Okay folks, talk to me about the front take down pin on a 601 clone.

I thought I had all of my parts for a 601 built, and was just waiting on a barrel (1-12,not a 1-14!). I figured I'd assemble my lower while I waited and that's when I realized the front pin was different! I know real 601's had a non captive pin, and knew Brownells did the same. In fact I just looked at their front pin when I ordered a barrel, but I didn't realize the H&R 601 lower was the same way! H&R doesn't sell the pin from what I saw (unless  I'm missing it) so I just assumed it used a regular captive pin. I know, I assumed...

Anyway, I ordered a Brownells 601 pin. Is that in fact what will work with my H&R 601 lower?

EDIT: Now that I go back and look at the H&R listing I see someone answered this question in the Q&A section. You'd sort of think this would be pertinent info to add to the item description itself...

The Brownells pin worked on mine just fine.  It was more black than I wanted, but it was the only option.

Okay, glad to have the confirmation. I can Moly coat it gray if need be.

Fun fact:

The original 601 front pin was a green painted, domed pin with no detent that was held in place by staking the left side directly in the middle and slightly mushrooming it out so it couldn't be removed without hammering it out (or grinding off the end past the expanded portion).

I believe these were in early armalite models and a few were used in the first colt 601's that used up the last of the armalite parts during the transition.

Oh! That is a fun fact. That's kind of crazy.

Please post a source.

Not to call you out, as this may have happened once or twice. However, just based on my experience/study of the original ArmaLite AR-15s, I would chalk this up to fudd lore. Reference my prototype thread that’s stickied in the retro forum to see why this is a dubious claim, at best. You can also reference my 601 photo reference thread that goes in Serial number order. Again, I think you will find that the claim is false.

Now, a true unique fact about the 1958 ArmaLite AR-15s is that their uppers were machined so that the front pins were to be installed from left to right (from rollmark side to ejection port side) while the rear pins were the opposite. In my thread, a couple of the rifles have it wrong simple because they've been taken apart and put back together by people who assume they are machined like the 601/later M16s.

*I* am the source.

I saw them first hand.  Hammered out a bunch during a demil operation. Not my happiest project.

Original 601 front pivot pins

Very cool!  Happen to have any details on the serial numbers they were pulled from?

Sorry, I cannot divulge that information. I will say they were all sub 14k SNs.

My best guess is that they were part of project agile and originally issued to ARVN soldiers and specifically produced like this to prevent them from fully dissassembling the rifles and losing pins.

Also possibly from other agency testing around the same time.

And while very difficult to tell, thise pins ARE painted green.

Attached File

Attached File

Attached File

Attached File

Attached File


Thanks for the pictures. I don’t doubt your story, as the pins to which you are referring obviously exist. However, I remain skeptical and stand by my statement against your claim that, “The original 601 front pin was a green painted, domed pin…”

Again, even the earliest ArmaLites had the detented pin. My initial assumption, sort of like you stated, is this may have been an in-country and/or contracted remedy/fix for pins that were lost in the field. I doubt they were “produced” like this though

No Colt factory documents that I have seen refer to this pin, and this is the first time I have seen them. I’m by no means the authority, but I do own a collection of 1963 Colt factory documents (including parts lists, spreadsheets, etc), and I have paid attention to just about every 601 picture I have ever come across (hence the photo reference thread), and I have never seen these.

Not trying to cause an argument, again I trust your story. I’m just engaging in discourse over a difference of opinion haha

Were the serials a concurrent run? Or were they in a specified block? Or were they a random set of rifles?

They look like rivets repurposed for pivot pins.

I agree this was more than likely an in-country field mod and not an original production item. Very cool though, thank you for sharing.

This

The de-milled guns were across a wide band of SNs, but i honestly don't remember which range of SNs had these pins. Unfortunately, even if i did remember, i still couldn't share the details.

I do believe these were a factory installed part, not an aftermarket fix as they were originally painted with a similar color to the handguards (that darkened over time with storage lube. I.E. VCI). Like i told the other poster, i believe they were for Agile testing in SE Asia or for other agency testing that was taking place at the same time.

ETA: thanks for making the pics live.

I do not believe so as the heads are the same diameter as the flat head pins. I suspect a re-purposed rivet would not be made to proper spec.

Also remember that the first 1k guns sent were pre-AF production order and the design was still in flux. As part of Agile, guns were given to advisors, ARVN, and other govt. Agency. Knowing that some of the guns were going to low experience or poorly trained TCNs, i believe the decision was made to "soldier proof" some of the guns as best as they could.

I’d have to go back through the AGILE report, but I don’t think it references specific serials. I do remember references to limbs being “blown off” though

Agree to disagree though haha, I think they were a replacement personally.

Some of the very first first 601s were sent to Malaysia, and didn’t have these though lol.

Same with Myanmar, Indonesia, India, etc.

These pins were either an after market/factory requested pin specially for that order as to have the end user not be able to take them apart or an install in theatre.

There is 0 evidence in records, pictures, manuals, brochures or first hand accounts of originally guns that were first off the line as well as prototypes that had these pins.

Neat pins but in no ways ‘original’ colt 601

This one is a 1" , but they come in any length.  I think 1 1/8" would be what would work.  Maybe my next jungle worn 601 carbine bakelite build will include one!

And those guns weren't sent to forces for testing or being advised/trained by US personell who already understood some of the fielding issues.

Also, don't forget the potential of the other agancy involvement,  of which no public mention would ever be made of the requirements they requested.  Not saying that's where those things were from, but the potential is there given the wide variety of SNs worked on.

That being said, were your assumptions correct, i wonder if the AF ever had an approved version of this "fix" as i do know some of the SNs were in the range of the original AF contract.

Like I said, I’d have to go through the report. But DARPA at that time was about as secret as it gets.

And the rifles referenced absolutely were for testing. Thats why the countries mentioned only bought 25-100 of them

And the point of AGILE WAS to test the feasibility of issuing the rifle and other equipment to countries like Vietnam, Indonesia, Myanmar, etc.

It makes sense that these configurations would be used in early "trials" that they wanted to keep the whole upper and lower together for.  Possibly the reason for these rivets.  Also very interesting that they were painted.  That is very odd for a rivet.

I’m not buying it. If that were the case, why then would Colt continue to manufacture and sell 601s and 602s for 2-3 more years afterward with the standard pin? Why are there no references to it on parts sheets, but we’ve found references for things like a “semi-auto only” safety (of which very few are known to exist)?

Meh. Your prerogative, i suppose.

They do exist and they were removed from actual 601's. Some green stock versions some black stock versions(probably updated at some point in their operational lives) and most were in excellent condition (a few had been painted black over anode at some point.

Believe it or don't. Things exist regardless if you "buy" them or not.

Lastly. There are things that happen in some agencies that DARPA has zero control over. What they purchase and how they want things go well outside of the ordinary. I seent it.

As stated in previous posts, i believe your story that you removed them.

I do not buy the fact that they “originally” came in 601s as stated. Again, a dubious claim at best when the source is: “Just trust me bro.”

It’s interesting to me that they’re painted green. Why?

Colt wouldn’t waste money on paint unless they were obligated to. Factory or no, I think that points to an off the shelf part that was already painted green.

Hiw many green painted rivets (and painted nearly the same color as the gun in question) have you ever seen?

You're free to believe what you will.

Attached File

Attached File

Attached File

This sounds plausible.

I have the reports for most of the early trials 1958-1967 including Aberdeen, Benning, Greely, Ord, AGILE, etc. None of the tests that involve 601s and 602s (slabside lowers) have these. Plausible as an in-country or aftermarket replacement. As a Colt factory part, i don’t think so.

I'm just saying it sounds plausible that they were used to keep rifles from becoming mix masters. No clue who put them there or why. For all I know it was supply chain issues and parts availability during the big Covid outbreak of 63.

How long was Colt still supplying those removable 601/602 front pins to the military (as spare parts)?

I could envision some CATM guys in the USAF later using these rivets to replace missing pins, due to not having any replacement Colt pins available. (Or nobody knowing how to obtain some more.)

Lol point taken. Agree, the premise is possible.

Aircraft rivets that are painted after the fact is the reponse?

These pins are fully painted prior to install.

It is an answer to your question, yes.

As I usually say when I get into these debates, I come with the full weight of official government reports, factory documents, and lots of photographs.

You’re expecting the rest us to buy into a theory based on anecdotal evidence (your testimony).

Edit: and as i have stated, i believe you when you say what you saw. But your claim based on that observation has no basis

Gentlemen, can I call for a recess please. ASD and AE, you guys have become masters without a doubt of finding hidden info. APSD, please don't drop off. Let me splain my request for the recess.
I'm currently digging for info regarding known made X SN M14s. There are only one handful known right now. They were built at SA as factory built semi auto rifles. I'm not talking about the NM rifles that have the selector parts welded. These are machined very different, never had the selector lug, the dismount notch is under the rear sight like a M1 Garand and other machining not found on your standard M14 rifles. What I noticed on 2 of the examples I have pics of, X100 and X500, I have good clear pics of is that not only do they have the 7 digit drawing number of a standard M14 7790189 but a 2nd what appears to be another 7 digit drawing number roll marked next to the 779 one,,, 2123708. Guy on another forum who has some hook into govt records, I asked him if he could send me the drawings for 7790189 and 2123708. The 1st was easy as it's the drawing for a standard M14. He can not find anything (yet) on 2123708. Yet both numbers are on these X sn M14s. My thinking is that IF there is a 212 drawing it would show that actual semi only rifles were built at SA and if a person was to come across the ones in the X300 range (IIRC there are 3) but may be others out there, maybe having the 212 number would proove it was factory made semi,make it legal to own as that 212 number would prove it was never machined as a machine gun and later altered to semi a machine gun. (once a machine gun, always a machine gun)
Sooo, that said, I'm a never say never, never say absolutely when it comes to this stuff.

APSD in my opinion (my opinion) has produced info that is well worth digging deeper into before anyone says "no way, doubtful, etc". Remember guys, not long ago we were all lock on the info on Retro Black Rifle, but then WOW an explosion of new info was found by you few that changed a lot!!  Whether factory made at Colt, or at the request of ???? some agency or ?? I truly think this info is worth pursuing.
I personally am cured of RBRD, so I'll leave it to you deep researchers who have done such an incredible, amazing job at digging up the unknown in the last few years. I only come here now to see what new info you few have found. I will never again in my life build another M16 anything. But I love to learn.


Soooo, a recess guys??? Time to dig deep.... Agree to disagree for now but dig down deeper.

Rob, I personally believe I’ve done about all the digging I can do. I’ve got a ridiculous number of files on my computer (reports, brochures and otherwise) and have not seen a single reference or mention of these from the factory.

I think the burden of proof should be to state otherwise, considering that every ArmaLite AR-15 (XAR-1501 thru SN27) has the 601 style pin, as does every rifle we’ve ever seen a photograph of with serials roughly 100-40,000.

We generally say “anything is possible with Colt,” but we generally say that in reference to parts that were known to have existed, but are combined in a strange way.

Using the “its super secret we cant talk about it” excuse for a front pivot pin doesnt pass the sniff test to me. As mentioned, agree to disagree, but unless i see documents or pictures, I will not be convinced that this is a Colt factory part, myself.

Well, I hear what you're saying but will add this. Having dealt with a couple of the originators of RBR and befriending one of them, I'm sure they felt the same way when they finished their work, and years later you and Alex have expanded the knowledge base at least 30 fold. HUGE kudos to you both.
I'm just not willing to dismiss anything. I'ma open mind kinda guy. There may be a paper trail out there somewhere. Look at what you and Alex have found and come into possession of just in the last few years.
PS, member PrivateSnafu has sent me pics over the years (He prolly posted some here) of things that "should not" exist, yet they were found at a place that bought a lot of demilled stuff out of Crane years ago.
PPS, I was always interested in the SEAL 50 rd mags. Never thought I would engage in a conversation with a member here who owned 2 from his father and had original paperwork with the reports on them. He sent me a copy under the condition that I never post them on the internet.  Sooo,,, that's me throwing something out there with no way to prove (because of the promise I made) , I will honor his request, does this make my statement bogus because I can't back it up here??
His request was to never post on the internet, so if you feel I just made a bogus statement, I'll be happy to send you a copy but with the same conditions. But knowing you, you prolly found  that report already.

The difference is photos of those are known to exist in country.

And the statement isn’t, “this is an original Colt factory 50 round mag” lol

Context matters

Agreed but when did those pics come out? Before they came out who would have known they existed except for the few SEALs and the makers of them, and if someone was to post back in the day (without pics) obviously pre internet, that they were in fact made, how many folks would have called BS?
Don't know why he can't let us know who they were made for, maybe a legit reason, mayby not. I just don't like to see anyone being dismissed. That could make them never want to come back and he may have other great info to share that he can be more open about. Hope you're catching my drift my Friend.
PS, BTW, I remember one or 2 times info posted by willp was questioned.. Further research proved him right.
BTW, I still want/need your help with that website now that I own it. I want to add to it but I'ma admitted puter moron. Maybe when you're out we can spend time on fone and chat as to what can bring that site up a few levels.

BTW Lt. As you prolly know, I tend to really examine closely pics when posted. Remember a few years ago when you posted pics of that depression you observed on one of your lowers, I examined it real hard and close. I think I was the one who 1st explained it as having been made by the bolt stop, followed by others who confirmed it.
When I looked at the pics of those pins what caught my attention was 2 things. Most have a soft radius on the end, others have tapered ends and some have a dimple on the end. My Buddy Nicky is huge on manuals, a ton of M16 ones. I don't remember where it 1st shows up nor do I remember if it was written text or one of the disassembly illustrations. It showed how a bullet can be used to pop the front pivot pin and the pic shows a dimpled pin. He mentioned they were "staked", ok yeah, I can see that working on the ones with the soft radius, but those others with the taper? Not sure if with that taper, staking would really work. But it caught my interest. No Idea if that was the reason for the dimple from a manufacturing point of view, or one of the contractors just did it due to the lathe or machines they used., you would prolly know better then me.
I have done retro restorations (WW2 military vehicles and ordnance and other equipment) and have used ole skool steel rivets and the round over hand tools. None of the rivets I have ever had (a lot came from old time machinists when my Dad had his antique shop) had a dimple on the end. They were all perfectly flat.
So again, I'm gonna keep an open mind re: these pins until someone can prove beyond a shadow of doubt one way or the other.

I don’t view it as a dismissal, as I trust and believe the story. I don’t concur with the conclusion drawn from said story lol

A difference of opinion and viewpoint I suppose. That said, I welcome all to Retroland and encourage people to do their own research projects. I will gladly concede if my stance is proven wrong, as I have many times before.

It’s a free country, people are entitled to their own opinions lol. Still agree to disagree on this one haha. APS is entitled to the same and I’m sure he will elect to continue to disagree with me as well.

However, the statement that began this discussion, “The original 601 front pin was a green painted, domed pin with no detent that was held in place by staking the left side directly in the middle and slightly mushrooming it out so it couldn't be removed without hammering it out (or grinding off the end past the expanded portion). I believe these were in early armalite models and a few were used in the first colt 601's that used up the last of the armalite parts during the transition” is patently false

Love you Brother.

I'm kinda afraid to post my 601 build when it's done now, lol. I was happy putting together something close but, considering I was confused on the front pin, and after reading all the in depth knowledge here, I probably have got a hundred other things wrong that I didn't even know about!

Ah, well. Hopefully it captures the spirit of a 601 at least!

You own Retro Black Rifle now? That's awesome. That has been a go to for me for ages, and I check back frequently. It would be fantastic if much of the additional info that percolates here is added eventually too.

Nah, noone really cares about that lol, a retro inspired rifle is a rifle for you to shoot and enjoy.

From my observations, the earliest AR receiver pins sat flush with the receiver side when the rifle was assembled, rather than protruding slightly as with more modern rifles. With a flush-fitting pin, you cannot push the pins out by hand, so the pin's central divot would allow a positive register for the bullet of a cartridge to push on the pin. The divots probably remained on the pins for awhile due to manufacturing inertia, and nobody requested their removal.

Yep

No Sir, I took over >https://imageevent.com/willyp
when Phil called me and told me was not going to renew and asked if I wanted to take it over. Too much good info on his site to let disappear, so I gladly took it over, but Ima puter moron and have not added to it yet. I want to expand on the M16 section with the help of AmericanSheepDog and AE Young if they are willing, but even more so the M14/XM21 section as that is my real interest, wood and steel..
I hope to add a small section on M1 Garand sniper rifles.
RBR site is owned by member Texsquirrel

Oh heck man, no one here will knock your build, please do post. We may add info, but we LOVE all retro and retro inspired builds!!

I have another theory...  Field mod due to either the lower or upper receiver pin hole wearing or out of tolerance.  This might have helped keep them from falling out.  

I was also thinking this might be a later thing vs an earlier thing....  They did change the pin design completely at some time(I forget that exact time) to get away from the 601 style pin.  Thoughts?