Rainier Arms Milspec Non-Forward Assist Upper Receiver

[UWone77]

Rainier Arms is one of those companies that is constantly improving their existing products or innovating new ones. In this case, Rainier Arms wasn't simply happy with offering a standard milspec upper receiver. Based on customer feedback, they are offering a non-forward assist upper. These uppers are not their existing Gen II Uppers which also offered a non-forward assist version. Demand outstripped supply for the Gen II's and they couldn't keep them in stock. These will be forged uppers from their Milspec line. They will be offered at the same price point as the forward assist versions. These should be available in the next 4-6 weeks. Keep checking Rainier Arms' website for release.


Description:

Rainier Arms Forged Mil-Spec Upper Receiver
Rainier Arms flattop upper receiver is carefully machined to mil-spec to serve as a great foundation for a quality AR rifle.


Features:

Made from 7075 - T6 aluminum
Type III hard coat anodized
Matte black finish
Dry lube coating: Inside to reduce wear and adds lubricity
"T - Marked" engraved
M4 Feed Ramps






Also a .22LR Upper is in the works for those of you that want to build your own .22 upper. Note the smaller ejection port.

[JGifford]

You know, I wish it had a port door. Other than that, this thing is an absolute thing of beauty, and I'm sure many won't mind that there is no port door. Very solid kit for a LW build!!!

[GOST]

Looks good, but I would like it better without the logo.

[RiverRat]

I like RA products as much as the next guy and I get the need to be constantly introducing new products. I'm also a huge fan of slick-side uppers (I own 3 of them).

But hump-sided? With such a prominent logo?

Count me out on this one.

[Slippers]

You know, I wish it had a port door. Other than that, this thing is an absolute thing of beauty, and I'm sure many won't mind that there is no port door. Very solid kit for a LW build!!!

I don't see any reason you can't put an ejection port cover on it. It has the lugs for the pin.

I like RA products as much as the next guy and I get the need to be constantly introducing new products. I'm also a huge fan of slick-side uppers (I own 3 of them).

But hump-sided? With such a prominent logo?

Count me out on this one.

It's hump sided because they took a mil-spec upper receiver forging, and instead of drilling out the hole for the forward assist, they simply lopped off as much as possible. Also, I'm not necessarily disagreeing or agreeing with your viewpoint of the aesthetics, just commenting on why the hump is there. :)

[UWone77]

Someone mentioned to me that the upper liked like the same hump in a Colt 605 Upper:

[Chainring]

I dig it. Love me some slickside, and I like Rainier. I'd run that one in a heartbeat.

[Dr Tran]

I don't see any reason you can't put an ejection port cover on it. It has the lugs for the pin.



It's hump sided because they took a mil-spec upper receiver forging, and instead of drilling out the hole for the forward assist, they simply lopped off as much as possible. Also, I'm not necessarily disagreeing or agreeing with your viewpoint of the aesthetics, just commenting on why the hump is there. :)

But only they didn't mill off as much as possible. They left a hump.

I'd like to see a true slick side with no FA or deflector. It's what the lightweight guys are all asking for.

[Slippers]

It looks like they milled it until they hit the radius of the upper receiver. This will leave the flat spot unless you go in and cut out the extra material to match the curve, which would add a ton of machine time and honestly wouldn't remove a significant amount of weight.

Leaving off the deflector is not a good idea. I don't think it requires an explanation as to why.

[Dr Tran]

It looks like they milled it until they hit the radius of the upper receiver. This will leave the flat spot unless you go in and cut out the extra material to match the curve, which would add a ton of machine time and honestly wouldn't remove a significant amount of weight.

Leaving off the deflector is not a good idea. I don't think it requires an explanation as to why.

Google "M16A1 slick side".
I'd like an explanation. :)

[Slippers]

Google M16A2, A3, A4, A5. Need more explaining? :)

[Dr Tran]

Lol. Now I must have one more than ever.

[UWone77]

But only they didn't mill off as much as possible. They left a hump.

I'd like to see a true slick side with no FA or deflector. It's what the lightweight guys are all asking for.

I don't think the idea was to offer a "true lightweight" upper in this case. They already offer a non-FA Gen II Upper, so instead of just making the same type of upper, they decided to go with the logo and "hump." This "hump" requires less machining and ultimately did not raise the price. Some people like it, some people don't care for it. Either way it offers options.

[Dr Tran]

It's a good thing for the hump-minded crowd.

[mustangfreek]

Are these coming back?