Update below, new picture showing the removed bayonet lug and new phosphate finish BCG.

Hi guys. I am not big into the retro stuff, so I was hoping to get some feedback on this XM177E2 I bought at the local gun show this week. It is an H&R lower and stock AFAIK. No issues there that I know of. The upper is kind of a mystery to me, maybe you can help ID some of it. The upper receiver is unmarked. The barrel is an RRA 11.5 inch, 1/7 twist. I do not see markings on the flash hider, which is pinned and welded. It is legal length, 16.25 inches. The BCG appears to be chrome, but is also unmarked.

I know the bayonet lug is incorrect, I can get that removed easy enough. It has a Colt 6 hole handguard and A1 grip. So, can anybody ID who made the receiver or FH? Anything else I need to change other than the bayonet lug to get a close XM177E2 replica? TIA

Did any XM177E2's use chrome BCGs? I was happy with this one, but I have read some posts that indicate there were no chrome BCGs used. If so, why did Colt use a chrome BCG in their reissue/replica XM177E2? I see a lot of guys using chrome in their builds here in the retro forum. Do I need to find an appropriate phosphate finish BCG? TIA

Attached File
 
Attached File


New picture showing the new phosphate BCG and cut bayonet lug. It is getting there!
Attached File

Upper looks like the newer mfg H&R. FH is hard to say for sure but could be H&R as well.

Chop that lug and call it good, nice rifle!

I’ve picked up slings like this but not this, help a brother out on where to get one?

.  Try here https://ar15sport.com/product/surplus-adjustable-slings-with-green-webbing/

Looks like one of the TNTE blem one piece flash hider/fake moderators. Nice carbine!

Bump for new question answers in OP.

E2s were in production around 1968-1969. It is likely they had phosphate carriers considering that transition happened approximately 1965-1967 in M16s.

Colt probably did it in their reissues because people who don’t know will just see chrome and assume it is correct, and since it is flashy/shiny/different, people may also be more likely to purchase one. None of the reproduction rifles by anyone have been 100% accurate. Some have been out of laziness, and some because it just isn’t feasible in the market. I wouldn’t expect Ford to be able to make a ‘65 Mustang today without some changes that collectors would notice.

If starting with any manufacturer’s “reissue,” you will need to make your own changes to make it clone correct.

My 2¢

Various shorty prototypes:
Attached File

Attached File

Americansheepdog, thanks for your reply. So will a current production phosphate full auto bcg (I was looking at a Toolcraft no logo phosphate bcg on PSA) be close enough for a clone?

There’s some minor differences, but 98% of people (ie everyone not in this forum or on reddit’s retro sub) will not know the difference, so it will be good enough.

Op, you have a beautiful rifle there as is, you could just leave it and all your shooting buddies would never know a thing other than it is cool retro.

But since you did ask, and other than what you already discussed, there are 2 things I would change.

First thing is simple. I would swap the castle nut for a buffer tube nut with just the centered hole for the spanner wrench. I am not sure when the castle nut came to be, but probably not 68-69 time frame. The retro gurus here can correct if I am wrong.

Second thing is a bit more work. There appears to be a crush washer peeking out behind your grenade ring. That would make me personally change that. Now it may be done because whoever built that upper needed extra length for legality, or they simply wanted to time the wrench flats side to side. Who knows. Changing it would be a pain in the ass. I have done a few re-pin welds and it can be difficult. It would probably be a piece of cake for a guy like John Thomas thou.

I have way worse things on my retro builds but my excuse is I built them in the early 80's and it was a way different market then. I would never post a picture of them here, lol.

Beansay, thanks for your reply. Right now, I think I am going to swap out the bcg with a phosphate finish one. The chrome bcg is "pretty", but I think I will go that step closer to original appearance of an XM177e2. Plus it is an easy fix. I will also get the bayonet lug removed. Not as easy, but very doable. At that point I might just call it good. Your two suggestions are certainly good ones. I will see how it looks after the bcg and bayonet lug fixes.

Another simple thing is if you want to do is to change out the safety to a no tic style

Great point! Another thing I can handle. Thanks!

Ejection port door while you are at it.  Did you get a good deal on it?

I like the color match on the one currently on the rifle. If I can find a close match grey correct door, I will swap it out.

Got it for $950. I think it was a fair price.

It’s possible that is a TNTE barrel assembly, as I know they have had to source their 11.5” barrels from whoever they can since Green Mtn cut them off. Mine on my 733 is I think a Roscoe barrel but honestly not sure. The p&w looks pretty similar

Regarding the chrome bolt…I shoot mine and prefer the easy cleanup.  I recently scored an original Colt chrome BCG without the f/a serrations at a show for $90.  It resides in my converted SP1 carbine.  Whether or not it’s correct doesn’t matter to me.  It trips the sear and I love that simply wiping it off removes the fouling.
I’m sure that I could get top dollar for it on junkbroker and replace it with several from PSA, but I don’t have time or interest to deal with it.  Sometime down the road, the next owner will have a little bonus when he or she takes possession of it, lol!
Keep what you have and enjoy the time you don’t spend cleaning a parkerized finish.

If your sending it out to get the bayonet lug removed, consider having the seam removed from the front sight base as well.
That was another trademark of the XM177E2.
I had John Thomas do that to mine.

I searched their website, and I do believe my barrel/flash hider is TNTE, using a RRA sourced barrel. It actually looks closer to a real XM177E2 than some of the other options available.

Reply to BTT OP with new picture of the XM177E2.

Could you go into more detail on the cut off by GM thing? I hadn't heard that before.

honestly, why bother to "chop that lug".

It doesn't have a sear, sear hole or anything else, so really, it is not technically correct anyhow.  Why is one little thing like that making it "more worse" than it already is.

Not dogging on the gun, I think they are the bees knees.  But the purist thing about the lug is silly, it's not correct no matter what you do, so why bother?

I think many has it in their ability, know how, and/or legality to do 99% of the things to make one clone correct. The sear, sear hole, and full auto group to make it 100% clone correct either comes with a multi 10k price tag, breaking the law (I agree, all gun laws are illegal but that's another discussion) or the person needs to get a FFL / SOT license, etc. So many do all they can to reach that 99% line. I myself (unless I win a lottery) am not paying $200 for a mag release button cause its has one extra circle or paying $100 extra for a barrel with correct twist when one twist up will work. That is just me and where I am at right now. I can be happy with 90-95% correct. The people willing and able to do 99%, I am proud of them. Me being a big 2A person, it just makes me feel good knowing their are one more gun out there that is almost perfect that is going to be passed along to the next generation. I also like to see the person's excitement when they get that much closer to that 99% goal line.

JS, If that was my gun and that's an A2 eject door on there, id change that to a retro A1, $20. I would change the buffer tube nut to a retro one $8. I would take a full auto safety selector with no tick, file off the shark fin, and install that $20. And would have done everything else he has done simply because they are easy, simple, and cheap things to put it right at that 99% line. I most likely would have left the chrome BCG in it. That is just me though. Each to their own.

Good explanation.  Just never understood the 99% vs 98% when neither is 100%

But like I said, I love the xm177 look period and am glad to see these available.  And I would even take one with a A2 ejection port cover