User Panel
Quoted:
That's mine. After reading this entire thread I checked and sure enough was able to pick off the "C" . Does have the fugazy "M4" font. Everything else appears legit, SOCOM barrel and side sling mount as far as I can tell, but this is my first Colt. I am going to email the company I bought it from and see what they say. https://i.imgur.com/hWNAchB.jpg https://i.imgur.com/wZhDDGB.jpg https://i.imgur.com/qzLUAXm.jpg View Quote |
|
Quoted:
Another discrepency giveaway besides the m4 gas tube marking and keyhole placement (in regards to the picatinny slot) is that the upper shelf line above the C and keyhole doesn't extend all the way to the rear of the receiver either. It looks like it ends just slightly after where the picatinny portion ends. I have c stamped square (brass) and cerro forge, as well as cage coded brass and cerro forge uppers, and none are like that. View Quote Maybe when they stopped selling to civis the last orders they fulfilled got subcontracted out to another company or at least had another company source parts. Either of those ideas seem like a stretch if it's only small quantities of rifles we're talking about |
|
Quoted: Well that's a bummer. Any other ideas on who else might know? Cerro seems like a dead end as cs doesnt seem to know much based on the previous note in the thread. So far the only official source that has used one of these weird uppers is Colt themselves on some Socoms. View Quote |
|
Quoted:
If anybody would know a valid Colt contact it'd be @Minuteman1636. Maybe he can get Colt to confirm/deny. View Quote |
|
Quoted: @BmNJ @oxford411 did either of your Socoms happen to have the T Mark's painted or dry film lube applied in the upper? View Quote My socom has a cage code upper with square forge mark. T marks are painted white and there is dry film lube applied. This was one of the first shipped out as I jumped on getting one as soon as dealers had them in stock. |
|
Quoted: @henryfrank My socom has a cage code upper with square forge mark. T marks are painted white and there is dry film lube applied. This was one of the first shipped out as I jumped on getting one as soon as dealers had them in stock. View Quote |
|
Quoted: Well that's a bummer. Any other ideas on who else might know? Cerro seems like a dead end as cs doesnt seem to know much based on the previous note in the thread. So far the only official source that has used one of these weird uppers is Colt themselves on some Socoms. View Quote I know this is a picky bunch (me too), but I am not obsessive about forge marks. Colt has used every forge mark known to mankind over the years, and even in current times has used two of three. To me, they are all the same. I know the squad armorer on the front lines did not look and say, "wow, a square forge mark this week." No, they grabbed whatever they could get, and many times the Colt receiver came in a CAGE code bag from FN, since FN had the resupply contract and so forth. Sorry, random vent. It has been a while since I have been on this forum, so I am catching up. |
|
Quoted:
I am surprised this is still being debated. The crumbly raised C / Cerro Forgings are fake. I have no idea where they came from, and everyone who has purchased one has failed to disclose the source of the purchase beyond a few guys on EE, and a gun shop that nobody had heard of before, and for which they are not Colt direct dealers. Nobody can or is willing to trace the origin of the uppers that are the fakes. Maybe some want to wish it true, but it is false. Not Colt. I know this is a picky bunch (me too), but I am not obsessive about forge marks. Colt has used every forge mark known to mankind over the years, and even in current times has used two of three. To me, they are all the same. I know the squad armorer on the front lines did not look and say, "wow, a square forge mark this week." No, they grabbed whatever they could get, and many times the Colt receiver came in a CAGE code bag from FN, since FN had the resupply contract and so forth. Sorry, random vent. It has been a while since I have been on this forum, so I am catching up. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted: Well that's a bummer. Any other ideas on who else might know? Cerro seems like a dead end as cs doesnt seem to know much based on the previous note in the thread. So far the only official source that has used one of these weird uppers is Colt themselves on some Socoms. I know this is a picky bunch (me too), but I am not obsessive about forge marks. Colt has used every forge mark known to mankind over the years, and even in current times has used two of three. To me, they are all the same. I know the squad armorer on the front lines did not look and say, "wow, a square forge mark this week." No, they grabbed whatever they could get, and many times the Colt receiver came in a CAGE code bag from FN, since FN had the resupply contract and so forth. Sorry, random vent. It has been a while since I have been on this forum, so I am catching up. Take a look at pictures here: https://www.ar15.com/forums/Industry/Colt-upper-receiver-pics-raised-C-keyhole-versus-various-square-forge-BAFE-variants/29-294991/ I put that post together because I received a Colt LE6960 "CCU" upper from Brownells last November, and it had the infamous "raised C + keyhole" markings. Having previously read through this thread, this raised my eyebrow when I saw what I received... This "raised C + keyhole" upper has all of the questionable characteristics described in detail early in this thread... 1) the very "thin" C + keyhole in wrong location, 2) the appearance of a square/bafe forge upper near the front ejection port area, 3) different T-marking font on top, 4) machine work on the sides underneath the picatinny rail, 5) different M4 stamp on front. However, this upper was fully finished/assembled/barreled - and it has white T-marks, dry-film lube, and typical "colt" small parts. And... last but not least, it came from Colt. So, did Colt source the "fake" uppers from this nefarious counterfeit forger and complete them into assembled CCU uppers? Did Brownells source the "fake" uppers from this counterfeit forger and slap them together with a Colt CCU mid-length barrel and Centurion rail and offer them for sale? There are also pictures of recent production Colt SOCOM uppers that have the forge marks milled-off (ie. sanitized). I looked the pics of the "sanitized" SOCOM upper in ProbablyAColtAddict's thread. Except for the removal of the forge codes, it is identical to the "raised C + keyhole" upper that I have (same machining, same T-mark font, same m4 stamp font, same heavy dry-film). I think it is possible that Colt had a batch of these uppers made for them. Maybe they didn't turn out right (ie. C/keyhole too thin). Since it appears they were forged by BAFE, maybe Cerro caught wind of this and flipped when their "keyhole" was present on something they didn't produce. All pure speculation. From the pics in my thread, I think it is clear that there are TWO sources doing the final machining of the Colt uppers. So, the T-mark/M4-stamp "font" argument mentioned in this thread doesn't hold any water. The two 100% legit Colt cage-code marked square forge uppers pictured have the different font styles. |
|
Quoted: I am surprised this is still being debated. The crumbly raised C / Cerro Forgings are fake. I have no idea where they came from, and everyone who has purchased one has failed to disclose the source of the purchase beyond a few guys on EE, and a gun shop that nobody had heard of before, and for which they are not Colt direct dealers. Nobody can or is willing to trace the origin of the uppers that are the fakes. Maybe some want to wish it true, but it is false. Not Colt. I know this is a picky bunch (me too), but I am not obsessive about forge marks. Colt has used every forge mark known to mankind over the years, and even in current times has used two of three. To me, they are all the same. I know the squad armorer on the front lines did not look and say, "wow, a square forge mark this week." No, they grabbed whatever they could get, and many times the Colt receiver came in a CAGE code bag from FN, since FN had the resupply contract and so forth. Sorry, random vent. It has been a while since I have been on this forum, so I am catching up. View Quote If only colt would ever chime in on stuff like this to set the record straight. Might otherwise have to wait and see if CD sees one in a few years. If not, then probably not a clone upper. Lol |
|
Quoted:
If only colt would ever chime in on stuff like this to set the record straight. Might otherwise have to wait and see if CD sees one in a few years. If not, then probably not a clone upper. Lol View Quote If some of the members here knew someone was a Colt employee, much less from their executive staff, they would immediately blast them with with all kinds of negative comments. So, there isn't really a positive incentive for them to step out from the shadows. Decisions are made above their level anyway. In regards to parts used on civilian rifles, Colt has used whatever parts have been available for Colt civilian rifles for decades. If you look at the history of the evolution of the M16/M4 family and how excess parts from old variants got filtered into the civilian production cycle this becomes more apparent. Part of what causes the stress in the current market with many buyers is that they want to still see all of the legacy markings that we have been acustomed to seeing over the last twenty years. But, Colt is minimizing steps in production. C marks were an old milspec requirement but is now obsolete. The CAGE code is only a U.S. military requirement so it doesn't go on all of the uppers, barrels, etc. For every C that you see stamped on a bolt carrier or upper receiver is labor dollars spent. They are minimizing unnecessary markings to reduce their production costs. Will they decide to restore marking protocols? Who knows. I have stopped trying to predict what will happen as has many others. So, what part you get on a civilian rifle is currently luck of the draw. You could get a CAGE code upper, a repurposed upper that has had incorrect or foreign marks milled off, etc. Although we are unhappy about this as collectors, I understand that Colt is simply maximizing use of resources and minimizing wasted materials/money. I do think if a customer is paying $1500.00 for a 2018 SOCOM they should get correctly marked parts however. Uppers with forge marks milled off shouldn't be part of a $1500.00 collectors rifle. They have to consider economy of scale. But, just because a part doesn't have our favorite forge code or marking, doesn't mean it isn't still milspec quality or better. It is kind of a no win situation for Colt. If they stick to old marking protocols, they bleed money. If they minimize unnecessary markings and minimize labor costs, they upset the collectiors. A police department or foreign military organization doesn't give a hoot about having C marks or cage codes. |
|
Quoted: @barrelnutz While I'd still be completely on board with these being fakes, it's stuff like what @jjf and others have posted that has got me super perplexed. I dont see how they can be complete fakes if Colt is using them. Who knows, with these recent new contracts maybe colt had a ton of these made and some of them weren't needed so ended up on the open market... View Quote |
|
Quoted: I think you are mixing up parts in the thread. The upper receivers with the raised C and the keyhole that crumble with a fingernail are fake. Nobody has wanted to come forward with the source of this product. These uppers are NOT from Colt rifles. Someone interjected about Colt using non-CAGE code marked uppers on complete rifles. That is true, and that is a Colt rifle. Two different conversations, and the latter should not be the subject of this thread. View Quote |
|
Quoted: I think you are mixing up parts in the thread. The upper receivers with the raised C and the keyhole that crumble with a fingernail are fake. Nobody has wanted to come forward with the source of this product. These uppers are NOT from Colt rifles. Someone interjected about Colt using non-CAGE code marked uppers on complete rifles. That is true, and that is a Colt rifle. Two different conversations, and the latter should not be the subject of this thread. View Quote There are also ones that colt shipped out with no markings except the forge code but that is definitely another discussion. |
|
Quoted: There are two significant people in the Colt organization that scroll through here periodically. This group is not known to be a respectful bunch so they don't make themselves known. If some of the members here knew someone was a Colt employee, much less from their executive staff, they would immediately blast them with with all kinds of negative comments. So, there isn't really a positive incentive for them to step out from the shadows. Decisions are made above their level anyway. In regards to parts used on civilian rifles, Colt has used whatever parts have been available for Colt civilian rifles for decades. If you look at the history of the evolution of the M16/M4 family and how excess parts from old variants got filtered into the civilian production cycle this becomes more apparent. Part of what causes the stress in the current market with many buyers is that they want to still see all of the legacy markings that we have been acustomed to seeing over the last twenty years. But, Colt is minimizing steps in production. C marks were an old milspec requirement but is now obsolete. The CAGE code is only a U.S. military requirement so it doesn't go on all of the uppers, barrels, etc. For every C that you see stamped on a bolt carrier or upper receiver is labor dollars spent. They are minimizing unnecessary markings to reduce their production costs. Will they decide to restore marking protocols? Who knows. I have stopped trying to predict what will happen as has many others. So, what part you get on a civilian rifle is currently luck of the draw. You could get a CAGE code upper, a repurposed upper that has had incorrect or foreign marks milled off, etc. Although we are unhappy about this as collectors, I understand that Colt is simply maximizing use of resources and minimizing wasted materials/money. I do think if a customer is paying $1500.00 for a 2018 SOCOM they should get correctly marked parts however. Uppers with forge marks milled off shouldn't be part of a $1500.00 collectors rifle. They have to consider economy of scale. But, just because a part doesn't have our favorite forge code or marking, doesn't mean it isn't still milspec quality or better. It is kind of a no win situation for Colt. If they stick to old marking protocols, they bleed money. If they minimize unnecessary markings and minimize labor costs, they upset the collectiors. A police department or foreign military organization doesn't give a hoot about having C marks or cage codes. View Quote Regarding markings, I agree. People definetly should be getting the correct markings. No marking at all is really a bummer. These sketchy uppers would also be a bummer to get on a colt if they're not going to be issuing them with these markings and no cage code to the military. If these somehow end up as being genuine I'm wondering if they are going back to a raised c to avoid having to pay extra for engraving the cage. If it's already marked when the forging is done it might save on cost while still leaving a distinct marking |
|
Quoted:
@jjk has a link to his thread above. One of the uppers that came on a complete colt upper he bought from brownells seem to use the same uppers that have the thin c that crumbles and the other weird characteristics that were theorized to be fakes in this thread. Colt only added dryfilm lube and painted the t-marks. Pretty sure they are the same as the "fake" uppers from this thread and dont believe we're talking about different things. There's also that one that came on a colt socom in this thread so it seems colt is using these uppers on at least some commercial rifles. There are also ones that colt shipped out with no markings except the forge code but that is definitely another discussion. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted: I think you are mixing up parts in the thread. The upper receivers with the raised C and the keyhole that crumble with a fingernail are fake. Nobody has wanted to come forward with the source of this product. These uppers are NOT from Colt rifles. Someone interjected about Colt using non-CAGE code marked uppers on complete rifles. That is true, and that is a Colt rifle. Two different conversations, and the latter should not be the subject of this thread. There are also ones that colt shipped out with no markings except the forge code but that is definitely another discussion. I also do not disagree that Colt is shiping rifles and uppers with no markings. I had not seen the milled off markings, but does not surprise me. Quoted:
You couldn’t be more clueless. |
|
Quoted: the uppers in the post from @jjk look legit. Totally onboard. His #1 is not the same as the ones posted earlier. I dissagree that is evidence that the crumbled pieces of shit uppers are even close to what he posted. The forge marks are thin, but look fine. The others looked glued on, and I have held a few. Also, T-markings painted v. unpainted. I also do not disagree that Colt is shiping rifles and uppers with no markings. I had not seen the milled off markings, but does not surprise me. Hmm. I do not recall your commentary adding much to a discussion. I give you the benefit of the doubt from time to time, but you a bit rude and off topic. View Quote Ultimately I dunno what this all means still. Theres definitely more to find out I think. I'm still hoping we find out where these came from one day and what the story is behind them. Hoping people keep coming forward with more pics and info as they see it. |
|
Quoted:
Gotcha. That's probably what's causing the disconnect between us. To me, his #1 pics look identical to most of the "fake" ones in this thread except colt finished the #1 upper by just coloring the t-marks and adding dry film lube. The base uppers look to have very thin "c", weird keyhole, deeper black anodizing, different machining, different m4 stamp from old school colts in his #1 pics. Ultimately I dunno what this all means still. Theres definitely more to find out I think. I'm still hoping we find out where these came from one day and what the story is behind them. Hoping people keep coming forward with more pics and info as they see it. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted: the uppers in the post from @jjk look legit. Totally onboard. His #1 is not the same as the ones posted earlier. I dissagree that is evidence that the crumbled pieces of shit uppers are even close to what he posted. The forge marks are thin, but look fine. The others looked glued on, and I have held a few. Also, T-markings painted v. unpainted. I also do not disagree that Colt is shiping rifles and uppers with no markings. I had not seen the milled off markings, but does not surprise me. Hmm. I do not recall your commentary adding much to a discussion. I give you the benefit of the doubt from time to time, but you a bit rude and off topic. Ultimately I dunno what this all means still. Theres definitely more to find out I think. I'm still hoping we find out where these came from one day and what the story is behind them. Hoping people keep coming forward with more pics and info as they see it. That is what I thought when I inspected my "Receiver 1" (Colt CCU le6960 upper from brownells). It looked very very similar to the fakes posted in this thread (Good reference pictures on page 2). I do not own one of the suspected fake stripped uppers. I believe these were made for Colt and they ultimately decided to not use them for some reason... Then, Colt or their supplier sold off the fully-machined and annodized stock before final finishing. I don't know why they would have made this decision - we can make some educated guesses. The appearance of some SOCOM rifles showing up on the market with "sanitized" uppers is another clue. They wouldn't go through that extra costly step for no reason.... and as I mentioned, the "sanitized" upper pictured in ProbablyAColtAddict's post also looks like my "Receiver 1" and the fakes. If the milling away of the markings was required for some valid reason (perhaps legal), it would make sense for them to dump those parts.... All of this sounds more plausible to me than some conspiracy. Also, I really don't want to try to scrape off the C and keyhole from my upper. :) |
|
Quoted: I agree with this. That is what I thought when I inspected my "Receiver 1" (Colt CCU le6960 upper from brownells). It looked very very similar to the fakes posted in this thread (Good reference pictures on page 2). I do not own one of the suspected fake stripped uppers. I believe these were made for Colt and they ultimately decided to not use them for some reason... Then, Colt or their supplier sold off the fully-machined and annodized stock before final finishing. I don't know why they would have made this decision - we can make some educated guesses. The appearance of some SOCOM rifles showing up on the market with "sanitized" uppers is another clue. They wouldn't go through that extra costly step for no reason.... and as I mentioned, the "sanitized" upper pictured in ProbablyAColtAddict's post also looks like my "Receiver 1" and the fakes. If the milling away of the markings was required for some valid reason (perhaps legal), it would make sense for them to dump those parts.... All of this sounds more plausible to me than some conspiracy. Also, I really don't want to try to scrape off the C and keyhole from my upper. :) View Quote The uppers in question in this thread from the early 2000s have nothing to do with Colt SOCOMs |
|
The real vs. fake test is whether the C mark can be scraped off with finger nails. Anodized 7075 should not be weaker than human nails.
If it comes off, it's fake. For those that try to believe it's real Colt but suffered a forging problem, it still makes me worry about strength of the rest of receiver. |
|
Quoted: The uppers in question in this thread from the early 2000s have nothing to do with Colt SOCOMs View Quote The raised C Cerro uppers in this thread that are in question are not the ones from the early 2000s. The ones made in that timeframe have a specific placement of their markings that is different from the uppers in question. See my post here. |
|
Quoted: The raised C Cerro uppers in this thread that are in question are not the ones from the early 2000s. The ones made in that timeframe have a specific placement of their markings that is different from the uppers in question. See my post here. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: The uppers in question in this thread from the early 2000s have nothing to do with Colt SOCOMs The raised C Cerro uppers in this thread that are in question are not the ones from the early 2000s. The ones made in that timeframe have a specific placement of their markings that is different from the uppers in question. See my post here. Attached File No more flapping at the gums...... |
|
If anyone bought one of the recent Colt complete uppers from Brownells, could they check to see what kind of uppers came on them? Interested to see if they're still getting these with weird thin-C uppers.
|
|
Anyone know where to find a real Colt upper receiver for a decent price? There are usually tons of cage coded uppers for sale but now that I need one, none are listed.
|
|
|
|
Quoted: If anyone bought one of the recent Colt complete uppers from Brownells, could they check to see what kind of uppers came on them? Interested to see if they're still getting these with weird thin-C uppers. View Quote Last year I picked one up from Brownells. Mine has Colt square/bafe forge marking - No C stamp or cage code on the receiver, but dry lubed inside. Barrel marked as normal with cage code, etc. I was lucky that I bought the CCU upper and a Colt 6933 upper from Brownells last year - both on sale, the CCU for $450 and the 6933 for $395. Also bought a complete Colt 6991U from G and R Tactical for $699. The 6933 has Cage Code and the 6991 has the C on the upper receiver. Glad I bought them last year! |
|
Interesting thread... all 15 pages of it! A lot of good information and made me double check mine just to see what markings it had. Bought rifle complete from Bud's so had zero worries on it being legit, purchase experience was fantastic, $962 31 AUG 2019. I decided to jump in after hearing the rumors about Colt stepping back from the liability of civilian sales and went with the MagPul edition of the LE6920. I see Remington just paid the price again with their Chapter 11... a shame. The gun is not the issue, it is the person pulling the trigger.
My marks below, need to check for the M4 mark. https://1drv.ms/u/s https://1drv.ms/u/s https://1drv.ms/u/s https://1drv.ms/u/s |
|
|
|
View Quote Thanks for sharing! That was a good read too. I keep coming back here occasionally hoping someone solves the mystery of these ones from this post some day. I'm still torn whether they are fake/civvie vs real/mil considering colt put out at least several complete 6920 guns/uppers with these to the public but it's still perplexing what the story behind them was and why they were marked the way they were. If anyone has any leads, would still be great to get to the bottom of it |
|
Some more of the rabbit hole. Post 2 has links to 2 other threads mostly on the dot matrix C but has mention of the raised C.
Upper discussion |
|
Quoted: Some more of the rabbit hole. Post 2 has links to 2 other threads mostly on the dot matrix C but has mention of the raised C. Upper discussion View Quote Dang. That's a whole other upper rabbit hole haha. ?? Seems to be parallel to this situation and honestly might be the same company making both too since that White Label Armory guy mentioned they do both raised and dot matrix versions. Could be that some of the pieces are coming together. Still doesnt explain how these would have ended up on colt rifles tho lol. |
|
I picked up a brand new upper with a square forge marking and it was having some of the same issues as whats been seen in this thread, but on the square marking.
part of the square seems to have come off. It is not a C marked upper and there is no reason anyone would fake this. |
|
I have 2 early production M4 that don’t have numbers at all on the rail . I’ve owned since the mid ‘1990’s.
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.