Armory Sponsor
Posted: 5/6/2010 2:31:21 PM EDT
|
I have a chance to acquire a beautiful M16, pre-1986. It is practically unfired and in stunning condition.
Now, moving on. This weapon's upper receiver would be replaced for most use, I want the original in absolute perfect condition. I was wondering whether doing any kind of modification to the lower is legal (I.e. NP3 treatment). Now, admittedly, a sear may be a better choice as dropping one into a semi-auto and getting an M16 bolt carrier would probably be better when the weapon was resold. But I have this weapon for the purpose of use. Extensive use. I would also be fitting a Shrike upper to the weapon. Thanks in advance. |
| You can do anything you want to the lower, except obliterate the original serial number. If your modifications were to make it into a substantially different type of weapon, it might no longer be a pre-1986 transferrable machinegun, but within those bounds and with that understanding you can do anything to it you want. |
|
Quoted:
...weapon's upper receiver would be replaced... I want the original in absolute perfect condition.... But I have this weapon for the purpose of use. Extensive use. Hmmm. To answer your question - yes, it is legal to refinish your lower. I'm a little confused by your comments though. You want to keep your (unregulated, easily replaced, relatively inexpensive) upper in pristine condition to preserve "resale value". OTOH, you want to shoot the snot out of your (regulated, expensive) registered lower, which accounts for 95% of the gun's "value". Am I missing something? 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
...weapon's upper receiver would be replaced... I want the original in absolute perfect condition.... But I have this weapon for the purpose of use. Extensive use. Hmmm. To answer your question - yes, it is legal to refinish your lower. I'm a little confused by your comments though. You want to keep your (unregulated, easily replaced, relatively inexpensive) upper in pristine condition to preserve "resale value". OTOH, you want to shoot the snot out of your (regulated, expensive) registered lower, which accounts for 95% of the gun's "value". Am I missing something?
Well, the upper retains some value, and if I have that I have something. I'll be hanging onto the lower for usage and the Nickel coating will protect the actual lower. IF I wanted to sell it, it still functions and it would still be of substantial value because of its full-auto properties. I know its illogical, but that's what I'll do. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
...weapon's upper receiver would be replaced... I want the original in absolute perfect condition.... But I have this weapon for the purpose of use. Extensive use. Hmmm. To answer your question - yes, it is legal to refinish your lower. I'm a little confused by your comments though. You want to keep your (unregulated, easily replaced, relatively inexpensive) upper in pristine condition to preserve "resale value". OTOH, you want to shoot the snot out of your (regulated, expensive) registered lower, which accounts for 95% of the gun's "value". Am I missing something?
Well, the upper retains some value, and if I have that I have something. I'll be hanging onto the lower for usage and the Nickel coating will protect the actual lower. IF I wanted to sell it, it still functions and it would still be of substantial value because of its full-auto properties. I know its illogical, but that's what I'll do. the upper itself is worth the cost of a used upper.. make no bones about it. If you want to go nickeling a transferrable auto ... be prepared to market that item to the next unsuspecting fool. Refinish jobs are tell tale signs of problems and if the gun is in the condition you say it is .. you are a fool for wanting to pursue this option. YOU WILL LOSE $$$ Yes its very illogical to make a gun worth way less than you paid for it. |
|
Quoted:
Yeah, don't touch it. A nickel-plated lower is going to look ridiculous and will be harder to sell, especially if it doesn't match the upper. Just shoot and enjoy the gun. If you wear it out, you can always refinish it. Yes. I could do that. But I want this for use and I want the Nickel finish for function. I will not be selling this gun any time soon, and if I decide to do so, I'll be waiting for a price on which I could make money. And whomever said that an RDIAS was the way to go, I disagree. There are how many of them in circulation now? Six hundred or so, right? And if you, in theory, had an RDIAS, why sell? Those are almost as valuable as an M16 on their own, and I'd need to then acquire a selective-fire safety and BCG. This gun is right in front of me. EDIT: Oh. Just saw the "sell and buy a cheaper one to bling out. Good idea. |
|
Quoted:
And whomever said that an RDIAS was the way to go, I disagree. There are how many of them in circulation now? Six hundred or so, right? And if you, in theory, had an RDIAS, why sell? Those are almost as valuable as an M16 on their own, and I'd need to then acquire a selective-fire safety and BCG. Yeah, I call BS on that. That number seems a little low, by thousands. And I have to agree - NP3ing an M16 will turn it into an abortion that will forever be significantly below M16 market value. You might as well engrave Hyundai emblems all over it while you're at it. |
| So how does NP3 help function of the lower? I could see it in the upper, but there's nothing that the NP3 will help on the lower, IMHO. You'll lose a grand or 2 in the process, too. Most Colt M16 buyers like the original finish. At the end of the day, it will be your gun so do what pleases you, but don't say we didn't warn you! |
|
Quoted:
Can't wait to see your youtube video shooting your "Pimped" out AR. Make sure you have some rap music playing loudly in the background. Gezzzz..... Yeah. I suppose you never saw the whole "getting a cheap one to bastardize" deal. And i believe tossing around "pimped" wasn't my idea. I was just using his word. And something rather personal just came up. The long and the short being I have to set aside big money for my fiancée. Oh well. The weapon sold and I came to my senses too. Sorry for pissing you all off. |
Hey, we're not pissed off. We just wanted to make sure you knew what you were doing.
There are about 20,000 transferable Colt factory M16s. I've been tracking them for about 20 years now, and I know there are prolly less than 4,000 in like-new condition ... I suspect substantially less than that. So your post was like someone going on a classic Corvette web site and saying, "I have a chance to buy a zero-mileage, mint original 1953 Corvette. Like all first-year Corvettes it's white, but I believe Corvettes should be red, so I'm going to strip off the orignal paint and redo it in red, plus swap the original six-banger/auto tranny for a big-block and a six-speed." Well, the bottom line is that in America, when you buy something, you can do whatever you want with it. But in the Corvette case, painting a mint '53 red and swapping in a big-bore would cut the resale value from the original $250k to around $40k. If I wasn't familiar with the market and was spending big bucks as a newbie, I would want someone to warn me before I did that. And we assumed you would like the same warning. FWIW. 
|
|
Quoted:
Hey, we're not pissed off. We just wanted to make sure you knew what you were doing.
There are about 20,000 transferable Colt factory M16s. I've been tracking them for about 20 years now, and I know there are prolly less than 4,000 in like-new condition ... I suspect substantially less than that. So your post was like someone going on a classic Corvette web site and saying, "I have a chance to buy a zero-mileage, mint original 1953 Corvette. Like all first-year Corvettes it's white, but I believe Corvettes should be red, so I'm going to strip off the orignal paint and redo it in red, plus swap the original six-banger/auto tranny for a big-block and a six-speed." Well, the bottom line is that in America, when you buy something, you can do whatever you want with it. But in the Corvette case, painting a mint '53 red and swapping in a big-bore would cut the resale value from the original $250k to around $40k. If I wasn't familiar with the market and was spending big bucks as a newbie, I would want someone to warn me before I did that. And we assumed you would like the same warning. FWIW.
I would listen to whatever that guy has to tell you. IMHO, take your money and invest it into a cheaper registered receiver that may be banged up already and THEN refinish it. If your deal is too good to pass up, then buy it, sell it on the ee, buy a cheaper registered reciever that may be banged up already and then refinish it. Take the extra dough, and buy a Stealth upper and ammo. Refinishing a mint condition colt would be the most idiotic thing I have heard of. Not only would you be destroying a piece of history, you would be removing one more desirable weapon off of the already dwindling list of registered lowers everyone else can buy.
|
|
Quoted:
... But in the Corvette case, painting a mint '53 red and swapping in a big-bore would cut the resale value from the original $250k to around $40k. And saying that your intention was for "use. EXTENSIVE use". That rifle is a collector's piece now, you would be lambasted by the entire gun-owning community for using that rifle for anything other than bragging rights, investment, and occasional enjoyment. Just like racing and towing a travel trailer with a mint '53 Vette, you would be - intentional or not - insulting anyone else that can actually appreciate something like that for what it's worth. Probably best that rifle went somewhere else as it sounds like you would have abused it and caused severe depreciation anyway. |
|
I should, I suppose, confirm this: I very much realize that what I'd proposed earlier seemed incredibly stupid and a waste of an amazing firearm. So, now that I see the light and realize what I almost did (for once, a relationship interrupted a firearm purchase in a GOOD way).
Thanks for helping me the error in my ways. |
|
Quoted:
I should, I suppose, confirm this: I very much realize that what I'd proposed earlier seemed incredibly stupid and a waste of an amazing firearm. So, now that I see the light and realize what I almost did (for once, a relationship interrupted a firearm purchase in a GOOD way). Thanks for helping me the error in my ways. Again, no problem. No harm, no foul, etc. FWIW, when I bought my first Colt factory M16A1 in '94, everyone was refinishing their Colts –– a lot of owners wanted the current black color instead of the original gray. A lot of mint gray guns were redone just to make 'em black. The problem was, a lot of ridden-hard-and-put-away-wet Colts also were refinished, after welding repairs. Of course, after refinishing, it's really tough to tell if a gun was mint or beat prior to refinish. But a repaired alloy receiver is never as strong as an original. Enough folks bought refinished Colts, only to later have problems, that I started advising buyers to stay away from refinished ones. The market must have agreed, because on the whole, today the refinished guns are not worth as much as mint original-finish guns. To this day, a lot of first-time Colt buyers immediately want to make them look "new," just like the current production. It's a natural impulse. Like I said, at one point, I did, too. And I also understand why you'd want to Robar NP3 one –– it is a very durable finish that I also was considering. But it's now 24 years since the May 1986 "transferable MGs" cutoff. The vast majority are high-mileage guns. And that naturally places a much higher value on MGs that can be proven to be low-mileage. I hope this thread has been useful to many first-time Colt owners. 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I should, I suppose, confirm this: I very much realize that what I'd proposed earlier seemed incredibly stupid and a waste of an amazing firearm. So, now that I see the light and realize what I almost did (for once, a relationship interrupted a firearm purchase in a GOOD way). Thanks for helping me the error in my ways. Again, no problem. No harm, no foul, etc. FWIW, when I bought my first Colt factory M16A1 in '94, everyone was refinishing their Colts –– a lot of owners wanted the current black color instead of the original gray. A lot of mint gray guns were redone just to make 'em black. The problem was, a lot of ridden-hard-and-put-away-wet Colts also were refinished, after welding repairs. Of course, after refinishing, it's really tough to tell if a gun was mint or beat prior to refinish. But a repaired alloy receiver is never as strong as an original. Enough folks bought refinished Colts, only to later have problems, that I started advising buyers to stay away from refinished ones. The market must have agreed, because on the whole, today the refinished guns are not worth as much as mint original-finish guns. To this day, a lot of first-time Colt buyers immediately want to make them look "new," just like the current production. It's a natural impulse. Like I said, at one point, I did, too. And I also understand why you'd want to Robar NP3 one –– it is a very durable finish that I also was considering. But it's now 24 years since the May 1986 "transferable MGs" cutoff. The vast majority are high-mileage guns. And that naturally places a much higher value on MGs that can be proven to be low-mileage. I hope this thread has been useful to many first-time Colt owners. That's definitely the impulse I was feeling, the "I want it to look new and seem new". I guess, when the money comes back in, I will hunt around for an RDIAS and put it in a POF or something. Thanks. |
Armory Sponsor