john paul
Member
if i were to look at a ar15 reciever and a m4 receiver could i tell the difference? i know there are machining differences but could you see them? not that it's likely but if someone handed me one could i tell?
ar15 vs. m4
- Thread starter john paul
- Start date
- Status
FlyinBryan
Member
if you look inside a true m4 you can tell the difference, although they are minimal.
the m4 will have feed rapm cuts in the lower
the m4 will have feed rapm cuts in the lower
No.
First, the M4 was produced starting in 1994. Therefore they are restricted and not available to peasants... er... civilians. An M4 lower will have the appropriate Colt M4 stampings, as well as a selector switch notating the full-auto position. Other differences can be seen in the machining like the height of the rear shelf underneath the rear of the fire control.
The extended feed ramps are cut into the upper and barrel extension.
FlyinBryan
Member
o ya, it is the upper.
FlyinBryan
Member
so, according to the brute (and i cant disagree with it) none of the rifles on "the chart" are m4's?
Last edited:
Agent Smith
Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2009
- Messages
- 48
They are all 'M4geries'.
Chart? Sorry, I don't know what you're referring to.
The M4 is a specific rifle produced by Colt Defense. It is not a type of rifle.
http://www.colt.com/mil/M4.asp
There are quite a few rifles that imitate certain features of the M4; Feed ramps, barrel profile, oversized handguards, collapsible stock, etc. These rifles are generally referred to, amusingly, as "M4geries."
The M4 is a specific rifle produced by Colt Defense. It is not a type of rifle.
http://www.colt.com/mil/M4.asp
There are quite a few rifles that imitate certain features of the M4; Feed ramps, barrel profile, oversized handguards, collapsible stock, etc. These rifles are generally referred to, amusingly, as "M4geries."
FlyinBryan
Member
aah, yes. forgot about that term.
interestingly, i did just read that a district court in maine ruled that "M4" was now a generic name, and that Colt's trademark was to be revoked.
FlyinBryan
Member
lol, im surprised that you havent heard of it. its been the source of some pretty heated threads and discussions here.
its a chart showing the various technical advantages or shortcomings of the different models of m4's or m4geries.
im not sure of the accuracy of the chart however. i can say there are instances where it is incorrect on certain models and their features.
That was in 2005 and applies to commercial applications of the name. Basically, other manufacturers are trying to capitalize on Colt's trademark. Regardless of how you stand on the trademark case, there is only one rifle designated M4 by the army.
FlyinBryan
Member
lol, actually, i think its happened about a dozen times.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=446115&highlight=chart
http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=6642
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pwswheghNQsEuEhjFwPrgTA&hl=en
these are two sources for "The Chart"
oh and Tech the M4 Designation has been issued to more than just Colt products within the military
"most" of the M4s are colts but not all of them
they have used a varient amount of manufacturers including armalite stag LMT and various others all with the M4 name
civy world and military desigmnations are two different ballgames Colt holds the name in the copyright world but the military can call them whatever they want because its patterned after the original rifle that meats the contract i.e. its designation refers more to the type than a specific make and model
think of it like this colt/browning used to produce the M2 50 BMG but now FN hold the contract for the M2 did they have to change the designation... no and it probably wont change if someone else made that specific firearm
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pwswheghNQsEuEhjFwPrgTA&hl=en
these are two sources for "The Chart"
oh and Tech the M4 Designation has been issued to more than just Colt products within the military
"most" of the M4s are colts but not all of them
they have used a varient amount of manufacturers including armalite stag LMT and various others all with the M4 name
civy world and military desigmnations are two different ballgames Colt holds the name in the copyright world but the military can call them whatever they want because its patterned after the original rifle that meats the contract i.e. its designation refers more to the type than a specific make and model
think of it like this colt/browning used to produce the M2 50 BMG but now FN hold the contract for the M2 did they have to change the designation... no and it probably wont change if someone else made that specific firearm
I'd be interested to see the source for this information. As far as I'm aware, Colt Defense is the exclusive supplier of M4 rifles to the US military. I believe the contract may be coming up for review soon, but I believe it is still current.
HorseSoldier
Member
Never seen an M4 or M4A1 built on anything but a Colt lower, with the exception of some true Frankenguns some USAF aircrews we trained with had issued to them. I think one of those was built on an H&R lower left over from god knows when (another they had featured an XM designation struck through with GAU-5 added next to it). (And, technically, their guns may not have been true M4s for the purest.)
I have heard about some FN built lowers being used for M4s online, but never saw any such thing. Have seen a ton of uppers from various people (LMT, Noveske, and HK416s) stuck on top of standard issue M4A1 lowers, though.
Colt owns the Technical Data Package for the M4 and is sole source producer of the M4 for the US Government until 30 June 2009, 8 days from now. The Army and Colt agreed to an M4 addendum to the 1967 license agreement for the M16 contract number DAAF03-67-C-0108. FNMI filed a claim on 5 May 1998 challenging this with the US Court of Federal Claims. The court held that the Army was correct in awarding Colt the M4 addendum and sole ownership of the technical data package.
The Army cannot let the technical data package out to anyone until after 30 June of this year. So no one but Colt can make an M4 for the US Government, because only a rifle made to the specs in the TDP is an M4.
I believe that Colt gets royalties on every M4 made by another manufacturer until 30 June 2012.
This only applies to M4s for the US government made to the specs in the technical data package. The copyright decision won by HK has nothing at all to do with this, it involves the use of the term M4 commercially.
Colt sells various models identical or very similar to the military M4 commercially as the R0977, R0978 and R0979. Note Colt doesn't even sell them as M4s. A true M4 is built for the US Government from the specs in the TDP owned by Colt.
I don't know how the weapons rebuilt at depot level into M4s meet the TDP, I don't think they can because the lowers on the M16s and M16A1s used in those conversions are different from the lower specified in the TDP.
The Army cannot let the technical data package out to anyone until after 30 June of this year. So no one but Colt can make an M4 for the US Government, because only a rifle made to the specs in the TDP is an M4.
I believe that Colt gets royalties on every M4 made by another manufacturer until 30 June 2012.
This only applies to M4s for the US government made to the specs in the technical data package. The copyright decision won by HK has nothing at all to do with this, it involves the use of the term M4 commercially.
Colt sells various models identical or very similar to the military M4 commercially as the R0977, R0978 and R0979. Note Colt doesn't even sell them as M4s. A true M4 is built for the US Government from the specs in the TDP owned by Colt.
I don't know how the weapons rebuilt at depot level into M4s meet the TDP, I don't think they can because the lowers on the M16s and M16A1s used in those conversions are different from the lower specified in the TDP.
FlyinBryan
Member
i am going to assume that the thread starter was not referring to the rifles that only the us governement has access to.
if such is the case, i think we could have maybe avoided the whole who knows more about the m4 discussion, and just said "well, one way to tell is that it will have feed ramps cut into the receiver"
if so, he wants to know how to tell an m4gery receiver, but the simple answer got sidetracked somehow.
maybe the feedramps are not a good indicator of an m4gery, i dont really know, ive never had one.
if such is the case, i think we could have maybe avoided the whole who knows more about the m4 discussion, and just said "well, one way to tell is that it will have feed ramps cut into the receiver"
if so, he wants to know how to tell an m4gery receiver, but the simple answer got sidetracked somehow.
maybe the feedramps are not a good indicator of an m4gery, i dont really know, ive never had one.
My 6920 box is printed "M-4 style semi-auto", so Colt is marketing them that way,and my 6920 was built by Colt Defense.
waterhouse
Member
I don't know if that is a safe assumption. John Paul did seem to specify the difference between the AR-15 and M4 receiver. Tech Brute noted the differences.
They aren't, at least not by themselves. I've seen 18" and 20" barreled AR-15s with M4 style feed ramps, neither of which would fit what most people describe as an M4gery.
Colt does not own anything having to do with the M-4 name, the US governement owns the name, therefore its public property and cannot be copyrighted. Just like M-16, these are military designations. The M-4 name can be used in a product name by any company that so chooses to.
The M-4 name will probably soon be on another product made to the exact standards, possibly by a different manufacturer.
I was informed recently that the contact with AMgeneral ran out and the replacement for the HMMV (hummer for you civilians). A new vehicle is being made to replace it.
Colt has a copyright on the specific Colt model name and number, not M-4.
In fact multiple manufacturers have made M-4 rifles for the government on contract, multiple companies have made M-16 rifles on contract for the government.
All that matters is that they are built to military specs.
The M-4 name will probably soon be on another product made to the exact standards, possibly by a different manufacturer.
I was informed recently that the contact with AMgeneral ran out and the replacement for the HMMV (hummer for you civilians). A new vehicle is being made to replace it.
Colt has a copyright on the specific Colt model name and number, not M-4.
In fact multiple manufacturers have made M-4 rifles for the government on contract, multiple companies have made M-16 rifles on contract for the government.
All that matters is that they are built to military specs.
Last edited:
No that is completely incorrect. Look up the contract I listed and the M4 Addendum. No one may produce an M4 for the government until Colt's license runs out on 30 June 2009.
multiple manufacturers have and may produce m16 rifles, but not m4 carbines. The patent and technical data is still solely owned by Colt for the M4, but M16 patents have long expired; the design is a solid 50 years old now.
The reason why people like CD, FN, LMT, and others have provided to the military is because the M16's patent has long expired. But such is not the case for the M4 Carbine...yet.
The reason why people like CD, FN, LMT, and others have provided to the military is because the M16's patent has long expired. But such is not the case for the M4 Carbine...yet.
Texpatriate
Member
To answer what I think is the OP's question, there is no difference between an "AR-15" lower receiver and an "M4gery" lower receiver, assuming we are talking about civilian legal stripped lowers. An M4gery lower, in order for it to be a decent "knock off" of a genuine military M-4, would have to have a carbine receiver extension (preferable "mil-spec" rather than commercial diameter) and adjustable 4 or 6 position stock. An "AR-15" (used as a general term rather than to refer to a specific Armalight rifle) could have any kind of stock and receiver extension, adjustable or not.
Typically the term "AR-15" is used to refer to a broad range of variously configured rifles within the civilian legal "AR-15" family. M-4 (or more technically correct, "M4gery") is typically used to refer to civilian legal AR-15's that are cosmetically designed to resemble military issue, full-auto M-4's. While neither term is technically correct (as they both technically refer to specific rifles), this is their common use, even among many industry professionals.
With that said, a genuine military issue M-4 (the only "true" M-4's) stripped lower receiver is identical to a genuine military issue M-16 (the only "true" M-16's), as they are both full-auto. A civilian legal AR-15, however, is designed with a higher "shelf" and cannot accept an auto-seer without significant modification, and lacks a third, "full auto" or "burst" marking (usually). That is my understanding. Other parts, once assembled within the lower receiver, are "full-auto" versus "semi-auto". I believe they are the hammer, the selector switch (safety), and the seer.
Does that answer your question?
Typically the term "AR-15" is used to refer to a broad range of variously configured rifles within the civilian legal "AR-15" family. M-4 (or more technically correct, "M4gery") is typically used to refer to civilian legal AR-15's that are cosmetically designed to resemble military issue, full-auto M-4's. While neither term is technically correct (as they both technically refer to specific rifles), this is their common use, even among many industry professionals.
With that said, a genuine military issue M-4 (the only "true" M-4's) stripped lower receiver is identical to a genuine military issue M-16 (the only "true" M-16's), as they are both full-auto. A civilian legal AR-15, however, is designed with a higher "shelf" and cannot accept an auto-seer without significant modification, and lacks a third, "full auto" or "burst" marking (usually). That is my understanding. Other parts, once assembled within the lower receiver, are "full-auto" versus "semi-auto". I believe they are the hammer, the selector switch (safety), and the seer.
Does that answer your question?
Texpatriate
Member
Outside of the lower receiver itself, the Bolt Carrier is also typically designed to be "semi-auto" in most civilian legal AR-15's, though "full-auto" bolt carriers are not illegal to be used in a semi-auto rifle. A semi-auto bolt carrier is cut back so that it would not trip an auto seer if one were installed. This is simply a CYA "lawyer proof" design feature. This goes beyond the scope of your question, but is another design difference between a civilian AR-15 and a true M-4.
- Status