Member
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
491
EE: 100% (17)
TX, USA
Posted: 1/21/2026 11:48:30 AM EDT
|
Looks like M5 uppers in 11.5, 14.5 and 16, a 14.5 M4 upper, and an 11.5 IAR upper. https://scatteredshots.com/2026/01/20/new-colt-product-at-shot-show-2026/  11.5 pistol variants of the EPR II and M5. https://scatteredshots.com/2026/01/21/more-rifles-from-colt-at-shot/   The conversion kits have been around for awhile for mil/LE so I don't know that this means they'll become more available for civilians, but the pistol versions are interesting. |
Member
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
492
EE: 100% (17)
TX, USA
|
M5 pistols and SBRs in the commercial display makes me happy. More closeups at the link. https://scatteredshots.com/2026/01/22/colt-shot-show-commercial-rifle-display/ 
|
Joined:
Nov 2025
Posts:
534
EE: 0% (0)
USA
|
Nice to see the A4 still around, I was kind of hoping for a factory A2 offering, but I guess Colt doesn’t want to compete with dedicated retro companies and clone builders or bother making another dedicated A2 rollmark. ETA, I really want to see another 6720 or perhaps a M5 with a lightweight profile barrel. |
|
Originally Posted By CheemsK1500: ETA, I really want to see another 6720 or perhaps a M5 with a lightweight profile barrel. It would be nice if Colt brought back the 6720 in a in middy configuration and offered it with a FSB, or lo-pro gas block. I know Colt has the 6960, but I don't think it is the same contour their 6720 barrel. Colt could be way more successful if they just offered some common sense options while still maintaining TDP standards. C'mon, Colt! I believe in you...still! |
Change is the only constant. - Heractilus
Member
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
496
EE: 100% (17)
TX, USA
|
If they offered the M5 with a 6960 barrel, I would have probably bought that instead. Other than the gas journal diameter (having a .750 gas block makes logistics way easier), the barrel profile is pretty similar to the 6720. Attached File |
|
Originally Posted By urbankaos04: It would be nice if Colt brought back the 6720 in a in middy configuration and offered it with a FSB, or lo-pro gas block. I know Colt has the 6960, but I don't think it is the same contour their 6720 barrel. Colt could be way more successful if they just offered some common sense options while still maintaining TDP standards. C'mon, Colt! I believe in you...still! The 6960 sells in exceptionally low quantity from what I'm told. If that holds true, there is little market evidence to support putting time/resources into additional mid-length options. However, it would be cool to see it updated to the new EPRII type configuration or M5. |
Member
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
499
EE: 100% (17)
TX, USA
|
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/shot-2026-colt-ar-pistols-two-new-5-56-skus-with-lower-variants-44825875 Apparently the pistols will just be marked M4/M5, not M4/M5 Carbine. Probably a good thing considering how stressed out people have gotten over whether a lower can be made into a pistol.  They also had an FDE M5 on display. 
|
|
Originally Posted By Apple3_14159: https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/shot-2026-colt-ar-pistols-two-new-5-56-skus-with-lower-variants-44825875 Apparently the pistols will just be marked M4/M5, not M4/M5 Carbine. Probably a good thing considering how stressed out people have gotten over whether a lower can be made into a pistol. https://cdn-fastly.thefirearmblog.com/media/2026/01/26/20153/shot-2026-colt-ar-pistols-two-new-5-56-skus-with-lower-variants.jpg?size=720x845&nocrop=1 They also had an FDE M5 on display. https://cdn-fastly.thefirearmblog.com/media/2026/01/26/20156/shot-2026-colt-ar-pistols-two-new-5-56-skus-with-lower-variants.jpg?size=720x845&nocrop=1 I like FDE, but that appears to be Cerakote. I'd much rather have it anodized |
ARFCOM’s CHO
Joined:
Aug 2022
Posts:
4237
EE: 100% (1)
FL, USA
Here's what they showed off to our guys EPR & M4/M5 Braced Pistol | Colt | SHOT Show 2026 |
"I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend."
|
Originally Posted By Apple3_14159: Apparently the pistols will just be marked M4/M5, not M4/M5 Carbine. Probably a good thing considering how stressed out people have gotten over whether a lower can be made into a pistol. I have a couple of factory built M5's that are just marked M5, so I don't think dropping the Carbine is an across the board thing to designate that it's a pistol lower. |
Joined:
Apr 2023
Posts:
1757
EE: 100% (10)
NH, USA
Member
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
501
EE: 100% (17)
TX, USA
|
Originally Posted By Xenophon2023: What is the difference between the M5 and M4/6920 aside from the ambi controls? Are there any other upgrades to the lower receiver? Clearly the upper is different, new barrel nut? The lower is full ambi and uses slightly longer trigger pins, which means that if you want to use a Geissele trigger, you'll need to buy their 901 pins. The lower isn't really a selling point for me personally. The barrel nut has the threads on the external diameter, instead of the inside like most barrel nuts. It threads into a longer, internally threaded "extension" (not sure what the real term is) on the upper, which should help with rail rigidity, similar to other more conventional rails that have long barrel nuts, like the SOLGW L89. The rail and upper also have matching male/female anti-rotation tabs instead of the more common side ones that are only on the rail, similar to the Geissele Super Duty. I believe it's also a solid rail instead of the pinch-tab style used on the 6920 and 6960 (not that those are bad designs, just not as good). Generally, the upper should be more rigid and have better zero retention for things like BUIS or IR lasers. I can't get a screenshot to upload but go to pg. 5 to see diagrams. https://www.colt.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/2024-Colt-MLE-Catalogweb.pdf Barrel nut: 
|
Joined:
Apr 2023
Posts:
1758
EE: 100% (10)
NH, USA
|
Originally Posted By Apple3_14159: The lower is full ambi and uses slightly longer trigger pins, which means that if you want to use a Geissele trigger, you'll need to buy their 901 pins. The lower isn't really a selling point for me personally. The barrel nut has the threads on the external diameter, instead of the inside like most barrel nuts. It threads into a longer, internally threaded "extension" (not sure what the real term is) on the upper, which should help with rail rigidity, similar to other more conventional rails that have long barrel nuts, like the SOLGW L89. The rail and upper also have matching male/female anti-rotation tabs instead of the more common side ones that are only on the rail, similar to the Geissele Super Duty. I believe it's also a solid rail instead of the pinch-tab style used on the 6920 and 6960 (not that those are bad designs, just not as good). Generally, the upper should be more rigid and have better zero retention for things like BUIS or IR lasers. I can't get a screenshot to upload but go to pg. 5 to see diagrams. https://www.colt.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/2024-Colt-MLE-Catalogweb.pdf Barrel nut: https://cdn11.bigcommerce.com/s-6faujhppx4/images/stencil/960w/products/2322/5126/Screenshot_2025-03-28_at_1.53.12PM__88621.1743195393.png?c=1 Originally Posted By Apple3_14159: Originally Posted By Xenophon2023: What is the difference between the M5 and M4/6920 aside from the ambi controls? Are there any other upgrades to the lower receiver? Clearly the upper is different, new barrel nut? The lower is full ambi and uses slightly longer trigger pins, which means that if you want to use a Geissele trigger, you'll need to buy their 901 pins. The lower isn't really a selling point for me personally. The barrel nut has the threads on the external diameter, instead of the inside like most barrel nuts. It threads into a longer, internally threaded "extension" (not sure what the real term is) on the upper, which should help with rail rigidity, similar to other more conventional rails that have long barrel nuts, like the SOLGW L89. The rail and upper also have matching male/female anti-rotation tabs instead of the more common side ones that are only on the rail, similar to the Geissele Super Duty. I believe it's also a solid rail instead of the pinch-tab style used on the 6920 and 6960 (not that those are bad designs, just not as good). Generally, the upper should be more rigid and have better zero retention for things like BUIS or IR lasers. I can't get a screenshot to upload but go to pg. 5 to see diagrams. https://www.colt.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/2024-Colt-MLE-Catalogweb.pdf Barrel nut: https://cdn11.bigcommerce.com/s-6faujhppx4/images/stencil/960w/products/2322/5126/Screenshot_2025-03-28_at_1.53.12PM__88621.1743195393.png?c=1 Thanks for that. Interesting design. Looks like the barrel doesn’t have the pin, so not compatible with any standard aftermarket barrels, unless I am mistaken. It does look like a better set up for a free float rail than most designs. I wouldn’t mind finding an upper, not terribly interested in the lower either. So the EPR II seems to be a more traditional upgraded M4, correct? |
Member
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
502
EE: 100% (17)
TX, USA
|
Originally Posted By Xenophon2023: Thanks for that. Interesting design. Looks like the barrel doesn’t have the pin, so not compatible with any standard aftermarket barrels, unless I am mistaken. It does look like a better set up for a free float rail than most designs. I wouldn’t mind finding an upper, not terribly interested in the lower either. So the EPR II seems to be a more traditional upgraded M4, correct? Correct on both counts. |
|
Here is some info on my 10.3" M5 upper I posted in a different thread. I could have cared less about the M5 lower as ambi does nothing for me, but the upper is a product improved version of my favorite Colt series, the 6940. "Ok, here are a few pics of the 10.3” M5 upper with the hand guard removed. Removal is easy. I placed the upper in my Midwest reaction rod (just got it, love that thing) and removed the two T30 retaining screws at the rear of the hand guard. They had red Loc Tite on them and screw into a steel tie nut on the other side. The hand guard slid off with hand pressure. Even with the screws removed there was no play; the fit between the hand guard and the upper receiver interface is excellent. There is no ‘split’ at the bottom of the hand guard, meaning the retaining bolts don’t use provide any clamping force to retain the hand guard. They only interface with two grooves in the upper to keep the hand guard from sliding off. When installed it is rock solid. The operator manual that came with my rifle says the retaining bolt torque is 85 inch pounds. The barrel is a heavy profile. The gas block is a shaved A2. The bottom is marked with Colt’s CAGE, MP, and 5.56 NATO. There is an “R” near the chamber end and I think there is an “O” closer to the chamber but I couldn’t get a good pic. There is a dot of yellow paint on the top of the barrel between the gas block bosses. The upper also has a steel insert pinned in by the charging handle latch. If anyone is looking for a particular pic, let me know."       
|
|
Originally Posted By AL25: I like FDE, but that appears to be Cerakote. I'd much rather have it anodized I saw a LE catalog that said FDE could be available in Cera or Ano finish. No idea if you would actually be able to get your hands on one or not. Maybe would be a minimum contract order. |
|
Originally Posted By Minuteman1636: It is anodized. I believe you, but those pictures make it look painted. It doesn't look anything like the finish on the Colt Canada C20, which is also anodized. The rail does look like the finish on the C20. |
|
Originally Posted By mbinky: Here is some info on my 10.3" M5 upper I posted in a different thread. I could have cared less about the M5 lower as ambi does nothing for me, but the upper is a product improved version of my favorite Colt series, the 6940. "Ok, here are a few pics of the 10.3” M5 upper with the hand guard removed. Removal is easy. I placed the upper in my Midwest reaction rod (just got it, love that thing) and removed the two T30 retaining screws at the rear of the hand guard. They had red Loc Tite on them and screw into a steel tie nut on the other side. The hand guard slid off with hand pressure. Even with the screws removed there was no play; the fit between the hand guard and the upper receiver interface is excellent. There is no ‘split’ at the bottom of the hand guard, meaning the retaining bolts don’t use provide any clamping force to retain the hand guard. They only interface with two grooves in the upper to keep the hand guard from sliding off. When installed it is rock solid. The operator manual that came with my rifle says the retaining bolt torque is 85 inch pounds. The barrel is a heavy profile. The gas block is a shaved A2. The bottom is marked with Colt’s CAGE, MP, and 5.56 NATO. There is an “R” near the chamber end and I think there is an “O” closer to the chamber but I couldn’t get a good pic. There is a dot of yellow paint on the top of the barrel between the gas block bosses. The upper also has a steel insert pinned in by the charging handle latch. If anyone is looking for a particular pic, let me know." https://i.postimg.cc/9MB3yyF3/temp-Image9-LXKHl.avif https://i.postimg.cc/VNnPL3xQ/temp-Imageam-FH7-D.avif https://i.postimg.cc/DZhkWxhH/temp-Image-Rm-I34q.avif https://i.postimg.cc/xdMVTWwb/temp-Image-U0-NSZ8.avif https://i.postimg.cc/tTbQ1BbP/temp-Image-XC5-BCT.avif https://i.postimg.cc/nVmsWXtw/IMG-2953.avif https://i.postimg.cc/RhwNJDT8/IMG-2954.avif My M5 10.3" upper did not have the steel insert. Are these steel inserts to be expected going forward now. Mine came from AU. |
USMC 85-'93 Amphibious YAT-YAS
|
Originally Posted By Frens: Commercial sales history says otherwise… See the 6940P, 6960, 901, etc Originally Posted By Frens: Originally Posted By urbankaos04: Colt could be way more successful if they just offered some common sense options while still maintaining TDP standards. Commercial sales history says otherwise… See the 6940P, 6960, 901, etc @Frens Okay, I have been giving your response some thought. So here it goes. And this is as a Colt fan. Colt 6960: Love that they finally came out with a middy, but was not thrilled with the pencil barrel. Woulda been more marketable had they utilized a more modern barrel profile (BCM ELW or Criterion Core). Also, they used a cheaper Ceturion Arms rail. Maybe they should have used the better version, or had the option to just go with a C4 rail? Or, even offered it as an OEM stripped down upper? Colt 6940P: To be honest, I never got into the piston AR trend, so this rifle was never on my radar. However, after doing some research, it seems like this piston Colt rifle was a pretty good design! However, the rifl looks a little chonky and could have be benefited from having a sleeker profile like the LMT monolithic rifles. I hate to say it, but it just didn’t look as nice as other piston rifles. Shoulda had a slimmer rail profile with m-lock, no? The design does seem solid and better than other piston rifles. Colt 901: Cursory research sorta showed it was not as accurate as expected. And it was modular in design? Also didn’t look as sleek as some other designs. The LMT .308 rifle looks a lot better, so I don’t know if that played into poor sales. I feel like Colt had some good ideas that just needing some tweaking. I love my Colt 6720 rifle, due to it’s lightweight barrel, but would not buy a 6960 as I would want a more modern profile barrel. Now that I researched the 6940p, I wouldn’t mind having one of those, but heard parts are hard to come by? Addendum: In checking out some Small Arms Solutions videos, the Colt Individual Carbine looked pretty damn cool! Attached File |
Change is the only constant. - Heractilus
|
Originally Posted By urbankaos04: @Frens Okay, I have been giving your response some thought. So here it goes. And this is as a Colt fan. Colt 6960: Love that they finally came out with a middy, but was not thrilled with the pencil barrel. Woulda been more marketable had they utilized a more modern barrel profile (BCM ELW or Criterion Core). Also, they used a cheaper Ceturion Arms rail. Maybe they should have used the better version, or had the option to just go with a C4 rail? Or, even offered it as an OEM stripped down upper? Colt 6940P: To be honest, I never got into the piston AR trend, so this rifle was never on my radar. However, after doing some research, it seems like this piston Colt rifle was a pretty good design! However, the rifl looks a little chonky and could have be benefited from having a sleeker profile like the LMT monolithic rifles. I hate to say it, but it just didn’t look as nice as other piston rifles. Shoulda had a slimmer rail profile with m-lock, no? The design does seem solid and better than other piston rifles. Colt 901: Cursory research sorta showed it was not as accurate as expected. And it was modular in design? Also didn’t look as sleek as some other designs. The LMT .308 rifle looks a lot better, so I don’t know if that played into poor sales. I feel like Colt had some good ideas that just needing some tweaking. I love my Colt 6720 rifle, due to it’s lightweight barrel, but would not buy a 6960 as I would want a more modern profile barrel. Now that I researched the 6940p, I wouldn’t mind having one of those, but heard parts are hard to come by? Addendum: In checking out some Small Arms Solutions videos, the Colt Individual Carbine looked pretty damn cool! https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/22392/IMG_2533_png-3712922.JPG As a Colt fanboy my point was that we tend to blame Colt for being too classic.. it’s a military oriented company like KAC or HK, we know that.. but when they release something new we still find something to complain about  |
|
Originally Posted By Frens: As a Colt fanboy my point was that we tend to blame Colt for being too classic.. it’s a military oriented company like KAC or HK, we know that.. but when they release something new we still find something to complain about Yes, you are correct. Civilian sales do appear to be more of a secondary concern to them. But, man, it would be super nice if they had someone that could guide their civilian side market development while implementing high QC and using quality materials (i.e. cmv steel, HPT/MPI, quality small parts and springs, etc). Colt really needs to hire me!! Oh, and to reiterate, that Colt Individual Carbine sure looks great, but it probably has a gov profile barrel and carbine gas system. 
|
Change is the only constant. - Heractilus
|
Originally Posted By Bishop3: My M5 10.3" upper did not have the steel insert. Are these steel inserts to be expected going forward now. Mine came from AU. Interesting. I bought my upper from AU last summer. Ordered July 28th. I wonder if it was a running change. |
