Did Colt ever sell the M16's new to civilians ?

Armory » M-16

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Did Colt ever sell the M16's new to civilians ? (Page 1 of 2)

Posted: 10/10/2012 7:04:39 AM EDT

I'm doing a FOIA on our m16. Got me wondering did colt ever sell the M16 directly to civilians? before the registry closed. LIke NIB or all the ones in circulation from dept guns?
Thanks

Posted: 10/10/2012 7:39:24 AM EDT

[#1]

Tony will be along shortly (if he hasn't already beat my sloooow typing!)... but sort of in my case. In 1979 the Alyeska Pipeline Co. went to Colt to buy a buttload (technical term) of AR-15 rifles for their private security guards along the route of the pipeline. Colt somehow convinced them to get M16A1s instead. Maybe Colt had too many MGs left over from the ending of Vietnam and made the boys at Alyeska a deal they couldn't refuse. They shipped pallet loads (from a FOIA request I got) in '79 of M16A1 assault rifles with only semi-auto selectors installed. My theory on this was A.P.C. did not want bored pipeline guards, in the middle of nowhere, "greasing" bears with machine guns for sh!ts and grins. In '02 my LGS/Title II dealer got 10 of them in from A.P.C. and I picked one up. Looking back, a pristine-never-fired-in-full-auto M16A1, I should have bought them all.

$7200 ea.

Posted: 10/10/2012 7:54:26 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
Tony will be along shortly (if he hasn't already beat my sloooow typing!)... but sort of in my case. In 1979 the Alyeska Pipeline Co. went to Colt to buy a buttload (technical term) of AR-15 rifles for their private security guards along the route of the pipeline. Colt somehow convinced them to get M16A1s instead. Maybe Colt had too many MGs left over from the ending of Vietnam and made the boys at Alyeska a deal they couldn't refuse. They shipped pallet loads (from a FOIA request I got) in '79 of M16A1 assault rifles with only semi-auto selectors installed. My theory on this was A.P.C. did not want bored pipeline guards, in the middle of nowhere, "greasing" bears with machine guns for sh!ts and grins. In '02 my LGS/Title II dealer got 10 of them in from A.P.C. and I picked one up. Looking back, a pristine-never-fired-in-full-auto M16A1, I should have bought them all.
http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c314/Z06M16A1/Title%202%20Toys/79right.jpg
$7200 ea.

Nice. Gives me some incite of how the got to civilian hands. Just wondering if they ever sold them directly to civilians.

Posted: 10/10/2012 8:38:32 AM EDT

[#3]

Colt's official policy was that their NFA items were for sale only to military/law enforcement. They went so far as to threaten to drop LE dealers and distributors who sold to civilians.

Of course, a few "slipped through the cracks" from dealers to their best customers, but Colt would raise a stink if any dealers advertised they had new ones for sale to us regular folk.

That's why so many M16s are ex-LE, and so few are still NIB.

Posted: 10/10/2012 3:34:15 PM EDT

[#4]

did colt ever sell full auto AR-15 or SP1s or are all of the Colt non m-16s conversions after they were sold as title 1 guns?

Posted: 10/10/2012 3:46:29 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
Tony will be along shortly (if he hasn't already beat my sloooow typing!)... but sort of in my case. In 1979 the Alyeska Pipeline Co. went to Colt to buy a buttload (technical term) of AR-15 rifles for their private security guards along the route of the pipeline. Colt somehow convinced them to get M16A1s instead. Maybe Colt had too many MGs left over from the ending of Vietnam and made the boys at Alyeska a deal they couldn't refuse. They shipped pallet loads (from a FOIA request I got) in '79 of M16A1 assault rifles with only semi-auto selectors installed. My theory on this was A.P.C. did not want bored pipeline guards, in the middle of nowhere, "greasing" bears with machine guns for sh!ts and grins. In '02 my LGS/Title II dealer got 10 of them in from A.P.C. and I picked one up. Looking back, a pristine-never-fired-in-full-auto M16A1, I should have bought them all.
http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c314/Z06M16A1/Title%202%20Toys/79right.jpg
$7200 ea.

I would buy it for that price! Sell it to me!

Posted: 10/10/2012 5:53:47 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
did colt ever sell full auto AR-15 or SP1s or are all of the Colt non m-16s conversions after they were sold as title 1 guns?

For clarity's sake ...

Gene Stoner designed the AR15 as a full-auto (or select-fire) rifle for Armalite, which later sold the rights to Colt. Colt produced it and convinced the U.S.military to try out limited numbers in Vietnam. When it was accepted, the military designated it as the M16, though many thousands were sold to .gov and issued still wearing the "AR15" rollmark. Only later did Colt (and then H&R and Hydramatic) change the rollmark to M16 etc. Even after that, some foreign contracts for select-fire guns continued to be rollmarked "AR15".

Years later, Colt decided to develop and market a semi-auto version for sale to civilians. These also were rollmarked AR15 but, of course, only had two selector positions, and the serial numbers started with "SP."

Colt never sold a full-auto SP version, nor did they ever convert a semi SP to full-auto –– their lawyers would not let them for liability reasons. So if it has an SP serial number, it left Colt as a semi, and was later converted to FA by a third party.

Posted: 10/11/2012 3:24:05 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:

Colt's official policy was that their NFA items were for sale only to military/law enforcement. They went so far as to threaten to drop LE dealers and distributors who sold to civilians.

Of course, a few "slipped through the cracks" from dealers to their best customers, but Colt would raise a stink if any dealers advertised they had new ones for sale to us regular folk.

That's why so many M16s are ex-LE, and so few are still NIB.

This is the way I remember it.

Posted: 10/11/2012 3:35:19 AM EDT

[#8]

When I bought my 16, the dealer and I shared a laugh at the way he had to lie his ass off to Colt in order to get guns to sell. They were adamant that none of their M16s would go to civilians, even though it was perfectly legal so he assured them that each and every one of them went to LE. Actually that was true in my case, but probably not the way Colt wanted it.

They still hold the title of "World's Most Anti-gun Gun Company" in my opinion.

Posted: 10/11/2012 6:39:20 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:

They still hold the title of "World's Most Anti-gun Gun Company" in my opinion.

With Ruger (when 'ol Bill was still above dirt and in charge) right up there with Colt... re: AC556/GB/Mini 20 rnd (and above) mags.
He is probably spinning in the box with the newer rifles/products.

Posted: 10/11/2012 2:51:57 PM EDT

[#10]

Yeah, Ruger used to give Colt a run for the title, but with Bill taking the Big Dirt Nap, they have gotten much more reasonable.

I can only imagine his reaction to his guns being offered with factory threading for EVIL SILENCERS!!!!!

Fuck you, Bill. Rot in peace.

Posted: 10/11/2012 6:49:45 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
When I bought my 16, the dealer and I shared a laugh at the way he had to lie his ass off to Colt in order to get guns to sell. They were adamant that none of their M16s would go to civilians, even though it was perfectly legal so he assured them that each and every one of them went to LE. Actually that was true in my case, but probably not the way Colt wanted it.

They still hold the title of "World's Most Anti-gun Gun Company" in my opinion.

ahhhhh i wish i was around back in the day haha. did that rifle cost any more than the semi version back in the day?

Posted: 10/11/2012 7:09:57 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:

Quoted:
When I bought my 16, the dealer and I shared a laugh at the way he had to lie his ass off to Colt in order to get guns to sell. They were adamant that none of their M16s would go to civilians, even though it was perfectly legal so he assured them that each and every one of them went to LE. Actually that was true in my case, but probably not the way Colt wanted it.

They still hold the title of "World's Most Anti-gun Gun Company" in my opinion.

ahhhhh i wish i was around back in the day haha. did that rifle cost any more than the semi version back in the day?

This may sound really weird to ya ... But back in the '70s, M16s were worth less than semi versions, because of the $200 transfer tax. I remember folks cutting and demilling receivers because they could not find a buyer willing to pay that tax, and the only way to sell them was as parts kits.

Sigh.

Posted: 10/11/2012 7:56:23 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:

Quoted:
When I bought my 16, the dealer and I shared a laugh at the way he had to lie his ass off to Colt in order to get guns to sell. They were adamant that none of their M16s would go to civilians, even though it was perfectly legal so he assured them that each and every one of them went to LE. Actually that was true in my case, but probably not the way Colt wanted it.

They still hold the title of "World's Most Anti-gun Gun Company" in my opinion.

ahhhhh i wish i was around back in the day haha. did that rifle cost any more than the semi version back in the day?

This may sound really weird to ya ... But back in the '70s, M16s were worth less than semi versions, because of the $200 transfer tax. I remember folks cutting and demilling receivers because they could not find a buyer willing to pay that tax, and the only way to sell them was as parts kits.

Sigh.

WTF

Posted: 10/11/2012 9:28:49 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:

Quoted:
When I bought my 16, the dealer and I shared a laugh at the way he had to lie his ass off to Colt in order to get guns to sell. They were adamant that none of their M16s would go to civilians, even though it was perfectly legal so he assured them that each and every one of them went to LE. Actually that was true in my case, but probably not the way Colt wanted it.

They still hold the title of "World's Most Anti-gun Gun Company" in my opinion.

ahhhhh i wish i was around back in the day haha. did that rifle cost any more than the semi version back in the day?

This may sound really weird to ya ... But back in the '70s, M16s were worth less than semi versions, because of the $200 transfer tax. I remember folks cutting and demilling receivers because they could not find a buyer willing to pay that tax, and the only way to sell them was as parts kits.

Sigh.

You don't even have to go back that far to when M16s were worth less than some of their semi counterparts. When I first started getting into NFA back in the late 90's and it was the height of the 94 AWB and the panic buying leading up to the W2K scare, nice preban semi Colts (like factory 6721s) and even some preban Bushmasters in good condition commanded more of a premium than lower end M16's. I remember looking at lightning links for $1500, and non Colt M16s in the 3K range. When I bought my first M16 in 2001 (an oly registered receiver) it was about the same price as a highly valued preban semi-auto at $3500ish dollars.

I remember thinking at the time it was stupid for somebody to pay upwards of $5000 for a preban Colt 6721 or a OA93, when they could just buy a lighting link for $1500 and build up a preban style gun out of post-ban parts for less than a grand, since the whole gun was no longer a semi-auto "assault weapon" but now a machinegun. You would get a brand new gun with all the evil features for less than a preban semi counterpart and would get full auto on top of that.

Alot of that pricing disparity back then was probably because trust transfer didn't exist and very few people knew about or wanted to go through the trouble to form and maintain a corporation. The overall segment of black rifle owning public was much smaller, so your pool of available buyers for M16s was much reduced. Vector also had a mountain of Uzi's for sale at $2500 to $2900 until maybe 03 or 04 which probably depressed the overall machinegun market for quite a few years as many first time buyer just purchased an Uzi over an M16.

Posted: 10/12/2012 4:44:04 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:

Quoted:
When I bought my 16, the dealer and I shared a laugh at the way he had to lie his ass off to Colt in order to get guns to sell. They were adamant that none of their M16s would go to civilians, even though it was perfectly legal so he assured them that each and every one of them went to LE. Actually that was true in my case, but probably not the way Colt wanted it.

They still hold the title of "World's Most Anti-gun Gun Company" in my opinion.

ahhhhh i wish i was around back in the day haha. did that rifle cost any more than the semi version back in the day?

I have no idea what semi's were going for back then, but the 16 cost me a whole $600 NIB.

I wonder how much of a loss I'll take when I sell it.......

Posted: 10/12/2012 7:53:03 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:

Quoted:
When I bought my 16, the dealer and I shared a laugh at the way he had to lie his ass off to Colt in order to get guns to sell. They were adamant that none of their M16s would go to civilians, even though it was perfectly legal so he assured them that each and every one of them went to LE. Actually that was true in my case, but probably not the way Colt wanted it.

They still hold the title of "World's Most Anti-gun Gun Company" in my opinion.

ahhhhh i wish i was around back in the day haha. did that rifle cost any more than the semi version back in the day?

I have no idea what semi's were going for back then, but the 16 cost me a whole $600 NIB.

I wonder how much of a loss I'll take when I sell it.......

Wonder no more my fine friend. $650 is yours for the asking.

That's 8.3% profit, no small potaters in this down economy

Posted: 10/12/2012 9:16:24 AM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:

Quoted:
When I bought my 16, the dealer and I shared a laugh at the way he had to lie his ass off to Colt in order to get guns to sell. They were adamant that none of their M16s would go to civilians, even though it was perfectly legal so he assured them that each and every one of them went to LE. Actually that was true in my case, but probably not the way Colt wanted it.

They still hold the title of "World's Most Anti-gun Gun Company" in my opinion.

ahhhhh i wish iwas around back in the day haha. did that rifle cost any more than the semi version back in the day?

I have no idea what semi's were going for back then, but the 16 cost me a whole $600 NIB.
I wonder how much of a loss I'll take when I sell it.......

since you are in CT yours is truly irreplaceable since it's still "select fire" hahah
i'd love to shoot it some time since CT isn't that big a place

as for the other mentioned pre-bans, is that what they were going for during the fed ban? we still have that faggotry here in CT with average lower price of $500-650 as normal but WOW that's just stupid.
i too would have just gotten a machine gun in stead, well if i was aware of it anyway. besides those are 100% pre-ban hahah

Posted: 10/12/2012 10:10:56 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
as for the other mentioned pre-bans, is that what they were going for during the fed ban? we still have that faggotry here in CT with average lower price of $500-650 as normal but WOW that's just stupid.

In 2003, pre-ban complete rifles were going for $1500-$2000, with an occasional bargain here and there to be found. Not sure what they got like in 2004, because I was confident the ban was going to be allowed to sunset, so didn't track any prices.

Posted: 10/12/2012 1:04:02 PM EDT

[#19]

The peak was right before W2K when everybody had to have an AR because the end of the world was coming. The most expensive were those 130ish preban Colt 6721s rollmarked (AR15 A3 Tactical Carbine) which commanded upward of 5K or more. Low volume stuff like OA93 pistols were also really expensive.

New in box Colts between the green and blue label generation that had a mix of more desirable traits found in blue labels like small front pushpin, fence, black annodizing but with green lable traits like no sear block, standard fire control pins, factory bayo lug were next in line along with bushy's. The less desirable and more common Colts which were rollmarked "Sporter" and had a bunch of undesireable characterists like sear blocks, no fence, and a big front pin, light gray annodizin, etc were worth markedly less.

I bought a well used preban Oly carbine (bottom of the totem pole) in 99 and it was $1500, which was a fair deal at the time.

I had a LNIB box Colt Lightweight with small push pin, normal sized trigger pins, but with a one side pinned sear block and paid about $2500 for it in 2001. Sold the Colt and the Oly for close to what I paid for them to fund my Oly registered receiver acouple years later.

After W2K calmed down and GW was elected prices started stabilizing and then coming down. As time went on and the odds of the ban getting renewed became less and less as each year passed prices continued to fall as folks like myself started unloaded preban gear, like Colts and CMAGs.

However, I still have at least a dozen NIW preban $125 dollar plastic ramline 50rd 10/22 mags if anybody is interested.

Posted: 10/12/2012 2:08:42 PM EDT

[#20]

Actually the ironic thing is that post-ban ARs are a pretty good configuration.

Almost liike a semi-target version.

Of course the law was absurd and aside from being a disgusting infringement of our rights, also had no effect on crime.

Just a complete failure all around. Totally incompetent lawmaking.

Actually it did have the positive effect of making about 1 million new members join the NRA

Posted: 10/13/2012 8:37:14 AM EDT

[#21]

I must say I really enjoy reading your conversations, I'm only 25 so I had no chance of ever picking up a cheap full auto. I dream to one day be able to purchase a rr or Uzi, but I find it so interesting to read that prices for these guns used to be so cheap. Thanks for the info that you all always provide to us younger generation of shooters...

Posted: 10/13/2012 9:49:19 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

Quoted:
When I bought my 16, the dealer and I shared a laugh at the way he had to lie his ass off to Colt in order to get guns to sell. They were adamant that none of their M16s would go to civilians, even though it was perfectly legal so he assured them that each and every one of them went to LE. Actually that was true in my case, but probably not the way Colt wanted it.

They still hold the title of "World's Most Anti-gun Gun Company" in my opinion.

ahhhhh i wish i was around back in the day haha. did that rifle cost any more than the semi version back in the day?

This may sound really weird to ya ... But back in the '70s, M16s were worth less than semi versions, because of the $200 transfer tax. I remember folks cutting and demilling receivers because they could not find a buyer willing to pay that tax, and the only way to sell them was as parts kits.

Sigh.

WTF

The '70s were a really different world. Just as today, most gun ranges would not allow full-auto. And MGs (and NFA) were generally ignored by gun magazines, reflecting the Fudd theory that "nobody needs those things." And don't forget that the only way to legally buy ammo was in stores, and you were limited to what your local gun store had in inventory (GCA '68 banned mail-order sales of ammo).

Finally, there was no such thing as the internet. If you wanted to find out about machine guns, you headed to your local library. If you wanted to meet other MG owners, you pretty much had to ask around at ranges and gun stores ... and just as today, a stranger asking who owned MGs usually got the "nobody owns them, kid. Get outa here" response from longtime MG owners.

Some were lucky enough to find a copy of Shotgun News, maybe hear about the one big MG shoot (Knob Creek) and make a pilgrimage. But most would-be MG fans couldn't just drop everything and drive across the country, to find someone to talk to.

Thus, a whole lot of registered machine guns were simply destroyed, when the owners died or had to relocate to a non-MG state. There was no place to sell them (most newspapers refused to list machine guns in the classifieds) and no way to reach potential buyers. Shops wouldn't take them because you can't consign NFA, you have to buy it and pay the $200 transfer tax to the dealer; thus, the FFL would have the cost he paid you, plus the $200 to get it ... and then he had to find someone who actually wanted to buy it after hearing, "What!?!?! There's a $200 federal tax on this? No way."

Like I said, a really weird world back then. Without the internet as an information resource and contact point for NFA fans to meet, you were pretty much on your own, unless someone in your family was into MGs (in that way, I was lucky). And through them, I did meet other MG owners ... and, unfortunately, many ex-owners selling parts kits that used to be transferable guns. Sigh.

HTH.

Posted: 10/13/2012 11:57:15 AM EDT

[#23]

I really gotta get back to working on that time machine.

Posted: 10/13/2012 3:39:19 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
I really gotta get back to working on that time machine.

Let me know when you figure it out.

Posted: 10/13/2012 6:52:14 PM EDT

[#25]

So Tony, I've heard you refer to guys cutting up MGs so they could sell them as parts kits, my question is, are those guns still on the registry? Or have they been deducted from the total that the ATF says is out there?

Posted: 10/13/2012 6:58:33 PM EDT

[#26]

I have no freakin' idea. In some cases, I believe they did notify ATF; in others, particularly in estate cases, I'm sure they are still in the Registry as live MGs. I do know that there are a ton of WWII bring backs in the Registry still registered to the GIs who brought them back ... Far more than there are surviving WWII vets. Sigh.

Posted: 10/13/2012 9:10:29 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:

Quoted:
When I bought my 16, the dealer and I shared a laugh at the way he had to lie his ass off to Colt in order to get guns to sell. They were adamant that none of their M16s would go to civilians, even though it was perfectly legal so he assured them that each and every one of them went to LE. Actually that was true in my case, but probably not the way Colt wanted it.

They still hold the title of "World's Most Anti-gun Gun Company" in my opinion.

ahhhhh i wish i was around back in the day haha. did that rifle cost any more than the semi version back in the day?

This may sound really weird to ya ... But back in the '70s, M16s were worth less than semi versions, because of the $200 transfer tax. I remember folks cutting and demilling receivers because they could not find a buyer willing to pay that tax, and the only way to sell them was as parts kits.

Sigh.

WTF

The '70s were a really different world. Just as today, most gun ranges would not allow full-auto. And MGs (and NFA) were generally ignored by gun magazines, reflecting the Fudd theory that "nobody needs those things." And don't forget that the only way to legally buy ammo was in stores, and you were limited to what your local gun store had in inventory (GCA '68 banned mail-order sales of ammo).

Finally, there was no such thing as the internet. If you wanted to find out about machine guns, you headed to your local library. If you wanted to meet other MG owners, you pretty much had to ask around at ranges and gun stores ... and just as today, a stranger asking who owned MGs usually got the "nobody owns them, kid. Get outa here" response from longtime MG owners.

Some were lucky enough to find a copy of Shotgun News, maybe hear about the one big MG shoot (Knob Creek) and make a pilgrimage. But most would-be MG fans couldn't just drop everything and drive across the country, to find someone to talk to.

Thus, a whole lot of registered machine guns were simply destroyed, when the owners died or had to relocate to a non-MG state. There was no place to sell them (most newspapers refused to list machine guns in the classifieds) and no way to reach potential buyers. Shops wouldn't take them because you can't consign NFA, you have to buy it and pay the $200 transfer tax to the dealer; thus, the FFL would have the cost he paid you, plus the $200 to get it ... and then he had to find someone who actually wanted to buy it after hearing, "What!?!?! There's a $200 federal tax on this? No way."

Like I said, a really weird world back then. Without the internet as an information resource and contact point for NFA fans to meet, you were pretty much on your own, unless someone in your family was into MGs (in that way, I was lucky). And through them, I did meet other MG owners ... and, unfortunately, many ex-owners selling parts kits that used to be transferable guns. Sigh.

HTH.

So crazy. Like my dad says when I ask him about why he didn't buy machine guns back then (And he was 21 years old in 1968), he always says "he didn't know you could own them, and it would have just been a waste of ammo anyways." He has a good point, and $200 was a lot in the 1960s and 1970s. Plus, I can guarantee you that the fruit probably wouldn't be nearly as sweet as it is if wasn't for the 1986 ban, but it still would be nice to be looking forward to owning 10 or 20 machine guns and not paying much for them, instead of owning just 4 or 5 nice ones for more than $100,000.

Thanks for the info as always. Hey guys...I'm in on that time machine too!

Posted: 10/13/2012 9:49:58 PM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
I have no freakin' idea. In some cases, I believe they did notify ATF; in others, particularly in estate cases, I'm sure they are still in the Registry as live MGs. I do know that there are a ton of WWII bring backs in the Registry still registered to the GIs who brought them back ... Far more than there are surviving WWII vets. Sigh.

That is the sad truth. I've worked in a gun shop for just over three years now, I've had seven different families come forward with guns they found in parents or grandparents houses that they didn't know about. Told them all the same thing, gave them the number for a good lawyer. Only one of them ended up being registered that I know of. The other six? Who knows.

Posted: 10/14/2012 2:47:10 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I really gotta get back to working on that time machine.

Let me know when you figure it out.

I'll take the time off, from work, to go back too!

Posted: 10/14/2012 9:11:08 AM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:

Quoted:
When I bought my 16, the dealer and I shared a laugh at the way he had to lie his ass off to Colt in order to get guns to sell. They were adamant that none of their M16s would go to civilians, even though it was perfectly legal so he assured them that each and every one of them went to LE. Actually that was true in my case, but probably not the way Colt wanted it.

They still hold the title of "World's Most Anti-gun Gun Company" in my opinion.

ahhhhh i wish i was around back in the day haha. did that rifle cost any more than the semi version back in the day?

This may sound really weird to ya ... But back in the '70s, M16s were worth less than semi versions, because of the $200 transfer tax. I remember folks cutting and demilling receivers because they could not find a buyer willing to pay that tax, and the only way to sell them was as parts kits.

Sigh.

WTF

The '70s were a really different world. Just as today, most gun ranges would not allow full-auto. And MGs (and NFA) were generally ignored by gun magazines, reflecting the Fudd theory that "nobody needs those things." And don't forget that the only way to legally buy ammo was in stores, and you were limited to what your local gun store had in inventory (GCA '68 banned mail-order sales of ammo).

Finally, there was no such thing as the internet. If you wanted to find out about machine guns, you headed to your local library. If you wanted to meet other MG owners, you pretty much had to ask around at ranges and gun stores ... and just as today, a stranger asking who owned MGs usually got the "nobody owns them, kid. Get outa here" response from longtime MG owners.

Some were lucky enough to find a copy of Shotgun News, maybe hear about the one big MG shoot (Knob Creek) and make a pilgrimage. But most would-be MG fans couldn't just drop everything and drive across the country, to find someone to talk to.

Thus, a whole lot of registered machine guns were simply destroyed, when the owners died or had to relocate to a non-MG state. There was no place to sell them (most newspapers refused to list machine guns in the classifieds) and no way to reach potential buyers. Shops wouldn't take them because you can't consign NFA, you have to buy it and pay the $200 transfer tax to the dealer; thus, the FFL would have the cost he paid you, plus the $200 to get it ... and then he had to find someone who actually wanted to buy it after hearing, "What!?!?! There's a $200 federal tax on this? No way."

Like I said, a really weird world back then. Without the internet as an information resource and contact point for NFA fans to meet, you were pretty much on your own, unless someone in your family was into MGs (in that way, I was lucky). And through them, I did meet other MG owners ... and, unfortunately, many ex-owners selling parts kits that used to be transferable guns. Sigh.

HTH.

I cannot agree with the part in red above.

I grew up around guns here in eastern PA back in the 1960s and 1970s.

Most of the people I knew were not really shooters, they were hunters. Those people look at guns like a shovel or pickaxe, just a tool they needed to shoot crows or ducks or whatever.

The guys I knew that were shooters never ever expressed any "fudd" ideas. The only real difference between then and now is that those WWII/korea guys looke at military surplus guns as a "poor man's gun."

You could buy an 03 springfield for like $15 and they are just a big heavy clunky rifle with an ugly finish. The WWII guys wanted fancy walnut stocks and glossy blue finish.

It's not an accident that colt would polish their blue job on the python until it glowed like a mirror, the consumers demanded it.

As far as full auto guns go, it was just a matter of economics. Some guy who's worried about his bald tires is not going to go pay $200 so he can buy a gun that burns up $100 worth or ammo in a half hour.

Also, we didn't have St. Famine's day looming over us, so there was no real strong motivation to get one. Consider that your attitude towards buying say a dodge viper would be a lot different if the government chopped off all performance car production forever.

Even just 10 years ago prices were a fraction of what they are today, and that's not because of fuddishness.

Posted: 10/15/2012 7:21:32 AM EDT

[#31]

RE: cutting up Colt M16s into parts kits.

It seems strange that people would do this and yet you had C2's like Norrell taking demilled M16 receiver halves and welding them together to remanufacture them into functional guns. Were these happening at different times or was the market for machine guns so localized that someone might cut up a gun because they didn't realize there was a market a couple states over for that gun?

Posted: 10/15/2012 7:44:28 AM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:

This may sound really weird to ya ... But back in the '70s, M16s were worth less than semi versions, because of the $200 transfer tax. I remember folks cutting and demilling receivers because they could not find a buyer willing to pay that tax, and the only way to sell them was as parts kits.

Sigh.

I could not find a buyer for my AR-15/SP1 + RDIAS in mid-80s. Nobody wanted to pay more than the SP1 price. I was just trying to recover my parts cost - $95 for RDIAS, $100 for FCG+B/C. Yes I paid more for the FCG-B/C than I did for the RDIAS.

Posted: 10/15/2012 8:42:47 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
RE: cutting up Colt M16s into parts kits.

It seems strange that people would do this and yet you had C2's like Norrell taking demilled M16 receiver halves and welding them together to remanufacture them into functional guns. Were these happening at different times or was the market for machine guns so localized that someone might cut up a gun because they didn't realize there was a market a couple states over for that gun?

Both. I'm speaking of about a decade before John started doing the weld-ups ... and most of the guns I know of being cut up were WWII bringbacks, not M16s, though there were a few. And yes, the lack of market communication was a root cause.

Posted: 10/15/2012 9:29:12 PM EDT

[#34]

Go ahead and rename this thread to "Most depresing thread ever that won't make sense to anyone born in the 1980s"

Posted: 10/16/2012 6:08:58 AM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:
Go ahead and rename this thread to "Most depresing thread ever that won't make sense to anyone born in the 1980s"

The past is dead.

The only point worth pondering is the fact that NFA stuff is increasing in price on a month to month basis.

I think a lot of people are going to sit frozen with sticker shock until they are simply priced right out of the market.

Eventually, the prices will reach a point where 95% of the market just gives up. Then you'll see prices level off.

At that point thousands of guys will be kicking themselves for not buying in back in 2012 "when prices were still fairly low".

Posted: 10/16/2012 11:07:02 AM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Go ahead and rename this thread to "Most depresing thread ever that won't make sense to anyone born in the 1980s"

The past is dead.

The only point worth pondering is the fact that NFA stuff is increasing in price on a month to month basis.

I think a lot of people are going to sit frozen with sticker shock until they are simply priced right out of the market.

Eventually, the prices will reach a point where 95% of the market just gives up. Then you'll see prices level off.

At that point thousands of guys will be kicking themselves for not buying in back in 2012 "when prices were still fairly low".

Pretty much what will happen. People will pay what they think they are worth. When its priced at a point no one wants to pay, things will level off. I wish I had bought more in 2006 when I first started getting into them, but I thought the prices were too high.

Posted: 10/16/2012 12:18:07 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Go ahead and rename this thread to "Most depresing thread ever that won't make sense to anyone born in the 1980s"

The past is dead.

The only point worth pondering is the fact that NFA stuff is increasing in price on a month to month basis.

I think a lot of people are going to sit frozen with sticker shock until they are simply priced right out of the market.

Eventually, the prices will reach a point where 95% of the market just gives up. Then you'll see prices level off.

At that point thousands of guys will be kicking themselves for not buying in back in 2012 "when prices were still fairly low".

Pretty much what will happen. People will pay what they think they are worth. When its priced at a point no one wants to pay, things will level off. I wish I had bought more in 2006 when I first started getting into them, but I thought the prices were too high.

I honestly don't think we're anywhere near the peak of the market yet.

The baby boom generation is enormous in size and they have a vast tidal wave of money to spend.

And the supply of NFA guns is TINY.

I know a guy who sold a nearly new vector UZI on subguns for 8K, he was swarmed with buyers, like 5 in an hour. He didn't even post a picture.

What does that tell you? And here we are in the middle of a crippling recession.

I've been trying to guess how high M16s will go before the average buyer either cannot or will not buy one.

It's practically the ideal MG to own, cheap to run, a niagra river of parts and accessories, it's the current bad ass USGI main battle rifle, made by a first rate famous maker. There's no down side of any kind.

30K? who knows?

Posted: 10/16/2012 1:50:54 PM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
I've been trying to guess how high M16s will go before the average buyer either cannot or will not buy one.

It's practically the ideal MG to own, cheap to run, a niagra river of parts and accessories, it's the current bad ass USGI main battle rifle, made by a first rate famous maker. There's no down side of any kind.

30K? who knows?

I won't presume to tell you what will happen ... but here's something that could happen:

More and more MGs will be owned not be individuals, but by corporations set up to own them, with several individuals chipping in and, in return, getting stock shares that reflect usage, according to proportions. If this does happen, all MGs could eventually climb over 100k.

This is what happened with private aircraft.

Back in the '60s, the going price for a nice used 1940's Taylorcraft BC-12 two-seater was $2,000. A high-school buddy of mine who was obsessed with flying bought one for that when he was 16, in 1967. He had worked hard every summer, nights, weekends to raise the $$$ over several years. A lot of money at the time, when new Mustang convertibles were $3k, but still do-able for a high-schooler who worked hard and knew how to save.

The product liability lawsuits drove the private aircraft manufacturing industry almost to extinction. What few were still being built had huge pricetags, to cover the liability issues. And insuring an aircraft is also a huge expense today.

So what happened? More and more, a few buddies got together, pooled their money, and bought a plane, usually using a corporation to keep things straight and legal. The price and insurance was impossible for one person, but with five people each paying 20%, it's do-able. Besides, you don't use a private plane every day of the year –– and avgas ain't cheap, either. So each of the five partners gets 72 flight days each year, and that covers their Flying Jones.

I know some guys who already do this with more expensive MGs, through corporations. It's also a great way to own a piece of a small collection –– say, an M16, an MP5 and an M60 –– for a total of $15k instead of having to shell out $75k.

But one side effect of ownership through partnerships: It allowed the market price of the shared item to keep climbing and climbing, way beyond what the average individual could afford.

So, I guess we'll see how high MGs go .... but I really don't think M16s will level off anywhere near $30k. Just my prediction; Your Mileage May Vary.

Posted: 10/16/2012 5:55:52 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I've been trying to guess how high M16s will go before the average buyer either cannot or will not buy one.

It's practically the ideal MG to own, cheap to run, a niagra river of parts and accessories, it's the current bad ass USGI main battle rifle, made by a first rate famous maker. There's no down side of any kind.

30K? who knows?

I won't presume to tell you what will happen ... but here's something that could happen:

More and more MGs will be owned not be individuals, but by corporations set up to own them, with several individuals chipping in and, in return, getting stock shares that reflect usage, according to proportions. If this does happen, all MGs could eventually climb over 100k.

This is what happened with private aircraft.

Back in the '60s, the going price for a nice used 1940's Taylorcraft BC-12 two-seater was $2,000. A high-school buddy of mine who was obsessed with flying bought one for that when he was 16, in 1967. He had worked hard every summer, nights, weekends to raise the $$$ over several years. A lot of money at the time, when new Mustang convertibles were $3k, but still do-able for a high-schooler who worked hard and knew how to save.

The product liability lawsuits drove the private aircraft manufacturing industry almost to extinction. What few were still being built had huge pricetags, to cover the liability issues. And insuring an aircraft is also a huge expense today.

So what happened? More and more, a few buddies got together, pooled their money, and bought a plane, usually using a corporation to keep things straight and legal. The price and insurance was impossible for one person, but with five people each paying 20%, it's do-able. Besides, you don't use a private plane every day of the year –– and avgas ain't cheap, either. So each of the five partners gets 72 flight days each year, and that covers their Flying Jones.

I know some guys who already do this with more expensive MGs, through corporations. It's also a great way to own a piece of a small collection –– say, an M16, an MP5 and an M60 –– for a total of $15k instead of having to shell out $75k.

But one side effect of ownership through partnerships: It allowed the market price of the shared item to keep climbing and climbing, way beyond what the average individual could afford.

So, I guess we'll see how high MGs go .... but I really don't think M16s will level off anywhere near $30k. Just my prediction; Your Mileage May Vary.

The sky truly is the limit on these. Who knows where they will level off, if ever. I couldn't see paying to own part of an MG. I like being able to come home every day and seeing my 60 sitting on the table. Not that I shoot it every day(or every month for that matter) but its still there.

Posted: 10/16/2012 6:10:13 PM EDT

[#40]

i would also like to think that there has to be a limit to the MG prices. i would like to think that the common ones such as M16 type and H&Ks would level out at mid 20s to high 30s for collector grade guns in the next 10 years. but at that point why not just go the FFL/SOT route and possibly break even in the end.

like Tony said about the corps or LLCs for multiple guys to own MGs like a time share why not start a "gun shop" at that point because with 5 guys throwing in 5k for a total $25,000 investment that is a lot of MG fun. but more paperwork since you have licenses and what not.

Posted: 10/16/2012 7:57:46 PM EDT

[#41]

It's already happened for airplanes, which are a good analogy to a high-ticket item that was once affordable to the average joe, and now impossible for all but a very select few to afford individually. I would expect LLCs/partnerships on first, collections, and then slowly on individual desirable machineguns to become the norm as prices inevitably climb.

Mac10s are today's ultralights, and Uzis and M16s are today's piper cubs and cessnas.

Posted: 10/17/2012 7:07:56 AM EDT

[#42]

Don't forget, though, that airplanes have the special property of being part of a lawsuit happy industry.

You buy an airplane as part of a corporation, you can't get sued. That is a big deal.

I don't know that you would necessarily see the same thing with guns, because there are already collector guns that cost 50K or 100K and you don't see them being bought by corporations.

Or do they? Maybe i just never heard of it.

These NFA trusts and corporations do seem to be set up for a group buy, I could see it happening.

Posted: 10/18/2012 3:08:26 PM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
I must say I really enjoy reading your conversations, I'm only 25 so I had no chance of ever picking up a cheap full auto. I dream to one day be able to purchase a rr or Uzi, but I find it so interesting to read that prices for these guns used to be so cheap. Thanks for the info that you all always provide to us younger generation of shooters...

Most of us who were around back then didn't have access to cheap machine guns either. Trusts were not accepted until 2002. We were at the mercy of local law enforcement. Most would deny prior to 1986.

Posted: 10/18/2012 4:23:17 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I must say I really enjoy reading your conversations, I'm only 25 so I had no chance of ever picking up a cheap full auto. I dream to one day be able to purchase a rr or Uzi, but I find it so interesting to read that prices for these guns used to be so cheap. Thanks for the info that you all always provide to us younger generation of shooters...

Most of us who were around back then didn't have access to cheap machine guns either. Trusts were not accepted until 2002. We were at the mercy of local law enforcement. Most would deny prior to 1986.

That is the sad truth. My mother(kind of scary, isn't it?) bought me my first MG in 2001, but the local CLEO wouldn't sign.

Posted: 10/18/2012 7:04:22 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I must say I really enjoy reading your conversations, I'm only 25 so I had no chance of ever picking up a cheap full auto. I dream to one day be able to purchase a rr or Uzi, but I find it so interesting to read that prices for these guns used to be so cheap. Thanks for the info that you all always provide to us younger generation of shooters...

Most of us who were around back then didn't have access to cheap machine guns either. Trusts were not accepted until 2002. We were at the mercy of local law enforcement. Most would deny prior to 1986.

That is the sad truth. My mother(kind of scary, isn't it?) bought me my first MG in 2001, but the local CLEO wouldn't sign.

WTF!!! best mom ever hahaha

so the ass clown CLEO was just protecting his town?

Posted: 10/18/2012 8:09:12 PM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I must say I really enjoy reading your conversations, I'm only 25 so I had no chance of ever picking up a cheap full auto. I dream to one day be able to purchase a rr or Uzi, but I find it so interesting to read that prices for these guns used to be so cheap. Thanks for the info that you all always provide to us younger generation of shooters...

Most of us who were around back then didn't have access to cheap machine guns either. Trusts were not accepted until 2002. We were at the mercy of local law enforcement. Most would deny prior to 1986.

But the corporate and LLC route has been around for a long time. I know of a handful of people who used this method. My "history" is limited in that I only began following title-2 stuff while in highschool in the early 1990s.

For the more seasoned guys on the board, when did Corp/LLC ownership of title-2 arms become legit, or has it always been this way?

Posted: 10/18/2012 8:30:14 PM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I must say I really enjoy reading your conversations, I'm only 25 so I had no chance of ever picking up a cheap full auto. I dream to one day be able to purchase a rr or Uzi, but I find it so interesting to read that prices for these guns used to be so cheap. Thanks for the info that you all always provide to us younger generation of shooters...

Most of us who were around back then didn't have access to cheap machine guns either. Trusts were not accepted until 2002. We were at the mercy of local law enforcement. Most would deny prior to 1986.

But the corporate and LLC route has been around for a long time. I know of a handful of people who used this method. My "history" is limited in that I only began following title-2 stuff while in highschool in the early 1990s.

For the more seasoned guys on the board, when did Corp/LLC ownership of title-2 arms become legit, or has it always been this way?

Not that I was around back then....

... But the 1920's and 1930's were a time to tremendous social change and upheaval, and the emergence of the union movement. So major industrial powers, in the auto, steel, mining industries, owned large numbers of machine guns to protect their plants against violently striking workers. It was what it was.

So when Congresscritters back then drafted the National Firearms Act, they made sure to make it easy for corporate America –– then as now, their biggest financial supporters –– to own machine guns to defend their corporate assets. Thus, the original 1934 law was carefully crafted to present huge obstacles to individual ownership, but to make it relatively simple for corporations to own NFA items.

Posted: 10/19/2012 7:35:57 AM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I must say I really enjoy reading your conversations, I'm only 25 so I had no chance of ever picking up a cheap full auto. I dream to one day be able to purchase a rr or Uzi, but I find it so interesting to read that prices for these guns used to be so cheap. Thanks for the info that you all always provide to us younger generation of shooters...

Most of us who were around back then didn't have access to cheap machine guns either. Trusts were not accepted until 2002. We were at the mercy of local law enforcement. Most would deny prior to 1986.

That is the sad truth. My mother(kind of scary, isn't it?) bought me my first MG in 2001, but the local CLEO wouldn't sign.

WTF!!! best mom ever hahaha

so the ass clown CLEO was just protecting his town?

Yeah, my mom is pretty cool.

And yes, the local chief said to go to the sheriff, and he was of the opinion that no one should own MG's.

Posted: 10/19/2012 11:30:58 AM EDT

[#49]

This subject is just one of the reasons why I went with a "factory" SBR. Because IMHO I do believe we will have another Assault weapons ban. One that bans all semis no matter what it looks like.
And you never know, some idiot could throw in another poison pill & lock the registry for all NFA weapons.

Just imagine how much used sbr/sbs & used suppressors would be going for after a ban on those..

Posted: 12/12/2012 8:57:57 PM EDT

[#50]

Not considering any sort of government bans.

Unless ATF cracks down on issuing SOTs, that will cap prices. Not to mention people with enough money will just become friends with their local LEOs or go overseas and shoot god knows what with a friendly 3rd world general.

Also at some point, you won't find anyone willing to weld on a $80k receiver, therefore people will stop shooting them which will stunt any further appreciation.

Ultimately though, I think the country is going to go a lot more left in the future, I think we have seen a peak in pro gun feelings and enthusiasm. Plus another 10-20 years of technology combined with lousy economic growth, leaving the house paying $4 a gallon gas to sit at a range to blast expensive ammo surrounded by dust and loud noises will seem so foreign when you can just ride the couch and plug into the iholobrain for cheap.

As far as the olden days go, I didn't see any mentioned ammo costs. From what I understand, unadjusted for inflation, ammo prices in the early 80s are pretty much the same as today. Also, this may be hard to understand for the facebook generation, but people didn't want to fill out government forms and let people know their business.

Heck even in the early 90s in Texas, you could go to two or three wellstocked gunshops and maybe see one AR15. I went to a fair number of gunshows in Texas in the early and mid 90s, I can only remember seeing one table with NFA weapons.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Did Colt ever sell the M16's new to civilians ? (Page 1 of 2)

Armory » M-16

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us