AR Sponsor
Posted: 9/23/2016 8:24:42 PM EDT
Found this no proof marks,front lug not rebated, had a primer like spray on coat, under coat is a purplish anodize looking finsh. Any ideas?
|
|
Quoted:
Later GM ones didn't, just like the 70-71ish Colt uppers. My Gm upper isn't rebated. Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm pretty sure GM rebated their front lugs. Later GM ones didn't, just like the 70-71ish Colt uppers. My Gm upper isn't rebated. I love learning new things. |
|
It is common knowledge that factory "second" forgings ended up in the hands of other manufactures during the '70s and '80s, who finished the rejected products, to various levels of quality. Some of these uppers are garbage (soft metal, poor anodization, sloppy fit and finish), despite how nice they look. Flippers know this as well. these receivers pop up misrepresented for resale from time to time advertised as something that they are not.
|
|
I can't see what tool marks are on the front and back. Can you describe them? If your phone will not focus on the small part in the frame, you can surround the small thing you care about with other objects the same distance from the camera so the camera has no choice but to focus on the thing you care about. (does that make sense?) I believe only PM, LM, and some later commercial manufacturers milled the rear of the carry handle, some did the front too. (Can anyone else chime in regarding this?) The forge lines do look later, ~1970 or post "CK" forge upper receivers.
Quoted:
<a href="http://s745.photobucket.com/user/sergio762/media/20160923_191933_zpslfza0s7j.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i745.photobucket.com/albums/xx96/sergio762/20160923_191933_zpslfza0s7j.jpg</a> <a href="http://s745.photobucket.com/user/sergio762/media/20160923_191937_zpswznomcdx.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i745.photobucket.com/albums/xx96/sergio762/20160923_191937_zpswznomcdx.jpg</a> |
AR Sponsor