Is the Polymer Lower a Good Idea?

By CTD Rob published on in Firearms, Reviews

In this industry, everyone wants to buy the highest quality products. However, in reality most people simply buy what they can afford. Our biggest sellers are not $1,200 ARs decked out with the latest gadgets. By a huge margin, our top sellers are the least expensive guns we can ship out. This is a simple fact of capitalism. Most major gun manufacturers tweak its assembly processes to reduce cost, thereby increasing profits. More plastic means less money required for investing in materials. You might notice that it is becoming more difficult to find a modern duty pistol that isn’t made of 50 percent polymer.

ATI Omni

ATI Omni

The AR platform is no exception. Traditionally, much of the AR is already plastic. However, recent developments are pushing the limits of AR design, and the polymer lower receiver is now commonplace. Many shooters will scoff at a polymer lower, but I think it shows some degree of promise. New Frontier Armory produced some torture test videos to show its plastic product, the LW-15, isn’t a junky ill-fitting gun part. Additionally, American Tactical Imports produces its Omni lower which has realized good deal of success on the market, despite a few wavering reviews on its ability to pair with mil-spec uppers. Since only a handful of owners reported problems, you can probably assume there was an out-of-spec run that made it past quality control.

The biggest question people have with polymer AR lowers isn’t usually the fit of the product, it’s the durability. In the 1980s, Glock faced significant market resistance due to the perception that plastic guns could never work. Today, Glock is the most popular choice by police departments around the world. The early versions of M16s had plenty of detractors both inside and outside of the Army’s weapons program. Much of this stemmed from the partial plastic construction. High-ranking brass were accustomed to large, heavy, .30-caliber wood and steel rifles that felt more substantial.

ATI HD16

ATI HD16

When you study the AR lower closely, you’ll notice the only part of the component that could face any real stress is where the buffer tube screws in to the receiver. If a polymer lower was going to fail, it would be there. While the recoil of a .223/5.56 NATO is minimal, that part of the lower still bears a significant physical load. Part of the reason polymer pistols work so well, is the lack of a buttstock component. Imagine a Glock pistol with a metal tube screwed into the back of the grip, which feeds into a buttstock. Much of the recoil force would cause stress on the point where the two components meet. That part of the AR lower has a similar role and there have already been a few broken polymer lowers floating around the Internet. Since we weren’t there to witness how they actually failed, we won’t know if this was caused by normal use, or by someone mounting a .50 BMG upper on a polymer lower and whining about it breaking.

My polymer lower comes in next week. If it breaks, then I’m out a little over $35. However, I really don’t think that is going to happen. We aren’t going to throw it around and run over it with a truck. The job of this rifle will simply be to shoot .223 downrange, and that’s all I expect out of it. While I wouldn’t consider using a polymer lower AR as my SHTF gun, I think the low cost and reduced weight make it a viable option for training or for a first-time owner. We’re going to see a lot more polymer lowers in the future, hopefully they’re up to the task—time will tell.

Tags: , , , , ,

Trackback from your site.

The mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, "The Shooter's Log," is to provide information-not opinions-to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (118)

  • Dan

    |

    I purchased an polymer lower, put it together after maybe 100 rounds it cracked. Not near the buffer tube but on the right side. I do not believe this is a indication that poly lowers are bad I think I just happen to get a bad one. Waiting on the manufacture to see if they will replace it

    Reply

  • Tegra Arms

    |

    Very useful information. Thank you for sharing with us.

    Reply

  • Best Selling AR-15s of 2013

    |

    […] year, CTD Rob bought a cheap plastic AR-15 lower. He questioned his gun’s durability. A year later, CTD Rob is completely satisfied with his cheap build and his […]

    Reply

  • LeeC

    |

    #48… I must wholeheartedly agree! At least in my particular application. I tried a Vulcan lower with a pistol caliber upper in .45 ACP and a collapsible carbine stock.
    I did not know to change the buffer to a heavier weight. Their unit broke at the given spot. Not only did they not respond when I sent my part back, they ripped open the package, sent it back without even taping it back up… surprised that anything stayed in the package. I now have a DPMS lower and have yet to try to shoot it as I am afraid that I will break another lower. At least I did find a heavier buffer to install. Makes a great wallhanger! Looks awesome with the Rogers SuperStoc.

    Reply

  • Best Selling AR-15s of 2013

    |

    […] year, CTD Rob bought a cheap plastic AR-15 lower. He questioned his gun’s durability. A year later, CTD Rob is completely satisfied with his cheap build and his […]

    Reply

  • Darrel

    |

    Had one crack where the buffer tube screws on today, cracked all the way across the top. See how warranty goes and go from there. Not pleased. Maybe just mfg defect maybe poor design I don’t know.

    Reply

    • dubbz

      |

      Bought a New Frontier LW-15 lower and after 1,800 rds, no problem with the lower , except for the FACT that the castle nut is not staked and will the buffer tube will wiggle loose- a little red loc tite and home staking with a $8.00 spring punch tool foxed the issue! Mated my polymer upper to a PSA mid length freedom upper- overall cost for my ” cheap build” was $520.00-

      $309.00 for PSA upper with M-16 BCG

      $160.00 for the complete LW-15 lower with 6 position stock, buffer tube and carbine buffer( includes tax and DROS)

      $49.00 for Magpul flip up buis.

      War winner??? Hell no! But satisfactory firearm that can withstand the occasional travel to range bumps and punch 2.5″ groups on paper at 100 yds?- yes.

      For people who scoff at polymer lowers, remember the the Bushmaster ACR and the combat PROVEN FN Scar 16/17 are both polymer lowers and predominantly polymer- the HK G36 is as well.

      You can destroy any weapon with poor maintenance, handling and improper ammo selection- if some of the backyard beer belly bubba commandos want to ” torture test” a gun to failure just to ” prove it will fail” , its their money.

      Me? I treat my guns like all equipment I own- cars, tools, appliances; keep them cleaned, inspected and properly used, and they’ll last. I have also owned three Glocks since 1997 and all are still in good operating condition( no broken or cracked frames, no internal wear, barrels in good shape) – so much for the failure of plastic guns….

      Reply

Leave a comment

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.


%d bloggers like this: