Aero Precision Releases Long-Awaited .308 Receivers

Aero Precision has released their long-awaited .308 receivers. The receivers are DPMS (Gen 1)-patterned. Both receivers are machined from forged 7075 t6 aluminum and then mil-spec anodized.


The upper receiver is notably beefy and has a recessed cut-out for the bolt release. No extra material has been removed for popular “levers” (much to my chagrin). Uppers are available for $135 (stripped) and $155 (assembled). 


The lower receiver comes pre-threaded for both the bolt release pin and the pin detent hole. Further, it has a integrated enlarged trigger guard and accepts short-throw safety/selectors. The lower is available for $185 and does not currently have an assembled or completed option. A full kit with both receivers is also available for $288 for the bare upper and $306 for the assembled upper (forward assist and dust cover installed).

Upper Receiver Features:

  • Forged from 7075 T6 aluminum
  • Precision machined to our specs
  • M4 feedramps
  • Matte black hard coat anodized Mil 8625 Type 3 Class 2
  • .2795” takedown pin holes (DPMS size)
  • Laser engraved T-marks
  • Accepts standard .308 components
  • Works with DPMS high profile handguards
  • Assembled upper comes with forward assist and port door installed

Lower Receiver Features:

  • Semi-auto M5 (.308) lower receiver (DPMS cut)
  • Machined from 7075-T6 forged aluminum
  • Matte black hard-coat anodized Mil 8625 Type 3 Class 2
  • Marked “Cal Multi”
  • Works with standard DPMS 308 components and magazines
  • Rear takedown pin detent hole is threaded for a 4-40 set screw
  • Bolt catch is threaded for a screw pin (no roll pin needed)
  • Integrated trigger guard
  • Selector markings will work with 45, 60 or 90 degree safety selectors
  • Accepts Battle Arms Development short throw safety selectors, but will work with any standard selector

Nathan S

One of TFB’s resident Jarheads, Nathan now works within the firearms industry. A consecutive Marine rifle and pistol expert, he enjoys local 3-gun, NFA, gunsmithing, MSR’s, & high-speed gear. Nathan has traveled to over 30 countries working with US DoD & foreign MoDs.

The above post is my opinion and does not reflect the views of any company or organization.


  • Zachary marrs

    WOW. WHAT A NEW AND EXCITING PRODUCT, WOW, THIS WILL SURELY BE A GAME CHANGER. /Sarc off. Is this really all we can do anymore? Ar receivers? Is there ANY company out there that is doing something original?

    • JumpIf NotZero

      I know right!! Competition is such a terrible thing! $155 for a complete AR-10 upper, pfft, those are a dime a dozen from mfgs like… um….. well….

      • Rusty Shackleford

        DPMS. Then again, that was the first link on google, I can check for others.

  • JumpIf NotZero

    The more and more I see AR-10 components that are just 100% scaled up AR-15 parts, the more I think DPMS/Rem might be on the right track with their Gen II 308 parts that are more appropriately sized.

    That is…. If the Gen II stuff can hold decent accuracy or it’s all over the place. I really don’t know. But looking at the SCAR 16 vs SCAR 17, it’s not just a 100% scale like the AR15 v AR10 is.

    • BillC

      Actually, it’s the other way around. The AR-15 was originally just scaled DOWN AR-10 parts. So, it’s incorrect to say that AR-10’s are just scaled up AR-15’s.

      • JumpIf NotZero

        Thanks, but that isn’t relevant. Looking at all the other 308 designs out there, the AR-10 is massively overbuilt, the AR-15 is not.

        • Spencer W

          I see what you’re saying but I’m not sure about the numbers considering the design and material limitations the AR has. I have handled a few but only shot one and I never got the impression they were overbuilt. Can you give an example of one or two parts that are overbuilt?

          • JumpIf NotZero

            The bolt is fine, but the carrier is too large, which makes the upper too large, so the rail and barrel nut are too large, the charging handle is too large (for no reason), while the lower too is also large.

            In order to not require a 7′ monster, the receiver extension is too short (so as to fit normal people) for an appropriately matched buffer and spring, so DPMS-style guns use a stupid stubby buffer, better Armalite-style guns use a longer tube and an AR-15 buffer but the weight is questionable considering carrier mass and gas driving the action, which leads to a LOT of AR-10 guns (notoriously) unlocking early which makes them exceptionally hard to shoot accurately (the issue being follow-through for the shooter).

            I hate to admit it, but the DPMS G2 stuff has a LOT of merit. That is -IF- those smaller size components can be proven to be reliable and accurate.

            Note: Some guns are better than others, and some “wear” the extra mass well. The LMT doesn’t feel too clunky. The HK MR762 doesn’t look bad, but it’s a damn piggy. The KAC looks and feels decent enough, but coming right off an AR-15 it’s a big boy too. Other guns are big just to big I feel.

          • Spencer W

            So a majority of it hinges on the idea of shrinking down the carrier without weakening the system. Seems to me it could be done a lot easier by going to a piston for the new design.

            But going to such lengths to get the best you can out of a rifle a whole new design sounds like the way to go. With a new design one could do away with the limiting recoil system as well.

          • Rusty Shackleford

            Exactly. That is why I wish RRA would take their LAR-PDS platform and upscale it for .308 winchester.

          • Ben M

            The early unlocking issue can be mitigated to a large degree by running a rifle length gas system. It also produces the added benefit of lengthening the recoil impulse and therefor reducing felt recoil. Most long-range precision AR 308 rifles are set up this way, if not, they’re doing it wrong. I’d put the rifle length gas system on any 308 AR running a barrel 18.5″ or more.

    • I can tell you after shooting one a LOT it’s plenty accurate.

  • Andrew R

    I really wish these were G2 instead… 🙁

    • Mike N.

      I bet that there are some sort of IP protections on the G2 design. Now that the G2’s are out, I want a G2 sized receiver set for a custom build and have no interest whatsoever in building a traditional/”full sized” large frame AR.

      • It is really protected?
        I mean the original G1 DPMS design (or should I say KAC’s SR25) was not protected,
        and that was what made it so popular and established itself almost as a
        standard. If it is protected, DPMS would loss a lot in small part sales.

        Try to find small parts
        for .308 AR and guess who’s the major manufacturer?, yes DPMS.

        • The basic design (DI) has been in the public sphere long enough. However, specific items such as the dual ejectors, receiver dimensions, etc may be protected depending on their uniqueness and serve a specific purpose.

          Then again, an item can also be copyrighted for appearance. The receiver may be distinctive enough, but I dont think Remington went that far with it.

        • snmp

          DI basic design is from 1901 (French ENT 1901 Rossignol semi auto rifle).

          The weapon could protectes with copyright like fashion, but not for technical pupose

      • Nicks87

        I felt the same way. I finally broke down and bought a Recon G2. I didnt want to lug some 14 lbs. behemoth with me everytime I wanted to go hunting or to the range. My worry is that the after-market companies wouldnt support the new rifles but so far the accessory companies are slowly catching on. Midwest industries makes 2 handguards specifically for the G2s. Samson manufacturing makes some too. I really think the G2 .308s are going to become the standard before long. It just makes sense.

        • Mike N.

          The G2 can use DPMS AR-15 handguards out of the box, and other AR-15 handguards have to only be adapted to the G2 specific barrel nut. I guess that’s how MI came out with their handguards so quickly.

          • Nicks87

            Yeah I think so. I ordered the MI-SS series handguard. I havnt got it yet but I wasnt going to wait around for people to figure out which AR15 handguards work with the G2. They advertise the weight to be 11.5 oz for the 15in model and light weight is my priority with this rifle so I’m hoping that it will work out..

        • I do love that Recon G2!

          • Nicks87

            Yes, Phil thanks for the Gen 2 article that you did. It planted the seed that resulted in me buying the Recon and I love it. It’s the lightest .308 AR that I’ve handled and an absolute tack driver.

  • kevinp2

    What does this mean?

    No extra material has been removed for popular “levers” (much to my chagrin)

    • JumpIf NotZero

      BAD Levers and the like.

      A little extra material needs to be removed from the upper around the bolt release. I can’t think of anyone I respect as a shooter that still runs a bad lever. Almost everyone who has seen the reliability issues they can cause (extra weight on the bolt release/catch), safety issues (ND when releasing the bolt, finger can be inside trigger guard, safety should be on but whatever), and just general thought about “WHAT IS THIS REALLY DOING FOR ME?”

      I care not to discuss the pros and cons of BAD levers really. Just take a look around and notice that the only people using them are people on ranges or maybe 3gun guys who often need to lock their bolt back. But more so that no good mfg is shipping a rifle with a BAD installed.

      I actually think it was forward thinking of AERO to leave it off. FAR less complaints from people who insist there must be something wrong with the upper/lower because of issues that actually come from the lever. If I made an upper, I’d sure as hell make it incompatible on purpose.

      • sianmink

        I think if you have any reliability issues with a BAD lever, it was either installed poorly or you have a bad bolt catch spring or something.
        OR, I think people run into issues with the thing when they’re running a ton of other mods.. H buffer and tweaked springs and low-pressure Russian ammo etc etc.. the further you get out of spec the more likely one of those mods will cause issues somewhere else. There’s so many varying AR builds out there, it’s bound to not work well on some of them.

        For me, the ability to lock back the bolt without having to do gyrations with the rifle is worth a tiny possibility of the bolt not locking back on an empty mag (A malfunction I’ve never personally experienced with mine)

        • JumpIf NotZero

          “I think if you have any reliability issues with a BAD lever, it was either installed poorly”

          Yes… I installed upside-down, what a goof ball I am. I suppose all the threads on arfcom/m4carbine/lightfighter where everyone realized awhile back the BAD could cause malfunctions… They must have all installed theirs upside-down too.

          • sianmink

            If it causes a malfunction on your rifle, don’t use it.

            Doesn’t mean it doesn’t work brilliantly for the rest of us.

          • Rusty Shackleford

            Woah! Don’t go against our resident Gunnery Sergeant/Master Tactician like that. 😉

          • Nicks87

            Well if the “experts” on arfcom/m4carbine/lightfighter all agree it sucks then it must suck. We all know that internet chat rooms are THE very best place to find unbiased info on firearms/accessories.

          • LOL–yep

      • Ben M

        As a lefty, there certainly is value to these devices. Locking the bolt back is a contorting exercise without one of these levers (or a purpose built ambi lower, which I would agree is preferable).

        As far as the “levers” go, if you are having reliability issues you could check out the Tactical Link EBAL. I can’t speak to reliability issues related to additional weight on ALL platforms, but it has had no ill effect on my Bushmaster XM-15 with factory buffer and spring. Mounting is also rock solid, much more confidence inspiring than the BAD lever. It mounts with two mount screws and a retaining screw, as opposed to the single screw design of the magpul.