AR Sponsor
Posted: 11/7/2008 4:25:47 PM EDT
| Would the lower have been marked XM177E2 or Commando - besides the US Property, etc. I'm getting ready to start on mine and have heard both... |
| That's actually from the RBR website's XM177E1 page. However, the page on the E2 has a different picture of the same rollmark. I'm not sure about this 100% though since biggerhammer.net says the rollmark should be XM177E2 instead of Commando. E1s were definitely marked "Commando" though. |
|
Quoted:
I would also have thought that an E2 would still have been marked as ".223" rather than 5.56.....I was confused by their descriptions also which is why I asked. Perhaps someone will know for sure...as I tend to lean toward XM177E2 for a US military issue. I'm not sure I'm familiar with a single property marked weapon marked .223 rather than 5.56mm. There was no ".223" in official nomenclature. |
AR Sponsor