I'm looking at original photos of XM16E1 receivers, and XM177E2 receivers, and on some the engraving above the selector lever has "fire arms" as two words, and on others "firearms" is one word.  Does anyone have a definitive answer as to which is MORE correct? It looks like "fire arms" may be earlier than "firearms".  If this IS the case, does anyone have dates and/or serial numbers when the change took place?  Please let me know ASAP, as I have a receiver at the engravers right now and need to know which way to go.  Thanks.

The company has changed names a number of times over the years, but this shift is more due to lexical conventions changing than anything else, I think.

In the 1800s, their advertisements were as "Colt's Patent Fire Arms Manufacturing", later abbreviated to Fire-arms, later conjugated to Firearms.

I guess technically the correct version is whatever was on their incorporation papers in current effect at the time the receivers were manufactured, which might be searchable from Connecticut public state records.  After 1968 GCA, it would be whatever was on their FFL as the corporate entity name, or DBA.

I would go with the top version. The bottom photo is an 80% engraved lower, so it may not be totally correct.

I understand what you are saying, but I just grabbed the wrong photo.  I've got original pictures, including a 601 receiver, that are engraved the same as this 80% receiver with "firearms".

If you have pictures of originals, and it was done both ways, how could one be MORE correct than the other?
edit. For what its worth, ive seen many more that firearms is one word than two.

What I mean is more correct BASED on serial number or date range.  I'm hoping someone has a database on markings.

I was looking at some pictures earlier and most of the xm16e1 rifles I saw were marked fire arms. I did see a 602 that was marked firearms though so I don't think there was a firm date that they changed it. This needs more investigation.

If they have (had) more than one roll station I'm betting they could have came both ways on the same day.


 

I was thinking something like that. It's probably random.

If I have learned anything from my study of the AR10/15 it would be that a manufacturer will frequently set aside a lot of parts that display a blemish or a non function effecting evolutional defect in preference to a new batch but then in a pinch because of their immediate availability are quickly re-purposed and built to fill a contract or special request . Sometimes sales require a 'pretty product' where something more experimental can lack being pretty to field a new modification. There is no such thing as a 'correct military weapon' they are all built from what ever parts were on-hand. One at the beginning of a production run can be very different from the last one or ones in the middle. The machinists here will tell you, the first of production can be crude until the process is established and then the product improves and holds somewhat constant until production ceases. Since overrun costs the manufacturer production can often come up short at which time previous rejects are re-examined to meet quota and decrease level of loss to burned parts.

I'm sorry, but how does this apply to my question?  Are you saying that you think "fire arms" could be a reject marking?

"Firearms" is earlier.

Every photo I have of a real 601 shows "Firearms" .

Every photo I have of a 607 or a GX marked prototype says "Fire Arms".

602s also seem to say "Firearms" and most XM16s and everything after seem to say "Fire Arms".

The XM16 and the GX rifles are from the same time period. About 1965. Keep in mind, the GX rifles use a serial number range between the 601 and 602 run, because that range was set aside by Colt specifically for these experimental guns. If you go by the actual years we know these weapons to have been produced, you can see a real change.

Given what I've seen, I'd say they shifted to "Fire Arms" sometime in '65 and continued to use it until they changed to "Colts Firearms Division" in the late 60's or early 70's.

This wasn't some extra marking die, this wasnt contract overrun, this was an easily spotted change in the manufacturing process. There are way too many pictures showing a clear progression.

I am saying just about anything goes and there really is no such thing as correct or incorrect, clearly it can be demonstrated either has been used during production. In some instances serial number ranges can be guidelines but nothing is set in stone.

A retired Australian military Xm16E1...

XM16E1's in the 555,XXX serial number range (early '66) were marked FIRE ARMS.

Wpns Man

My 3 digit 601 (1960) is Fire Arms IIRC. My late 1970's M16A1 9,1xx,666 (a truly evil black rifle) is Firearms (both original Colts).