I just committed to buying this M16 - what are thoughts on the upper etc?

Wow. COngratulations! If you've already spent that much, you might as well make it complete with the moderator - are you telling me the moderators were S/N'd to the lowers? Because it was my understanding that initially, until they were classified NFA they weren't S/N'd at all, and their serial numbers had nothing to do with the lower's numbers. Weren't the original E1's 10" barrels though, not 10.5" ? Regardless, that is one sweet carbine!

ETA: WTH is that set screw on the front of the FSB?

I was just wondering the same thing

Edit: I'm sorry OP, I forgot to say congrats!

Gas adjustment for suppressor usage would be my guess.

Edit: can't be it's too far forward from the port

Congrats on the new purchase.

You've got a very nice configuration there.

Ditch the A2 pistol grip too.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that is an AF contract 604/GAU-5A/A lower. It's marked "M16", not "M16A1". And it's got a FA upper on it, so the upper probably isn't original.

that set screw has been found on a few FSBs

http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=123&t=320592

www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=123&t=413304

That is super nice. Great score and many congrats. If it were me, I would have to put on a rifle length barrel and an a1 buttstock and go for that late Vietnam thing. That configuration is such a sweet shooter. And, you don't have to worry about doing a few mag dumps on full auto through a later chromed-up barrel. Or, and this is just a thought, get an alternate upper and do the whole 653 thing. Ohhhh, the possibilities.

I think a 604 upper would be a nice change––put it a bit closer to original––and I'd love to see it with a real moderator. But even just the way it is, I'm digging it. Big time!

That lower looks great for its age!

The biggest concern when buying a transferable machine gun, at least if its a shooter, is not the upper that it comes with. The Lower is where the money is at, and yours is one of the best. The rest can be aquired for nominal cash and a little patience. I agree with the other poster, in that this gun does not look stock. It's a cool peice though, don't get me wrong. Especially if it's not a re-weld, getting a property marked Colt lower is a nice find.

This^^^^^^

Wow.....Nice !

Any way you slice it..a sweet gun. Congrats and enjoy. Be sure to let us know how she shoots

Nice gun.That serial number is pretty close to mine. Mine It is not US Property marked though. The moderators were sometimes numbered to match.

I don't want to be that asshole parade rainer-on-er, but does that "PROPERTY" marking look off to anyone else?

It looks like it's been engraved, rather than rolled like the other markings, and the color, character width/distance seems off compared to other U.S. PROP marked lowers I've seen.

The poster above me's M16 is almost identically marked, with the same amount of space as the OP's, with no property marks but less than fifty away in serial number.

Granted, I wouldn't scoff at it, I'm still jealous!

I am curious, too, about this FSB set-screw mod, we've seen a couple pop up, but very little information on it - maybe when the OP gets his carbine he can see what gives?

~Augee

Thanks for all of the replies guys. If this is what it is supposed to be, I will be very pleased with it.

wow, so nice. congrats!!

I'd spend the $100 to get a letter from Colt Historical and they'll tell you who it was sent to, assuming they have M16s archived. Can't imagine why they wouldn't.

http://www.coltsmfg.com/CustomerServices/ArchiveServices.aspx

Jealous.

While I agree the 603 upper isn't original to the lower due to the lack of the A1 on the roll mark, I'm leaning more toward the 604. Although the PROPERTY OF US GOVT does look like it was engraved post production. It looks like it was originally a commercial M16.

Also, IIRC the GAU-5/A/A models were roll marked as such, so I doubt it is a GAU.

BTW, awesome gun OP!! I am wicked jealous.

I've seen a few AF GAUs/GUUs that looked like this one. They appeared to me to be commercial/export guns that were diverted to fill AF contracts and possibly the US Property marking were added by Colt after production. Most AF carbines I've seen have AR-15 markings with a small M16 or GAU marking below the Pony, so the big M 16 marking beside the Pony really stood out out me.

Unfortunately, Colt has an odd policy against sharing info on full-auto firearms. For those of us who invest in these, this is a source of some frustration.

This is some info from Tony K's serial number guide on the M16 forum.


Colt M16 Model 640 – SN: 5,016,xxx: Export model of XM177E1. 11.5” barrel with chrome chamber, sliding buttstock, 4” stovepipe suppressor with spacer and no forward assist. Can sometimes be found with correct, Colt proofed upper receiver with forward assist, vice no forward assist. Finish is usually dark black. Serial number can be as high as 5,096,xxx and be accurate. At least three production runs done of this model. Most are in the 5,016,xxx range. Should not have a bayonet lug. Most will have their factory correct barrel and flash hider – all are factory marked barrels – Caveat Emptor as there have been at least 25 sets of XM model gun uppers sold since 1994.

The US Property marks on that gun look faked.

The barrel is not Colt and neither is the grip.

The US Property mark does look a little odd. I had one dealer tell me that this added about 5K on to the sticker price due to scarcity of an already scarce commodity. I do think it is worth a call to the seller to see if you can get any more information.

i would agree with what has been said on here.

This would not surprise me, but I have never seen a property marked AR-15/M16 type without a designation of some sort. Even the over-stamped GUU-5/Ps have that marked on the lower in some fashion.

Unlike this one, the two I saw during initial inspection had 14.5 in pencil barrels. They were hand stamped at the lower end of the mag well with the GUU markings, but the big M16 marking was unaltered.

Most of the ones I handled had the" M16" xxx out or milled out and over- stamped.

I've seen at least a decent number that were Colt COTS (Commercial Off The Shelf) purchases that are U.S. Government Property, some of which are marked "M16" in the commercial style, but I don't think any were re-marked with the "U.S. GOVT. PROPERTY" marking. They are usually either stamped, electro-pencilled, or have had sections milled out and re-marked.

Even if it was marked "U.S. GOVT. PROPERTY" after being accepted as a COTS purchase, I wonder if the marking would be quite so tidy? The marking has "the feeling" of a Colt factory rollmark to me, but as I mentioned, it looks... "off." Kind of looks like the Ident Markings or Braceman lowers - where they look right, but you can still tell by "feel" that it's a reproduction.

I could be wrong, but if it's not an unusual Colt factory rollmark which is quite rare - which, I'd like to make sure, it *could* be, I've just never seen it, and for some reason it "feels" wrong. Maybe it's just because it's very unusual.

But if it was done after the fact, it looks like someone took great pains and great care to reproduce Colt factory rollmarks. I just have the sneaking suspicion that if it was the Air Force's doing after the fact, it would just look... different. I don't know, more "USGI." Like I said, all the other re-marking methods are... well, plain obvious and look like re-marks, even the prettiest ones. This one, on the other hand, looks like someone went out of their way to make it *unobtrusive.*

Like I said, I'm not saying it *is* fake, but it's certainly unusual, and bears closer examination before a large sum of money changes hands - particularly if you're paying extra for a former U.S. Property receiver.

~Augee

You can tell just by looking at it that it was engraved and not stamped. Look at the stamped lettering below it, you can see the displaced material pushed up around the outside of the letters creating ridges. The US PROP markings have no such ridges.

Whether or not it was engraved by Colt or the DOD somewhere down the line after initial manufacture, I guess is a quandary. Like Augee said, normal US markings tend to be sloppier.

I agree the US Property markings were not done at the same time as the rest of the markings and it certainly was not issued to the DoD. As far as I know, the only uncut former DoD M16 that are transferable would be 1968 Amnesty registered M16s. I would think that would narrow it down to a Colt add on engraving done in anticipation of going to the Gov or a fake.

This lower was made after 1976.
I don't remember when Colt changed from Colt's Patent Firearms to Colt Firearms Division, but it WAS after 1976.

After reading the thread, I took your pix and enlarged them 300% ... on all the correct such rollmarks I've seen, on the left side, the "P" in Property lined up perfectly vertically with the "O" in Of; on the right side, the "T" in GOVT was slightly indented to the left, and the "." after the GOVT lined up perfectly with the "Y" in the Property. On yours, the period was wider than the above line. In other words, the left and right side of the markings square up vertically, in every other such marking I have seen.

So I now believe they were indeed added after the fact. Now, knowing Colt, it's not impossible they added them to comply with a contract, but again, I would think they would use their standard spacing.

My initial impressions were incorrect. My apologies, JC.

Which would have been after 604 production ended.

Well guys, I thank you very much. I am backing out of this deal - considering this most likley is not a legit unit - you saved me at least 10K that I would have been overpaying for this unit.

I wouldn't pay over $12K for that.

No USGI M16 is marked M16 to the left of the horse and globe logo. Lowers like this are only for commerial guns.

Looking over the picks again I noticed there wasn't a period after the "s"

The front taper pin on the FSB looks to have been pushed out.

Can't tell on the rear pin. Picture is not big enough.

Good info here as usual. Sorry I posted when I was so damn tired. Still a nice weapon, but when so much is at stake, you want the real thing.

A little possible info on the set screw in the FSB. I found this shorty barrel instruction sheet in an original XM177E2 manual. It mentions the set screw.


and the part with the set screw.

So NOW we have to drill and tap and put allen head set screws in our FSB's? Gee thanks tgus. Seriously, I'm glad Augee caught the discrepancy as I was focused on that SEAR PIN. I see happy switch, I get all giddy like a schoolgirl. I am still wondering if the property marks could be original, I mean we know the feds filled orders with unusual stuff, for example GM/HR during VN, FN/SAK later - need I go on? Seems like the more I think I know about this stuff the less I really seem to know. The set screw thing blows my mind. I have to say, at this point if I ever get the money for a happy switch, I'd probably go for an M16A2 at this point - a little cheaper maybe, and I could run a 733 upper. Damn, I need to stop thinking about such things. I hate you guys.

I believe that is correct for the markings on the SP1 but the full autos were changed earlier for some reason. My commando was made in 1971 and is marked Colt Firearms division.
.

Well, the seller replied to my earlier email for more pics and my concerns about the markings being milled verses rolled.

I dug up some photos of the "U.S.Property" engravings, to compare to yours. Most have the markings squared off on the left and right side; two, however, do not. One of these "unsquare" guns is an H&R, so it was done with different stamps; the other odd one is a reweld, and many rewelds had cuts through the magwell and were re-engraved after welding, so there is no proof that stamp is authentic.

Note: These pics were saved form posts over the years –– if one is yours, LMK and I'll credit you or take it down. TIA!

First, three typical Colt property markings. Notice the alignment on the left and right sides:







Now, the H&R. The property marking on these differs from Colts ... because they used a different stamp:



Finally, the Colt reweld. Again, this stamp may be original ...or the magwell may have required welding during the matching-up process –– it was common for the magwell to get cut on the early demils. In such cases, the 07/02 would have it re-engraved. So who knows if it's authentic?

The third picture you posted is a fake Colt lower. Why did you post this?

Looks like an A2 profile

I had that pic in my Norrell reweld photo file (see the filename). I threw it up as an example of US Property markings. As a reweld, the markings are suspect –– but at least they correspond to the other Colts.

If it offends you, I shall pluck it out.

I'm going to go with the US Property marking being a faked addition due to that:

1. It's within less than 50 units from a known non-property marked lower (5016004).
2. Every legit property-marked lower that I have ...ever... seen has had a model designation of some type stamped or etched below the property marking itself regardless of what was printed next to the pony. Even if it was somehow added to the .Gov books & marked after leaving the factory, the model designation would have still had to be added as part of the required re-markings.
3. The property marking is not left/right-aligned as it would be if it was marked at the factory as a direct U.S. Property purchase.
4. & lastly, it appears as if the marking itself has a slightly dissimilar look to it as compared to near-by surrounding markings.

Just my opinion, but if it were me - I'd either request proof of provenance; request a severe price-drop, or lacking those options - politely bow-out of the purchase...

FlDiveCop71

Here is one that is fairly close in s/n range but is not M16 marked. Most all of the 5M serial range Colts with US Property marks that I have seen look like this. A lot of these were DOE guns.

[URL=http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/40/603marks2600x333.jpg/]

Looks like a nice job on a reweld to me. I've seen some that were pretty bad and suspect on even being safe

It'd be nice to know what the re-work Colts were like when someone had a transferable lower that was worn out and sent it into Colt and had them replace it for a new one of the same serial number. Didn't Colt get their hands slapped for doing that at one time or was that just a rumor?

Dang there's a lot of funky guns out there. Didn't realize it was that bad.

Copyright © 1996 - 2013 :: AR15.Com LLC :: All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.