New Colt M4A1 Socoms...yay or nay?

[Disciple]

As a side not, I just ordered a Colt trigger from Armsunlimitted and it's marked F4. Came in a package with all Colt's branding and everything. No S anywhere I can see. Internet search is saying they're mim parts from India???

Those are the ones that were recalled, right?

[c_rion]

They were super transparent about it at that time. They let writers into the factory to see the single assembly line for themselves, and indeed they were pulling parts from the same bins regardless whether it was an M4 or 6920, regardless of who the end user was. Employees from that era have also confirmed it.

There are also no distinguishing marks that would make a contract BCG to where it could be differentiated from a commercially sold one. In other words, they couldn't have been up to anything, because the risk of putting a non TDP part in a contract rifle was too high. Basically the way the line was set up and the way the parts were marked you just knew beyond any doubt you were getting the same parts as the guys in Iraq. Whether you were a green beret or a dirt shooter you were getting the same stuff. That's basically unheard of, so it was a big deal when they did it, that was much publicized back then.

The only differences were the barrels and FCGs. But the barrel blanks were the same, and they were also supplying 16 inch barrels and SA FCGs to police and even foreign military who didn't want grunts to have giggle switches. For example, Mexico's DoD orders at least some of their M4s in semi with 16 inch barrels. They're even marked LE6920 and have any random roll mark that Colt is doing whenever the order gets placed.

But with the markings not consistent with TDP, you know two things now. First of all, those parts can't be put in contract guns. Second, that they have two lines, obviously, because they couldn't risk getting those parts mixed up. Ergo, our stuff can't be coming out of the same bin anymore. So they apparently have a bin of parts for the government and another one for us lowly civilians.

The sub contracted stuff might be okay, I don't know. If it were though, they wouldn't really have any good reason to not put the correct markings on it. The fact that they're not would indicate those can't go in contract rifles and therefore implies they're not TDP, which would mean less quality control, less testing, etc. Like there's literally zero plausible excuse to have two separate lines, unless they're skipping steps on our stuff to save money. That's the bottom line.

ETA: Also couldn't really care less about the FSB. It's the BCGs I'm most concerned with, followed by the barrels. I'm also not opposed to them sub contracting whatever they want, as long as it's done the right way, i.e. according to the TDP.

How, exactly, were they "Pulling parts from the same bins whether the gun was an M4 or a 6920" when %50 of the parts in a 6920 are and always have been different ( Hammer, Trigger, Disconnector, Safety/Selector, Barrel, Lower Receiver, pre 2011 FCG pins ,and pre 2011 semi auto cut bolt carriers) from the M4? That does not even pass the smell test. %50 of the parts used in a 6920 are completely different from the M4 and must be kept separate from M4 parts. Do you know how one of these rifles is made? One container bin is assigned to an employee, who picks all of the parts for one weapon( Be it an M4, M16A4, 6920, 6720, etc) and throws all of the parts for that one weapon into that one bin. Then that one bin with all of the parts that are picked for that one weapon goes down a line and each employee on that line (actually called an assembly cell) assembles their part of that one weapon out of the one bin that contains all of the parts picked for that one weapon. One bin full of parts=one rifle. If the rifle is a 6920, semi auto non TDP parts are all picked and piled into that one bin. If the weapon it is an M4, Full auto TDP spec parts are picked and put into that one bin for assembly into that one weapon. Then those parts in that one bin go down a line and are assembled into a complete weapon. A line of workers pulling parts out of bins stacked full of parts in front of them at their workstation is not how these rifles are made. Also, could you point me to one of the super transparent statements by Colt MFG that Semi Auto 6920 rifles conformed to the "TDP"? Also,what markings does the TDP require for semi auto spec parts? Lastly, Colt pistol grips currently and Fiberlite telestocks in the past have had the same F followed by a number mold marks, just like the current hammers. Is it more likely that Colt bought FCG components for semi auto non TDP spec 6920 rifles from an unknown source, or is it more likely that colt went to a trusted supplier of other parts currently used on the rifle, and sourced FCGs from that supplier for use in rifles at a time that Schmid could not keep up with demand. Is it more likely that a manufacturer just happens to use the same exact mold marking system on their hammers that the same contractor has always used on other parts of Colt rifles, or that a different unrelated MFG uses the same mold marking system as a current Colt supplier for other parts of the rifle? The bottom line here is, %50 of the parts in the 6920 in no way conforms to the TDP and never have, Colt has always subcontracted parts, and markings put on parts by Colt previously were a Colt thing, not a TDP thing.

[DG23]

As a side not, I just ordered a Colt trigger from Armsunlimitted and it's marked F4. Came in a package with all Colt's branding and everything. No S anywhere I can see. Internet search is saying they're mim parts from India???

Specialized Armament is where you want to be shopping for that sort of stuff.

If I had bought Colt parts and received what you did it would have already been returned...

FWIW - Appreciate some of your thoughts / comments here in this thread. Very well thought out and written up replies with plain and simple facts.

[okie]

How, exactly, were they "Pulling parts from the same bins whether the gun was an M4 or a 6920" when %50 of the parts in a 6920 are and always have been different ( Hammer, Trigger, Disconnector, Safety/Selector, Barrel, Lower Receiver, pre 2011 FCG pins ,and pre 2011 semi auto cut bolt carriers) from the M4? That does not even pass the smell test. %50 of the parts used in a 6920 are completely different from the M4 and must be kept separate from M4 parts. Do you know how one of these rifles is made? One container bin is assigned to an employee, who picks all of the parts for one weapon( Be it an M4, M16A4, 6920, 6720, etc) and throws all of the parts for that one weapon into that one bin. Then that one bin with all of the parts that are picked for that one weapon goes down a line and each employee on that line (actually called an assembly cell) assembles their part of that one weapon out of the one bin that contains all of the parts picked for that one weapon. One bin full of parts=one rifle. If the rifle is a 6920, semi auto non TDP parts are all picked and piled into that one bin. If the weapon it is an M4, Full auto TDP spec parts are picked and put into that one bin for assembly into that one weapon. Then those parts in that one bin go down a line and are assembled into a complete weapon. A line of workers pulling parts out of bins stacked full of parts in front of them at their workstation is not how these rifles are made. Also, could you point me to one of the super transparent statements by Colt MFG that Semi Auto 6920 rifles conformed to the "TDP"? Also,what markings does the TDP require for semi auto spec parts? Lastly, Colt pistol grips currently and Fiberlite telestocks in the past have had the same F followed by a number mold marks, just like the current hammers. Is it more likely that Colt bought FCG components for semi auto non TDP spec 6920 rifles from an unknown source, or is it more likely that colt went to a trusted supplier of other parts currently used on the rifle, and sourced FCGs from that supplier for use in rifles at a time that Schmid could not keep up with demand. Is it more likely that a manufacturer just happens to use the same exact mold marking system on their hammers that the same contractor has always used on other parts of Colt rifles, or that a different unrelated MFG uses the same mold marking system as a current Colt supplier for other parts of the rifle? The bottom line here is, %50 of the parts in the 6920 in no way conforms to the TDP and never have, Colt has always subcontracted parts, and markings put on parts by Colt previously were a Colt thing, not a TDP thing.

A former Colt employee from that era has several long, detailed videos on the subject so I'm not going to type out pages of painful detail when you can just go and watch his video (or any one of the other ten thousand on this subject).

The trigger I just ordered though is a good example of why they're not what they used to be.

[c_rion]

A former Colt employee from that era has several long, detailed videos on the subject so I'm not going to type out pages of painful detail when you can just go and watch his video (or any one of the other ten thousand on this subject).

The trigger I just ordered though is a good example of why they're not what they used to be.

From "that era"? What does that even mean? If Chris had a video supporting what you claim, you would have posted it. BTW, The Small Arms Solutions guy has not worked for Colt for over a Decade (His Last day was in 2010), and only worked there for >24 months when he did work there. When I want to know about a rifle made after Bartocci's first day In 2008 and before his last day in 2010, then I will reference his work.

How Colt rifles are made? Dude, I just outlined specifically how a Colt rifle is made and why parts from a real M4 can't be used in, and aren't "pulled from the same bin as", the parts for a commercial Colt rifle. A full %50 of the parts do not interchange with Govt rifles, so THEY CAN'T come from the "same bin as a real M4". There is no SAS video to refute that. THOSE ARE FACTS. Period. I know folks want to fantasize that their commercial Colt Rifle is %100 the same as a real Govt m4, but it just ain't so. It never has been. Parts have always been subcontracted out to meet demand and to meet regulatory requirements.As for Colt parts being subcontracted now, Schmid, AO Precision, CMT, Green mountain, Roscoe, those are just a few of the legacy Colt subcontractors that have made subcontracted Colt parts pre CZ. Colt has ALWAYS subcontracted parts to meet production schedules and demand. And as for your hammer, so Colt got some bad parts from a subcontractor, identified the problem, TOLD YOU about the problem, and are fixing rifles with problem parts. How is that "not what they used to be"? If by "not what they used to be" you mean how previously Colt would have kept their mouth shut and fixed problems as they presented, instead of having some integrity and admitting there was a problem, getting in front of it, publicly posting a by serial number recall list and replacing the problem parts? If that is what you mean, then yes, Colt is not what they used to be. They got better.

Im still waiting on that super transparent statement by Colt that commercial rifles met the TDP, and TDP marking requirements for Colt commercial rifle parts.

ETA: Here is a picture, just to prove that Colt rifles have all parts picked first and thrown in a bin,with the type of rifle (commercial or military) determining what goes in the pre picked bin of parts. Then the rifle is assembled in an assembly cell,where one bin of picked parts equals one rifle. This is a picture of a colt rifle, parts already picked and placed in the bin, and ready to go to the assembly cell. There are no lines of workers with piles of parts at their workstation , putting the same parts in Military and Commercial rifles willy nilly no matter what it is and moving it down the line.............
.
ColtFactoryMil-Spec_Bin.jpg

[okie]

From "that era"? What does that even mean? If Chris had a video supporting what you claim, you would have posted it. BTW, The Small Arms Solutions guy has not worked for Colt for over a Decade (His Last day was in 2010), and only worked there for >24 months when he did work there. When I want to know about a rifle made after Bartocci's first day In 2008 and before his last day in 2010, then I will reference his work.

How Colt rifles are made? Dude, I just outlined specifically how a Colt rifle is made and why parts from a real M4 can't be used in, and aren't "pulled from the same bin as", the parts for a commercial Colt rifle. A full %50 of the parts do not interchange with Govt rifles, so THEY CAN'T come from the "same bin as a real M4". There is no SAS video to refute that. THOSE ARE FACTS. Period. I know folks want to fantasize that their commercial Colt Rifle is %100 the same as a real Govt m4, but it just ain't so. It never has been. Parts have always been subcontracted out to meet demand and to meet regulatory requirements.As for Colt parts being subcontracted now, Schmid, AO Precision, CMT, Green mountain, Roscoe, those are just a few of the legacy Colt subcontractors that have made subcontracted Colt parts pre CZ. Colt has ALWAYS subcontracted parts to meet production schedules and demand. And as for your hammer, so Colt got some bad parts from a subcontractor, identified the problem, TOLD YOU about the problem, and are fixing rifles with problem parts. How is that "not what they used to be"? If by "not what they used to be" you mean how previously Colt would have kept their mouth shut and fixed problems as they presented, instead of having some integrity and admitting there was a problem, getting in front of it, publicly posting a by serial number recall list and replacing the problem parts? If that is what you mean, then yes, Colt is not what they used to be. They got better.

Im still waiting on that super transparent statement by Colt that commercial rifles met the TDP, and TDP marking requirements for Colt commercial rifle parts.

ETA: Here is a picture, just to prove that Colt rifles have all parts picked first and thrown in a bin,with the type of rifle (commercial or military) determining what goes in the pre picked bin of parts. Then the rifle is assembled in an assembly cell,where one bin of picked parts equals one rifle. This is a picture of a colt rifle, parts already picked and placed in the bin, and ready to go to the assembly cell. There are no lines of workers with piles of parts at their workstation , putting the same parts in Military and Commercial rifles willy nilly no matter what it is and moving it down the line.............
.
ColtFactoryMil-Spec_Bin.jpg

The only parts that are different are the lower receiver, barrel, and fire control group. Everything else is interchangeable. Like I said, the BCG is the most critical, and those were absolutely pulled from the same bins. The barrels, despite being a tad bit longer, were also pretty much identical. Same blanks, same extensions, just cut 1.5 inches longer.

Like I said, this has been written up in so many publications and confirmed by employees who were there. It's not debatable at this point. The old LEs were semi auto versions of the full on M4, TDP and all, and all evidence pretty much conclusively proves it's no longer the case.

Like I said, I have no issue with them using sub contracted parts, as long as those parts are made to the TDP, which Colt legally has to provide and give them permission to use, and therefore only Colt or parties authorized by Colt can make a real AR15 of any kind. That was the entire reason to buy them, and now it no longer applies. I guess now the only option is to hunt down the real parts and build your own, assuming those are still available.

I really don't understand why some people find this concept so hard to grasp. It's like the Springfield M1As vs. a real M14. When you buy a non TDP AR15, it's NOT really an AR15, it's just a clone, like the M1A is a clone of the M14s. Yea, all the dimensions are identical and they look the same, but the similarities are only skin deep. All the material specs and procedures and most importantly the quality control procedures are completely different, resulting in a completely different gun. It's like making an Armani suit knockoff from the same wool that goes into a JC Penny's suit, and then berating people about how it's identical and just as good. It's not. Looks identical to an untrained eye, but it's not just as good for anyone who cares to know the difference.

A 2010 era Colt was a real M4 with a semi auto FCG. Whereas the ones now have exactly as much in common with a real M4 as the M1A does with the real M14s.

[c_rion]

The only parts that are different are the lower receiver, barrel, and fire control group. Everything else is interchangeable. Like I said, the BCG is the most critical, and those were absolutely pulled from the same bins. The barrels, despite being a tad bit longer, were also pretty much identical. Same blanks, same extensions, just cut 1.5 inches longer.

Like I said, this has been written up in so many publications and confirmed by employees who were there. It's not debatable at this point. The old LEs were semi auto versions of the full on M4, TDP and all, and all evidence pretty much conclusively proves it's no longer the case.

Like I said, I have no issue with them using sub contracted parts, as long as those parts are made to the TDP, which Colt legally has to provide and give them permission to use, and therefore only Colt or parties authorized by Colt can make a real AR15 of any kind. That was the entire reason to buy them, and now it no longer applies. I guess now the only option is to hunt down the real parts and build your own, assuming those are still available.

What do you mean "It no longer applies". For %50 of the major parts in the commercial rifles that have no TDP spec( What you call ONLY the Barrel,lower receiver,hammer,trigger,dis connector,selector lever) it never applied. People just assumed it did, because, fantasy. For the other half of the rifle, what proof do you have that Colt isn't making Subs produce to their specification (The TDP). Some Bad Hammers? Internet rumor mill? LOL. Okay. Post proof. Solid ,verifiable proof of what you claim (the parts of the rifle that interchange with USGI rifles are not produced to the TDP). Not internet speculation, and appeals to authority. If it has been written up in so many publications, why aren't you providing links or proof of that information. Stop the appeals to authority fallacy and provide proof of what you claim. You have already been proven wrong with respect to how the rifles are made IE, a Bin of prepicked parts sent to an assembly cell for assembly VS what you claimed was a line of people with piles of parts dropping those parts into rifles regardless of whether the rifle is commercial or Govt. I wonder what else you are completely wrong about? Actually I don't wonder about that at all. You basically have no idea, and no substantive proof, of what you speak. Internet conjecture regurgitation is all you have. That is what is not debatable at this point.

A 2010 6920 was a real M4 except it had a semi auto sear blocked receiver, a 16 inch barrel, a different hammer, trigger, disconnector, selector lever, and no auto sear. Aside from all of those differences, just the same, right? LOL. No. When %50 of the rifle is different, it is not and never was "the same as". And how, exactly, did you get your "trained eye" trained to differentiate between Colt parts that are made to the TDP and parts that are not, and confidently proclaim it to be so? Are you a metallurgist? What testing and/or proof do you have that some Colt parts are NOT made to "the TDP", aside from regurgitating conjecture that you read elsewhere on the internet? What training and qualifications do you have, that allow you to take two identical parts from Colt and proclaim one is made to the TDP, and one is not?

This concept is so hard to grasp because you have no proof of what you claim. You are just regurgitating internet borne rumor and conjecture, while making appeals to an authority that does not exist, and with nothing to verifiably substantiate what you claim. I thought this site was all about verifiable fact and solid info, not unsubstantiated conjecture and internet rumor milling. I guess I was wrong.

Still waiting for proof of those super transparent statements you claim were made by Colt, and while you are at it could you also post those commercial Colt semi auto parts markings that are required by the TDP.

[okie]

What do you mean "It no longer applies". For %50 of the major parts in the commercial rifles that have no TDP spec( What you call ONLY the Barrel,lower receiver,hammer,trigger,dis connector,selector lever) it never applied. People just assumed it did, because, fantasy. For the other half of the rifle, what proof do you have that Colt isn't making Subs produce to their specification (The TDP). Some Bad Hammers? Internet rumor mill? LOL. Okay. Post proof. Solid ,verifiable proof of what you claim (the parts of the rifle that interchange with USGI rifles are not produced to the TDP). Not internet speculation, and appeals to authority. If it has been written up in so many publications, why aren't you providing links or proof of that information. Stop the appeals to authority fallacy and provide proof of what you claim. You have already been proven wrong with respect to how the rifles are made IE, a Bin of prepicked parts sent to an assembly cell for assembly VS what you claimed was a line of people with piles of parts dropping those parts into rifles regardless of whether the rifle is commercial or Govt. I wonder what else you are completely wrong about? Actually I don't wonder about that at all. You basically have no idea, and no substantive proof, of what you speak. Internet conjecture regurgitation is all you have. That is what is not debatable at this point.

A 2010 6920 was a real M4 except it had a semi auto sear blocked receiver, a 16 inch barrel, a different hammer, trigger, disconnector, selector lever, and no auto sear. Aside from all of those differences, just the same, right? LOL. No. When %50 of the rifle is different, it is not and never was "the same as". And how, exactly, did you get your "trained eye" trained to differentiate between Colt parts that are made to the TDP and parts that are not, and confidently proclaim it to be so? Are you a metallurgist? What testing and/or proof do you have that some Colt parts are NOT made to "the TDP", aside from regurgitating conjecture that you read elsewhere on the internet? What training and qualifications do you have, that allow you to take two identical parts from Colt and proclaim one is made to the TDP, and one is not?

This concept is so hard to grasp because you have no proof of what you claim. You are just regurgitating internet borne rumor and conjecture, while making appeals to an authority that does not exist, and with nothing to verifiably substantiate what you claim. I thought this site was all about verifiable fact and solid info, not unsubstantiated conjecture and internet rumor milling. I guess I was wrong.

Still waiting for proof of those super transparent statements you claim were made by Colt, and while you are at it could you also post those commercial Colt semi auto parts markings that are required by the TDP.

Because they can't be. I don't know how else to explain it to you without just repeating everything I've said to this point. And BTW, appeal to authority is only a fallacy if the authority isn't applicable to the topic. Appeals to authorities that are applicable are valid points of argument. And former employees from that era are pretty much the ultimate source. Like I said, watch the guy's videos. He explains it all in detail. If you think he's lying or doesn't know what he's talking about then I guess there's no further point in talking about this.

[RUTGERS95]

I was competing in High Power Rifle at the time and could not get it to group well with match loads using bullets between 62g and 80g. The rifle I purchased to replace the HBAR was considerably more accurate.

I was never a fan of colt's hbars, despite many attempts to like them. I found old bushmaster hbars to be superb in accuracy

[RUTGERS95]

Because they can't be. I don't know how else to explain it to you without just repeating everything I've said to this point. And BTW, appeal to authority is only a fallacy if the authority isn't applicable to the topic. Appeals to authorities that are applicable are valid points of argument. And former employees from that era are pretty much the ultimate source. Like I said, watch the guy's videos. He explains it all in detail. If you think he's lying or doesn't know what he's talking about then I guess there's no further point in talking about this.

I'm pretty sure on the colt forum on the other site they pretty much shot down a lot of what this guy says, his background and contribution to colt. Is colt perfect, nope but no other rifle in the US has it's history of success and all of mine went bang each time and with more than acceptable accuracy