Why doesn’t PSA sell lowers with a full cut(M16 pocket)? I’m not talking about with the auto sear holes drilled, I’m referring only to the pocket. Its not illegal and it saves weight. It makes no sense imo why “low shelf” even exists.
1 Like
@GamecockOperator might can give more info on this as he has studied it and is almost the defacto expert when it comes to PSA lowers. At one point, PSA sold lowers made by FN that IIRC had it. Purely a guess on my part, but if their sister companies are making lowers for others, or have in the past (Like LW Schneider or even Aero Precision) then it is easier to just have the tooling for one kind of lower. Retooling means production downtime.
1 Like
It’s sad that this is even a discussion. I’m willing to bet money that if they retooled for a full cut on all of their lower, that would increase their sales and they’d make their money back quickly. The demand for guns isn’t going down anytime soon imo.
1 Like
Maybe, but the reality is the vast majority of AR shooters have no need for a full cut. Even not all binary triggers and forced reset triggers need it. Time is money, and doing a full cut over a low shelf (or even a high shelf like some do) takes more time. Even if it takes just an extra second, that could slow production significantly.
For example, if PSA makes 10,000 lowers per week, that is roughly 1 lower per minute for a week. If it takes 1 extra second per lower…that is 10,000 extra seconds, or 166 minutes, or 2.77 hours. That only equals 9,834 lowers being made, at a loss of $16,600 in sales of lowers (current price of $100/lower). The loss would actually be more when you account for the cost of the machines, electricity, etc.
Over the course of a month (30 days), the loss would be $66,400 (4 weeks). For the year, $796,800. That extra money they make is what pays employees, bills, materials, insurance, and the fight for the 2A that PSA supports. Additionally, it would keep all those unmade lowers out of the hands of 2A supporters and shooters.
3 Likes
I get your point, but with that logic we might as well get rid of full auto BCG’s too. I guess I’ll have to go buy real lowers from companies that do full cuts.
1 Like
Full auto BCG’s are more about weight and function, so no, the logic isn’t the same at all. Enjoy your search.
1 Like
Full auto BCGs have less material cut out than semi auto BCGs. It would affect production and revenue the same as @GuitarGuy mentioned to cut out that extra material.
2 Likes
I think its also important to say that PSA is not about profits, but instead about spreading freedom. Profits are secondary to the goal of spreading freedom, and in this case, making sure the populace is equipped with the very things that guards our freedoms.
2 Likes
For anybody that wants a full cut lower minus the excuses.
https://strategicprecisiondefense.com/lower-receivers-1
Centurion arms and SOLGW also sell full cut lowers.
I find it amusing that you say “without the excuses” and then post a BLEM lower that costs $20 more.
2 Likes
Who gives af about a blem when you actually plan on using your gear? Also from what you’re saying it SHOULD cost more seeing as how they’re taking out more material as opposed to a low shelf cut. With all that being said I don’t mind paying more for a full cut.
1 Like
We are selling to the average consumer who would have no reason for the M16 pocket. If you are interested in having that cut, there are retailers like you mentioned who I would recommend purchasing through.
3 Likes
How many other manufacturers with PSA’s level of output cut their lowers with the m16 pocket, or is it considered more of a niche product?
Are there jigs available where owners can route it themselves after the fact?
I’m sure there are alternative options for end users to get what they are looking for without placing all of the liability for regulatory scrutiny solely on the manufacturers and businesses.
I’m not sure what PSA’s output level is in comparison to other companies.
I’ve seen jigs that allow you to mill out the shelf to a full cut, but they have it behind a government permission slip wall. I’m also not sure what you mean about liability seeing as how full cuts aren’t illegal. Imo its not really a niche product, but how all lowers should be.
You can cut the low shelf with any 80% receiver jig, there’s no permission slip needed to cut out the lower. It is also a niche product because the only people who can actually utilize the pocket and drill a third hole are 07 FFLs/SOTs. The fact it is low shelf doesn’t make it more valuable, its more expensive because it takes longer to manufacture. There is very little demand for low shelf lowers. You are entitled to your opinion, but it is based on a market that does not exist.
If I wanted to mill out a lower, i’d just buy a 80% and wouldn’t be having this conversation. I do however mill 80 lowers, but that’s not the point. You sound like the same people that said “Bump stocks suck and are a niche product, so who cares if they ban it”. It won’t be long until they add “Full cuts” to the nfa list with folks like y’all. Inch by inch as they chip away at the 2A.
1 Like
We’re having a discussion, no need for personal attacks. Banning bump stocks set a horrible precedent on what the Justice Department can get away with. I was never arguing that it was about the legality of the low shelf, we’re talking about practicality. From a business standpoint it is more expensive and all triggers that aren’t select fire (or certain binary triggers) work with a high shelf. There is no practical need for every lower to be low shelf because there is currently enough low shelf lowers available to meet current demand. Why spend the money on a change most gun owners won’t care for or even notice and have to charge more to cover additional costs? If someone wants a receiver with a low shelf they can build, modify, or buy a lower with a low shelf.
1 Like
Don’t take it personal. I’m referring to rhetoric.
It’s sad that this is even a discussion. I’m willing to bet money that if they retooled for a full cut on all of their lower, that would increase their sales and they’d make their money back quickly. The demand for guns isn’t going down anytime soon imo.
You were wrong, you can’t increase sales while slowing production. Its a bad business model.
I get your point, but with that logic we might as well get rid of full auto BCG’s too. I guess I’ll have to go buy real lowers from companies that do full cuts.
Also wrong, any other profile takes longer to mill.
For anybody that wants a full cut lower minus the excuses.
Go buy from them because they provide a product for the limited number of gun owners who prefer to pay more for a non functional difference.
I’m not sure what PSA’s output level is in comparison to other companies.
I’ve seen jigs that allow you to mill out the shelf to a full cut, but they have it behind a government permission slip wall. I’m also not sure what you mean about liability seeing as how full cuts aren’t illegal. Imo its not really a niche product, but how all lowers should be.
You not being sure means you’re making assumptions that justify your logic. They can 100% have liability if it can be proven to a jury their intent behind changing their lower design was to better fit full auto triggers.
If I wanted to mill out a lower, i’d just buy a 80% and wouldn’t be having this conversation. I do however mill 80 lowers, but that’s not the point. You sound like the same people that said “Bump stocks suck and are a niche product, so who cares if they ban it”. It won’t be long until they add “Full cuts” to the nfa list with folks like y’all. Inch by inch as they chip away at the 2A.
I brought up there’s little demand and we don’t need to mass produce them because the market for them is balanced, you went on a rant about how I and other posters have what the industry calls a “fudd mentality.” When you use phrases like “You sound” and “like y’all” it is clearly meant to be personal. Just because something can/should be one way doesn’t mean a company needs to change their whole production/sales model.
You have no place in a forum if your understanding of gun laws or basic economics doesn’t go past “but muh rights”
2 Likes
You’re absolutely right. Most people don’t need an M16 pocket so it won’t matter when they’re added to the nfa. I also don’t need an ar 15 so let me just go get a shotgun like Uncle Joe said. 
I love you fisters.
2 Likes