User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 10:07:21 AM EDT
[#1]
Is the upper factory built??
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 10:07:27 AM EDT
[#2]
M4A1 has a flattop upper.
Your carbine sounds a lot like an IDF carbine. And as long as it doesn't have an A2 upper, it's welcome here. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 10:19:04 AM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
M4A1 has a flattop upper. Your carbine sounds a lot like an IDF carbine. And as long as it doesn't have an A2 upper, it's welcome here. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Bushmaster called them m4a1's. It is an m4 stile gun as in the barrel with an a1(well generally a c7) upper. They did it before the official military m4a1 rifles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 10:19:06 AM EDT
[#4]
What does idf mean?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 10:30:17 AM EDT
[#5]
Israeli Defense Forces
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 10:30:52 AM EDT
[#6]
Quoted:
What does idf mean? Israeli Defense Forces. The gun appears to be a factory made gun. The finish matches all the way around on it and I have since seen a few pictures of them for sale etc...on other websites. I don't think they make it anymore though. It was basically a "budget" rifle with a decent milspec type barrel from what I can tell. It has the Bushmaster single heat shield handguards etc....I think I got a smokin' deal after looking around a little. Hell, the ammo (Federal) and mags (new D&H's) are worth almost $100. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 10:35:30 AM EDT
[#7]
Only thing I found that was a little concerning is the staking of the gas key bolts. They are just tiny little dimples. I'm going to go MOAKS on them when I get home tonight and shouldn't have any problems after that.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 10:59:25 AM EDT
[#8]
Just call it an RO723 clone.
I'm skeptical that Bushmaster used the term M4A1 before the M4A1 was type classified in 1995, though I could be wrong. Before the M4 "existed" it wouldn't really be a worthwhile marketing term. Also, just because Bushmaster likes to use fucked up nomenclature doesn't mean we should encourage it. That's what's caused the great "A3 upper" debacle, and that was Colt's fault. This is an A3 upper receiver: 
This is an M4A1: 
~Augee |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 11:41:25 AM EDT
[#9]
I just ordered one of these.
It has a c7 upper, 14.5 cl barrel (1/9 twist) w/ perm phantom. You got a steal for that price. Eta: bushy calls it the m4a1, you are correct on the name. It is not what we consider a m4a1. Great a1 carbine from the factory. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 11:54:57 AM EDT
[#10]
Quoted:
I just ordered one of these. It has a c7 upper, 14.5 cl barrel (1/9 twist) w/ perm phantom. You got a steal for that price. Eta: bushy calls it the m4a1, you are correct on the name. It is not what we consider a m4a1. Great a1 carbine from the factory. They still make them? I looked on their site and didn't see them listed. I agree, I think it's a darn good deal for me. Probably going to give it to my son for Christmas, he's 13 and it will fit him perfectly.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 12:50:34 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I just ordered one of these. It has a c7 upper, 14.5 cl barrel (1/9 twist) w/ perm phantom. You got a steal for that price. Eta: bushy calls it the m4a1, you are correct on the name. It is not what we consider a m4a1. Great a1 carbine from the factory. They still make them? I looked on their site and didn't see them listed. I agree, I think it's a darn good deal for me. Probably going to give it to my son for Christmas, he's 13 and it will fit him perfectly.... Yes its a special order item, from what I was told they do a small run for davidsons and other vendors each year. It's not a catalog item. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 1:21:13 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I just ordered one of these. It has a c7 upper, 14.5 cl barrel (1/9 twist) w/ perm phantom. You got a steal for that price. Eta: bushy calls it the m4a1, you are correct on the name. It is not what we consider a m4a1. Great a1 carbine from the factory. They still make them? I looked on their site and didn't see them listed. I agree, I think it's a darn good deal for me. Probably going to give it to my son for Christmas, he's 13 and it will fit him perfectly.... Yes its a special order item, from what I was told they do a small run for davidsons and other vendors each year. It's not a catalog item. Ah, that makes sense. The pawnshop I bought it out of is the only place around that sells Bushmaster and they use Davidsons as their main wholesaler. They probably sold the rifle to the guy a year ago or so and he either needed cash or wanted something different and brought it back. In looking around the web it looks like during the ban they made the same rifle with a comp and a fixed telestock, just an interesting observation.Thanks for the info.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 1:45:39 PM EDT
[#13]
Its the only a1 carbine on the market offered from the factory.
Why I got one |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 2:48:43 PM EDT
[#14]
Buddy has the post ban model with 10 rd mags and had a non adjust stock which I was kind enough to replace for him. His had A-1 rear sight and A-2 square front post with C-7 style upper and BM M-4 style barrel in 1-9 twist and fixed FH/suppressor. He paid $599 NIB from local gun dealer at last years T-giving sale. Carbine shoots fantastic and his BCG had a properly staked carrier key. Possibly not the best job on the key but very functional and has done everything he wanted it to. Any decent especially name brand AR for $450 is a deal and you got mags and ammo to boot. Good score and as stated probably perfect for your son. Think I might have to suggest adult supervised shooting but some kids are more mature than others. Many variables/scenario's here but 13 is a tough age and I wouldn't recommend access to possibly go postal or just get in trouble with an AR personally. These things have a way of ending up at school for one. In my surrounding counties every year a couple of kids get banned from county school's because of this. Heck every year some adults lose there jobs for possessing firearms in gun restricted zones. Popular rat fink move with the job market being so ultra tight. Gonna get laid off, rat out your buddy that you know has a gun in his car. Real popular move at the power stations for one.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 4:16:16 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:
Buddy has the post ban model with 10 rd mags and had a non adjust stock which I was kind enough to replace for him. His had A-1 rear sight and A-2 square front post with C-7 style upper and BM M-4 style barrel in 1-9 twist and fixed FH/suppressor. He paid $599 NIB from local gun dealer at last years T-giving sale. Carbine shoots fantastic and his BCG had a properly staked carrier key. Possibly not the best job on the key but very functional and has done everything he wanted it to. Any decent especially name brand AR for $450 is a deal and you got mags and ammo to boot. Good score and as stated probably perfect for your son. Think I might have to suggest adult supervised shooting but some kids are more mature than others. Many variables/scenario's here but 13 is a tough age and I wouldn't recommend access to possibly go postal or just get in trouble with an AR personally. These things have a way of ending up at school for one. In my surrounding counties every year a couple of kids get banned from county school's because of this. Heck every year some adults lose there jobs for possessing firearms in gun restricted zones. Popular rat fink move with the job market being so ultra tight. Gonna get laid off, rat out your buddy that you know has a gun in his car. Real popular move at the power stations for one. Move to Tennessee and avoid these issues |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 4:30:56 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
Its the only a1 carbine on the market offered from the factory. Why I got one DPMS and olympic arms both sell rifles with a1 or c7 style uppers. Colt has a 9mm carbine with an a1 upper as well. For a 5.56 rifle I'd go with the bushmaster between them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 4:39:05 PM EDT
[#17]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Its the only a1 carbine on the market offered from the factory. Why I got one DPMS and olympic arms both sell rifles with a1 or c7 style uppers. Colt has a 9mm carbine with an a1 upper as well. For a 5.56 rifle I'd go with the bushmaster between them. True but the lack of chrome was a deal killer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 4:42:30 PM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Its the only a1 carbine on the market offered from the factory. Why I got one DPMS and olympic arms both sell rifles with a1 or c7 style uppers. Colt has a 9mm carbine with an a1 upper as well. For a 5.56 rifle I'd go with the bushmaster between them. I think I agree, the Bushy would be the better buy over the DPMS...And Oly...BLARGH! BTW, are the Colt 9mm A1 uppers available to the civvy market or not? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 4:54:01 PM EDT
[#19]
Removed
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 5:44:20 PM EDT
[#20]
I don't worry a whole lot about my son. He is young but he has tens of thousands of rounds down range- not kidding even a little. We bought an MP15 22 about two years ago- between him and his little brother they have shot 5 full cans of ammo through it- a .30 cal can holds 3,500 rounds. Not to mention he's an Appleseed Rifleman. In January he tests for his black belt in TKD. We have our own steel range and he shoots all the time. It's gotten to the point where I spend most of my "free time" reloading ammo just to keep the two little shits in shells.....
He's hunted on his own (often with an AR) for about two years now- we hunt out of blinds for the most part but nonetheless he has killed over a half a dozen hogs and 4 deer by himself. He's in AP classes and knocking down A's. His mother and I have taught him right from wrong and he has never really disappointed us, he's made mistakes but always done the right thing. It may be foolish pride but I think he's going to be ok and I am trying to equip him with the tools he may need to get by in a world much different from the one I grew up in. Guns are a big part of that.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 5:56:15 PM EDT
[#21]
Removed
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 5:56:41 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted:
His mother and I have taught him right from wrong and he has never really disappointed us, he's made mistakes but always done the right thing. It may be foolish pride but I think he's going to be ok and I am trying to equip him with the tools he may need to get by in a world much different from the one I grew up in. Guns are a big part of that.... Dude I hear ya, I am about to have a daughter and hopefully a son one day. I hope to raise them right and ensure they have the skill set to make it no matter what comes in the future. Alfred nice blaster, I remember you had a thread about it in the past. Glad to see you put the side sling swivel on it. Any thought about a light? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 6:00:30 PM EDT
[#23]
Sorry Alfred, where are my manners? Very nice rifle and that is EXACTLY what I have. I think I even have one of those Colt side sling mounts in my parts bin! I think it's going to be a pretty cool Christmas at my house this year! Now I gotta find something for ME!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 7:10:15 PM EDT
[#24]
WTF over? This is the retro forum. Plenty of other forums for these types of threads.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 7:36:48 PM EDT
[#25]
Quoted:
WTF over? This is the retro forum. Plenty of other forums for these types of threads. never fails does it...these guys are having a happy thread and someone comes in and dirtbags the entire thing... If you dont like their thread then move along and stop being a dirtbag. I thought it was interesting and it wouda been poorly received in any of the other forums. It belongs here...maybe you dont. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2011 8:45:58 PM EDT
[#26]
Quoted:
WTF over? This is the retro forum. Plenty of other forums for these types of threads. OP purchased a rifle with an A1 upper. He did not know where else to go. He came here looking for help. It's all good. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 12:54:12 AM EDT
[#27]
In my opinion you made out like a bandit! I would say that the rifle is probably worth $800 or so on any internet site, and the mags are worth about $10 each, the ammo however is worth more than the mags! Locally here I bought some new ammo at $12 per 20 rds. nothing special, just the PMC ball ammo. So if you got 6 mags, thats 180 rds = 9 boxes at $12 each = $108 for the ammo alone. Good take on your part!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 3:02:22 AM EDT
[#28]
Quoted:
WTF over? This is the retro forum. Plenty of other forums for these types of threads. Op wanted to get info on his 723 clone. It has an a1 upper, he came here as it made sense. Were all here to learn and share knowledge. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 6:14:32 AM EDT
[#29]
There simply is not a forum that is suited to the "700" series. There is a very large, gray area of overlap between was is clearly retro and what was, for a brief time, state of the art. The retro forum has historically accepted the "IDF, BHD" builds. Heck we have even discussed the C7/8 and, in much more friendly times, the old school A2 which is now a pariah. History knows no boundaries and many ideas overlap. Judging from this thread if it has an A1 sight and a fixed carry handle, it is GTG.
Ralph |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 6:28:54 AM EDT
[#30]
Quoted:
Quoted:
WTF over? This is the retro forum. Plenty of other forums for these types of threads. never fails does it...these guys are having a happy thread and someone comes in and dirtbags the entire thing... If you dont like their thread then move along and stop being a dirtbag. I thought it was interesting and it wouda been poorly received in any of the other forums. It belongs here...maybe you dont. I would be hesitant to be so rude to one of the founding members of the Retro forum. The Retro forum exists as the resource it is because it's been self-policing since the beginning. The majority of members who frequent the Retro section have an appreciation and interest in the history of the weapon system and platform, and generally we try to keep the discussion to such things. While we understand that the other forums can be sometimes hostile to members who want to talk about fixed carry handle configurations - it still doesn't make the Retro-section the "anything goes fixed carry handle" discussion board. Allowing that to happen becomes a slippery slope of more and more members wanting to come in here and discuss things not relevant to historical or historical-inspired projects. There are discussions here, and like a thread that I'm about to start that are in the "gray areas" of retro - things like Blackhawk Down era, Bosnia era, and IDF stuff that are always closely watched to ensure that they don't stray too far from the intent of the Retro forum - and this is one of them. Generally speaking, current catalog items, especially commerical - not military items, aren't completely welcome in here. An out was given - to make it a discussion about an RO723 clone using currently available parts. Another thing you'll notice here is that people are much more concerned about proper nomenclature than in other sections of ARFCOM. An M4A1 means something much more specific to us than it does in GD or Tech. As does "M16" versus "M16A1" versus "XM16E1" versus "Model 01/R601" versus "SP1." Please help us to maintain the integrity of the Retro forum, rather than flippantly telling one of the founding and most contributing members in this section that he's a "dirtbag" and maybe "doesn't belong here." Enjoy your stay, and please remain civil. ~Augee |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 6:35:38 AM EDT
[#31]
Quoted:
There simply is not a forum that is suited to the "700" series. There is a very large, gray area of overlap between was is clearly retro and what was, for a brief time, state of the art. The retro forum has historically accepted the "IDF, BHD" builds. Heck we have even discussed the C7/8 and, in much more friendly times, the old school A2 which is now a pariah. History knows no boundaries and many ideas overlap. Judging from this thread if it has an A1 sight and a fixed carry handle, it is GTG. Ralph As I mentioned, discussion of BHD era and IDF carbines is very closely watched and policed to ensure that it doesn't stray away from the intent. And the A2 hasn't become a pariah - it's been given its own forum. The combined decision of the site staff and the membership has determined that interest in the A2 is enough to warrant a seperate, if somewhat more sparesly participated in forum section. There are still relatively lively discussions in there, too, though. As time goes on, I expect the A2 section to expand the same way the Retro forum did, as members who started on the M16A2 in the military rather than the M16A1 start feeling the pangs of nostalgia as many of the older vets here have. And by then, I'm sure there will be heated arguments as to whether early M4s and M4A1s belong in there, with those arguing that the M4 has evolved so much since the mid nineties that there needs to be a seperate discussion area for them because Tech will always be hostile to anything perceived as "old and irrelevant." ~Augee |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 7:08:18 AM EDT
[#32]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
WTF over? This is the retro forum. Plenty of other forums for these types of threads. never fails does it...these guys are having a happy thread and someone comes in and dirtbags the entire thing... If you dont like their thread then move along and stop being a dirtbag. I thought it was interesting and it wouda been poorly received in any of the other forums. It belongs here...maybe you dont. I would be hesitant to be so rude to one of the founding members of the Retro forum. The Retro forum exists as the resource it is because it's been self-policing since the beginning. The majority of members who frequent the Retro section have an appreciation and interest in the history of the weapon system and platform, and generally we try to keep the discussion to such things. While we understand that the other forums can be sometimes hostile to members who want to talk about fixed carry handle configurations - it still doesn't make the Retro-section the "anything goes fixed carry handle" discussion board. Allowing that to happen becomes a slippery slope of more and more members wanting to come in here and discuss things not relevant to historical or historical-inspired projects. There are discussions here, and like a thread that I'm about to start that are in the "gray areas" of retro - things like Blackhawk Down era, Bosnia era, and IDF stuff that are always closely watched to ensure that they don't stray too far from the intent of the Retro forum - and this is one of them. Generally speaking, current catalog items, especially commerical - not military items, aren't completely welcome in here. An out was given - to make it a discussion about an RO723 clone using currently available parts. Another thing you'll notice here is that people are much more concerned about proper nomenclature than in other sections of ARFCOM. An M4A1 means something much more specific to us than it does in GD or Tech. As does "M16" versus "M16A1" versus "XM16E1" versus "Model 01/R601" versus "SP1." Please help us to maintain the integrity of the Retro forum, rather than flippantly telling one of the founding and most contributing members in this section that he's a "dirtbag" and maybe "doesn't belong here." Enjoy your stay, and please remain civil. ~Augee Well put Augee. OP, there are two threads that you should post pics of your new rifle in, here and here. Best, Fin |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 10:05:56 AM EDT
[#33]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
WTF over? This is the retro forum. Plenty of other forums for these types of threads. never fails does it...these guys are having a happy thread and someone comes in and dirtbags the entire thing... If you dont like their thread then move along and stop being a dirtbag. I thought it was interesting and it wouda been poorly received in any of the other forums. It belongs here...maybe you dont. I would be hesitant to be so rude to one of the founding members of the Retro forum. The Retro forum exists as the resource it is because it's been self-policing since the beginning. The majority of members who frequent the Retro section have an appreciation and interest in the history of the weapon system and platform, and generally we try to keep the discussion to such things. While we understand that the other forums can be sometimes hostile to members who want to talk about fixed carry handle configurations - it still doesn't make the Retro-section the "anything goes fixed carry handle" discussion board. Allowing that to happen becomes a slippery slope of more and more members wanting to come in here and discuss things not relevant to historical or historical-inspired projects. There are discussions here, and like a thread that I'm about to start that are in the "gray areas" of retro - things like Blackhawk Down era, Bosnia era, and IDF stuff that are always closely watched to ensure that they don't stray too far from the intent of the Retro forum - and this is one of them. Generally speaking, current catalog items, especially commerical - not military items, aren't completely welcome in here. An out was given - to make it a discussion about an RO723 clone using currently available parts. Another thing you'll notice here is that people are much more concerned about proper nomenclature than in other sections of ARFCOM. An M4A1 means something much more specific to us than it does in GD or Tech. As does "M16" versus "M16A1" versus "XM16E1" versus "Model 01/R601" versus "SP1." Please help us to maintain the integrity of the Retro forum, rather than flippantly telling one of the founding and most contributing members in this section that he's a "dirtbag" and maybe "doesn't belong here." Enjoy your stay, and please remain civil. ~Augee So basically you're saying that this is the Curio and Relic section on AR15's and just because a rifle has an A1 upper this may not be the right place to talk about it? I'll leave you guys to your dusty old parts and quirky, Poindexter like discussions then. Thanks all who put me on the right track. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 10:11:32 AM EDT
[#34]
I really don't think member Will meant any harm, he just didn't know where to post ?
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ In the spirit of the Retro Forum Morg308 is a really cool guy, he will do anything in the spirit of the Retro Forum to get people information on Retro rifles. He even called my house two times to help me with Retro questions. I see where Morg308 & Augee is coming from and maybe others, they want to keep the Retro Forum pure Retro and I respect that. Out of respect to the Retro Forum, I removed my post from this thread. Alfred
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 10:51:09 AM EDT
[#35]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
WTF over? This is the retro forum. Plenty of other forums for these types of threads. never fails does it...these guys are having a happy thread and someone comes in and dirtbags the entire thing... If you dont like their thread then move along and stop being a dirtbag. I thought it was interesting and it wouda been poorly received in any of the other forums. It belongs here...maybe you dont. I would be hesitant to be so rude to one of the founding members of the Retro forum. The Retro forum exists as the resource it is because it's been self-policing since the beginning. The majority of members who frequent the Retro section have an appreciation and interest in the history of the weapon system and platform, and generally we try to keep the discussion to such things. While we understand that the other forums can be sometimes hostile to members who want to talk about fixed carry handle configurations - it still doesn't make the Retro-section the "anything goes fixed carry handle" discussion board. Allowing that to happen becomes a slippery slope of more and more members wanting to come in here and discuss things not relevant to historical or historical-inspired projects. There are discussions here, and like a thread that I'm about to start that are in the "gray areas" of retro - things like Blackhawk Down era, Bosnia era, and IDF stuff that are always closely watched to ensure that they don't stray too far from the intent of the Retro forum - and this is one of them. Generally speaking, current catalog items, especially commerical - not military items, aren't completely welcome in here. An out was given - to make it a discussion about an RO723 clone using currently available parts. Another thing you'll notice here is that people are much more concerned about proper nomenclature than in other sections of ARFCOM. An M4A1 means something much more specific to us than it does in GD or Tech. As does "M16" versus "M16A1" versus "XM16E1" versus "Model 01/R601" versus "SP1." Please help us to maintain the integrity of the Retro forum, rather than flippantly telling one of the founding and most contributing members in this section that he's a "dirtbag" and maybe "doesn't belong here." Enjoy your stay, and please remain civil. ~Augee So basically you're saying that this is the Curio and Relic section on AR15's and just because a rifle has an A1 upper this may not be the right place to talk about it? I'll leave you guys to your dusty old parts and quirky, Poindexter like discussions then. Thanks all who put me on the right track. Augee was being straight forward about the composure of the forum. There is a lot of good info this this section, while most of it has nothing to do with my tastes, I am a fan of learning, and the retro section has a lot to offer. Anyway, post pics of it in the KISS thread! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 11:02:38 AM EDT
[#36]
FWIW, my comment was directed at Captain_Howdy's response, not at the thread or its existence as a whole.
I just posted a thread about a historical RO727 variant. Morg might have some choice words for me about that one, too. 
Nevertheless, I feel that we here in Retro make it a point a) to be a little bit more polite to each other than calling each other "dirtbags," or for that matter "Poindexters" and b) police our own about inappropriate subject matter, and give warnings when there's the potential for straying too far. Which we may be doing as we speak. ~Augee |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 11:22:42 AM EDT
[#37]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
WTF over? This is the retro forum. Plenty of other forums for these types of threads. never fails does it...these guys are having a happy thread and someone comes in and dirtbags the entire thing... If you dont like their thread then move along and stop being a dirtbag. I thought it was interesting and it wouda been poorly received in any of the other forums. It belongs here...maybe you dont. I would be hesitant to be so rude to one of the founding members of the Retro forum. The Retro forum exists as the resource it is because it's been self-policing since the beginning. The majority of members who frequent the Retro section have an appreciation and interest in the history of the weapon system and platform, and generally we try to keep the discussion to such things. While we understand that the other forums can be sometimes hostile to members who want to talk about fixed carry handle configurations - it still doesn't make the Retro-section the "anything goes fixed carry handle" discussion board. Allowing that to happen becomes a slippery slope of more and more members wanting to come in here and discuss things not relevant to historical or historical-inspired projects. There are discussions here, and like a thread that I'm about to start that are in the "gray areas" of retro - things like Blackhawk Down era, Bosnia era, and IDF stuff that are always closely watched to ensure that they don't stray too far from the intent of the Retro forum - and this is one of them. Generally speaking, current catalog items, especially commerical - not military items, aren't completely welcome in here. An out was given - to make it a discussion about an RO723 clone using currently available parts. Another thing you'll notice here is that people are much more concerned about proper nomenclature than in other sections of ARFCOM. An M4A1 means something much more specific to us than it does in GD or Tech. As does "M16" versus "M16A1" versus "XM16E1" versus "Model 01/R601" versus "SP1." Please help us to maintain the integrity of the Retro forum, rather than flippantly telling one of the founding and most contributing members in this section that he's a "dirtbag" and maybe "doesn't belong here." Enjoy your stay, and please remain civil. ~Augee So basically you're saying that this is the Curio and Relic section on AR15's and just because a rifle has an A1 upper this may not be the right place to talk about it? I'll leave you guys to your dusty old parts and quirky, Poindexter like discussions then. Thanks all who put me on the right track. yes, this basically is the curio and relic section on AR-15s with the exception of some later rifles.. we love out dusty old parts, and our poindexter dimpled pin discussions. And yeah, in my opinion an A1 upper that has nothing but magpul and other modern AR-15 components does not belong here. To be honest I cringe when I see an A1 rifle, or SP1 that has been "upgraded" to today's modern tactical specifications. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 11:49:12 AM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
Quoted:
There simply is not a forum that is suited to the "700" series. There is a very large, gray area of overlap between was is clearly retro and what was, for a brief time, state of the art. The retro forum has historically accepted the "IDF, BHD" builds. Heck we have even discussed the C7/8 and, in much more friendly times, the old school A2 which is now a pariah. History knows no boundaries and many ideas overlap. Judging from this thread if it has an A1 sight and a fixed carry handle, it is GTG. Ralph As I mentioned, discussion of BHD era and IDF carbines is very closely watched and policed to ensure that it doesn't stray away from the intent. And the A2 hasn't become a pariah - it's been given its own forum. The combined decision of the site staff and the membership has determined that interest in the A2 is enough to warrant a seperate, if somewhat more sparesly participated in forum section. There are still relatively lively discussions in there, too, though. As time goes on, I expect the A2 section to expand the same way the Retro forum did, as members who started on the M16A2 in the military rather than the M16A1 start feeling the pangs of nostalgia as many of the older vets here have. And by then, I'm sure there will be heated arguments as to whether early M4s and M4A1s belong in there, with those arguing that the M4 has evolved so much since the mid nineties that there needs to be a seperate discussion area for them because Tech will always be hostile to anything perceived as "old and irrelevant." ~Augee Agreed Augie. Perhaps pariah was the incorrect word to have used. I too see no need for the name calling (dirtbag etc.) but I also think that when the policing of a thread is done it should be done politely, i.e "WTF over", while most probably made in jest, seems rude somehow. Old line forum member or not you shouldn't be rude. I know the A2 has it's own forum, but it is not historical in nature as the retro forum is. This thread would be a better fit there but I would bet that the some A2 guy would have a problem with it's "A1" sight. Fact is the OP got his answers here and that says a lot for the retro guys. No offense intended toward anyone, Ralph |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 4:31:38 PM EDT
[#39]
...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 5:16:47 PM EDT
[#40]
Well, I want to apologize to the OP - I didn't see the comment about an A1 upper, or I would not have made that comment. The first phot in the thread is a flattop in action, then there are A2 pics. Sorry, but I'm working 60 hrs a week and I don't get much of a chance to do more than speedread things. If I was rude, I'm sorry - I certainly didn't mean to piss in anyone's wheaties. I think, in fact, that C7 uppers belong here more than in the A2 section, where they seem to have taken up residence. I certainly love the 'weird builds' that we see here sometimes, like a certain prototype carbine I remember...
BTW, I own an A2 and am building a Mk18 clone. Also, this forum started with mostly A1 uppers on A2 lowers - since Nodak Spud wasn't around - then guys started reprofiling lowers. When I see a thread 'What M4 should I buy?' or 'What tacticool flashlight is best' here on the forum, it tells me they didn't take enough time to read, (just as I did BTW  ) and are in the wrong place, but it's getting old. When I see M4A1, I think flattop, ESPECIALLY when there's a picture of one in the thread. The most retro thing I saw in the thread was alfredB's C7 upper, M4 barrelled, A2 lower carbine. Nice gun, but I wouldn't really call it retro, although it's close to some AF carbines. It really belongs sin the KISS carbine thread.
All in all I appreciate the defense Augee, but I should have read deeper. I missed the reference to an A1 upper in the OP and responded to the other parts, including the photo. Cool pic, just not the place for it IMO - which is why I responded the way I did. Doesn't make it right, and this is the second time in a week I've 'snapped' at someone, so I'm going to sit back, STFU and kick it with a beer. I love the fact that this forum is so friendly, and although I don't know if I'm one of the 'founding members', I do think of myself as somewhat of a plankholder as I was here at the beginning. The thing that has always set this forum apart is it's willingness to welcome and help others, and the friendliness shown here. I was out of line. Way out of line actually by 'retro forum standards.' Sorry guys.  - Morg
ETA: This doesn't mean I appreciate the 'dirtbag' comment, nor is it appropriate. I'd be a little more cautious with only 40 posts, but hey, this is the Interweb... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 5:19:35 PM EDT
[#41]
OP did get a screamin deal and who knows as addictive as retro is he may be buying another barrel and a flat top upper in the near future. Some nice A-1 furniture possibly a CS stock and his stellar child may end up with two very nice weapons. One retroland would be happy to see and one that would be great for GD with possibly a night vision scope for shooting hogs. Sounds like he got the deal most anyone here would pop on. Probably doesn't belong in retro but following the no stomp rule does show a little more class than following the stomp rule.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 5:22:51 PM EDT
[#42]
Er, no it ain't. Issue M4A1 has a 14.5" barrel (heavier than an M4, in more recent iterations), since 2000 or so with the KAC flash-suppressor/mount and KAC RAS. It has a carbine length gas system and a conventional FDB. I think the weapon in your picture is from Crane, and I think it's a Mk12, probably a Mk 12 Mod 0 from the continuous, uninterrupted RAS along the top. Normally seen with bigger optics for the SPR role. The RAS doesn't look right for an HK416 to me, but that's another currently deployed AR knockoff with long rail and no FSB. Just because a guy looks like he's SOF doesn't mean his weapon is an M4A1. There's a lot of stuff in the armory. Also, I'm always suspicious of these pictures with patches blacked out. Guys' faces, yes; but if you don't want your patch to show, well, that's why they're velcroed on. (Of course, there are a lot of smart-ass patches kicking around that someone might not want going out over the interwebs, lest people not in tune with SOF humor see). Anyway, Bushmaster did label a series of carbines that combined some M4 features with some of what Bushy thought were M16A1 features and named it the M4A1, completely apart from the issue weapon... if you think it's hard keeping up with official issue weapon variations, and the many Colt factory running changes (and I do!), try to get your head around the idea of cataloging the 10,000 variations of AR made for the civilian market by hundreds or thousands of licensed manufacturers over the last 53 or so years. ¡Ay caramba! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 5:37:01 PM EDT
[#43]
Quoted:
Er, no it ain't. Issue M4A1 has a 14.5" barrel (heavier than an M4, in more recent iterations), since 2000 or so with the KAC flash-suppressor/mount and KAC RAS. It has a carbine length gas system and a conventional FDB. I think the weapon in your picture is from Crane, and I think it's a Mk12, probably a Mk 12 Mod 0 from the continuous, uninterrupted RAS along the top. Normally seen with bigger optics for the SPR role. The RAS doesn't look right for an HK416 to me, but that's another currently deployed AR knockoff with long rail and no FSB. Just because a guy looks like he's SOF doesn't mean his weapon is an M4A1. There's a lot of stuff in the armory. Also, I'm always suspicious of these pictures with patches blacked out. Guys' faces, yes; but if you don't want your patch to show, well, that's why they're velcroed on. (Of course, there are a lot of smart-ass patches kicking around that someone might not want going out over the interwebs, lest people not in tune with SOF humor see). Anyway, Bushmaster did label a series of carbines that combined some M4 features with some of what Bushy thought were M16A1 features and named it the M4A1, completely apart from the issue weapon... if you think it's hard keeping up with official issue weapon variations, and the many Colt factory running changes (and I do!), try to get your head around the idea of cataloging the 10,000 variations of AR made for the civilian market by hundreds or thousands of licensed manufacturers over the last 53 or so years. ¡Ay caramba! It is an m4a1. Block II mod, there is a 63 page thread on them in the ar discussions section. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 5:47:04 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted:
Quoted:
As I mentioned, discussion of BHD era and IDF carbines is very closely watched ... And the A2 hasn't become a pariah - it's been given its own forum.... I expect the A2 section to expand the same way the Retro forum did... ... Tech will always be hostile to anything perceived as "old and irrelevant." Those are all very good points. I have to say that I have learned a great deal from these forums (and elsewhere on ARFCOM) about the weapons I carried in the Army and in combat –– and I had a very solid gun knowledge background and extremely good, from a military standpoint, weapons education. I was always curious about the variations I observed in our issue weapons (as well as in allied and enemy weapons), but didn't know the reasons behind some of the changes. (I think I understand why now. The services are an oral culture... vital information passes in briefings and classes, not in written documents, more than anywhere else in society. While this means that skills are effectively transmitted and vital tribal knowledge is maintained, it also means that urban legends have a very fertile environment for growth). For instance, many soldiers believe that the heavy barrel of the A2 was created for greater accuracy. Actually, it was created to better resist bending when misused as a pry bar! That's why it's only heavy from the FSB forward. That's in contemporary documents, but many soldiers believe an A2 is more accurate than an A1, intrinsically. It is not (it does have more easily adjustable rear sights –– not an unalloyed good –– and a superior front sight from a visibility standpoint). As many of the members of this forum have demonstrated, a good pencil-barrel rifle can shoot at least as well as the later, heavier weapons. Anybody who thinks weapons should be heavier has never been a 11B (or 0311 for our bro's in the Corps). Of course, if you save a pound on the rifle they hang something else on you... or you get a two-pound Rambo knife. (Before there was Rambo, we called this a "John Wayne knife" or a "Jungle Jim Killer Knife." One new term is "Taliban video prop.") The problem with the endless pursuit of novelty that you find on the tech forums is that you either step off the treadmill and your weapon is soon, by their standards, "obsolete," or you continue running on the treadmill (and paying, and paying) like a hamster in a cage –– and you still pile up a closet full of obsolete parts that had to be taken off when they weren't cool any longer. One great advantage of a build to a historical point, is that when it's done, it's done. (Unless, like a lot of forum members, you start making something approximate... then get a bit closer... then change out that one part that's bugging you... then learn something new....) |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 6:16:35 PM EDT
[#45]
Quoted:
It is an m4a1. Block II mod, there is a 63 page thread on them in the ar discussions section. OK, I stand corrected, when I retired (early 2010) the SOPMOD II kit did not include any uppers w/o FSBs –– at least, as issued to us. In fact, it was all optic and electronic at that point, with new longer rails systems "coming RSN [real soon now]". So time marches on, things change, and my inside knowledge gets more retro every day. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 6:58:59 PM EDT
[#46]
Quoted:
Well, I want to apologize to the OP - I didn't see the comment about an A1 upper, or I would not have made that comment. The first phot in the thread is a flattop in action, then there are A2 pics. Sorry, but I'm working 60 hrs a week and I don't get much of a chance to do more than speedread things. If I was rude, I'm sorry - I certainly didn't mean to piss in anyone's wheaties. I think, in fact, that C7 uppers belong here more than in the A2 section, where they seem to have taken up residence. I certainly love the 'weird builds' that we see here sometimes, like a certain prototype carbine I remember... BTW, I own an A2 and am building a Mk18 clone. Also, this forum started with mostly A1 uppers on A2 lowers - since Nodak Spud wasn't around - then guys started reprofiling lowers. When I see a thread 'What M4 should I buy?' or 'What tacticool flashlight is best' here on the forum, it tells me they didn't take enough time to read, (just as I did BTW ) and are in the wrong place, but it's getting old. When I see M4A1, I think flattop, ESPECIALLY when there's a picture of one in the thread. The most retro thing I saw in the thread was alfredB's C7 upper, M4 barrelled, A2 lower carbine. Nice gun, but I wouldn't really call it retro, although it's close to some AF carbines. It really belongs sin the KISS carbine thread.
All in all I appreciate the defense Augee, but I should have read deeper. I missed the reference to an A1 upper in the OP and responded to the other parts, including the photo. Cool pic, just not the place for it IMO - which is why I responded the way I did. Doesn't make it right, and this is the second time in a week I've 'snapped' at someone, so I'm going to sit back, STFU and kick it with a beer. I love the fact that this forum is so friendly, and although I don't know if I'm one of the 'founding members', I do think of myself as somewhat of a plankholder as I was here at the beginning. The thing that has always set this forum apart is it's willingness to welcome and help others, and the friendliness shown here. I was out of line. Way out of line actually by 'retro forum standards.' Sorry guys. - Morg
ETA: This doesn't mean I appreciate the 'dirtbag' comment, nor is it appropriate. I'd be a little more cautious with only 40 posts, but hey, this is the Interweb... about as appropriate as WTF over but thats ok...I been around for far longer than 40 posts. and as always that is how folks judge others around here. I originally date back far enough to remember that sargent guy who did the funny skits with the GI Joes figures. And even before the Arock debacle. All I was doing was taking up for the thread itself. Which I thought the thread was cool. I read a lot because I have a lot to learn about the different old variants. Enjoy your beer sounds like you need more than one...and time to drink it as well it seems. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 8:38:34 PM EDT
[#47]
Quoted:
Quoted:
It is an m4a1. Block II mod, there is a 63 page thread on them in the ar discussions section. OK, I stand corrected, when I retired (early 2010) the SOPMOD II kit did not include any uppers w/o FSBs –– at least, as issued to us. In fact, it was all optic and electronic at that point, with new longer rails systems "coming RSN [real soon now]". So time marches on, things change, and my inside knowledge gets more retro every day. If my post came across smartassish, it was not the intent. I had to be quick before the misses finished up with the dishes...... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2011 8:39:02 PM EDT
[#48]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, I want to apologize to the OP - I didn't see the comment about an A1 upper, or I would not have made that comment. The first phot in the thread is a flattop in action, then there are A2 pics. Sorry, but I'm working 60 hrs a week and I don't get much of a chance to do more than speedread things. If I was rude, I'm sorry - I certainly didn't mean to piss in anyone's wheaties. I think, in fact, that C7 uppers belong here more than in the A2 section, where they seem to have taken up residence. I certainly love the 'weird builds' that we see here sometimes, like a certain prototype carbine I remember... BTW, I own an A2 and am building a Mk18 clone. Also, this forum started with mostly A1 uppers on A2 lowers - since Nodak Spud wasn't around - then guys started reprofiling lowers. When I see a thread 'What M4 should I buy?' or 'What tacticool flashlight is best' here on the forum, it tells me they didn't take enough time to read, (just as I did BTW ) and are in the wrong place, but it's getting old. When I see M4A1, I think flattop, ESPECIALLY when there's a picture of one in the thread. The most retro thing I saw in the thread was alfredB's C7 upper, M4 barrelled, A2 lower carbine. Nice gun, but I wouldn't really call it retro, although it's close to some AF carbines. It really belongs sin the KISS carbine thread.
All in all I appreciate the defense Augee, but I should have read deeper. I missed the reference to an A1 upper in the OP and responded to the other parts, including the photo. Cool pic, just not the place for it IMO - which is why I responded the way I did. Doesn't make it right, and this is the second time in a week I've 'snapped' at someone, so I'm going to sit back, STFU and kick it with a beer. I love the fact that this forum is so friendly, and although I don't know if I'm one of the 'founding members', I do think of myself as somewhat of a plankholder as I was here at the beginning. The thing that has always set this forum apart is it's willingness to welcome and help others, and the friendliness shown here. I was out of line. Way out of line actually by 'retro forum standards.' Sorry guys. - Morg
ETA: This doesn't mean I appreciate the 'dirtbag' comment, nor is it appropriate. I'd be a little more cautious with only 40 posts, but hey, this is the Interweb... about as appropriate as WTF over but thats ok...I been around for far longer than 40 posts. and as always that is how folks judge others around here. I originally date back far enough to remember that sargent guy who did the funny skits with the GI Joes figures. And even before the Arock debacle. All I was doing was taking up for the thread itself. Which I thought the thread was cool. I read a lot because I have a lot to learn about the different old variants. Enjoy your beer sounds like you need more than one...and time to drink it as well it seems. I have never met Morg308, would like to some day as he seems a good egg. Sure he has been a little snippy of late but who hasn't had those times. Take care Morg and have another beer, take some time to smell the roses. Ralph |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2011 5:04:25 AM EDT
[#49]
Post count, join date, whatever - the "WTF Over" was kind of snippy. The "dirtbag" and "maybe you don't belong here" was downright rude.
Not everybody does everything right all the time, and I've made some snippy comments before that perhaps I shouldn't have, but I think I've stopped before being rude, at least I hope. My taking up for Morg was about being rude to one another in the forum, not about the subject of the thread. As for the M4A1 thing - a) it sounds like I inadvertently caused all of this because I posted that photo about "this is an M4A1" and b) I think the identity of that carbine has been settled already, so I won't comment more on that. 
Disagreements and discussion are fine, but I still prefer the Retro forum because it tends to be generally "classier" than the other forums, so I personally don't appreciate when people are called "dirtbags" GD style, especially a long standing, helpful, and contributing member. I don't particularly care about post counts and join dates - but at the same time, lurking is not the same thing as contributing. ~Augee |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2011 5:21:23 AM EDT
[#50]
Man, two whole pages and not a single photo of the rifle in question, the Retro forum just ain't what it used to be.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
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.
