AR15 US GI Configuration

[kenc9]

Other than the mag. what is the configuration of GI rifle, scope, length, trigger group ect.?

-ken

[docsmileyface]

Depends on which one, M16, M16A1, M16A2, M16A4?

They've all got 20" barrels, the M16 and M16A1 have 1x12 twist, A2 and A4 have 1x7 twist. Most common optical systems for the A2 and A4 are the ACOG and M68 (Aimpoint M2) CCO.

The M16 trigger group is alot different than the AR15 one because of the 3-round burst function.

[shopkeep]

There are still a TON of A2 rifles out there. Not to mention most 20 inch AR-15 builds I've seen are all A2 rifles. The A4 is mostly flat-top 16 inch rifles.

[BigAL]

Other than the mag. what is the configuration of GI rifle, scope, length, trigger group ect.?

-ken

Ummm...there is no such thing as "USGI AR-15" configuration.

[kenc9]

Configurations

Ummm...there is no such thing as "USGI AR-15" configuration.

Awwwww....the old distinction without a difference???

I wasn't asking what the military calls them...just some of the differences between the two or three or so!!!

Are theirs right off normal production lines with the burst triggers and such or are the rifles they get assembled like no others?

-ken

[FoxOneHaji]

Awwwww....the old distinction without a difference???

I wasn't asking what the military calls them...just some of the differences between the two or three or so!!!

Are theirs right off normal production lines with the burst triggers and such or are the rifles they get assembled like no others?

-ken

Ken,

The topic you ask has a LONG and extensive history to it. "Colt" and its subsidiary branches makes the majority of our DOD rifles. They are military spec cut and do come with burst trigger group off the production line (different trigger groups can be fitted to any mil spec cut reciever, as needed- during the production process). Each rifle is fired to check tolerences before being shipping to our troops.

Click on the link below for a far better explination:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M16_rifle

I built my rifle on what most our troops use today in Iraq (Certain brands are hard to come by, so get what you can). The following are most of them:

A3 Upper Receiver (Flattop)
14.5" barrel, 1/7 twist, w/ A2 flash supp.
Knight's Armament RIS/RAS w/ vertical grip
Aimpoint Comp M(many versions) mounted on an Aimpoint QRP
MaTech BUIS (600meter backup sight)
mil-spec 6 position CAR buttstock (tons of brands)
Lower reciever (too many to list)

Doesn't look like much, but it can get expensive (and hard to find due to need).

Hope this helps some.

[docsmileyface]

Actually, believe it or not, more troops are running around with muskets than M4's. Alot of people still have M16A2's with gooseneck mounts for their M68's and brackets for their PAQ4C's, and alot more, especially in the Infantry Divisions still have M16A4's. So a 20" barrel might be more appropriate.

The MaTech BUIS is sort of hard to come by, and before that the Knights Armament 300m BUIS was the standard issue one. Luckily for me my cousin promised me to "aquire" his RFI MaTech BUIS for me when his tour ends. Alot of people say the only way to get a MaTech is to steal it, but like most of the other RFI stuff the MaTech is given to soldiers without a hand-recipt or any record of it, so the Army is pretty much GIVING soldiers equipment.

I'm building an M16A4 clone of my own.

The best place I found for M16A2 and A4 uppers is CMMG. The thing is almost mil-spec, 1x7" twist, chrome lined bore and barrel, government profile.... What I'm going to be using in my M16A4 once I get the money for it.

[grammaton76]

Luckily for me my cousin promised me to "aquire" his *** for me when his tour ends. Alot of people say the only way to get a *** is to steal it, but like most of the other RFI stuff the *** is given to soldiers without a hand-recipt or any record of it, so the Army is pretty much GIVING soldiers equipment.

If I were you, I wouldn't be speaking happily of acquiring government property in public. This kinda stuff happens pretty often, but I'd really recommend editing out that bit in your post. Remember what happened to the folks who bought surplus Interceptor vests? It's still government property, technically...

[docsmileyface]

The difference between an IBAS and an RFI MaTech is the IBAS is a sensitive item that you sign for and are required to have. Right now, like I said, the Army is GIVING away stuff to its soldiers. I've been GIVEN without signing for and explicitly told to by my supply sergeant to not turn back in no less than 3 camelbaks in the same manner.

The supply sergeants don't have them on their records because their given to the soldiers at the RFI point. They can't take them back, and the soldiers are stuck with a bunch of gear. Some of its really neat useful stuff, some of it is just extra load. At the end though, the soldier is simply stuck with it because once you go to RFI you most likely don't go to through it again.

The Interceptor Vest is something you HAVE to turn back in as its been signed out and hand-recipted. Alot of things like silkweight clothing, combat goggles, gerber tools, spring loaded combat knives, MaTech BUIS are simply just handed over to the soldier. Its been given to the soldier without giving the soldier any oppertunity to give it back. I would never accept something that was STOLEN, an item somebody was responsible for. But someone giving me something that the government gave them is better than getting a tax-return in my opinion!

[Pryde]

Actually, none of the currently made M16s and M4s are produced by Colt.

FN-Usa makes all our small arms for our armed forces.

Thank god too, From my experience Colt issue weapons were FAR inferior to the quality of the FNs.

[grammaton76]

The difference between an IBAS and an RFI MaTech is the IBAS is a sensitive item that you sign for and are required to have. Right now, like I said, the Army is GIVING away stuff to its soldiers. I've been GIVEN without signing for and explicitly told to by my supply sergeant to not turn back in no less than 3 camelbaks in the same manner.

Actually, I have a friend whose Interceptor was under the exact same conditions... he still has it, after out-processing. Of course, he's a marine, not Army.

I don't disagree with finding a use for something the Army won't take back, I just think it'd be wise not to post about it in public. If it'd been issued to you, I wouldn't see an issue with posting about it, but I'm assuming you're not in the Army - sort of a difference there.

Like I say, it's not that I think you're doing anything immoral, just something I wouldn't talk about openly.

[kenc9]

Cinfiguration

Technical Ted, that is good info thank you, it is tough to argue with the facts.

Alot of government contracts awarded to the prime contractor subcontract some of the parts that are assembled. What 1x7 barrels were used if somebody knows.

There is alot of very good info in all these posts, thanks!

-ken

[Pryde]

Sorry I made a mistake,
What I should have said was that all of our M16's are made by FN, I was never issued an M4. I assumed that since most of my issue M16s were FN that the M4 were FNs too, my bad. I cannot speak on the M4's but the FN M16's were of superior quality to the Colt M16's.

Your data seems to back this up because all the Colt contracts are for M4's.

[Pryde]

When the initial procurement for M16A4's began in 1998 Colt did recieve a small contract for A4's, but since then the contracts for complete rifles have gone to FN.

While this may be true, I joined in 99 and never once saw an A4 that was Colt branded, A2's yes, A4 no. The fact still remains that 90% of our grunts out there today are carrying FN M16A4 service rifles. And the fact still remains that Colt firearms produces crappy weapons.

[ocabj]

While this may be true, I joined in 99 and never once saw an A4 that was Colt branded, A2's yes, A4 no. The fact still remains that 90% of our grunts out there today are carrying FN M16A4 service rifles. And the fact still remains that Colt firearms produces crappy weapons.

I have no idea where the foundation is regarding the poor quality of Colt M16 and AR15 variants is based.

All the AR owners I know own mostly Colts and none of them have had any quality control issues. All my ARs are Colts and I've never had any problems with them. Aside from the sear block, I have no problems with my Colts (and they all have the standard pivot pins).

I think the only reason people bomb on Colt is because of their current attitude in snubbing civilian sales.

I'm not a die hard Colt fan. It just happens that Colt was the main player in the AR business back when I started shooting and wanted an AR and that's how I and all the other guys I know in California bought Colts.