Home AR-15 AR-15 vs M-16 Cut Lower Receiver (Aero/Geissele)

AR-15 vs M-16 Cut Lower Receiver (Aero/Geissele)

269
13
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, social media, internet forums. etc.

13 COMMENTS

  1. Full auto will one day be legal again… in a post-Bruen era, it only a matter of time before the “house of cards” comes down.

    Already owning an m16 receiver at that point is simply a step ahead of everyone else.

  2. bcm is way nicer then aero in my opinion and they have the nice flared magwell. the geissele is just like colt, its mil spec and built to be used as a tool, not a safe queen thats blued steel with walnut stocks.everyone gets pissed and trashes on colt and other mil spec manufacturers. well u want milspec thats it. its made to run its ass off and not break, not look pretty.if ur looking for aesthetics, get a billet lower because they will of payed a lot more attention to details cause they are gonna cost a lot more.

  3. Great video. I think they might’ve improved those imperfections on the Geissele that you name off. The one I’m looking at right now doesn’t have the rib by the buffer tube goes. This one also has a slight notch where the trigger guard hole is, but not as defined as the Aero.

  4. I remember when LRB was the cheap solution. Very rough. I can't remember if they were high or low shelf. But you could get them cheap. I don't think they make them anymore.
    The Anderson's are the ones surprising me of late. When they first came out they were not exactly steller. Then the new ones seem to be really descent.

  5. I have no idea why companies do these low shelf cuts. Are they doing it to appease the ATF? Doesn't make sense when swift links are easy to make and work fine in low shelf cut lowers. Someone determined to fire full auto isn't going to be stopped by a low shelf cut.

Leave a Reply