AR Sponsor
Posted: 11/27/2011 5:12:33 PM EDT
|
So, here's the deal. I recently picked up a Colt 14.5" ltwt carbine barrel, NIW, also an upper with an earlier Colt C7 receiver - it's grey, has a teardrop FA and no M4 ramps. Now I bought a decent, but used 933 Commando upper (6933 likely) which apparently are a great setup, but not retro. I have another Fail Zero upper that I was planning on using for a Mk18 build. So, should I buildup a 723 with the C7 upper and 14.5" barrel, leave the 933 alone and use the 10.5" barrel that came with the C7 upper for the Mk18 build, or should I build a 733 with the C7 upper and the Colt 11.5" barrel, save the NIW ltwt barrel for later - maybe a 653 or 652 build, and use the Colt 933 upper receiver for the Mk18 build?
I know the non-M4 C7 upper will work fine with the 933 barrel, which I assume is M4 spec, but not sure the 10.5 barrel's ramps will line up with the 933 upper. I kind of like the idea of leaving the Colt-built 933 upper alone, despite liking the 733 a lot. I know the 14.5" will work fine with the C7 so I'm tending that way. I'm going to SBR a lower soon, but can build up a pistol for now until my Form 1 comes through. I plan on having 2 or 3 SBR's eventually, since that's what I like, and I'm going the trust route soon. I want these carbines to come to fruition soon, and I could put the 723 together once I get another lower for it. Anyway, what's the verdict? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm confused. I'll read more later... Quoted:
Those are tough decisions. Wish those parts were sitting on my bench and I had to ponder them! ++ here, and +pie. Oh yeah, and pie for me too... Sorry I'm not more help, I'm going on 4 hours sleep in the last 48... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm confused. I'll read more later... Quoted:
Those are tough decisions. Wish those parts were sitting on my bench and I had to ponder them! ++ here, and +pie. Oh yeah, and pie for me too... Sorry I'm not more help, I'm going on 4 hours sleep in the last 48... Wow man - been there, done that. Get some rest! I guess I'm making up for having to sell my 649, 635 and 607 builds which were approaching completion when the economy went into the dumper. It's a little discouraging trying to find 'all the correct parts' again, so I'm concentrating on useful, dirt cheap, effective builds that aren't necessarily correct - for example, I have a couple Colt Fiberlite stocks that I'll use rather than trying to find aluminum stocks again. Hell, I'll even be using 4 and 6 position buffer tubes likely. I love seeing correct builds, but I'm tending towards 'correct' in an AF or IDF sort of way - make sense? The flattop builds will be simple, near KISS, dragged through the dirt and shot prone a lot. I plan on spending some time this next year spending time and money making lead fly in the desert. I've avoided buying 601 parts in the past for this very reason - I'll leave that to my buddy Olgunner.  Lately I'm thinking effective and cost effective first, 'correct' second. I know that's not the retro forum way, but there it is.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm confused. I'll read more later... Quoted:
Those are tough decisions. Wish those parts were sitting on my bench and I had to ponder them! ++ here, and +pie. Oh yeah, and pie for me too... Sorry I'm not more help, I'm going on 4 hours sleep in the last 48... Wow man - been there, done that. Get some rest! I guess I'm making up for having to sell my 649, 635 and 607 builds which were approaching completion when the economy went into the dumper. It's a little discouraging trying to find 'all the correct parts' again, so I'm concentrating on useful, dirt cheap, effective builds that aren't necessarily correct - for example, I have a couple Colt Fiberlite stocks that I'll use rather than trying to find aluminum stocks again. Hell, I'll even be using 4 and 6 position buffer tubes likely. I love seeing correct builds, but I'm tending towards 'correct' in an AF or IDF sort of way - make sense? The flattop builds will be simple, near KISS, dragged through the dirt and shot prone a lot. I plan on spending some time this next year spending time and money making lead fly in the desert. I've avoided buying 601 parts in the past for this very reason - I'll leave that to my buddy Olgunner. Lately I'm thinking effective and cost effective first, 'correct' second. I know that's not the retro forum way, but there it is.I don't know, that cost effective first ,correct 2nd sounds like a good idea to me. Maybe because I'm impatient, but I like getting a build running and tracking better parts down later. 
|
|
Meh, I'm not a huge fan of the 933 - an 11.5" barrel on an M4 receiver is kind of odd to me, I think the 11.5" .625 barrel belongs on a fixed carry handle upper.
Just a cosmetic thing for me, but I think the pugnacious flattop looks better with a 10.x" barrel while the thin and slender 11.5" barrel looks great on a C7 upper. Actually, I've been on the lookout for an RO933 upper to yank the barrel off of, swap with my RO723 clone, and use the M4 upper for some project where it's needed (maybe a MK12 clone?). So, being in a somewhat similar situation, that'd be my choice. ~Augee |
fanning the flames........
|
For which, though? 
~Augee |
|
Quoted:
For which, though?
~Augee Both of course, this IS arfcom after all. |
I would opt for the chocolate banana cream pie w/EXTRA whip cream! 
As for the builds, C7 upper with 11.5" barrel, fiberlite stock, tear drop F/A, and say "Honey look what I found for you!" 
Flat top upper with 14.5 barrel, fiberlite stock and say "Son, here's your Christmas present." Then hand them each a slice of pie, just in case! |
|
Some time in the distant future I believe I am destined to build a IDF when ?
I don't know but I want it to happen. I will buy a NoDaK Spud Lower receiver age it, and go from there. One of the cool things about the IDF is many avenues one can travel and still be correct. 
|
|
Quoted:
Are any of the barrels "F" marked? If you worry about all Colt parts (like many of us), the F marked FSB on a carry handle will burn you up. That;s a good point - I won't get to look at it until next week, but It'll be interesting to see. Are you saying the F marked FSB won't work right with a CH upper? That makes no sense to me. They were designed for carbine length barrels, and the height of any AR rear sight should be basically the same, whether A1, A2 or BUIS. Can you explain more? I agree with Augee - I really like the 10.5 on a flattop - thus the Mk18 build. I also like the 733 look, especially with C7 upper, but I've heard the 933 and 6933 are very reliable, especially with an H3 buffer. The 933 'look' is growing on me. Force Recon uses them, so they have some provenance. I'm not sure if you guys are helping though - now I REALLY want pie! |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Are any of the barrels "F" marked? If you worry about all Colt parts (like many of us), the F marked FSB on a carry handle will burn you up. That;s a good point - I won't get to look at it until next week, but It'll be interesting to see. Are you saying the F marked FSB won't work right with a CH upper? That makes no sense to me. They were designed for carbine length barrels, and the height of any AR rear sight should be basically the same, whether A1, A2 or BUIS. Can you explain more? I agree with Augee - I really like the 10.5 on a flattop - thus the Mk18 build. I also like the 733 look, especially with C7 upper, but I've heard the 933 and 6933 are very reliable, especially with an H3 buffer. The 933 'look' is growing on me. Force Recon uses them, so they have some provenance. I'm not sure if you guys are helping though - now I REALLY want pie! It'll work, I think what Stottman is referring to is the fact that using the "wrong" parts with the 733 upper will bother you.
I've considered this before as well, and come to the conclusion... "well, the "F" is really small.... maybe if I try real hard I won't notice it." 
Worst comes to worst, I can pull it and install something else. 
I think Colt has said specifically that their 11.5" gas port is much different from the Crane spec CQBR / MK18 gas port, and that the 11.5" has a much higher cyclic rate. Depending on who you ask, the RO933 is "more reliable" or "overgassed" compared to the 10.3" barrel. ~Augee |
|
I see - that makes sense. I have another .625 FSB, but doubt I'd change it. The temptation to run the 933 as is though is pretty overwhelming - it was apparently a LEO upper, has a few scratches and dings, but like many cop guns, may not have many rounds through it. This is something I really need to think long and hard about apparently. I'm wondering if I should put M4 feed ramps on the C7 upper, but I kind of hate to do that. I have another flattop (Fail Zero) upper that I can use for the Mk18 'beater' build, and if I used the C7 upper on the 14.5 then it'd give me the barrel I need for the Mk18. I guess the main question is, in a nutshell, 733 or 933? Remember, this will likely be my go to gun, retro or not. Not sure if I want to roll around on the ground with that nice C7 upper...
ETA: Here's a pic of a 733: 
And the 933 - I know it's not retro, but again, this will be a go to gun. I can still build a 733 upper later after all, but looks wise I prefer the 733. I don't have a modern carbine right now though, am considering this as a good one. 
|
|
Quoted:
I see - that makes sense. I have another .625 FSB, but doubt I'd change it. The temptation to run the 933 as is though is pretty overwhelming - it was apparently a LEO upper, has a few scratches and dings, but like many cop guns, may not have many rounds through it. This is something I really need to think long and hard about apparently. I'm wondering if I should put M4 feed ramps on the C7 upper, but I kind of hate to do that. I have another flattop (Fail Zero) upper that I can use for the Mk18 'beater' build, and if I used the C7 upper on the 14.5 then it'd give me the barrel I need for the Mk18. I guess the main question is, in a nutshell, 733 or 933? Remember, this will likely be my go to gun, retro or not. Not sure if I want to roll around on the ground with that nice C7 upper... ETA: Here's a pic of a 733: http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h92/Morg308/m16a2postb733.jpg And the 933 - I know it's not retro, but again, this will be a go to gun. I can still build a 733 upper later after all, but looks wise I prefer the 733. I don't have a modern carbine right now though, am considering this as a good one. http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h92/Morg308/3240m16j.jpg Got to love that Commando. If it was me, anywho. |
|
Well, that's the thing - they are BOTh Commandos. Truthfully I like them both, but I like the looks an 'retroness' of the 733 more. I'm just trying not to let my tendency towards A1's color my thinking into possibly taking apart a nice 933 upper and regretting it later - know what I mean?
|
| Definately more user friendly with the carry handle convertible option. Especially if one needs a modern carbine. I really dig mine, fun for irons, or optic and drop groundhogs at 300 yds. Nothing wrong with M-4 ramps but once done don't look back. Decisions, decisions. I still just use 16" barrels. Locals including police frequent the posted/no trespassing farm for a little illegal fishing and hunting and I don't need any extra hassles. Wish they wouldn't leave their trash. |
AR Sponsor