Problem anodizing blem 80% AR-15 Lower Receiver

[vlady]

I'm dropping mine off to the anodizer tomorrow so we'll have another lower to compare in about 5-7 days

[nil]

I'm dropping mine off to the anodizer tomorrow so we'll have another lower to compare in about 5-7 days

Very good. At least this'll give another data point.

Is yours from the Cerro forge? Does it have the keyhole mark on the right side of the lower?

[Lostsheep]

I don't know who to believe. I have no way of knowing if the certifications are for the same batch as the lower I received.

So far all I've done is ask questions and post the responses. All I have right now is a "he said he said."

As soon as I get my lower back from the anodizer in San Diego I can see about having it tested. Without testing the lower and without anyone else's experiences with trying to anodize a TM lower from the same blem sale I'm not sure what else I can do.

2024 forged lowers do not exist.

You have a forged lower.

Therefore your lower is not 2024.

I understand your frustration and it really sucks but TM's reputation is outstanding. You seem to be questioning them publicly and potentially damaging their reputation without the same fervor directed at the most likely culprit, the anodizer (who you have not even outed).

Your lower is not 2024. Your problem is solvable, I gave you 2 solutions. Stop Flaming TM.

Sorry if that is a little harsh but succinctness appears to be called for here.

[vlady]

Very good. At least this'll give another data point.

Is yours from the Cerro forge? Does it have the keyhole mark on the right side of the lower?

No. It's the exact same forging that you received from their other provider.

[JackRydden224]

Jaysus nil you got some bad luck. You should have bought an AK pistol and called it a day

Reading this makes me want to just get a 100% billet lower instead of an 80%. It seems to be so much easier on the wallet and time.

[JackRydden224]

Jaysus nil you got some bad luck. You should have bought an AK pistol and called it a day

Reading this makes me want to just get a 100% billet lower instead of an 80%. It seems to be so much easier on the wallet and time.

[m16]

I'm picking one up Thursday, it's a blem but it does have a keyhole code.

I'm having it done in Type III hard coat, I'll post a pic of the results.

[Nathan Krynn]

I really would appreciate it if you ever have problem to call or email me before posting stuff to the internet. We do use mostly Cerro but when they can't keep up we get some from Brass Aluminum which are actually more expensive but since they don't have a key hole people complain, so we don't use them as much. I truly care how the company is perceived and performs.


1) There is no such thing as 2024 forgings.
2) 2024 is gummy so you would know it, also at our production level we wouldn't use it.
3) Metallurgy certs are expensive as someone mentioned. However we get them on ALL raw materials. I provided them to this individual today when he first contacted me.


BRASS ALUM CERT.PDF

[Dhena81]

2024 forged lowers do not exist.

You have a forged lower.

Therefore your lower is not 2024.

I understand your frustration and it really sucks but TM's reputation is outstanding. You seem to be questioning them publicly and potentially damaging their reputation without the same fervor directed at the most likely culprit, the anodizer (who you have not even outed).

Your lower is not 2024. Your problem is solvable, I gave you 2 solutions. Stop Flaming TM.

Sorry if that is a little harsh but succinctness appears to be called for here.

Further more its not the best etiquette to start a thread without first speaking to the manufacture/company especially if they are a well established and trusted company.

[nil]

Further more its not the best etiquette to start a thread without first speaking to the manufacture/company especially if they are a well established and trusted company.

I started the thread to get more information from Calgunners who also purchased the same blems.

As of right now I have no way to prove either claim. All I can do is present what little information I have.

[Nathan Krynn]

As of right now I have no way to prove either claim. All I can do is present what little information I have.

I gave you the metallurgy certificate today when I first heard of your issue, I don't know what other proof I can provide. I even posted all the information here so everyone can see it.

[hardlyworking]

IMO - take it for what its worth:

You've already sunk time, money and "love" etching to personalize this lower. You have been assured by the manufacturer that it is 7075.

If they anodizing is FUBAR and it sounds like it is... paint that mofo, build and shoot it

[Whiterabbit]

Here are responses from Nathan at TM.

In response to the anodizer's letter:
I responded with a picture of the lower I received:
Nathan's response:
My response:
Nathan's response:
To which I responded:
And finally, Nathan's response:
I have no idea how to proceed. I think my next step is to have the lower tested to see which aluminum alloy it is. Right now all I have are vendors pointing fingers at one another. So far nobody else who's received a non-Cerro forge marked lower from TM has had it anodized (that I know of).

You are pressing the wrong vendor here, Nathan has done his due diligence and the anodizer has given you inaccurate info and it sounds like you are angry with TM and spreading bad info about them. What more than a material certification do you want? As Nathan pointed out, 2024 forgings do not exist. Your anodizer is full of it.

I for one, have MORE confidence in TM after his responses to you.

You have 2 choices to fix this:
1. Cerakote it and call it a day
2. Oversize all of the FCG holes enough to install metal bushings after reanodizing. This will require a skilled machinist. See this link here to see what I am talking about.

ETA: I'll save you the trouble of following the link:

Hi nil,

You've gotten some great advice from more than one calgunner, but I also see you are reluctant to follow that great advice. I will throw my voice in too. You are pressing the wrong vendor.

Were I in your shoes, coat and move on. These things are made out of plastic these days. products like alumahyde fill voids very well. others still recommend cerakote. Whatever your budget allows or demands. The outside should polish up pretty easy with some wet sandpaper and oil. Or you can have it re-blasted. I don't think you have a dead project here.

On a more personal note, IMO Nathan here should not even be required to support you at all. Isn't that the point of a "blem" unit? to give a price discount with no guarantee of service? IMO you should be on your own (and IMO you'd be fine to proceed as such! You seem more than competent to do so). Nathan here has gone above and beyond to support a $50 part, and should be commended for his efforts. The coaters told you to jump in a lake, insulted your product, then gave you a refund so you wouldn't complain too much about them.

IMO, I really do not see a showstopper here. You aren't putting this on a 50 BMG are you? Not putting it on a 458 socom pistol? Just a 223 or 300 blk pistol? Why not just reblast, recoat, and move on?


I don't see any reason we shouldn't all get along here. You seem like a nice guy, so does Nathan. If you wanted to start over, I'd offer to lend a tool to help with the machining, but you are a wee far from me. Again, I don't think it's needed anyways.
------


I'm sure there are corrosion protective coatings too if you are truly worried about "brass aluminum" compared to "zinc aluminum" (alumahyde may well be one such coating. Same with duracoat or cerakote)

[spdrcr]

I started the thread to get more information from Calgunners who also purchased the same blems.

As of right now I have no way to prove either claim. All I can do is present what little information I have.

You listed the name of the vendor for the 80% forging right off the bat and made explicit statements that the forgings are not 7075. Yet you still have not listed the name of the shop you took it to for anodize. It certainly comes off that you have a bias and are only focusing on one aspect of the situation.

Why don't you have the lower tested and provide the name of the shop that attempted to anodize it?

[daphonz]

I wonder if that anodizing shop sent the same type of e-mail to all the other owners of the lowers in that batch. Everyone has 2024 lowers!