Kristophr, the print bed is usually too small for printing everything in place, the AR10 receiver is just about maxing out even the largest print beds.
Warfairy has done some experiments with printing parts separately that are then glued together, there has been some success with that, but the alternative that has worked is over building the buffer tower.
You can see in that AR10 design that some parts are way over sized, not sure what they did with the buffer tower on this one for sure, but for instance you can very easily tell that the front take down pin is a bolt due to the overly thick receiver.
March 25th, 2015 at 3:38 pm
Wow, my favorite fast food. A Mac in a Sack.
March 25th, 2015 at 5:13 pm
The folks making these printed AR lowers should also print the stock as part of the lower. The recoil spring tube hole is a weak point on these.
March 25th, 2015 at 6:50 pm
Kristophr, the print bed is usually too small for printing everything in place, the AR10 receiver is just about maxing out even the largest print beds.
Warfairy has done some experiments with printing parts separately that are then glued together, there has been some success with that, but the alternative that has worked is over building the buffer tower.
You can see in that AR10 design that some parts are way over sized, not sure what they did with the buffer tower on this one for sure, but for instance you can very easily tell that the front take down pin is a bolt due to the overly thick receiver.
March 26th, 2015 at 5:05 pm
OK, I didn’t realize he was dealing with tool limitations. But I still think Cavalry Arms’s solution to the problem was the best one.
March 26th, 2015 at 5:09 pm
I think Mitch Leary was ahead of the curve on this subject.