COLT XM177E2 CORRECT PARTS

HI ! i have just purchased a Colt AR15 xm177e2 lower receiver , just a receiver , serial is : 9067xx , it is marked

1) colt horse logo , at the right "COLT AR -15"
2) property of the u.s. govt
3) cal 5.56
4) serial 9067XX

i would like to complete it , using just the real parts , no compromise ....all i have is the lower with internals , that`s it ......

any links where i can get them to complete my baby ?

btw: was the rifling 1:7 or 1:12 ? being 5.56 , i guess it would be 1:7 ......but not sure ....

thank you very much in advance !!

Richard

This is the old gun, 1/12 twist. 1/7 didn't come out until much later.

Interesting period photo of XM177 in Viet NamAttachment 83740

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RCS

period photo

---

BAR belt, could hold about four or five mags per pouch. That would give him about twenty five or thirty mags. The flash hider on the rifle just behind him is interesting too...I wonder if it came from a Stoner? That would have been the time when prong flash hiders were still around and many didn't prefer those.

Jim, that looks like a standard bird cage flash hider to me. Did y'all notice the hinged trigger guard missing on the XM?
http://www.cybershooters.org/dgca/im...flashhider.JPG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Hollinger

looks like a standard bird cage flash hider

---

OK, I thought it looks like there's a transverse hole straight through and looked longer. Probably not, time and space... I know the standard Stoner looks the same as the birdcage.

The XM177E2 had 'sound moderator' to reduce the noise and flash. Depending on who you believe, it was not without problems. The moderator tended to improve reliability of function, but did increase carbon fouling. Some problems were had with tracer ammunition. While I was in Viet Nam I did get notification that couple of XM177E2's were being sent for our platoon to evaluate for possible replacement for the M3A1 submachine gun on tanks. We never did get them, for as soon as they arrived they were appropriated by the Battalion Commander and the S-3. Can't say how it would have worked for us, but it did allow the brass at base camp to look cool on their stroll to the chopper pad.

Early CAR-15 ColtsAttachment 83742

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RCS

Early CAR-15 Colts

---

There's one of those in the post museum in Ft Lewis Wa...the curator was unaware.

I carried an XM177E2 (we called them CAR 15s). Never had any problems with it. The E1 with the shorter barrel was the one that had problems.
I brought home all of it except the lower receiver. When I got home I bought an early AR 15 and put my CAR 15 "parts kit" on the lower. I also registered it as a short bbl'd rifle AND since some claimed that the flash hider was a suppressor - BS! took a machine to measure the sound difference - I registered it as a suppressor just for S&G!
Still have it and shoot it occasionally. It is also my car gun when traveling - like going to Mo. next week.
Sarge

Sarge, would you be willing to share a photo of your faux XM177E2?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarge

I brought home all of it except the lower receiver.

---

I'd like to see it too.

Make that three.
And I will show you mine.
Not an XM177E2 but a Colt 651 clone.

I have posted these photos before. The CAR-15 stock was found in a salvage dump, still had a rack number. It did require some internal restoration which took a very long time.
I then installed it on a semi auto Colt AR-15 lower. Any of this CAR-15 or XM177 parts or stocks that are original are very difficult to find (always were)Attachment 83776Attachment 83777Attachment 83778

Here is my CAR 15. Along with some of its stable mates. All are select fire but 3 and one of those (CAR) is registered as a short bbl'd rifle. I also registered the CAR flash hider as a suppressor to make the feds happy.
Sarge

Nice looking little piece. Specially neat because of where it came from originally. The rest are looking mighty fine too...

Sarge, thank you so much for sharing with us. Your XM177E2 is very much the plan for this little gem:


http://www.milsurps.com/images/impor...2818d82a-1.jpg


Colt 6001 carbine above compared to my faux Colt Commando/XM177E2. I have a really nice coated aluminum two position stock ready for when I do the paperwork and shuck out the $200.00.

I got the impression, some years ago, that the "muzzle device" had a lot more to do with maintaining a pressure curve that would enable the gas system to function without over-stressing any components.

Basically, it was supposed to "extend" the "dwell-time" of the gas pressure within the bolt. With such a short barrel and with the port so close to the functional muzzle, the impulse WITHOUT the "device" would have been a very short "spike". Even with a "proper" barrel that was the same overall length of the 177 with "device", it is unlikely that the pressure curve would have been acceptable. Just look at the long-term dramas with the M-4 and the latest "big thing"; "special" ammo for it and the introduction of a whole NEW range of "universal" M-16A2 /3), M-4 / SAW ammo, that is supposed to work equally well in "diverse" systems.

At least the designers of the XM-177 series went to a LOT of effort to make THEIR toy work with the STANDARD ammo of the time (M-193), instead of generating a requirement for "special" ammo..

With the "device", and its complex internal "chambers", the pressure curve at the port would have been "smoothed" and extended.

Merely extending a plain barrel to the same overall length probably did not produce the desired reliability. As I said, it's all about "dwell time".

As for "significantly quieter" than a "naked" barrel? Only in the fevered imagination of some ATF drone.

Only ever played with ONE. And as any statistician will tell you: "A sample of 'one' isn't much of a sample".

However, the "sample" I played with functioned quite nicely in both "economy" and "fun" modes, but it was LOUD!

This is what I have come to understand as well. However, once they figured out that different buffer weights could achieve the same thing the "moderator" was no longer in use.

While at training some years back I was able to come in contact with a Treasury Department agent's 11.5 Colt Commando M16. I was amazed at how well it shot and since we were all there at an armors course I got to dissect it. It used an H2 buffer which allowed it to function with the short 11.5" barrel and no "moderator". Oh yeah, it was loud and could have doubled as a flame thrower! :D

I've run an H2 buffer for some time and they're great on the shorter barrels. You can feel the dwell time increase and things slow down.

Another "interesting" variation on the theme was one that had a "clone" of the AK-74 muzzle device attached to a 7 1/2" barrel and actually worked, but was horrendously loud, especially out to the sides, and in "low light' lit the place up like a fireworks show.

The "74" gizmo has an expansion chamber at the rear. the gas exits by either the small-ish bore hole forward or a couple of very small holes on top; "compensator"-style. The front section is a simple baffle "plate in front of two BIG rectangular ports, one on each side.

The small holes in the main chamber are supposed to help keep the muzzle down and the forward baffle plate acts as a simple "brake". The "downside" is the noise, especially to the sides.

A LONG time ago, there was a TV series called, "Comrades", with each episode covering a different aspect of then-current "soviet" life. One episode was about a young man going off to do his military service.

There they all were, in a fairly tightly-packed firing mound, and all armed with AK-74s. Conspicuously absent was any sign od hearing protection for the trainees or the instructors. Instant deafness epidemic!other "interesting" variation on the theme was one that had a "clone" of the AK-74 muzzle device attached to a 7 1/2" barrel and actually worked, but was horrendously loud, especially out to the sides, and in "low light' lit the place up like a fireworks show.

The "74" gizmo has an expansion chamber at the rear. the gas exits by either the small-ish bore hole forward, or, via a couple of very small holes on top; "compensator"-style. The front section is a simple baffle "plate" in front of two BIG rectangular ports, one on each side.

The small holes in the main chamber are supposed to help keep the muzzle down, a la the old DTA "Muzzle Mizer", and the forward baffle plate acts as a simple "brake". The "downside" is the noise, especially to the sides.

A LONG time ago, there was a TV series called, "Comrades", with each episode covering a different aspect of then-current "soviet" life. One episode was about a young man going off to do his military service.

There they all were, in a fairly tightly-packed firing mound, and all armed with AK-74s. Conspicuously absent was any sign od hearing protection for the trainees or the instructors. Instant deafness epidemic!

I had a 14.5 with a fancy muzzle break made by a local business here...it increased the noise and blast to an unacceptable level under the guise of reducing felt recoil...

The noise when in the shooting sheds was unbelievable, once removed the carbine was fine. After all, recoil? This is 5.56, let's just take the "Recoil", shall we? It wears a standard A2 FH now.

Pix of "after-market" muzzle devices from the 1980's.

The bottom one is the "aftermarket "74' brake made to fit the 1/2" x 28 thread on AR-15 variants.

The top one is the "Fabian Brothers Muzzle Stabilizer" for 7.62 NATO goodies and is threaded 9/16" x 24.

Attachment 83930A slightly better photo:

The right one in the second photo I like OK. The other promises to be noisy...

The "Fabian Muzzle-Mizer" / "DTA Mil-Brake" is basically designed to reduce muzzle RISE, via the ports and chamber in the rear half of the device, and to reduce flash via the conventional slots in the front section. Having seen (and felt) them in action on FALs and M-1As, I reckon they work. The interesting one, as I recall, was the .308 / 7.62 brake fitted to a "short" M-1A. The effect of the "downwards" force from the "compensator" ports was sufficient to make it feel like the rifle was rotating and the butt was "smacking the firer in the chops", at every shot. Not really "unpleasant" just "different".

The wildest one of these gizmos has to be the "whistle" device on the front of the 5,45 x 39 Russian AN-94. This gadget is supposed to be "tuned" to both "optimise" gas function and reduce muzzle blast by some sort of "phase cancellation" effect.

I have NEVER handled or fired one, so I leave further analysis to those who have.