AR Sponsor
Posted: 8/4/2012 3:35:17 PM EDT
|
I suspect some of you have seen this rifle in the auction catalog. I figured that everybody needs a peek
before the auction gets going. I have a feeling the hammer price will exceed their estimate of $2-3K. http://rockislandauction.com/viewitem/aid/56/lid/558 
This is what is written in the catalog description: Very early example of a Colt AR-15 Sporter manufactured in 1963. Colt bought the
rights for the AR-15, (M16 military designation), from Armalite in 1959. Colt began a special run production of a semi-automatic variation in 1963 and made only 23, (serial number SP00001 to SP00023) for Colt executives and board members. This particular rifle comes with the original shipping box with shipping label addressed from R.L. Wilson to Robert Sutherland, both of whom were board members for Colt at that time. In 1964 Colt began production of AR-15 Comanche which was quickly changed to the Sporter due to a rival company already having a Comanche bolt action rifle. The left side of the magazine well is marked with the circled Rampant Colt followed by "COLT/AR-15" over "CAL. .223/MODEL SP1/SER SP00017" and the left side of the receiver is marked with the three line address. The rifle is equipped with a three prong flash hider and bayonet lug, post front and flip up rear peep sight and is not equipped with forward assist. Mounted with a fibrite handguard, pistol grip and stock with a rubber buttplate and black nylon sling. Complete with the original Colt shipping box, red S.S. White muzzle cover, (cracked and repaired masking tape that has fallen off) extra magazine, manual, bulletin D-2, 4-piece cleaning rod, takedown tool, sight adjustment tool and a Department of The Air Force manual 50-12. |
| Please correct me if I'm wrong but.... If that is number 17 off the line, why does it have a forged instead of a cast fsb? Why don't the take down pin and selector switch have divots in the center of them? It also looks like it has modern carrier release lever and mag release button? |
|
Quoted:
Please correct me if I'm wrong but.... If that is number 17 off the line, why does it have a forged instead of a cast fsb? Why don't the take down pin and selector switch have divots in the center of them? It also looks like it has modern carrier release lever and mag release button? I've been comparing this rifle to my unfired,new in box, born Nov 16,1964 SP1 SN 118x, and you do raise some good questions. Mine has a forged FSB, dimpled selector, NON dimpled takedown pin. Mine has the late version bolt stop. This one in the auction,,,it may have a transitional bolt stop,,I can't tell for sure from their pics.. ETA,mine also has a dimple in the mag release lever. Can't tell if this auction one does or not. |
| This rifle came out the same year as the 602 and should have the same parts in common. 602's had cast front sight bases, early model carrier release, and it has a raised direction arrow at the rear sight. It should be recessed. Also, notice the wear on the ejection port door and none where it would make contact against the lower receiver. I'm betting it doesent even have a chromed bolt carrier. According to Retro black rifle. Com, the military took possession of 19,000 of the model 602's that same year. Me thinks colt would have a lot of spare 601 and 602 parts laying around to make the first sp-1's. Although I've been wrong before. |
|
Quoted:
This rifle came out the same year as the 602 and should have the same parts in common. 602's had cast front sight bases, early model carrier release, and it has a raised direction arrow at the rear sight. It should be recessed. Also, notice the wear on the ejection port door and none where it would make contact against the lower receiver. I'm betting it doesent even have a chromed bolt carrier. According to Retro black rifle. Com, the military took possession of 19,000 of the model 602's that same year. Me thinks colt would have a lot of spare 601 and 602 parts laying around to make the first sp-1's. Although I've been wrong before. Yes and no in regards to shared parts with the 602. The Gentleman I got my rifle from was sent from IBM to Colts to inspect their facilty. The assembly lines were seperated.He described the building as having a center hall with 2 chain link fences as walls. On one side ,Gubberment contract M16s were assembled with M16 parts,on the other side the " all new civilian semi SP1" was assembled with SP1 parts.Words used by the guide that walked Jack thru the plant.The guide asked if Jack wanted to handle one of the new semis,he did,and placed his order that day for the one I now have . I wish I had saved the GB auction of SN 11 from a few years ago.Seller had $30,000 start price on it.It was a documented rifle.Was in a book as well. That one would be a great reference to compare to. ETA,,it is weird that this auction rifle has an A1 port door.It should have the 601 square pad door on it. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
ETA,,it is weird that this auction rifle has an A1 port door.It should have the 601 square pad door on it. it looks like a large square pad door, just at a weird angle. http://www.rockislandauction.com/photos/56/p_standard/MWG9-G-F2-L.jpg Look how much space there is from the bottom of the pad to the bottom of the door. Plus,on mine,the door is very dark colored matching the color of the upper. I'm VERY comfortable saying that one is an A1 rectangle pad. 1st pic is straight on,2nd is at an angle: 
|
|
Quoted:
i think that's a replacement barrel. if you blow up the pic, i swear i can see a 12 near the muzzle end. http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k517/s0b3/2_digit.jpg That could be correct,but I would expect the barrel to be a " vp" marked with cast FSB then. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
ETA,,it is weird that this auction rifle has an A1 port door.It should have the 601 square pad door on it. it looks like a large square pad door, just at a weird angle. http://www.rockislandauction.com/photos/56/p_standard/MWG9-G-F2-L.jpg Look how much space there is from the bottom of the pad to the bottom of the door. Plus,on mine,the door is very dark colored matching the color of the upper. I'm VERY comfortable saying that one is an A1 rectangle pad. 1st pic is straight on,2nd is at an angle: http://i711.photobucket.com/albums/ww111/Robpics/015-1.jpg http://i711.photobucket.com/albums/ww111/Robpics/016.jpg after looking at your pics and the spacing, i agree with you that it's not a large pad. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
i think that's a replacement barrel. if you blow up the pic, i swear i can see a 12 near the muzzle end. http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k517/s0b3/2_digit.jpg That could be correct,but I would expect the barrel to be a " vp" marked with cast FSB then. i know there were some 1/14 barrels, wouldn't #17 have been one of those? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
i think that's a replacement barrel. if you blow up the pic, i swear i can see a 12 near the muzzle end. http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k517/s0b3/2_digit.jpg That could be correct,but I would expect the barrel to be a " vp" marked with cast FSB then. i know there were some 1/14 barrels, wouldn't #17 have been one of those? It's speculated there may have been some on SP1s,,but I personally don't have any proof yet. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
i think that's a replacement barrel. if you blow up the pic, i swear i can see a 12 near the muzzle end. http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k517/s0b3/2_digit.jpg That could be correct,but I would expect the barrel to be a " vp" marked with cast FSB then. i know there were some 1/14 barrels, wouldn't #17 have been one of those? It's speculated there may have been some on SP1s,,but I personally don't have any proof yet. RMiller posted his 1/14 barrelled 3 digit 4xx here: http://3gn.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=123&t=488558 i picked up a SP1 upper with a Winchester 1/14 barrel as well. granted neither one is factory fresh but if they were replaced, one would think they would get replaced with later barrels and not earlier ones. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
i think that's a replacement barrel. if you blow up the pic, i swear i can see a 12 near the muzzle end. http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k517/s0b3/2_digit.jpg That could be correct,but I would expect the barrel to be a " vp" marked with cast FSB then. i know there were some 1/14 barrels, wouldn't #17 have been one of those? It's speculated there may have been some on SP1s,,but I personally don't have any proof yet. RMiller posted his 1/14 barrelled 3 digit 4xx here: http://3gn.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=123&t=488558 i picked up a SP1 upper with a Winchester 1/14 barrel as well. granted neither one is factory fresh but if they were replaced, one would think they would get replaced with later barrels and not earlier ones. Exactly why I say "speculated". ETA,BTW Boywonder,,the lower on RMillers rifle above is now the one on my 601 that Victor did the bushing work for. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
i think that's a replacement barrel. if you blow up the pic, i swear i can see a 12 near the muzzle end. http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k517/s0b3/2_digit.jpg That could be correct,but I would expect the barrel to be a " vp" marked with cast FSB then. i know there were some 1/14 barrels, wouldn't #17 have been one of those? It's speculated there may have been some on SP1s,,but I personally don't have any proof yet. RMiller posted his 1/14 barrelled 3 digit 4xx here: http://3gn.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=123&t=488558 i picked up a SP1 upper with a Winchester 1/14 barrel as well. granted neither one is factory fresh but if they were replaced, one would think they would get replaced with later barrels and not earlier ones. Exactly why I say "speculated". ETA,BTW Boywonder,,the lower on RMillers rifle above is now the one on my 601 that Victor did the bushing work for. wow i can't believe that rifle was split up. do you know why RMiller decided to part it out? i don't know if we'll ever get positive proof on anything if we only used NIB examples as gospel. with the production m16 timeline, we've had to make a lot of assumptions on the timeline and supply chain and field replacements make dating stuff a challenge especially during the transitional phase. granted the timeline doesn't match up with the date of the sp1 and production of the barrel on the 1/14s but we've seen many cases where the m16 and sp1 lines don't match and the story above just strengthens that it was 2 separate products made in separate processes w/ 2 separate sources of parts. i have 2 4 digits and the later one (52xx) has a M VP 12 barrel and the earlier one (36xx) has the MP 12 barrel. not sure what happened with that one. maybe they found some spare M VP 12 barrels after they started using MP 12 barrels? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
i think that's a replacement barrel. if you blow up the pic, i swear i can see a 12 near the muzzle end. http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k517/s0b3/2_digit.jpg That could be correct,but I would expect the barrel to be a " vp" marked with cast FSB then. i know there were some 1/14 barrels, wouldn't #17 have been one of those? It's speculated there may have been some on SP1s,,but I personally don't have any proof yet. RMiller posted his 1/14 barrelled 3 digit 4xx here: http://3gn.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=123&t=488558 i picked up a SP1 upper with a Winchester 1/14 barrel as well. granted neither one is factory fresh but if they were replaced, one would think they would get replaced with later barrels and not earlier ones. Exactly why I say "speculated". ETA,BTW Boywonder,,the lower on RMillers rifle above is now the one on my 601 that Victor did the bushing work for. wow i can't believe that rifle was split up. do you know why RMiller decided to part it out? i don't know if we'll ever get positive proof on anything if we only used NIB examples as gospel. with the production m16 timeline, we've had to make a lot of assumptions on the timeline and supply chain and field replacements make dating stuff a challenge especially during the transitional phase. granted the timeline doesn't match up with the date of the sp1 and production of the barrel on the 1/14s but we've seen many cases where the m16 and sp1 lines don't match and the story above just strengthens that it was 2 separate products made in separate processes w/ 2 separate sources of parts. i have 2 4 digits and the later one (52xx) has a M VP 12 barrel and the earlier one (36xx) has the MP 12 barrel. not sure what happened with that one. maybe they found some spare M VP 12 barrels after they started using MP 12 barrels? To start,ya know how you would send me links to SP1s you were interested in and we would examine,bounce thoughts back and forth, and evaluate them before you bought?? Well RMiller,when I 1st posted my unfired in box SP1 did the same thing.We examined several rifles before he bought that one,,and at a very good price I might add.Neither of us knew at the time it was a 1/14.He noticed no "12" on it so he checked the twist several times. As for breaking it up,,well he went a different direction regarding the AR15/M16 platform.A Buddy of his wanted the 1/14 barrel,he sold it,,then offered pretty much the rest of the rifle on EE for sale.Pretty much everything but the HGs,gas tube and barrel.I bought it.Yes,upper receiver came with too. What I can't figure out is what you and I have discussed many many times via emails but you seem not to want to accept." Assumptions" as you say above ARE NOT FACT. Fact would be having NOS in the wrap examples to examine. Yes we make assumptions that make sense,BUT they are assumptions all the same.Same thing with opinions. We retroheads,with a great head start from guys like Ekie,CaptRichardson,Scottryan,Wpnsman,Leid and others,collectively,over the last few years have uncovered a wealth of info,and have been able to formulate some sort of timelines.But those timelines come with a percentage of error.So,yes,to answer,the only way to document for 110% certainty,,we need to find unissued,direct from factory, examples to know what's what for sure. And think on this too.In reading many posts by guys who have been members years before me,it appears the retro "craze" is relatively new. Past 10-12 years??? But do you honestly think that folks back in the 70s,80s,90s didn't "play" around with their rifles,switching/swapping parts? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
i think that's a replacement barrel. if you blow up the pic, i swear i can see a 12 near the muzzle end. http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k517/s0b3/2_digit.jpg That could be correct,but I would expect the barrel to be a " vp" marked with cast FSB then. i know there were some 1/14 barrels, wouldn't #17 have been one of those? It's speculated there may have been some on SP1s,,but I personally don't have any proof yet. RMiller posted his 1/14 barrelled 3 digit 4xx here: http://3gn.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=123&t=488558 i picked up a SP1 upper with a Winchester 1/14 barrel as well. granted neither one is factory fresh but if they were replaced, one would think they would get replaced with later barrels and not earlier ones. Exactly why I say "speculated". ETA,BTW Boywonder,,the lower on RMillers rifle above is now the one on my 601 that Victor did the bushing work for. wow i can't believe that rifle was split up. do you know why RMiller decided to part it out? i don't know if we'll ever get positive proof on anything if we only used NIB examples as gospel. with the production m16 timeline, we've had to make a lot of assumptions on the timeline and supply chain and field replacements make dating stuff a challenge especially during the transitional phase. granted the timeline doesn't match up with the date of the sp1 and production of the barrel on the 1/14s but we've seen many cases where the m16 and sp1 lines don't match and the story above just strengthens that it was 2 separate products made in separate processes w/ 2 separate sources of parts. i have 2 4 digits and the later one (52xx) has a M VP 12 barrel and the earlier one (36xx) has the MP 12 barrel. not sure what happened with that one. maybe they found some spare M VP 12 barrels after they started using MP 12 barrels? To start,ya know how you would send me links to SP1s you were interested in and we would examine,bounce thoughts back and forth, and evaluate them before you bought?? Well RMIller,when I 1st posted my unfired in box SP1 did the same thing.We examined several rifles before he bought that one,,and at a very good price I might add.Neither of us knew at the time it was a 1/14.He noticed no "12" on it so he checked the twist several times. As for breaking it up,,well he went a different direction regarding the AR15/M16 platform.A Buddy of his wanted the 1/14 barrel,he sold it,,then offered pretty much the rest of the rifle on EE for sale.Pretty much everything but the HGs,gas tube and barrel.I bought it.Yes,upper receiver came with too. What I can't figure out is what you and I have discussed many many times via emails but you seem not to want to accept." Assumptions" as you say above ARE NOT FACT. Fact would be having NOS in the wrap examples to examine. Yes we make assumptions that make sense,BUT they are assumptions all the same.Same thing with opinions. We retroheads,with a great head start from guys like Ekie,CaptRichardson,Scottryan,Leid and others,collectively,over the last few years have uncovered a wealth of info,and have been able to formulate some sort of timelines.But those timelines come with a percentage of error.So,yes,to answer,the only way to document for 110% certainty,,we need to find unissued,direct from factory, examples to know what's what for sure. i agree that 100% certainty would be factory examples but even Reid Knight doesn't have factory fresh examples of all the retros (not sure if he has any, usually just drool at the pics on his wall). to go back and try to date things 50 years later we have to depend on pics and documents. even the documents aren't a good example as they frequently used outdated drawings in manuals. for example the "605" upper as it's referred to commonly, who actually owns a factory fresh 605? is there even a transferable 605 in civilian hands? i think that "assumption" has pretty much been cemented as fact that the 603 upper w/ forward assist boss machined down was used in 604s and 605s. even if you have a NIB example, how can you be 100% sure that someone along the chain of custody a magazine wasn't swapped out or a sling swapped out? the gun shop in the 60s could have had a customer want to pick through them and swap the accessory pack around b/c one mag had a little wear. even with a cardboard insert in the barrel (don't think they did that back then), can you be 100% sure that rifle was only fired at the factory? i do understand that we are still discovering new things all the time and we need to be careful about stating things as fact. a few years ago, it was assumed that the SP1 aluminum stock only had the rounded top sling loop. i found examples of it with the angled one and there were some discussions about it. even when i got one with the Newton markings, there were people that doubted the authenticity of it and suggested it might have been an essential arms. i don't think we've ever seen a newton marked aluminum stock outside anything but colt but b/c that "assumption" of the rounded sling loop was around for so long, people had a hard time accepting that another variant may exist. but like the point you're trying to make, unless we have a factory fresh sp1 carbine with the angled style, we can't be 110% it exists but the evidence strongly suggests that 2 styles exist from pictures in auctions and examples i own. i guess we're just stuck on terminology and semantics. even in a court of law, the burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. granted this case of the 1/14 barrels may not pass that sniff test with RMillers example and the SP1 upper i have being the only 2 documented examples i've uncovered so far. like you stated, some assumptions make sense and i am willing to take that leap of a well supported assumption make be factual in nature at some point. i will accept the 605 style upper being used on a 605 and 604 as fact from the pictures that exist while you may only accept that as an "assumption" that it left the factory that way in lieu of a unissued factory direct 604 or 605 w/ that upper. not saying you don't believe that it wasn't used in the 604/605 but that you won't accept it as fact but as a very well support and likely assumption. +1 to the timeline having a percentage of error. especially when it came to arsenal rebuilds, field replacements etc... where many parts remained in circulation and used even though it is way out of the timeline of that particular part. also i think we've noted quite a few differences in what should be shared parts btw the SP1 and M16 (parked vs hard chromed one piece firing pin retaining pins, only angled detent housings on the large pad ejection port covers, parked full round gas keys used a lot in SP1s with only a few examples found on their M16 counterpart...) |
|
Is it just me or does the front pivot screwslot look kinda buggered up.
Like someone took it apart a few times with the wrong size screwdriver. Or were the screws just rough looking to begin with. ETA: On second thought, just looks like rough machining that wasn't quite cleaned up. 
|
|
Quoted:
for example the "605" upper as it's referred to commonly, who actually owns a factory fresh 605? is there even a transferable 605 in civilian hands? i think that "assumption" has pretty much been cemented as fact that the 603 upper w/ forward assist boss machined down was used in 604s and 605s. tgus has one. 
|
|
,it appears the retro "craze" is relatively new. Past 10-12 years??? But do you honestly think that folks back in the 70s,80s,90s didn't "play" around with their rifles,switching/swapping parts?
It was done quite often but usually just to make one mint and one shooter/seller. Keep in mind the lowers were the hard part to obtain and non Colt's were virtually non-existent. The rest of the parts were not only very available but very cheap to purchase. I remember Hbars being the craze and everybody had to have one. Then XM-177's. Most the retro pencils were trash by then except for a limited number that were squirrelled away. Check any magazine build published from the late 80's90's and every builder advised to stay as far away from a surplus A-1 barrel as you could get. Buy new if buying/building. That sure has changed. Heck until the last year or two SP-1 parts on the EE had to be almost given away unless super early. In most any rural American distress town this stuff can still be had very cheap and there are a whole lot of them today. |
|
Interesting SP1. I re-read the description. I may have missed it, but it seems to only suggest but not outright say all original.
I don't know if the 2K to 3K bracket is expected sale or expected jumping off point. The appraiser may have taken into account the kind of discussion that is unfolding in this thread. I guess the only thing that can really have a provenance is the naked lower. Maybe the serial number alone is enough to attract high dollar bidders. It will be very interesting to see the sale price. |
|
I have to agree with the things many here have said. After deep reflection on whether I'd even want to own that old rifle, I decided that one would have to be a fool to even bid on such a tossed-together pile o' parts as that.
Therefore, I encourage everyone here to stay away from that particular item. In fact, I encourage you all to go a step further and share this advice with any potential bidders you know who don't frequent this board. Do the right thing––spread the word! Warn everyone that they should not bid on that old SP1. That is all, thank you. (This message brought to you by The Organization for Lower Retro Prices, at Least When I'm Considering a Purchase But Not Necessarily If or When I Eventually Decide to Sell Something.) |
|
Quoted:
I have to agree with the things many here have said. After deep reflection on whether I'd even want to own that old rifle, I decided that one would have to be a fool to even bid on such a tossed-together pile o' parts as that. Therefore, I encourage everyone here to stay away from that particular item. In fact, I encourage you all to go a step further and share this advice with any potential bidders you know who don't frequent this board. Do the right thing––spread the word! Warn everyone that they should not bid on that old SP1. That is all, thank you. (This message brought to you by The Organization for Lower Retro Prices, at Least When I'm Considering a Purchase But Not Necessarily If or When I Eventually Decide to Sell Something.) LMAO OG! 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I have to agree with the things many here have said. After deep reflection on whether I'd even want to own that old rifle, I decided that one would have to be a fool to even bid on such a tossed-together pile o' parts as that. Therefore, I encourage everyone here to stay away from that particular item. In fact, I encourage you all to go a step further and share this advice with any potential bidders you know who don't frequent this board. Do the right thing––spread the word! Warn everyone that they should not bid on that old SP1. That is all, thank you. (This message brought to you by The Organization for Lower Retro Prices, at Least When I'm Considering a Purchase But Not Necessarily If or When I Eventually Decide to Sell Something.) LMAO OG! Don't do it OG ! |
|
I believe the first 100 lower receivers were put aside to be assembled at a later date using whatever uppers were being used in production at that time and then given to Colt employees. So the upper would not be correct for 1963 but could still be a factory assembled gun.
BTW, I have #323. It has a 1/14 barrel. As far as I can tell, 1/14 barrels were used (mixed in with?) 1/12 barrels on the first 500 and possibly up to 700. |
|
Quoted:
I believe the first 100 lower receivers were put aside to be assembled at a later date using whatever uppers were being used in production at that time and then given to Colt employees. So the upper would not be correct for 1963 but could still be a factory assembled gun. BTW, I have #323. It has a 1/14 barrel. As far as I can tell, 1/14 barrels were used (mixed in with?) 1/12 barrels on the first 500 and possibly up to 700. Definitely possible. Did you buy your SP1 323 new or get from the original owner? I'd love to hear the history on that one. |
|
I got it from a guy that I think brokered it for the original owner but he may have purchased it outright. He told me where the gun was originally purchased from which was verified when I got a letter from Colt. The gun came with the original 20 round mgazines, one of which was blocked to 5 rds. The gun is in almost perfect condition. Internally it's almost mint.
Also, although bought seperately, I have a mint Comanche manual that looks awfully good next to it.
|
AR Sponsor