Battle ready Ar15

[prepare]

Since civilian versions are semi only wouldn’t that alone qualify for not meeting TDP?

[steelcore]

Colt or FN. If money is no object kac or lmt is what would interest me.

[pinzgauer]

Since civilian versions are semi only wouldn’t that alone qualify for not meeting TDP?

Missing the point. Obviously you can't have full auto prescribed parts. But can have certain ones. The 6920 walks that line properly. There are no qualitative compromises made for the 6920 versus the M4. The bcg is identical, etc. The barrel is the same steel and process, only 16 in instead of 14.5. same buffer, spring, etc.

Only a couple of parts and a couple of missing cuts and holes make it different from the M4.

The tdp is as much about processing, dimensions, finish, Etc. Colt figured it out and considered proprietary.

A few have reverse engineered much of it. Or claim to have illicit copies, now not talked about much. It started with the first clones, but certain manufacturers have gone further than others.

Other manufacturers have their own TDP that they think makes better ARs. Maybe, maybe not, depends on what you want.

FN largely has to use the TDP to make make a compliant product. Or say they did, which might be what Mistwolf referred to. Clearly they are allowed some variation or the TDP is silent in some areas, like hammer-forged barrels vs. Button rifled.

If the FN commercial rifles were like the 6920, they would be much more popular. They are not, so the people that buy them either just want the roll mark or are you okay with a rifle made from unspecified commercial parts.

FN is not stupid so you would assume there is a legal barrier preventing them from doing this. Or they just don't care.

Colt was clueless in this regard and lost with a line of lookalikes that did not sell well because they use junk parts. I don't think anyone saying the f ends have junk parts, just different parts than the mill rifles as I understand it. It would be like taking an FN, Colt or LMT receiver and barrel but building the rest of the rifle with Rock River parts.

FN manufacturer commercial FALs are beautiful and virtually identical to the military version. So they can get it right, did in the past.

Same for the original Steyr AUGs civvvy to mil.

[MikhailBarracuda91]

Last year I called FN to inquire about the military collector series rifles. The guy I spoke with told me that the upper half of the rifle was literally made on the same production lines that the US contract M4A1 and M16A4 are made on. I really grilled him. He told me they have the same exact BCG and everything.
The main difference is, although they're manufactured by the same people, on the same machines, these rifles have a different job ID for the factory workers. They're still proof tested and magnetic particle inspected, but they're just not done quite as thorough as the mil contract calls out for on the blueprint. He mentioned how they have to pull the collector series M4 off the line at a different point of assembly than the usgi ones to pin the muzzle device.
The lower receivers are manufactured at a totally different facility NOT FN (could possibly explain the incorrect rollmarks etc)

Chris Bartocci from Small Arms Solutions mentioned on a live chat that his personal military collector M4 had a barrel length of 14.5" (less than 16"overall) no matter how he measured it.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[pinzgauer]

Last year I called FN to inquire about the military collector series rifles. The guy I spoke with told me that the upper half of the rifle was literally made on the same production lines that the US contract M4A1 and M16A4 are made on. I really grilled him. He told me they have the same exact BCG and everything.

The main difference is, although they're manufactured by the same people, on the same machines, these rifles have a different job ID for the factory workers. They're still proof tested and magnetic particle inspected, but they're just not done quite as thorough as the mil contract calls out for on the blueprint. He mentioned how they have to pull the collector series M4 off the line at a different point of assembly than the usgi ones to pin the muzzle device.

Well that would be a good thing, what I would have expected. You'd think it would be a selling point.

The lower receivers are manufactured at a totally different facility NOT FN (could possibly explain the incorrect rollmarks etc)

I'm fuzzy on this but from memory I recall there were differences in fire control group manufacturer, buffer tube, buffer, etc.

The difference should only be a few changes in the lower receiver itself and some omitted parts in the fire control group. Everything else should be the same. And specifically don't just OEM a complete lower from another builder with no FN parts. (Granted, FN probably contracts their small parts like others including colt)

Then you would have the equivalent of a 6920 to Colt M4.