Warning

 

Close
Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Cancel Confirm
AR15.COM
AR Sponsor
2/15/2007 11:02:12 AM EDT
Hey everyone,

Please check this link out and tell me what your feelings are.

www.auctionarms.com/search/displayitem.cfm?itemnum=7866636

Thanks for any input.

Scott
2/15/2007 11:23:38 AM EDT
[#1]
If you have the money, BUY IT!

Dunno what that little thing in front of the FSB is though
2/15/2007 11:25:42 AM EDT
[#2]
Value is hard to define....it is an oldie for sure (doubt it was bought in 1960----1963 or 64 maybe ). I think it is high, but others may disagree.
2/15/2007 11:32:05 AM EDT
[#3]
Check out that bolt release.

Modern hook style with grooves in the lower ½.

And what is that just in front of the front sight base?
2/15/2007 1:03:20 PM EDT
[#4]
Color match is terrible.  I've seen several under 5k and my opinion is that they were all perfect when they left the factory.  The mismatched colors didn't frequently occur until the late 70s.  There are no pics of the expensive parts-BCG, buffer, hammer.  Sling should be black.  That thing on the barrel may be a barrel protector for a bipod.

I know where sn# 46xx is right now for $2000 and supposed to be 98+%

48xx sold recently for $1750 and it was 98%+

7xx sold for $2000 and was 95%+

2xxx lower sold on GB for $600

13xx sold on GB for $1200

ETA: buffer tube looks purplish and shiney to me.

Also no divot in rear sight screw

Is that front sight cast? #7xx wasn't
2/15/2007 1:42:06 PM EDT
[#5]
It wasn't made in 1960
2/15/2007 1:57:37 PM EDT
[#6]
The upper isn't the original. I doubt that the shade would be so mismatched and wouldn't it have the triangle charging handle? Is that sliding piece on the barrel maybe to keep it from getting scratched in a rack?
2/15/2007 3:05:05 PM EDT
[#7]

Quoted:
The upper isn't the original. I doubt that the shade would be so mismatched and wouldn't it have the triangle charging handle? Is that sliding piece on the barrel maybe to keep it from getting scratched in a rack?



How do you know its not original?

And would have came with a regular charging handle.
2/15/2007 3:56:51 PM EDT
[#8]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The upper isn't the original. I doubt that the shade would be so mismatched and wouldn't it have the triangle charging handle? Is that sliding piece on the barrel maybe to keep it from getting scratched in a rack?



How do you know its not original?

And would have came with a regular charging handle.


My bad, I was guessing that Colt wouldn't have been that much of a shade mismatch. Wasn't the small charging handle on the first models?
2/15/2007 4:46:12 PM EDT
[#9]

Quoted:
Check out that bolt release.

Modern hook style with grooves in the lower ½.

And what is that just in front of the front sight base?


the mag release should have just horizontal lines not circular? right?

2/15/2007 4:49:50 PM EDT
[#10]
I think the upper is nor original based upon the extreme mismatch on color and the rear sight screw is not drilled.
2/15/2007 6:29:51 PM EDT
[#11]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Check out that bolt release.

Modern hook style with grooves in the lower ½.

And what is that just in front of the front sight base?


the mag release should have just horizontal lines not circular? right?



Wrong

That feature dates to the earliest 601s
2/15/2007 6:36:18 PM EDT
[#12]

Quoted:
I think the upper is nor original based upon the extreme mismatch on color and the rear sight screw is not drilled.


The extreme mismatch in color is not proof the upper is not matching to the lower.  It is a clue, but it is not proof.

The rear sight screw with the dimple, I don't really know what to say about that.  It was being dropped during the time period this gun was being made.


The FSB is cast which would be correct.
2/15/2007 6:43:17 PM EDT
[#13]
Both 7xx and 48xx matched very well and both had the dimple in the rear sight screw.
2/15/2007 6:52:35 PM EDT
[#14]
Then I would say this one should have the dimple.  I don't know what to say about the reciever though.  All the other parts would be correct if the receiver wasn't matching.
2/15/2007 7:50:08 PM EDT
[#15]
Remember, as stated above, this is a 1964 rifle, not 1960.  Looks all original to me, except I don't know what that thing on the barrel is.

BTW, most 1960's uppers and lowers don't match in color.
2/15/2007 8:33:53 PM EDT
[#16]
I could be wrong, but isn't that thing on the barrel used with the bipod (to allow easier  movement/adjustment of the bipod without scratching the barrel)?

2/15/2007 8:48:17 PM EDT
[#17]
On the Price, is this something you would expect to see with this rifle? This is not my listing by the way.

Thanks for the info so far.
2/16/2007 6:56:30 AM EDT
[#18]
I think the upper has been changed but I may be wrong.  If the bcg, buffer , buffer tube, hammer are all original it may be worth $2000-$2500 given my doubts about the upper. If these parts are missing I'd go no higher than $1500.  

I have NEVER seen an early BCG or hammer for sale and people are trying to get $150 for buffers.  
2/16/2007 6:58:50 AM EDT
[#19]

Quoted:
I think the upper has been changed but I may be wrong.  If the bcg, buffer , buffer tube, hammer are all original it may be worth $2000-$2500 given my doubts about the upper. If these parts are missing I'd go no higher than $1500.  

I have NEVER seen an early BCG or hammer for sale and people are trying to get $150 for buffers.  



I don't think used edgewater buffers are worth $150 either.
2/16/2007 7:04:42 AM EDT
[#20]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I think the upper has been changed but I may be wrong.  If the bcg, buffer , buffer tube, hammer are all original it may be worth $2000-$2500 given my doubts about the upper. If these parts are missing I'd go no higher than $1500.  

I have NEVER seen an early BCG or hammer for sale and people are trying to get $150 for buffers.  



I don't think used edgewater buffers are worth $150 either.


Neither do I!  That's why I don't have one yet I guess.  I turned down a used, stained one for $50
2/16/2007 7:22:23 AM EDT
[#21]
If the upper ain't original then where did he come up with the new old school port door and old time barrel with cast FSB?  Find that real hard to belive.  Not to mention the like new 1960's no forge code upper SP1 receiver in the proper brown color.

Talking about some rare parts, and the odds they just all happened to end up on a 1964 SP1 lower?
2/16/2007 8:18:37 AM EDT
[#22]

Quoted:
If the upper ain't original then where did he come up with the new old school port door and old time barrel with cast FSB?  Find that real hard to belive.  Not to mention the like new 1960's no forge code upper SP1 receiver in the proper brown color.

Talking about some rare parts, and the odds they just all happened to end up on a 1964 SP1 lower?


I have an early port door, same barrel, earliest gas tube, no hole handguards, and a no hole buttstock screw that I bought off a guy at a gunshow that had them on a Doublestar lower.

Here is 48xx


2/16/2007 8:37:36 AM EDT
[#23]
Looks like he left the port door open when he closed the upper and lower receiver together...

Beautiful rifle, ranchhand.  Thanks for the pic.
2/16/2007 12:27:30 PM EDT
[#24]

Quoted:
Looks like he left the port door open when he closed the upper and lower receiver together...

Beautiful rifle, ranchhand.  Thanks for the pic.


I no longer own this one,  Can't keep them all.  
2/16/2007 12:37:00 PM EDT
[#25]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If the upper ain't original then where did he come up with the new old school port door and old time barrel with cast FSB?  Find that real hard to belive.  Not to mention the like new 1960's no forge code upper SP1 receiver in the proper brown color.

Talking about some rare parts, and the odds they just all happened to end up on a 1964 SP1 lower?


I have an early port door, same barrel, earliest gas tube, no hole handguards, and a no hole buttstock screw that I bought off a guy at a gunshow that had them on a Doublestar lower.



Yeah, and you have a XM177/E1 barrel.  An advance collector and a guy wanting $5,000 for an SP1 are two different things.
2/16/2007 1:27:42 PM EDT
[#26]
The parts I listed above were used to build a gun that a guy had on a rack at the gunshow when I spotted them.  

HK45shooter  scored a 2xxx lower with the original buffer and tube and already had an early upper that will be correct for it.  

I could be wrong about upper originality but I would still require pics of the impossible to find internals before I'd lay out $2k + for it.
2/16/2007 1:47:48 PM EDT
[#27]

Quoted:

I could be wrong about upper originality but I would still require pics of the impossible to find internals before I'd lay out $2k + for it.


We are on the same page on that one.
2/16/2007 2:05:24 PM EDT
[#28]

Quoted:
If the upper ain't original then where did he come up with the new old school port door and old time barrel with cast FSB?  Find that real hard to belive.  Not to mention the like new 1960's no forge code upper SP1 receiver in the proper brown color.

Talking about some rare parts, and the odds they just all happened to end up on a 1964 SP1 lower?




I agree
2/16/2007 2:36:48 PM EDT
[#29]
SN 7xx has a forged fsb, M VP 12 marked barrel, early port door and upper and lower match nicely.  It is almost as clean as 48xx pictured on page 1
2/16/2007 4:37:23 PM EDT
[#30]
In my SP1 file folder I have 1,541 pictures.  And quite a few have one receiver a different hue of blue or brown then the other.  Here are a few examples (most owned by members):















2/16/2007 5:20:31 PM EDT
[#31]

Quoted:




#18 huh?

OK, I must be wrong about the color mismatch.  

I might pay $4k for #18  
2/16/2007 8:00:20 PM EDT
[#32]

Quoted:
#18 huh?



#5 sold here in the EE a few years back.
2/18/2007 1:35:24 AM EDT
[#33]
I like this one

Nice color match  


Why the flood of early SP1s all of a sudden? This makes at least 4 in the last week  
2/18/2007 6:50:48 AM EDT
[#34]
Number 4 was on gunbroker yesterday, upper is purple though.

I think the single and double digit SP1's are of later manufacture.
2/18/2007 12:27:55 PM EDT
[#35]
#323 sold for $3995!
AR Sponsor