User Panel
Well except for me of course, who is stuck with the stupid Match Targets.
Easy now, nothing wrong with the Match Target At least that's a "real" Colt. |
|
Quoted:
Well except for me of course, who is stuck with the stupid Match Targets.
Easy now, nothing wrong with the Match Target At least that's a "real" Colt. This might be as well. The spotters were held in similar regard in the 90's IIRC. Grant on ToS states that the BCG matches 6920 bolts. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well except for me of course, who is stuck with the stupid Match Targets.
Easy now, nothing wrong with the Match Target At least that's a "real" Colt. This might be as well. The spotters were held in similar regard in the 90's IIRC. Grant on ToS states that the BCG matches 6920 bolts. And Scott Ryan is skeptical. Who to believe? Mr. Timberlake feels that the "staking" and "engraving marks" are the "tell." I feel that none of the other "tells" that should be there are anywhere near that rifle. Barrel marking style - engraved, not rolled receiver markings, lack of "C" markings, ect. I don't have one in my hand, and it doesn't sound like he does, either. I could be wrong - but my gut says not to be optimistic. It would have been nice to have a budget "base" rifle using standard parts that I could re-barrel, like I've done with old Sporters and Match Targets. Sporters were held in the same regard for the same reasons in the 90's - non-standard parts - large pivot pins, sear blocks, plastic buffers, FP retaining pin destroying unshrowded firing pins, ect. I would agree with you that the LE6920 is the budget "baseline" model. ~Augee |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well except for me of course, who is stuck with the stupid Match Targets.
Easy now, nothing wrong with the Match Target At least that's a "real" Colt. This might be as well. The spotters were held in similar regard in the 90's IIRC. Grant on ToS states that the BCG matches 6920 bolts. And Scott Ryan is skeptical. Who to believe? Mr. Timberlake feels that the "staking" and "engraving marks" are the "tell." I feel that none of the other "tells" that should be there are anywhere near that rifle. Barrel marking style - engraved, not rolled receiver markings, lack of "C" markings, ect. I don't have one in my hand, and it doesn't sound like he does, either. I could be wrong - but my gut says not to be optimistic. It would have been nice to have a budget "base" rifle using standard parts that I could re-barrel, like I've done with old Sporters and Match Targets. Sporters were held in the same regard for the same reasons in the 90's - non-standard parts - large pivot pins, sear blocks, plastic buffers, FP retaining pin destroying unshrowded firing pins, ect. I would agree with you that the LE6920 is the budget "baseline" model. ~Augee To tell you the truth, I usually just go with whatever you say or Scott Ryan says. |
|
[[/quote]
The roll-mark above the selector. As far as I know, Colt doesn't do marking variances for their rifles. Even the Colt Competition rifles have the BI roll- mark. [/quote] Colt has sold guns with a marking variance this year, they have had them in their booth at SHOT the last two years. |
|
Quoted:
Colt has sold guns with a marking variance this year, they have had them in their booth at SHOT the last two years. Which models? Was it Colt MFG or Colt Defense that did the variance? |
|
There are unconfirmed reports that the LE6900 are actually built for Colt by Anderson Manufacturing (KY).
I looked at AM's site and it is similar to what they're making, the barrels, tubular handguards and they even sell the Damage Industries mil-spec 6 position M4 with QD sling mounts. |
|
Sounds rather like the Colt Single Action Army and the Colt Cowboy.
The Cowboy was an attempt to offer shooters a single action Colt at a price lower enough to compete with the Uberti and Ruger offerings. If you wanted the higher quality gun you bought the Single Action Army, and at a significantly higher price. Can't fault them for that, and whether Colt actually assembled it or not, like the Colt black powder revolvers of the 1980's, they're stamped "Colt" and will letter as Colt. |
|
free float tube with an M4 barrel, boggle
should have just gone with a government barrel sans M4 cut or just a medium profile the whole way |
|
Quoted:
Sounds rather like the Colt Single Action Army and the Colt Cowboy. The Cowboy was an attempt to offer shooters a single action Colt at a price lower enough to compete with the Uberti and Ruger offerings. If you wanted the higher quality gun you bought the Single Action Army, and at a significantly higher price. Can't fault them for that, and whether Colt actually assembled it or not, like the Colt black powder revolvers of the 1980's, they're stamped "Colt" and will letter as Colt. This is nothing new. Colt had licensed versions of their 44 Walker pistol made in other countries back in the 1800s. This is in their DNA. It's where the market is.They can probably sell 10 of these for every Colt made in Hartford at $100 more. People have commodiitized AR15s and Colt feels it in their bottom line because of all the cheaper variants out there. Cost is king, people are hurting, cheap is good even if quality isn't what they would like. You can bet that there is no MP inspection, shot peening, multiple step parkerizing and certainly much less documentation of the manufacturing processes than you will see in a Mil-spec product. What do average Joes need with all that unnecessary stuff? If ammo is $1 a round, they won't be shooting them much anyway. This is "decontenting" in progress before our very eyes. What's in the future for Colt? I wouldn't be surprised to see Colt dump Hartford manufacturing facilities, and see them pop up in North Carolina or Alabama. Same reason you don't see many cars made in Michigan anymore. Cost cutting and Colt will be synonymous. What next? Colt China? Colt Vietnam? LOL. |
|
The Colt Cowboy was NOT simply about price. They had to produce a gun with an internal safety to sell it to the general public - the old SAA will shoot you if you drop it on the hammer, fully loaded. But they were tired of all the Italian knock offs taking a share of the market they created.
Put yourself in Colt's shoes. They have watched other makers made cheaper (and frequently worse) copies of the Single Action Army, the 1911 and the AR-15 - and steal significant market share, frequently with an inferior copy. All markets that they created, too. Now it is the "Year of the AR-15". For years, when they had the Security of Government Contracts, they didn't have to think about the consumer market. Now they are looking at ways to get business from ALL of the different spectrums of people that buy them. Bushmasters and DPMS have long sold as an 800 Dollar price point - and they were cheaper, not beter. Now Colt wants those Customers, too. Because they become repeat customers for more expenisve guns in the future! Colt wants in at the lower price point - and it only makes sense. I doubt if these guns will be bad guns - for Joe Sixpack. And if you have more money - they will sell cheerfully sell you a 6940 for a bit more. It's just good business. CC |
|
just a rumor from the web:
The rifle is built, and possibly designed by Anderson Mftg for Colt.
ETA: oops missed the A-R3 post above |
|
Quoted:
There are unconfirmed reports that the LE6900 are actually built for Colt by Anderson Manufacturing (KY). I looked at AM's site and it is similar to what they're making, the barrels, tubular handguards and they even sell the Damage Industries mil-spec 6 position M4 with QD sling mounts. I have Anderson Mfg. uppers, lowers, and BCGs sitting on the table in front of me right now, and the only markings that match are the Cerro Forge "keyhole" marks on the uppers/lowers. There are no other marks present on the "Colt" parts pictured that match. The only variation in markings present is 1 of the 4 Anderson Mfg uppers I have (newest, purchase post panic) has a Square forge mark, rather than the Cerro Forge Keyhole. I wouldn't think they would take the time to add additional markings to the production process... unless they are just the assembler, and get shipped finished parts? On the other hand though... Someone within Anderson Mfg. has told me they do OEM parts work for some of the larger brands, but wouldn't name names... I just assumed it was small parts work. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
There are unconfirmed reports that the LE6900 are actually built for Colt by Anderson Manufacturing (KY). I looked at AM's site and it is similar to what they're making, the barrels, tubular handguards and they even sell the Damage Industries mil-spec 6 position M4 with QD sling mounts. I have Anderson Mfg. uppers, lowers, and BCGs sitting on the table in front of me right now, and the only markings that match are the Cerro Forge "keyhole" marks on the uppers/lowers. There are no other marks present on the "Colt" parts pictured that match. The only variation in markings present is 1 of the 4 Anderson Mfg uppers I have (newest, purchase post panic) has a Square forge mark, rather than the Cerro Forge Keyhole. I wouldn't think they would take the time to add additional markings to the production process... unless they are just the assembler, and get shipped finished parts? On the other hand though... Someone within Anderson Mfg. has told me they do OEM parts work for some of the larger brands, but wouldn't name names... I just assumed it was small parts work. Anderson Mfg. and Colt won't have any common factory markings, as you said they only have the Cerro keyhole forge codes that are common and even these don't indicate who machined the parts, they're just the forge marking of the company that did the raw forging billet that are unmachinned. The similarities that I noticed are the 4140 steel alloy barrel material used, 1/8 rifling twist, M4 profile, free floating tube handguard (except Colt doesn't have any vent holes, probably their own specified feature to have a lower cost component). The only other unkown feature that we don't know about is does the Colt Light Carbine barrel, upper and lower have the Anderson's RF85 finish treatment that doesn't need any lube (it reduced friction up to 85 percent). I also had unconfirmed communications from an Anderson worker that stated the same info that you have, that they do complete rifle assemblies and supplies parts for larger known brands but he won't specifically state who these companies are. |
|
Quoted:
I wish consumers wouldn't demand a product like this. This consumer won't demand it. No dustcover, no Forward assist, no buy! |
|
I guess there is a market for a stripped down AR/M4 carbine, but I'm not feeling this Colt model.
For the Colt AR collector, this is a must to have since I don't see this model being around but for a few years. |
|
I almost bought one of these locally for $850.00
I like the 1:8 rather than the 1:7 rate of the 6920. Balance was exceptional and it fit the hand very well, unlike Magpul handguards. I agree, the M4 profile was odd, a light profile would be better. Lack of FA and dustcover killed it for me though. I will not buy an AR rifle without these. Nice little rifle though. I hope they sell a ton of 'em. |
|
I looked at one for a couple of seconds today at Hunters Haven in Tupelo MS. It's $1200 if anyone is interested. I don't care for the non forward assist upper. They also had a M400 Magpul Sig for $969 and a Bushmaster OCR flat top with M4 barrel no front sights with forward assist for $919. It was really good to see someone with new guns under$1000 for a change.
|
|
You may not want a "stripper' model - but they do sell to those who just can't afford the top shelf stuff. Detroit has always had a "plain white pickup truck" without power windows, just an AM radio and black wall tires, for the guy that just wants transportation and doesn't need the bells and whistles. Colt is no longer content to ceed the bottom tier to other makers - since people frequently upgrade to a better gun when their finances improve. And if they are happy with their first puchase, they will buy more from you.
I would submit that being shot with the "Lightweight Rifle" would not feel signifcantly differnt than being shot with a 6940. CC |
|
To me it definitely cheapens the name. Not only based on looks but by the inconsistencies in all markings (if it indeed ended up being made in house).
|
|
Quoted:
To me it definitely cheapens the name. Not only based on looks but by the inconsistencies in all markings (if it indeed ended up being made in house). Nothing on that rifle is made at Colt. |
|
Quoted:
Range Report? You won't get one from the posters here as none of them own this rifle. |
|
I really don't see the problem here. Sure, it's not up to Colt's usual quality, so of course some folks will be misled, but a complete AR with free float tube for $800 isn't a bad deal at all in my book. I'd have no problem buying and shooting this sucker, especially as a hunting rifle. I do like dust covers, but I never use my FA. I had one of those cheapie DPMS ARs a while back and never had a problem with it.
|
|
Quoted:
I really don't see the problem here. Sure, it's not up to Colt's usual quality, so of course some folks will be misled, but a complete AR with free float tube for $800 isn't a bad deal at all in my book. I'd have no problem buying and shooting this sucker, especially as a hunting rifle. I do like dust covers, but I never use my FA. I had one of those cheapie DPMS ARs a while back and never had a problem with it. I agree. I handled one at the range the other day while I was working. Not a bad rifle. And what does the FA and dust cover really get you? I could live without them.. I've never used the FA on my 6920, and am too lazy to close the dust cover. |
|
Quoted:
Range Report? Here's a new vid review of the Colt LE6900 from Gunblast.com also with Colt-Leupold VX-R Firedot scopes, he also stated that they are made in Kentucky. Shooting the Colt LE6900 5.56X45mm Light Carbine with Colt/ Leupold VX-R Firedot Scopes - YouTube vid link |
|
So the complaints are with the upper; the lower is considered "kosher"?
|
|
Eww...
Colt really doesn't mind smearing their own name every now and then |
|
from what i've seen, very disappointing!!! i buy colts for the better built quality. lowering standards is not a good road to success and could turn off loyal customers. i also noticed they have cutback in other areas. other changes like magpul sights on 6920 (which is ok) and shipping with only 1 mag is much more preferable to me than cutting quality.
|
|
|
wholesale price difference between a 6900 and 6520 is 275 bucks, between 6900 and 6900 is 300 bucks. 6900 makes the colt slogan a joke.
what a piece of junk. Might work for range toy, but not for real work. I will keep my real milspec Colt for that thanks.... |
|
I've recently seen them showing up at the range where I work. I was clearing the line after a cease fire when I came across a 6900 that was still in battery. I asked the owner if I could pick up the rifle and lock the BCG back. He said ok. Well I dame near burned my left hand when I put it on the front grip. Barrel heat can really fire it on a 6900..
|
|
Quoted:
I've recently seen them showing up at the range where I work. I was clearing the line after a cease fire when I came across a 6900 that was still in battery. I asked the owner if I could pick up the rifle and lock the BCG back. He said ok. Well I dame near burned my left hand when I put it on the front grip. Barrel heat can really fire it on a 6900.. yeah although the FF handguard is nice and what i liked, without vent holes? wouldn't that heat up the barrel and handguard real fast? |
|
i actually like the design, i am sick and tired of seeing 20 centry old handguards that need to be replaced as soon as you get the rifles, the le6920 i handled wobbles and handguard is pretty loose, i don't see any "colt quality" there but lousy craftsmanship. the 6900 is in the right direction if it's built by colt and has good quality and tight fit
i think colt is inspired by m&p sport's success and wants to join the game, very much like they revive the colt mustang after sig p238's success |
|
Quoted:
i actually like the design, i am sick and tired of seeing 20 centry old handguards that need to be replaced as soon as you get the rifles, the le6920 i handled wobbles and handguard is pretty loose, i don't see any "colt quality" there but lousy craftsmanship. the 6900 is in the right direction if it's built by colt and has good quality and tight fit i think colt is inspired by m&p sport's success and wants to join the game, very much like they revive the colt mustang after sig p238's success Well then you are the only one. Sorry to burst your bubble but M4 handguards have some wobble to them and Colt builds fighting rifles not beauty queens (and most people here think the 6900 is not a Colt built rifle). I will take my 6920 to battle any day of the week. |
|
Unless and Until someone has bonafide, confirmed, multiple reports of problems, why is everyone dissing this rifle?
Yes, it's a "Sportical" design - and not the only low price leader on the market. Yes, it's cheaper - but if it always goes bang for you and allows Mr. Average Guy to buy in to owning an AR at $2-300 less than the "top shelf" Colts, why not? This market is being served by others - why can't Colt claim a part of a market THEY CREATED!! I doubt if it's "junk". Colt is aware of their name image, and after the labor troubles over twenty years ago, I'm pretty sure they don't want to hurt it. CC |
|
Colt should be ashamed. That is the ugliest factory rifle currently in production.
|
|
Anyone know the source of their 6900 uppers? I bought a stripped up from the EE, it has the key forge mark. Picked it up for an uber light 3gun build since mega won't make rainiers upper w/o FA
|
|
I like the look of the 6900. I haven't put my hands on one yet. You do get some good features with it from what I see. The price is excellent. around $825.00 or a little more right now plus shipping and transfer (I think they come without sights). There's a lot to be said in the differences between a fighting rifle and a sporting rifle. I've always liked forward assist. I don't use it much, but when you need it, its nice to have. I like a dust cover too. They are both nice to have, but are not required for the rifle to function. The 1 in 8 barrel twist is nice. It's a free floated barrel that's good too. The match trigger is an upgrade to a standard trigger. It wasn't that long ago that we couldn't go buy a Colt off the shelf with some of the basic components included in the 6900 such as standard .154 hammer and trigger pin holes, .250 take down and pivot pin holes for upper swaps (no large pin pivot hole and no .250 screws). It has 5.56MM markings, no sear bock (suitable host lower) and it has selector stops, they are not milled off. The 6900 is the only Colt model I know of besides full auto or burst receivers that has selector stops.
While I do like the look of the integral trigger guard, I prefer the standard opening type. So it's not the same as a military AR-15.or M4. From what I've seen and heard so far I think it's a going to be a popular rifle and for the price it's a good buy IMHO. The majority of the differences are appearance related. I can't claim to know exactly how they are manufactured and what is done to them and what is not. The barrel, carrier, bolt, upper markings (keyhole is what i've seen no C), lower markings (keyhole marked on the upper part of the trigger guard), are not the same as a 6920. Cerro is a good forging just about every manufacturer uses them. . If they marked them all the same all over the rifle with a subcontractor manufacturing the rifle how would they know who is to supply the warranty service? I'm pretty certain these parts and the finished products have to pass Colt's quality control standards. The 6900 has a few things that come with it that the 6920's and other Colt's don't. The match trigger, free float, no sear block and selector stops are upgrades. Personally I don't mind if it doesn't have the C on the upper and the carrier or the MP C on he barrel. I think there have been improvements to the rifles function and utility. I agree that the castle nut on the stock should be staked. (Maybe they use a higher torque so it wont come loose). It's easy enough to stake the nut and it becomes a non issue. I like the look, the function, and the price. I would buy one. I don't see the 6900 as a real reduction in Colt quality. (for sportsmen and women and only time will tell) These are not being shipped to the military. It's a consumer product. I would pick a 6920 over the 6900 for a military or LEO duty rifle. But I just target shoot and a 6900 lightweight would be just fine by me. Happy shooting everyone. -William |
|
Quoted:
No one has anything to say about the trigger guard? Thats what I was wondering, trigger gaurd is now "billet" Style? |
|
I bought one for the hell of it for $895. First trip to the range after 12 rounds it fails to eject and attempts to feed the next round while the fired cartridge is still chambered. Not an ammo problem as I fired two other Colts and one DDM4V1 with the same ammo all day long. Called Colt. They said "it needs to be sent in for "repair". Gave the Cs guy the serial number, he hesitated, and said that it had to go to "another facility". He said he will email to me the shipping label today. It will be interesting to find out where I will send it. My guess it will go down the road about 100 miles from my home here in Kentucky. What do you think about the ejection problem, and where do you think it will be shipped to?
Respectfully, Chief72 |
|
Hi Chief72,
I'm not a gunsmith, just a hobbyist. You said you're having failure to extract and eject malfunctions, with a spent casing left in the chamber. It's good you'll have it repaired soon. I always appreciate warranty service myself. Just in case. It's easy enough to have fixed by Colt with little stress over it.. The only time I've had failure to extract and eject is when I used lacquer coated brass ammunition. It left hot sticky lacquer in my chamber and the casings got stuck. A good cleaning fixed that. If the malfunctions happened to me with a new rifle, I would try to clean/polish the chamber real good and add a new extractor and spring only because I have a few extra parts around. I wouldn't buy anything for it since Colt is fixing it under warranty. I think you'll ship it to Anderson manufacturing in Kentucky. I've heard, I don't know this to be a fact, that Anderson manufacturiing is a subsidiary or owned by Colt Mfg. Connecticut. I heard that Colt is expanding, and possibly relocating out of Connceticut. That is strictly a rumor. I heard it on the internet.. Please fill us in on the repair, and what the problem was so we all know. Good luck to you Chief. -William eta: after some consideration, I think the malfunction was a failure to extract only. If the case didn't come out of the chamber as the bolt came out of the barrel extention, the bolt face never had the opportunity to eject that case. So I've decided to edit this in. A gunsmith would know the exactt terminology. |
|
Thanks wools10! I appreciate your advice about the extractor. I am still working the issue. I will take it back to the range today to try again. I disassembled, inspected, cleaned, and properly lubricated. During inspection I did not notice anything unusual about the appearance or positioning of the bolt carrier group, bolt, pin, extractor, locking lugs, chamber, or barrel. Like I said, I will attempt to fire it again today to see if I get better or same results. Meanwhile, I contacted Colt for warranty repair. Took them to days to email me the FEDEX shipping label.
Here is the recipient address: CMCI Attn: CMCI Service Center 1743 Anderson Blvd HEBRON, KY 41048 800-962-2658 On another note wools10, about where the rifle was made; as you can see it is not going to Colt in Connecticut. It is going up the road close to my home. The above address is in fact Anderson Mfg., Inc., and the phone number is Colt Mfg., Customer Service in Connecticut. So, all the discussion I have read on this and other forums can be laid to rest. The Colt 6900 was manufactured by Anderson for Colt in Hebron, KY. To back that up, I asked the customer service why it was shipping to Hebron, KY, and she said "it needs to go to back to Anderson where it was made". |
|
Quoted:
Thanks wools10! I appreciate your advice about the extractor. I am still working the issue. I will take it back to the range today to try again. I disassembled, inspected, cleaned, and properly lubricated. During inspection I did not notice anything unusual about the appearance or positioning of the bolt carrier group, bolt, pin, extractor, locking lugs, chamber, or barrel. Like I said, I will attempt to fire it again today to see if I get better or same results. Meanwhile, I contacted Colt for warranty repair. Took them to days to email me the FEDEX shipping label. Here is the recipient address: CMCI Attn: CMCI Service Center 1743 Anderson Blvd HEBRON, KY 41048 800-962-2658 On another note wools10, about where the rifle was made; as you can see it is not going to Colt in Connecticut. It is going up the road close to my home. The above address is in fact Anderson Mfg., Inc., and the phone number is Colt Mfg., Customer Service in Connecticut. So, all the discussion I have read on this and other forums can be laid to rest. The Colt 6900 was manufactured by Anderson for Colt in Hebron, KY. To back that up, I asked the customer service why it was shipping to Hebron, KY, and she said "it needs to go to back to Anderson where it was made". I was never too keen on the 6900 rifle; could have it been a money maker for Colt like the S&W Sport? Sure, but the bottom Ine is that today you can get a base 6920 for the price of mid tier rifle makers. I am disappointed that Colt let Anderson mfg construct this weapon with the Colt trademark |
|
Quoted:
. I am disappointed that Colt let Anderson mfg construct this weapon with the Colt trademark You are not alone..... I've heard it's been discontinued. |
|
6900 not milspec - 6920/40 milspec
6900 = poor peoples affordable colt |
|
pc-ops,
In response to your comment: According to the August 2008 issue of Combat Tactics, page 29, para 6 I quote 'Just so we're crystal clear on this important point: no commercial AR-15 carbine or rifle is, or ever will be, Mil-Spec. If the government is not testing the gun, by definition, it is not Mil-Spec. "Mil-Spec commercial" is an oxymoron'. They also state that according to Jim Battaglini, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of Colt Defense LLC, "Commercial black rifles are not considered Mil-Spec because there is no U.S. government verification to assure that their performance, endurance, accuracy, interchangeability, and reliability meet all specifications imposed by the United States Armed Forces." Credit for the above statements goes to "GetYerShells" of The Firing Line Forum. 10/2008. A true Mil-spec rifle will be factory assembled and have manufacturers proof marks on it. Military Specs for the M4 carbine and the A4 rifle dictate that the firearm be a select fire weapon. I don't want to hijack this thread, or throw the Colt forum into an uproar. I have read most of the mil-specs for the M4. It is a very long, very detailed set of documents I recommend it when you have some extra time. Have a nice day, and happy shooting to everyone. -William |
|
Cabelas has this rifle on the front page of its Hunting Sale Ad for $850 this weekend. I guess there are still plenty out there.
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.