter anyway. That's just my 2 cents, though. Touching on the other point Rambo brought up about the prices, since this is a small operation they keep the prices low on everything else, so I see no reason why it would change. Hooray for small buisness and good people Last edited by Ad hoc; 04-02-2008 at 04:36 PM.

04-01-2008, 04:10 PM	#2
ArkansasHunter Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: South Arkansas Posts: 10,525 Trader Rating: (0)	As long as they used steel or brass bushings at all metal contact points it might go over with some. But I'll never buy one though. Thank you for shareing the idea and lets see what others think...A.H

04-01-2008, 04:22 PM	#3
Cyrano Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: New York Posts: 1,964 Trader Rating: (0)	In my opinion the best thing to do with the AR platform is take it back to what Eugene Stoner envisioned, 7.62 NATO or better. The only AR that has ever tempted me is the new one Bushmaster is making that uses the Hornaday cartridge Jeff Cooper envisioned to handle and sort of African hunting, a .45 caliber round nearly as big as the old .45-70 Government. His name for that project rifle was "Thumper." Don't recall what Hornaday calls the cartridge, but I feel that would finally fix most of the problems I associate with the AR design. That said, I'd be interested in seeing tests run on a polymer receivered AR as against other of the same caliber in metal or metals for reliability in all sorts of weather and conditions of weapons cleanliness. It could be a good idea, and not just for AR rifles.

04-01-2008, 05:55 PM	#4
Ad hoc Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Southern AZ Posts: 19 Trader Rating: (0)	I guess theyre going to prototype it using an AK first. It's interesting because it's a lot cheaper than milling the reciever, but you can still use the milling rivets which makes it easier to switch out parts, etc etc. If that works out then they'll move on to AR's. If they combined a functional polymer reciever with their new full-stroke piston in a caliber like....6.8 spc...well I think that'd be pretty interesting. Thanks for the replies, its nice to see what other people are thinking.

04-02-2008, 07:08 AM	#6
Rambo Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Iowa Posts: 571 Trader Rating: (0)	As for making it lighter, huh? Who can't carry a typical AR now? They're all pretty light. And cheaper? I doubt they'll pass the savings on to the consumer. Just the C.E.O.'s. Look at all the trucks made in Mexico with real cheap labor and how much has that lowered the price of the trucks.

04-02-2008, 12:41 PM	#7
at4rxj Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 810 Trader Rating: (0)	The lowers would be fine for a lightweight setup or plinking gun. I wouldn't use it for something that's going to be a very high round count gun or a duty gun of any kind.

04-02-2008, 02:37 PM	#9
Orlando Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Ohio Posts: 484 Trader Rating: (0)	There is someone already making them, read about them a year or so ago

04-02-2008, 03:08 PM	#11
Darkfront Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 112 Trader Rating: (0)	I'd feel better about a polymer lower if it were a piston operated system. Less heat stress on the polymer. I also agree in that I'd rather see a buttstock that's not integrally molded into the lower. Makes it feel like a toy gun or something. I think people would appreciate the weight savings especially if they're like me and love to hang every possible gadget off the gun. Double stacked mags, BUIS, optics, laser designator, flashlights and vertical grips that store batteries all start to add up the pounds. Also frees up weight for heavier barrels for heat management.

04-02-2008, 05:01 PM	#13
at4rxj Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 810 Trader Rating: (0)	I'd be interested in seeing what they end up offering. The AR in itself isn't that heavy... but when it starts growing lights/lasers/scopes/mags with ammo/bipods/grips/slings it starts to get pretty hefty. Any bit helps as far as I'm concerned...