Legality of M16 bolt carrier in an OLL

[Josh3239]

The ATF considers any rifle that fires more than one bullet for one pull of the trigger to be a machinegun. That is why when a rifle doubles it is strongly suggest to immediately fix the problem if known, or disassemble it. The ATF has F-d people for bogus things before. They don't spend their time chasing down people who have malfunctioning rifles, but as I said, they have F-d over Americans for bogus things before. And then you of course have to find out whether an attorney on behalf of the government believes they have a case strong enough to prosecute you.

[Chuntsman949]

???

Noveske provides full auto BCGs with their uppers ,LWRC does as well IIRC

[The DRis]

I don't know if anyone said this yet. But the BCG has absolutely nothing to do with F/A. Having that name is extrememly deceptive and confusing.

The "F/A" BCG just has extra metal to increase the dwell time making it more reliable in Full Auto. You could achieve the same thing by getting a heavier buffer. It's not a full auto part. Period

[m24armorer]

I don't know if anyone said this yet. But the BCG has absolutely nothing to do with F/A. Having that name is extrememly deceptive and confusing.

The "F/A" BCG just has extra metal to increase the dwell time making it more reliable in Full Auto. You could achieve the same thing by getting a heavier buffer. It's not a full auto part. Period

The carrier trips the sear, that is why semi carriers were cut back and Colt in the 90's put sear blocks in some of the AR products and cut a full slot. Go back to the start of this thread and learn something.

[The DRis]

Typical calguns douchey answer. Thanks pal.

I love CA

[freonr22]

I don't know if anyone said this yet. But the BCG has absolutely nothing to do with F/A. Having that name is extrememly deceptive and confusing.

The "F/A" BCG just has extra metal to increase the dwell time making it more reliable in Full Auto. You could achieve the same thing by getting a heavier buffer. It's not a full auto part. Period

Respectfully, You sir, are MISTAKEN. M24 IS Correct

\
google is your friend, if you disbelieve

[metalhead357]

Typical calguns douchey answer. Thanks pal.

I love CA

Oh, dont worry- he didn't mean too much by it: we're a rambunctious crowd and just get riled when dead threads re-surface with bad info for questions already answered (correctly) multiple times throughout the thread....................

[MikeWilliamson]

25 years Army and Air Force. I was issued both chromed and parked carriers in service. I will not have a parked carrier in any of my personal rifles. When I deployed, I took my own chromed carrier with me. My wife has one for hers when she goes to the field.

Chromed is most certainly superior in every regard. It is easier to clean. It sheds crud by itself better. It has better natural lubricity, and glides over a lubed surface better. The original USAF AR15s I was issued never needed a forward assist, because they never had issues.

The Army's justification for changing the design (at the time it was @#$ing up every other aspect of the weapon, too) was A: that chrome wasn't "tactical" because it is shiny. This is of little matter when the cover is closed, and less matter when you're pointing and shooting. 2: It wears out the upper. I'm told it does. I never witnessed this problem, even in 20 year old weapons. If so, by the time you've shot the barrel out, you'll have halfway worn out the upper . Solution? Replace the whole damned upper anyway, as it's easier than changing just the barrel.

I have two parked BCGs, brand new, on Gunbroker right now, because they were part of a package deal, and I won't have those abortions in my weapons. They're cheap, if you want them.

The BCG is a critical internal component. If you won't spend money on it, just use the money for your ubercool rail system, optics and other gadgets for a nice headstone.

Yes, I feel that strongly about it.

I'm looking to test some of the TiN, BN and ceramic carriers shortly.

[MikeWilliamson]

http://www.gandrtactical.com/images/...6%20Letter.pdf and here's a link to the ATF letter. Now, state law I can't help with.

[Scott Connors]

I would think a faster cyclic rate using a lighter carrier. My next question is, has anyone used an aluminum carrier???

I had one that Smith Enterprises made, and used it on a registered MG lower. Cyclic rate was up there with an Ingram M10. Not a good idea. If you want a lightened bc, check out JP Enterprises'.

[MikeWilliamson]

I don't think an AL carrier would handle the beating, either. It would work harden and crack in short order.