Are polymer rifles a good idea yet?

Are polymer rifles a good idea yet?

Why has it taken them so long to make good polymer ARs when Gaston Glock made his pistol decades ago?

Attached: 753263-R1-044-20A_004-1.jpg (799x540, 68K)

yer dum

Are you retarded

That actually doesn't look too bad

>Why has it taken them so long to make good polymer ARs when Gaston Glock made his pistol decades ago?
Different things are different. Who knew?

because firing a 5.56 has a lot more force involved as opposed to a 9mm?
Also buffer tube ring

Because U.S law is retarded. As such, manufactures have little incentive to make a polymer rifle receiver. Majority of customers are paying a transfer fee. Some are paying tax. $15-50 in fees just to transfer and own. How cheap of a receiver will user be interested in when paying $50 to take it home? Psychologically that makes someone want to spend more to make the transfer fee seem worth it

So there is little incentive to create your own receiver, if you're going to have to design, and tool up, while you charge the same as, or less than an aluminum or steel receiver

Since polymer is generally less durable (or perceived as) and a steel or aluminum receiver is standard, few people want to pay more for something that others may consider inferior

There are some polymer receivers that are not well received, and some have durability issues (keltec). The first sub2000 was aluminum, which is fitting

Been a good idea since 1977.

Attached: 1435479807704.jpg (1600x1067, 239K)

Vegas bro?

I have a basic bitch polymer lower that I bought back before I knew any better, and amazingly it has so far seen several thousand rounds without failure. For the most part, if you aren't trying to do pushups on your AR like AKOU, it won't matter.

Now, polymer upper receivers are a bit of a different matter and I've never actually seen one in person before so I can't vouch for their reliability. But in theory, since the receiver itself does not actually contain the force of the shot, it should be fine.