Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 71

Thread: M4/CQBR Clone, too soon to be retro?

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Posts
    1,594
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by albatrossarmament View Post
    Ahh ok gotcha. Who type classified that? Because the mil has separate NSN's for the two?
    Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Division
    "A Bad Day At The Range Is Better Than A Great Day Working"

    USMC Force Recon 1978-1984
    US Air Force Res. 1995-2004 (Air Transportation)
    M16/AR15 shooter since 1978, gun collector and AR builder since 2004

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    151
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Been a while, waiting for the Form 1 to arrive, but I've made progress. Got rid of most of the PSA parts and went with Colt. Below is a current build list, I'm now thinking about optics...

    Mk18/CQBR build

    RAS hand guard
    KAC forward grip and panel covers
    10.3” Colt 6920 barrel chopped by Adco
    Colt upper
    Colt bolt/carrier assy
    Colt LPK
    PRI gas-buster charging handle
    Surefire 952 weapon light with IR filter
    Chopped A2 rear sight
    KAC NT4 suppressor mount
    CQD rear sling mount
    CQD sling
    CAR stock
    4 Pos receiver extension
    H2 buffer
    Colt/BI lower on form1
    Colt A2 grip



    Future mods:
    Optic/mount
    UID tag
    Modify selector and remove “tic”














    Last edited by albatrossarmament; 04-25-17 at 14:55.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Posts
    1,594
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Nice build. I will say to not worry about removing the tic from the selector since you have it on an A2 lower. If you had the correct A1 full-fence lower, I would say to get a M16 no-tic selector and remove the center fin from it. That is what I have done with my Mk18 Mod 0. I have a Nodak Spud NDS-16A1 lower on mine.
    "A Bad Day At The Range Is Better Than A Great Day Working"

    USMC Force Recon 1978-1984
    US Air Force Res. 1995-2004 (Air Transportation)
    M16/AR15 shooter since 1978, gun collector and AR builder since 2004

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    151
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Thanks Renegade. As you know, these "clone" builds can take time but are an excellent way to learn the details of how a particular model was developed.

    You are right, on the true Mk18 Mod0 and A1 forging would be used. However, on the CQBR (which I must admit is the direction I am going at this point) was built on M4A1 donor lowers (which would be A2 forgings)

    As for the "tic" vs "no tic" discussion, it is my understanding that even the A2/M4 lowers that were military issue did not have the tic marks on the selector, later they were marked " burst/auto/semi/safe" on the opposite side but never had the corresponding tic mark on the selector. This was a change submitted by Chris Bartocci at Colt that for whatever reason, was only partially approved (ie the markings on the lower but not on the selector). So even a CQBR clone (built on an M4A1 lower) would not have the tic mark on the selector.

    Am I wrong or am I missing something?

  5. #55
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    317
    Feedback Score
    0
    thats an old colt lower it's not marked colt defense
    "Guns are tools; people are the real weapons!"
    - Anonymous
    "The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it."
    - Albert Einstein
    “An armed society is a polite society.”
    - Robert Heinlein

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    360
    Feedback Score
    21 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by albatrossarmament View Post
    waiting for the Form 1 to arrive, but I've made progress.
    Don't mean to be "that" guy, but if you're waiting for your Form 1, shouldn't you at least have the upper removed from the lower?
    Last edited by amd5007; 04-26-17 at 08:44.
    Quote Originally Posted by RichDC2 View Post
    That rifle has won trophies for its game face alone!

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    151
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by amd5007 View Post
    Don't mean to be "that" guy, but if you're waiting for your Form 1, shouldn't you at least have the upper removed from the lower?
    Haha, what I meant to say was, "Its been a while BECAUSE I was waiting on the Form 1 to arrive"... This was my 11th stamp.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Posts
    1,594
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by albatrossarmament View Post
    Thanks Renegade. As you know, these "clone" builds can take time but are an excellent way to learn the details of how a particular model was developed.

    You are right, on the true Mk18 Mod0 and A1 forging would be used. However, on the CQBR (which I must admit is the direction I am going at this point) was built on M4A1 donor lowers (which would be A2 forgings)

    As for the "tic" vs "no tic" discussion, it is my understanding that even the A2/M4 lowers that were military issue did not have the tic marks on the selector, later they were marked " burst/auto/semi/safe" on the opposite side but never had the corresponding tic mark on the selector. This was a change submitted by Chris Bartocci at Colt that for whatever reason, was only partially approved (ie the markings on the lower but not on the selector). So even a CQBR clone (built on an M4A1 lower) would not have the tic mark on the selector.

    Am I wrong or am I missing something?
    From all that I have seen, M16A2s, M4s, and some earlier M4A1s had selectors with a tic mark on them. This coincided with the markings on the right side of the receiver. These and the tic on the selector were primarily for the benefit of the left-handed shooters. Most of the later M4A1s has ambi-selectors them. Typically, if it had an A2 lower, it had a selector with a tic mark. Now, Colt has been renowned for using whatever parts they have on hand in order to complete production. There may very well have been some M16A2s and M4s with no-tic selectors. Whether it had a tic or not made no difference in function. The sear made the difference between a weapon firing full-auto or 3-round burst.

    I have seen Mk18 CQBRs (all Blocks) and M4 and M4A1 SOPMODs (all Blocks), with M4 (BURST) and M4A1 (AUTO) lowers, with and without ambi-selectors. All the ones I have seen without ambi-selectors had selectors with a tic mark. The Mk18 CQBRs built on M16A1 lowers will have had a no-tic selector.
    "A Bad Day At The Range Is Better Than A Great Day Working"

    USMC Force Recon 1978-1984
    US Air Force Res. 1995-2004 (Air Transportation)
    M16/AR15 shooter since 1978, gun collector and AR builder since 2004

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    151
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade04 View Post
    From all that I have seen, M16A2s, M4s, and some earlier M4A1s had selectors with a tic mark on them. This coincided with the markings on the right side of the receiver. These and the tic on the selector were primarily for the benefit of the left-handed shooters. Most of the later M4A1s has ambi-selectors them. Typically, if it had an A2 lower, it had a selector with a tic mark. Now, Colt has been renowned for using whatever parts they have on hand in order to complete production. There may very well have been some M16A2s and M4s with no-tic selectors. Whether it had a tic or not made no difference in function. The sear made the difference between a weapon firing full-auto or 3-round burst.

    I have seen Mk18 CQBRs (all Blocks) and M4 and M4A1 SOPMODs (all Blocks), with M4 (BURST) and M4A1 (AUTO) lowers, with and without ambi-selectors. All the ones I have seen without ambi-selectors had selectors with a tic mark. The Mk18 CQBRs built on M16A1 lowers will have had a no-tic selector.
    Having reviewed many pics since my last post, I must agree. Tic selectors are common on the M4 lowers...I must have misunderstood Chris' statement. This is good news, less work for me! Thanks for the input renegade, its much appreciated.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Gulf Coast Texas
    Posts
    423
    Feedback Score
    0
    My 6920 does not have the ambi selector, purchased in 2012.

    My AR15A4 does, purchased in 11-2016.
    Never forget every word you spoke when you took your oath of office.

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •