Colt LE6920-OEM1 & OEM2

Let’s take a quick look at two new offerings from Colt in the LE6920-OEM1 and LE6020-OEM2 models. Several places have these listed and they are in the Colt 2015 catalog, but no one currently has them in stock. They should be available and hitting the market after Shot Show. The OEM’s come without a stock, handguards, trigger guard and BUIS. Now, you might be thinking, what is the big deal with the OEM models? If you are new to the AR15 platform they might not be for you, but if you already have a few ARs you can see the benefits.

Colt LE6920-OEM1 & OEM2
Colt LE6920-OEM1 & OEM2

#1) It’s a Colt, you know what you are getting, (proven reliability), enough said. #2) I currently have several stocks, handguards , grips, rail systems and BUIS laying around. Most of us do as we are constantly getting new accessory products to try out. #3) The MRSP is just under 800 dollars. That means you will probably be able to get an OEM1 or OEM2 in the mid 600 dollar range once they start hitting the street. Slap on the extra parts you have laying around and you have a new standard configuration Colt LE6920 for under 700 dollars with the OEM1.

Colt LE6920 OEM1
Colt LE6920-OEM1

The LE6920-OEM2 is the real winner here, with the factory pinned FSB / Gas System that has been milled down to a low profile gas block. The delta ring has not been added, leaving just the barrel nut and no handguard cap behind the FSB. The OEM2 is screaming for you to slap on an extended Free Float (FF) rail system of your choice. If you choose a rail system designed to mount directly to the mil-spec barrel nut, (i.e. Centurion C4, Fortis or Midwest), you simply put it directly on. No removal of the flash hider or FSB is needed. This saves you time and money, while keeping the reliability of factory gas system in place. If you choose a propriety barrel nut FF rail system, you still get the benefit of the factory gas system, you save money not having to replace it with an unpinned low profile gas block or have the FSB milled down.

Colt LE6920 OEM2
Colt LE6920-OEM2

Hopefully the OEM’s will be available soon. I think these will be one of the best “Bang for the Buck” items, especially when most of us strip off the factory accessories anyway. The LE6920-OEM2 is on my list of next purchases.

Duncan.

Update:

A few days after we posted this article, Larry Vickers did a quick video of the Colt LE6920-OEM1 and OEM2 offerings at Shot Show 2015. Check out the video bellow.

ATF changes mind on Stabilizing Brace pistol stock.

The BATFE has released an open letter posted here.
http://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/Firearms/FirearmsIndustry/open_letter_on_the_redesign_of_stabilizing_braces.pdf

OPEN LETTER ON THE REDESIGN OF “STABILIZING BRACES”

The Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division (FATD), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has received inquiries from the public concerning the proper use
of devices recently marketed as “stabilizing braces.” These devices are described as “a shooter’s aid that is designed to improve the single-handed shooting performance of buffer tube equipped pistols.” The device claims to enhance accuracy and reduce felt recoil when using an AR-style pistol.

These items are intended to improve accuracy by using the operator’s forearm to provide stable support for the AR-type pistol. ATF has previously determined that attaching the brace to a firearm does not alter the classification of the firearm or subject the firearm to National Firearms Act (NFA) control. However, this classification is based upon the use of the device as designed. When the device is redesigned for use as a shoulder stock on a handgun with a rifled barrel under 16 inches in length, the firearm is properly classified as a firearm under the NFA.

The NFA, 26 USCS § 5845, defines “firearm,” in relevant part, as “a shotgun having a barrel or barrels of less than 18 inches in length” and “a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length.” That section defines both “rifle” and “shotgun” as “a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder….” (Emphasis added).

Pursuant to the plain language of the statute, ATF and its predecessor agency have long held that a pistol with a barrel less than 16 inches in length and an attached shoulder stock is a NFA “firearm.” For example, in Revenue Ruling 61-45, Luger and Mauser pistols “having a barrel of less than 16 inches in length with an attachable shoulder stock affixed” were each classified as a “short barrel rifle…within the purview of the National Firearms Act.”

In classifying the originally submitted design, ATF considered the objective design of the item as well as the stated purpose of the item. In submitting this device for classification, the designer noted that

The intent of the buffer tube forearm brace is to facilitate one handed firing of the AR15 pistol for those with limited strength or mobility due to a handicap. It also performs the function of sufficiently padding the buffer tube in order to reduce bruising to the forearm while firing with one hand. Sliding and securing the brace onto ones forearm and latching the Velcro straps, distributes the weight of the weapon evenly and assures a snug fit. Therefore, it is no longer necessary to dangerously “muscle” this large pistol during the one handed aiming process, and recoil is dispersed significantly, resulting in more accurate shooting without compromising safety or comfort.

In the classification letter of November 26, 2012, ATF noted that a “shooter would insert his or her forearm into the device while gripping the pistol’s handgrip-then tighten the Velcro straps for additional support and retention. Thus configured, the device provides the shooter with additional support of a firearm while it is still held and operated with one hand.” When strapped to the wrist and used as designed, it is clear the device does not allow the firearm to be fired from the shoulder. Therefore, ATF concluded that, pursuant to the information provided, “the device -2- is not designed or intended to fire a weapon from the shoulder.” In making the classificationATF determined that the objective design characteristics of the stabilizing brace supported the
stated intent.

ATF hereby confirms that if used as designed—to assist shooters in stabilizing a handgun while shooting with a single hand—the device is not considered a shoulder stock and therefore may be attached to a handgun without making a NFA firearm. However, ATF has received numerous inquiries regarding alternate uses for this device, including use as a shoulder stock. Because the NFA defines both rifle and shotgun to include any “weapon designed or redesigned, made or
remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder,” any person who redesigns a stabilizing brace for use as a shoulder stock makes a NFA firearm when attached to a pistol with a rifled barrel under 16 inches in length or a handgun with a smooth bore under 18 inches in length.

The GCA does not define the term “redesign” and therefore ATF applies the common meaning. “Redesign” is defined as “to alter the appearance or function of.” See e.g. Webster’s II New College Dictionary, Third Ed. (2005). This is not a novel interpretation. For example ATF has previously advised that an individual possesses a destructive device when possessing antipersonnel ammunition with an otherwise unregulated 37/38mm flare launcher. See ATF Ruling 95-3. Further, ATF has advised that even use of an unregulated flare and flare launcher as a
weapon results in the making of a NFA weapon. Similarly, ATF has advised that, although otherwise unregulated, the use of certain nail guns as weapons may result in classification as an “any other weapon.”

The pistol stabilizing brace was neither “designed” nor approved to be used as a shoulder stock, and therefore use as a shoulder stock constitutes a “redesign” of the device because a possessor has changed the very function of the item. Any individual letters stating otherwise are contrary
to the plain language of the NFA, misapply Federal law, and are hereby revoked.

Any person who intends to use a handgun stabilizing brace as a shoulder stock on a pistol (having a rifled barrel under 16 inches in length or a smooth bore firearm with a barrel under 18 inches in length) must first file an ATF Form 1 and pay the applicable tax because the resulting firearm will be subject to all provisions of the NFA.

If you have any questions about the issues addressed in this letter, you may contact the Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division at fire_tech@atf.gov or by phone at (304) 616-4300.

Max M. Kingery
Acting Chief
Firearms Technology Criminal Branch
Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division

Re-Thinking the Modern Rifle

Howard’s recent article about the M16A4 and its numerous disadvantages sparked a firestorm of discussion and criticism. I utilize rifles in all my shooting and have a few M16A2 style clunkers myself…but I am here to offer some discussion on the future of the rifle length platform and who can take advantage of it. So Where does the modern fighting rifle fit in the world of AR15’s?

M16A4: Not So Modern

Let’s get this away right out front: the M16A4 is not a good example of a modern fighting rifle. Every bad thing about the platform Howard touched upon is absolutely right. From the A2 stock to the outdated KAC rail system, the weapon is a rather heavy for what it does. We cannot define a modern fighting rifle based on what the Marines use, just as we cannot define a modern fighting carbine as a vanilla issue US Army M4. As civilians, we don’t have the barriers to building a rifle that will suit our needs and purpose; as cool as it is to build civilian M16 series clones, it usually ends up being a poor choice in a defensive weapon. Let’s start by changing the configuration.

Outfitting an M16A4 style built with modern components significantly reduces its biggest two handicaps: Weight and Length.

ACOG NTC (3)

Ditching the A2 stock is the first step in keeping a rifle length system useable

I updated my A4 rifle with a Vltor A5 stock years ago. The system is now useable with body armor and is a good update to any rifle length system. The rifle can run with standard buffers as well (I would recommend starting at H2) and needs very little attention. Performing this one upgrade is a good start, but can make the weapon muzzle heavy. Solution? Shorten the barrel or add a lighter hand-guard system… or do both.

Shortening the barrel from 20 to 18 inches and equipping the rifle with a modern rail system shaves off both weight, and length. Shortening the barrel to 18 inches and equipping the rifle length system with a modern lightweight rail such as a Daniel Defense Lite Rail 12.0 or a BCM KMR does wonders for the handling of the rifle.

IMG_20150106_100343

The biggest advantage of a rifle? M193 still works well for self-defense. Here is my 18 inch rifle with Criterion barrel.

The 20 inch barrel is a long pipe and modern defensive loadings diminish the need for reliance on velocity as a fragmentation mechanism. I recognize this fact, but logistically I also recognize the availability of M193 and how easy to obtain it is. Keeping the 20 inch barrel or updating to an 18 inch barrel still keeps the benefit of fragmentation as a wounding mechanism for the common as dirt M193 loading.

M193 is still humming along at around 3200 to 3250 fps out of an 18 to 20 inch barrel. While it is agreed that modern defensive loadings are preferred to M193, the ability to stockpile and train with 55gr fragmenting FMJ for a good price is a benefit in its own right. With Winchester PDX running near $1.40-1.49 a round vs $ .42 cents a round for Federal M193 then it begins to turn the table in favor of logistics. It allows you to train with the same round you can use for self-defense. While I have a magazine loaded with 69 grain OTM available for self-defense, I keep more M193 on hand due to cost and availability.

Not Just a Shorter Rifle

Keeping in mind the changes above, a rifle length system can be far more versatile than the stock M16A2 and M16A4 clones. There are a few extra advantages to modernizing a rifle setup, especially for new shooters.

Anyone who has tossed a quality compensator on a 20 inch gun knows how easy it is to keep these rifle length systems flat. Giving a rifle to a new shooter interested in AR’s is a good move, since the concussion and recoil will be kept to a minimum while the handling of the weapon will be excellent.

Is it any wonder why 3 gun competitors love to shoot 18 inch rifles? They handle well and stay on target. While 3 gun setups may be a far cry from a defensive rifle, it doesn’t take much to adapt the beneficial characteristics of a 3 gun rifle to a AR15 set up for home defense.

While my opinion may differ from a majority of internet opinion, I believe that proper forethought into how you set up a rifle can elevate it from “the old musket” to a weapon that can go toe to toe with modern carbines, and in some ways outperform them. The modern upgrades available to carbines are directly beneficial to the rifle while preserving its smooth shooting characteristics.

Bonus: I didn’t even have to mention sight radius or bayonets for this article.

Brian – www.thenewrifleman.com

Duncan’s Best of 2014

Here are a few of my favorite products of 2014. They are in no particular order.

M&P Shield,  without safety:

After the first of the year disappointment in the G42 being a .380, the new M&P Shield stepped in to fill the single stack 9mm role everyone was wanting. Smith & Wesson quickly capitalized by finally listening to what most had said about the Shield over the last few years. Mainly, many wanted the Shield to be offered without a safety, to operate more like the M&P Full Size models and a Glock.  I picked up the new Shield offering mid-year and it basically goes with me every day. The Shield had a few hiccups when first released and some recently. These issues have been fixed by Smith & Wesson and the Shields are very reliable. One thing I found very interesting, is when I fired the 9mm Shield and the G42 together, I did not feel a lot of recoil difference.

S&W M&P Shield /no safety
S&W M&P Shield /no safety

Lancer L5 AWM Magazines:

If you have followed us for a while, you know my personal stock up/go to magazines are USGI with Magpul followers and L-Plates. In 2014 I found amazing deals on Lancer L5 Advanced Warfighter Magazines (AWM) at USGI prices so I jumped on them.  The Lancer L5 AWM is (In my Opinion)  the best magazine to use for Duty/Defensive purposes. A true 30 round capacity polymer magazine with the strength of wraparound steel feed lips. Most of the popular polymer magazines will crack, over time, around the feed lips. With the Lancer’s this is a non-issue. Price was always the only reason I did not buy a lot of Lancer’s. In 2014 Lancer L5 AWM’s became my go to magazine.

Lancer L5 AWM Smoke Translucent
Lancer L5 AWM Smoke/Translucent

Surefire X300 Weapon Light:

Several of the LR staff have bugged me to get a Surefire X300 over the last few years. As with everything I get, price is always a factor, as I have multiple defensive weapons and it’s hard to get several firearms equipped with a weapon light when they are expensive.  The Streamlight TLR-1 is usually what I like to use. I purchase a Surefire X300 specifically to mount on one of my AR-15’s and I am glad I did. The Surefire X300 is the best weapon mounted light I have used on an AR-15. It is a little more user friendly on the AR, has a longer distance more focused beam and has a little more lumens than the TLR-1’s I normally use. On a patrol rifle, for my specific purposes, the Surefire X300 is the best weapon mounted light I have used to date. It has just the right combination of function and light output, for both outdoor and indoor use.

SureFire X300 Weapon Light
SureFire X300 Weapon Light

Colt AR15-A4 Lightweight LE Carbine (AR6720):

The low prices on AR15’s have been great in 2014. At the beginning of the year I purchased a Colt AR6720. It is one of those AR’s that made me say, ” Why did I wait so long to get it”. You find yourself wondering how a pencil barrel can really make that much of a difference. Once you get it in your hands, it just feels right.  The 6720 has all of the things you want in a reliable lightweight Carbine. It is lightweight, fast, smooth, accurate, fun to shoot and most importantly, it has the quality and features you expect in a duty/defensive carbine. I really purchased the 6720 for my wife and she absolutely loves it, but I find myself wanting to steal it. (looserounds.com / colt-lightweight-ar6720-carbine)

Colt AR6720 Lightwieght LE CArbine
Colt AR6720 Lightwieght LE CArbine

Aimpoint Micro T1/H1:

For the second year in a row, I have to mention the Aimpoint Micro’s. I have slowly replaced all of my older 30mm (M2, ML2, ML3) Aimpoint’s. They are simply, small, fast, rugged, reliable, lightweight and have unmatched battery life. There is not much more that I can say that is not already out there. Aimpoint is simply the best RDS and I feel the micro’s are the best within the Aimpoint line.

Aimpoint Micro  T1/H1(RDS)
Aimpoint Micro T1/H1(RDS)

Kinetic Concepts Tactical MOLLE-Link:

For me, the Kinetic Concepts Tactical (KCT) MOLLE-Link system, has to be my favorite and I think most innovative products this year. It is one of those things that is so simple yet so effective and makes you wonder why it took so long for someone to think of it. The MOLLE-Link system allowes a low profile ability to mount Kydex holsters, magazine and accessory pouches directly to MOLLE webbing, with no bulky accessory attachments.  The KCT MOLLE-Link products are easy to quickly mount/remove and are extremely secure. Great product and idea from KCT. (looserounds.com / kinetic-concepts-tactical-molle-link-holsters)

Kinetic Concepts Tactical (KCT) MOLLE-Link
Kinetic Concepts Tactical (KCT) MOLLE-Link

Duncan.

ATF Changes Opinion on Legality of SIG Brace Fired From Shoulder Apparently

YnA2mTj

O7EOpTm

SBJBf3b

 

 

Looks like due to high profile use and constant  questions by users. The ATF has changes its mind/policy/ whatever,  on the legal use of the popular SIG brace for AR15 pistols. Ostensibly for use by putting your firing arm through the “brace” to more easily hold the AR pistols with one hand. Many have been using it as a legal way to have something very close to a SBR. due to an earlier opinion letter from the ATF that  it did not make the part illegal if fired in a way other than it was intended, i.e. arm brace.   This now seriously calls into question the further use and popularity of the SIG Brace,   I am sure for many, if you can not  use it on the shoulder, few will care for it much longer.

 

RJeff21   Shared these scanned copies via AR15.com earlier today.

You can read opinions gnashing of teeth and rending of multicam clothing here.

 

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1700566_Sig_Brace_ruled_ILLEGAL_TO_SHOULDER_by_ATF.html