DPMS Target / Hi-Rise receiver stupidity

[patrol120]

During the Covid lockdown, I purchased one of the DPMS/Bushmaster/Remington kits that CDNN was blowing out. I got it all togethers, and it shoots great, but it has that stupid high profile DPMS upper receiver. The kit included a 15" CMMG rail that I would like to keep, but I would like to swap the upper out for a conventional height piece.

I guess my question is; What receivers work (well) with DPMS lowers, and is there a rail height issue I need to be on the lookout for?

 

[308pirate]

What's the problem?

Doesn't it free you up from using extra high rings?

 

[patrol120]

In all honesty...I just don't like it. I cant use a one-piece mount, which I would greatly prefer, and the upper is just ugly and pig heavy.

 

[hlee]

Why can you not use a one piece mount? I am using a NF unimount on my DPMS high profile receiver.

 

[patrol120]

Jeez.....I dont want elventeen hundred dollar NF mount on this gun, I want a lightweight one piece like an Aero to mount a LPVO.

I don't need a solution to make what I have work, it already works just fine with the Warne rings that are on it. I want a normal profile upper receiver with a rail height that matches the existing rail.

 

[Powder_Burns]

DPMS pattern is one of the more common receiver types for ar10 rifles. Anything described as dpms lr308 pattern should work with your lower.

 

[patrol120]

Thats my understanding as far as receiver profile, with some exceptions. My only real concern is rail height in relation to my existing rail.

I guess the simpler version of my question is this;

Is there a standard rail height for 308 pattern guns like there for the standard AR platform rifles?

 

[RTH1800]

Why can you not utilize a one piece mount? I understand your dislike of the high receiver for weight or esthetics but see no reason not to use a one piece mount??

 

[patrol120]

Dear Lord.........

 

[srt-4_uk]

Is there a standard rail height for 308 pattern guns like there for the standard AR platform rifles?

There is no "standard" for anything large frame

 

[hlee]

Jeez.....I dont want elventeen hundred dollar NF mount on this gun, I want a lightweight one piece like an Aero to mount a LPVO.

I don't need a solution to make what I have work, it already works just fine with the Warne rings that are on it. I want a normal profile upper receiver with a rail height that matches the existing rail.

Dear Lord.........

The NF mount was <$250, but whatever. It just happens to be the mount that I had on my DPMS. What about the current receiver precludes you from using the Aero mount, or any other one piece mount? I get that the offset between the high receiver and the low rail on the hand guard is ugly. That alone would be reason for me to ditch one or the other. But, you are claiming that there is a functional reason that warrants the change? Why can you not use an Aero one piece mount and a LPVO with this receiver?

BTW, the handguard on my DPMS does not have a top rail, which allows me to use a larger objective scope with a lower mount. The bell of the scope sits below the line of the receiver rail. This would not be possible with a hand guard rail that is in line with the receiver rail.

Please, for the love of baby jeezus, tell all of us that you are not attempting to bridge the gap between the upper and the hand guard with a one piece mount. Dear lord indeed...

 

[RTH1800]

It seem the OP is dealing with two issues regarding this receiver. Neither of which is actually related to the receiver.

Lack of understanding of the platform and piss poor ability to communicate.

 

[patrol120]

There is no "standard" for anything large frame

Thank you for actually answering the question.

For the others...yes, the main issue I have it that its ugly and I don't like it....and that's enough. A secondary issue is the increased height over bore that the taller receiver introduces. If I were to use a standard Aero type one piece mount with the standard AR height, it would be ridiculously tall.

The rings I have now work fine, as would the NF Unimount recommended earlier....but I would prefer a lighter weight, simpler mount, and no I don't intend to bridge anything. I am not using a large objective scope, I don't need the clearance the high profile receiver offers.

 

[Powder_Burns]

 

[patrol120]

Thank you very much. That's was exactly what I had been looking for, but had been unable to locate for some reason. With those dimensions, I can extrapolate the appropriate receiver that would match the rail. Much appreciated.

 

[kvpm]

Thank you very much. That's was exactly what I had been looking for, but had been unable to locate for some reason. With those dimensions, I can extrapolate the appropriate receiver that would match the rail. Much appreciated.

Just a heads up. If you use an Aero one piece mount, you have to set your cross hairs a little counter clockwise prior to tightening the rings. As you tighten the rings, the scope will rotate clockwise. One of the shittiest designs in my opinion. I recommend avoiding any vertically split scope mount with exception to american defense.

 

[patrol120]

Just a heads up. If you use an Aero one piece mount, you have to set your cross hairs a little counter clockwise prior to tightening the rings. As you tighten the rings, the scope will rotate clockwise. One of the shittiest designs in my opinion. I recommend avoiding any vertically split scope mount with exception to american defense.

Yeah, I have had a couple of them in the past, and have had the same issue. I was not, and am not, dedicated to that certain mount, just used it as an example. I do like how light and minimalist they are, but with that comes certain issues.

 

[Im2bent]

As mentioned there 2 profiles for large frame dpms .Low and high. No need to extrapolate anything. Just make sure the upper you choose says it is low profile. You think that's ugly on my low profile setup with a full length top rail I used a 20 moa one piece and a strike eagle. Why yes I ground 3 sections of picatinny down to the base and painted it black for clearance.

 

[patrol120]

As mentioned there 2 profiles for large frame dpms .Low and high. No need to extrapolate anything. Just make sure the upper you choose says it is low profile. You think that's ugly on my low profile setup with a full length top rail I used a 20 moa one piece and a strike eagle. Why yes I ground 3 sections of picatinny down to the base and painted it black for clearance.

That's the rub...there are actually 3 profiles, Low, High, and Extra-High/Target whatever, which is what I have. My issue is/was determining the dimensions of the Low and High, and what the mystery rail I have matches.

 

[Im2bent]

Holy fuck me I learned something new today. Yes there was a target profile and from what little i found online the only rail that matches it is the quad rail they originally came with.

 

[patrol120]

Holy fuck me I learned something new today. Yes there was a target profile and from what little i found online the only rail that matches it is the quad rail they originally came with.

Yep, that's what I have now, and am getting rid of....I just have to do some measuring and see what my profile my rail matches.

 

[LRRPF52]

That's the rub...there are actually 3 profiles, Low, High, and Extra-High/Target whatever, which is what I have. My issue is/was determining the dimensions of the Low and High, and what the mystery rail I have matches.

I came to post this. Within the LR-308 and AP4 1st Generation large frame DPMS rifles, there are 3 rail heights.

This does not include the Gen II small frame.

You have:

LR-308 “Lo-Pro” which came out in 2003, had no forward assist or ejection port door
LR-308 AP4 “High” .210” (which is lower than the "Lo-Pro")
LR-308 AP4 Low ~.151"

The small frame GII has standard M4 receiver height.

"Freedom Group” shut down the DPMS brand, along with Bushmaster and Remington, so DPMS parts are now a finite quantity.

 

[msgriff]

I always heard the 0.535" height rifle as being called the "DPMS/Panther Sportical" (sport+tactical). 2012 DPMS/Panther catalog PDF. There are other quasi DPMS receiver heights out there, most notably being the PSA PA-10, which is slightly higher than DPMS low. CMMG does not specify which profile (high/low) OPs rail is on their website. It may be in between, and as the OPs concern is cosmetic, that may be an issue if he's building around the rail. I would contact CMMG for clarification.
One issue with the Sportical is if you intend on using BUIS. There are solutions to that (ex. HK416 rear, standard front). A tubular handguard might
solve a cosmetic concern. I modified one for a short range .358 Winchester for use with reflex or prism optic with a built-in rear flip-up sight.

 

[Mike_in_FL]

I believe Aero Precision M5 uppers are considered DPMS high, .210 tang but not sure it will attach to DPMS lower. I bought one of the kits as well but without the rail as what they originally had were carbine (10" IIRC) length. I have the same issue sort of. I have a DPMS low MLOK 15" rail and I don't even remember where it came from.

 

[patrol120]

Now that I know the height of the various receivers, and the height of my existing receiver, I can measure the rail based on that and give me a clear idea on which way to go.

If the worst case scenario is I leave it the way it is, it's not a real big deal. For a hundred bucks however, I would gladly exchange it for a standard height receiver.

 

[x2cross]

Get the round JP freefloat. No rail heights to line up. Problem solved!