Just saw this on Primary Arms. Anyone have any experience with one?
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Integrated folding AR15 receiver
- Thread starter Familydude
- Start date
I don't have one, surprised I have never heard of it. I do have ~10 Law Tacticals which is the industry benchmark in my simple opinion.
The bolt catch hex screw axle is handy, I drill and tap all mine 6-32 and use stainless steel axles.
A few simple thoughts:
A potential problem is the "proprietary" buffer weight, it's shaped like the composite of a Law Tactical bolt adapter + buffer weight, which means you may have no adjustablility with buffer weights to tune your system if that's important.
Price wise, the lower + folder mechanism is less than a Law Tactical adapter itself.
It doesn't mention whether the folding mechanical axle has adjustable tensioning, like a Law Tactical.
The trigger guard is integral to the receiver, i.e. aperture is fixed, so fat / gloved fingers may be an issue for some.
Looks as though the trigger LOP increase would be about the same as a Law, which is a moot point if you have an adjustable stock.
The bolt catch hex screw axle is handy, I drill and tap all mine 6-32 and use stainless steel axles.
A few simple thoughts:
A potential problem is the "proprietary" buffer weight, it's shaped like the composite of a Law Tactical bolt adapter + buffer weight, which means you may have no adjustablility with buffer weights to tune your system if that's important.
Price wise, the lower + folder mechanism is less than a Law Tactical adapter itself.
It doesn't mention whether the folding mechanical axle has adjustable tensioning, like a Law Tactical.
The trigger guard is integral to the receiver, i.e. aperture is fixed, so fat / gloved fingers may be an issue for some.
Looks as though the trigger LOP increase would be about the same as a Law, which is a moot point if you have an adjustable stock.
I held one last week I think in my buddies gun shop. The whole gun. It's a true "backpack gun" , in an ar-15 platform. Pretty cool. I think the whole gun was like $2400. I'm not sure it was a primary arms though. It was pretty cool.
Did you see the thread about the Rogers stock? I tried to remember who had the photos of them, and couldn't, until you mentioned all those LAW folders. Sorry if I'm mistaken, the hardware was nice for sure. But the OP in that post had Q's about the Rogers
Sorry for the hijack
I use a bunch of Rogers stocks and would be interested to read that if you have a link?
Is there a cheek riser that fits Rogers Super-Stock ?????
Howdy folks. Recently bought an AR-10 equipped with the Rogers Super-Stoc. My plans are to scope it and am wanting to add a cheek riser. Have you used anything or seen anything that you'd recommend ??? Didn't know if there was anything on the market that would work well. It may be...
www.snipershide.com
Is there a cheek riser that fits Rogers Super-Stock ?????
Howdy folks. Recently bought an AR-10 equipped with the Rogers Super-Stoc. My plans are to scope it and am wanting to add a cheek riser. Have you used anything or seen anything that you'd recommend ??? Didn't know if there was anything on the market that would work well. It may be...
Oh. That one. The guy who didn’t understand charging handle interference with a cheek riser.
I just finished cobbling together these two RRA 9 mm / 5.56 pistols using the Law folders, pretty small packages.
Shield Arms also uses the same lower branded in there name. I have owned it for about a year now and shot close to 5000 rounds with the lower. It has been phenomenal. The integrated folder is super positive and rigid. I would highly recommend it. Quality is as good as the Law Folder but lighter weight. The only downside is the proprietary buffer. It’s about 3.02 oz and if you want the weight of a H2 or H3 you will need to fill with tungsten shot to gain the weight. I have yet to find anyone that sells the buffers by it self
The inner diameter (smaller) of the buffer is not standard is why you would need to use tungsten shot but it is one of my favorite lowers regardless of the folder
Attachments
Heads up 3 for 1 (kinda).
17 DESIGN IFLR AND 17 DESIGN 2X BILLET LOWER RECEIVER SET : 17 DESIGN AND MANUFACTURING IFLR LOWER RECEIVER & BILLET LOWER RECEIVER SET | Brownells
17 DESIGN IFLR AND 17 DESIGN 2X BILLET LOWER RECEIVER SET Introducing the IFLR-15 (Integrated Folding Lower Receiver).The 17 Design & Manufacturing IFLR ...
www.brownells.com
My 2 main rifles rock folding lowers. My shorty has the New Frontier version while my 16" has the 17 design. I believe the 17 design is a licensed copy of the New Frontier, or it may be that both are a licensed copy of the Shield Arms. My 17 design locks up pretty tight while the New Frontier has some wobble, but its possible that's because I got the New Frontier when they first came out and were still working out the tolerances.
Obviously I love them. Unlike a LAW, the weight increase is very small, as is the LOP increase, and they fold up shorter. You will need to trim a couple springs when building the lower, and the rear takedown spring/detent is retained by the pistol grip which is annoying.
However, I read on Arfcom that 17 Designs has gone out of business. Apparently the owner didn't care much about QC, so it is highly likely these last samples are going to have QC issues. If it weren't for that concern I would pick up a couple more just to have. At this time I would probably recommend just getting the New Frontier version.
Edit: To the above concern about buffer weights. The buffer is proprietary, but I got the "A5H1" buffer for mine which allows running an A5 system, works great. Unfortunately they stopped making that part, hopefully New Frontier or another company picks up the slack and starts making more buffer options for these lowers.
Obviously I love them. Unlike a LAW, the weight increase is very small, as is the LOP increase, and they fold up shorter. You will need to trim a couple springs when building the lower, and the rear takedown spring/detent is retained by the pistol grip which is annoying.
However, I read on Arfcom that 17 Designs has gone out of business. Apparently the owner didn't care much about QC, so it is highly likely these last samples are going to have QC issues. If it weren't for that concern I would pick up a couple more just to have. At this time I would probably recommend just getting the New Frontier version.
Edit: To the above concern about buffer weights. The buffer is proprietary, but I got the "A5H1" buffer for mine which allows running an A5 system, works great. Unfortunately they stopped making that part, hopefully New Frontier or another company picks up the slack and starts making more buffer options for these lowers.
I wish I would have known about the out of business thing. Thinking Brownells would make it right but hopefully I won't have the hassle.
Illinois is pushing new legislation (again) so my order is just another "fuck you" to the state.
Illinois is pushing new legislation (again) so my order is just another "fuck you" to the state.
Both were licensed copies of the Shield Arms version, which is still in business and available.
I've heard the same thing about the 17D quality issues, but have a few of them myself with no issues.
While the buffer bodies are proprietary, the weights inside and bumpers, pins, etc are all standard carbine parts. Anyone with a vise and hammer/punch set can change buffer weights in these to whatever a standard carbine buffer will hold.
Also about the buffers - my early 17D buffer bodies are all one piece of anodized aluminum, with that extension on the front, but a more recent Shield Arms version I saw this summer appeared to be a standard carbine buffer with a stainless steel puck attached to the face of it with a single screw. It'd be pretty easy to modify a carbine buffer this way (or pay a machine shop to do it if you can't), even if you couldn't get replacements from Shield.
