Building an AR as a display piece on the wall...

[clm2112]

Well I'll be damned. That's almost exactly what I was looking for. I gave up several years ago, stopped looking. 10-4 on the Colt lower. You have to buy the entire gun if you can find one. The real thing is 7-8 grand. The Colt repro runs 2000-2800. Seems pricey.

I thought it might be cool just for grins to put a binary trigger in a repro to sort of emulate select fire. It would be just a fun gun for me. My older brothers are both VN vets and I recall them writing me and sending photos when they were deployed. I thought they were having fun playing Army, which of course was not the case. Around the same time I went on my first pheasant hunt. The only gun I had fired was a 28 ga shotgun and my cousin's 22. I was fascinated by their M16s.

If you are willing to accept the H&R logo, the PSA ones are reasonable (around $140) and they do come in the slick side version with no fences, and the A2 version with the captive front take-down pin and fence around the mag release. So, you do have a choice of the lower that resembles a 1960's or 1980's lower.

 

[Bobster]

Well I'll be damned. That's almost exactly what I was looking for. I gave up several years ago, stopped looking. 10-4 on the Colt lower. You have to buy the entire gun if you can find one. The real thing is 7-8 grand. The Colt repro runs 2000-2800. Seems pricey.

Here you go, 1/2 the puzzle: LINK

And the other half(ish): LINK

GET BUILDING!

 

[Bongo Lewi]

If the SC ever rules favorably on FRT's, that would be as close as you can get without a tax stamp. Not that I'm looking for that to happen...

Probably not on the FRT. Never say never, but I'm not optimistic.

Binary triggers like Franklin or Fostech are fun for about 15 minutes. Full auto or pretend full auto accessories really dont bring much to the game. I can fire any semi auto rifle fast enough to get the job done. In this case, with the replica AR, all I'd be interested in is a few minutes of fun flipping it to select fire (burst) and letting the trigger do the work. Do a mag dump in 20 seconds and call it fun. It's hard to justify its usefulness. In a practical sense, I dont think I'm going to find myself in a situation where I need to lay down fire so my platoon can advance.

I'm really not an AR aficionado. My interests have always been with clays, pistols, subguns, bolt action hunting and long range precision. Infantry weapons never really captured my interest. The category I really enjoy is subguns. HK, B&T, CZ. Stribog too... which is the best value in the category. Roller delayed. It's the MP5's homely sister. I also have an affinity for the classics. Intertec, UZI , MAC10 and its clones by MPA, Cobray. The modern SIG subguns are very cool as well.

 

[clm2112]

And the other half(ish): LINK

GET BUILDING!

They have a string of those that are almost there... if they would sell the same markings without the US Government Property rollstamp, then I would consider them myself. With that you could add the retro logo of choice through etching, without altering the markings that make it transferable. Or just leave it blank with minimalist markings. At which point you could take it to matches without raising any eyebrows... it is just another commercially made AR, though the "Burst" or "Auto" switch markings might make the match director split the rifle and look to make sure the guts are just semi-auto.

Not a consideration for a wall hanger that isn't going to travel, but if I was building one to take to matches I'd go for a commercial one. (that's why the actual competition rifle I'm cobbling together is on a commercial CLE lower with associated paperwork so there are no questions.)

 

[Bongo Lewi]

I could laser engrave the Colt Logo and it would look close to what I imagined. Done deal. For 59 bucks, nothing to lose.

I saw a select fire genuine article (not a repro) for $35k. <sigh> Reminds me of the time a friend wanted to sell me his '69 Barracuda for $700 and I thought that was too much. I saw one like it at Mecum go for $50k.

 

[seniormoment]

I could laser engrave the Colt Logo and it would look close to what I imagined. Done deal. For 59 bucks, nothing to lose.

I saw a select fire genuine article (not a repro) for $35k. <sigh> Reminds me of the time a friend wanted to sell me his '69 Barracuda for $700 and I thought that was too much. I saw one like it at Mecum go for $50k.

Wanted to buy a red ‘57 Chevy when in HS. The guy wanted $300, Dad thought it was over priced.

 

[no4mk1t]

They have a string of those that are almost there... if they would sell the same markings without the US Government Property rollstamp, then I would consider them myself. With that you could add the retro logo of choice through etching, without altering the markings that make it transferable. Or just leave it blank with minimalist markings. At which point you could take it to matches without raising any eyebrows... it is just another commercially made AR, though the "Burst" or "Auto" switch markings might make the match director split the rifle and look to make sure the guts are just semi-auto.

Not a consideration for a wall hanger that isn't going to travel, but if I was building one to take to matches I'd go for a commercial one. (that's why the actual competition rifle I'm cobbling together is on a commercial CLE lower with associated paperwork so there are no questions.)

When the Clinton AWB passed back in the 90's, some folks were worried that the alphabet bois would be traipsing the firing line at Perry looking for post ban guns with a F/H and bayonet lug. This was before CMP changed the rules for ban states. It never happened. Never had anyone at a match come up looking to see if your lower was "factory" or not.
A buddy that has now passed may his own lower from a forging years ago. Back before 80% was a thing. He put his NRA number on it and his monogram together with his name and city/state. Took it to Perry a couple of times. Never had anyone say anything.

If someone is worried about it, an unmarked lower will of course be obvious. But there are so many past and present AR manufacturers that the average person wouldn't know if the artwork on your lower is factory or homemade as long as it looks decent.

 

[Bongo Lewi]

+1 I'll go on to add...

People that think the alphabet agencies are sending agents under cover to ranges to look for citizens who have guns that are not compliant with some rule need to give the bong a rest or get their lithium prescription refilled. . It just doesn't work that way. These are the insane ramblings of people who know nothing about how these colossal bureaucracies operate. Nobody is watching and waiting for Bubba to shoulder his brace at the range so they can arrest him.

But I'm sure some nitwit is going to respond by saying they read about average Joe's getting busted at their range by agents. It's true because it was on Twitter.

 

[clm2112]

If someone is worried about it, an unmarked lower will of course be obvious. But there are so many past and present AR manufacturers that the average person wouldn't know if the artwork on your lower is factory or homemade as long as it looks decent.

That was the whole purpose of replicating the Olympic markings from way back when.

Most of the clubs I've shot at usually had the match director checking the rifles during sign in. While all the checked was the trigger weight, I wouldn't want to give cause to question what the rifle is. Particularly if the match is being held at a military base, like Camp Blanding in Jax.

Though that does remind me of a dumb thing one of my former co-workers did years ago... took a service call on some network equipment at Mayport and had his target rifle in the trunk. I got the phone call at the office. The Navy was pretty cool about it, he just had to leave the rifle at the base entrance, do his service call, and collect it on the way out when he turned in the visitor's pass.

 

[no4mk1t]

That was the whole purpose of replicating the Olympic markings from way back when.

Most of the clubs I've shot at usually had the match director checking the rifles during sign in. While all the checked was the trigger weight, I wouldn't want to give cause to question what the rifle is. Particularly if the match is being held at a military base, like Camp Blanding in Jax.

Though that does remind me of a dumb thing one of my former co-workers did years ago... took a service call on some network equipment at Mayport and had his target rifle in the trunk. I got the phone call at the office. The Navy was pretty cool about it, he just had to leave the rifle at the base entrance, do his service call, and collect it on the way out when he turned in the visitor's pass.

The only time I've ever had a match director examine my rifle was for EIC matches where he was looking for the tape that indicated the trigger had been weighed. Never looked at the markings.

 

[Bongo Lewi]

@clm2112 and @no4mk1t

Ordered the H&R M16A1 lower and upper. That was the closest to what I am aiming for.

I have a small Grizzly vertical mill that I bought mainly for making hard to find parts for the vintage bikes I used to amuse myself with. I have also completed a couple of 80% AR lowers with it. The first AR, I used a jig. It came out OK but the mill for obvious reasons makes a difference. I decided to not go 80% with this project. This is more about how it looks than how well it shoots. After the new gun smell has gone away, I will probably spend more time looking at this vintage repro AR on the wall than shooting it. Even so, I'm going to assemble this rifle using quality parts. I may or may not do the binary trigger. I'm on the fence with that. An extra 300 bucks for something I'm not going to use much is giving me pause.

 

[no4mk1t]

@clm2112 and @no4mk1t

Ordered the H&R M16A1 lower and upper. That was the closest to what I am aiming for.

I have a small Grizzly vertical mill that I bought mainly for making hard to find parts for the vintage bikes I used to amuse myself with. I have also completed a couple of 80% AR lowers with it. The first AR, I used a jig. It came out OK but the mill for obvious reasons makes a difference. I decided to not go 80% with this project. This is more about how it looks than how well it shoots. After the new gun smell has gone away, I will probably spend more time looking at this vintage repro AR on the wall than shooting it. Even so, I'm going to assemble this rifle using quality parts. I may or may not do the binary trigger. I'm on the fence with that. An extra 300 bucks for something I'm not going to use much is giving me pause.

Look forward to seeing it when finished.

 

[Bongo Lewi]

All the parts have arrived. I'm surprised. I ordered the furniture from US Collectors Ordinance. I thought that was going to take forever. The box arrived today.

M16A1 may be done in a couple of days!

I had the choice of remanufactured original stock and hand guard, but most are a little beat up and not cheap if they are in good shape. This gun is not a museum piece, it's more of an homage. So I thought it best to go with new.

 

[Bongo Lewi]

Need to do some test firing. Won't have time for that today.
General opinions:

It's light weight
The handguard feels flimsy, but it is supposedly authentic
Everything fit without a lot of fussing
The plastic stock also feels flimsy
I went with a standard AR trigger, not a drop in or binary. For now. I want to shoot it for a while before making a decision to change that.
I'm not sure what Stoner was thinking with the handle, rear sight thing. I'm not sure why anyone would carry a rifle that way.

 

[clm2112]

Need to do some test firing. Won't have time for that today. View attachment 21056
General opinions:

It's light weight
The handguard feels flimsy, but it is supposedly authentic
Everything fit without a lot of fussing
The plastic stock also feels flimsy
I went with a standard AR trigger, not a drop in or binary. For now. I want to shoot it for a while before making a decision to change that.
I'm not sure what Stoner was thinking with the handle, rear sight thing. I'm not sure why anyone would carry a rifle that way.

Looks good, just needs the 3-prong flash hider. I see they gave you the straight delta-ring for the hand guards. Were the handguards fiberglass reinforced or just molded plastic?

The "carry" handle is well... not quite what it appears. I don't think he ever intended to have it used to carry the rifle around like some piece of Samsonite luggage. It really is a stylized design element originating with the AR-10. That "bow", that looks like a handle, solves a couple of engineering problems in a manner that an aero engineer of the 1950's would find elegant on several levels. (Well, they were a bunch of Fairchild Aircraft propeller-heads running their own little side projects.)

First, it solves the structural rigidity problem of the aluminum casting, which had a slot in it to accommodate the charging handle. Second, it guards the charging handle from getting hit by anything. Third, it serves as a mounting point for the rear sight which is deliberately high over the bore to keep all the reciprocating parts down low. And last, it protects that rear sight from damage by guarding the sides. It also just looks futuristic at a time when the potential buyers were in love with speed... which is perhaps a feature that trumps all the other engineering decisions. That it got thought of, and sometimes used, as a handle probably came as a surprise to the engineers who designed it

So, it may seem silly, and probably should have gone away when the charging handle was relocated to the "T" handle we are all familiar with, the design stayed right up until the rise of the flat-tops (where the picatinny rail shape and better aluminum alloy forgings gives the upper the required rigidity without resorting to a truss that looks like a handle.)

I guess when evaluating the AR one needs to look at the contemporary designs of the time... i.e. 1956. The same time that Fairchild was giving us the F-105 Thunderchief and Chevrolet was selling the Bel Air with the required aerodynamic (ahem) tail fins.

 

[Bongo Lewi]

Looks good, just needs the 3-prong flash hider. I see they gave you the straight delta-ring for the hand guards. Were the handguards fiberglass reinforced or just molded plastic?

The "carry" handle is well... not quite what it appears. I don't think he ever intended to have it used to carry the rifle around like some piece of Samsonite luggage. It really is a stylized design element originating with the AR-10. That "bow", that looks like a handle, solves a couple of engineering problems in a manner that an aero engineer of the 1950's would find elegant on several levels. (Well, they were a bunch of Fairchild Aircraft propeller-heads running their own little side projects.)

First, it solves the structural rigidity problem of the aluminum casting, which had a slot in it to accommodate the charging handle. Second, it guards the charging handle from getting hit by anything. Third, it serves as a mounting point for the rear sight which is deliberately high over the bore to keep all the reciprocating parts down low. And last, it protects that rear sight from damage by guarding the sides. It also just looks futuristic at a time when the potential buyers were in love with speed... which is perhaps a feature that trumps all the other engineering decisions. That it got though of, and sometimes used, as a handle probably came as a surprise to the engineers who designed it

So, it may seem silly, and probably should have gone away when the charging handle was relocated to the "T" handle we are all familiar with, but the design stayed right up until the rise of the flat-tops (where the picatinny rail and better aluminum alloy forging give the upper the required rigidity)

I guess when evaluating the AR one needs to look at the contemporary designs of the time... i.e. 1956. The same time that Fairchild was giving us the F-105 Thunderchief and Chevrolet was selling the Bel Air with the required aerodynamic (Ahem) tail fins.

That’s the most lucid explanation I have read on the subject of Stoner’s design. My experience with the AR began after the flat top was the norm.

The hand guards are molded plastic with an aluminum heat shield. The barrel resembles the original well enough and the flash hider was due to my haste in putting all together. I forgot to order the three prong.

The H&R upper and lower are very good quality and there is literally no rattle. They mate perfectly.

The hand guard and stock seem cheesy to me but my frame of reference is rigid metal hand guards and Magpul or equivalent stocks on an AR.

Overall, appearance-wise the gun is a pretty good approximation. I may change some parts out to make it a more authentic replica but overall my expectations were met. I’ll find out Sunday how well it performs.

 

[clm2112]

Little history...

Here a picture that's worth a thousand words.... the original AR-15 being tested at Ft. Benning in March, 1958 (US Army photo.)

The upper is thin, slick sided, and has a charging handle shaped like a trigger sticking out the top of the upper receiver, just like the AR-10. At this moment in time, the production rights to the AR-10 have already been sold to a company in the Netherlands and the overall design flaws are being figured out and incorporated into the AR-15 design. When Colt acquires the AR-15 design and develops it into the Model 601, the charging handle got redesigned into the "T" handle out the back of the upper, but it's guard remained for the structural rigidity it adds to the upper. They could have removed it and added more metal to the upper right above the charging handle slot, giving it a spine, but the tooling for the upper was already done, so why start over.

I think a similar situation happened with the introduction of the removable sight assembly for the M4 and M16A4.... they already had all the production tooling from the millions of A2 uppers manufactured, so with a slight modification to the A2 upper receiver blank, they could churn out buckets of detachable A2 sight assemblies with minimum development costs.... so the absurd carry handle that wasn't a carry handle kept on trucking and wound up on numerous flat tops, until the Matech backup iron sights got into mass production.

The most absurd thing I've seen (I wish I could find the photo again) was a soldier in Iraq with a ACOGS on the top of his rifle... and the stupid detachable carry handle on the bottom of his RAS quad rail. Well, that's one way of not loosing it on the battlefield. I suspect it was a gag photo, though I've heard plenty of negative comments about the Knights plastic broom-handle grip, so the detachable A2 sight assembly might have been an improvement as a forward grip.

 

[Bongo Lewi]

The detachable “handle” that some accessory makers still offer is baffling to me.

 

[Bongo Lewi]

May I compliment you on your shooting skill, Colonel? said Major Lynch. (photo)

I'm fascinated by how skinny that barrel looks.

I thought about getting the 'green' furniture or trying to replicate the unpainted brownish color of the originals. But I read that the M16A1 was quickly shifted to black when it went into production. My brothers both carried an M16A1 and they were black.

I'm taking it out to the proverbial back 40 tomorrow. My plan is to put 100 rounds thru it then take back to the bench for a look inside.

 

[no4mk1t]

Here's serial number 1 from the Knights Armament collection. You can look at all the changes that have taken place in the last 60+ years.

I am told the TDP for the M16 is a ponderous document indeed. Many inches thick. Even in digital form, it is a 69MB file.

M 16 Technical Datapackage + Aditional Prints + Bolt Schematic : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

M16 Technical Datapackage

archive.org