Another Polymer 80% Lower Manufacturer Stops Taking Orders

Following the raid on EP Armory and Ares Armor, companies selling polymer 80% lower receivers across the country are reacting by halting new sales of their products and scrubbing their websites of all references to them. One such company is They made their own 80% polymer lowers in competition with EP Armory and used a very similar process. Their videos and pictures are MIA from the website, but you can see one of their products in the “unboxing” video above. In the wake of the raid, they’ve completely ceased operations and are now in the process of getting the ATF’s blessing on their manufacturing methods before starting back up. Rumor has it that Ares Armor and Poloymer80 are in talks to start selling their lowers to the public once the letter comes through, replacing EP Armory as Ares Armor’s supplier. Stay tuned.


  1. Who wants that junk anyway?

    1. avatar Bobby N says:

      Precisely. The stuff is junk and the companies are well aware that most purchasers are trying to skirt the NFA rules. Defend the constitution and the second amendment people. Do not defend these fly by night scam artists.

      1. Trying to skirt what NFA rules?

      2. avatar William Burke says:

        How true. We should build a time machine and take out all the WWII partisans with their “fly by night” Stens, too!

      3. avatar Wes says:

        Comments like this suggest we are our own worst enemy. Face-palm happening now.

        1. avatar Ralph says:

          Crazy Rev is crazy. Don’t know who the other guy is but if he thinks that polymer lowers have anything to do with the NFA, he’s a tr0ll.

      4. Note to self: If Burke and Ralph are the litmus test for “sane” around here, “Houston, we have a problem.”

        1. avatar William Burke says:

          How ’bout that $1000 bet, Great White Grub? What are you, chicken? Smack and run artist, are ye?

    2. avatar Pulatso says:

      If it pisses off a gun grabber, I’ll take two, and make sure they’re fresh.

      1. avatar Grumpy F'er says:

        I was planning on getting one just for the fun of it. Too late, I guess.

    3. avatar Have Blue says:

      Maybe because it’s an excellent introduction to hobbyist gunsmithing? While not as stout as an aluminum 80%, they’re more than suitable for a nice .22 build. Additionally, the polymer lowers are cheaper than aluminum 80% lowers, which is nice when you’re working the bugs out of your CNC program for milling out the FCG, or just want to gain some confidence on an old Bridgeport without a DRO.

      Also, have you considered that some people actually gain a sense of accomplishment from DIY work? How many firearms do you have that you can point to and say with pride “I built that”?

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        You didn’t build that! Someone in the GOVERNMENT helped you!

    4. Ralph again demonstrates the reason they put him in the lower reading group in first grade…my point is simply who would want a polymer lower anything on an AR15 to begin with.

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        AH! The sleeper troll finally emerges!

  2. avatar Hannibal says:

    “…and scrubbing their websites of all references to them. One such company is…”

    Gonna be tough to scrub THAT website.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      Funny thing is, if the ATF does not approve their lowers because it is a “firearm”, they could still be prosecuted no matter how squeaky clean their web site is NOW for all the lowers they sold in the past.

  3. avatar nnjj says:

    Yeah, maybe get the determination letters BEFORE you start selling this stuff, guys..

    There’s a lesson in there somewhere.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      No, there isn’t. ATF changes its mind as often as you change your underwear. Twice a year.

  4. avatar neiowa says:

    Wow 2 trolls in the 1st 10 posts. Shannon must be watching.

  5. avatar Jon in NC says:

    Who cares?

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      Yeah, freedom and the Constitution. Who cares?

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        Tr0lls don’t care.

  6. avatar Cliff H says:

    Legal question for anyone familiar with the technicalities of the Connecticut civilian disarmament law –

    The BATFE says that the serialized lower receiver IS the firearm. If that is the case, can people in CT with ARs strip all the parts out of the lower and turn in ONLY that piece and a handful of mags and be within the requirements of CT law?

    If that is the case they could even sell the stripped lowers out of state, use that money for a non-polymer 80% lower without a serial number, build a new lower and add a 10-round magazine. In theory their new rifle should be both legal and unregistered as well as not requiring registration, since it is not a serialable firearm according to BATFE.

    Or is that solution not workable?

    1. From what I understand it is even easier than that. The CT AWB is just a change from a two-feature test to a one-feature test. The most common features are: collapsible stock, pistol grip and threaded barrel/flash suppressor. If your rifle isn’t specifically singled out (see ) and doesn’t have a threaded barrel or flash suppressor you can just change out the pistol grip and stock for one of the ‘funky stocks’ and you should be good to go. If your barrel is threaded and/or has a flash suppressor you can take it to a gun smith and have that part cut off (so long as total length wouldn’t go under 30 inches), or get a different barrel for it (the old one should be stored out of state or taken out on the boat). You can also alternately get something like the hammerhead pistol grip ( ) and have a normal stock, but if is a collapsible one it needs to be epoxied or otherwise changed to a non-collapsible one.

      Alternately convert yours to a ‘fixed magazine’ rifle:

      What you propose has two problems: 1) an unfinished AR-15 lower receiver ‘blank’ is only ‘not a firearm’ so long as it is unfinished. Once it is finished it is a firearm. It only has to be serialized, however, if it is to be sold to another person, which would also require you to have a manufacturing license. 2) The CT law considers the rifle an ‘assault weapon’ if it is ‘readily assembled’ into a rifle. So as long as all the parts are there it is just a disassembled banned rifle.

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        When the ATF, a civilian agency, gets rid of their “illegal” features, we can talk about getting rid of ours.

        1. Ignoring the law is, of course, another option. My answer was only in reference to the question asked.

  7. It’s actually a cool and useful piece of information. I’m glad that you simply shared this helpful information with us.
    Please stay us informed like this. Thank you for sharing.

  8. avatar AJ Rond says:

    Illegal laws are not laws. But we still need to scrap the infringements because the so called “laws” are being used to punish law abiding citizens.

    James Madison stated that citizens are to be MORE armed than the government by a ratio of 25 to 1.

    We need to be educating people about our freedoms and how abusive government has gotten.

    Shooting sports are safer than school sports. Chemicals in a home are more hazardous than guns. Teach people these facts as well.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email