Old Colt SP1 and Full Auto FCG???

[goodlookin1]

Hey guys,

I have a question on the FCG that came in the Colt SP1. Serial # is SP1104XX....not sure when it was made. I was able to fondle this older Vietnam looking AR-15 for a bit and the owner claimed it was Semi only (out of state). I believed him, but wanted to take a closer look. Upon inspection, I found it had a Full Auto FCG! I told him, "Whoa, what do you have going on here?!?!" and asked him if he or any previous owner had changed anything out since the Factory purchase....he said, "no, back then they came that way". I then continued to inspect it. I found that the selector would indeed move into the third position, and it was properly milled out like the 3 position selectors are. When I flipped it into the unmarked "auto" 3rd position, it indeed pushed down the disconnector out of engagement of the hammer. I also saw that it had the full auto hammer with the "sear catch" on the back of the hammer's head. When I had the upper removed, I was able to move the selector into the third position, hold down the trigger and move the hammer back and forth freely WITHOUT it clicking and stopping (not requiring the trigger to be pressed to release the hammer). Indeed, this was a correct and functional Full Auto FCG.

Now the strange part was that there was ABSOLUTELY NO autosear or lightning link. The shelf was a "low shelf" lower with no "Colt block" installed. It didnt look as if anything had ever been installed and taken out either. It appeared that an auto sear **could** fit without milling anything out (this is common with many/most lowers today). There was also NO hole drilled into the lower for the auto sear to be installed. Then, I noticed the carrier was the semi-auto Colt SP1, not a full auto BCG.

Doing some more testing, I found that when I had the selector in the semi mode and no magazine installed, I could pull back the charging handle and let it go forward, and it would go back into battery ready to be fired. However, when the selector was moved into the third position, disabling the disconnector, I tried racking back the BCG and releasing it, but the BCG would stop half way in the upper receiver as if it was being blocked by something. Essentially, only in the semi position would the carrier return to battery.

So my conclusion was this: It was not a machine gun per the BASIC definition.....IE - it would only fire one shot per pull of the trigger, Constructive Possession issues aside.

Now for the legal question: Given that this gun is in it's factory condition with no change out of a semi FCG to a full auto FCG, having no auto sear and having a semi auto only carrier.......would this be legal with no possible issues of being charged with Constructive Possession of a Machine Gun? My (limited) understanding of CP is that you must have ALL of the parts to make a Machine Gun, SBR, SBS, etc, in order to be successfully prosecuted for CP. I understand that they may try to charge you (so why bother, right?), but that it couldn't hold up in court. I have heard of many HK's having both a full auto carrier plus full auto FCG's, but only fire in semi auto mode and no one gets in trouble for these......why then would AR's be any different? I guess what i'm wondering is, since the gun is semi auto (so it doesnt need to be registered with the ATF), how can owners of once lawfully purchased rifles be prosecuted for having this? You'd think if they banned them that they would grandfather in the ones that had already been purchased and register them to the owners.

Just curious...

Thanks.

[freonr22]

fa fcg= constructive possession imho, ymmv... but it wont.... fa fcg= nonononononono

on the other hand a semi fcg + fa bolt carrier+ good to go

[AJAX22]

The earliest ones came that way...

It's why DIAS registration was possible as a machinegun by itself...

I don't think I'd leave it that way myself, but that IS a factory configuration for those guns.

[bwiese]

What you might get away with Federally may be a bit doubtful in CA.
The CA laws track NFA stuff in general but there's a lot less clarifying regulation, case law, etc.

I wouldn't own 'em myself - and if I did, I wouldn't. I'm pretty uncomfortable with parts that have a primary FA purpose due to wording in 12200PC definition of MG. There's a lotta grey hanging out there.

[goodlookin1]

fa fcg= constructive possession imho, ymmv... but it wont.... fa fcg= nonononononono

on the other hand a semi fcg + fa bolt carrier+ good to go

So federally speaking, you are saying that in order to be legal, you are REQUIRED to replace the internal parts to remain legal? Remember, this was made before Colt started selling them with Semi Auto FCG's, so it was legally purchased this way.

What you might get away with Federally may be a bit doubtful in CA.
The CA laws track NFA stuff in general but there's a lot less clarifying regulation, case law, etc.

I wouldn't own 'em myself - and if I did, I wouldn't. I'm pretty uncomfortable with parts that have a primary FA purpose due to wording in 12200PC definition of MG. There's a lotta grey hanging out there.

Yeah, I certainly wouldnt try this in CA....not to mention automatic AW status just because it's a Colt SP1. In the end, it doesnt matter here because we cant get FA guns at all, so there's no point in having a FA FCG if you cant go the whole 9 yards.

[Scott Connors]

So federally speaking, you are saying that in order to be legal, you are REQUIRED to replace the internal parts to remain legal? Remember, this was made before Colt started selling them with Semi Auto FCG's, so it was legally purchased this way.




Yeah, I certainly wouldnt try this in CA....not to mention automatic AW status just because it's a Colt SP1. In the end, it doesnt matter here because we cant get FA guns at all, so there's no point in having a FA FCG if you cant go the whole 9 yards.

It is not a defense that "it came that way from the factory." Remember that case in Wisconsin that Lou Dobbs was publicizing? Army Reservists lent an AR to a friend, it was an old Olympic Arms with FA FCG. It doubled at the range, cop witnessed and contacted ATF, owner convicted of illegal transfer of MG. I wouldn't go near that thing w/o a semi FCG and a pin punch.

[desertdweller]

I'd like to see pictures of the inside. This will fire select full auto if you put the switch to the third position but it won't last long as the trigger parts will get chewed up (tip of the trigger and a little catch on the hammer), after that you just have uncontrolled auto.

Again, like you said, while it probably won't hold up in court if they came this way from the factory, there still is the time in between....

On a lighter note, sounds like a very nice piece of early history!

[desertdweller]

Remember that case in Wisconsin that Lou Dobbs was publicizing? Army Reservists lent an AR to a friend, it was an old Olympic Arms with FA FCG.

I remember that, and it was much more than a mis-fire. He was on forums telling people how to modify to full auto and got caught with other stuff too.

http://de-de.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=42718350374&_fb_noscript=1

[mej16489]

I have an SP1 that came from the factory in nearly the exact configuration you describe. Mine had a FA BCG, so the only thing missing was the sear and holes.

When Roberti-Roos came along it got moved out of state into a corporation. A couple years later my brother and I went the NFA route with a DIAS. Sadly, it only gets shot about once every 2 years or so

[goodlookin1]

It is not a defense that "it came that way from the factory." Remember that case in Wisconsin that Lou Dobbs was publicizing? Army Reservists lent an AR to a friend, it was an old Olympic Arms with FA FCG. It doubled at the range, cop witnessed and contacted ATF, owner convicted of illegal transfer of MG. I wouldn't go near that thing w/o a semi FCG and a pin punch.

David Olofson is who you are talking about, and he intentionally changed his weapon to fire fully automatic in the third position, and when his friend Robert Kiernicki got caught at the range, it came back to Olofson and he tried to claim it was a malfunction.

Upon inspection of the weapon, the inspector tested the weapon in the third selector position and dumped 3 magazines. All 3 magazines fired full auto.

That's a far cry from "one double at the range".

EDIT:

I remember that, and it was much more than a mis-fire. He was on forums telling people how to modify to full auto and got caught with other stuff too.

http://de-de.facebook.com/note.php?n..._fb_noscript=1

Yep

[goodlookin1]

I'd like to see pictures of the inside. This will fire select full auto if you put the switch to the third position but it won't last long as the trigger parts will get chewed up (tip of the trigger and a little catch on the hammer), after that you just have uncontrolled auto.

Again, like you said, while it probably won't hold up in court if they came this way from the factory, there still is the time in between....

On a lighter note, sounds like a very nice piece of early history!

I'll ask for some pictures....i'll post them up here if/when I get them.

[supersonic]

When I had the upper removed, I was able to move the selector into the third position, hold down the trigger and move the hammer back and forth freely WITHOUT it clicking and stopping (not requiring the trigger to be pressed to release the hammer). Indeed, this was a correct and functional Full Auto FCG.

Something seems very strange about this part. This would mean that, apparently, when the rifle is discharged with the selector in the "#3" position, it would be slam-firing each & every time (not desirable NOR is this safe). With the selector in the #3 position, and you were holding the trigger back, that hammer should have caught on the disconnector. It is the bolt carrier design that effectively "times" the release of the hammer by hitting a sear just before going back into battery. But there was no auto sear. There is no way the rifle came like this from the manufacturer (Colt) & if the owner ever actually fired it in this condition (in #3 mode), he/she is lucky the piece is still in working condition today. Something tells me that certain M-16 parts were installed by someone who thought they knew what they were doing (legal or 'otherwise').........am I missing something here?

[goodlookin1]

In the #3 position, the only thing that holds back the hammer in a proper Fully Automatic AR-15/M16 is the Auto Sear. The design of the selector is such that when it is turned into the 3rd position, it pushes down the back of the disconnector, disengaging it from the backside of the hammer when it is pushed back by the carrier. The reason it does not slamfire is because the carrier is not a full auto carrier: It is the Colt SP1 carrier, so it should not allow for full auto or slam fire type situations. Furthermore, what vexes me is why the carrier was not allowed to go forward after charging it when in the 3rd position. Maybe with the sear notch on the hammer, it is jamming up on the carrier when it is coming back forward towards battery??? Without the auto sear holding the hammer back, im thinking the problem lies in the semi carrier. Wonder what would happen with a full auto carrier??? I sure ain't finding out....

In any case, I dont believe this was anything intentional.....the owner really doesnt know anything about how an AR functions. I was told the rifle has not been shot by the current owner and has been sitting in a safe for yeeears.

Still, it does seem odd that Colt would even sell a rifle with these parts. The only reason I can think that they would do that is because they werent manufacturing semi auto FCG civy editions yet.....if this rifle is that old.


On a side note, I've asked for pics and hopefully they'll come in soon. That may give someone an idea of when this thing was made.

[supersonic]

In the #3 position, the only thing that holds back the hammer in a proper Fully Automatic AR-15/M16 is the Auto Sear. The design of the selector is such that when it is turned into the 3rd position, it pushes down the back of the disconnector, disengaging it from the backside of the hammer when it is pushed back by the carrier. The reason it does not slamfire is because the carrier is not a full auto carrier: It is the Colt SP1 carrier, so it should not allow for full auto or slam fire type situations. Furthermore, what vexes me is why the carrier was not allowed to go forward after charging it when in the 3rd position. Maybe with the sear notch on the hammer, it is jamming up on the carrier when it is coming back forward towards battery???

In any case, I dont believe this was anything intentional.....the owner really doesnt know anything about how an AR functions. I was told the rifle has not been shot by the current owner and has been sitting in a safe for yeeears.

Still, it does seem odd that Colt would even sell a rifle with these parts. The only reason I can think that they would do that is because they werent manufacturing semi auto FCG civy editions yet.....if this rifle is that old.


On a side note, I've asked for pics and hopefully they'll come in soon. That may give someone an idea of when this thing was made.

I don't see how a semi-auto carrier could "prevent" a slamfire in this situation, especially since the SP-1 carriers didn't have the firing pin shroud, thereby allowing hammer-to-firing pin contact much sooner than most of today's S/A and F/A carriers that have shrouded FP's. Again, maybe I am still missing something, as I am no expert on full-auto operation, but it still seems weird to me. At any rate, I look forward to seeing the pics.

[Riodog]

"Something tells me that certain M-16 parts were installed by someone who thought they knew what they were doing (legal or 'otherwise')".

I think Super has it nailed.
Sounds like a mish/mash of mixed parts to me and while the possession is legal in other states, I wouldn't be caught dead with them around here.
I wouldn't admit to something like this also.
jmho
Rio