AR Sponsor
Posted: 2/27/2015 6:17:46 PM EDT
|
I'm looking at a used Colt "Match Target Competition HBAR II" at the local gun store. The firearm is in very good condition, although I think the stock has been replaced (i believe the originals were fixed stocks, but this one has a collapsible stock). They want $850 for it.
According to Colt (by serial number) this particular firearm was manufactured in 2002, and has standard take-down & hinge pins but over-sized trigger group pins (0.170 inch). How big of a deal are the over-sized trigger group pins? Should I avoid such a configuration? Is the price reasonable for this configuration? I'm considering this one because I like the accuracy improvement of the heavy barrel over the pencil barrel (weight notwithstanding). Any advice or help for this "newbie" would be GREATLY appreciated. Thanks in advance, Beuford Picture of lower markings: 
|
| What would really help are some pics of the whole rifle. A lot of times, builds are done using the Colt Match HBAR lowers. They use these because they want a Colt lower and these particular lowers are more affordable than the ones marked "M4 Carbine" and "M4A1" or "Colt Law Enforcement Carbine". I would be extremely hesitant to buy this AR until it can be properly identified to determine if it is, in fact, a real Colt or just a build with a Colt lower. |
|
Quoted:
What would really help are some pics of the whole rifle. A lot of times, builds are done using the Colt Match HBAR lowers. They use these because they want a Colt lower and these particular lowers are more affordable than the ones marked "M4 Carbine" and "M4A1" or "Colt Law Enforcement Carbine". I would be extremely hesitant to buy this AR until it can be properly identified to determine if it is, in fact, a real Colt or just a build with a Colt lower. More pictures will have to wait until tomorrow. However, the barrel was properly marked a "C MP 5.56 NATO 1/9 HBAR". Beuford |
|
Quoted:
More pictures will have to wait until tomorrow. However, the barrel was properly marked a "C MP 5.56 NATO 1/9 HBAR". Beuford Quoted:
Quoted:
What would really help are some pics of the whole rifle. A lot of times, builds are done using the Colt Match HBAR lowers. They use these because they want a Colt lower and these particular lowers are more affordable than the ones marked "M4 Carbine" and "M4A1" or "Colt Law Enforcement Carbine". I would be extremely hesitant to buy this AR until it can be properly identified to determine if it is, in fact, a real Colt or just a build with a Colt lower. More pictures will have to wait until tomorrow. However, the barrel was properly marked a "C MP 5.56 NATO 1/9 HBAR". Beuford If that is the case, it may very well be the original upper. It may be that someone just replaced the stock. It would not be hard to convert it back to its original configuration. You would just have to buy an A2 stock assembly. |
|
More info:
I also remember that the upper has a removable handle, which is correct for this model, too. And one of the guys at the shop took out the bolt and noted that it was a "commercial" bolt (again, I think correct for this model/era of rifle). The big question: Is it worth $850 ?? Beuford |
|
Quoted:
You can deal w/ the trigger pins. There are oversized replacement triggers. ETA: Should work fine w/ that stock. Not original configuration, but the Army is starting to convert some A2s to that configuration. They run H2 buffers or so, I believe. OK, now I'm about to show my ignorance: H2 buffer? *** OK, found info on buffers *** I assume the the buffers are heavier on the carbines due to the lower overall mass of the rifle when using shorter barrels. However, why then would a carbine-length HBAR (which is overall heavier than a standard carbine) need an H2 buffer? I tried to search the forum, but because I'm a newbie the scope of my searches is very limited. Thanks, everyone, for all your input. Beuford |
|
Quoted:
OK, now I'm about to show my ignorance: H2 buffer? *** OK, found info on buffers *** I assume the the buffers are heavier on the carbines due to the lower overall mass of the rifle when using shorter barrels. However, why then would a carbine-length HBAR (which is overall heavier than a standard carbine) need an H2 buffer? I tried to search the forum, but because I'm a newbie the scope of my searches is very limited. Thanks, everyone, for all your input. Beuford Quoted:
Quoted:
You can deal w/ the trigger pins. There are oversized replacement triggers. ETA: Should work fine w/ that stock. Not original configuration, but the Army is starting to convert some A2s to that configuration. They run H2 buffers or so, I believe. OK, now I'm about to show my ignorance: H2 buffer? *** OK, found info on buffers *** I assume the the buffers are heavier on the carbines due to the lower overall mass of the rifle when using shorter barrels. However, why then would a carbine-length HBAR (which is overall heavier than a standard carbine) need an H2 buffer? I tried to search the forum, but because I'm a newbie the scope of my searches is very limited. Thanks, everyone, for all your input. Beuford That sounds worth it. An H2 buffer is a heavier than normal carbine buffer. Best way to search the site is to use Google: site:ar15.com |
|
Quoted:
OK, now I'm about to show my ignorance: H2 buffer? *** OK, found info on buffers *** I assume the the buffers are heavier on the carbines due to the lower overall mass of the rifle when using shorter barrels. However, why then would a carbine-length HBAR (which is overall heavier than a standard carbine) need an H2 buffer? I tried to search the forum, but because I'm a newbie the scope of my searches is very limited. Thanks, everyone, for all your input. Beuford Quoted:
Quoted:
You can deal w/ the trigger pins. There are oversized replacement triggers. ETA: Should work fine w/ that stock. Not original configuration, but the Army is starting to convert some A2s to that configuration. They run H2 buffers or so, I believe. OK, now I'm about to show my ignorance: H2 buffer? *** OK, found info on buffers *** I assume the the buffers are heavier on the carbines due to the lower overall mass of the rifle when using shorter barrels. However, why then would a carbine-length HBAR (which is overall heavier than a standard carbine) need an H2 buffer? I tried to search the forum, but because I'm a newbie the scope of my searches is very limited. Thanks, everyone, for all your input. Beuford This Colt would have originally had an A2 buttstock with a rifle buffer. The carbine stock and H2 buffer were added at some point. You are correct on the BCG. These had the lighter weight BCG. Obviously, the former owner used the H2 buffer to try and reduce as much of the recoil as possible. As for the price, I would not feel comfortable paying that much for a Colt HBAR carbine with an incorrect stock. I would not give any more than $750 for it. They are not that desirable. They would only appeal to a small amount of people. It would be a nice piece to add to a Colt AR collection if it had a correct A2 stock on it. I am sure some will disagree with me, but this is my opinion. |
| Its a good rifle at a fair price. The Value on firearms litterally changes by zip code nowadays. I have owned a few of these over the years and all were very accurate and reliable with zero issues, except finish, some call flaws, some call it Colt. I have always been a fan of the HBAR barrels, pays off when "light weight" is the big fad now!!!!! |
|
All -
Thank you all for your input. After carefully inspecting the rifle, I decided to pass. It had an upper that was not marked Colt, the collapsible stock was some off-brand, and it was evident that someone had tried to work on the sights without the proper equipment. All in all, for $850 I was not too impressed. If it had been all-original and un-molested by amateurs, I would have gone for it. But under the circumstances $850 seemed to be a bit too much. Thanks again, Beuford |
|
Quoted:
All - Thank you all for your input. After carefully inspecting the rifle, I decided to pass. It had an upper that was not marked Colt, the collapsible stock was some off-brand, and it was evident that someone had tried to work on the sights without the proper equipment. All in all, for $850 I was not too impressed. If it had been all-original and un-molested by amateurs, I would have gone for it. But under the circumstances $850 seemed to be a bit too much. Thanks again, Beuford Thanks for letting us know. It is important to be careful these days when buying an AR like this. Too many of them get bastardized and unsuspecting people spend good money under the impression it is what the seller says it is. That is why it is important to get educated on an AR before you buy. Sorry things did not work out, but there is going to be something for you out there. Just be patient. |
AR Sponsor