Arsenal receivers

[blackbird]

Has anyone gotten one of these receivers?

I have a few Arsenal products and like them very much but the increase in metal thickness to a U.S. standard 1/16" (1.6 mm) and lack of X/Y stampings on the hammer/trigger pin holes (from all the pictures I've seem) make me a bit nervous. My SSR-85B doesn't have 1.6mm steel (wouldn't that also affect how tightly they can radius the corners???). I see they warn that the trunions must thinned down to use their receiver so it's obviously not "original thickness". Why would they do this??? Are they unsure of their heat treatment? If non-metric steel sheet cheaper for them to get? I dunno!

I also don't understand how they can stamp the magwell dimples in the flat blank and machine to either 7.62 OR 5.45 after bending since the dimples are a different depth on those two calibers.

I just don't get the "warm fuzzies" from those inconsistencies or, frankly, the pictures.

I am very happy with the OOW receivers so far but would like to get "the best" if indeed the Arsenal ones are better.

Anyone?

[Packrat]

The "X" on the hammer/trigger holes were necessary with the 1mm stock, but the 1.6mm stock doesn't need them. The Norincos, which were stamped from 1.5mm stock, doesn't have them, just like receiver covers from thicker stock doesn't have the ridges stamped into it. They were, for whatever reason, making a stronger receiver, but it ends up causing a lot of problems.

Get the Hesse (now Vulcan) receivers. They seem to have the least number of faults. OOW receivers have more holes wrong than Hesse, I understand.

You can't expect American manufacturers to be able to match the gun-making skills of the Romanians, can you?

[Madtechcool]

:) About the comment comparing AMERICAN to Romainian manufacturers. I would think that the AMERICAN manufacturer should have enough pride to try and do better than anyone other than the Russkies. What do ya'll think? :ak47: :D The Madtechcool :cool_smal

[blackbird]

Hmmmm. I thought the X/Y stamp was to create a wavy edge that acted as a bearing to spread the load over a larger area of the pins to prevent scoring (as would occur with a single narrow surface). BTW, the only hole that was out of place on an OOW receiver (with SOME kits) was the selector lever on the '47 receiver. Even that was cosmetic, not functional. I appreciate the feedback on Vulcan... I must admit to having developed an allergy to all things Hesse a long time ago... won't do the "twice shy" thing.

Thanks for the feedback guys. Got an AMD-63, a 65 and a Bulgie '74 for after September 13th, all in need of receivers. I guess I'll stick with OOW for now.