12-24-2013, 03:41 PM
What I am referring to is DPMS uses those Low Profile/Slick Side Uppers on the 556 and .308. I know it has more mass and that makes them more rigid and not as brittle. I guess the difference is being brittle can break and being more pliable will absorb and hold together if there was a malfunction.
In a lower I think the Billet is more needed due to wear areas from trigger rub inside the lower, KNS anti rotation can help that, take down pins, buffer tube area and the support of the upper receiver. I guess the wakest point n my opinion is the barrel nut area can not be made thicker but the side walls can and the carrier just slides they that area.
As Bwaites said, the long heavy barrel on the barrle nut area would be the weakest part of an upper. Just wanted to hear the opinions on the difference of the brittleness and pliable relation. Has anyone had a failure of the 6061? I've seen failures of the Plastic/polymer lowers and milspec uppers that have exploded due to punched primers with backward explosions. someone here on the forum posted the picture of a milspec upper in two pieces.
In a lower I think the Billet is more needed due to wear areas from trigger rub inside the lower, KNS anti rotation can help that, take down pins, buffer tube area and the support of the upper receiver. I guess the wakest point n my opinion is the barrel nut area can not be made thicker but the side walls can and the carrier just slides they that area.
As Bwaites said, the long heavy barrel on the barrle nut area would be the weakest part of an upper. Just wanted to hear the opinions on the difference of the brittleness and pliable relation. Has anyone had a failure of the 6061? I've seen failures of the Plastic/polymer lowers and milspec uppers that have exploded due to punched primers with backward explosions. someone here on the forum posted the picture of a milspec upper in two pieces.