Liberal Forum

Skans » 16 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

16 minutes ago

LOL - not me. 

Why do you say stuff like this?  It isn't true. Many of the earlier Colt semi-auto rifles had a number of hidden differences which made them quite different from an M16. 

• The upper receiver was missing an internally milled groove
• The push-pin holes were misaligned and a different size from the M16 - made it difficult to replace the upper receiver with an M16 upper
• Different bolt carrier - wouldn't allow full-auto fire even if you milled the lower to accept the auto-sear
• Different fire control parts
• Different milling on the lower receiver.

Then, in the 1980's, Colt blind-pinned "blocks" in their lower receivers so that you couldn't use a DIAS to convert it to full auto. 

You would have sounded smarter if you said "AR's built on modern receiver-sets are much closer to the M4 (modern M16) rifles used by the Military than were the early Colt semi-auto rifles".  Colt actually went to substantial lengths to make sure that the AR's they built were rather difficult to make into M16's.

I don't care what you THINK it does. I'm telling you the actual facts here. 

They were separately designed.  Colt actually redesigned the upper and lower receivers to prevent them from using M16 parts.  Some work-arounds came much later, but they were not manufactured by Colt. 

You really don't.  In fact, you really don't even have a clue.  And, I can tell that you've only ever read about the AR-15, you've never handled one, never disassembled them and know next to nothing about the different variants and manufacturers.  

PS: - This is why you didn't take my pink gun test, isn't it.