Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 121

Thread: Why YOU should buy a Colt (or LMT, or Noveske, or. . .)

  1. #71
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    91
    Feedback Score
    0
    A TDP is a formal document(s) written by a contractor to specify how they will meet the requirements of the contract.
    Not saying that the Gov didn't collaborate in writing this one, but too many people believe that a TDP is the FED saying "This is how you must do it" when instead its the company saying "this is how we intend to meet our contractual obligations".

    Pete
    CO Springs, CO
    NFA Manufacturer
    FFL-07 & SOT

  2. #72
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The Free State of Nebraska
    Posts
    5,427
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by aloharover View Post
    A TDP is a formal document(s) written by a contractor to specify how they will meet the requirements of the contract.
    Not saying that the Gov didn't collaborate in writing this one, but too many people believe that a TDP is the FED saying "This is how you must do it" when instead its the company saying "this is how we intend to meet our contractual obligations".

    Pete

    Colt cannot change anything on the rifle without approval from the US Govt.

    The Govt requires mag testing and proof firing of bolts and barrels. This is added cost. Which lower AR companies don't have to follow.

    The government requires ISO9000 certification among other corperate and manufacturing conditions. Which lesser AR companies don't have to follow.

    All of this costs money.

  3. #73
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    91
    Feedback Score
    0
    Yes the GOV has certain specs that the contractor must meet. The Company makes a TDP and submits it. After it's signed off on by the Gov/Client/COTR the contractor would need to submit a change request. Depending on the project the process to get a change approved can be quite lengthy.

    The person I quoted said
    "Colt as well as others gets very close, but to match it would cost Colt VERY dearly."

    Again since Colt wrote the TDP and builds to meet it I was wondering why they said what they said.

    I understand why it costs more for someone else to get started manufacturing.
    CO Springs, CO
    NFA Manufacturer
    FFL-07 & SOT

  4. #74
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Clearwater, Florida
    Posts
    22
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by WS6 View Post
    Other than the flattop vs. carry handle, is the 6920 different from the 6520?
    the 6920 has an M4 profile barrel
    the 6520 has a lightweight - pencil - barrel

    the 6920 has M4 feedramps
    I do not think the 6520 does

    the 6920 has dual heat shield M4 (fat) handguards
    the 6520 uses single shield CAR handguards

    the 6920 has a side sling swivel
    the 6520 uses an under-FSB swivel

    6920 = 5.95 lbs.
    6520 = 5.8 lbs.

    the 6920 has at least $200-$300 resale advantage

    there may be more, but this is what comes to mind.

  5. #75
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    NoVA
    Posts
    10,780
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)
    Redfisher,
    The 6520s of the last year that I've seen have all had M4 ramps. Though the ramps were 'dremeled' in after anodizing and left unfinished in the upper receivers.
    Chief Armorer for Elite Shooting Sports in Manassas VA
    Chief Armorer for Corp Arms (FFL 07-08/SOT 02)

  6. #76
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,611
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Redfisher View Post
    the 6920 has an M4 profile barrel
    the 6520 has a lightweight - pencil - barrel

    the 6920 has M4 feedramps
    I do not think the 6520 does

    the 6920 has dual heat shield M4 (fat) handguards
    the 6520 uses single shield CAR handguards

    the 6920 has a side sling swivel
    the 6520 uses an under-FSB swivel

    6920 = 5.95 lbs.
    6520 = 5.8 lbs.

    the 6920 has at least $200-$300 resale advantage

    there may be more, but this is what comes to mind.

    Wow...big difference.

  7. #77
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The Free State of Nebraska
    Posts
    5,427
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by aloharover View Post
    Yes the GOV has certain specs that the contractor must meet. The Company makes a TDP and submits it. After it's signed off on by the Gov/Client/COTR the contractor would need to submit a change request. Depending on the project the process to get a change approved can be quite lengthy.

    The person I quoted said
    "Colt as well as others gets very close, but to match it would cost Colt VERY dearly."

    Again since Colt wrote the TDP and builds to meet it I was wondering why they said what they said.

    I understand why it costs more for someone else to get started manufacturing.

    He was talking about selling illegal full auto to civilians.

  8. #78
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    463
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by gotm4 View Post
    Redfisher,
    The 6520s of the last year that I've seen have all had M4 ramps. Though the ramps were 'dremeled' in after anodizing and left unfinished in the upper receivers.
    I have read this before but my 6520 was built shortly after the ban, before Colt marked them LE only. It has the sear block, half circle carrier and M4 feedramps done before anodizing. I wonder why the change?

  9. #79
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,611
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by scottryan View Post
    He was talking about selling illegal full auto to civilians.
    It is illegal to have even an M16 trigger itself. Colt is allowed to ONLY produce certain components for the military, noone else. Yes, the M16 trigger is slightly different in that it has a notch in the bottom of it. It is illegal for a civvi to have this part. I am sure there are other nicknacks about it similar to this.

  10. #80
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Lakeland, FL
    Posts
    800
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by WS6 View Post
    It is illegal to have even an M16 trigger itself. Colt is allowed to ONLY produce certain components for the military, noone else. Yes, the M16 trigger is slightly different in that it has a notch in the bottom of it. It is illegal for a civvi to have this part. I am sure there are other nicknacks about it similar to this.
    I've never heard of it being illegal to have full auto parts, it's just illegal to have full auto parts and an AR.

Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... 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
  •