Choosing AR Bolt/Carrier Group (5.56/.223 & 7.62x39)

[-JD-]

You're incorrect on the M16 BCG / ATF issue. Or GTS is. Whatever, the ATF issued a letter stating it is OK to use an M16 BCG in a semi-auto AR15.

Go with the LMT or BCM FA BCG's and never worry about it again.

Thanks, Guys.

Tony, do you have a link for that?

Believe me, I'd love to use the ION Bond BCM M16 Carrier, but my readings are that the BATF would likely arrest and prosecute, especially if the thing should ever double on a slam fire or the like. (They may anyway, but why give them any more ammo.) Given the successful Olofsen prosecution for an obviously, intemittantly-malfunctioning rifle, it just isn't worth the risk to me, even if it is legal. When it is my A$$ on the line it doesn't matter if they are right, if they can succeed in making my life hell at the least. Especially for something that does not matter all that much.

Even these guys are seem to fall on the better safe than sorry side.
http://www.ar15.com/content/legal/AR15-M16Parts/
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=6&t=739614

Unless someone has a BATF letter that says "we are absolutely fine with it" that I can staple to to my receipt, I'm not doing it. Even with that, they would probably change their minds tomorrow.

So for me it look like AR15 carriers only.

[-JD-]

Don't rule out the Young non-NM BCG. Great buy for the money IMHO.

I'm considering their NM - Safer in my mind.

[Asmodeus6]

Is there a place you can send your existing BCG out to get coated?

Something I've been wondering about lately.

My DPMS does not have a dust cover - much like the old colt models. So I could handle some bling. It also begs the question, if, for only bling factor considered. Can I run a coated bolt carrier, and the rest of my existing uncoated guts. Or does this somehow create a problem?

Sorry to interject...

[stevieb92]

I'm considering their NM - Safer in my mind.

Can you explain what you mean by "safer"?

[synergy]

I'd get a Colt, LMT, BCM or FN contract BCG.

M16 BCG is highly preferred, IMO. I'm not putting in an auto sear, M16 trigger, disconnecter, selector, or hammer....so I think I'll be ok.

You can always buy what's available...then replace it with one of the above listed bolts...and keep the first one as a spare, too.

[synergy]

Thanks, Guys.

Tony, do you have a link for that?

Believe me, I'd love to use the ION Bond BCM M16 Carrier, but my readings are that the BATF would likely arrest and prosecute, especially if the thing should ever double on a slam fire or the like. (They may anyway, but why give them any more ammo.) Given the successful Olsen prosecution for an obviously, intemittantly-malfunctioning rifle, it just isn't worth the risk to me, even if it is legal. When it is my A$$ on the line it doesn't matter if they are right, if they can succeed in making my life hell at the least. Especially for something that does not matter all that much.

Even these guys are seem to fall on the better safe than sorry side.
http://www.ar15.com/content/legal/AR15-M16Parts/
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=6&t=739614

Unless someone has a BATF letter that says "we are absolutely fine with it" that I can staple to to my receipt, I'm not doing it. Even with that, they would probably change their minds tomorrow.

So for me it look like AR15 carriers only.

You do know that Colt, and a number of other manufacturers ship/offer to ship guns with the M16 BCG...right?

Keep a spare disconnector on hand, and fix your gun if it doubles.

[-JD-]

Can you explain what you mean by "safer"?

You do know that Colt, and a number of other manufacturers ship/offer to ship guns with the M16 BCG...right?

Keep a spare disconnector on hand, and fix your gun if it doubles.

Safer means that in an environment where crap like this (http://forum.pafoa.org/news-123/1460...ral-crime.html) occurs, and in my estimation will get worse not better, I feel it is prudent for me to select an "AR15"/Semi-Auto not "M16"/Full-Auto Bolt carrier for my use. Should an event ever occur, I believe that they would push the FA BC as "intent". No need to give them help.

[I AM SPEAKING SOLELY FOR MYSELF - I AM NOT TRYING TO TELL ANYONE ELSE WHAT TO DO - AND I AM NOT OPINING THAT IT IS IN ANY WAY NOT LEGAL TO USE A "M16" BOLT CARRIER]


Overall - marginal benefit?, extremely small chance of adverse outcome, but catastrophic consequences if it goes bad though.

I realize that it might be less than the "BEST" functionally, but can you give me a percentage - 1%, 5%, 50% difference?

Especially since both LMT and Young make semi versions - I'm assuming of the same quality.

LMT ($130 http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/LMT-B...g-lmt-ar15.htm)

Young National Match Chrome ($215 - http://global-tactical.com/youngnati...pcomplete.aspx)

[-JD-]

...

Tony, do you have a link for that?

...

Unless someone has a BATF letter that says "we are absolutely fine with it" that I can staple to to my receipt, I'm not doing it. Even with that, they would probably change their minds tomorrow.

Tony, is this what you were referring to? http://www.gandrtactical.com/images/...6%20Letter.pdf

It sure this looks like a step in the right direction. Every previous BATF letter that I could find has been (it seems deliberately) vague but essentially saying WE RECOMMEND YOU DON'T DO IT. (EX. http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wb...f_letter52.txt, http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/wb...f_letter55.txt)

I'll stew on this a bit. I might just change my mind given that letter.

[TonyF]

Tony, is this what you were referring to? http://www.gandrtactical.com/images/...6%20Letter.pdf

Yes.

I have a copy of a similar letter but I can't find it.