User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/2/2011 2:00:31 PM EDT
[#1]
Demilled XM16E1 lower receivers pop up very frequently on Gunbroker, but they are usually pricey.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2011 2:30:33 PM EDT
[#2]
Excuse my ignorance, but what's the point of buying one? Is it legal to weld back together and use?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2011 2:45:17 PM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
Excuse my ignorance, but what's the point of buying one? Is it legal to weld back together and use? Only if you're an 07/02 SOT I believe. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2011 2:58:11 PM EDT
[#4]
Quoted:
Excuse my ignorance, but what's the point of buying one? Is it legal to weld back together and use? I own one just for the historical value. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2011 4:02:42 PM EDT
[#5]
pardon my ignorance. but what is a demilled M16 lower?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2011 4:06:34 PM EDT
[#6]
A cut up M16 receiver, particularly the lower. Demilled uppers are pretty much worthless, unless you collect aluminum scraps.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2011 4:17:16 PM EDT
[#7]
so if i understand this correctly its a lower receiver that has ll the outside milling done but its solid so someone cant just go ahead and put in a fire control group so alot like 80% lower or just a novelty paper weight
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2011 4:18:31 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Excuse my ignorance, but what's the point of buying one? Is it legal to weld back together and use? I just want it for a desk ornament. Desk ornament and historical value... got it. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2011 4:24:17 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted:
so if i understand this correctly its a lower receiver that has ll the outside milling done but its solid so someone cant just go ahead and put in a fire control group so alot like 80% lower or just a novelty paper weight No its an old .mil M16 lower receiver that's been cut into pieces. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2011 4:26:39 PM EDT
[#10]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Excuse my ignorance, but what's the point of buying one? Is it legal to weld back together and use? I just want it for a desk ornament. Desk ornament and historical value... got it. Thanks. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2011 4:37:24 PM EDT
[#11]
My brother bought this years ago. He gave it to me. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2011 4:48:44 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted:
My brother bought this years ago. He gave it to me. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v323/Colt_SBR/Guns/IMG_1914b.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v323/Colt_SBR/Guns/IMG_1920b.jpg That looks to be either a 601, 602, XM16E1 or an early 604 receiver judging by the buffer tube roll pin hole. Later 603 M16A1's and later 604's didn't have a pinned buffer tube. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2011 4:55:34 PM EDT
[#13]
it would be alot cooler if there was more of it there but dosnt seem like its good for much but holding down paper anymore
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2011 3:13:53 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted:
Excuse my ignorance, but what's the point of buying one? Is it legal to weld back together and use? I just want it for a desk ornament. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2011 3:23:26 PM EDT
[#15]
Many years ago you could buy barrels of them (literally) for cheap.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/4/2011 3:10:31 AM EDT
[#16]
What are the de-milled colt's worth? I know a guy who has maybe 10 of them and they look a lot better than the picture.
The ones he has look like they were cut not crushed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/4/2011 7:15:02 AM EDT
[#17]
Depending on condition, they could be worth a lot to a retro builder... original Colt parts from early models are always in demand. As for price? Have to cruise auctions and see what such retro parts are going for.
Also have to be careful that the receiver sections are demilled to current standards (3 torch cuts with 1/4" kerf) or the receiver sections are still considered to constitute a machinegun, even if they were properly demilled back in the 70's/80's with just narrow saw cuts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/4/2011 8:06:18 AM EDT
[#18]
My M-16 paperweight:
 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2011 4:34:22 AM EDT
[#19]
For demilled lowers to registered reweld items, what are the typical tell tale signs of a reweld?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2011 4:53:47 PM EDT
[#20]
Quoted:
For demilled lowers to registered reweld items, what are the typical tell tale signs of a reweld? The name of the manf. Some of them you can tell on the inside of the lower(you can see the weld marks). Some of them were really, really well done, and about the only way to tell is xray the lower. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/7/2011 4:56:06 PM EDT
[#21]
these are cool as hell! Anyone know where to purchase either the magwell or the rear piece? Would love to have one of each on my desk.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2011 12:07:30 PM EDT
[#22]
What a shame to see these pics no wonder it cost 10 grand for an FA lower thats legal. They need to reverse the Ban.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/8/2011 1:51:12 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: Is there anywhere selling demilled M16 lowers? Everwhere I have looked is sold out or not listed. TIA Model 1 sells them at local gun shows. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2011 9:50:17 AM EDT
[#24]
Quoted:
these are cool as hell! Anyone know where to purchase either the magwell or the rear piece? Would love to have one of each on my desk. Here are some. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2011 7:22:27 PM EDT
[#25]
holy crap!?!? I have a bunch of M4A1 marked ones, they are cool paperweights, but no way in hell they are worth 150 bucks? I was going to cut the roll stamp off and make a keychain out of it lol.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2011 3:52:07 AM EDT
[#26]
Would taking a demilled M16 lower and re-welding it to a fully functional machine gun be illegal?
ETA: page ownage |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2011 5:12:00 AM EDT
[#27]
Quoted:
Would taking a demilled M16 lower and re-welding it to a fully functional machine gun be illegal? ETA: page ownage Not for normal peons of the citizenry...ANYMORE! Before FOPA 1986 and the attached Hughes Amendment, you could file a Form 1 to "make" a machine gun. Once approved you would reweld the two or three parts and have yourself a M16. BUT NO MORE. Title II manufacturers can do it. I am not sure about normal Title II dealers. They may or may not be allowed to FORM 1 a reweld. Either way, these would not be transferable to citizens anyway, they would be classified as a POST MAY 1986 machine gun. (or post sample, or post 86, etc) |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2011 9:08:26 AM EDT
[#28]
Quoted: Would taking a demilled M16 lower and re-welding it to a fully functional machine gun be illegal? ETA: page ownage I have wondered the same thing. In reality, what's the difference betweena REWAT and this? The only thing that I can logically think of is that a rewat has always been a whole receiver - never destroyed. Hence it's always been a machinegun. Once you reweld, however, you've created a "new" machinegun and as such have violated the law. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2011 11:44:28 AM EDT
[#29]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Would taking a demilled M16 lower and re-welding it to a fully functional machine gun be illegal? ETA: page ownage I have wondered the same thing. In reality, what's the difference betweena REWAT and this? The only thing that I can logically think of is that a rewat has always been a whole receiver - never destroyed. Hence it's always been a machinegun. Once you reweld, however, you've created a "new" machinegun and as such have violated the law. Rewats had to be registered in the 1968 Amnesty. Those that missed the deadline are forever contraband. And FWIW, the demilled receivers shown above –– if you own both front and rear, and the edges meet or overlap –– is possession of an unregistered machine gun. ATF has changed the demil standards since those were chopped in the 1980s. There are many demils which suddenly became "restorable" and thus live MGs again when ATF changed the standards. Today, the receiver must be cut in two places –– through the trigger group and through the magwell –– and the center piece must be destroyed. Possession of all three pieces constitutes possession of a live MG. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2011 11:58:18 AM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: Really? Why do Form 1s still have the checkbox for reactivating a firearm?Quoted: Quoted: Would taking a demilled M16 lower and re-welding it to a fully functional machine gun be illegal? ETA: page ownage I have wondered the same thing. In reality, what's the difference betweena REWAT and this? The only thing that I can logically think of is that a rewat has always been a whole receiver - never destroyed. Hence it's always been a machinegun. Once you reweld, however, you've created a "new" machinegun and as such have violated the law. Rewats had to be registered in the 1968 Amnesty. Those that missed the deadline are forever contraband. And FWIW, the demilled receivers shown above –– if you own both front and rear, and the edges meet or overlap –– is possession of an unregistered machine gun. ATF has changed the demil standards since those were chopped in the 1980s. There are many demils which suddenly became "restorable" and thus live MGs again when ATF changed the standards. Today, the receiver must be cut in two places –– through the trigger group and through the magwell –– and the center piece must be destroyed. Possession of all three pieces constitutes possession of a live MG. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2011 12:07:10 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Really? Why do Form 1s still have the checkbox for reactivating a firearm?
Quoted:
Quoted:
Would taking a demilled M16 lower and re-welding it to a fully functional machine gun be illegal? ETA: page ownage I have wondered the same thing. In reality, what's the difference betweena REWAT and this? The only thing that I can logically think of is that a rewat has always been a whole receiver - never destroyed. Hence it's always been a machinegun. Once you reweld, however, you've created a "new" machinegun and as such have violated the law. Rewats had to be registered in the 1968 Amnesty. Those that missed the deadline are forever contraband. And FWIW, the demilled receivers shown above –– if you own both front and rear, and the edges meet or overlap –– is possession of an unregistered machine gun. ATF has changed the demil standards since those were chopped in the 1980s. There are many demils which suddenly became "restorable" and thus live MGs again when ATF changed the standards. Today, the receiver must be cut in two places –– through the trigger group and through the magwell –– and the center piece must be destroyed. Possession of all three pieces constitutes possession of a live MG. That is for Dewats that were registered during, or prior to, the 1968 Amnesty. Most have already been rewatted (either via Form 1's or Form 2's). But there still are some registered Dewats out there. Just to recap, there are five types of MGs –– two are registered, three are not: ––Registered, live and operational. (Whether transferable, pre-sample or post-sample.) ––Registered dewats, which transfer on a Form 5 and may legally be restored to operational via a subsequent Form 1/2. ––Demilled receivers –– destroyed to the point where they cannot be repaired to function, because of missing sections. ––Dummy receivers, which are designed so that they cannot be modified into a live gun. ––Unregistered contraband. This includes guns never registered, or parts kits which are able to be welded back together into a live gun. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2011 12:11:06 PM EDT
[#32]
lord $150??? What's a demilled M2 carbine receiver worth??
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2011 12:15:28 PM EDT
[#33]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Really? Why do Form 1s still have the checkbox for reactivating a firearm?Quoted: Quoted: Would taking a demilled M16 lower and re-welding it to a fully functional machine gun be illegal? ETA: page ownage I have wondered the same thing. In reality, what's the difference betweena REWAT and this? The only thing that I can logically think of is that a rewat has always been a whole receiver - never destroyed. Hence it's always been a machinegun. Once you reweld, however, you've created a "new" machinegun and as such have violated the law. Rewats had to be registered in the 1968 Amnesty. Those that missed the deadline are forever contraband. And FWIW, the demilled receivers shown above –– if you own both front and rear, and the edges meet or overlap –– is possession of an unregistered machine gun. ATF has changed the demil standards since those were chopped in the 1980s. There are many demils which suddenly became "restorable" and thus live MGs again when ATF changed the standards. Today, the receiver must be cut in two places –– through the trigger group and through the magwell –– and the center piece must be destroyed. Possession of all three pieces constitutes possession of a live MG. That is for Dewats that were registered during, or prior to, the 1968 Amnesty. Most have already been rewatted (either via Form 1's or Form 2's). But there still are some registered Dewats out there. Just to recap, there are five types of MGs –– two are registered, three are not: ––Registered, live and operational. (Whether transferable, pre-sample or post-sample.) ––Registered dewats, which transfer on a Form 5 and may legally be restored to operational via a subsequent Form 1/2. ––Demilled receivers –– destroyed to the point where they cannot be repaired to function, because of missing sections. ––Dummy receivers, which are designed so that they cannot be modified into a live gun. ––Unregistered contraband. This includes guns never registered, or parts kits which are able to be welded back together into a live gun. I feel like I must be using the term incorrectly. Is there a difference between rewat and dewat? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2011 1:10:16 PM EDT
[#34]
(First, in my initial post, I used the term incorrectly, as you will see:)
A dewat –– Deactivated War Trophy –– is a registered machine gun which has been rendered inoperable but is able to be restored to fully function. (ATF uses the term "unservicable.") A rewat –– Reactivated War Trophy –– is a registered dewat which has been restored to live function. For comparison, a demil is a firearm which has been demilitarized. According to DoD 4145.26M, that means: "To disarm, neutralize, and accomplish any other action required to render ammunition and explosives innocuous or ineffectual for military use." In terms of firearms which come under the purview of ATF, demilling requires destruction of the registered part (usually the receiver, but can also be a sideplate, DIAS, etc.) to the point where it cannot be restored to a working firearm. Thus the ATF regs that require at least one section be totally destroyed by melting, crushing, feeding into a chipper, etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2011 1:01:53 AM EDT
[#35]
 And here i am looking for a Colt post sample and can't find one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2011 6:01:55 AM EDT
[#36]
Quoted:
crap!?!? I have a bunch of M4A1 marked ones, they are cool paperweights, but no way in hell they are worth 150 bucks? I was going to cut the roll stamp off and make a keychain out of it lol. I wouldn't pay that much for one. I paid $60 for mine, and I thought that was a lot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2011 12:43:33 AM EDT
[#37]
damn Arfcom.
Now I want a demilled m-16  .Well and RDIAS, but that is another story... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/24/2011 10:18:24 PM EDT
[#38]
I had to have a couple..Thankfully I have an H&R still in one piece..
 But these two still make me want to cry..Oh just a habit with the serials..Not sure what I was thinking..
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/25/2011 6:48:09 AM EDT
[#39]
That is pretty funny you blurred the s/n on them.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/25/2011 12:51:36 PM EDT
[#40]
Yep just a habit that I'm still not sure why its even done..I mean if a can or machine gun is owned by you what does it matter the number is known..Everyones VIN is exposed. Couple years later now and still no idea why I do that..Ah at least with photobucket it only takes a second or so..
When I was playing..Tell me this doesn't look good..  It was a where's Waldo kind of thing to see if anyone was paying attention. This pic was to show the Liberty Torch originally..Thats the can I got for my M16..
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/26/2011 8:06:52 AM EDT
[#41]
Out of curiosity, what if you took that mag well, chopped off the gnarled bits, and welded it to the back half of a semi-auto lower? Aside from being unfeasible, I'm just going to guess that that would be illegal, yes?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/26/2011 9:37:01 AM EDT
[#42]
Quoted:
Out of curiosity, what if you took that mag well, chopped off the gnarled bits, and welded it to the back half of a semi-auto lower? Aside from being unfeasible, I'm just going to guess that that would be illegal, yes? No, that probably would be legal. I say "probably" because common sense would be that the old front (magwell) section is not now a firearm, and thus not now an MG, and therefore it should only be classed as scrap metal which is being used to manufacture a new lower. The key area –– the new semi rear half –– has never been drilled for the autosear pin, so it also has never been an MG and thus is not one now. But with ATF, you cannot rely on common sense. And this is an issue which AFAIK ATF has never ruled on. Remember, in the past, ATF has ruled that a shoelace is a machine gun requiring registration.
So proceed with caution. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/26/2011 12:17:08 PM EDT
[#43]
That would be kind of cool, even if it would be really expensive, to have a semi marked H&R or something of that nature. I'd guess some of the retro guys would like it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/26/2011 12:35:03 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted:
Out of curiosity, what if you took that mag well, chopped off the gnarled bits, and welded it to the back half of a semi-auto lower? Aside from being unfeasible, I'm just going to guess that that would be illegal, yes? I don't see a reason that would be illegal. You're using what is essentially scrap aluminum to build a title 1 gun. The only issue I would see is due to the markings, but if you were to have documentation concerning the build I don't see it being an issue. Someone did that w/ an HK416 on HKPro http://www.hkpro.com/forum/showthread.php?92860-Abandoned-Civilian-416-Project-%28 
Gave up because it was so difficult to weld the aluminum. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/26/2011 4:42:31 PM EDT
[#45]
All this talk of hacked ones has to be depressing to more than just me..Here's my complete H&R set up for rimfire..Mine was one of 3 that came out of the H&R display..Not the fella that got the original 150-200 transferables..Think I have pieced together most of the origin of them now..
It's all condomed up so I can toss back all the original parts when I'm 70 and sell it.(well if I need to..LOL). It is a blast.. 
In action again.. 5 Black dog drum dumps 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/26/2011 6:08:08 PM EDT
[#46]
Quoted:
All this talk of hacked ones has to be depressing to more than just me..Here's my complete H&R set up for rimfire..Mine was one of 3 that came out of the H&R display..Not the fella that got the original 150-200 transferables..Think I have pieced together most of the origin of them now.. It's all condomed up so I can toss back all the original parts when I'm 70 and sell it.(well if I need to..LOL). It is a blast..
In action again.. 5 Black dog drum dumps http://i824.photobucket.com/albums/zz163/Chondro2009/DSCN9043.jpg That is pretty cool. How long have you had that??? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/26/2011 8:10:40 PM EDT
[#47]
I got possession of it around January/February. See what these damn forums get you into..I was just a silencer nut..
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2011 6:17:31 AM EDT
[#48]
Quoted:
I got possession of it around January/February. See what these damn forums get you into..I was just a silencer nut.. Well, if you don't want it.......
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2011 6:22:49 PM EDT
[#49]
Quoted:
My brother bought this years ago. He gave it to me. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v323/Colt_SBR/Guns/IMG_1914b.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v323/Colt_SBR/Guns/IMG_1920b.jpg The trigger pin hole appears to be out of spec. Tough to say on the hammer pin hole. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2011 7:32:18 PM EDT
[#50]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Out of curiosity, what if you took that mag well, chopped off the gnarled bits, and welded it to the back half of a semi-auto lower? Aside from being unfeasible, I'm just going to guess that that would be illegal, yes? I don't see a reason that would be illegal. You're using what is essentially scrap aluminum to build a title 1 gun. The only issue I would see is due to the markings, but if you were to have documentation concerning the build I don't see it being an issue. Someone did that w/ an HK416 on HKPro http://www.hkpro.com/forum/showthread.php?92860-Abandoned-Civilian-416-Project-%28 http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q214/HKNC/416Dgraft.jpg Gave up because it was so difficult to weld the aluminum. You might be better off buying a 10% 416 forging and "roll your own". Then have the fire selection marking engraved, then anodize the lower, then laser engrave with HK 416 D markings and all that jaz, then color fill the fire selection markings. Have you tried contacting M60 Joe? I beleive can re-weld lowers |
|
|
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.
