Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 41

Thread: LEcarbine vs M4carbine

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    S.E. Texas
    Posts
    89
    Feedback Score
    0
    The cheaper of the two. Being as that there is zero mechanical difference between the two, there is no reason whatsoever to pay extra for the rollmark. Although, at one time that was sort of "en vogue" to do so.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    2,057
    Feedback Score
    5 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by HMsailor View Post
    which one would you choose? i know the LE version has the "restricted" markings. would you spend extra for the markings?
    I would be willing to pay 50-75$ more to NOT have these nonsense markings.

    Why would anybody want a rifle marked with a "restriction" when they are not in fact restricted, nor do actual restricted guns like real M4s say restricted on them.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,343
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by albatrossarmament View Post

    I much prefer the "For Civilian Use Only" marked rifles.
    My preference . . .







    ....
    All that is necessary for trolls to flourish, is for good men to do nothing.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    9,209
    Feedback Score
    47 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Molon View Post
    My preference . . .







    ....
    That, right there, is out****ingstanding!

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    819
    Feedback Score
    5 (86%)
    I would not pay more for it. I happen to have one of the restricted marked LMT lowers; it happened to be available at a time when there was talk of a new state ban.

    I don't hate the marking, but I can care less if it's there.

    Does anyone know if LMT uses these markings for actual gov/le rifles, or is it just purely for show?

    I know that they are in fact not restricted, but what I want to know is if this an actual marking intended for lowers going out to LE.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    VA/OH
    Posts
    29,630
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    We just received a fresh batch of LE6920's if interested. ;-)


    http://www.gandrtactical.com/cgi-bin...ction&key=6920



    C4

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    12,722
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    I have an old 6920 back when you had to send in letterhead.
    And I have another plain AR. The markings really do nothing but inspire fat weirdos at the range to question the 'legality' of your rifle or some kid fresh out of the academy "demanding" to know how you got a 'Cop M4'.

    Or the buzzcut Tackleberry doing a "Terry Inventory" "for your safety and mine" during a DUI/Seatbelt/papers please checkpoint seeing the words RESTRICTED LE/MILITARY/EXPORT USE ONLY....

    That blasted engraving has inspired so much stupidity out of what should be right-thinking, educated people who probably know better but somehow don't.

    Back inna day it was pretty much a status symbol that you had a brand spanking new Colt. Now anyone can get one and will pay extra. To me, it is a relic of a hopefully bygone time of the Federal ban where somehow a department sign off made you "more equal" enough to enjoy the simple pleasure of a collapsible stock, bayo lug, and flash hider.

    If you found a marked one in new condition for the same as a stock 6920, have at it. But paying 400 more for some stupid words would be woefully lame.

    FWIW, I'd never part with mine just because I've had it forever and it shoots how I like it to shoot.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    12,722
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by TMS951 View Post
    I would be willing to pay 50-75$ more to NOT have these nonsense markings.

    Why would anybody want a rifle marked with a "restriction" when they are not in fact restricted, nor do actual restricted guns like real M4s say restricted on them.
    I don't know about current catalog, but I know back in 2003 there were brand spanking new select fire Colt M4s with the restricted markings. So they do exist. Not trying to be 'that guy'.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    XXX
    Posts
    1,851
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Watrdawg View Post
    Why pay the extra money for verbiage? I can put it to better use elsewhere.
    More to color in !!!

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    556
    Feedback Score
    10 (100%)
    I have had my "restricted" rollmark Colt since 2005 when there really wasn't much of an option for anything else for a 6920. At least in my neck of the woods.

    Not to be a dick, but maybe find a new range? Or flip the gun over to the unmarked side, put it in case when not used, or my personal favorite strategy, tell the nosy neighbor to mind his (or her) own you-know-what business? I have never had anyone question me about my gun. Ever. Here or the libtard states next to me when it has gone with me to the range or for training.

    OP; to answer your question, not worth the money or necessary with the same non-marked lower readily available these days.


    Quote Originally Posted by Firefly View Post
    I have an old 6920 back when you had to send in letterhead.
    And I have another plain AR. The markings really do nothing but inspire fat weirdos at the range to question the 'legality' of your rifle or some kid fresh out of the academy "demanding" to know how you got a 'Cop M4'

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... 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
  •