Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 2/12/2006 8:39:16 PM EDT
Hi fellow Retro Enthusiasts! I have a question for discussion. Through all the pic threads and some of the other Retro related topics you see a lot of a certain comment. The comment being that Retro Style AR's are tacticaly outdated, inferior, &c. &c. My question is why?

Most everybody will agree that fundamentally very little has changed with further develpment of the AR15/M16 platform. Parts made in the 60's and 70's will most likely fit in rifles of today. So what is it specifically that brands them "non-tactical"?

I personaly would be willing to grab my Retro Rifle in a "stressful" situation. I am working on an XM build now also; when finished I would be comfortable grabbing the carbine as well. Is it because all the doodads and extras generally are not attached? Yet something has to be said for the KISS method. Less things to go wrong.

I feel like I'm rambling a bit so I'll cut it short. But what do you think? I thought it would be a pretty decent topic to discuss.

Regards,
PatG.
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 8:51:01 PM EDT
better bbl specs
better twist rates to work with better bullets offered today
optics that increase "hit" percentage
better parts
better materials
more "tactical" items availabe
more parts that make the ar platform "reliable"
better knowledge of what "didnt" work
technology to provide "better" items
greater choice of options


just like cars of today.

but i still love my xm build
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 9:43:33 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 9:46:49 PM EDT
My Colt "M4" has a flattop reciever, and right now I have the carry handle on it. I mainly shoot 55grn FMJ. I don't think it's any better than an SP1 carbine, except it has a little bit shorter of a barrel (personal preference, could be good or bad). Oh yeah, it weighs more too

I qualified just as good or better with the M16A1 than I did with the A2.

Personally, I could give 2 shits less if I EVER heard the word "tactical" again. I'm damn sick of it myself. GI's cleared rooms just fine with M1's, carbines, and thompsons in WWII. Are those the best weapons to use today for the same purpose? No, of course not. Did they get the job done? Obviously they did. I just don't buy into all the newfangled gadgets these days. Just because a gun/weapon is new, doesn't mean it's better, or the old version sucks.

If the dog won't quit barking outside, I grab a flashlight and the Benelli M3 loaded with 00B. No MajicDuraCeramiTeflonKote finish, no sidesaddle, no CAR stock, no AR pistol grip, no 19 point CQB MOUT RANGER sling, no Deltaforce PAQ-49 IR laser, no Aimpoint, etc. Since 99% of the time I'd grab that and not my M4, I'll probably get killed. Oh yeah, I don't have any of the 77grn MK87394898 Mod 03958 Special Delta Force ammo either. So I'd probably die if I took it anyway

If I really set out on a mission, I'd probably take the M1A anyway. Since I don't have a SAGE stock, aimpoint, cut barrel, compensator, 3 point sling, and forged national match everything, I'll probably get killed doing that too. Guess my synthetic GI stock and web sling will have to try and make due.

RANT MODE OFF

What I'm trying to say is, in my opinion, about 80% of it is what you have between your ears and 15% is what you've experienced previously. What is stamped on your reciever or how much you've spent on a stock doesn't mean a whole lot.
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 11:27:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/12/2006 11:28:23 PM EDT by gmtmaster]
I have a gun I train with, but I almost always take along my retro A1... Its the most fun out of the bunch, and thats why I have the hobby I do... Purely fun...

ETA: Its only obsolete if it doesnt do what you want it to anymore...
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 12:31:50 AM EDT
I would not feel terribly handicapped carrying my MUCH lighter 20" early AF M16ish clone. It's a full 20" rifle that's lighter than my midlength 16" and shoots M193 just as well.
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 3:35:50 AM EDT
I agree with JoshD. The gun is the tool and it's the Guy who has the brains to use it correctly. I don't go for all this tactical BS.
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 10:28:57 AM EDT
While I appreciate how far the M16 has come, as well as its accessories, I really love the older stuff. I personally prefer the feel of the M16A1 compared to the newer A2/A4. I like the triangular handguards and the lighter weapon. It doesn't make much sense to switch to a smaller and lighter caliber when the weapon is heavier than the weapon it replaced....any weight savings is negated.
A1 sights are a better battle sight than the fully adjustible A2 sights, which are more suited to range use. A2 sights add a level of complexity which isn't necessary as most are far more likely to use Kentucky Windage rather than appropriatly click thier sights. If you do adjust your sights to fire on that MG nest at 500 yards, better click 'em back....one more thing to remember under fire.
I believe the A1 style sights with an A2 apeture to be a superior iron sight setup. I personally don't feel limited by a 1/12 barrel, as the bulk of my stored ammo is M193. I was at a gunstore a few years back which had an old Olympic with cast lower and A1 upper next to a current Colt HBAR. That really put it into perspective for me, which is part of the reason I am building an A1 clone. Though ACOGs and Aimpoints are great, I can really appreciate the older stuff. I personally believe the original 20 inch A1 to be one of the best "feeling" weapons I have ever shot.
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 11:18:24 AM EDT
.
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 11:42:34 AM EDT
I find it interesting that when one goes to the range with a super duper, whiz bang M4ery with optics, rails, handles etc, people look at it and say "nice".

When one goes to the range with a retro, in my case a SP1 clone, people want to shoot it. I guess it has something to do with nostalgia or watching Viet Nam war movies.

Link Posted: 2/13/2006 12:44:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/13/2006 12:45:24 PM EDT by graywolf]

Originally Posted By monkeyman:
I find it interesting that when one goes to the range with a super duper, whiz bang M4ery with optics, rails, handles etc, people look at it and say "nice".

When one goes to the range with a retro, in my case a SP1 clone, people want to shoot it. I guess it has something to do with nostalgia or watching Viet Nam war movies.

img.photobucket.com/albums/v489/mac66/sp1.jpg

nicerig, why do people build clones ?
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 1:12:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By graywolf:
.... why do people build clones ?


Link Posted: 2/13/2006 1:19:31 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 1:33:46 PM EDT
I must have a brass deflector, but other than that I like them as retro as one can get. I love my SP1, but I don't shoot it due to the aforementioned lack of a brass deflector, and it being a safe queen.
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 1:42:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:
I must have a brass deflector, but other than that I like them as retro as one can get. I love my SP1, but I don't shoot it due to the aforementioned lack of a brass deflector, and it being a safe queen.




left handed?
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 2:31:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By eklikwhoa:

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:
I must have a brass deflector, but other than that I like them as retro as one can get. I love my SP1, but I don't shoot it due to the aforementioned lack of a brass deflector, and it being a safe queen.




left handed?



Both myself and the GF.
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 2:42:05 PM EDT
IMHO my M16A1 clone (semi, of course) is BETTER in several ways than many newer guns.

Here's why: chrome lined bore and chamber... plenty of new ARs out there without. The upper is Colt and is of very nice quality... I've seen plenty of newer guns that are not as well made. It is very light (a 20" A1 barrel is light!)... many new HSLD builds incorporate pencil barrels. Even the A1 pistol grip is more comfortable than a stock A2 grip (for me, anyway). Finally, less parts - less things to break! The A1 DOES have a forward assist and brass deflector.

The only thing I really DON'T like is the triangular handguards. Actually, I love them... they define the gun. BUT if my A1 had to be used in a real combat situation (I know... not too likely) I would slap on a pair of A2 handguards.

Scot
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 2:58:14 PM EDT
I have always liked the oldies.
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 4:07:17 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Shal1:
The A1 DOES have a forward assist and brass deflector.



Not trying to nitpick, but the A1 didn't have a built-in brass deflector. GI's had access to a cheesy clip-on plastic one, but it wasn't a factory accessory.



The only thing I really DON'T like is the triangular handguards. Actually, I love them... they define the gun. BUT if my A1 had to be used in a real combat situation (I know... not too likely) I would slap on a pair of A2 handguards.


My basic training rifle was an XM-16E1 updated to A1 standard. By that time (1988) A1 handguards were starting to go out of the system and our rifles had A2 handguards. The combo of A1 rifle and A2 handguards was the best configuration I ever carried.
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 4:10:19 PM EDT
People want retro rifles for the same reason they want a non-bastardized Sig 55X... its all nostalgia and, to many people with whiz-bang M4s, they are actually something "new!"


If the old Colt lowers weren't illegal in my state, I'd build an oldie.


- BG
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 4:18:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/13/2006 4:21:40 PM EDT by Aimless]
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 4:34:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/13/2006 4:39:48 PM EDT by pun]
First time I saw a "tactical" M16 were the XM177s with Armson sights carried by the son tay raiders...who says retro rifles are not tactical.Of course for me red dots are not a tactical thing for me its just a better way to reliably hit something at night.As far as tacticaly out dated ...according to who..guys on this site who build rifles and accesories added to "wow" folks but are otherwise safe queens that never get used.Just check out an "oh know" I scratched my AR thread.There are people here who do use what they put on the rifle along with the rifle.There are also alot of people who do it for show and status like look what I have and you dont.Its like this give a bad pilot the most up to date jet and a real good pilot a less than capable jet and the better piulots gonna win.Same with rifles give a good experienced trigger man a stock no BS rifle and a less experienced person with the latest do dads and you end up with the most experienced guy that now has an extra rifle with some do dads.
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 4:40:50 PM EDT

"The combo of A1 rifle and A2 handguards was the best configuration I ever carried."

Something like this?

Link Posted: 2/13/2006 4:55:32 PM EDT
I am not sure how to answer this thread.

I am building the 607D (shorty triangle). Do I think this retro build is any less lethal than a modern AR, NO? I think if I build it right and reliable, it could be a SHTF/Go AR. Very compact, light, quick, and deadly. The shorty retro look is so beautiful to me that I just can't wait to have it in my hands!!!

Best of both worlds Old School appeal, and Modern abilities!!!
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 5:01:53 PM EDT
If I find an old Aimpoint for a good price was thinking of trying something like this out:

Link Posted: 2/13/2006 5:32:53 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 5:53:12 PM EDT
retro rifles/carbines are just great, while I love my M4gery, I was trained with and carried the A1 up until they were replaced in my unit with A2's in 1994. I really like the triangular handguards, I actually get a better grip on them than with the round ones.

Of all the mods that I want to do to the M4gery, most them are A1 in nature.
I want to add/change:
1. tear drop bolt assist in place of round type.
2. A1 grip to replace A2 style.
3. 4 pos CAR stock in place of M4 6 pos.

While I like retro flavored carbines I prefer the A2 upper (sights are better bigger brass deflector).

All I really need now is $10K for RDIAS so I can get FA internals for it.
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 6:04:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Pointman_M4A1:
retro rifles/carbines are just great, while I love my M4gery, I was trained with and carried the A1 up until they were replaced in my unit with A2's in 1994.



Wow, that late, 1994! I got to Germany in 1985 and was issued an A1. I believe by 1987-88 we had the A2's which were well broken in by the time we invaded Iraq during Desert Storm.




Link Posted: 2/13/2006 6:42:07 PM EDT
When I was stationed at Ft. Hood in 88-89 we still had M16A1's, 1911's, and M3 Grease guns for the M88 Tank Recovery crew!
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 7:03:59 PM EDT
When I served there were no A2 s

God I'm Old

Link Posted: 2/13/2006 7:28:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Pointman_M4A1:
Of all the mods that I want to do to the M4gery, most them are A1 in nature.
I want to add/change:
1. tear drop bolt assist in place of round type.
2. A1 grip to replace A2 style.
3. 4 pos CAR stock in place of M4 6 pos.





Curious as to the manufacturer of this rifle you want to change.



Cant really say as to which is my most prefered, love the looks of the older stuff and the history the best part, Love collecting them
but, if I had to grab one rifle and go it would be a newer M4, rail system, ACOG, Surefire, just well refined.

Kinda like a road trip, the old 55 Chevrolet is fun to tool around in but for some serious traveling I'm gonna drive something more luxurious
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 8:52:41 PM EDT
I'm kind of going semi-retro. I ordered a Bushmaster Dissipator (light M4-profile barrel) on an A1 upper, and plan to slap an A1 furniture set onto it. I'm short, so I like the shorter A1 stock. I like iron-sights, so prefer the fewer moving parts of the A1, and don't need the detachable nature of the A3.

Just for jollies, I'm having a 3-prong FS put onto it.

If I had to do it all over again, I'd consider getting a 16" midlength from CMMG. For an extra $25, they'll build it onto an A1 upper receiver. Toss on an A1 buttstock and XS aperture in the carry handle, and best of all worlds: sights with few moving parts, mid-length 1/7 chrome lined, shorter buttstock.

And all with the ever-so-sexy pre-A2 figure.

I'll post pics of my semi-retro Dissy, should be getting it back from the dealer tomorrow. It'll be an abomination for a bit, because I'm going to try out the ACE Shorty stock I have in my closet. I'll probably end up selling the ACE and getting a Cav A1 stock (but putting a decent buttplate onto it), but will try out the ACE first. If anyone wants to trade my stock for yours +cash, let me know.

I can't hold a candle to the collections of uxb and others, but I can have a little retro fun.

-MV
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 4:58:53 AM EDT
One bad thing about the A1 handguards is they get really hot. I blistered my left hand on a live fire once. Six 30rnd mags in 5-10 minutes, OUCH!

Other than that I think my M605 clone is dead sexy.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 7:24:48 AM EDT
Another retro/semi retro fan here. I am getting ready to fully update my SP1 ( A1 ) and SP2 ( A1 ) Carbine to C7/A1 style guns. The SP1 is already A1ed out but the lower is still a slabbie/largge hole...that will be changing and the SP2 is alredy a C7 upper but it's large hole front pin on the upper and lower..... but not for long!!!!

I have always prefered the simplicity of the A1 upper but like the ability to shoot left if I like, the C7 is the best of both worlds.

Link Posted: 2/14/2006 10:13:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/14/2006 10:23:04 AM EDT by monkeyman]

Originally Posted By graywolf:

Originally Posted By monkeyman:
I find it interesting that when one goes to the range with a super duper, whiz bang M4ery with optics, rails, handles etc, people look at it and say "nice".

When one goes to the range with a retro, in my case a SP1 clone, people want to shoot it. I guess it has something to do with nostalgia or watching Viet Nam war movies.

I
img.photobucket.com/albums/v489/mac66/sp1.jpg

nicerig, why do people build clones ?



In my case I found the Colt SP1 upper on Ebay (back when they allowed such things on ebay) for $125 shipped. I traded an A2 stock and pistol grip for A1 versions and was good to go. It is on a CMT lower. It is a lightweight fun to shoot gun that I put together pretty inexpensively.

My other favorite AR is a A1 CAR with a pencil barrel. Lightweight, handy to carry with no crap hanging off of it. I have no fantasies of fighting off hoards of zombies, space aliens, illegal alliens, chinese invaders, politicians, or fighting house to house in the rubble of some post apocalytic civilization. My SP1 clone and A1 CAR are about as tactical as I need.


Link Posted: 2/14/2006 10:26:34 AM EDT
I have been wanting to put together an A1 retro (I have an old Colt SP1 but it is mint and I really do not like to shoot it- it has at most 40 rounds through it) but I would like to have the lower receiver the same grey color as the upper.
Do you guys have any recommendations for the spray-on/bake finishes for the best durability and color match to the grey upper?
Thanks,
Luckdog
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 10:53:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By PatG:
Hi fellow Retro Enthusiasts! I have a question for discussion. Through all the pic threads and some of the other Retro related topics you see a lot of a certain comment. The comment being that Retro Style AR's are tacticaly outdated, inferior, &c. &c. My question is why?

Most everybody will agree that fundamentally very little has changed with further develpment of the AR15/M16 platform. Parts made in the 60's and 70's will most likely fit in rifles of today. So what is it specifically that brands them "non-tactical"?

I personaly would be willing to grab my Retro Rifle in a "stressful" situation. I am working on an XM build now also; when finished I would be comfortable grabbing the carbine as well. Is it because all the doodads and extras generally are not attached? Yet something has to be said for the KISS method. Less things to go wrong.

I feel like I'm rambling a bit so I'll cut it short. But what do you think? I thought it would be a pretty decent topic to discuss.

Regards,
PatG.



I am jumping ahead to answer your question without reading the other posts...but, it is the operator and not the tool. Give a good operator a SP-1 and some M193 and he can accomplish just as much as the latest urban commando who has a light, dot scope, forend...yada, yada.

Gear is fun...to argue over and buy. But, it is the nut behind the sights that gets the job done. Simple is best. Add-ons have a tendancy to break. Now to read what others are saying about this topic...

Jeff
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 1:36:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Luckdog:
I have been wanting to put together an A1 retro (I have an old Colt SP1 but it is mint and I really do not like to shoot it- it has at most 40 rounds through it) but I would like to have the lower receiver the same grey color as the upper.
Do you guys have any recommendations for the spray-on/bake finishes for the best durability and color match to the grey upper?
Thanks,
Luckdog



If you are not shooting it due to the excellent condition of it, then why ruin the collector value by refinishing the upper? Just leave it be an build the second rifle.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 1:44:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:

Originally Posted By eklikwhoa:

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:
I must have a brass deflector, but other than that I like them as retro as one can get. I love my SP1, but I don't shoot it due to the aforementioned lack of a brass deflector, and it being a safe queen.




left handed?



Both myself and the GF.



Don't mean a thing, not a thing

You want to shoot that SP1? Get a Wolff HD extractor spring, install it, and your angle of ejection will be either straight out or even a bit forward. You DON'T need a brass deflector. Honest

(Written by the left handed owner/shooter of An XM177E2 clone, and M16A1 and "A0" clones.)
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 2:35:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By MatthewVanitas:
I'm kind of going semi-retro. I ordered a Bushmaster Dissipator (light M4-profile barrel) on an A1 upper, and plan to slap an A1 furniture set onto it. I'm short, so I like the shorter A1 stock. I like iron-sights, so prefer the fewer moving parts of the A1, and don't need the detachable nature of the A3.

Just for jollies, I'm having a 3-prong FS put onto it.
(CUT)
-MV



The dissy with triangular furniture and A1 grip would look a lot like the model 605. Except that your dissy will be more reliable than the cut-barrel 605, since it will have barrel length past the gas tube for pressure. That'd be a sweet semi-carbine. Please post some pics when it is done.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 2:52:52 PM EDT
bmick325:

You are, of course, correct! No deflector on A1s. I don't know what I was thinking... I must have had an image stuck in my head of the "new" A1-style uppers.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 3:07:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/14/2006 3:07:27 PM EDT by bmick325]

Originally Posted By JohnRippert:
"The combo of A1 rifle and A2 handguards was the best configuration I ever carried."

Something like this?

img.photobucket.com/albums/0903/johnrippert/TruckGun.jpg



Change the sling out for the GI black nylon and add a fun switch.

Otherwise, it's close.
Link Posted: 2/14/2006 3:14:48 PM EDT
My M4gery is a Bushy, so I don't mind changing things around.

My duty weapons from 1989 to 1994 were the M16A1, and M1911a1 (combat medic).

I didn't get issued the A2 or M9 until 1994 then I went active duty.
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 8:06:39 AM EDT

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:

Originally Posted By Luckdog:
I have been wanting to put together an A1 retro (I have an old Colt SP1 but it is mint and I really do not like to shoot it- it has at most 40 rounds through it) but I would like to have the lower receiver the same grey color as the upper.
Do you guys have any recommendations for the spray-on/bake finishes for the best durability and color match to the grey upper?
Thanks,
Luckdog



If you are not shooting it due to the excellent condition of it, then why ruin the collector value by refinishing the upper? Just leave it be an build the second rifle.


He wants to refinish the lower, not the upper. But if the lower is the SP1 lower that came with the upper then I wouldn't touch it either.
Link Posted: 2/15/2006 8:24:41 AM EDT
Sorry for the confussion guys.
I am planning on using a new Stag lower on the retro-build probably with the kit from Sarco.
I wanted to use one of the bake-on finishes to color the lower as closely to the upper (which should be the old grey SP1 color) instead of having the lower re-anodized.
I was wondering if anyone had a recommendation on which finish would more closely match that grey and have good durability.
Thanks,
Luckdog
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 6:50:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/16/2006 6:52:12 AM EDT by lobsterman]
"Do you guys have any recommendations for the spray-on/bake finishes for the best durability and color match to the grey upper?"


i would recomend Norrells. I love it and should have what you want for a match.
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 9:40:26 AM EDT

Originally Posted By JoshD:
My Colt "M4" has a flattop reciever, and right now I have the carry handle on it. I mainly shoot 55grn FMJ. I don't think it's any better than an SP1 carbine, except it has a little bit shorter of a barrel (personal preference, could be good or bad). Oh yeah, it weighs more too

I qualified just as good or better with the M16A1 than I did with the A2.

Personally, I could give 2 shits less if I EVER heard the word "tactical" again. I'm damn sick of it myself. GI's cleared rooms just fine with M1's, carbines, and thompsons in WWII. Are those the best weapons to use today for the same purpose? No, of course not. Did they get the job done? Obviously they did. I just don't buy into all the newfangled gadgets these days. Just because a gun/weapon is new, doesn't mean it's better, or the old version sucks.

If the dog won't quit barking outside, I grab a flashlight and the Benelli M3 loaded with 00B. No MajicDuraCeramiTeflonKote finish, no sidesaddle, no CAR stock, no AR pistol grip, no 19 point CQB MOUT RANGER sling, no Deltaforce PAQ-49 IR laser, no Aimpoint, etc. Since 99% of the time I'd grab that and not my M4, I'll probably get killed. Oh yeah, I don't have any of the 77grn MK87394898 Mod 03958 Special Delta Force ammo either. So I'd probably die if I took it anyway

If I really set out on a mission, I'd probably take the M1A anyway. Since I don't have a SAGE stock, aimpoint, cut barrel, compensator, 3 point sling, and forged national match everything, I'll probably get killed doing that too. Guess my synthetic GI stock and web sling will have to try and make due.

RANT MODE OFF

What I'm trying to say is, in my opinion, about 80% of it is what you have between your ears and 15% is what you've experienced previously. What is stamped on your reciever or how much you've spent on a stock doesn't mean a whole lot.





Well said

+1 here
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 9:44:06 AM EDT
I love the old style, the Vietnam era original. That's what got me interested in the AR in the first place.
Link Posted: 2/16/2006 9:54:03 PM EDT
After building about every major configuration there is, I am back to an A1 as my prefered 20"er. I had an M-16A1 when I was in the Marines, and maybe that's why, but it just "feels" so much more natural. The balance is perfect when compared to A2/3/4 rifles. I still have my A4 flat-top with the ACOG, and I still have my CAR with the Aimpoint (never did an M4, as I have no M203, and couldn't see the reason for a 203 compatible barrel without one). Having said all that, the rifle I would grab first in any situation is my A1...actually it would probably be the closest one at hand...though I'd prefer if it was the A1
Top Top