Home Forums Hunting & Shooting AR and Tactical Rifles AR 10 in .243 - Which Manufacturers?

I have a friend who has a DPMS Panther 243 he is trying to sell right now for no other reason than he thinks it's to heavy.It is capable of amazing small groups right from the factory with the add'n of a scope. For $975 with accessory BIUS that cost $215 it looked like a good buy. Not sure why you have to build what you can just buy for less cost than a build. Magnum Man

Kinsman, you make eminent sense. I also am not a metal smith nor a metalurgist. But I am able to gather data, analyse it and detect trends. 6061 aluminum is used in billets which are then CNC machined into very nice receivers. Billets are more expensive to make because there is a lot more material to remove.

7075/7175 aluminum is about twice as strong as 6061 is and it is forged because it is not as machinable as 6061. Forging also strengthens the aluminum further. Forging is cheaper because less material is removed since the receiver is closer to its final shape than when starting from a billet.

I note that the companies who use 6061 in their 308 model receivers readily highlight the use of 7075/7175 aluminum in the AR-15 receivers. The ones that do not highlight the type of aluminum used in their 308 receivers just say "space age" or "aircraft grade" aluminum and to me that translates to 6061. Could it be that the AR-15 marketplace is more competitive than the "AR-10" one.

I completely agree the stresses placed on AR receivers are easily handled by either types of aluminum, but I also know that 7075/7175 is stronger (read more durable) than 6061.

Armalite alone produces the AR-10 and they are happy to tell you the lower receivers are made of forged 7175-T73 aluminum and the upper receivers are made of forged 7175-T74 aluminum.

Quentin defense manufactures lowers, uppers and complete rifles. They have several large Govt. contracts. I have shot many AR-15 type rifles that have plastic, composite or whatever you want to call them, lowers. His point and mine is that the lower does not need to be made of 7000 series aluminum to be strong enough. A billet lower made of 6061 is several times stronger than a composite one.


7074 is used because it is a CHEAPER manufacturing process when one is making enough volume to justify the machinery. Apparently 6061 is not well suited to forging. Don't ever confuse yourself that a DPMS lower is the equivalent to a POF, Sun Devil, Quentin Defense, Seekins precision et al. They are all billet and with the exception of Seekins, are made of 6061. As far as the piston system. I won't get into that argument. I can see it both ways. I am not building a piston gun but rather a direct impingement system gun.

I agree that my rifle is NOT an AR-10, I was just tacking onto his post. Most accurately, it is an AR-260Rem (or will be). Fundamentally, however, they are the same. Only thing is the parts aren't interchangeable.

In low volumes, billet is most likely cheaper to make. No cost of forging dies to amortize into your production costs. Put the blank in the machine, program it, walk away. ten parts later you decide to tweak the design, you can do so with a programming change, no need to remake the expensive dies.

There's a good reason why billet receivers have extra material in certain spots that forged receivers don't...

Billet is hype, pure and simple, I don't care who's name is on the side.

Dennis in AZ: so essentially you advocate buying receivers that are about half as strong as forged receivers but to make up for the diminished durability you get to pay more for it.

It just does not compute.

I am ready to start my ultimate AR-10 build and I am not starting with 6061 aluminum.

A billet 6061 receiver is probably 95% as strong as a forged DPMS receiver. It is probably 5X as strong as it NEEDS to be. That is my point. Have you ever heard of a billet lower blowing up? Never happened. They make them out of plastic and they are safe. Billet 6061 is many times better. You get better fit, finish and aesthetics with a billet lower than with a forged one.

Preferring a DPMS lower over a high end billet lower is like preferring a Savage over a BAT. Wby mark V actions are supposed to be the strongest, do you ever see competitive accurate rifles built on them? NO!

If someone starts building a lower of titanium, are you going to build on it because it's better? It will cost $1000 just for the lower and it will be stronger but it won't be any better. That's why nobody will build it except to satisfy a handful of nut-jobs with more money than sense.

DPMS uses 7000 series aluminum because they can build a lower CHEAPER! Remington uses CM tubing because they can build an action cheaper. Remington uses tubing to build their bolts and solders the three pieces together because it's CHEAPER and good enough. BAT, Stiller, Pierce et al make the actions out of a BILLET of CM steel or stainless because it is BETTER. It is quite a bit more expensive, however.

The most accurate and coveted barrels are hand made one at a time, mostly cut rifled. There isn't a gun factory left that makes cut rifled barrels. They use methods that are production efficient. Most of the bigger makers use hammer forged barrels. They can make a hammer barrel in 60 seconds, a button barrel in about 20 minutes and a cut rifled barrel in 3 hours. The hammer forged is 'good enough' so that is what they use.

I am going to use my POF action because is is precisely made, looks good, is 5X stronger than it needs to be and will make a better rifle than a cheap forging from a huge company.

I can buy a barrel from DPMS for $299 retail. A barrel from Krieger or Satern will cost me $450-$500. Which is better? I submit that the two cut-rifled, hand made barrels are better. Since I am not trying to build a Bench Rest rifle, I will use the DPMS barrel because it is cheaper and certainly 'good enough' for my purposes.

K'man,
Nobody else seems to have caught that,(or just DGAF), but what you described, sure as hell, isn't forging...

Isn't just pouring into a mold casting?

Forging is a method of hammering/compresing or something like that.

Oh and cast lowers were the original bottom rung receivers.

Dennis in Az. Once again you make good sense.

I am not building an AR-10 from the DMPS crap, I am planning to use Armalite receivers, which are forged from 7175T73 or T74 aluminum.

You are absolutely correct that from the point of view of simply firing the rifle, 6061 is plenty strong. However, I am planning this rifle for more rugged use and so I think 7175 is better suited.

And 6061 is not at 95% of 7175, it's more like 50%, which is still plenty strong for benchrest shooting.

Forged is very expensive to get into initially, but once you have the equipment, it is inexpensive to run. Billet is cheap to get into initially, but it requires a lot more work which is why they are more expensive.

Forging actually strenghtens the aluminum further. I think that's desirable and 7175 does not lend itself well to billet, because it is so strong.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with 6061 billet receivers, as long as they are not in my rifles. But that's just me.

What is a colt lower made of?

7175 is about as strong as you can get in aluminum. I believe the ONLY advantage that it has over the 6061 in a lower receiver would be corrosion resistance since both are many times stronger than is warranted.
I'm not sure what 'more rugged' use you have in mind for your receiver, pulling nails maybe? I know in a number of destruction tests, the typical billet aluminum lowers have held up better than the colt lowers and they are what the military has used for years.

Your lower will be stronger than mine, but mine will shoot better and be plenty strong!!

Colts are forged receivers made of 7075-T6 aluminum.

The lower is not what counts for shooting better, it's the upper that is important.

Torg, My bad.. Process mix up, Forging/casting.

Forging is the process of heating metal, Aluminum, Brass and Copper, to a moldable temperature, and then using precision machined dies to forge parts to a near net shape. This process does not change the grain structure of the metal, resulting in stronger parts. When compared to machining bar stock, forged parts are already in near net shape, which reduces the cycle time required to machine the part, and gives our clients more capacity on their machining, and reduces freight time and scrap costs, ultimately reducing their cost. When compared to mold casting, which is the melting of the metal and pouring of the liquid metal into molds, forging is superior in strength - in most cases 15% stronger, and is porosity free which is ideal for cosmetic surface requirements.

The process begins with only the finest extruded raw materials, usually round stock, however, more flexibility with our mills have allowed us to design custom shapes to be extruded, reducing the overall forging cost along with supporting more complex designs. The stock is cut to length on one of five saws based on part requirements, and then is transferred into the forge ovens, where aluminum stock is heated to between 800 to 900 degrees Fahrenheit, depending on which alloy is being processed.

We then forge the parts using precision-machined closed die forging presses resulting in a perfectly dimensioned forging. Parts move from here to various trimming, heat-treating, washing, and finishing processes, and then to shipping or to machining or polishing. The final result is stronger parts, with less waste, and lower cost.
"Harvey Forging"

.308 on the AR platform has been on my wish list always and the SR-25 platform is becoming more common for a .308 AR platform.
308 ar manufacturers

I have a Rock River Arms LAR-8 in 308. My brother has one in .243 Winchester and both are very accurate. The 308 can be bought as a complete gun, but the 243 and 7-08 are bought as a LAR-8 lower reciever and the complete upper of the caliber you want. One thing to remember about the RRA LAR-8, is the .243 and 7-08 can not use the FAL mags like the 308 chambering.

My brother's .243 Predator shoots 80gr Speer bullets under .75" all day and puts the 105gr Speer SP under 1" with no load development at all.

I found out that my POF is actually made of 7075, not 6061. I asked a couple of knowledgeable people in the industry and was told that the main reason someone would use 7075 over 6061 is so it can be called "milspec" since that's what Colt uses.

I am going to get QD to make me a lower out of 2024 for kicks and grins.

I also bought a barrel from Green Mountain. I am waiting on a reamer so I can chamber it. I might build me a Plumb crazy lower rifle too, just so I can say I have a plastic gun!

Since you brought this up... You asked above if anyone has ever seen a receiver blow up, arguing the 7075 is overkill or that 6061 is as good as.

Well since the pressure is contained to the barrel extension, your argument might make sense until you realize that blowing up isn't why the TDP requires 7075 forged receivers. I myself have seen pin holes worn and cracks develop when stressed. This is the reason a standard was set. Though there will always be those that fire a few rounds and say parts is parts...

You can build one out of bubble gum if you wish, doesn't make it as good as or good enough.

Well, since the lower determines the mag, and the 243 and 7-08 are on the 308 case, why can't you use FAL mags?

this doesn't make sense to me.

That is what we thought too, but there is a difference. The follower of the RRA 243 mag has a longer raised section than the FAL mag, and the lips along the side are longer. If you try to load a FAL mag with 243 winchester cartridges, they pop out or tip up at the nose.

I told my brother he should try building out the raised section on a FAL follower to see if that allows the 243 to feed correctly.

Well, I am also interested to know same as about ar 15 manufacturers. These guns are really awesome with more legal flexibility option. I searches online for it and found many good results as they also provides buying option.

ar 15 manufacturers