User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/26/2004 5:32:51 PM EDT
[#2]
They made a run of about 800 carbines in 90 or 91 for the first gulf war but it is true they did make them for the military,its what colt sued them for and lost the first time around.I beleive those first weapons went to seals and army special forces.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2004 5:41:35 PM EDT
[#3]
They made the first 3000 M4s that were issued out. At the time, they all went to SEALs and SF.
This was back in 1991. I read this in Duncan Long's AR15/M16 Source book.Every AR owner should have it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2004 5:45:08 PM EDT
[#4]
Good to hear it was more
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2004 5:52:15 PM EDT
[#5]
Here is the quote out of Duncan Long's book (the context is post developement of the M4):
"Ironically, Colt lost one of the contracts to buil the M4 to Bushmaster Firearms/Quality Parts when the small company underbid Colt and recieved a contract to build 3,000 carbines for the U.S. Navy SEALs and U.S. Army Special Forces in 1991." -Duncan Long The AR15/M16 Sourcebook P.S. I strongly recommend the book. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2004 9:45:27 PM EDT
[#6]
It was 350 made in 1989. The buttstocks, pistol grips, and handguards were all replaced with Colt parts by the military(Crane?) before they were delivered to CAG and NSW. The first 50 or so were fitted with Colt Aluminum stocks the rest with Colt 2 pos fiber rite stocks. They have 1/7 twist 14.5" bbls, standard carbine handguards and A2 uppers.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2004 10:54:44 PM EDT
[#7]
Duncan Long's books aren't bad, but he repeats rumors/stories a few too many time to be taken seriously as a source of fact. He gets hammered all the time on the net about things he gets wrong and simply says he doesn't have enough time to check everything.
As an example, in his HK book, he repeats the same old tale about the metal clip being there so you can hang it from a nail. It's there because it's part of HK's three-point sling system in reality. He just took the story and repeated it. There's mistakes like this in all his books. Not any huge, glaring falsehoods, but just use of unproven stories and rumor. His books are good for what they are, and I own a couple myself and they're worth owning, but he isn't exactly a reliable source for this kind of information on numbers and contracts, etc. Ross |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2004 11:16:43 PM EDT
[#8]
Anyone have any evidence?
Contracts, POs, RFIs, etc? Serial number ranges? Pictures? Last time I did a CAGE search on BFI it came up with one rifle they had produced under .gov contract. It was some kind of pseudo sharpshooter carbine thing for one of the big Fed agencies, DOE, someobody. The last time someone asked this in the BFI forum it never got answered. Nor did it get answered the times before that. The plural of anecdote is not evidence. I can't believe ANYONE would quote Duncan Long's cut and paste crap. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2004 11:43:01 PM EDT
[#9]
I think I have one pic of a Bushmaster M4, I'll see if I can dig it up. Because of the whole Colt M4 fiasco, Bushmaster nor the US Govt will discuss the matter. There were quite a few CAG members with Bushmaster M4's in Panama. Most of the carbines were assigned to individuals in South and Latin America, a few (maybe 50-100) were deployed in GW1. By now most are pretty worn out and have been destroyed or are used strictly as training weapons.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 12:10:48 AM EDT
[#10]
The CAG guys I saw in JC were carrying Colts and MP5s.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 12:16:41 AM EDT
[#11]
I think spoke with Bushmaster on this subject a few years back. Bushmaster has not bidded on a subsequent contracts for M16/M4 rifles because they don't have the capacity to deliver it at the rate the DoD wants delivered. That would make sense, Bushmaster isn't all that big. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 12:23:56 AM EDT
[#12]
Bushmaster and the government won't talk about it,
 Yep, and they destroyed all the paperwork too Just like the X-Files 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 2:05:50 AM EDT
[#13]
__________________________________________ |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 2:10:59 AM EDT
[#14]
Screw "the evidence," THINK about how these two statements would have no relation to the way things happen in the real world. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 2:50:09 AM EDT
[#15]
Cmom Now Lumpy.. that's why I put.. "As I have Heard" in front of that. cause that is just a basic asssupmtion and I what to find out the true story as to if they ever made M-4's for Uncle Sugar. and I figured this web site would have an answer with some actually data to support it. Somebody hasgot to have some info to support it or I'm just gonna have to believe it did not happen.
And what does CAG stand for??? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 3:00:40 AM EDT
[#16]
 That's priceless, and no I don't know what happened to him. I know only that this "question" has been around the block more times than a D.C. streetwalker.  I also know that the author of BRII was going to let the cat out of the bag but stopped short for business reasons. Yeah, Colt couldn't produce enough guns. This from the same company that filled a foreign military order at the height of the VN war in the middle of their M16 contract with Sam. CAG, Combat Applications Group, 1st SFOD-D, Detachment Delta, Delta Force, D- boys, D- troop  The whole thing stinks like one of those "sole survivor" BS stories made up by poque heroes. It's the same "My records were sealed" BS. Show me definite proof. I've shown time and time again that they BS about their "milspec" claims. Now they think I work for some opposing company "out to get them."  I don't care what else you do in the world, don't lie to me, I find it offensive. In this case I don't care what BFI sells or how, just don't expect me to believe the hype. They make decent affordable mostly reliable rifles with easily repairable problems. That should be enough of a selling point. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 5:00:24 AM EDT
[#17]
Black Rifle II does not include Bushmaster specifically because the author could find no evidence of any Bushmaster rifles supplied to the government.
HFG |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 5:13:27 AM EDT
[#18]
Tweak, where does one go to do a CAGE search? Thanks! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 5:33:02 AM EDT
[#19]
I have actually seen a Bushmaster M4 while while serving in the Army. It was in the hands of a security guy for the Commanding General of USASOC (US Army Special Operations Command). That was way back in 95, when normal SF was just starting to get the 1st generation of M4A1s.
I only noticed the Bushmaster snake logo, didnt have a chance to fondle one, check it out, etc. It was in the older M4 configuration, with an A2 upper. The guy also had a TA11, older style cheekpiece, and some sort of visable laser. This was all pre-SOPMOD. Since that time, there have been two generations of M4A1s for SOF. The originals (95), and the newer heavy barreled models (2001). Any Bushmasters have been withdrawn from service, I am sure. The early Colt M4s (A2 upper) I have seen and fondeled have commercial M16A2 markings; Not the normal "property of US Gov't". I assume that they were a commercial off the shelf purchase (SOF units can do this), and not thru the Military system. Going to assume the Bushmaster ones were the same deal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 5:48:01 AM EDT
[#20]
From www.cybershooters.org/dgca/bushmaster_m4.htm
"Bushmaster Firearms entered the scene during Operation Desert Shield. With the imminent prospect of war, the military suddely fould themselves with a large demand for rifles. Many Army units were still armed with the M16A1, the replacement of which had only begun in 1986. With a large demand for M16A2s and M4s both from the US forces and Allied forces, the Dept. of Defence approved a contract to buy M4 carbines from Bushmaster Firearms of Maine. Bushmaster supplied 4,000 M4 carbines to the US Army, these were deployed by the 82nd Airborne Division during Dester Shield and Desert Storm, reportedly being used by Gen. Schwarzkoph's bodyguards at one point." Hey, I read it on the internet, it must be true. Don't shoot the messenger! |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 5:57:45 AM EDT
[#21]
We need to be careful when we reference supplying to the "government" and to the "military" as the same thing. Certainly Bushmaster has supplied AR's to certain government agencies such as the DEA and FBI. It is my personal belief that Bushmaster supplied one run of M16's to the military in Gulf One. How many ?? If I heard I've long since forgotten.
I've read the Bushmaster-is-milspec-bullshit countless times on this board. Not true, never was true and likely will never be true. As "Tweak" notes above, Bushmaster makes a good, reliable, repairable AR product and that should be the thrust of their marketing effort. 5sub |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:28:59 AM EDT
[#22]
Never said it was a super top-secret X-files thing. In 1988 when the contract was shopped, Colt was busy trying to build as many M16A2 rifles as they could for the US Military. Colt had produced limited runs of the Model 723( M16A2 carbine with C7 style upper) and the 727( M16A2 carbine with 14.5” pencil bbl and the New M4 style) most if not all that were delivered to the US Military were commercial marked. The XM4 project that was started in early 1984 had been shot down various times by the Senate so all carbines were special limited order items.
Certain units needed additional M16 carbine rifles, Colt was unable to deliver in the time frame required so elements of the US Defense Department took the Tech package for the new Colt XM4 carbine and shopped it around. Bushmaster produced an initial order of 350 with plans to build as many as 4000. Colt found out and sued Bushmaster and the US Government claiming that the M4 was a proprietary design and that only they were allowed to produce it. Colt won and was declared the sole source for future M4 carbines. Bushmaster and the US Government don’t talk about it because: 1.) It’s a sore subject 2.) Part of the settlement was said to be that Bushmaster could not talk about the contract. That’s why for so long there were the vague references to the Military contracts and Milspec parts. Read my initial post and you can see that even as delivered they did not meet Milspec and had certain parts replaced with Colt parts prior to issue. Colt has had various problems supplying the US Military. In 1968 during the height of the Vietnam war Colt was unable to supply the required number of M16A1 rifles so two contracts were let one to GM and one to H&R both for approximately 300,000 rifles. In 1988 realizing that Colt would not be able to produce the required number of M16A2 rifles in the time frame desired, the US Military opened up bids for production of the rifle. FN won a contract and started producing M16A2 rifles shortly after. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:45:39 AM EDT
[#23]
Who the hell really cares?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:47:38 AM EDT
[#24]
When I was in Infantry OSUT in early 1999, I had a Bushmaster lower M-16A2.
Now don't get all huffy on me and let me explain. At the time I knew next to nothing about guns. Fresh out of high school with two Ultra-Lib parents who wouldn't allow even a BB gun in the house. The reason I remember it being Bushmaster is because it has the Snake on the side. I don't remember much else about it other than the snake that always reminded me of the "Don't Tread On Me" yellow Revolutionary-War flag. Now you can go on and on about how there's no way I could have had that, I must have been thinking of something else, etc. But I was there and I remember exactally what I saw. At the time I couldn't have told you the difference between a Bushmaster, Armalite, Colt, etc. I just wasn't gun savvy. I knew what I shot, M-16A2, and I knew how to clean it. I also knew that if a DS saw me with the mag in my LCE belt on a roadmarch my ass was in deep shit. For those that are about to ask me why some Joe had a weapon that only came out in an M4 configuration for SF units, you need to take into account the way the Army refurbishes the weapon. Weapons for various reasons end up in the weapons pool- hard use, broken parts, shot out barrels, etc. When this happens, they sometimes completely dissassemble the weapon and inspect all the parts. They then grade the parts, stick them in grade bins and assemble weapons from those components. the crappiest of these end up in the hands of new Soldiers going through IET. My M-16A2 was so loose between teh lower and upper I had feeding problems that cost me a Sharpshooter badge at the Qual Range. Anyways, that's my story, take it or leave it. -U- |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:51:41 AM EDT
[#25]
Bushmaster mad 14.5" 1/7 M4 barrels for the Deprtment of Energy. I have one of the contract over run barrels.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 11:51:28 AM EDT
[#26]
Bottom line is this, like the Mac OS was duped out of the market place by more agressive marketing from Bill Gates, and an inferior OS, Windows now rules the world....such is the AR world.
In a similar fashion, Bushmaster is 2nd tier to Colt, only via tricky, calculated marketing practices, and corperate espionage from Colt's people. In reality, the finest AR available, anywhere in the world, is produced by Bushmaster. Sure, others go "bang"...but judging AR's on military/government contracts is no measure one should go by. Knights, Armalite, RRA, Colt....whatever...all lovely weapons. Particularly enjoyable for collectors. However, Bushmaster, though less in numbers operationally, has a VASTLY superior comabt record of reliability, accuracy and over all quality. Fact, not fiction. I know this is hard for you "Colt Freaks" to swollow, but there is simply no combination of words or spin that will change this fact. The link below should clear up any confusion about this, as it is THE definative resource for such matters. Bushmaster Firearms Combat Proven, Superiority Fact Page.....The Colt Legend Is A Myth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 12:23:45 PM EDT
[#27]
I have no contract data, but they do have an NSN for a rifle with DoD... And of course they could hypothetically sell under another NSN if it was a mil-spec.
CAGE 7Z500: NSN 1005-01-469-9387 XM15 E2S V MATCHCOMMANDO Company: BUSHMASTER FIREARMS DUNS: 099897357 DUNS +4: D.B.A.: QUALITY PARTS COMPANY Division: 999 ROOSEVELT TRAIL WINDHAM, ME 040625650 USA NSN: 1005-01-469-9387 ITEM NAME: RIFLE,5.56 MILLIMETER MRC REQUIREMENT STATEMENT FULL TEXT REPLY AMWN MODEL NUMBER XM15E2S AMWX FEED METHOD MAGAZINE FEAT SPECIAL FEATURES 16 IN. FLOATING BARREL; FLATTOP; MILITARY UPPER AND LOWER RECEIVERS; SAFE-SEMI AND FULL-AUTO TRIGGER MECHANISM; GG-F-FLIP FORESIGHT ON BARREL; COLAPSIBLE STOCK; TANTALUM FIRING PIN; INCLUDES MAGAZINE, SLING, OPERATORS MANUAL AND CLEANING KIT |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 12:51:10 PM EDT
[#28]
Tweak,
You must have the patience of a Saint! I admire you for having the ability to respond to this drivel over and over again and remain polite. How some of you people can absorb outright bullshit and regurgitate it back on this site as fact astounds me. Duncan Long?............Puleeeze! And thats only the tip of this iceberg. The JFK asassination can't hold a candle to the shit that some of you people have bought into! |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 1:00:38 PM EDT
[#29]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 1:07:13 PM EDT
[#30]
That's why I asked the question. I want to know first hand instead of the internet answer or out of some one's book who has no Bibliography to back up any statements. Reading Tweaks posts on Several boards I have made my own judgement that he's a straight up guy and even though I don't know him I seem to want to gravitate towards any info he puts out, but then again I know Stottman and UHLEK on an equal level (Internet boards) and they have made claims to have seen Bushmasters in the Military with equal veracity.. And I know a couple of ya don't give a shit and that's fine too. Colt-653- also has a story that could be the truth. I guess I will have to put this question and the possible answer
in the "Bigfoot" column. Most don't believe, a few have seen one, but there is still no hard evidence to prove or disprove. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 1:07:32 PM EDT
[#31]
DAMN! {:D
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 1:25:16 PM EDT
[#33]
Dont know if this helps any, but I was watching Tales of the Gun (the AK47) on History Channel and they showed U.S. Army Weapons specialist test firing an AK and M16's. One guy was firing an M16A2 in burst mode and it had a purple lower receiver. I think this may be a clue!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 1:53:12 PM EDT
[#34]
Sorry I've seen Colts with Purple lowers... Not a clue at all. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 1:55:43 PM EDT
[#35]
Lumpy I can't speak to the second one - but the first one I don't have a problem with. During that time between Colt producing M16A2s for the Army and all their labor problems (Colt & Labor problems were almost constant in the late 80s through the early 90s) I don't doubt they would have issues. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 2:01:46 PM EDT
[#36]
The military decides they need them NOW, so much so that they turn to a vendor that normally specializes in semi-automatic rifles and has no previous experience filling military contracts for rifles that meet the mil spec, yet Colt whines, and suddenly the military no long has their pressing need for them........
hmmmmmmm |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 2:08:36 PM EDT
[#37]
Happened quite a bit in WW2. The military has a need and if the primary can't supply it they will requirest bids. GM Hydramatic (and H&R) make M16s during Vietnam because Colt couldn't keep up with demand. How much experience does a transmission manufacture have in making semi-auto rifles?
Colt held all the cards with thier legal agreements with the Govt. Recall when FN tried to get the M4 contract - Colt 'whined' again (asserted their rights) and FN was removed from bidding on the M4 contracts. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 2:11:59 PM EDT
[#38]
FWIW
I know my unit received 50 M4/GUU-5P conversion kits (Barreled uppers, Shoulder Stocks, and replacement FCG non burst) new in the wrap marked Bushmaster Firearms Windhem Maine. I saw them myself, the finished product was stamped GUU-5P and also on a colt lower marked additionally AR-15 (factory)...... GAU5A (Stamped) ......... SMG (Factory)......... I actually held in my own hands an M4 with the Receiver marked BFI no "Snake"....Early run flattop....IIRC Bushmaster was the only company that offered a flattop at that time. The V-Match Upper...... That was in a "5th world" foreign country....These folks wished they could work their way up to third world....The weapon did not belong to my unit, it did belong to the Army don't recall the unit but they were SF. About a year later I saw an add in a magazine....But I cannot produce documentation to prove it..... Oh Well it is fun to read this stuff though..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 3:51:12 PM EDT
[#39]
I'm with Forest. The government hands out the Spec, if you can read and follow the spec, you can be a Goverrnment contractor. just like Remington Rand Singer Sewing AC Spark Plug GM Guide Lamp International Harvestor Rock Ola Juke Box Co. GM Hydramatic Smith-Corona And dozens of other companies who knew Jack about weapons, but they could read spec's and diagram drawings and they had machines to mill and forge metal. I don't have a problem believing Bushmaster produced at least parts or whole weapons. My gut tells me it was a small amount under dubious legal battles and corporate animosity and the almight buck which is why any of them build weapon's in the first place and not for patriotic reasons. But if I had to testify in court that I knew for sure Bushmaster had made M-4's... I would have to say No because I have not seen any proof that is intangible. But more then a few people have seen Bigfoot. does'nt prove he's real... but it does'nt prove he's not either...  The truth is out their... and Like Kane, I will keep searching for it.... 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 4:05:02 PM EDT
[#40]
It was a joke. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 4:06:03 PM EDT
[#41]
I always thought FN was the biggest supplier of M16A2's?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 4:31:07 PM EDT
[#42]
model927...what are your thoughts on all this?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 5:27:16 PM EDT
[#43]
FN is the biggest supplier of M-16A2's nowaday's the only thing Colt now produces for the military now are M-4's and they suck at it their nearly 2 years behind on production. According to the contract my unit was supposed to recieve M-4 nearly 3 years ago, but Colt says now we won't get them til atleast June 2005. US GOVT needs to give Colt a big middle finger and use other contracters seeing that Colt has breached contract and not been able to meet manufacturing needs for 3 years. By the way I repair weapons in the Air Force and I have seen several none Colt and FN lowers. So the Military does seem to procure weapons from other sources have even fondled a 4-digit M-16.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 9:47:13 PM EDT
[#44]
Then the court ruling is public record. Post it.
No, Colt was producing rifles to meet the numbers outlined by their contractual obligations. The military asked for more rifles and decided to shop out the job for reasons of national defence. On the M16A2, FN came in CHEAPER. It had nothing to do with production schedules. Colt is quite capable of producing in excess of 50,000 rifles a month. You don't want to bring H&R and GMC's rifles into this discussion, we all know how well they fared in testing and why those contracts ended. From Weps Comm's Procurement History and Analysis of the M16 Rifle AMSWE-PPE-72-01 2AUG71
For all those with the "Colt only makes M4s" out there Colt is also building the M16A4. That, or all those pictures from overseas have been doctored. The plural of anecdote is not evidence. Give me proof. If I want stories I'll read a book. Do you know how many jackasses over the history of this site have swore they carried Mattel rifles? JLM, CAGE www.bpn.gov/bincs/begin_search.asp Str8Shot, It's not patience, it's just having the same stupid discussions over and over. I've heard all the stories and know all the replies, BTDT. I could see BFI selling COTS to .mil. Hell, .mil even bought some COTS OAIs. Doesn't mean they're spec or that they had a contract, just that someone on the inside bought them. Anyone else notice how the arguement changes each time? "Yeah, well I wasn't actually IN Vietnam during the CIA ambush that killed me team. I can't talk about where I was." Had a dickhead in a local VA PTSD group who claimed to have done POW rescues in North VN in 1975. I checked his records and he would have been 17 in 1975. Wasn't even enlisted yet. Turns out he had suffered a serious blow to head during his 2 months in the Navy. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/27/2004 10:16:05 PM EDT
[#45]
To tell you the truth Bradd I was waiting to see your take in of this first
From articles I have read back in 1990 namely the SOF article in fighting firearms "Bushmaster builds a better M16"if I remeber the article said they made 1500 M4 carbines for the Seals and SF units.I have also heard it was only upper receiver assemblies for the seals as I have seen many pictures of M16A1 lowers with M4 uppers fixed loop hybrid rifles.So I dont know the exact number but since Bushmaster is a main suporter of this site maybe they could chime in an answer the question once and for all on how many M4s they made.How ever many it is a matter of record that colt tried to sue them over the lost contract and a previous response lists an NSN# for the rifle wich I think can be checked against those # listings,where to find that list I dont know.Im sure though what ever many weapons were made and accepted they probably refit them with the colt stock and handguards as Bushmasters carbine handguards at the time were crap and the colt dimensioned receiver extension is the standard.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2004 12:58:25 AM EDT
[#46]
Colt vs FN regarding M4 1998:
www.hklaw.com/Publications/Newsletters.asp?ID=50&Article=129 www.ffhsj.com/govtcon/ffgalert/gcarch/nb981206.htm I'll try and see if I have a copy of the ruling regarding...... Colt vs Quality Parts Company/Bushmaster Firearms, Inc....Think it was 1990-1992 time frame....If I can't find it some one is bound to have it floating around somewhere. Not sure what problems other than initial production problems you're talking about regarding H&R and GM M16A1's. I've never had a problem with any of the ones I've fired....still a ton of them going on strong as rebuilt A2's....and in some cases M16A1's....The contract for them ended after a specific # were manufactured, not because of any problems. The whole reason they were contracted to make the M16A1 in the first place was Colt was as usual having a series of strikes that was holding up production of complete rifles and spare parts.(Pg 283 Black Rifle) The same thing happened in 1987/88 when FN entered/stepped back into the M16 arena. Colt was having problems meeting DOD demands so the M16A2 rifle was shopped to other interested parties. FN won based on cost and the fact they had a facility already established, were currently manufacturing arms for the US DOD(a requirement of the agreement with Colt) and they had produced M16A1 replacement parts for various Army and Air National Guard units . SOF's Fighting Firearms issue from Spring 1992 doesn't list the # of Bushmasters sold just the fact that they were provided to the US Military and that the 14.5" bbls were 1/7 twist. The total produced was 350 with the option for up to 4000 units....but the contract was never expanded past the initial 350. At the time(1989-91) certain military units were also purchasing #'s of Colt 720,723 and 727 carbines as well as XM4 PIP kits to convert older GAU-5/M16A1 carbines. Most of the carbines came directly from Colt's LE line and were commercial marked. Don't quite understand why people seem to get so upset......figure out the truth and post it in an FAQ so we don't have to answer the same questions every 3-6 months...... |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2004 1:54:41 AM EDT
[#47]
Uh yeah, we know about that one. That's called "protecting intellectual property." We were talking about Colt and BFI, not FN. Is the same someone going to post that court case that is going to post the pics of the BFI M4? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2004 2:24:35 AM EDT
[#48]
Tweak, thanks man
 Once you have the CAGE code, how do you find out what products they are selling the .gov? 3W544 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2004 3:22:55 AM EDT
[#49]
The Bushmaster lower bring redone as an M16A2 is very possible. A1 lowers have been redone like this.
Also, no one ever metions the 4th M16A1 manufacturer. Never seen anything ever mentioned in a book. Saw one in 2002, Ft.Gordon GA. It was an A1 overstamped to A2. Didnt have a logo, just the normal "prop of US Gov't markings" , and a contract number. Over the trigger group, it had some address in FL (not KAC). |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2004 4:20:47 AM EDT
[#50]
you guys remember a couple of years ago we had a guy who was an arms room technician and took photo's of all the wierd M4s he saw come through his armory. i said this then and ill say it again. the only M4 i have shot while a Marine was a bushmaster. it had a fixed carry handle A2 upper, a 4pos stock, and M4 handguards. the finish was all worn off and it was on its last legs but it ran just fine.
|
|
|
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.
