NOTICE - SAFETY NOTICE - SAFETY NOTICE
Dear valued customers and shooting
This notice is to inform you of the
potential hazard of using a .308 / 7.62mm caliber FAL receiver fabricated
out of aluminum. Some of you have called and asked us to provide
barrel and headspacing services on this new Aluminum FAL type upper
receiver manufactured by Williams Arms Co. Many of you had also
wished to purchase our lightweight alloy components to assemble an ultra
light FAL. We respectfully refused to provide you with these
services. Regretfully, this has angered some of you.
following test result, photos and data are the main reason we refused to
provide these services to you.
This is what happens to an FAL type upper
receiver made out of 7075-T651 aluminum.
of H.P. White Laboratories test of a standard FAL type rifle built from
a Williams Arms Co. Aluminum upper receiver.
Williams Alumalite receiver from various angles.
View 3 of the Williams
Alumalite receiver in its various pieces. There were several pieces that
were unrecoverable due to the
fragmentation that took place.
On October 2, 2001 H.P. White Laboratories,
Inc. of Street, Maryland performed an independent reliability-firing test
of a Williams Arms Elite 7.62mm semi-auto FAL type receiver, serial number
15012. The proposed testing was to fire 1,000 rounds of service
ammunition in 100 round increments with a SAAMI high pressure (proof) test
round fired between each 100 round increment. Standard NATO Radway
Green ammunition was used, headstamped RG-82, 83 and 84. This
test mimics one that was performed on our own FAL type 7.62mm semi-auto
receiver manufactured from 7075T6 aluminum.
The testing of the Williams Arms receiver
was terminated after 189 service round firings and one proof firing when
the receiver of the rifle was blown into a multiplicity of
fragments. The receiver was measured before the first 100 rounds
were fired, after the 100 service rounds and again after the proof
round. The measurements indicate the headspacing progressively
increased. While not conclusive, this is likely an indication of
receiver distortion (stretching) which resulted in the catastrophic
failure of the receiver after firing 189 service rounds and one proof
round. H.P. White Labs also performed pressure and velocity tests on
the ammunition. The copper unit of pressure average was
52,800. The velocity average was 2798 (ft/s).
Our company had the same test performed on
our own experimental aluminum FAL type receiver, serial number DS10000EXP4
that was produced three years ago. H.P. White labs also conducted
this test. Unlike the Williams Arms receiver, our receiver was not
lightening cut to Type 1 depths, as the Williams Arms receiver is, but had
a much greater volume of material, which should increase the strength
potential. The first 100 rounds went without serious incident.
The first proof round produced no overt damage to the rifle, but the case
head separated. Firing of the second segment began with round 101of
service ammunition. The case head again separated and the upper
receiver cracked on both sides at the rear of the locking shoulder.
The locking shoulder also cracked. Testing was terminated at this
This was the third of our receivers to fail in testing
that started over three years ago. One of our aluminum receivers,
which also had a much greater volume of material, lasted approximately
2,000 rounds fired through it before failure by cracking behind the
Out of six that were
manufactured, three were tested and all three failed
DSA, Inc. experimental
Claims of 7075-T651 being stronger or more
durable than 4140 alloy steel are simply false. To check, please
refer to comparison charts in Machinery Handbooks accredited
figures. We cannot reprint these specs without the permission of the
publishers. We will not address the durability issues since strength is
the issue. If you would like more information on the durability
issues, please feel free to contact us.
Our legal counsel recommended that we
conduct these tests in order to provide the products and services
requested by our customers. This was to ensure that this new product
combined with our own would be safe enough to operate and put into
commerce. These tests have proven to us as well as our council that
this product is not safe according to any standards. Unless further
development and testing is done, we will not change our position. We will
not compromise your safety on this issue for financial gain. We would
welcome any additional testing, suggestions or comments concerning this
Please accept our most sincere apologies for not providing
services to assemble these receivers or sell components to be used with
Very truly yours,