I'm thinking about getting an M60 soon.
I've no idea what to look for and what mfg M60 is more desirable or to avoid.
Often times, I've noticed that the seller emphasize on trunnion but have no idea what they're talking about.
Searched the internet but can't find the specific forum or good info on buying M60 "the right way" and avoid pitfall, etc.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.

First, you have to understand the nature of the M60. Unlike, say, a Browning-type MG, where the sideplate is the "gun," legally, or an M16, where the lower receiver is the "gun," the M60 receiver is an assemblage of parts, which together constitute the "gun."

The serial number and maker's information may be on the trunnion, it may be on the bottom channel, or it may be on a combination of these places. For example, my M60, which was made by RIA using a Maremont trunnion, has the serial number on the trunnion (along with the Maremont markings), but "RIA" is stamped on the bottom channel.

The part with the serial number is considered inviolate; the other parts of the receiver assembly can be replaced. Which part is serialized makes a difference in the value. I believe that guns with serialized trunnions are more valuable than those with serialized bottom channels. (The bottom channel, which is just a stamping, is more likely to need replacement than the trunnion.)

The most valuable M60's are complete factory Maremont guns. RIA rebuilds using Maremont trunnions come next.

Desert Ordnance can take any M60 and rebuild it to the current specs, but their service is very pricey.

My personal opinion is that the M60 is overrated. For the price that one of those is going for, you could probably buy two Browning M1919's. And the M1919's would be more rugged and versatile.

And the 1919 weighs a ton, requires a tripod, and can't be fired from the shoulder.  Also, that little revolver pistol grip on the ass-end of it isn't very tacticool!

Lots of good info in AlexanderA's post above.  You should track down he five-part M60 articles from Small Arms Review - it's a good collection of M60 background.

Joe

I don't necessarily believe anyone is more better or greater than the other mfg unless it comes down to put monetary value or collector value. Anyone could rebuild it if you found one for a good enough deal.

My only advice is make sure it's something you want. I'd have sold mine if it didn't hold sentimental value of being my first machine gun.

Excellent advice...
So, look for the M60 with serial# on Trunnion?
How's the durability of M60 Trunion?
I'm buying M60 as a shooter and have zero interest in collectibility.

oh... so just grab anything that's cheaper?
I've seen M60 as low as $32K on GB.
What makes it slow performer when it comes down to MG price compare to HK sear or M16?
Too expensive to feed or not versatile?

Check out the videos on the M60 Machine Gun YouTube channel.  https://www.youtube.com/user/Vietnow01/videos

Here is everything you need to know about owning an M60. It's the definitive guide to civilian ownership of an M60.




http://machinegunpriceguide.com/html/m60_part_1.HTM

Granted, some of it is technical, but the guide will help. The most important thing to take away from the guide: civilian ownership of a transferable M60 is very different from military ownership of an M60. The two standards and methods of care are very different. This is because the military can just throw away and replace their gun, the civilian M60 community can never replace their transferable guns.

Opinions vary on which M60 to own, so I won't get into that, as it's already been well summarized above. I would add that you should avoid rewelds. Rewelds are cheaper, but they are not safe to shoot, no matter what the guy trying to sell his reweld tells you.

If you're just looking for a blaster, you won't and no one else will care who made it. If it a really good price, I'd buy it and shoot it or rebuild whatever It may need.

I probably wouldn't buy one with a serialed trunnion. Simply because trunnions wear out and it wont be able to be replaced legally. My gun has the serial on the bottom channel sheet metal. So I can replace the trunnion, the rails, side receiver sheet metal (if I ever needed to); receiver parts that are more prone to damage or repair.

M60 prices have to compete with hk sear versatility and m16s are just the things to have. M60s are pretty stale unless you want to drop thousands to 10s of thousands on new kits to have any of the numerous variations. Probably not that appealing when you're essentially stuck with the same gun, but shorter barrel and an optics rail.

For me, the M60 is the best beltfed to own when it comes straight to going to the range and shooting it without the need of a ton of shit. But, for me they're just not that exciting anymore.

Trunnions have been known to get "out of round" (on the inside) if the gun has been fired a lot. This is a problem more if the gun is fired from the barrel-mounted bipod, than if it's habitually fired from a tripod.

If the serial number is on the trunnion, the trunnion cannot be replaced. It can be restored by welding and re-machining, but this is a very expensive proposition.

Nevertheless, a bent bottom channel is much more common, so that's why I would recommend a gun with the serial number on the trunnion.

I have trouble wrapping my mind around the idea of a $30,000+ gun as a "blaster." Not to mention the cost of ammunition. I'll admit that my M60 is a safe queen, and not a range toy. The few times I have taken it out shooting (including with blanks), I have bitterly regretted it. The wear and tear is something you will cry about.

Have plenty of new top covers stashed away. That fragile aluminum piece will rapidly begin to look like hell, if you shoot it. I used to keep mine protected with electrical tape.

My 60 is a working whore. It's fallen off of tracked vehicles, been kicked around, used as a shield for tree branches on moving vehicles, left out in the rain, top cover working on looking like polished aluminum, etc. It's just another gun to me. But she's never failed me when I do shoot it which is a lot less simply because I just don't get excited about it anymore.

I certainly wouldn't purchase the cheapest M60 you can find.   As mentioned above M60s receivers are a collection of parts from  a receiver perspective.  The main structural components being the trunion, left/right rails, lower rail, rear bridge, and sheet metal channel.  If you buy a cheap M60 that wasn't put together right or has bad repairs done, it can turn into an expensive headache to try and get fixed.

In my opinion, unless you are really well versed on the nuances of the M60 and have a great depth of technical experience to evaluate each gun individually on its merits,  I would personally stick to the following three manufacturers who built a good number of guns and are known quantities for the most part.

1. All variants of the US Military contract suppliers which include the Maremont, SACO, Lowell, New England marked guns.

These guns would be the gold standard of the M60 world made by US Military contractor/s.   However, they will be priced  "accordingly" so be prepared for a $45 to $55K check to be written for a basic good condition E1.

2.  RIA - Rock Island Armory
There are some variations here in terms of build quality and serial number ranges to keep in mind.  

The serial numbers start at 10,000 and go up to about 10,500.  The first 25 or so guns (10000 to 10025) are purported to have more issues including receiver component alignment issues.

The first ~80 guns were built with military contractor trunions. (10000 to ~10080)  The original SACO serial number is usually removed and a new RIA serial number is engraved on the SACO trunion and the maker markings are on the channel.   The downside to these guns is that since the serial is on the trunion and the RIA stamp is on the channel, neither part can be replaced if damaged.

The 10100 serial numbers are up are generally registered channel guns with both the serial and marker identification marks on the channel.  With these guns everything can be replaced except the channel (including the trunion).  US/Dessert Ord will take a  RIA registered channel gun and rebuild it from  scratch using a new trunion, rails, and bridge. (plus new E4/E6 top cover, gas tube, stock, grip, barrel, forearm, and ammo hanger)

3. Catco also has a reputation for good M60 builds using a mix of USGI and their own in house components.  Although they are more rare to pop up for sale then USGI or RIA guns.

I would personally stay away from  any gun that has rewelded parts, and that goes double-time for a rewelded trunion (especially if the rewelded trunion has the serial #) regardless of who did the work or price discount.

Given the amount of money you are going to be spending for any M60, I would suggest doing an in person visit/inspection.

- Bring along a receiver stretch gauge to check the receiver for overall wear  (you are welcome to borrow mine if you pay shipping back and forth)
- Check the barrel socket in the trunion for any signs of wear or previous repair. (and or has the barrel has been sleeved to make up for an oblong or worn trunion)
- Check the integrity of the trunion to rail/channel welds and if there are no welds that the rivet joints are tight.
- Inspect the charging handle area of the channel for any signs of repair or damage
- Inspect the fire control/grip cutout in the bottom of the sheet metal for wear or damage and that the grip assembly doesn't exhibit any excessive "wobble" with the bolt forward and in battery.

There are pros and cons to a registered trunion vs. a registered channel.

The trunion is really the heart of the receiver group and is a big hunk of metal.   That said the material surrounding the barrel socket is actually pretty thin and can exhibit wear and or be damaged, especially if the gun as been aggressively shot off the older E1 style bipod.  

The downside to registered trunion guns is that trunions can be more difficult to  repair if damaged and is really the structural the heart of the receiver group.

A registered channel gun ,the benefit is that all of the main real structural components can be replaced.  The channel is really only a primary structural component for the changing handle, grip frame, and ammo hanger (on the E4 and up guns).    If the trunion or rails get damaged, than they can be pulled and replaced.  

That said a channel can be more easily damaged since it is just sheet metal but is more straight forward to repair and doesn't take the same critical stress the trunion does.  The most common damage to the channel s somebody who gets  a round stuck in the barrel and decides the best operation to get it out is to furiously yank on the changing handle, which can then bend or damage/gouge the receiver channel.

Personally I think the best financial deal out there from a shooter perspective is to get a registered channel RIA gun (saving yourself 10K over a similar spec USGI contractor gun), send it off to US/Desert Ord and let them rebuild it from  the ground up to an E4 or E6 and let them  replace any receiver components they feel need to be replaced at the same time.

However, there is a strong argument to be made that just getting a low mileage USGI/Maremont gun with a registered trunion is the best option as well.     If money was no object, you can never go wrong with a USGI/Maremont gun and then sending it off to be upgraded to an E4 or E6.

I personally have a registered channel RIA gun upgraded to a E4 by US/Dessert Ord and it was been rock solid over the past 7 years I have owned it.

Other good sources of information are the SAR articles that MGTony already recommended, the Kevin Dockerty M60 guidebook (available on Amazon), as well as the myriad of USGI TM publications.

In terms of comparison to HK sears or M16s,  M60s are one trick pony's and are not an entry level gun.   I suspect that the vast majority of M60 owners already own an M16 and/or HK sear so there is less competition for M60s in the marketplace as those future owners almost invariably purchase an M16 and HK sear first and only if they are really dedicated to the hobby go after an M60.   M60s are more expensive to feed, parts are more expensive, are more difficult to repair, bigger item to take to the range, less ranges will let you shoot them, and are probably more technically complex/intimidating for most folks as very few people get their feet wet with a "semi" M60 vs. an AR15 or semi MP5 clone.

If you have any other questions just let me know and good luck in your search.

I've got questions regarding the receiver stretch gauge... What is the maximum amount of stretch (from nominal) allowed on the gauge? What is considered failing? The guy on M60 MG YouTube videos said he had never heard of one failing the gauge. Has anyone here heard of a receiver which did fail?




How is the gauge used to determine correct placement of the receiver components? Do you just measure from the back part of the gauge to the channel walls? The SAR article mentions alignment, but doesn't explain the measurement method(s) very well.




 

 

Impressive knowledge!
I've never seen anyone who's more capable than  Jbntex.
My hats off to you sir.
It will help me guiding through out my M60 quest.

From the 24P manual is all I know about it.

Assemble gage frame up through the trigger group slot and place pin 'b' (short pin) through the top cover pivot hole. Put pin 'A' (long pin) through the pintle pin holes. Insert rod through the rear and slide the buffer yoke gage through the slot. First push the yoke gage to the lowest position( upper groove on gage aligned with rail tops). Look at rear of the assembly at center pin location. Pin must be flush or above gaging surface. Raise yoke gage to lower groove and recheck rear pin location. Remove yoke gage, rotate 180 degrees and repeat the process. If the gage pin falls below(inside) the gaging surface at any time in the procedures, the receiver is considered unserviceable.

The stretch gauge is made from a couple of parts. The gauge body, which is the horseshoe looking piece that attaches to the trunion with multiple gauge plugs. The spring loaded gauge rod and the gauge shim that replaces the buffer yoke during measurement.

The way it works is you assemble the receiver gauge body (horseshoe looking part) to the trunion using the gauge pins.   This will make sure that all of the holes in the trunion are the proper size and in alignment to each other.  The trunion and assembled gauge are then used as a reference point for the rest of the measurements.   You then install the spring loaded gauge rod into the main gauge body (which is pinned to the trunion) and insert the gauge wedge into the buffer yoke slot cutouts in the rear of the rails. (the gauge wedge replaces the buffer yoke during measurement)

On the back of the spring loaded gauge rod is a "pin" that will stick out the back (similar to a loaded chamber or cocking indicator).  You then reinsert the gauge wedge into the buffer yoke cutout a couple of different ways. The test is to make sure that the pin that protrudes out the back of the spring loaded portion of the gauge is always at a minimum "flush" with the back of the gauge rod body and taking measurement with the wedge in a few different positions.  

I am not sure what the specs are on how much that pin on the back of the spring loaded gauge rod can/should protrude at max until it eventually goes below the body of the gauge (indicating the receiver is no longer in spec) but I am guessing based off memory of about maybe 1/8 of an inch.

I am not aware of any "official" way/test that the stretch gauge can confirm alignment of the rails or rear bridge.  However if the rails and channel are out of alignment to the trunion, than the rear bridge would be as well, and the gauge wedge wont properly go through bridge buffer yoke slot and engage the spring loaded gauge rod because since the gauge rod would no longer centered down the channel of the receiver if it was tweaked left/right/up/down.

There is also a receiver "looseness" test as well, to confirm the proper join between the trunion, rails and channel.  However, I am not sure how applicable that test is with the current standard to weld the channel and rails to the trunion (vs. just rivets)

I have old scans of the Army TM manuals on both tests (stretch and looseness) and will try and get them uploaded later this evening.  

If I have time this holiday weekend I will see if I can break out the stretch gauge and take some pic of it in use, along with the steps.  

The one downside with an upgraded gun (E4 or E6) is that the ammo hanger on the E4/E6 is bolted to the receiver and gets in the way of the stretch gauge body from being pinned to the trunion.  So in order to use it on the more modern variants you have to removed the ammo hanger on the receiver vs. the older version where the ammo hanger comes off with the feed tray.

jbntex wrote:



My gun is in this serial number range (serial on the trunnion, "RIA" on the bottom channel) . We actually had a discussion about this issue here on this board, a while back. My bottom channel has some minimal damage (it's a long story) and, ideally, I would like to get it replaced. The consensus here was that, legally, this is a gray area. I contacted Desert Ordnance and they would do it, but it would be very expensive (a complete rebuild). I figured it was not cost-effective and decided to leave well enough alone. The damage is not noticeable unless you know exactly what you are looking for, and then look very closely.

BTW, RIA did not use hardened steel for their bottom channels. It's soft, and bends fairly easily. That means that while it can be damaged fairly easily, it can also be repaired (bent back) equally easily. You have to worry about gouges more than bends.

Regarding the receiver stretch gauge, the Desert Ordnance representative at Knob Creek told me that they did not use the stretch gauge when doing their rebuilds. This surprised me. Apparently, they also did not weld the rails to the trunnion.

It is definitely an expensive proposition for the rebuild.  I had a conversation with another guy on the board from Dallas a couple years back who had the whole rebuild done and the quote was in the $10K to $12K range to take an RIA gun and rebuild it from scratch (leaving only the channel) and upgrading to an E6 at the same time.

My guns runs fine but if the trunion ever gets egged out, I will send it off to get upgraded and move from E4 to E6.    The nice thing about the RIA SACO trunion guns is you are getting a forged milspec trunion without the Maremont/SACO pricetag of the factory USGI guns, so theoretically you should have less change of trunion wear/damage with the forged mil-spec SACO trunion vs. the RIA in-house made trunions later in the production run.

Either way its really nice to have the current US contractor for these guns (US/Desert Ordnance) be available to do such upgrades and repairs.  

Thanks for the detailed responses!! Lots of great info here!




I searched for TM's and these are the best I could find:





TM 9-1005-224-23&P





I tried a string search for the instructions David_4x4 quoted for the receiver stretch gage, and this was the only hit:




http://dirtydozensbunker.com/showthread.php?t=153019




Looks like some good info there also.




 
 
 

Here are some pics of the actual M60 receiver stretch gauge and a scan of how the test is performed from the Army Technical Manual.

I am not a certified M60 armorer by any means.....however, I presume the gauge is more like a "field" headspace gauge and is used to measure the high level health/dimensional spec of a receiver.  If  you are building an M60 from scratch (and are professional outfit like US Ord) I would expect they have some crazy accurate alignment jigs to hold everything in 3 planes (X,Y,Z) during assembly to much higher tolerance than what the "Armorer" Stretch Gauge is designed to test for.

However, if you are buying an M60, a $200 Stretch Gauge is a cheap investment to confirm that the $40,000 to $60,000 receiver you are buying is within "service" spec and that all the parts are at least in rough proper alignment.  Its also not bad idea to own one to periodically check for receiver spec as well every couple years.

Stretch Gauge Box with NSN number



Stretch Gauge Box Components



Stretch Gauge Assembled on Bench




Stretch Gauge "Pin" on back of Gauge Spring Rod *Pin should be flush or extended from handle to be considered "In-Spec"



TM Manual on Testing Steps



If I get some free time this week between family and holidays, I will try and get it assembled onto my M60.  Its a bit more of a PITA since I have to remove and reinstall the ammo hanger which is bolted to the receiver vs. just field strip the gun.

Hope this helps at least give folks an idea of what the US Army M60 Stretch Gauge looks like and how it is used to measure receiver dimension and confirm if a receiver is still in "serviceable" spec.  

This is a gun that requires lots of information to keep it operational with lots of maintenance done to it or if left unattended and just shot all the time, it will shoot itself to pieces.

If I get around to digging it out, I'll scan in the manual I have. It has a attachments and inserts for each section on repairs. Some even with giant food out schematics and measurements.

jbntex wrote:



Yes. Let's look at the economics of this.  If you spend $10-12K on a rebuild, you're not going to get that money back in terms of increased resale value. (What kind of premium does an E6 command over an unmodified M60?) The only way this makes sense is if you plan to keep it forever, and shoot it a lot.  That brings us back to the wisdom of using a $30K+ gun as a "blaster." There is also the "opportunity cost." Let's say you spend $30K on the gun, and another $10K on a rebuild. You now have $40K in it. How many other NFA toys could you get, instead, for that $40K? Maybe two Thompsons, or three M1919 belt-feds? (And if you're looking at it from an investment standpoint, those alternatives would appreciate more, percentage-wise.)

This is why the M60 is such an impractical, niche weapon for civilian ownership. (It's a whole different proposition if the government is paying.) I was lucky enough to have bought mine in the early '80's, for about $1,600 directly from RIA. I wouldn't consider one for a second, at today's prices.

Seems to be a whole lot of M60 hate in this thread. I can't comment for or against as I don't own nor have I ever fire one. Seems like it would be an awesome gun. Especially considering your options for a modern transferable 308 MG is limited an M60 or HK21. Sure there are M240s(MAG58s) but at $180,000+ I don't even consider that an option. If you don't mind going old school you have the M1917, M1919, MG34 and MG42 which can all be converted over to 308.

Yeah, I'm not a technical person at all and it seems like M60 is more than what I could swallow...
I've a sear and might go with HK21E clone.
Not sure HK21E is superior to M60 platform but at least it's a lot cheaper.
Any opinion between HK21E vs M60?

I still like the top loading belt-fed and might even consider M1919.
It seems like M1919 price isn't moving at all... expensive ammo and impractical perhaps?  

An E6 kit the last time I priced one was $8500 for the kit not installed.  I think the install for the kit is another $500 + to have the holes for the ammo hanger drilled and reverse-spot faced and there is a whole in the gas tube that has to be drilled as well.  Something you could do yourself if you are mechanically inclined and have access to a vertical mill.  If you are ready at a E4 configuration the E6 kit is really a true bolt on upgrade.

That leave you at ~$3 grand for the rest of the receiver rebuild as a standalone item when bundled with the E6 upgrade.

The reason I suggest the best value gun out there from a shooter perspective is a good condition RIA registered channel gun.  RIA registered channel guns can be had in the upper 30s to low 40s for an E1 configuration.   Add in $10 to $12,000 for a complete rebuild to E6 and you are now in 50 to 55K territory, which is pretty much the entry level price for a good condition E1 USGI/Maremont gun…however  best case that is still a low mileage 30 to 50 year old gun depending upon date of manufacture.

A US Ord rebuilt RIA channel gun is basically a brand new M60 with all the latest upgrades, using all brand new parts from the current USGI manufacturer, including a brand new forged trunion for the same price as a 30+ year old Maremont E1 gun.

Some folks are collectors vs. shooter and/or just really have a preference for the older Vietnam era E1 configuration.  If that scenario fits a certain buyer demographic it probably makes more sense to just get the official USGI E1 Maremont gun and call it a day.

For me personally if somebody offered me a 30 year old, unknown mileage, E1 Maremont for ~$50K or brand new US Ord E6 rebuilt RIA gun for ~$50K I would take the rebuilt RIA E6.  Obviously some folks may have a different opinion.

If money is no object, than by all means pick up a cherry Maremont and send it in for an E6 upgrade for another $9,000 on top of the $50K the host gun cost you.

Whether you get your money back for the upgrade is debatable.   Assuming you didn’t shoot the gun after the upgrade is done I would think that you would get most if not all your money back.  Going through the process to vet a M60 purchase, get it transferred to you and then box it back up and send it back out for an upgrade, wait a month or two and then pay to ship/insure it back isn’t a risk-free and/or effortless process.

Again if somebody offered me an E1 RIA channel gun, plus an uninstalled E6 kit, and a free shipping/insurance/US Ord labor coupon or a gun already done for the same price,  I will take the completed E6 gun (even if I got to keep and sell off all the original E1 parts)

I think anything in this hobby is hard to justify from a purely financial perspective.   You have to make the decision if you want to own an M60 as well have to make the decision as to whether 40 to 50K is worth the enjoyment you will get from it, knowing you may get more money back one day should you sell or it could blow up with a bad round on your first day of ownership.  

The fact that I could own two 1919s for the same pricetag holds no real personal allure for me as 1919s just are not on my personal “grail” gun  list.  Conversely,  I could probably scrape together the funds for a M240 but the shooting experience and enjoyment factor isn't worth the $100K uplift over an M60 to me vs. what else I could get/do with those funds.

The same analogy holds true for cars, watches, knives, etc. as  You could own two vettes for the price of a Ferrari  or 100 casio G-Shocks for the cost of a Rolex.  

My personal M60E4 runs awesome, has no issues, and there is nothing the E6 kit would give me that personally would justify doing a full rebuild/upgrade at this point as I would personally rather spend the $12K on something else.  

However, if shopping for an M60 today I would definitely be looking for a good condition E1 RIA and send it off for a full rebuild with the money I saved over the equivalent Maremont gun.

I prefer the M60 to the 21/23e series myself.  M60s are easier to load, have a slower rate of fire, and are easier to shoot offhand as they are a quasi bullpup configuration so balance really nice when shooting from the shoulder.

The advantage of the 21/23e series is that they can convert between 5.56 and 308, has the ability for accurate semi-auto fire (being closed bolt and a semi setting), and its a better platform from an optic perspective as the optic is mounted to the receiver vs. the topcover on an E4 mod1 or E6 (and there  no real optic option for the E1 to E3.)

As  you mentioned, they are also cheaper assuming you already own an HK Sear.

The pricing issue with 1919s is that there are a lot of them out there (DLO made a ton of sideplate guns), they are big/heavy, pretty much require a tripod, are a much older design, no longer in military service, etc.   If you think an M60 is impractical for its size/weight a 1919 makes an M60 look like a svelte option in comparison.

If you already have a HK Sear, I would say a HK21 is a no brainer financially. Plus you can get barrels and parts to convert it to a Hk23(5.56) or HK22(7.62x39)

They dont have prices listed on their websites but I've read around $10-15k for the semi-auto hosts.
http://www.michaelsmachines.com/

Which really isnt that bad considering the prices of other Smei-Auto belt fed hosts

Shrike Upper:  $5k
http://dealernfa.com/accessories/

Semi-auto M249:  $8k
https://www.fnamerica.com/products/collector-series/m249s/

Semi-Auto M240B: $14k
http://www.ohioordnanceworks.com/rifles/semi-auto/oow-line/m240-slr-277

Semi-Auto M60 E6: $12k
http://www.urban-armory.com/cart/proddetail.php?prod=m60E1

Even if you didn't have an HK sear already, I think the 21/23 would be a better option than the M60 just because everything I've read points to the M60 being a pain in the ass to own.

Since you already have one, it's a no-brainer in my book. I want a 23e and I don't even have a sear...

I've never had an issue with my 60. Curious as to what a pain in the ass moment for them are. They're simple as all get out and parts are easy to find and replace. Outside of having to have the receiver or trunnion rebuilt, anyone can repair or replace any part on it no time at all.

The M60 is a sweet rifle, shoots like butter. You can shoulder it and fire it pretty acutely.


hk21 is a heavy bitch. You CAN* shoulder it, it is violent and fast.






1919 is a real heavy bitch, Bring a friend to the range. ROF is right between the other two. tripod only.

Love your dog! Beautiful indeed...

 

Thanks, he knows it too





Only thing that makes him as happy as taking him for a ride is shooting in the back yard.


If you grab his leash he runs to the front door, pickup a gun and put a can on and he runs and waits at the back door.

If I just have a gun out he does not care. But put a can on it and he knows. He is too smart...

This thread has really opened my eyes.  I had no idea an M60 was such a gigantic pain in the ass to own.

Why in the hell would they choose to register two parts in the gun which are apparently notorious for wear and damage?  Surely the actual sideplate or something could have been registered in alternate?  Whole thing just seems analogous to registering the rollers on an HK bolt or the BCG in an m16.  Sounds ludicrous to register a part that's going to see a lot of wear and tear...

The M60 just moved down pretty far on my "to buy" list

M60s really are not bad to own.  My personal M60 has been a rock solid performer with nary a part replaced in 7 years and thousands of rounds of ownership.  I can probably count the stoppages in all that time on two hands  (most of which were operator or ammo/link fault).

Are M60s more complicated than an M16, in which a trained monkey could be taught to take care….sure they are more challenging/difficult/expensive.

However, in comparison to roller locked belt fed HK variants they are much easier to take care of.  

I have had  more issues with my HK23 than I have with my M60.   Learning how HKs work and debugging them, dealing with bolt gap, locking piece angles, +/- rollers, sear/hammer timing, dealing with the resetting burst mech, etc. all add a lot more difficulty and variability to the HK platform in my opinion than the M60 design which is pretty simple in comparison.   There are probably twice the number of parts on a HK beltfed as there are on an M60.

Tearing down and doing a full field strip on an M60 I would gather most folks could learn in an a couple hours.   You could probably spend a couple hours on just learning and become proficient with the burst mech on an HK gun.






The reason there is no registered sideplate is because there isn’t a side plate part on an M60.   The most common variant / analogous way I can describe M60 construction is think of it sort of like a scaled up AK47.

An AK-47 doesn’t really have a single part that is the “receiver”.  There is the barrel trunnion, the left/right rails, the rear stock trunnion, and the sheet metal channel.  These parts are all riveted and/or welded together to make the AK47 receiver and the marking are usually on the barrel trunnion and/or the sheet metal channel.

When these M60s were manufactured and registered 30 years ago the two common parts that took the maker markings and/or serial were either the trunnion and/or the sheet metal channel.   Being an NFA firearm you cannot remove or obliterate the serial number of any maker markings.  

A transferable AK47 where the serial number is on the trunion and the maker markings are on the sheet metal would be in the same position as an M60 that has marking on both parts.   However, the vast majority of the M60s out there (save the first 80ish RIAs) all the markings are on one single part.

As for doing due diligence on a purchase I would give folks the same advice if buying a $50K HK belt fed, but the list of things to check is probably even longer than an M60 given the complexity of the HK platform over the M60.

Owning both the M60 and HK beltfed platforms, if somebody asked me which one is the better “belt-fed” to own I would definitely recommend the M60 over the HK. (removing the flexibility advantage of a sear to move from host to host)

When I was originally looking to purchase my first belt-fed I was debating between the 21 and the M60 as well.  However, I had a couple conversations with Mike Woodard at TSC machine and he recommended getting an M60…and this was coming from a guy who builds HKs for a living.  Now owning both I would agree with his advice he gave me at the time.

Below is a pic of an M60 receiver with the sheet metal channel not installed. This is basically the skeleton of the M60 receiver with the trunnion being the big chunk of metal on the far right.



Picture of the sheet metal channel and how it lines up with the skeleton of the receiver group (rails/bridge/trunnion)



However, as mentioned above the trunnion is a big piece of metal but the barrel socket walls are thin and can wear or be damaged.  Barrel goes into the larger hole on top.

I'll second jbntex's points.  My M60 (in E4 config) has been rock-solid reliable for about 7,000 rounds so far.  Great gun.  The only downside is that it has made my expensive subguns seem a lot less exciting to shoot.

If you want a '60, do your homework and buy one in good shape and it'll outlast you.  

Joe

Wow! My hats off to you gentleman!
I was leaning toward HK21E, but you guys really gave me good knowledge about M60.
Now, my quest to acquiring M60 just started!

I have a love-hate relationship with my M60.  I love to bitch about how it eats parts (compared to something like a 1919) but I love to shoot it.  My wife saw too many Rambo movies when I was trying to decide if I should get an M60 or a Mg42.  She pulled me over to the dark side.

Excellent advice from everyone here, so I'll keep mine shortish, and just stick to "what I like and went with".

I own an MG42, M60E6, MG34, MM23E, and a post sample RPD.  They are all fun, but if I had to pick one for all around stuff, itd be the M60 in E6 configuration.  It's a damn good gun.

There are many manufacturers.  It boiled down to two options for me.  Buy a Maremonet, and keep it factory?  Buy a RIA and have it rebuilt and modified into an E6?  I didn't want to do the conversion to a factory Maremont gun, so RIA it was for me.  Plus, I like that the trunnion can be replaced on them.  Personal preference.  After. Trip to RIA, I got an essentially brand new E6 with a warranty.  Total investment if I remember right was $43,700.  

Study them.  Read up on them.  Don't hesitate to just have to pay others to do good work if ever needed.  Enjoy!!!

mwarnick1, I see from your photo your wife was firing steel-cased ammo. Do you have a favorite kind? Have you ever had to replace an extractor?

I've shot a decent amount of steel cased ammo but I don't have an opinion on if it causes much more extractor wear compared to brass.  Usually I just have to pull the extractor to clean crap out from under it.  That seems to be what first starts causing malfs for me.  The wolf 150gr fmj has been running well.

I'm really tempted to do the e6 upgrade because it looks cool.  I'm not sure if it's worth it for a range toy though.  I'm on the fence

Absolutely do the E6 kit.  It changes the entire gun!

Edit edit

I think he was telling you to just get an HK 23.....

Nice

None of you people know anything about me.

The M60 is definitely a range toy for me so the E4/E6 kit hasn't seemed like $8-10k more fun than the standard model.  My buddy has the E4 so I have some trigger time on it for comparison.  Maybe the standard model does it for me since it brings back the USMC memories.  If I was carrying it for anything other than a range toy I'd be all over the upgrade.

Alaska must be the aberration on full auto toys because I've run into a surprising number of folks using F/A as personal protection guns in the past few years.

another +1 to jbntex's points... my M60E4 has been trouble-free ever since I bought it unfired NIB over a decade ago...