User Panel
Quoted:
Quoted:
There was a time twenty or so years ago when almost ALL mil-spec forged-lowers from just about every single manufacturer, including Colt, had almost the exact same amount of left-over "flashing" not removed from the lower, especially in the trigger-guard area. We've all become spoiled in the past decade or so with various manufactures selling "prettier", better-machined and finished lowers. Colt included. View Quote This Colt makes a Military grade rifle with a Military grade finish for....wait for it.....The Military. Aesthetically pleasing is not a Mil Spec...buy $3K Benelli shotgun for that. View Quote There are many, many, many other manufacturers making military grade weapons with military grade finishes that don't have the QC issues Colt does. |
|
|
|
Quoted:
Lowest bidder that meets the contract spec's. and I guarantee you those blemishes are not in the contract. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Pretty sure the government contracts colt not because of quality but because they were the lowest bidder. Lowest bidder that meets the contract spec's. and I guarantee you those blemishes are not in the contract. The lowest bidder thing is retarded. Colt wrote the book on the M4. All contractors meet their (COLT) specs that they set up for the gun. The military testing and fitment (milspec) mention nothing of those cosmetic blemishes. OP will you please go shoot your gun. You'll feel a lot better. |
|
I have a couple of blem lowers from other manufacturers that look 10 times as good as that one. I do own one Colt, but don't see the point anymore.
|
|
My Colt 6920 was perfect on the outside. Not a single mark.
Inside the trigger guard was another story. Its not much of a line but it is obvious that the excess was broken off not ground off. They did nothing to smooth it out. I can live with that, it's a Colt. Of course after reading this thread I had to check out the rest of my rifles. I am building on my first Anderson lower. It was sold as a blem. The blem area is a tiny spec on the right side. No problem. Now the trigger area on the Anderson in smooth as a babies bottom. I've got three late RRA lowers, they are all smooth. I have two of the original RRA lowers that I can slightly feel the line. I guess RRA got better over time. My older Bushmaster has a line about half as pronounced as the Colt. It's not just Colt's rifles but their pistols also. I've been telling folks for a couple of decades that if you're going to buy a Colt, then look it over very well. You can say that the rifles are built for war but that doesn't explain their lack of QC on civilian pistols. Don't get me wrong, I love Colt products, but their QC left town years ago. |
|
Quoted:
The lowest bidder thing is retarded. Colt wrote the book on the M4. All contractors meet their (COLT) specs that they set up for the gun. The military testing and fitment (milspec) mention nothing of those cosmetic blemishes. OP will you please go shoot your gun. You'll feel a lot better. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pretty sure the government contracts colt not because of quality but because they were the lowest bidder. Lowest bidder that meets the contract spec's. and I guarantee you those blemishes are not in the contract. The lowest bidder thing is retarded. Colt wrote the book on the M4. All contractors meet their (COLT) specs that they set up for the gun. The military testing and fitment (milspec) mention nothing of those cosmetic blemishes. OP will you please go shoot your gun. You'll feel a lot better. Benz made the first automobile late 1800s. It has been approved upon since then. Just saying,but ID send it back |
|
Quoted: Its a Colt. It adds character and charm to the experience. I have a few that are worse than that. One of mine you can see the unfinished machining marks and the unbeveled edge on the front left side. One has a light purple anodizing that matches my upper which I have grown quite fond of. My most recent one which is a M4LE has the same excess trigger guard molding but I really didn't give 2 shits once the gun was put together. Now I wouldn't even notice it. It will not affect the future value 1%. Once you start using it you will create some new character marks. Colt usually just slaps some black paint over the mistakes. If I were you I would just get some black paint and slather it over the hole. Don't do a good job, make sure to use too much paint and let it dry in a glob. Then it will be more authentic Colt. Just enjoy it and know each colt is unique and yours is unique. View Quote So following this logic you could not say what the shitty product because it adds character and is for Military use.. I've built 5 ARs using different manufacturers upper and lower receiver and never seen that bad finish as on this Colt. Maybe they could sent it to Government but for general public QC should be much better otherwise Colt will hear it. I wouldn't let it slide |
|
Looks like shit, OP.
Contact Colt and have them make it right. |
|
|
Quoted:
Great catch man. God knows what might have happened if we let that typo slide. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
"approved" upon? Or Improved upon! Great catch man. God knows what might have happened if we let that typo slide. Nothing would have happened, I just found it funny, as if I ever make a typo, it becomes a major component of a discussion! |
|
Kinda sucky, but colt aren't rhe prettiest. Id contact them but if it was a hassle to get them to fix it I wouldn't worry about it.
|
|
Quoted:
Benz made the first automobile late 1800s. It has been approved upon since then. Just saying,but ID send it back View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pretty sure the government contracts colt not because of quality but because they were the lowest bidder. Lowest bidder that meets the contract spec's. and I guarantee you those blemishes are not in the contract. The lowest bidder thing is retarded. Colt wrote the book on the M4. All contractors meet their (COLT) specs that they set up for the gun. The military testing and fitment (milspec) mention nothing of those cosmetic blemishes. OP will you please go shoot your gun. You'll feel a lot better. Benz made the first automobile late 1800s. It has been approved upon since then. Just saying,but ID send it back So colt is making the same rifle it did 50 years ago with no improvements? |
|
The nicks and what not wouldn't bother me but the trigger guard area is unacceptable its almost like they didn't finish completing the lower. I understand the war gun thing but you bought a nice new gun they shouldn't look that bad
|
|
While crappy looking it is, and shouldn't have left the factory, it's already registered so it wouldn't be worth the hassle and wait time to send it back.
|
|
If more people would bring this stuff to Colt's attention then it would happen less. Definitely contact Colt and make them replace it...their QC has been crap lately. Simply letting their customer service department know won't have an effect, it's when they have to replace things that it gets logged.
|
|
Quoted:
If more people would bring this stuff to Colt's attention then it would happen less. Definitely contact Colt and make them replace it...their QC has been crap lately. Simply letting their customer service department know won't have an effect, it's when they have to replace things that it gets logged. View Quote You want them to replace an NFA registered lower receiver? |
|
Quoted:
You want them to replace an NFA registered lower receiver? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
If more people would bring this stuff to Colt's attention then it would happen less. Definitely contact Colt and make them replace it...their QC has been crap lately. Simply letting their customer service department know won't have an effect, it's when they have to replace things that it gets logged. You want them to replace an NFA registered lower receiver? It is going to be a hassle to replace an NFA receiver and they are not going to put the same serial number on another receiver and then the whole registration process would have to be redone and Colt is sure not going to pay for the new stamp! As said, I would clean it up with a needle file and then refinish in that area. |
|
Quoted:
It is going to be a hassle to replace an NFA receiver and they are not going to put the same serial number on another receiver and then the whole registration process would have to be redone and Colt is sure not going to pay for the new stamp! As said, I would clean it up with a needle file and then refinish in that area. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If more people would bring this stuff to Colt's attention then it would happen less. Definitely contact Colt and make them replace it...their QC has been crap lately. Simply letting their customer service department know won't have an effect, it's when they have to replace things that it gets logged. You want them to replace an NFA registered lower receiver? It is going to be a hassle to replace an NFA receiver and they are not going to put the same serial number on another receiver and then the whole registration process would have to be redone and Colt is sure not going to pay for the new stamp! As said, I would clean it up with a needle file and then refinish in that area. The hassle is all the more reason that Colt should know that its customers are not satisfied. A responsible company would pay more attention with QC of NFA registered weapons, even if it doesn't give a shit about the over the counter sales market. This is not an either/or situation. Other US Gov't contractor weapons manufacturers seem to be able to provide reliable rifles that don't look like someone beat the hell out of them with a crowbar and sledge hammer. Colt could do better, It just chooses not to because it knows its fanboys will defend it until it ends up like Remington. Does it have to get as bad as Remington/ Marlin Freedom Group before buyers balk? By then it will be too late. One more bankruptcy reorganizaation (how many has it been now?) ought to finish Colt off, unless they start paying attention to QC. They are already losing market share with gov't contract. Their lobbyists can only do so much in the procurement business. Once that is gone, then "poof." |
|
Quoted:
The hassle is all the more reason that Colt should know that its customers are not satisfied. A responsible company would pay more attention with QC of NFA registered weapons, even if it doesn't give a shit about the over the counter sales market. This is not an either/or situation. Other US Gov't contractor weapons manufacturers seem to be able to provide reliable rifles that don't look like someone beat the hell out of them with a crowbar and sledge hammer. Colt could do better, It just chooses not to because it knows its fanboys will defend it until it ends up like Remington. Does it have to get as bad as Remington/ Marlin Freedom Group before buyers balk? By then it will be too late. One more bankruptcy reorganizaation (how many has it been now?) ought to finish Colt off, unless they start paying attention to QC. They are already losing market share with gov't contract. Their lobbyists can only do so much in the procurement business. Once that is gone, then "poof." View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If more people would bring this stuff to Colt's attention then it would happen less. Definitely contact Colt and make them replace it...their QC has been crap lately. Simply letting their customer service department know won't have an effect, it's when they have to replace things that it gets logged. You want them to replace an NFA registered lower receiver? It is going to be a hassle to replace an NFA receiver and they are not going to put the same serial number on another receiver and then the whole registration process would have to be redone and Colt is sure not going to pay for the new stamp! As said, I would clean it up with a needle file and then refinish in that area. The hassle is all the more reason that Colt should know that its customers are not satisfied. A responsible company would pay more attention with QC of NFA registered weapons, even if it doesn't give a shit about the over the counter sales market. This is not an either/or situation. Other US Gov't contractor weapons manufacturers seem to be able to provide reliable rifles that don't look like someone beat the hell out of them with a crowbar and sledge hammer. Colt could do better, It just chooses not to because it knows its fanboys will defend it until it ends up like Remington. Does it have to get as bad as Remington/ Marlin Freedom Group before buyers balk? By then it will be too late. One more bankruptcy reorganizaation (how many has it been now?) ought to finish Colt off, unless they start paying attention to QC. They are already losing market share with gov't contract. Their lobbyists can only do so much in the procurement business. Once that is gone, then "poof." I think colt already demonstrated it doesnt care with the abomination "expanse" |
|
Quoted:
The hassle is all the more reason that Colt should know that its customers are not satisfied. A responsible company would pay more attention with QC of NFA registered weapons, even if it doesn't give a shit about the over the counter sales market. This is not an either/or situation. Other US Gov't contractor weapons manufacturers seem to be able to provide reliable rifles that don't look like someone beat the hell out of them with a crowbar and sledge hammer. Colt could do better, It just chooses not to because it knows its fanboys will defend it until it ends up like Remington. Does it have to get as bad as Remington/ Marlin Freedom Group before buyers balk? By then it will be too late. One more bankruptcy reorganizaation (how many has it been now?) ought to finish Colt off, unless they start paying attention to QC. They are already losing market share with gov't contract. Their lobbyists can only do so much in the procurement business. Once that is gone, then "poof." View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If more people would bring this stuff to Colt's attention then it would happen less. Definitely contact Colt and make them replace it...their QC has been crap lately. Simply letting their customer service department know won't have an effect, it's when they have to replace things that it gets logged. You want them to replace an NFA registered lower receiver? It is going to be a hassle to replace an NFA receiver and they are not going to put the same serial number on another receiver and then the whole registration process would have to be redone and Colt is sure not going to pay for the new stamp! As said, I would clean it up with a needle file and then refinish in that area. The hassle is all the more reason that Colt should know that its customers are not satisfied. A responsible company would pay more attention with QC of NFA registered weapons, even if it doesn't give a shit about the over the counter sales market. This is not an either/or situation. Other US Gov't contractor weapons manufacturers seem to be able to provide reliable rifles that don't look like someone beat the hell out of them with a crowbar and sledge hammer. Colt could do better, It just chooses not to because it knows its fanboys will defend it until it ends up like Remington. Does it have to get as bad as Remington/ Marlin Freedom Group before buyers balk? By then it will be too late. One more bankruptcy reorganizaation (how many has it been now?) ought to finish Colt off, unless they start paying attention to QC. They are already losing market share with gov't contract. Their lobbyists can only do so much in the procurement business. Once that is gone, then "poof." Just to be clear, I am not a Colt fan and never have been, I do own 3 M16A1 fully automatic rifles, but I have them for the collectors value and because they were guns issued to guys I served with. In the civilian market, I won't buy one, I own older Remington's as well as S&W, but have never purchased a civilian Colt. Just to add, I have seen much worse on guns we were issued on the battle field, than this one. One question to be asked, did Colt know this was going to end up being an NFA gun? You can buy Colt's in gun shops and then change the barrel out and make it an NFA without Colt even having knowledge of it, now if it was purchase directly from Colt, that is a different story and they should be paying more attention, but often times companies don't, and it happens with all of them. |
|
OP you have been a member long enough to know not to buy a colt sight unseen if your concerned about finish.
Not taking up for them just saying it's common knowledge. I got a suppressor recently with fucked finish out of the box you won't find a thread about it......... you will find videos of how awesome it is. Krylon the whole gun shoot it and enjoy. It's not wise to buy anything NFA sight unseen if your worried about finish. |
|
Quoted:
So colt is making the same rifle it did 50 years ago with no improvements? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pretty sure the government contracts colt not because of quality but because they were the lowest bidder. Lowest bidder that meets the contract spec's. and I guarantee you those blemishes are not in the contract. The lowest bidder thing is retarded. Colt wrote the book on the M4. All contractors meet their (COLT) specs that they set up for the gun. The military testing and fitment (milspec) mention nothing of those cosmetic blemishes. OP will you please go shoot your gun. You'll feel a lot better. Benz made the first automobile late 1800s. It has been approved upon since then. Just saying,but ID send it back So colt is making the same rifle it did 50 years ago with no improvements? Of course they are, but the finish does not have jack to do with how it works.. Do you think the fit and finish of a M26 Fragmentation grenade is critical to its performance??? How about a AKM?? You should see the finish on a new or rebuilt Abrams Tank.... I should have emailed General Dynamics land systems division and told them this was unacceptable...and I am sending it back..... These are weapons of war ad the finish reflects that... The problem is over the years the civilian world got a hold of them and started to treat them like Custom wood furniture. And Colt has not changed their methods. If the Military does not reject that... why would you think they would be concerned if a civilian buyer might? |
|
So why pay a premium for a Colt when you can get a much nicer Anderson lower for $40?
|
|
I would shoot it, make it your go to gun, bond with it like a mama squirrel to its offspring,
and it will serve you well. If you send it back to Colt, be prepared for a wait. My last warranty work on a limited edition rifle was close to 4 months. They claimed they had to send it out 3 times until the contractor got the finish correct. YMMV |
|
Why does it matter? Because we want BOTH function and finish and a huge number of other manufacturers know this and provide both. I'm not buying an Abrams tank. Very poor analogy in a market of Daniel Defense, LMT, Noveski, Spikes Tactical and S&W, among many others. |
|
Quoted:
It is going to be a hassle to replace an NFA receiver and they are not going to put the same serial number on another receiver and then the whole registration process would have to be redone and Colt is sure not going to pay for the new stamp! As said, I would clean it up with a needle file and then refinish in that area. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
You want them to replace an NFA registered lower receiver? It is going to be a hassle to replace an NFA receiver and they are not going to put the same serial number on another receiver and then the whole registration process would have to be redone and Colt is sure not going to pay for the new stamp! As said, I would clean it up with a needle file and then refinish in that area. I don't know how they handle NFA, but they WILL re-manufacture a defective receiver. They redid a 1991 for me a few years back with same serial number. More importantly, they have a warranty that specifically covers cosmetic issues for 1 year, so not calling them up seems pointless. May as well call them up, and if they say they can look at it, they'll pay shipping both ways. Really, to the OP, you're looking at "do I want to wait again for this to be fixed"? You've waited at least 5 months, and warranty work might take another 3-5 months! |
|
I would just apply aluminum black or molycoat on the blem areas and shoot the piss out of it.
|
|
The finish of a Colt AR has never been great, but ever since they lowered the prices of the 6920 to compete with the market after prices cratered, it has really nosedived.
Add ARs to 1911s as Colts you have to see in person before buying. |
|
|
Years ago I had a Colt 6450 that had all kinds of flashing on the inner radius of the A1 "carry handle" of the upper receiver so I sent it back to Colt and they replaced it. I suspect with a serialized NFA item they would have to fix yours though and probably still not a big deal.
Cheers |
|
I bought my first Colt AR a few years ago and was very disappointed at the appearance of it when I pulled it out of the plastic. It was dinged up and the cast lines on the lower were horrible. It really bothered me at first and then I looked at how beat up my old bushmaster I had at the time was and decided to just shoot the piss out of it and call it good.
|
|
I bought my first Colt AR a few years ago and was very disappointed at the appearance of it when I pulled it out of the plastic. It was dinged up and the cast lines on the lower were horrible. It really bothered me at first and then I looked at how beat up my old bushmaster I had at the time was and decided to just shoot the piss out of it and call it good.
Sorry for the double post! |
|
Quoted:
I am not new to the AR world, but this is my first NFA item, a Colt LE6933 “M4 Commando” and I have to say, I am a bit disappointed by the finish quality. I know Colt has a solid track record for reliability but should I be concerned? <a href="http://s283.photobucket.com/user/05LT/media/ColtLower2_zps5jt28121.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i283.photobucket.com/albums/kk309/05LT/ColtLower2_zps5jt28121.jpg</a> <a href="http://s283.photobucket.com/user/05LT/media/ColtLower3_zpswzhyof0q.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i283.photobucket.com/albums/kk309/05LT/ColtLower3_zpswzhyof0q.jpg</a> <a href="http://s283.photobucket.com/user/05LT/media/ColtLower1_zpszoxemanw.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i283.photobucket.com/albums/kk309/05LT/ColtLower1_zpszoxemanw.jpg</a> It may not come through in the pictures too well, but there are many small pits and nicks and scratches, but what concerns me the most, is inside the trigger guard... is there any reason for me to be concerned? If this wasn’t a NFA item I wouldn’t be too worried, but because it is a NFA item and something I plan to hold onto for a long time (not to mention the time and money I have invested!) should I contact Colt? Has anyone else seen anything like this from Colt recently? What would you do? I'm open to your thoughts, ideas, suggestions, etc. View Quote SHOOT IT |
|
Quoted:
Any update yet? What did you decide to do? I can understand that this bothers you. I would not like that myself. I would suggest you’d ask Colt about it, maybe they can figure out a way to help you. Nothing wrong with letting them know that you are not satisfied with their quality control. If they can’t replace the lower maybe they can rework it. Anyway as already said you should be able to fix the trigger guard yourself by filing it down and rebluing the spot with BirchwoodCasey Aluma Black. I’d say it is just the luck of the draw, some Colt rifles have marks and spots, and others are flawless. It has always been that way with Colt I’d say as I have lately seen a box of M16A1 receivers that were sold to the Malaysian military in the late 1970s/early1980s. Some were flawless, others had marks and dings. Some serial numbers/markings were nice, others awful. One had exactly the same flash in the trigger guard area. I guess this was some flash that had not been removed properly before anodizing, as it could be removed with a sharp knife. I am a big Colt lover, but loving Colt means accepting their flaws too I’d say. <a href="http://s6.photobucket.com/user/1124/media/DSCI4088_zpszertn805.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y227/1124/DSCI4088_zpszertn805.jpg</a> <a href="http://s6.photobucket.com/user/1124/media/DSCI4147_zps6zlovbg6.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y227/1124/DSCI4147_zps6zlovbg6.jpg</a> <a href="http://s6.photobucket.com/user/1124/media/DSCI4086_zpsv60wifqo.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y227/1124/DSCI4086_zpsv60wifqo.jpg</a> View Quote Sad.....Very SAD but Hey its MilSpec |
|
My only concern would be the flashing in the trigger area. You really have three options...
1) Leave it and shoot it. You'll never touch that area anyways. If it catches on gloves though I would do #2 or 3... 2) Send it in to Colt. Let them knock it down and refinish. 3) Get out the dremel sanding wheel and lightly knock it down yourself. Alumablack. Done. |
|
Quoted:
My only concern would be the flashing in the trigger area. You really have three options... 1) Leave it and shoot it. You'll never touch that area anyways. If it catches on gloves though I would do #2 or 3... 2) Send it in to Colt. Let them knock it down and refinish. 3) Get out the dremel sanding wheel and lightly knock it down yourself. Alumablack. Done. View Quote or 4th option....Send it back to Colt...Get money back....Buy another brand. |
|
Depends on how long you want to wait if you send it back.
I too would not be happy with that, but I know how long they sometimes keep returns to "fix". Me personally, I would send it back. If you grind it yourself and touch it up with brownells stuff, it will not be a hard finish there. I don't have safe queens, but if I pay good money for an item I want it finished and not looking like a seconds Either way you go it will not affect the use of it. Just the looks. If it bothers you enough to post a thread about it, then you should send it back or you will never be happy with it. An update would be nice also......... |
|
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.