Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Page Armory » M-16
Posted: 7/31/2016 2:14:55 PM EDT
My uncle bought an M16A1 recently and the gun was advertised as 1 owner and in factory configuration.  At the price, he was buying the lower receiver so whether the upper was original or not didn't matter.  I suspect that it wasn't original since the finish doesn't match the lower receiver but I talked to some knowledgeable machine gun owners and they said it was possible since Colt would sometimes slap together parts that they had extras of.  All the parts are factory Colt.  

What do you guys think?

Edit: I know the Magpul furniture isn't original.  

</a>" />

</a>" />

</a>" />



</a>" />

Link Posted: 7/31/2016 2:35:06 PM EDT
[#1]
One just like that could ( err..... should) have came on it.  I am interested to see if that one has a sear relief and a rebated small front pivot hole.

Link Posted: 7/31/2016 3:42:57 PM EDT
[#2]
I would need to see more detailed images to make a definitive comment, it looks like some of them that I have seen over the years, besides the magpul, I can say, that charging handle is not original, as far as not matching, I have seen a lot of them that were pieced together from parts sitting in the corners.

The Delta ring does not look original either.

If you don't mind me asking, what price range did he pay for that gun?

I would like to see a picture of the inside of the lower if possible.

It looks similar to one of mine, which I know had parts mixed and matched on it to get it back in service.

Being honest with you, I would say that lower should be more worn if that is actually a service rifle, not saying he made a bad purchase, an operational M16A1 is always worth purchasing, but that gun does not look like it was ever actually used.
Link Posted: 7/31/2016 4:03:01 PM EDT
[#3]
I didn't mean to imply it was a service rifle.  The story was that the guy bought it from a dealer back in the day and rarely shot it.

Paid $23.5K back in December.  I just figured the upper and lower finish would match on a factory gun.
Link Posted: 7/31/2016 4:28:27 PM EDT
[#4]
Link Posted: 7/31/2016 4:41:03 PM EDT
[#5]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
FWIW, I have probably examined a few thousand transferable factory Colt M16/M16A1/M16A2's over the last three decades, and I'd say that on about 60%, the finishes on the uppers and lowers DID NOT match.

Colt made and finished the lowers in batches, put them in bins, and drew them out (not in sequential order) when a contract came in. They also made, finished and assembled uppers and put those in bins. When an order came in, they would look at the configuration spex listed on the contract, and pull parts as needed from the various bins.

Since all factory FA Colts were ONLY built and sold for military/LE/contracts, cosmetics were irrelevant, so most were mismatched in color.

YMMV.
View Quote


That makes sense, I appreciate the input.  Do you agree with the poster above's comments about the CH or was that more of a military thing.  I need to find out when this rifle was sold.  It could be anywhere from 70s to 86 correct?  Was told it was 70s, but who knows?
Link Posted: 7/31/2016 4:43:55 PM EDT
[#6]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I didn't mean to imply it was a service rifle.  The story was that the guy bought it from a dealer back in the day and rarely shot it.

Paid $23.5K back in December.  I just figured the upper and lower finish would match on a factory gun.
View Quote


Okay, that makes more sense to me, I am sorry, normally most of the 16A1 I run into have actually been service rifles.  All of mine look like they were drug through a rock bottom creek!

As far as uppers and lowers matching, I have seen to many of them to expect that, especially on end run guns when they were throwing parts together to get them out of the door.

Listen to Tony, He knows far more about them than anybody else I have ever read posts from, great source of information on these type of guns.

On the charging handle, it may very well be factory, it depends on how much that gun has been shot, but in my experience, I have seen a lot of charging handles changed over the years, when I was in the service we were changing charging handles all of the time.

Don't get me wrong, it is a good looking rifle and as long as it is fully functional, it was well worth the purchase, I would not turn it down!




Link Posted: 7/31/2016 11:41:55 PM EDT
[#7]
Link Posted: 8/1/2016 1:54:30 AM EDT
[#8]
The first one I purchased was made in 1967 and is still a fine gun, but that damn thing to look at it, looks like it was beat to hell, from what I have gathered on it over the years was it was used in Vietnam and somehow made it back to the states in working condition.  I purchased it from my supply Sargent. that served with me for several years.  And I didn't ask where he got it.  I paid a lot less than what they go for now!

It is always fun to try and track down when and where these rifles came from.

One of these days, I will have to dig mine out of the safe and take some pictures of them.
Link Posted: 8/1/2016 1:26:26 PM EDT
[#9]
I've owned several and handled several dozen and I'd conclude that even if it didn't come with this exact upper...it certainly could have.  So there is no reason to think it's not authentic.
Link Posted: 8/1/2016 2:07:41 PM EDT
[#10]
Link Posted: 8/1/2016 2:45:28 PM EDT
[#11]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

DaveP1, that is a cool story! Sounds like your gun has quite a history.

I'm guessing that the serial number on yours is not in the 9-mil range. Colt reserved the 9-mil SN range for LE and Export sales -- AFAIK, none ever made it into U.S. military service.

Of course, all the exported examples could not be reimported without losing their transferable status, so when you see a transferable one today, it is either a current or ex-LE gun, and those did not see the sort of extensive service that mil guns do. Thus, they tend to be in better shape on average.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
The first one I purchased was made in 1967 and is still a fine gun, but that damn thing to look at it, looks like it was beat to hell, from what I have gathered on it over the years was it was used in Vietnam and somehow made it back to the states in working condition.  I purchased it from my supply Sargent. that served with me for several years.  And I didn't ask where he got it.  I paid a lot less than what they go for now!

It is always fun to try and track down when and where these rifles came from.

One of these days, I will have to dig mine out of the safe and take some pictures of them.

DaveP1, that is a cool story! Sounds like your gun has quite a history.

I'm guessing that the serial number on yours is not in the 9-mil range. Colt reserved the 9-mil SN range for LE and Export sales -- AFAIK, none ever made it into U.S. military service.

Of course, all the exported examples could not be reimported without losing their transferable status, so when you see a transferable one today, it is either a current or ex-LE gun, and those did not see the sort of extensive service that mil guns do. Thus, they tend to be in better shape on average.


I have three of them Tony, the first and second, were issued during the Vietnam war, the second one was in 1971, the third one I have not tracked down much information as of yet, I purchased it back in February from the same supply Sargent, but have not been able to track any information down on it.  He called me and asked if I wanted it, he had been diagnosed with Cancer and knew he was going to pass away, so he gave me a really good price on it.

To be honest, with everything that has happened in the last 8 months, I really have not have had much of a chance to really look into things and won't have for a while in the foreseeable future.  It seems as if I am always drawn in different directions these days, this weekend I have to go back to WA and inter my Dad, Mom and Sister and of course Dad was a Navy guy, so it will be a large event with Honors and everything else that happens when a vet passes.

But it is fun to try and figure out where these guns have been.
Link Posted: 8/1/2016 3:54:07 PM EDT
[#12]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

DaveP1, that is a cool story! Sounds like your gun has quite a history.

I'm guessing that the serial number on yours is not in the 9-mil range. Colt reserved the 9-mil SN range for LE and Export sales -- AFAIK, none ever made it into U.S. military service.

Of course, all the exported examples could not be reimported without losing their transferable status, so when you see a transferable one today, it is either a current or ex-LE gun, and those did not see the sort of extensive service that mil guns do. Thus, they tend to be in better shape on average.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
The first one I purchased was made in 1967 and is still a fine gun, but that damn thing to look at it, looks like it was beat to hell, from what I have gathered on it over the years was it was used in Vietnam and somehow made it back to the states in working condition.  I purchased it from my supply Sargent. that served with me for several years.  And I didn't ask where he got it.  I paid a lot less than what they go for now!

It is always fun to try and track down when and where these rifles came from.

One of these days, I will have to dig mine out of the safe and take some pictures of them.

DaveP1, that is a cool story! Sounds like your gun has quite a history.

I'm guessing that the serial number on yours is not in the 9-mil range. Colt reserved the 9-mil SN range for LE and Export sales -- AFAIK, none ever made it into U.S. military service.

Of course, all the exported examples could not be reimported without losing their transferable status, so when you see a transferable one today, it is either a current or ex-LE gun, and those did not see the sort of extensive service that mil guns do. Thus, they tend to be in better shape on average.


So you think mine is former LE or that it was made for LE sales and the dealer diverted it into the private market.
Link Posted: 8/1/2016 4:30:10 PM EDT
[#13]
Link Posted: 8/1/2016 4:55:01 PM EDT
[#14]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Well, it never got exported ... some of the LE sales were indeed diverted to private buyers before reaching LE (although Colt threatened, and sometimes acted, to cease supplying any distributors or dealers who did so).

But IMHO, a big chunk of them actually went to LE -- some saw duty, more just sat in racks -- and were then sold off or traded in to SOTs to get newer gear. Plus, the availability starting in the '90s to LE of .gov-surplus M16s for $15 each was a great motivator for departments to trade in their now-much-more-valuable transferables.

The best way to tell, of course, is to file an FOIA. If it ever went to LE, there will be a Form 5 in there ... if it's only Forms 3 and 4, it has always been in civilian hands.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
So you think mine is former LE or that it was made for LE sales and the dealer diverted it into the private market.

Well, it never got exported ... some of the LE sales were indeed diverted to private buyers before reaching LE (although Colt threatened, and sometimes acted, to cease supplying any distributors or dealers who did so).

But IMHO, a big chunk of them actually went to LE -- some saw duty, more just sat in racks -- and were then sold off or traded in to SOTs to get newer gear. Plus, the availability starting in the '90s to LE of .gov-surplus M16s for $15 each was a great motivator for departments to trade in their now-much-more-valuable transferables.

The best way to tell, of course, is to file an FOIA. If it ever went to LE, there will be a Form 5 in there ... if it's only Forms 3 and 4, it has always been in civilian hands.


Thanks,

I was going to start a new post but figure you might be able to knock it out here.

Why is the word division always stamped noticeably deeper than the rest, and why are the other rollmarks so shallow?  The Colt's Firearms always looks like it is about faded away.
Link Posted: 8/1/2016 5:00:32 PM EDT
[#15]
Upper appears original.  Uppers and lowers didn't always match.

Charging handle appears to be colt as they grind the bottom edge a little, i know it doesn't match the upper but would you call it black?
Barrel and Upper markings date from late 70s+  They are colt markings and found on M16A1s
Ejection port cover, forward assist and carrier look original as well.

Link Posted: 8/1/2016 6:09:12 PM EDT
[#16]
Well, when it comes down to it, it does not matter, it is a gun with a LEGAL third hole

Time to rock and roll!

Page Armory » M-16
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! 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.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top