The M16 Rifle Family Part 2; M16A1/ Colt 614 USAF
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 08. 2024
- Today I continue my series of the M16 family and today we take a look at the M16A1 as it was adopted by the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps. As well as a brief look at the colt model 614 aka the "slickside A1"
Follow my channel on Utreon for content not available on youtube
utreon.com/c/M...
I carried the M16A1 with the forward assist in the Army in 1972.
When I was in the Air Force we were taught never to use the forward assist even if the rifle had one.
That is interesting to hear, if I had known that before I made the video I definitely would have mentioned it, and if it ever gets redone I will bring that up. When were you in the air force and how often did you come across rifles with a forward assist
@@milsurpminutes5809 I entered the Air Force in 1988 and retired in 2011. The rifles in basic training did not have the forward assist and we did have the .22 LR conversion BCG and mags. Which were crap. My first unit was a mobile comm unit I was assigned to in 1989. I believe my rifle their had a forward assist. It's been over 30 years so don't hold me to that. I do know that every M-16 I handled following that assignment did have the forward assist. The CATM troops that trained us said to never use it. According to them, it was "A stupid thing the Marines wanted and would only cause our rifles to jam." Personally I can see were if you're taking fire, you don't have time to fart around field stripping your rifle, you just need to get the dumb thing firing. You can figure out what went wrong later. All of my AR-15's have forward assists. So, I don't have anything against them.
Less of a stupid thing from the Marines and more of a stupid idea from the Army. I've been thinking about trying to track down one of those .22 conversion kits I don't assume it would work too well but it's more of what it is appeals to me. I bash the forward assist and think of him what you will but we did see Kyle Rittenhouse use his forward assist in the heat of the moment. Thank you for sharing your experiences.
USAF used the Colt model 604. 614s were for export/LE.
Curious, I had thought the Colt 604 was for the USAF contract and the Colt 614 its export model, identical in every way except for the roll marks
I thought that was the case originally too but I recall finding a source I used for the video that said the 614 was more of the slick side version of the A1 while the 604 was a slickside upper on a partial fence XM16E1 lower. That being said this was some time ago when I made it and I could be misrembering my source but that is something I will look back into thank you for your comment
When US Army made all the improvements to the Colt 602 after lessons-learned in SEA, the 2 updated service rifles were the Colt 603 and 604.
US Army and USMC standardized the RO603 as the US Rifle M16A1.
USAF insisted on their own variant that followed Stoner's recommendations with no forward assist, along with all the other improvements found in the 603. USAF version under Colt's product code was the RO604/US Rifle M16.
604s even have forward assist notches on the BCG, even though the upper is slick.
Lower receivers on the 604s are mechanically identical to 603s/M16A1s.
601s and 602s had different lowers and uppers.
614s are mechanically identical to the USAF 604, but were either exported or sold to State LE agencies.
I had an M16-A1 issued in West Germany. Hated it. Did not work right in the cold and got dirty too easy sitting on sand bags!
I bet it wasn't helped by the fact that yours had been in circulation for probably at least a decade and a half before you got it in your hands when we're you stationed there?
@@milsurpminutes5809 More than than I think. Probably 1968. They did not take care of it either but sure as hell made me take care of it! Ever clean one wearing NBC gear?
If it was 68 iw wouldn't have been that old the E1 first made it to the Army in like 64-65. I haven't had to clean one in NBC gear but I have shot the A2 with full NBC gear on and between the extended length of pull, plus the flak jacket, plus the mask made it a nightmare to even get a sight picture.
@@milsurpminutes5809 The one I was issued and kept in the USAF Security Police armory was not well maintained. There was a large gap between the upper and the lower and felt like it was loose as a goose.
Great explanation !
How do you know the year of manufacture of the M16 A1?
the colt 605 clone I built has the milled off FA like yours, soooo cool thanks for the vid, and if you can find the book 'The Black Rifle: M16 Retrospective Hardcover' you need it
I know I really need to get refrence books, Is that Chris Bartocci's newer book
@@milsurpminutes5809 no, the Chris Bartocci book picks up where the book I refenced stops Chris Bartocci's book starts with the M16A2E1, then the M4, so having both is ideal. I have other books as well but these 2 will get you to 90% quickly.
I see now yeah that book has been on my list for a while but I was kinda figuring they were too expensive to get a copy I do plan on getting Chris's new book
604
Thats what I thought coming into making this video, however the true 604 is basically the USAF slickside XM-61E1 with a partial fence lower.
@@milsurpminutes5809604s have full fenced lowers like the 603.
Your upper without FA is actually referred to as a Colt 605 upper, since they were seen on the 605 Carbine. Most samples of 605 uppers we can see, especially in the Reed Knight II collection, have the shaved FA boss like that instead of a slick upper like 601s, 602s, and 604s had using different forgings.
605 uppers were taken from forward assist forgings, and had the FA boss machined off.
That's a 605 build waiting to happen right there.
It wasn't just the Air Force that wanted the slick side the Marines also took the slick side of M16
Interesting where did you learn this, I mean I know the Army spearheaded the move.
USMC didn't care, just acquired whatever the Army did in the 1960s.
The M-16A2 wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't emasculated down with the 3 round burst option, instead of keeping it full auto..
Yeah they pretty much tried to design a system to bypass the benefits of good training, I discuss this topic at greater length in my videos covering the M16A2 and M16A4, thanks for commenting.
We pretty much never used it. In my first Recon Platoon, we still had M16A1s and used AUTO for break contact immediate action drills for the 1 & 2 man. It sucked when we got A2s.
In the line, we never used AUTO or BURST. It's almost pointless to have considering how we actually used the weapons.
Great content. I can’t believe there aren’t 100k views. Keep ‘em coming
Thank you sir, get the word out tell your friends about the channel I have more regular videos that I'm working on now thank you for the comment
Can I assume the serrations made for a lighter bolt? If so did it effect reliability?
The serrations were added so that it could be pushed by the forward bolt assist that came later on the XM16E1 that remains on most modern AR-15 pattern rifles
@@milsurpminutes5809 I understand that but did loss of weight effect reliability?
@@stendak yes, they had jams everywhere non-stop. They never solved it but kept it like that to make everyone as angry as possible while using it.
@@stendak No
@@milsurpminutes5809XM16E1 predates the 604 by 3 years. XM16E1 was an interim upper receiver solution mated to partial fence 602 lowers, after 602s proved to have so many problems. USMC got bent over with 602s issued to them, while the Army was working on solutions to it already identified before major US combat forces were ever deployed to Vietnam in 1965.
602s had a lot of under spec chambers, and no chrome lining.
XM16E1 uppers had forward assist added per US Army request, but can be distinguished by their 3 prong flash hiders.
M16A1 (603) and USAF M16 (604) were introduced in 1967.
1959 Colt 601
1963 Colt 602
1964 XM16E1
1967 Colt 603 and 604
The Air Force took the AR-15 the way Eugene Stoner originally attended it to be..
Exactly. Eugene Stoner didn’t design the rifle to have the forward assist as the rifle didn’t need it. However, the Army brass at the time demanded it for the M1, M14 etc had one (bolt handle) and wanted it incorporated in to the M16.