V7 Introduces Ultra-Light Lithium Aluminum Alloy Lower Recevier

V7 Weapon Systems, known for the plethora of ultra-light and titanium parts, has released their latest ultra-light part for the AR-15, a lower receiver. The new receiver features a relatively new alloy, 2055, which features a relatively high lithium content. The alloy is stronger for both toughness and strength, by about 20% in each regard according to Alcoa, the developer of the alloy.

The receiver set is about as bare-bones as one can get, and comes in at a scant 6.4 ounces, just below the similar low-weight 2A Armament Balios Lite (which clocks in at 6.5 ounces). The receiver includes a built-in winter trigger guard and an ultra-light end plate.


Receiver markings are kept to a minimum (though there is a “V” on the right-side of the receiver) and the safety-selector is machined for easy recognition with both 90-degree and the various 45/57/60 degree throw options in the market.

Price for the “Enlightend” Lithium Aluminum lowers is set at $359 retail. Rainier Arms is running a special at ~$323 for the initial launch.

Specs (Courtesy of V7):

–  WEIGHS 6.4 OZ


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.


  • Captain Obvious

    “The alloy is stronger for both toughness and strength,” hmmm…stronger for strength, what a concept. LOL.

    • Ambassador Vader

      I think they are referring to the engineering strength and toughness although it was a bad way to phrase it.

      • PK

        Materials science/engineering has some confusing terms, no doubt about it! When the layman says “strength” they generally mean tensile but sometimes shear, when “toughness” is the topic it generally means modulus of resilience but sometimes means the hardness…

        It can be overwhelming trying to translate between the engineering terms and the common understanding.

        • Captain Obvious

          In all actuality that phrase is redundantly redundant actually. Perhaps something like “it is stronger and tougher” would have sufficed.

          • PK

            Probably maybe, perhaps! Always have to use the three R’s every time… redundancy, repetition, and redundancy.

          • Southpaw89

            Hey, were talking firearms here, not aircraft!

  • Vitor Roma

    It is always good to see metal alloys still evolving. As cool as polymers can be, metals are more…metal ../

    • Bull

      Yeah! I want a tungsten receiver! Heavy metal!

  • Edeco

    I hope it doesnt give off mood regulating vapors when heated…*

    *yes, mostly kidding.

    • Twilight sparkle

      You’ll probably be fine as long as you don’t eat it.

    • Dracon1201

      I’m sorry there are morons that do that. It makes those of us that enjoy light firearms look bad.

      • Twilight sparkle

        I think that person is referring to lithium’s use in treating people with bipolar disorder.

  • Twilight sparkle

    I’d like to see an independent comparison between 2055 and 7075 if there actually is any real performance difference between the two. If Alcoa developed this lithium aluminium alloy then there should be some information on it fairly soon.

  • PK

    “Relatively new alloy” in this case, is extremely current material. 2007 was the first time I heard of 2055-T84, and it’s impressive stuff. Slightly less dense than 7075-T6, slightly higher tensile strength and very hard to fracture (for aluminum) makes it the logical choice for AR lowers.

    • JumpIf NotZero

      It’s a whole 4% lighter than 7075 :/

      But more 4% increase in price. Nothing about this is “logical” for AR lowers.

      It’s entirely marketing.

      • James L. Rainey

        2055 and 2099 is so much stronger then 7075. It is closer to steel density.

        • aka_mythos

          While it has many properties similar to steel to say density of the alloy is one would be a misrepresentation since a higher density of a relatively fixed volume means a higher mass.

          What makes this alloy light yet strong is three things: the lattice structure where by the lithium allows the aluminum to organize in such a way that it’s harder to push and pull crystalline structures apart instead of breaking off under force the structures simply collide with the lithium and stop moving; lithium is less dense than aluminum the addition of lithium to a fixed volume means a lower mass but greater stiffness; along grain boundaries the crystalline structure is slightly different but with the same effect of stopping breaks.

          This alloy approaches steel like properties while retaining weight and density values normally seen with pure aluminum, where pure aluminum is pretty impractical. This material is largely used on rockets and a growing number of aircraft components. It’s costs over other alloys appear to mostly come from the fact that it requires two distinct types of hardening treatments.

          • Old Vet

            Good post. I think I even understand, but the price is too much for me. Retired, not loaded.

          • aka_mythos

            I think there are a number of lightweight reciever options that come close enough without being nearly as expensive. The “Vorn Lima 1” light weight reciever is only an ounce more and only costs $100. unless you’re going for the absolute lightest possible you could easily spread the same $300 difference across a number of other components and get a better weight reduction for your money.

      • James L. Rainey

        Read the whole story about 2055 and 2099 and not from a single story you see online that only focus is on weight and price. Metallurgy is a science.

  • Harry’s Holsters

    This could be perfect for my sister AR!

  • Nimrod

    Yeah, what a great idea. Save a couple ounces on the receiver so you can hang 3 lbs of rails, optics, lights and all kinds of other gizmos on your rifle.

    Yeah, I get that some people are obsessed with ultra light weight ARs.

    • Harry’s Holsters

      Every ounce counts and if you have the money then why not?

      • ChierDuChien

        Exactly. You should never try to cost justify hobbies or sports. They are for fun and entertainment and you should get whatever you like and can afford. Life is short, enjoy it.

        • JumpIf NotZero

          That seems like what people who think gear buys skills say.

          • Squirreltakular

            That seems like what people who judge people without contributing anything useful say.

            And by that logic, everyone with a high skill set should use the lowest quality gear necessary. Obviously that isn’t the case.

    • PK

      You ought to see ultralight backpackers select their gear. Tenths of a gram difference between two items and they worry over it…

  • toms

    Got one of the first ones. Nice lower but I would have liked a funneled mag well.

    • Squirreltakular

      I was waiting on these, but for it to be lacking such a common feature at that price point, I’ll pass. I’ll get a Balios Lite.

  • joshv06

    A lot of money for not a lot of weight loss. 2.3oz weight saving. Would rather save the weight elsewhere. Carrier, buffer, handguard, barrel, muzzle device, gas block. You feel most of the weight savings to the front of the rifle. I guess this is cool for making the lightest AR-15 on earth.

    • Flounder

      how do you save a pound? take an ounce out of 16 different parts.

      I totally agree with you on the cost of this silliness but I absolutely love that there is a very light lower reciever out there and that people are still trying to improve.

      I bet in a few years it will be available at a more reasonable price… Unless they just stop making it.

    • Marcus D.

      Really. The heaviest individual piece of my build was the nearly three pound barrel.

      • aka_mythos

        I think barrels are where we really need to see weight reduction get innovative with new materials. Like your’s that is where mine’s weight is at.

    • James L. Rainey

      Lighter AND STRONGER.
      not designed to just shed weight.

      • m-cameron

        does it really need to be “stronger”…..is there really a problem with the current lowers not being strong enough?

        • James L. Rainey

          Who said anything like that, the person before was focusing on weight…. I wanted to say that 2055 is also much stronger then 7075, fact. Do we need stronger receicers?, I dont know, but it is nice to have that option. Relax a bit cameron.

  • m-cameron

    so youre paying an extra $300 to save 2 ounces…..?

    ide rather spend that $280 on ammo, and $20 on a set of barbells

    • Twilight sparkle

      Why not just spend all 300 on ammo and use your ammo cans as barbells?

  • James L. Rainey

    If I was buying a sports car, I would want a frame that was lighter and stronger then any previous models… Lighter to go faster and stronger to protect me inside the frame.

  • gunsandrockets

    There’s only so much weight you can squeeze out of an AR-15. However, it would be interesting to see how much weight reduction of an AR-10 could be achieved using some of these lightening techniques.

  • David Harmon

    I hope they offer matched pairs…

  • smartacus

    can they skeletonize it to make it even lighter?