View Full Version : Colt CM901 Multi-Caliber Rifle
wild_wild_wes
10-11-11, 21:27
I have not seen a discussion thread dedicated to the new Colt CM901 Multi-Caliber Rifle; it is very interesting, so I thought I would start one.
http://codlocker.weebly.com/uploads/7/6/9/4/7694729/7960008_orig.jpg
http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/5411/coltcm901arcarbinesbr55.jpg
My concern is that a rifle that can chamber 7.62 NATO, when converted to 5.56, would be inconveniently bulky; this does not really seem to be the case, judging from the pics.
What are your thoughts?
Belmont31R
10-11-11, 21:34
Really doesn't appeal to me. Its not that hard to have one gun per caliber. Im not going to be at the range, and fumble around with swapping uppers and lowers around.
Yep, I'd rather just have a 5.56 rifle and a separate .308. You can get a good quality, complete 5.56 lower for under $400.
However, another viable .308 AR that takes M16/M4 TDP specs and applies them to the larger cartridge is appealing. More options for the .308 buyer means more competition, and in the long run better quality products for the consumer.
Barrel is deal breaker for me. We've got enough precision AR7.62s. How about one that runs with the reliability of a legacy battle rifle but has the ergos of a modern AR.
Magic_Salad0892
10-12-11, 03:18
If I hadn't already invested into the KAC system, I'd choose this over anything in the market.
IMHO.
Colt Advantages: 5.56/7.62mm WEAPON SYSTEM, with full ambi lower, and if the lower right side bolt release works as a catch, then I'll say it's goddamn near perfect.
Colt Disadvantages: Monolithic upper, stupid flip up gas block sight.
KAC Advantages: Ambi lower, super light weight, most usable stock sight (tool-less!) system on the market, redesigned bolt, and gas system.
KAC Disadvantages: No right side bolt catch, not a 7.62 SYSTEM. Must have SR-25 lowers.
LMT Advantages: ... QD Barrels, good barrels?...
LMT Disadvantages: Monolithic upper, non ambi lower, non redesigned anything... nothing new really...
Colt's offering here basically makes HK, and LMT offerings look really unattractive in this price range.
I want a CM901. But not at the price of getting rid of my KAC systems.
If I was starting from scratch though?...
...
...
Maybe... ;)
3 or 4 fully operational rifles are better than one fully operational rifle with a bunch of uppers laying around .
DeltaSierra
10-12-11, 17:31
LMT Disadvantages: Monolithic upper, non ambi lower, non redesigned anything... nothing new really...
The LMT MWS actually has ambidextrous controls....
It is pretty much the same as a KAC lower...
wild_wild_wes
10-12-11, 22:21
Colt Disadvantages: Monolithic upper, stupid flip up gas block sight.
Why would you consider either of those to be disadvantages?
.
I read somewhere that I can't for the life of me recall, that the 5.56 upper to fit on the 7.62 lower required an "adapter block" be installed on the 5.56 upper.
Looking at the pictures above, I wonder if the small pouches in the gun case are for the "adapter blocks"?
Has anyone seen how these adapters work?
To me...that adapter just seems like something to lose...
But maybe it's just me...
.
Interesting concept for sure. Any ballpark idea on price yet?
Magic_Salad0892
10-13-11, 01:04
The LMT MWS actually has ambidextrous controls....
It is pretty much the same as a KAC lower...
The 7.62 gun does. The 5.56mm gun doesn't. KAC 5.56mm and 7.62mm guns do.
I've never seen an ambi 5.56mm LMT lower.
Magic_Salad0892
10-13-11, 01:09
Why would you consider either of those to be disadvantages?
I've seen somebody bust a monolithic rail in person, and they had to replace the whole upper receiver. It was a MEGA upper. They came down to fire on their side/prone stance, and they slammed the 3 O'clock rail at just the right place to bend it out of shape. It would no longer maintain zero, with a front BUIS.
MEGA did not cover it under warranty or anything.
That's retarded. They also weigh a shit ton more, and if they don't have built in anti-rotation sling swivels, you're SOL.
I mean... LMT MWS is like 9.4 lbs. WTF. NO.
Gas Block Sight disadvantages: I've shot 3 6940s from dudes at the range, and the sight was very hard to put into the up position, and it required tools to adjust.
I don't like that. That's why I run KAC Micro BUIS.
KAC, is the only company who's gas block sight I'd use. And it's still not my first choice.
I had the opportunity to shoot a few of these, and I thought that it was a very interesting lower design. I think it could be a very useful SBR. One $200 tax stamp for a 7.62 and 5.56 SBR. From what I remember, it had some sort of hybrid piston design, and felt recoil seemed very mild even under auto firing. Unfortunatly, I don't have any other specifics.
ETA: At the time (about 1 year ago) the rep was talking price around $1200-1500. I'm not sure what that included as far as uppers/conversion parts.
The Colt flip up front sight is inferior to the KAC.
The whole modular upper/barrel user change fad is a solution to a government bureaucracy property control and logistics problem and would never exist the real world.
I prefer a separate 7.62 and a separate 5.56 and I could care less about a quick change barrel.
DeltaSierra
10-13-11, 16:37
The 7.62 gun does. The 5.56mm gun doesn't. KAC 5.56mm and 7.62mm guns do.
I've never seen an ambi 5.56mm LMT lower.
Yep, that is why I specified that I was talking about the MWS... ;)
I hope Colt does not release this rifle with a heavy barrel installed. I think it will sell well regardless of the barrel type but a lighter profile barrel would be nice.
Magic_Salad0892
10-14-11, 23:22
The whole modular upper/barrel user change fad is a solution to a government bureaucracy property control and logistics problem and would never exist the real world.
I prefer a separate 7.62 and a separate 5.56 and I could care less about a quick change barrel.
I couldn't care less about the QD barrels, but I like the full ambi capability, factory camo offerings, and the ability to run 4 uppers on 2 lowers.
It is an interesting idea. I like the innovation.
To me "conversion" rifles are a lot like "all in one" hand tools.
While a socket handle that has hammer, wrench and screwdriver attachments can seem handy at first glance, the reality is that it really doesn't do most of those jobs to the full potential and it is often less frustrating to just bring along the hammer and screwdrivers.
I can't imagine any special forces types packing two additional uppers and two more ammo load outs and related parts. Guys who work with their rifles want to be able to set them up correctly the first time and do the job. They don't want to be playing games trying to reconfigure their rifle as they are doing the job.
So this kind of thing is really for the civilian shooter who wants a Lego rifle. And while I can understand why some might want a Lego rifle, I still think you are back to the "all in one" combo tool and related problems. I'd rather have a dedicated 5.56 and .308 rifle.
But as others have said, I can appreciate the innovation and design. It is ideas like this that eventually lead to more viable rifles.
Magic_Salad0892
10-15-11, 18:59
To me "conversion" rifles are a lot like "all in one" hand tools.
While a socket handle that has hammer, wrench and screwdriver attachments can seem handy at first glance, the reality is that it really doesn't do most of those jobs to the full potential and it is often less frustrating to just bring along the hammer and screwdrivers.
I can't imagine any special forces types packing two additional uppers and two more ammo load outs and related parts. Guys who work with their rifles want to be able to set them up correctly the first time and do the job. They don't want to be playing games trying to reconfigure their rifle as they are doing the job.
So this kind of thing is really for the civilian shooter who wants a Lego rifle. And while I can understand why some might want a Lego rifle, I still think you are back to the "all in one" combo tool and related problems. I'd rather have a dedicated 5.56 and .308 rifle.
But as others have said, I can appreciate the innovation and design. It is ideas like this that eventually lead to more viable rifles.
IMHO, I don't think dicking around with this gun mid-mission was part of the purpose.
I think it's simply to get one gun to do more things. And it does.
I appreciate that. I mean... that's why we love the M4 isn't it?
IMHO, I don't think dicking around with this gun mid-mission was part of the purpose.
I think it's simply to get one gun to do more things. And it does.
I appreciate that. I mean... that's why we love the M4 isn't it?
And you would be more informed than most. A lot of guys imagine a Navy SEAL running around with something like this and a backpack full of uppers.
And if it happens to float your boat, by all means go for it. I have plenty of firearms that would have a difficult time qualifying as practical.
wild_wild_wes
10-16-11, 03:26
So this kind of thing is really for the civilian shooter who wants a Lego rifle. And while I can understand why some might want a Lego rifle, I still think you are back to the "all in one" combo tool and related problems. I'd rather have a dedicated 5.56 and .308 rifle.
The modular/multi-caliber idea is derived from the SCAR program, correct? And that is a military aquisition issue, since the users wanted a new 7.62 rifle, but did not see the need for a seperate 5.56 rifle that offered no real improvement over the M4. However, a modular lower could give them 5.56 also. So perhaps the multi-caliber paradigm is just another evolutionary dead-end? Driven more by circumstance than actual operational need?
The modular/multi-caliber idea is derived from the SCAR program, correct? And that is a military aquisition issue, since the users wanted a new 7.62 rifle, but did not see the need for a seperate 5.56 rifle that offered no real improvement over the M4. However, a modular lower could give them 5.56 also. So perhaps the multi-caliber paradigm is just another evolutionary dead-end? Driven more by circumstance than actual operational need?
Could be. Honestly I'm not very researched on the SCAR program and the militaries final determinations. I basically know I still want one and that's about all.
but with anything new, would have to run it through there break-in phase.
Colt is no dummy, as we may want to think, but they are on top to the game with most everyone else, they just really don't need to change much...not yet. I remember a fer years ago, last time I was there, the GP rifle was hitting the market with all the rant and rave about how they were going to change the industry. I ask the guy there (VERY crediable source) why was Colt not looking into developing a GP system...he said to me
"who told you that...we have them ready to ship to the GOV when they make there decision that they want to go to them, don't think it will happen any time soon though"
...and it still hasn't, like they said. The HK IAR is the first real step to a GP system becoming a "GI" weapon for a branch of the MIL. Sure there are Scar's and 416 out there...but test systems, and limited OPS units. I really could see that MIL, if this thing really works out, replacing the current A4 systems and M4 systems with this thing as a "multi-capable IO/Squad weapon system". Get a few guy's with this system in a unit, but have the capability for any solider to be able to use the system just by changing a upper...and we know how long that takes...
..."if" it works, I think this will hit WAY bigger than anyone thinks right now. I want one!
Velcro
I'd be interested in selling my springefield m1a & buying one of these... if they'll ever release them. :sad:
Magic_Salad0892
10-21-11, 11:57
And you would be more informed than most. A lot of guys imagine a Navy SEAL running around with something like this and a backpack full of uppers.
And if it happens to float your boat, by all means go for it. I have plenty of firearms that would have a difficult time qualifying as practical.
I won't be getting it because 5.56mm meets all my rifle needs, and I won't be adding a caliber to the stable.
One reason I think of it this way:
Who runs around with both a CQBR upper, and DMR upper in 5.56mm?
Nobody. Why would a caliber change make that any different?
Pick the upper, and round to suit the mission. Cool part? You can do it all in one gun.
All of a sudden just because the gun changes calibers means you gotta carry like 3 or 4 uppers.
Same thing happened with the MRP series. ''I won't be carrying 3 barrels in the field, so why would I need this?!''
charmcitycop
10-23-11, 21:30
.......
patriot_man
11-15-11, 19:22
Is there a release date for the CM901?
Magic_Salad0892
11-15-11, 19:42
I agree but my understanding is that Colt chose that particular arrangement so they could use the same forging for both DI guns and their piston gun.
I wanna know what their piston design is so bad, and what the ''hybrid'' system is.
That's the million dollar question, for me.
Is there a release date for the CM901?
I've heard they'll start shipping december. I think Grant From G&R would be the best resource for this though.
crazymoose
11-17-11, 23:31
Don't give two shits about the multi-caliber capability. More interested in the fact that we'll have a presumably (fingers crossed) high-quality, non-accurized 7.62 AR for general usage. What's held me back from rifles like the OBR is that I personally have no need for the capabilities they offer (high accuracy semi-auto), and with this I won't feel like I'm burning out a high-dollar barrel for nothing when I'm shooting at two or three hundred yards with an Aimpoint. The cost of 7.62x51 hurts enough by itself.
Basically, hoping for the 7.62 equivalent of a 6920 or BCM.
This looks like a great rifle. Colt should have done this a while ago. Any idea when it is coming out?
notorious_ar15
11-21-11, 19:52
I'd like the idea if you could just throw whatever upper you wanted on there, but not sure if that's the case...
Yeah I don't understand that either. How would a 5.56 mag fit in the 7.62 mag well in the lower? I would think it would be too small. Maybe some kind of conversion?
jagdkommando
11-21-11, 20:40
Colt is telling us the 901's will ship in January.
charmcitycop
11-21-11, 23:31
........
charmcitycop
11-21-11, 23:42
........
Yeah I don't understand that either. How would a 5.56 mag fit in the 7.62 mag well in the lower? I would think it would be too small. Maybe some kind of conversion?
I would imagine it uses some sort of magwell insert like SMG style AR-15s use.
marshallwk
11-25-11, 20:35
As far as no one carrying two uppers; strange I know quite a few folks that carry a regular 14.5 and a mk18 or a mk12 and with mk18 upper. Heck if you offered every military member that is a good shooter one platform that offered a 10.5 cqb 5.56 and 16+ .308, they would take it up in a heartbeat. I know I would. For the range? Yes that would be stupid and I dou t it would sell well. It sure would beat using scar heavys just because we dont have anything else.
I definately agree on the obr's. Fantastic rifle that can shoot well. Personally id just use it as a battle rifle. This colt being full auto would be even better. Being able to roll out on a long range patrol with this one day, switch uppers and hit a compound the next would be awesome.
ComradeBoris
04-13-12, 09:16
Something I didn't see pointed out that was mentioned on lightfighter was only needing to get one SBR registered lower receiver. Alas, it would seem to be more of a convenience thing. I remain interested in the concept and have always wanted a 7.62 gun. As a college student, it seems a more affordable option if you wanted to only get paperwork done on one receiver and have the option of launching more than one caliber. I do understand that the need of several calibers for serious mission related operations seems a little hokie.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.