good, meh idea? got a Aero .223 Wylde Fluted stainless

[wild cat mccane]

Hey there,

Had a wild hair to replace a pencil PSA Freedom classic barrel only because I started having the perception of "meh" with it. Within a day of thinking of getting new, I bought a (just a copy and paste to make it easier) "Aero Precision AR15 16in .223 Wylde Fluted Barrel Complete Upper" with a stainless barrel. Obviously 1/8 twist. Atlas One free floating.


Stainless, 223 Wylde, free float, and 1/8. Only thing I kept similar with the PSA was 16" length.

Should have read more, but in what I did read, seems like I'll likely not have made a bad decision?

Any opinions? Would appreciate to hear them as I know not much on rifles.

Thanks

[jetinteriorguy]

I have an Aeroprecision rifle, .223 wylde, Ballistic Advantage 18” heavy barrel, 1/8 twist that with my best load is reliably 1/2-5/8 inch groups at 100yds. It’s also a rifle length gas system so very mild recoil. I’ve noticed the more I shoot it the accuracy has improved and the barrel has gotten easier to clean. I haven’t done anything special for barrel break in but I’m assuming it’s breaking in better as I shoot it.

[rickyrick]

You won’t be disappointed in AeroPrecision anything.
Heck, even their blemished items are better than par.

[kymasabe]

Aero barrels are made by Ballistic Advantage, and I have an AR with an Aero Atlas S-One handguard in it, it's a very nice handguard, no sharp edges, fit and finish are perfect. My 1:8 Wylde barrel is probably the most accurate AR barrel I have so...sounds like you made a good decision. The PSA is probably carbine length and the Aero is probably mid length, so you should enjoy a little lighter recoil as well.
Shoot it. Enjoy it. Then contact me if you want to sell the PSA.

[wild cat mccane]

So my psa charging handle doesnt fit the aero upper. Google turns up a billion results of charging handles not fitting aero uppers. Deciding to ship it back or not. Just not in the mood to sand to fit a spec item.

[kymasabe]

Originally Posted by wild cat mccane

So my psa charging handle doesnt fit the aero upper. Google turns up a billion results of charging handles not fitting aero uppers. Deciding to ship it back or not. Just not in the mood to sand to fit a spec item.

Rise Armament makes a handle that fits Aero uppers perfectly, I've bought a few, and they're not expensive, if I'm remembering correctly, I think I paid around $30 for them.
https://palmettostatearmory.com/rise...ck-ra-212.html

[stagpanther]

So my psa charging handle doesnt fit the aero upper.

Doesn't fit the upper--or doesn't clear the lower behind it?

[44 AMP]

I can understand the desire to not have to modify a part that should fit in order to get it to fit....

but let me see if I understand the situation correctly, you're considering sending back a relatively major part from one maker, because a relatively minor part made by someone else doesn't fit???

Have you considered the possibility that getting another upper receiver in the future might involve all the legal steps needed to purchase a firearm?

The ATF has changed its rules, and they go into effect soon. We can, at this point, only speculate on exactly how this will change the way we buy "parts". But its not impossible that an AR upper will be considered the same as the lower, and require the same paperwork, background checks, going through an FFL dealer and all the other Federal (and no doubt state, eventually) laws and requirements in order to own.

No matter how the legal mess shakes out, I'm still a bit boggled by your willingness to consider replacing a complex and expensive part, because a simple and "cheap" part from a different maker doesn't fit....

I could understand replacing the charging handle for another one (expecting the new one to fit) but replacing the upper to fit a charging handle doesn't make sense, to me.

Am I misunderstanding your situation??

[wild cat mccane]

Kind of missing it.

I said i googled and it is an established problem. It is all mil spec, and that goes both ways. Both should fit. There are a LOT of post with others having this issue. Channet too narrow? Too much spray? I dont know. It did eat up my ch pretty good.

My known working psa ch hung up half way in the slot. Jammed tight.

Can't get more functional part that a ch when it doest fit..cause then the bot carrier cant go in?

Dinging Aero too. They want pics. I sent. But it is a pic of a ch stuck half way where it should go...

[44 AMP]

It is all mil spec, and that goes both ways.

The point of specs, and in particular military specs is that the parts fit together and work.

No matter what is being claimed, the fact that they parts don't fit and work together means that one, or both are "out of spec".

I was a Small Arms Repairman (MOS 45B20) in the 70s. Worked on everything the Army had in its "small arms" inventory, from the M16 to the 4.2" mortar.

In spec GI parts do NOT require fitting, and my personal experience in more than one Small Arms shop is that no fitting is done. If a replacement part does not drop in, fit AND work, it is tossed and another part is used.

I'm not talking about civilian copies of military designs, made to what ever specs the makers use, but GI issue weapons where parts are made to mil-spec standards and inspected by govt inspectors before getting into the supply system.

If two makers both claim their parts are mil-spec and yet they don't fit and work togther, at least ONE of those makers is a) wrong or b) deliberately lying.

Don't see how it can be any other way...

[wild cat mccane]

Right.

And given the huge amount of other people posting about working CH not fitting Aero, my own experience with a working CH that didn't fit, and suggestions for specific CH that may or may not need sanding, I'm inclined to say Aero has a problem with their CH channels.

A bit odd because there is huge praise for Aero online, but when you search this issue, it's a known problem.

Spec, narrow, or huge, this is a really dumb area to get wrong since it doesn't enhance anything by being "tight." It's not a performance area. But I have a working CH that doesn't fit, so I can't put the bolt in, couldn't shoot a bullet if I wanted, can't close the upper to the lower. At this point, it's the most critical component stopping the upper from working.

Lame to hear back from customer service ask for a picture too. So I sent a picture of the now beat up charging handle that can't go where it is suppose to. Though the response was within an hour which I imagine is faster than PSA.

[stagpanther]

Between Aero and PSA--the Aero is going to be higher quality. I've found that Aero receivers often do not align well with PSAs' and versa vicey. Mil-spec these days means nothing unless it's delivered to the military IMO. Once that CH is bent, all bets are off on it working in your firearm.

What I have seen happen on occasion is that every so slight alignment issues between the upper and lower can result in the CH being pitched as it rides back over the lower's tube collar. You should see pronounced tracks worn by the CH if that is the case.

[wild cat mccane]

Oh. Good to know.

Ugh. I cant even get that far though to know if there is that problen bc the ch isnt all the way in and cant close. I sent it back to optics planet. Just a dumb place to have a problem. Might order a new one though.

[kymasabe]

Did everyone miss my recommendation for the Rise Armament RA-212 charging handle?
They're for sale nearly everywhere and fit Aero uppers perfectly. And they're $30-$40.

[44 AMP]

What I see as the point here is not that you can get a charging handle that will work with the Aero upper, but that when both companies are CLAIMING mil-spec and they don't fit or work together, then at least one of those companies is defrauding the consumer.

Mil-spec used to mean something specific. So did tactical. Today they seem to be terms thrown about at random for their market appeal and any relationship to what they once meant seems to be purely co-incidental.

[wild cat mccane]

I sent it back to Optics Planet (is an OP exclusive--16" no forward assist).

Bought another from Optics Planet coming next week.


Aero emailed back, said this is unusual, and they don't see that as a usual problem. They wanted it returned. I don't know about their comment that it is an unusual "never" issue. Saying they haven't heard of it is a bit of a stretch given there are LOTS of googleable threads where people have this issue. They did not want me to send it with my CH. Which makes me think they ruled out my CH being the issue.

I didn't ignore the recommendation on the other CH (thank you for it!), it's just not a "performance" item and they all should technically fit. So I'm not too interested in buying an Aero specific CH. By the way, the Aero made cheap CH has really poor reviews on OP for fit and finish. Not that I'm cheaping out on a CH, I just don't see the point. My $14 PSA CH is to spec and doesn't flex. What else do I want it to do?

I am going to give the new one an honest try, might even get a new CH as recommended above. But if it comes not fitting...that's not great. My current CH fits two other lowers without issue. I didn't know this was a thing until experiencing it on the Aero.

If it doesn't fit the new upper, Aero wanted the 1st upper back...I'm inclined to be on the side that Aero might be a bit hyped.

[rickyrick]

Disappointing that this happened to you. I’ve used many AeroPrecision upper receivers in my guns, as well as other upper components to assemble my guns. (Never used a complete upper)
All that said, I’ve never used a CH from AeroPrecision. I have used PSA charging handles, but not in any AeroPrecision uppers.
Always been good to go. Hopefully it will work out for you.

[stagpanther]

I sent it back to Optics Planet (is an OP exclusive--16" no forward assist).

AFAIK OP does not do any warranty work for manufacturer's stuff--they are sorta like Amazon, they just move the stuff as a middleman. I've been down this road with them before, if anything is wrong with the stuff it's between you and the manufacturer.

[wild cat mccane]

Exclusive made for OP. OP was great. Sent me a return label (free UPS return) automagically when I completed their form for returns.

[stagpanther]

Lucky that--they basically told me to get lost when I bought a defective item years ago.

[wild cat mccane]

Well....what do I do? Two for two stuck PSA CH.

Second exact same Aero upper came. Optics Planet was great and fast for returning/refunding first.

Put in the PSA CH. Sticky, but then slide in WAY better than first upper. Thought I was okay... Pulled it out, put it back in...super sticky to stuck. CH was totally black before sticking it in (put 2000 oil on it), but came out with these totally new aluminum coating rubs from this second new Aero upper.

First two are pics of joy, last two are the problems...

[stagpanther]

Any particular reason you are wed to PSA's CHs and haven't tried anyone elses'--it's not like they are hard to find or exorbitantly expensive?

[wild cat mccane]

They aren't a performance items is all. A 100 dollar Ch doesn't do anything a $14 dollar one doesn't do.

If I can avoid 1/8 the cost in the recommended or even 1/4 the cost of the upper on a CH, which doesn't add diddly, I want that route. Even Aero's cheap ch is panned on OP, so I don't want to play a game of searching a fitting one for someone's experience of fit if it doesn't fit all uppers.

I'm not annoyed with a recommendation at all. Or ignoring it.

I mean, what gives with this area being clearly tight on an Aero? That doesn't help a single thing. If anything, give it to me as loose as can be without falling out?

[stagpanther]

PSAs are simply put among the crappiest CH you can choose. If you want hold the fort based on that--good luck.

[wild cat mccane]

Aero did request back the first upper. They should say the same about this upper too.

That said, is Rise Armament RA-212 just going to fit? Or am I dealing with two Optics Planet exclusive uppers that are just built bad by Aero?