Bushy beats Colt

[HankB]

Mine came with a bayo lug, a threaded muzzle, a flash hider, 2 high capacity magazines....it does have the .170 pins instead of the .150, and the semi-auto's have the high-shelf receiver you're referring to.

Sounds like you got one of Colt's "LEO" rifles, which are "officially" available only to government agencies . . . though they do show up with some frequency in regular channels through the gray market. (gray market = 100% legal, but against Colt's asinine marketing policies.) Too bad Colt is still deviating from milspec where they don't have to with oddball pins etc. No doubt it's otherwise well made, but I hope you never have to seek Colt's factory "service."

If you buy a select fire, it will not.

I can't legally buy a post-'86 select fire . . . from any manufacturer.

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

Sounds like you got one of Colt's "LEO" rifles, which are "officially" available only to government agencies . . . though they do show up with some frequency in regular channels through the gray market. (gray market = 100% legal, but against Colt's asinine marketing policies.) Too bad Colt is still deviating from milspec where they don't have to with oddball pins etc. No doubt it's otherwise well made, but I hope you never have to seek Colt's factory "service."I can't legally buy a post-'86 select fire . . . from any manufacturer.

You know, I am not so sure that this is a "gray" market at all...my local gunshop, which is a very popular (see mainstream) one around here has the very same model LE Colt I have. Now, I paid $950 for mine brand new from an FFL on the internet, they have it for $1,899. At gunshows, there are many of them all around, but even more expensive ($2,499 if you can believe that!!!). Colt might say they are LE only...but that just seems like marketing hype to make these rifles more appealing. They are everywhere.


You can't buy a select fire, but a police dept can. When they buy the select fire, it will not have the high shelf receiver.


People always want what the perceive they can't have. As soon as something becomes LE only or Mil only...there is a frenzy to own it. Like Red Box Hornady TAP ammo, or in the past the Black Talon...or AP ammo for certain calibers...or whatever becomes LEO only or scarce. In most instances, it is silly - because a similar product exists of equal performance, it reminds me of young boys and baseball cards.


I could care less, I just want that which is built better, with better parts. If Colt really meant what people claimed they said about the LE carbines being LE only, they'd only sell them to police dept's or officers with dept letterhead. They'd require their distributors to do the same. They don't. So it's all BS.

 

[Too Many Choices!?]

Bushmaster IS better than Colt...

I f you need out of spec parts, poor customer service, and an anti 2nd ammendment policy then buy the Colt !!

The M4 feed ramps are nice but not worth the extra $$$, unless you get a CMMG upper...But get whatever cremes your twinkie.

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

Oh yea, I prefer their "mil-spec" 1/9 twist and cost saving HBAR... Here's a company that fancies themselves as a defense contractor that builds a mil-spec AR, yet hasn't even reached the stage where they can properly stake gas keys. They make lots of money, perhaps they should invest in a machine that does it properly like Colt does..instead, they are busy saving pennies using a center punch along with not parkerizing under the gas block.


Seriously though, what is so anti-2nd Amendment about Colt? Is there something I don't know about?

Is it because they've said that certain product lines of their rifles will be LE only, even after the ban, yet every single person whose wanted one, has one? Now Colt's have M16 carriers...Bushmaster's literature states that ANY M16 part is illegal in an AR-15, which is untrue. Does this mean Bushmaster is anti-2nd Amendment because they are denying you a better part/configuration based on a BATFE ruling that has ZERO legal basis? Same nonsensical argument people make against Colt for saying they won't sell LE rifles to civilians despite there being no law preventing civilians from owning such a configuration.


Please don't tell me you hold them with the same contempt as a company like Ruger, that fathered the magazine capacity ban. Or S&W who sold everyone out with their Clinton deal. At least S&W is trying to make it up to the community by producing newer and bigger handcannons. If anti-civilian attitude is all you have against Colt, then whatever. I prefer to hate companies that actively work against us.

 

[MTMilitiaman]

what is so anti-2nd Amendment about Colt?

Donald Zilkha

 

[lbmii]

Well regardless of everything posted here; Colt will soon be out of business.

They have been coasting towards a stop for how many decades now?

 

[cameron.personal]

lbmii Well regardless of everything posted here; Colt will soon be out of business.
They have been coasting towards a stop for how many decades now?

Then we better start buying as many Colts as we can as they will be worth a fortune!

 

[Lone_Gunman]

You know, I am not so sure that this is a "gray" market at all...my local gunshop, which is a very popular (see mainstream) one around here has the very same model LE Colt I have.

I find the fact that Colt marks their ARs "law enforcement only" to be politically distasteful, and reason enough not to buy from them.

I bought a new BushMaster right after the AWB ended, and have been very pleased with it. I compared them to the Colt's and could not perceive a difference in quality. The Colt was more expensive, but that was not why I didn't buy it.

In the end, I chose not to do business with a company that did not want me to buy its product.

They are both nice guns, and I would have probably gone with the Colt had it not been for their feelings that civilians should not own their ARs.

 

[Henry Bowman]

This legal decision has nothing to do with patents or whether Colt's quality is better than Bushmaster's. It is about trademarks. Colt claimed that consumers associated the M4 name with Colt alone. Clearly they do not.

In other words, the term M4 has been made generic by so many other companies ripping off Colt's trademark for so long, so now it's OK to do so...?

Yes, this is how trademarks work. If you sleep on your rights, they can disappear. Unlike patents, which expire after a certain term, trademarks can continue indefinately. "Indefinate" can mean "short" if the consuming public no longer recognizes the alleged mark as an indicator of source. Hence, terms like escalator, asprin, and adrenaline are no longer trademarks, but once were. When the consuming public changes its collective minds, your trademark can become generic, i.e., no longer a distinctive indicator of source.

In this case, M4 may or may not have ever been a trademark. My advice to Colt: Pick a mark that is protectable for your model names, not "M-something," which consumers recognize as primarily a military designation of a certain configuration. The fact that all military M4s were made by Colt for at least a period of time does not cause it to be distinctive, i.e., an indicator of source in the minds of the consuming public.

 

[davek]

Slightly off topic, but how exactly do companies like LMT and CMT fit in to this argument? Don't they have U.S. Military contracts and don't they produce M4's, or am I mistaken about that?

 

[lbmii]

How can Colt trademark M4? Does not the military come up with these names on their own?

Are not names like M1, M14, M16, M249 and so on, military given names?

 

[TexasRifleman]

I find the fact that Colt marks their ARs "law enforcement only" to be politically distasteful, and reason enough not to buy from them.

I find the fact that Colt marks their ARs "law enforcement only" to be a sleazy marketing trick intended to drive up demand and therefore price for a rifle that isn't that much different than anything that can be obtained from other makers, and reason enough not to by from them.

The whole thing about these being hyped as "unobtainable" even though everyone that has wanted one has been able to find one is what makes me roll my eyes at Colt.

 

[cameron.personal]

I don't get this...


You can by a Colt Match Target M4 (not marked LE Only) for about $100-$150 more than a Bushmaster M4gery... Why wouldn't you want to pay the little extra for the extras listed by Don't Tread On Me Above....

An M4 has, and should have, and buyers expect the following, all of which bushmaster does NOT have:

1] M4 feed ramps
2] Staked down castle nut on collapsing stock
3] Parkerizing under the gas block
4] Proper height front sight block (F-marked) to actually allow one to sight in the rifle properly with a flattop.
5] Magnetically tested and proof load fired Bolt and Barrel with a 77k psi 100gr load. Each and every bolt and barrel is done.
6] Properly staked gas key that will not come loose ever.
7] Enhanced extractor spring is standard
8] H-buffer
9] Double heat shields in handguards.
10] Handguards are made out of the non-melting real-deal material.
11] The receiver extension (buffer tube) is Mil-spec and the proper size to accept aftermarket type stocks like the VLTOR.
12] Colt has the real M16 carrier, that features a shrouded firing pin, and more metal at the rear.
13] 1/7 twist rates

I understand the annoyance with Colt's policy of LE Only rifles but I cannot see that it would stop me from being an intelligent consumer and getting the best M4 for my money.

Regards,
Cameron

 

[Too Many Choices!?]

How well does that 1/7 twist barrel shoot the most common .223 load? 55gr?

OH yeah, it won't . So you get more effective, arguably , but more expensive ammo to go with your more expensive rifle, that will not accept other manufacturers uppers without more expensive parts...What a bargain...I would have paid the extra do for a Colt, but why?MY Bushamaster feeds flawlessly. Does not need to be religiously cleaned to to run flawlessly. My gas key han never become,"unstaked". I have no need to shoot the super effective, but super expensive heavy loads, if I want I can get a 1/7 barrel that is better than Colts, for less. The stock thing is nice and the feed ramps are nice, but not worth the do when all properly made AR's will not stop ticking... So theres your valuie, with my Bushmaster's savings , I got a sure fire M73 quad rail handguard, and a few bricks of Wolf ammo to bo blasting with, and an optic. SO THERE IS YOUR VALUE....
And as has been stated earlier, there are manufactureres that will sell you an upper with all the Colt add-ons, for much much cheaper(cmmg). So if you like your prancing pony, that is fine, but don't call it the industry standard anymore because it isn't. There are probably 10-20X's the number of Bushmaster/Rock River AR-15's out there as Colt's, and many more Home built ones from reputable parts manufactureres, can BETTER than Colt...

Deal with it?Too Many Choices!? Colt is good, just not worth the dough when you can buldt a comparable procduct and have money left for optics, a case or so of wolf, and railed handguards....

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Any 1/7 barrel will shoot 55gr ammo just fine. Let's try and keep this thread related to the lawsuit/M4 issues. If someone wants to start a "which rifle is better thread" then let's start a new thread separate from this one.

 

[cameron.personal]

I think this is pertinent to the discussion...

On AR15.com
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=2&f=29&t=149078

This is straight from the horse's mouth (so to speak). Yesterday, I sent the following question to the Director of Sales and Marketing for Colt Mfg:

Hello,

My name is motown_steve. I was given your e-mail address by a user on 1911forums.com who said that you may be able to answer a couple of questions for me about Colt. As you may or may not be aware, there are some stories from credible people on AR15.com stating that Colt's policy regarding the sale of LE AR-15s is to require that Colt dealers and distributors obtain an LEO letterhead (stating that the rifle is being purchased for official use) from anyone attempting to purchase a Colt LE AR-15. Can you shed any light on this situation? Is it Colt's policy to require Colt dealers and distributors to obtain a letter on letterhead from a Law Enforcement organization stating that an LE model rifle is going to be used for official purposes before selling that rifle?

As you probably are aware, the features that seperate the Colt LE rifles (specifically the LE6520, LE6920, LE6921 and AR6721) from the rifles manufactured by Colt Mfg. are no longer prohibited by federal law. This makes these rifles highly desirable by citizen firearms enthusiasts and shooters. I look forward to your response.

With Regards,
motown_steve

Here is the response that I got from

When the ban was in effect we did have that policy, with the sunset of the band Colt no longer requires that practice. Colt has elected not to retro the MT product line. The LE products are still being sold to our LE distributors, they may have there own policy in place but it is not driven by Colt.

Mark Roberts
Director, Sales and Marketing
Colt's Manufacturing Co. LLC

 

[[email protected]]

The real deal on Colts

First let me qualify myself.I have been in the firearms industry for 12 years.I'm a N.R.A. instructor & manged a gun shop for 11 years.I'm also a certified Colt Law Enforcement Armorer for the M16,M-4,AR15 weapons systems.Okay the staking on the M4 locking nut on the receiver extension(buffer tube) is a pain to remove if u wanna change stocks if u need to because of damage or personal preference.The staking have to be cut,then u need a Colt specific spanner wrench.To replace use locktite & a spanner wrench.The 1/7 bbls for the M-4 was designed specificlly for the Military issue SS109 62gr .233 ammunition.Someone posted that 1/7 twist is better for 72gr or higher bullets that is completely wrong.The 1/9 bbl is better for high gr bullets & also lower gr bullets like the most common one used the 55 gr.Its not that the1/7 won't shot them,it will,but not as well or as accurately becuase the 1/7 wasn,t designed for those bullets weights.It was designed for the 62gr SS109 or the M193 both current U.S. Military issue.The carrier keys screws aren't staked there pinched which is efficent unless because of rotten luck or whatever u bend or damage the carrier key & need to replace it.Well then get a dremmel,a good thin file,or go see a competent gunsmith to take those screws off.Oh if u go the gunsmith way which I reccomend unless u know what ur doing it gonna be expensive.The M16 versus the AR15 bolt carrier it doesn't matter unless u own a regidtered machine gun(M16 pre 86 transeferable).Any new Colt including the L.E. like the 6920 come with a factory formed block in the lower so u ain't gonna make it run anyway.In fact u can use a semibolt carrier in a full auto,but it wiil only fire in the semiauto mode.Since 1990 Colts for the civilian market all come with .170 sz pins,only L.E. or Military select fire rifles come with .155 sz pins not .150szSo if u have a pre 90 Colt AR & u need to replace the pins u need sz .155 pins.The new pins won't fit.The Bushmaster being issued during the first Gulf War don't know if its true,what is true sometime betweem1988 to 1995 A Marine Unit( Don't know which one) were given Bushmaster M16 A2 for testing.They preformed as good as the Colts,some Marines actually liked them better,but let's remeber Colts got the contract & they weren't gonna give an inch of it up.The article was distributed around to dealers by Bushmaster when u received the rifles or catalogs.If u contact Bushmaster they may still have the copies.It was called "Bushmaster builds a better M16",thats were I found out about the Marine's field testing them.FN supplied M16 & M4 for a while,but problems arose & they were replaced by Colts.If u wanna try out a select fire post86 M16 from Bushmaster contact & become friendly with a class 2 or class 3 dealer or even better become one & u can receive them under ur S.O.T. add on to ur FFL & go out & play.The Knobb Creek machine Gunshoot held twice a year in Kentucky is a good place to see & fire these weapons,but there some ranges that have them & will rent them.Returning to the carrier key screw I've yet to see any come loose in A Bushmaster,DPMS, or anyothe rifle.MP or magenitical particle testing done on Colt bbls or parts is nice,but doesn't make that much of a difference.I have owned a Bushmaster AR15,shoot it,kept it clean only had a jamming issue due to some bad South African ammo.The day I had the issue with the S.A. ammo ,I stopped,checked my rifle & switched to PMC' no more problems,not one single jamm.So Colt supplys the best extractor spring assembly,this is actually true u cantell if a new heavier one the harmonic dampener is black.Thats the plastic piece inside the spring.IIts not a big issue because I think its DPMS & Bushmaster sell a heavy extractor spring assembly & its so cheap it not even an issue.Wolf .223 Ammo is BAD!!!!! for any AR<M16 including Colts u wiill ruin the extractor & the e.spring assembly.If God forbit u need it especially anyone in L.E. for selfdefense or a fun day at a the range & it fail well blame ur self.Cheap now ,but expensive later maybe even life threatning.I don't wanna hear,but extractors & e.s.assemblys r so cheap the thing is it will give u no warning it just fail possibly when u need it most.L.E. 6920 & other models do come out to the civilian market once in a while ,but at a minium price is over $1500.00.I sell both,but sell more Bushmaster between $950 to $980 thats the M4 model.My instructor when I took the course actually likes the Rock River AR over the Bushmasters.Rock River makes a great rifle & cheap too.If u wanna see a good tortue test on a full auto ,my buddy is a manufacturer, go to www.AR15.TV - 1100 rounds in 15 mins one jam due to a mag failure.Last ,but not least M4 is a Military designation thats all.Like M9 is for Beretta 92F.That one would be harder to challenge than M4 only standing specificlly for the Colt Carbine 14.5 bbl A3 Mode select fire rifle.If Fact The burst fire model Colt factory model# is different than the S.OPs full auto model.Well thats all.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

First let me qualify myself.I have been in the firearms industry for 12 years.I'm a N.R.A. instructor & manged a gun shop for 11 years.I'm also a certified Colt Law Enforcement Armorer for the M16,M-4,AR15 weapons systems.

Thanks for stopping by; however, a lot of what you say flat out contradicts my own experience with the AR15 system or is simply wrong and the way you said it made it difficult to read and understand.

The staking have to be cut,then u need a Colt specific spanner wrench.To replace use locktite & a spanner wrench.

Staking the castle nut is done because vibration will work the castle nut loose (along with the telestock) eventually. Loctite is a good soluton as well though.

The 1/7 bbls for the M-4 was designed specificlly for the Military issue SS109 62gr .233 ammunition.

Actually, it was chosen to allow the rifle to fire the longer M856 tracer. That round needs the faster twist to stabilize it.

Someone posted that 1/7 twist is better for 72gr or higher bullets that is completely wrong.The 1/9 bbl is better for high gr bullets & also lower gr bullets like the most common one used the 55 gr.

The 1/7 twist is commonly regarded as a better choice because it will fire both the heavier 73gr+ rounds and the lighter rounds (down to 45gr) accurately. Many 1/9s will fire 73gr+ rounds accurately; but not all of them will. The 1/9 twist is borderline enough that some will work and some won't. You'll even have 1/9 barrels right on the edge that will only work when it is hot outside. Nobody wants to fire match ammo and get a 4-5" group at 100yds and that is what you can see with some 1/9 barrels.

Its not that the1/7 won't shot them,it will,but not as well or as accurately becuase the 1/7 wasn,t designed for those bullets weights.It was designed for the 62gr SS109 or the M193 both current U.S. Military issue.

You realize that the M193 is a 55gr bullet? Just above you say the 1/7 will not shoot that weight as accurately and now you are saying that it won't do that because it was designed for a 55gr bullet?

In my experience, the 1/7 will shoot bullets as light as 45gr as accurately as any 1/9 barrel I've owned in the past. If there is a difference, it is smaller than any shooter I've seen can measure.

The carrier keys screws aren't staked there pinched which is efficent unless because of rotten luck or whatever u bend or damage the carrier key & need to replace it.Well then get a dremmel,a good thin file,or go see a competent gunsmith to take those screws off.Oh if u go the gunsmith way which I reccomend unless u know what ur doing it gonna be expensive.

The "pinching" you describe is the proper way to stake a carrier key. I've owned, built and worked on ARs since 1990 and never had to replace a damaged carrier key. I've tightened up a few improperly staked and/or loose ones though. Also, I don't know what you consider expensive; but an entirely new AR15 bolt carrier with key (staked) costs about $92.50 and can be replaced by even a monkey.

The M16 versus the AR15 bolt carrier it doesn't matter unless u own a regidtered machine gun(M16 pre 86 transeferable).

Actually, it can make a difference since the notched AR15 hammer likes to grab the collar of the firing pin and smash it against the firing pin retaining pin. This happens on a Colt AR15 bolt carrier because the firing pin isn't shrouded like a Colt M16 bolt carrier. As long as the firing pin is shrouded, then I agree that the weight difference between an AR15 and M16 carrier isn't a significant one and won't make a difference in functioning unless the rifle was already marginal to begin with.

FN supplied M16 & M4 for a while,but problems arose & they were replaced by Colts.

There was no problem with FN other than the Army lost a lawsuit to Colt over improperly supplying the TDP for the M4 to FN. FN still manufactures the M16A2 and M16A4 for the Marines and Army. Colt has the sole legal rights to produce or license the M4 for some time to come, so M4s must be produced by Colt as part of the terms of the legal settlement.

Returning to the carrier key screw I've yet to see any come loose in A Bushmaster,DPMS, or anyothe rifle.

Actually Bushmaster improperly staked hundreds of carrier keys on their rifles and had a major issue with this in 2003-2004.

MP or magenitical particle testing done on Colt bbls or parts is nice,but doesn't make that much of a difference.

Well, I'd be inclined to agree with you based on my own experience; but I don't understand how you can argue that Wolf may cause sudden extractor failure that could cost you your life and should be avoided at all costs a few sentences later. Using Wolf saves money (and a fair amount of money as well) just as using non-MP parts saves money. In both cases, you accept a higher risk of failure as the price of saving money. Why is it OK in one case and not OK in the other? Because in my experience, I've seen more cracked bolt lugs and cam pins than I have seen sudden extractor failures.

 

[[email protected]]

Bartholomue knows more than the Colt Factory Insturctors

I read the thread & it seem he knows more than a certified Armorer or Colt's Factory instruuctor who worked at the factory before he or myself was born.Everything in my post is berbatium from my memory,notes,& reading materials given to during the course.The 1/7 bbls was designed for the SS109 not the tracers in fact running auto with tracers shoot out the barrels.805 of problem with the rifle are due to the extractor spring assembly.If need be I will give the Colt Armorer's instructors contact info,fax u my diploma whatever.If u didn't work for Colt which I didn't or don't then don't make bold statemnets or call me a liar.I presented the fact by a man payed by Colt to give the course to Polcie Dept's or qualified candidates all over the U.S.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I read the thread & it seem he knows more than a certified Armorer or Colt's Factory instruuctor who worked at the factory

Well, whoever gave you the information, it is wrong.

The 1/7 bbls was designed for the SS109 not the tracers

So how is it that 1/9 and 1/8 barrels shoot M855/SS109 quite accurately if you you need a 1/7 in order to use that round? Check the June 1978 entry for this link:
http://www.thegunzone.com/556dw-3.html

It should explain that and a whole lot more quite nicely.

If u didn't work for Colt which I didn't or don't then don't make bold statemnets or call me a liar.

Feel free to show me the factual information that shows where I am wrong. "A guy who worked at the Colt Factory since before you were born told me" isn't considered credible especially when it goes against what many of us have personally experienced and lots of history on the subject.

THR has more than its fair share of armorers and gun dealers here. We require a little higher standard of knowledge than what sells stuff at the local gun shop.

 

[chakup]

I'd tend to lean towards bart's statements, but that's just me.

 

[Jeff White]

mikepirez,

I hate to be the one to inform you of this, but your instructor was wrong about a bunch of things. That's not really surprising, you can't expect an armorer's course to teach the history and development of a weapons system.

Bartholomew Roberts is absolutely correct in his assertion that the 1/7 twist barrel was adopted to accomodate the L110 (later to be adopted in the US as the M856) tracer. You can find the entire story in Edward Ezell's excellent refernce The Black RIfle. Start on page 337 with Extended Range 5.56mm Ammunition Developments.

There is a lot of misinformation and firearm urban legends surrounding the AR15/M16 series of weapons. I've heard it for years in the Army and in law enforcement training courses. The truth is out there, you just have to find it.

Jeff

 

[[email protected]]

Does anyone work directly for Colt here.

The man teaching the course does & gets payed for it.The book The black Rifle is not offical source book although He did recommend it.Why would he say something if the company pays him to give the right information that i.He works for Colt do any of you.If he were wrong Colt would find out He's teaching it wrong & fire him right.If u want the info pay & take the course,then call the factory.If u wanna believe what someone wrote in a book fine.Colt continues to pay him & send him all around the U.S.teaching & representing Colt.

 

[Jeff White]

Mike,
Who taught your armorers course? PM me if you don't wish to post it here.

As for believong everything you hear, I wouldn't recommend it. In 1974, my drill sergeant told us that 5.56mm was so lethal because hydrostatic shock from the little bullet cause the flesh to explode. He even went so far as to fill a .30 caliber ammo can with water and blow a large hole out of the back of it to demonstrate hydrostatic shock. He was in the Army and they were paying him to tell us that, but it wasn't correct. If I were to adopt your attitude, I'd still believe that it was and swear that it was the gospel truth, even against the overwhelming scientific evidence that bullet fragmentation is what cuses small high velocity projectiles to leave devastating wounds.

Your instructor put out wrong information. It happens....

Jeff

 

[Don't Tread On Me]

1/7 twist rate is actually kind of a waste unless you want to shoot tracers. 1/9 will *should* shoot any magazine length designed bullet up to 75gr out of a 20" barrel (not sure about those longer than mag length VLD's). 1/8 guarantees stability for anything up to 80gr, and guarantees 77's being stable out of a 16" barrel (although there aren't many 16" 1/8s).

Sierra lists their 90gr bullet as needing a 1/6.5, while their 80gr says either 1/7 or 1/8. So figure, the 1/7 would be ideal for something weighing inbetween those.

The problem isn't just weight - it is really length. The greater the weight - naturally the longer the bullet due to the diameter always being the constant (.224). However, some bullets are longer than their weight indicates. This can be as a result of using ligher materials within the bullet. The SS109 has a steel core penetrator. That weighs less than lead. So the 62gr SS109 bullet is LONGER than an all-lead 62gr bullet would be. Longer without increasing weight requires a faster twist.

The same holds true of the tracer. It is a very long bullet. It is LONGER than the Sierra 80gr. There's a reason most 1/8 barrels are stainless target barrels, because they were designed to shoot the 77 and 80gr match bullets accurately. IIRC, the tracer is longer than the 80gr Sierra, but it weights in at 60 or so grains. That makes it a long but light bullet. A fast twist is needed to keep it straight.

The ultimate twist is probably the 1/8 - but no one makes a barrel with 1/8 that is in a military profile like a .625 "pencil", M4 or Govt. (not HBAR), non-stainless, chrome-lined, with a real 5.56 nato chamber, proof load and MPI tested using 4150 steel and an M4 feed ramp extension. At least none that I know of other than custom shops which cost a fortune.


This is why a lot of folks just opt for the 1/7 and call it good even though it gives a little more twist than is really needed. It guarantees you can stabilize the 77gr loads out of 16" carbine barrels and that's that. No need to wonder, no need to test. Just get the 1/7 and be done with it. It isn't going to wear any faster than a 1/9 for anyone to notice anyway (if it even does). There's nothing but positives, and really no negatives.