AR lowers, what’s the diff?

[Shotgun Surgery]

If my lower parts are all quality, how does the stripped lower play into the equation?

It flat out doesn't. In order for a mil-spec lower to be mil-spec it must be 100% identical to every other mil-spec lower (besides markings). It has to be made of the same alloy, made to the same tolerances, and given the same finish. Any differences would mean it's no longer mil-spec. The only functional difference between any two mil-spec lowers is how much you paid for them. That being said, the 'lower end' mil-spec lowers tended to have their finishes applied better than Colt's AR lowers back when they sold them to us lowly civilians.

 

[CTS Tactical]

It flat out doesn't. In order for a mil-spec lower to be mil-spec it must be 100% identical to every other mil-spec lower (besides markings). It has to be made of the same alloy, made to the same tolerances, and given the same finish. Any differences would mean it's no longer mil-spec. The only functional difference between any two mil-spec lowers is how much you paid for them. That being said, the 'lower end' mil-spec lowers tended to have their finishes applied better than Colt's AR lowers back when they sold them to us lowly civilians.

Only one problem with that statement. You forget that people tell lies. Just because they are marketed as mil-spec does not mean they actually are. Yes, it is false advertising and yes, it happens every day. Not to mention that mil-spec is a list of basic requirements that a product must meet in order to pass military requirements. It is basically the bottom of the threshold. There is nothing saying it cannot exceed these specs. It can still reach mil-spec and exceed the base line to be called mil-spec. In other words there are many out there that are better than just the basic mil-spec.

 

[Shotgun Surgery]

Only one problem with that statement. You forget that people tell lies. Just because they are marketed as mil-spec does not mean they actually are. Yes, it is false advertising and yes, it happens every day. Not to mention that mil-spec is a list of basic requirements that a product must meet in order to pass military requirements. It is basically the bottom of the threshold. There is nothing saying it cannot exceed these specs. It can still reach mil-spec and exceed the base line to be called mil-spec. In other words there are many out there that are better than just the basic mil-spec.

There's 100% absolutely stuff better than mil-spec; as you pointed out, mil-spec is not the peak of performance. The thing is though, any improvements to a milspec receiver would prevent it from being milspec at that point. If multiple different companies are all making truly mil-spec lowers then they should be identical with only price and logos as a difference. OP pointed out that he has a mil-spec Anderson lower. I'm just pointing out that it isn't any better or worse than a mil-spec lower from any other company like Colt or Aero Precision.

Also, although companies could lie about their products not actually being mil-spec, I think that would be caught pretty quickly and word would get around. That might even be grounds for a lawsuit.

 

[CTS Tactical]

Completely disagree. Mil-spec is a minimum standard. You can exceed the base line minimum standard and still be mil-spec. Mil-spec is not an absolute. Just the absolute minimum. It does not say it has to be this and exactly this and nothing more. It says it has to be this material forged in this way and finished to this minimum but it does not take into context the quality of workmanship. I have seen plenty of items of military issued equipment over the years put out by different suppliers where there is a big difference in quality of workmanship between different brands even though it is all mil-spec or mil standard. And I am talking what is actually issued to the military. Not just weapons in particular but many different items that are supplied by more than one manufacturer.
As far as companies lying about being mil-spec, how many people would know the difference? How would they get caught. Who could prove that they continued milling a hole in a certain spot even though they knew the tool bit was worn and no longer within the minimum tolerance? Tough to prove.

 

[Shotgun Surgery]

Completely disagree. Mil-spec is a minimum standard. You can exceed the base line minimum standard and still be mil-spec.

I'm pretty sure that's not the case. As an example, Beretta has made quite a few improvements to its 92 design after it was adopted by the US military as the M9, but those improvements couldn't be adopted as they were not what was part of the initial technical specifications.That's not to say that the various branches of the military haven't gone out of their way to order non-milspec parts, Lord knows that they have, but I've heard that companies like Beretta can't offer improved versions of adopted military firearms after the specifications have been decided.

For every detail, there will be an acceptable range of tolerance. For example, the buffer retainer hole (or whatever the technical term for that would be) must be drilled to X depth with only + or - Y many thousands of an inch variance. If it's within the defined tolerance levels then it's milspec and if it isn't then it's not. The whole point of there being military specifications in the first place is so that the military can receive exactly the same product regardless of what company they happen to be contracting to make it at the time. Could one company get closer to the center of the acceptable variances for every specification and therefore be, from a purely technical level, better made? I guess. Would it make any functional difference? No. But any improvements that deviate from the specifications would therefore not be within military specifications.

As far as how people would know a product isn't mil spec, it depends. If it's off by any dimensions that would make a functional difference then it would be pretty apparent. If it were a different finish then that would also be blatantly obvious. The only way I could see a company making a technically not-milspec part while getting away with it would be if they used a different alloy for the metal, but I'm not sure if any company would look at some small amount of potential cost savings and determine that's worth the risk to their reputation. There is the possibility of what you pointed out that some specific part is the slightest bit out of spec but not in a way which matters and therefore, on a purely technical basis, is not milspec. I'd bet there are plenty of guns in military service that are technically out of spec in some insignificant way. So again, unless it's out of spec in some way that's entirely insignificant, it's pretty much not possible for a company to consistently make a supposedly milspec lower in a way which is significantly not within specifications.

TL;DR: A mil spec lower is a mil spec lower regardless of who makes it.

 

[cmshoot]

I know you know your stuff. I now have an additional question. Are there different billets? I run ADM’s UIC lower and I thought it was stronger. See below \/

not being argumentative, just inquisitive

I don’t see how. There is a reason the the military has specified forged receivers on every military rifle from the 1903 Springfield to the M16. You get a true grain flow in a forging that aids in the overall strength. When you mill a piece of bar stock (same as making a billet receiver), you cut those grain flows.

 

[cmshoot]

I see companies weekly that advertise mil-spec when they are not. Look at AR10’s from various companies and you’ll see the word mil-spec thrown around, despite the fact there is no such thing as a mil-spec AR10.

I’ve seen commercial receiver extensions sold as mil-spec. I’ve seen nitrided BCG’s advertised as mil-spec......and the list goes on. This is very common.

 

[Red Squirrel 556]

Names mostly.

 

[Red Squirrel 556]

I don’t see how. There is a reason the the military has specified forged receivers on every military rifle from the 1903 Springfield to the M16. You get a true grain flow in a forging that aids in the overall strength. When you mill a piece of bar stock (same as making a billet receiver), you cut those grain flows.
View attachment 2700362

I tried to explain that one time for like an hour.

 

[NewLeaf]

Carry calipers and a scale LOL j/k kinda