I use to be that ANY m-16 pts were not legal, yet i have seen adds say they can be used. On the side of caution i will not use one. Have the laws changed? in the last few yrs? MM
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
M 16 bolt car
- Thread starter mexicanmatch
- Start date
Re: M 16 bolt car
As I understand it Colt was selling their rifles w/ "M16" carriers all along as they only made (bought) one kind. The ATF didn't like it but it was impossible to track or fix.
I would not go to court with the above info and would research it completely. IMHO, YRMV etc.
Cheers,
Doc
As I understand it Colt was selling their rifles w/ "M16" carriers all along as they only made (bought) one kind. The ATF didn't like it but it was impossible to track or fix.
I would not go to court with the above info and would research it completely. IMHO, YRMV etc.
Cheers,
Doc
Re: M 16 bolt car
As long as you do not have an M16 fire control group they are fine. The M16 carrier is a little heavier and in my opinion a better choice (others argue it should be even lighter than a standard semi carrier like the JP low mass set, 2 different ways to go with that). At the federal level they are not prohibited unless you also possess the parts to assemble a functional full auto gun. Ive used M16 carriers in my 2 personal ARs and it seems to smooth out the recoil impulse and help my brass not get chewed up as much as the lighter carriers.
As long as you do not have an M16 fire control group they are fine. The M16 carrier is a little heavier and in my opinion a better choice (others argue it should be even lighter than a standard semi carrier like the JP low mass set, 2 different ways to go with that). At the federal level they are not prohibited unless you also possess the parts to assemble a functional full auto gun. Ive used M16 carriers in my 2 personal ARs and it seems to smooth out the recoil impulse and help my brass not get chewed up as much as the lighter carriers.
Re: M 16 bolt car
well this is just a thought and will never happen but why couldn't the surplus m16 rifles go to the cmp with the fire control group removed instead of being melted down.
( I know this is just a pipe dream and will never happen)
cedrake
well this is just a thought and will never happen but why couldn't the surplus m16 rifles go to the cmp with the fire control group removed instead of being melted down.
( I know this is just a pipe dream and will never happen)
cedrake
Re: M 16 bolt car
Reference the below linked letter from the BATFE:
http://www.gandrtactical.com/images/archive/ATF%20M16%20Letter.pdf
Using a M16 BCG with only semi auto FCG parts is perfectly legal.
Reference the below linked letter from the BATFE:
http://www.gandrtactical.com/images/archive/ATF%20M16%20Letter.pdf
Using a M16 BCG with only semi auto FCG parts is perfectly legal.
Re: M 16 bolt car
I believe some of them get sold as parts kits without the lower (you can find M16A1 surplus parts kits), I'm pretty sure the lowers aren't available to us.
M16 bolt carriers are fine though despite those who claim the contrary (like Glen Zediker...perhaps its because he pushes the Tubb CWS for standard AR15 carriers).
You can see the law here:
http://www.atf.gov/publications/download/p/atf-p-5320-8/atf-p-5320-8-appendix-b.pdf
It says not to use them or convert them to AR15 SP1 configuration... but the law states a machine gun is parts to construct a full auto or an AR15 that fires more than 1 shot per trigger pull, just make sure you don't have sufficient parts to construct one and yours doesn't.
I believe some of them get sold as parts kits without the lower (you can find M16A1 surplus parts kits), I'm pretty sure the lowers aren't available to us.
M16 bolt carriers are fine though despite those who claim the contrary (like Glen Zediker...perhaps its because he pushes the Tubb CWS for standard AR15 carriers).
You can see the law here:
http://www.atf.gov/publications/download/p/atf-p-5320-8/atf-p-5320-8-appendix-b.pdf
It says not to use them or convert them to AR15 SP1 configuration... but the law states a machine gun is parts to construct a full auto or an AR15 that fires more than 1 shot per trigger pull, just make sure you don't have sufficient parts to construct one and yours doesn't.
Re: M 16 bolt car
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cshooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">well this is just a thought and will never happen but why couldn't the surplus m16 rifles go to the cmp with the fire control group removed instead of being melted down.
( I know this is just a pipe dream and will never happen)
cedrake</div></div>
For the same reason a Romanian PSL can't be imported with the third axis pin hole, even if it has been filled in. ATF feels it can be easily converted, though the PSL does not shoot full auto. The M16 receiver has another pin hole and could be converted very easily to full auto. I think the surplus parts should be salvaged and sent to CMP.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cshooter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">well this is just a thought and will never happen but why couldn't the surplus m16 rifles go to the cmp with the fire control group removed instead of being melted down.
( I know this is just a pipe dream and will never happen)
cedrake</div></div>
For the same reason a Romanian PSL can't be imported with the third axis pin hole, even if it has been filled in. ATF feels it can be easily converted, though the PSL does not shoot full auto. The M16 receiver has another pin hole and could be converted very easily to full auto. I think the surplus parts should be salvaged and sent to CMP.
Re: M 16 bolt car
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RUSHTA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As long as you do not have an M16 fire control group they are fine. The M16 carrier is a little heavier and in my opinion a better choice (others argue it should be even lighter than a standard semi carrier like the JP low mass set, 2 different ways to go with that). At the federal level they are not prohibited unless you also possess the parts to assemble a functional full auto gun. Ive used M16 carriers in my 2 personal ARs and it seems to smooth out the recoil impulse and help my brass not get chewed up as much as the lighter carriers.</div></div>
An individual is also prohibited from modifying a weapon with the intent of making the weapon full auto. This is very vague. However, full auto bolt carriers alone do not count.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RUSHTA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As long as you do not have an M16 fire control group they are fine. The M16 carrier is a little heavier and in my opinion a better choice (others argue it should be even lighter than a standard semi carrier like the JP low mass set, 2 different ways to go with that). At the federal level they are not prohibited unless you also possess the parts to assemble a functional full auto gun. Ive used M16 carriers in my 2 personal ARs and it seems to smooth out the recoil impulse and help my brass not get chewed up as much as the lighter carriers.</div></div>
An individual is also prohibited from modifying a weapon with the intent of making the weapon full auto. This is very vague. However, full auto bolt carriers alone do not count.
Re: M 16 bolt car
I have them in mine.
The only main difference M16 ti AR15 BCG is the fact that the bottom is machined farther on the M16 to the front to be able to contact the auto sere which releases the hammer to fire another shot unless the trigger has been released. Its all about hammer control. "Theoretically" if there were to be no dis-connector in the trigger group the hammer would still fly forward after the shot in the trigger were held down and possibly have enough momentum to cause it to fire another shot and repeat. This of course being that the primers were light. This is possible with almost any AR-15 bolt carrier group. Its a slam fire but its automatic. I have done it to prove a point with a M4 at work. It was on semi with no dis-connector and the hammer came up as expected and dented the primer really good. But M855 primers are harder for use in the M249. I am kind of tired but I will check this again in the morning to make sure it still makes sense.
I have them in mine.
The only main difference M16 ti AR15 BCG is the fact that the bottom is machined farther on the M16 to the front to be able to contact the auto sere which releases the hammer to fire another shot unless the trigger has been released. Its all about hammer control. "Theoretically" if there were to be no dis-connector in the trigger group the hammer would still fly forward after the shot in the trigger were held down and possibly have enough momentum to cause it to fire another shot and repeat. This of course being that the primers were light. This is possible with almost any AR-15 bolt carrier group. Its a slam fire but its automatic. I have done it to prove a point with a M4 at work. It was on semi with no dis-connector and the hammer came up as expected and dented the primer really good. But M855 primers are harder for use in the M249. I am kind of tired but I will check this again in the morning to make sure it still makes sense.
Re: M 16 bolt car
Reading what Redmanss posted makes me feel alot better abt the m 16 bolt carrier. MM
Reading what Redmanss posted makes me feel alot better abt the m 16 bolt carrier. MM
Re: M 16 bolt car
All of my AR's have Full Auto Colt BCG's in them.
They are the only automatic part in my guns, and I believe the heavier mass of the full auto carrier mitigates recoil just a tad.
Also, if you're concerned about the legality, Colt puts them into their 6920, and 6721's which are sold to the public.
All of my AR's have Full Auto Colt BCG's in them.
They are the only automatic part in my guns, and I believe the heavier mass of the full auto carrier mitigates recoil just a tad.
Also, if you're concerned about the legality, Colt puts them into their 6920, and 6721's which are sold to the public.
Similar threads
