Picked up a new lower.

Here's my rendition so far.  It started with a sling and 2005 RAS lying around for about 10 years.  Went into a gun shop a couple months back and they had a used but actually NIB Colt AR15A4 for a Glock price so I snagged it and tossed on the rail, sling and a FA correct selector.  I ground off the FA fin to allow SA operation in that position and some of the fin on the SAFE side to mimic a SA selector on SAFE.

I guess I'm sort of going for a 2005-2007 rifle.  Maybe I'll swap to an ACOG/BUIS eventually but for now, sweet and simple.

I was at a local show last Saturday and saw a dealer with a demilled Sabre Defense M16A4 kit for sale for $750. I hadn’t known these were out there but found several listings for them on GB and other sites after getting home. It looked like ones I found online with a complete upper with M5 RAS, stock attached to the rear chunk of the lower (cut off just forward of the takedown pin, basically leaving a small triangle of metal attached to the upper by the pin) and original pistol grip in a bag. Seems like a quick way to build a clone.

It would be interesting to build a custom engraved Sabre lower from an 80%. Does anyone have photos they can share of the markings on these military rifles? The ones I found by searching had all succumbed to the Photobucket blurring.

What sling is that? And would it be correct for a USMC issued rifle during that time frame?

Well, my labor of love to clone my issued FN M16A4 from 2005 made great progress and then ran into a roadblock. Long story short, I misaligned the selector holes when drilling them out, I believe because I forgot to tighten down the 5D Tactical buffer adapter that screws into the threaded receiver extension hole at the rear of the lower. I realized after drilling all the holes (which I wanted to do first before milling out the FCG pocket) that I had only hand tightened it, so I tightened it down but didn't realize until I started the assembly process that the selector holes were misaligned. The selector rotates but has all sorts of slop in it (both rotating and side to side), and it has several hitches in the rotation - almost like it has two stops at each location. Clearly the selector detent is misaligned and not engaging properly with the indentations on the selector. In addition to the issue with the selector, I think my trigger holes are a little too big, maybe as a result of my failure to tighten down the jig before drilling. With a Colt hammer and trigger installed, I can push the pins a little from side to side with my fingers, and I really don't think they should be that loose. The selector issue isn't something I can live with, so I may have to de-mill this one and start from scratch. Of course, I didn't notice this until I had it finished by Outlaw Anodizing in Houston and started assembling it today after receiving it back.

I posted more details about my experience with the 5D Tactical Router Jig Pro here, so I'll stick to discussing the custom engraving and anodizing for this project in this thread. I'll just include some before photos of the inside of the lower to compare to the anodized finish in late photos. I was pretty satisfied with my milling job - if only I hadn't screwed up drilling the holes. It's hard to see in these photos due to the glare on the freshly-milled aluminum, but the interior came out fairly smooth with light marks between layers and a few small chatter marks.

Attached File

Attached File


Outlaw Anodizing preps the lower as part of the anodizing process and cleaned up a lot of the tool marks. They were easy to deal with and I think the finish looks good, but this is my first time having something anodized, so I'd welcome any feedback from the group. The finish is slightly more matte-looking compared to the FN factory A4 upper in the last photo, but that's probably because it hasn't been oiled down yet. I wanted to thank @alpha0815 for posting about his experience with Outlaw Anodizing in this thread, which gave me a good look at their work and convinced me to try them out.

This project started with a Cerro 80% that I had the Man himself engrave for me about a year and a half ago. He did great work, but I think I may have made a mistake and had him leave off the period after the "M16A4" because I thought I found some photos of receivers that didn't have the period, and some where I wasn't sure, so I thought maybe it wasn't on all of them. I also figured I could easily add it myself if needed, but I never really researched that fully and forgot about it before having it anodized. The anodizing seems to kind of highlight the slightly raise edge around each character from the CNC engraving process, which is more noticeable in these closeup photos:

Attached File


The shiny area in the middle of the engraving is a lighting effect here, not an anodizing issue, but you also see how the light catches the fine raised edge around the characters. Those fine squiggles / lines do appear in the anodizing when viewed in person - I think they may be imperfections in the aluminum:

Attached File


This photo shows the selector hole looking properly aligned in the middle of the selector markings:

Attached File


On other side, you can see that the hole is too close to the BURST and not centered under the SEMI. Once inserted, the selector drum is also visibly canted toward the rear on that side when view from above:

Attached File


There are some spots where the anodizing appears to be a little uneven, but I haven't oiled the surface, so I'm not sure if it's left over residue, imperfections in the aluminum, or variations in the anodizing itself. I'm not sure what creates the sort of lighter "halo" effect around the holes as seen in the photos above, but it may go away after oiling the lower. Overall, I kind of feel like the anodizing isn't quite as opaque (thick?) as a real military lower, but it could be just an effect of the light and may look different when lubed down. I haven't really had a chance to compare it to any factory lowers. Here's an area on the side of the mag well that looks kind of splotchy:

Attached File


Here's how the inside of the lower looks after prepping and anodizing by Outlaw Anodizing. You can see some faint horizontal lines between layers, and a few tool marks, but overall, I think it turned out really nice:

Attached File

Attached File

Attached File


Here's a final photo showing my FN / Cerro upper mounted on the lower to compare the two finishes. I think the Outlaw Anodizing finish goes well with it, but it's hard to tell how closely they match, since the upper came pretty well lubricated from Ohio Ordnance, and the lower hasn't been oiled or wiped down yet:

Attached File


This project took me about two years to get to this point, so I'm pretty disappointed that I screwed up the selector hole and made the lower basically unusable (in my opinion). However, I'm not as disappointed as I thought I would be, because I really enjoyed the learning process of both milling and anodizing. If I decide to redo this lower, I'll have the chance to correct a couple things. I really want to get this right - I'm a bit obsessive, but I'm also building this rifle as a replica of the one that I carried for the first four months of my first combat deployment to Iraq, and I want it to be as close to perfect as I can make it as a reminder of that formative experience in my life. If I redo it, I'll probably have the period added after the "M16A4," buy a drill press so I can drill the holes more precisely, and clean up a couple things in the milling process before having it anodized. I also still need to address a question about the finish on my FNMI barrel and want to have Retro Arms clean it up for me by reparkerizing the FSB, and maybe the whole barrel.

My apologies - this was really long-winded, but I wanted to contribute something here that might be a useful addition to this awesome thread. Thanks for all the inspiring photos and information you all have shared here.

Wow that is beyond cool. Thanks for sharing

Looks good man! I know the finish is pretty critical for the retro cloners. The ano work I’ve had done with Outlaw was with raw billet upper and lowers, so they obviously matched perfect.

Glad to see another option for you guys though.

There's something about m16a4's and m4a1's that I absolutely love... I used to be so jealous while carrying my c7a1 on exercises south of the border.

Can any of the experts give me some info on the nylon buttstock and handguard mounted sling adapters I often see on A4 clones? Who made them for the mil., where to buy (this is probably not an issue) etc...

@3ACR_Scout Awesome post soldier!! Sorry the lower is inop : (

http://www.spectergear.com/default.asp

Thanks! As I said, it's a disappointing setback, but it's also been a good experience for my first clone attempt.

As I mentioned above, I've been continuing to research early M16A4s (mine was produced by FN in 2004), and I came across two photos today that show early rifles with raised "F" Cerro upper receivers, something I've never seen pictures of before. I suspected there might have been raised F uppers, and here's the confirmation. I think it will be extremely difficult to find one of those on the civilian market, so I'll just stick with the stamped F Cerro upper that I posted above. Both these photos also show the Anchor Harvey style lower receiver forging with the short "tube" for the takedown pin detent spring instead of the full Cerro tube that I used on my lower above (the Cerro version seems to be common on later A4s):

This photo is from a free computer wallpaper site (the purple lower is pretty awesome):

Attached File


This photo is from a National Guard Facebook page and shows the raised F more clearly:

Attached File


Here are blowups of the two photos, because the originals looks fuzzy after I uploaded them:

Attached File


Attached File


This Anchor Harvey 80% lower from Delta Team Tactical is the correct forging, but I need to find someone who can reprofile the heavy lip around the magwell to look more like a military lower:

Attached File

Well... as it happens a little too often with me, it seems I was a bit premature in declaring failure! It turned out that selector detent wasn't extending far enough up into the selector hole to properly engage the indentations in the selector. After removing the selector, I saw that the detent hole was perfectly centered in the selector hole, so I tried another selector, and that one basically spun freely without the detent engaging it at all. This was as far as it extended:

Attached File


Apparently drilling the selector hole created some flash around the detent hole that was preventing it from extending all the way. On the advice of another member in the 5D Tactical thread, I cleared it out with a 1/8" drill bit, and it works great! Other than the usual new selector stiffness, of course.  That shows the engraving is actually not lined up quite right, but that's a minor concern at this point. The lettering is also a little misaligned between the BURST and SAFE labels, which is kind of surprising, since it was drawn on a CAD system that should have lined them up. Anyway, here's what the finished product looks like:

Attached File


Finished it up with all Colt lower parts, an FN A2 stock from Shark (still waiting on my metal trap door from eBay), and an FN grip from SAC. I still have to sort out the FNMI barrel, but it's come a long way!

Attached File

That engraving looks good.  I had a Colt M4 done and it looks a little shallow to me.

Did John do your engraving or was it someone else? Looks excellent

Yes, it’s John’s awesome work, done about a year and a half ago. It took me a while to finish it. I was pleasantly surprised how the engraving left a small raised outline around the characters, which I think makes it look a little more like a roll mark / stamping.

I’m curious if anyone has any thoughts about the period (or lack there of, in this case) after the “M16A4.” It seems like maybe it was a mistake originally, because it doesn’t make sense (to me) to have it there. I’m wondering if it was present on all FN A4s, or if it only appeared on certain batches:

Attached File


The current FN M16A4 listing on their website (the military version) doesn’t have a period, and the lettering has been redesigned a little (“M16A4” centered instead of offset to the left).

I have no clue on the period. I really wish John still did engraving. It has the perfect amount of metal displaced.

So I got the Acog and a KAC 600m rear sight. I mounted the rear sight first in the last slot, then the Acog right in front of it. But the bottom of the optic, sliding through the mount, is just barely touching the rear sight.

Would a new mount help? I don’t want to move the Acog up or remove the kac if I don’t have to.

FWIW heres an FN M16A4 that doesn't appear to have a period. I don't recall ever noticing one.



PS I would count your blessings with getting your items back from Outlaw with good results. There's a dude on IG that has been waiting on his 416 receiver set since ~August. And when they sent him photos of it in progress last week, he noticed that they had copied the engravings from an airsoft version of a 416 and had put the recommended speed marking on his lower.

Why am I having this clearance issue? Any fixes short of filing one part or the other? I'd rather not remove the KAC, or move the ACOG up a notch. I thought they were both supposed to fit together the way I have them.

If you have to file one, do the ACOG mount. Rounding out that back edge shouldn't be too difficult. LaRue mount doesn't have this issue so I assume it's just that mount with this specific problem.

This one? To be clear - I think it’s the acog itself that’s rubbing in the middle. It’s the part sticking out of the mount.

https://www.larue.com/products/larue-tactical-acog-mount-qd-lt100/

Move the ACOG up a notch, it works fine that way.

(whoops)

who does that engraving ?

Attached File


MIAD grip is not correct but I have one on all my AR's. I do need to find a Black one though, that Foliage one looks like crap.

Those foliage parts are hard to come by, throw it up on EE and make a little $$. Love the build BTW

FN M16A4 gov un-issued upper, FailZero BCG
Aero M16A4 lower, POF trigger, A1 stock

I know it’s not technically correct, but has anyone installed one of the Colt Side Sling Swivels on their A4’s? I’m thinking about doing this to mine because I hate the standard sling loop.

The correct forward sling mount the Blue Force Gear Rail Mounted Fixed Loop

Love it. Mine's gonna have an ACOG but I do love the look of CCOs on A4s.

By the way, see y'all in Richmond tomorrow.

Yes, I am aware. I have the A3/A4ish clone without the KAC rail.

I have one on mine, put it there before I knew they weren't issued on A4's, and just left it.

Did not know about the ACOG change. Got the TA31RCO-A4CP now I guess I need this one for my other A4.

Or reverse the positions of the ACOG and BUIS (as I did with A4 clone a few pages back).  You get better eye relief with the ACOG.

Unless you just need it to look a certain way, this is more practical.

She looks great. Glad it was just a burr hanging up the selector.

Were the FN A4's actually black, my issued A2 was purple...at least what finish was left on it.

The FN M16A4s that were delivered to units aboard MCB CamLej NC from 2005-ish to 2011 that I saw had lower receivers which turned blue and then purple after little use.  I saw quite a few that had worn down to a gold-ish color.

They started out looking black when removed from the shipping box, but they didn't stay that way for very long.

For some reason, the upper receivers didn't seem to have a problem with blue or purple anodizing.

As a sidebar to the topic of anodizing color, the most beat up, neglected, and worn looking M16A4 I ever observed belonged to a Marine from 8th ESB while he was qualifying with it at Stone Bay Rifle Range.  Man, that rifle was abused...I'm not sure what looked worse, though; the rifle or the KAC rail-the right side of the rail looked liked someone had twisted off a mounted weapons light or PEQ without loosening the screws that held it on.  That rifle had obviously been down range in the sand box a few times, with very little finish remaining.

Man, those gold lowers were really something odd.  I was on Lejeune from 2006-2010.  I never understood what could have caused that to happen.  But it dawned on me recently and had me wondering.  There were these big red “solvent” tank machines outside of the armory that I ended up asking one way why they were never used and why we weren’t cleaning our rifles with them.  The armorer told me that they didn’t trust anyone to use them correctly.  Maybe that was a pile of crap but I wonder if whatever solvent those tanks used had a reaction with the anodizing and caused that problem?  Maybe why they  never used them again too?

LOL. We used the solvent tanks in the maintenance shops, extremely hot water and Tide in the laundry sinks, carburetor cleaner, wire bristle brushes, and many other unauthorized cleaning methods.

Yeah, it looks like they may have removed it when they switched to centering the "M16A4" under the rollmark. That appears to be a late production rifle - I have that photo saved, and the collar at the rear of the receiver is the later tapered style kind that shows up on FN M4A1s and current production Cerro 80% lowers.

Here's an early example (SN 1011836, I think) that shows the period:

Attached File


This one appears to show it, but it's a fuzzy image. Definitely not as clear as the period after the "GOVT."

Attached File


That's odd about the guy's experience with Outlaw Anodizing on IG. Several of us here have used them and haven't had any issues. Their business seemed pretty busy and a little crazy in terms of the number of parts and orders they were handling when I stopped by, so I could see something maybe getting mixed up, but I don't think that's the norm.

Thanks! My A4 was definitely black, but it was less than a year old when it was first issued to me. We got a brand new batch of them in 2004 for our 2005 deployment. Our FN A2s were all a lot older, and they definitely had various shades of grey, black, and purple receivers.

Here's a picture I took of a Sabre Defence M16A4 in 2014.

Excellent, thanks for the photo! That would make for an interesting clone project. The font looks like it could be challenging to identify and engrave.

Never had a issue of the dry cleaning solvent in the red solvent tanks taking finish off M4s.  Oven cleaner on the other hand

CD

I'll never forget seeing a young supply clerk take his PVS-7s over to the solvent tank and start washing them off with the wire brush on the end of the solvent hose. I managed to get to him before he did any permanent damage to them, but the outside of the housing had a slight texture to it...

I think we stopped using the tanks out of potential health concerns, not because of any damage they were doing to weapons. We used them all the time up until the mid-2000s, but rarely saw them after that.

Did anyone else notice the carry handle is not mounted all the way forward?

The closest I came to that was mating one of the de-milled Sabre Defence M16A4 upper receivers to a new (to me) stripped commercial Sabre Defence lower receiver.  Unfortunately the Sabre lower has the electro-pencil/dot matrix markings and not true roll marks like the government issued rifles.

Sometimes they get moved to fit in a rack, or other reasons.

Deleted

Oven cleaner is the bane of my existence, I have seen it ruin the finish on more M4's than anything else...who the hell in the Army came up with using oven cleaner on their weapons, we never even thought to try that shit in the Marine Corps
and I would have stomped the shit out of my guys if I would have caught them doing that dumb shit