Any such thing out there as pre-1965 AR15 lowers ?

R

RobSmith

BANNED
BANNED
BANNED
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Location
Rigaud, Quebec
Since AFAIK the de-facto restriction of the AR states "Colt M16 and variants) and the M16 only got it's military designation in '65 when it was adopted by the US Army...

One wonders if there are such things out there, how they are classed...

d:h:
 
IF one were to make a semi-only AR-10 (as seen below), it would be classified as non-restricted.

ar10.jpg
 
RobSmith said:
Since AFAIK the de-facto restriction of the AR states "Colt M16 and variants) and the M16 only got it's military designation in '65 when it was adopted by the US Army...

One wonders if there are such things out there, how they are classed...

d:h:
Click to expand...

if there are any out there, more than likely they are all select fire, since they wouldn't be any civilian version yet.
 
RobSmith said:
Since AFAIK the de-facto restriction of the AR states "Colt M16 and variants) and the M16 only got it's military designation in '65 when it was adopted by the US Army...

One wonders if there are such things out there, how they are classed...

d:h:
Click to expand...

The law is actually more detailed than your recollection:

The firearm of the design commonly known as the M-16 rifle, and any variant or modified version of it, including the:

* Colt AR-15;
* Colt AR-15 SPI;
* Colt AR-15 Sporter;
* Colt AR-15 Collapsible Stock Model;
* Colt AR-15 A2;
* Colt AR-15 A2 Carbine;
* Colt AR-15 A2 Government Model Rifle;
* Colt AR-15 A2 Government Model Target Rifle;
* Colt AR-15 A2 Government Model Carbine;
* Colt AR-15 A2 Sporter II;
* Colt AR-15 A2 H-BAR;
* Colt AR-15 A2 Delta H-BAR;
* Colt AR-15 A2 Delta H-BAR Match;
* Colt AR-15 9mm Carbine;
o Armalite AR-15;

Colt 601s are typically marked "Colt / Armalite AR-15 / Model 01"
while the 602s I have pictures of are marked "Colt AR-15/ Property of US Government / Model 02. Either of these would be covered by the list above. In fact, the term "Colt AR-15" appeared on almost all Vietnam-era M16-type rifles, to serial numbers into the 4 million range.

By the way, the actual M16 was never adopted by the US Army. It was adopted by the Air Force in 1964, but was deemed unacceptable by the Army, due to the lack of a forward assist.
 
Since M-16 is the one specified, any semi-auto lower produced prior to the M-16 being officially adopted and given it's military designation should not be considered a "variant" since it was developped prior to the M-16 coming into existence.

Chicken or the egg sort of thing ...

BattleRife said:
The law is actually more detailed than your recollection:

The firearm of the design commonly known as the M-16 rifle, and any variant or modified version of it, including the:

* Colt AR-15;
* Colt AR-15 SPI;
* Colt AR-15 Sporter;
* Colt AR-15 Collapsible Stock Model;
* Colt AR-15 A2;
* Colt AR-15 A2 Carbine;
* Colt AR-15 A2 Government Model Rifle;
* Colt AR-15 A2 Government Model Target Rifle;
* Colt AR-15 A2 Government Model Carbine;
* Colt AR-15 A2 Sporter II;
* Colt AR-15 A2 H-BAR;
* Colt AR-15 A2 Delta H-BAR;
* Colt AR-15 A2 Delta H-BAR Match;
* Colt AR-15 9mm Carbine;
o Armalite AR-15;

Colt 601s are typically marked "Colt / Armalite AR-15 / Model 01"
while the 602s I have pictures of are marked "Colt AR-15/ Property of US Government / Model 02. Either of these would be covered by the list above. In fact, the term "Colt AR-15" appeared on almost all Vietnam-era M16-type rifles, to serial numbers into the 4 million range.

By the way, the actual M16 was never adopted by the US Army. It was adopted by the Air Force in 1964, but was deemed unacceptable by the Army, due to the lack of a forward assist.
Click to expand...
 
RobSmith said:
Since M-16 is the one specified, any semi-auto lower produced prior to the M-16 being officially adopted and given it's military designation should not be considered a "variant" since it was developped prior to the M-16 coming into existence.

Chicken or the egg sort of thing ...
Click to expand...

I know to us this argument is perfectly logical but your forgetting something crucial..... There is no logic in the classification of new firearms or old for that matter, remember sadly these are the meat heads who think a gsg 5 is an MP5 variant, or a mp15-22 is an AR variant
 
RobSmith said:
Since M-16 is the one specified, any semi-auto lower produced prior to the M-16 being officially adopted and given it's military designation should not be considered a "variant" since it was developped prior to the M-16 coming into existence.

Chicken or the egg sort of thing ...
Click to expand...

You're extrapolating from a situation that doesn't apply. The AR10 "chicken or the egg" ruling came about because the AR10 was a predecessor that was not classified. The AR15 clearly is classified: the law defines it as a variant of the M16. A judge would not have the power to rule otherwise.

Additionally, it is meaningful that the name of the rifle did not change from before the adoption of the M16 to after. As much as people on here like to state that gun laws have no logic, the fact is that they really are fairly straightforward to anyone who takes a few minutes to try to understand them. That would not be the case if the law took the position that an AR-15 made in summer 1964 had a different classification than the identical rifle made in the summer of 1965.
 
RobSmith said:
Since M-16 is the one specified, any semi-auto lower produced prior to the M-16 being officially adopted and given it's military designation should not be considered a "variant" since it was developped prior to the M-16 coming into existence.

Chicken or the egg sort of thing ...
Click to expand...

Did you read the list? The original rifle, the Armalite AR-15, is on it.
 
Well the is the example of the Sterling that one could use, most are prohibited by name, a handful of early ones are restricted (because they preceed the "banned" firearm), even though it is identical and called the same thing, so there is precedent there.

One would think that the US military would have mandated a few minor changes before adoptig it as the M-16, one simply has to figure out what those modifications were.

BattleRife said:
You're extrapolating from a situation that doesn't apply. The AR10 "chicken or the egg" ruling came about because the AR10 was a predecessor that was not classified. The AR15 clearly is classified: the law defines it as a variant of the M16. A judge would not have the power to rule otherwise.

Additionally, it is meaningful that the name of the rifle did not change from before the adoption of the M16 to after. As much as people on here like to state that gun laws have no logic, the fact is that they really are fairly straightforward to anyone who takes a few minutes to try to understand them. That would not be the case if the law took the position that an AR-15 made in summer 1964 had a different classification than the identical rifle made in the summer of 1965.
Click to expand...
 
The AR-15 did predate the M-16, The first rifles purchased by the US Gov't. were AR-15s. The M-16 name appeared after the rifle became standardized for issue. The M-16 is a variant of the AR-15, not the other way around.
I am trying to remember when I first saw a commercial semi auto Colt AR. Probably in '63-'64. Surely there must be information available about when Colt first sold semi auto AR-15s.
The point is probably moot, though. The intent of the law is clear, and it is highly unlikely that any judge would set the law aside.
 
You might reconsider posting this then. It is clearly a CA that was improperly registered.
 
Last edited:
What is the "intent of the law" when it comes to arbitrary OICs which clearly follow no logic, no standard, have no basis in law, and have no-one to answer to ?

Heck there is no such thing as a legal definition of "variant".

In theory : find an AR15 lower that predates the M16 designation, copy it precisely and then if anybody asks you can demonstrate that it is merely a "variant" or a prior model, not covered under the OIC.

You can then proceed to improve upon it to your heart's content, as long as you use a "clean room" technique, something familiar to computer geeks such as myself many moons ago (the independant development of an IBM PC "clone" BIOS) used.

tiriaq said:
The intent of the law is clear, and it is highly unlikely that any judge would set the law aside.
Click to expand...
 
Well, there's a project for you.....
Get the machinist's prints for a pre-M-16 Colt commercial AR-15, buy a so-called 80% unfinished lower. Finish it to duplicate the early Colt, and apply to register it.
Wouldn't even be particularly expensive to do, particularly if you act as your own counsel for the reference hearings.
 
Well, I'm still not sure how you figure this is possible, since the law clearly lists the AR-15 as restricted, but let's put that aside for a moment and focus on the practical aspects.

I am pretty sure that the Colt AR-15 SP1, which was the first AR-15 variant to be manufactured as a semi-auto, originated in 1964 after the US DoD issued purchase orders for the first M16 and XM16E1 rifles. Colts primary motivation was obvious: they had a new rifle that was making waves and entering military service, many average US shooters would want to experience the rifle, so they needed a semi-auto.

There was a second motivating factor. As you suggested, the military did require a few modifications, the most important of which was a new, fully captive front pivot pin. This necessitated a new receiver design and new forging dies, and the DoD would not accept any new rifles built on old receivers. This was a problem for Colt, because they had about 100,000 forgings of the original receiver pattern in stock, and they could not be modified. So the SP1 was introduced, in part, as a way to use up those old receivers. It took Colt until about 1982 to use them all, and then they switched to the current receiver style (fourth version) and changed the model number. So all Colt SP1 rifles, regardless of age, are built on the same receiver (first style) as those very first, 1964 semi-auto rifles.

RobSmith said:
In theory : find an AR15 lower that predates the M16 designation, copy it precisely and then if anybody asks you can demonstrate that it is merely a "variant" or a prior model, not covered under the OIC.
Click to expand...
 
The law states the M-16 as the "parent" in the OIC, then proceeds to list all known "children", including bastard childs that don't mechanically have anything to do with it, but kinda look like it if you close one eye and squint real hard.

So (at least in theory) if one gets hold of a pre-M16 lower, demonstrates that there are differences between the two (which there would have been, even if it's just the markings), then proceeds to copy it precisely, and documents the process, the RCMP/CFC suddenly doesn't have a leg to lean on....

Clean room for any "improvements" ...

Doesn't really matter at this point which trigger pack you use, but for some extra insurance you might want to design one yourself that just happens to fit all the critical functions.

Just sayin'...

BattleRife said:
Well, I'm still not sure how you figure this is possible, since the law clearly lists the AR-15 as restricted, but let's put that aside for a moment and focus on the practical aspects.

I am pretty sure that the Colt AR-15 SP1, which was the first AR-15 variant to be manufactured as a semi-auto, originated in 1964 after the US DoD issued purchase orders for the first M16 and XM16E1 rifles. Colts primary motivation was obvious: they had a new rifle that was making waves and entering military service, many average US shooters would want to experience the rifle, so they needed a semi-auto.

There was a second motivating factor. As you suggested, the military did require a few modifications, the most important of which was a new, fully captive front pivot pin. This necessitated a new receiver design and new forging dies, and the DoD would not accept any new rifles built on old receivers. This was a problem for Colt, because they had about 100,000 forgings of the original receiver pattern in stock, and they could not be modified. So the SP1 was introduced, in part, as a way to use up those old receivers. It took Colt until about 1982 to use them all, and then they switched to the current receiver style (fourth version) and changed the model number. So all Colt SP1 rifles, regardless of age, are built on the same receiver (first style) as those very first, 1964 semi-auto rifles.
Click to expand...
 
The Armalite AR-15 is the original rifle and it's on the list. Armalite of today has nothing to do with the old company other than the name and they call their models M-15 because Colt was suing anyone using their nomemclature. The M16 designation was given by the military after they adopted it, not Colt.

A picture says it best:

1q1lhe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom