View Full Version : Milspec AR15
rcoodyar15
02-20-21, 04:16
Now don't get me wrong. I am glad they did it. If the AR15 didn't use milspec specifications then we wouldn't be able to mix and match parts from all these different manufacturers.
But, since the AR15 was for the civilian market and not ever issued to the military why was it 8manufactured milspec.
Now this is a technical question for someone who knows the history of the AR15's development.
My theory is since the manufacturers were already set up to produce the m16 then it only made sense to produce a civilian semiautomatic version with basically the same parts.
Is the only difference really the fire control system?
The first civilian AR15 was the Colt SP1, which was essentially a semi automatic M16. M16 is the military designation, and AR15 was the original Armalite designation, AR being their abbreviation for Armalite.
Yes, the only substantive difference between a civilian/LE AR15 and a military M4 is the lower receiver and fire control group. Now that's Colt, mind you. Obviously you have a plethora of AR variants that are way off the reservation, where virtually nothing is interchangeable.
The original design is pretty much intact, with only a few minor updates. The largest of which was the flat top upper. There are more subtle changes that were made over the years, like the feed ramps being slightly tweaked.
Bottom line is that the AR-15 existed before the military M-16. Colt did not make a civilian version of the M-16; the DoD type-classified the AR-15 as the M-16.
Andy
Minor correction for clarity
Is the only difference really the fire control system?
On a good gun, Yes. That and the internal milling of the lower receiver, and one less hole reamed for the auto sear.
On a good gun, Yes. That and the internal milling of the lower receiver, and one less hole reamed for the auto sear.
If you get a low shelf receiver, the internal milling isn’t really different.
But, since the AR15 was for the civilian market and not ever issued to the military why was it 8manufactured milspec.
What are you talking about? You are making the back end of my brain pan hurt ...
What are you talking about? You are making the back end of my brain pan hurt ...
You have to play the name game semantics. The AR15 was never issued to the military. The M16 was. Totally different. Completely. Couldn’t be any more different.
It’s just intellectual dishonesty.
The_War_Wagon
02-20-21, 16:09
Are you familiar with, "The Chart," perchance? :rolleyes:
Bottom line is that the civilian AR-15 existed before the military M-16. Colt did not make a civilian version of the M-16; they made a miitary version of the AR-15
Andy
You have to play the name game semantics. The AR15 was never issued to the military. The M16 was. Totally different. Completely. Couldn’t be any more different.
It’s just intellectual dishonesty.
Let's get a few things straight:
1) The original AR-15, as designed and built by Armalite was a select-fire weapon, and there for not "a civilian version".
2) The later Colt's Manufacturing examples of "XM16"s were identical to the AR-15 in every way, except for the Marking of "XM16", and "US Property" markings.
3) The AR-15 was purchased and issued to "the military", Malaya bought some, the US Army bought some for testing, and a number (1000 to be exact) were given the Republic of Vietnam for issue to their troops and US Advisors.
4) The semi-automatic version of the "AR-15" came about after the events of item #3, so the "civilian version" post-dates the "military version".
Let's get a few things straight:
1) The original AR-15, as designed and built by Armalite was a select-fire weapon, and there for not "a civilian version".
2) The later Colt's Manufacturing examples of "XM16"s were identical to the AR-15 in every way, except for the Marking of "XM16", and "US Property" markings.
3) The AR-15 was purchased and issued to "the military", the US Army bought a number for testing, and a number (1000 to be exact) were given the Republic of Vietnam for issue to their troops and US Advisors.
4) The semi-automatic version of the "AR-15" came about after the events of item #3, so the "civilian version" post-dates the "military version".
Big facts right there. And most of my post was supposed to be dripping with sarcasm in case that didn’t convey.
If you want to play at semantics, there is technically no such thing as "milspec". There is the technical data package or TDP, which describes in intimate detail the specifications of each model of firearm accepted by the government. It is a huge amount of information covering dimensions, procedures, materials, tolerances,... ad infinitum.
In terms of civilian AR-15s, none of them meet the TDP 100%. If they did they would be select fire M-16s, or M-4s. When something is said to be "milspec" that means it is built as close as possible to the TDP. Many parts of an AR can be 100% compliant with the TDP. Some cannot, like the FCG, but can be manufactured as closely as possible to that standard. That is really all that is important. If an AR is built as closely as possible to the TDP, then one can have a degree of confidence in the construction of that AR. Your would expect certain criteria to be met.
That does not mean that TDP is the only measure of quality, let alone the pinnacle of perfection. A KAC SR-15 deviates from the TDP in a number of areas. I would not say that makes it "substandard". Though as a general rule, most deviation from TDP is not for the better.
Deviation from TDP can be good or bad, and TDP rifles certainly do go down. All it does is provide a standard reference to compare against.
Jeez, even wiki has more facts than this thread.
PracticalRifleman
02-20-21, 17:11
Let's get a few things straight:
1) The original AR-15, as designed and built by Armalite was a select-fire weapon, and there for not "a civilian version".
2) The later Colt's Manufacturing examples of "XM16"s were identical to the AR-15 in every way, except for the Marking of "XM16", and "US Property" markings.
3) The AR-15 was purchased and issued to "the military", Malaya bought some, the US Army bought some for testing, and a number (1000 to be exact) were given the Republic of Vietnam for issue to their troops and US Advisors.
4) The semi-automatic version of the "AR-15" came about after the events of item #3, so the "civilian version" post-dates the "military version".
What about the AR15, the original as designed by Armalite, disqualified it from civilian purchase at the time?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If you want to play at semantics, there is technically no such thing as "milspec". There is the technical data package or TDP, which describes in intimate detail the specifications of each model of firearm accepted by the government. It is a huge amount of information covering dimensions, procedures, materials, tolerances,... ad infinitum.
In terms of civilian AR-15s, none of them meet the TDP 100%. If they did they would be select fire M-16s, or M-4s. When something is said to be "milspec" that means it is built as close as possible to the TDP. Many parts of an AR can be 100% compliant with the TDP. Some cannot, like the FCG, but can be manufactured as closely as possible to that standard. That is really all that is important. If an AR is built as closely as possible to the TDP, then one can have a degree of confidence in the construction of that AR. Your would expect certain criteria to be met.
That does not mean that TDP is the only measure of quality, let alone the pinnacle of perfection. A KAC SR-15 deviates from the TDP in a number of areas. I would not say that makes it "substandard". Though as a general rule, most deviation from TDP is not for the better.
Deviation from TDP can be good or bad, and TDP rifles certainly do go down. All it does is provide a standard reference to compare against.
Actually, there is a "military specification", at least four that I am aware of, six if you include the M4 series.
MIL-R-45587 - Rifles, 5.56mm: M16 and M16A1
MIL-R-63997 - Rifle, 5.56mm: M16A2
MIL-R-41135 - Rifle, 5.56mm: M16A2E3
MIL-DTL-32309 - Rifle, 5.56mm: M16A4
MIL-C-70599 - Carbine, 5.56mm: M4
MIL-C-71186 - Carbine, 5.56mm: M4A1
All rifles, carbines, and parts made in accordance with these specifications are "mil-spec". There can be "mil-spec" parts sold on the civilian market, if they are made in strict accordance with the military/Colt drawings, and tested in accordance with the applicable specification. However, since the drawings are proprietary to Colt's, and the military drawing can only be used for Government contracts, the only (legal) civilian source for "mil-spec" parts would be Colt's or a Colt's licensed producer. I mean, how else could you get access to Colt's proprietary drawings?
What about the AR15, the original as designed by Armalite, disqualified it from civilian purchase at the time?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nothing but intent.
Armalite never tried to market the AR-15 to the civilian sector, it only when after military contracts, both foreign and US.
Colt followed suit, until it had secured a military contract.
Actually, there is a "military specification", at least four that I am aware of, six if you include the M4 series.
MIL-R-45587 - Rifles, 5.56mm: M16 and M16A1
MIL-R-63997 - Rifle, 5.56mm: M16A2
MIL-R-41135 - Rifle, 5.56mm: M16A2E3
MIL-DTL-32309 - Rifle, 5.56mm: M16A4
MIL-C-70599 - Carbine, 5.56mm: M4
MIL-C-71186 - Carbine, 5.56mm: M4A1
All rifles, carbines, and parts made in accordance with these specifications are "mil-spec". There can be "mil-spec" parts sold on the civilian market, if they are made in strict accordance with the military/Colt drawings, and tested in accordance with the applicable specification. However, since the drawings are proprietary to Colt's, and the military drawing can only be used for Government contracts, the only (legal) civilian source for "mil-spec" parts would be Colt's or a Colt's licensed producer. I mean, how else could you get access to Colt's proprietary drawings?
A Czechoslovakian honeypot?
rcoodyar15
02-20-21, 19:04
Just what I was looking for. Keep it going.
The ar15 was originally a military issue and not intended for the civilian market.
Learn something every day
Now don't get me wrong. I am glad they did it. If the AR15 didn't use milspec specifications then we wouldn't be able to mix and match parts from all these different manufacturers.
But, since the AR15 was for the civilian market and not ever issued to the military why was it 8manufactured milspec.
Now this is a technical question for someone who knows the history of the AR15's development.
My theory is since the manufacturers were already set up to produce the m16 then it only made sense to produce a civilian semiautomatic version with basically the same parts.
Is the only difference really the fire control system?
There is not a universal size for commercial parts, each vendor would build to there own specs and commercial parts do not interchange. Now when a manufacturer builds mil spec parts with little variance between them, you will have a nice tight build. This is why when building a precision rifle you would want matched upper / lower and a matched barrel from a manufacturers that has great QC.
This is why there is a difference when building a rifle with parts from geissele vs parts from Anderson even when it’s just the receivers.
From the start AR-15s were select fire rifles intended for combat. A brief history:
- July 1960: Gen Curtis LeMay shoots the AR-15 at a 4th of July party and orders 80,000 for the USAF. That order doesn’t get approved.
- Oct 1961: 10 AR-15s are tested by the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) in Viet Nam
- Jan 1962 ARPA received the first of 1,000 AR-15s for U.S Advisors and VN soldiers. 965 of those are used in combat against the Viet Congress through out 1962.
- May 1962: The first purchase of the AR-15 for the USAF, 8,500 rifles, is approved. It is part of an order that included 20,000 AR-15 for USN SEALs.
- 1963 USAF receives an additional 18,000 AR-15s.
- Oct 1963: first pre-production run of the XM16E1.
- Dec 1963: BATF approves of the sale of the semi-auto AR-15 to civilians.
- Jan 1964: Colt begins sale of the Model R6000 Colt AR-15 SP1 Sporter Rifle to civilians.
The above is from The Black Rifle by Steven Ezell and AR-15 Vol I Second Edition by Larry Vickers & James Rupley
PracticalRifleman
02-20-21, 19:27
Just what I was looking for. Keep it going.
The ar15 was originally a military issue and not intended for the civilian market.
Learn something every day
No. The AR15 was originally intended to make a profit. Initial pursuit of profit was through the avenue of contracts.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
JD Williams
02-20-21, 20:52
No. The AR15 was originally intended to make a profit. Initial pursuit of profit was through the avenue of contracts.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Lol. How droll and correct...gun companies like making guns but probably like making money more...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
From the start AR-15s were select fire rifles intended for combat. A brief history:
- July 1960: Gen Curtis LeMay shoots the AR-15 at a 4th of July party and orders 80,000 for the USAF. That order doesn’t get approved.
- Oct 1961: 10 AR-15s are tested by the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) in Viet Nam
- Jan 1962 ARPA received the first of 1,000 AR-15s for U.S Advisors and VN soldiers. 965 of those are used in combat against the Viet Congress through out 1962.
- May 1962: The first purchase of the AR-15 for the USAF, 8,500 rifles, is approved. It is part of an order that included 20,000 AR-15 for USN SEALs.
- 1963 USAF receives an additional 18,000 AR-15s.
- Oct 1963: first pre-production run of the XM16E1.
- Dec 1963: BATF approves of the sale of the semi-auto AR-15 to civilians.
- Jan 1964: Colt begins sale of the Model R6000 Colt AR-15 SP1 Sporter Rifle to civilians.
The above is from The Black Rifle by Steven Ezell and AR-15 Vol I Second Edition by Larry Vickers & James Rupley
You started a little late. And, the AR-15 very existence is due to a question from a General . . .
- 1956(?): General Willard Wyman (Commanding General, CONARC) asks Armalite if a "scaled down" version of the AR-10 was possible after reading an Aberdeen report on Small Caliber High Velocity (SCHV) tests and Armalite's AR-11 "Stoppette". The answer is "We can try..."
- May 1957: CONARC request 10 AR-15 (in .222 Remington) for US Army Infantry Board (USAIB) SCHV trials.
- Nov 1957: The AR-15, now in .222 "Special" (later .223 Remington) is tested against the Winchester's "Light Weight Military Rifle" in .224 Winchester.
- Mar 1958: The USAIB recommends several changes to the AR-15 that will result in the configuration of the first M16s, namely, redesigned trigger, charging handle, a flash hider, dust cover, 20 round magazine.
- Dec 1958: Arctic test of the AR-15 by CONARC.
- Feb 1959: the results of the SCHV test are published. (Around this time Remington introduces its "new" commercial cartridge, the .223 Remington).
- Feb 1959: Armalite sells the design of the AR-15 and all associated IP to Colt's Manufacturing for the princely sum of $75,000 and 4.5% royalty on all future production.
- 1959: Colt begins aggressive marketing of the AR-15 around the world.
- Dec 1959: Colt's completes production of the first 300 AR-15s (Colt's Model 601). Most of these were exported for trials in other countries.
Just what I was looking for. Keep it going.
The ar15 was originally a military issue and not intended for the civilian market.
Learn something every day
Here’s some pics of 3 (rather old) M16A2s borrowed from the CNARNG and USAR marked “Colt AR-15” to further confuse you: https://imgur.com/a/069aqj0
IIRC, at least one of them started life as an A1.
You started a little late. And, the AR-15 very existence is due to a question from a General . . .
- 1956(?): General Willard Wyman (Commanding General, CONARC) asks Armalite if a "scaled down" version of the AR-10 was possible after reading an Aberdeen report on Small Caliber High Velocity (SCHV) tests and Armalite's AR-11 "Stoppette". The answer is "We can try..."
- May 1957: CONARC request 10 AR-15 (in .222 Remington) for US Army Infantry Board (USAIB) SCHV trials.
- Nov 1957: The AR-15, now in .222 "Special" (later .223 Remington) is tested against the Winchester's "Light Weight Military Rifle" in .224 Winchester.
- Mar 1958: The USAIB recommends several changes to the AR-15 that will result in the configuration of the first M16s, namely, redesigned trigger, charging handle, a flash hider, dust cover, 20 round magazine.
- Dec 1958: Arctic test of the AR-15 by CONARC.
- Feb 1959: the results of the SCHV test are published. (Around this time Remington introduces its "new" commercial cartridge, the .223 Remington).
- Feb 1959: Armalite sells the design of the AR-15 and all associated IP to Colt's Manufacturing for the princely sum of $75,000 and 4.5% royalty on all future production.
- 1959: Colt begins aggressive marketing of the AR-15 around the world.
- Dec 1959: Colt's completes production of the first 300 AR-15s (Colt's Model 601). Most of these were exported for trials in other countries.
I did indeed. Excellent addition.
bamashooter
02-21-21, 08:22
https://i.imgur.com/YUugBcZ.jpg
Here’s some pics of 3 (rather old) M16A2s borrowed from the CNARNG and USAR marked “Colt AR-15” to further confuse you: https://imgur.com/a/069aqj0
IIRC, at least one of them started life as an A1.
The Colt's Model 602, as purchased by the USAF, and as described in USAF Technical Manual 50-12 (note the complete absence of "M16" markings):
https://i.imgur.com/CNCmHDi.png
The early XM16/M16s all were marked "Colt AR-15". Colt's dropped the "AR-15" somewhere around the 900,000 to 1,000,000 serial number.
https://i.imgur.com/Cq6nMHB.png
Never happened... from my own pic series, but no, I'm not the one who played with chalk.
https://64.media.tumblr.com/ac7934a0dda905ae788b683fe086125d/800468dba4009750-47/s1280x1920/fb734df886875853da4ff02e77fe96258629df70.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/YUugBcZ.jpg
ahh, a picture of the guy who killed JFK.
If you are talking about the guy with the AR, I agree.
99cobra2881
02-26-21, 05:09
- Jan 1962 ARPA received the first of 1,000 AR-15s for U.S Advisors and VN soldiers. 965 of those are used in combat against the Viet Congress through out 1962.
Viet Congress
That gem of a word salad is the best thing in this whole thread.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.