Home > Firearms Forums > General Firearms Forum > Saw three things at the gun show today: 80% lowers

Saw three things at the gun show today: 80% lowers

  1. I have seen them on YouTube and Instagram, but never in person until today. There were three different lowers. One for an AR-15, AR-10 and Glock.

    http://www.polymer80.com/pistol-frames/

    "This product is compatible with Gen 3, 3-pin: 9mm Glock 17, 34, 17L. .40S&W Glock 22, 35, 24. 357SIG use .40S&W Slide Glock 31, 35, 24."

    The handgun looked pretty straightforward since the template over it showed what size holes to drill and an area to mill out with a dremel. One gentleman told me a limitation of the handgun is that it doesn't lock back on the last round.

    Any experience with these handguns? It would be a fun project but I'd guess the cost would be close to that of a Blue Label Glock, or more if one used Zev or other third party internals/components.

    The AR receivers looked like a lot more work to do as they require a drill press. They sold the drill parts, the jig and lower.

    How exactly easy or hard is this to do?

    Lastly, They said the firearms couldn't be sold. How exactly would that be tracked or enforced? How exactly would a gun like this be processed if it were involved in a self defense scenario?

    It would take some degree of effort and maybe skill, but I don't know.

    Any firsthand experience with these? It's very intriguing, at least.
     
  2. I've done a couple 80% AR receivers under the guidance of a friend who has done a bunch of them. Some kits use a drill press, the one we used was with a router which has a little more power and torque. My first one was a little choppy i.e, tool marks etc. Second one was better. Both work fine. Like most things you have to go slow and be patient. The more you do the better you get. I would have been hesitant to do one on my own without some guidance.

    My friend also did one of the polymer 80 glock frames. It was pretty easy and works fine. I was going to do one but it is more expensive to build one i.e, buy separate parts than it is to buy one, even a used Glock.

    In regards to selling them. It is legal to sell a homemade firearm/receiver, you just can't make them with the intent to sell them. That would require a manufacturer's license. The ATF doesn't want people going into the business of making guns without a license. I would guess that if you start cranking them out and advertising them you would might get caught.

    Another myth is that you have to mark or put a serial number on a homemade receiver if you sell it. Not true. Serial number were not required by manufactuers until the gun control act of 1968. There of millions of non serialized firearms floating around. The law requiring marking/serial numbers only applied to licensed manufactures.

    In regards to a self defense use of a non serialized receiver. As mentioned, serial numbers were not required prior to 1968. Self defense use of a non serialized firearm is no different than any other firearm. One of my homemade AR receivers is registered in my state as a pistol. It does not have a serial number or marked in any way. NSN (no serial number) was put on the form to register it.

    Rifles in most places don't require registration. Self defense use of a non serialized AR is no difference than the same use of any other rifle.
     
  3. Other than a project to keep busy, I don't understand them. They don't save me money. They don't get me around any stupid laws(SBR or full Auto). They don't gain me any kind of anonymity. If you are worried about "The Man" tracking you, get a used gun for cash from an individual and probably spend less than these kits.
     
  4. I'd be careful with statements like that. The problem is, with as clear as the wording of the law may be, there is no precedent in court, there is no case law supporting either position.

    I would not sell any 80% finished firearms.
     
  5. I can see buying the Glock one to put in a MechTech CCU or 22 lr upper, if you can get frame and parts kit for a decent price. Would be semi custom I suppose and no FFL for any of it.
     
  6. The pistol seems like a lot of work for the time and expense of parts. I was thinking about doing an 80% lower just to say I did one. We'll see, I have a lot of other projects going on right now.
     
  7. Really? The law says it's legal but you say I shouldn't because there is no case law on the books? The reason there is no case law is because the law says it's legal.
     
  8. Boogy man?

    https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...lty-to-making-selling-ar-15-rifle-components/

    This guy also thought he was on the safe side. In the end it was the owner of the blank who pushed the button and he only rented his CNC, right?
     
  9. Might be a viable option in a state where you are required to get a government back ground check for all sales including private party, e.g. Colorado.

    If AR's were ever banned and you’re required to turn in your AR, the only thing I would give them is the stripped receiver.

    An 80% receiver and a rifle kit would not be illegal in most of the ban states so I imagine that could also be the attraction. 80% receivers are likely residing in a more than a few homes in the ban states.
     
  10. And it wouldn't be banned if you completed it to 100%? That would be one stupid AR ban.
     
  11. The guy at the gun show talked about how easy it is to do the Glock with just a Dremel and a drill (4 areas) but watching the video, there's more to it than just that.

    I'm very skeptical when someone describes it that easy. He obviously never did it before.

    I don't even own a drill press so I can see a huge primary investment for lower yield. If I had access to everything needed that would be different.

    Thanks, everyone. It was an interesting concept.