FN Herstal Firearms banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,600 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
For a little background, a huge part of my interest in clone rifles is the research and the history of how the weapons have evolved. In this way every clone i build in a way creates a pseudo personal museum. Some guns I have that are clones aren't even that good in some or alot of way but that doesn't diminish the historical niche they filled. I've spent months researching and scouring the internet and local stores for old/obsolete parts to get the right items for a build which is also rewarding in its own right once you find that illusive part.

So before anyone comes in and starts blabbering about how this or that part from whoever is better... thats not the point of this thread

In this thread I'd like to gather info on these rifles and start a comparison of how close to the mark they will be to their Mil issue cousins. I'm also not opposed to discussing other varients not FN produced but really want to stay on "as issued" or "as seen in the wild"

FNH USA - Distinct Advantage :: FN 15 Military Collectors Series

This looks like huge leap forward in getting a FN manufactured M16/M4 series rifle from the standard FN-15 series which were a disappointment in the clone aspect for me.

The biggest thing I am hoping for out of these is the appropriate roll mark on the lower, not the stylized fh rollmark on the FN-15.



The UID label is also a nice touch, even if it reminds me of the pain dealing with the AIT system that came with GCSS-A transition

Another items I can nitpick is the ambi selector on the M4 and M16, this feature was introduced on the M4A1, and is not found on regular M4 and M16 unless it was a unit armorer modification.

A big plus is that the rifles comes with the KAC RAS out of the box!!! Although am surprised they display the guns with the rail panels installed on the 12 o'clock position. KAC recommends not putting them on that position as it reduces heat dissipation ad they are a giant pain in the rear to remove unless you completely remove the rails once installed.

I can live with the 16" barrel due to the NFA pains but would be nice if they offer 14.5" uppers or even a factory SBR option... I see the former much more likely though.

Will have to wait for more details to come out before more detailed comparisons can be made
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,600 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I want this S/N if I'm gonna have any nostalgia...

QUOTE]

There is actually a way to do that depending on your level of motivation..

Would be good to see any more pics of you're rifle if you have them to assist with the future comparisons along with branch of service and time period if you don't mind sharing. See you have the M68 mounted on the forward rail with what I assume is the older style QRP mount. Also was that an issue sling or a PX purchase?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
339 Posts
There is actually a way to do that depending on your level of motivation..

Would be good to see any more pics of you're rifle if you have them to assist with the future comparisons along with branch of service and time period if you don't mind sharing. See you have the M68 mounted on the forward rail with what I assume is the older style QRP mount. Also was that an issue sling or a PX purchase?
Bought the sling in 2002 at Camp Eagle, Bosnia-Herzegovina, I still have it in a bin in the garage somewhere. That pic was taken either at Udairi or Speicher in 2006. So, FN is doing custom serial numbers on these?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,600 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 · (Edited)
No custom serial numbers that I am aware of from FN.

Easiest way (still alot of work) to get you old SN would be to get a 80% lower finished then sent to a custom engraver to recreate the markings from your pic then get anodized to match the FN lowers... lots of work for nostalgia which is why I mentioned level of motivation....

Just for a nice touch you could also get a faux sear pin engraved to give it that little something extra
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,561 Posts
My first weapon in Basic training was a Colt M16A4. Totally worn out, and a general PITA for a new soldier to learn the platform on. Thankfully, it broke about half way though, and I was fortunate enough to receive a much newer FN made M16A4. I've always wanted to rebuild that rifle, and now it looks like the FN M16 will be just that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,600 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
The first rifle I qualified on was an M16A1... wish I had some pics but that was pre-digital camera days
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,109 Posts
Interesting stuff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,366 Posts
I thought that the rifle was going to be a semiauto M16A2. Guess not. I don't want whatever the heck that thing is supposed to be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,600 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
I thought that the rifle was going to be a semiauto M16A2. Guess not. I don't want whatever the heck that thing is supposed to be.
Its the M16A4 which coincidentally happens to be the M16 variant FN has the contract for, and the market is much larger for the flat top rifles these days, whether for better or worse there really isn't a huge demand for fixed carry handle uppers but this would be easy to retrofit without much work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,366 Posts
Its the M16A4 which coincidentally happens to be the M16 variant FN has the contract for, and the market is much larger for the flat top rifles these days, whether for better or worse there really isn't a huge demand for fixed carry handle uppers but this would be easy to retrofit without much work.
My whole point of wanting an FN M16A2 semiauto is for nostalgia. Otherwise I can piecemeal together parts and pieces to make a semiauto M16A2. Since that I never carried the M4/M4A1 orM16A4, neither of the offerings interest me one bit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,600 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
So after doing some more research, looks like the current FN contract for M4s to the .mil is for the M4A1 varient. This makes me wonder in FN will include the heavier profile M4 barrel with the FN15 M4 or will they use the standard M4 barrel.

Also interesting to note that FN's page states the flash hider will be permanently attached which indicates a more correct length barrel for clone but leaves the question if they will be doing a 14.7" with a standard A2 or use the 14.5" with an extended flashider or spacer. This will also limit the users ability to home configure the rifle....
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,859 Posts
Also interesting to note that FN's page states the flash hider will be permanently attached which indicates a more correct length barrel for clone but leaves the question if they will be doing a 14.7" with a standard A2 or use the 14.5" with an extended flashider or spacer. This will also limit the users ability to home configure the rifle....
I caught that too, thought the samething about the barrel length
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
143 Posts
My whole point of wanting an FN M16A2 semiauto is for nostalgia. Otherwise I can piecemeal together parts and pieces to make a semiauto M16A2. Since that I never carried the M4/M4A1 orM16A4, neither of the offerings interest me one bit.
I was issued the M16A2 as well. And I think a repro of that would be cool to own. But I also think a civvie version of the latest USMC rifle, the M16A4, decked out with the OKC3S bayonet, RCO, etc (probably not the AN/PEQ-15...) would be plenty cool. I'm not super savvy to all the small AR differences, etc, nor did I pay that much attention to the details of my issued rifle back in the day, other than that it was clean and put together properly. So I look forward to this thread and folks eventually pointing out any differences or similarities the semi-auto product has to the military version.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,600 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
I was issued the M16A2 as well. And I think a repro of that would be cool to own. But I also think a civvie version of the latest USMC rifle, the M16A4, decked out with the OKC3S bayonet, RCO, etc (probably not the AN/PEQ-15...) would be plenty cool. I'm not super savvy to all the small AR differences, etc, nor did I pay that much attention to the details of my issued rifle back in the day, other than that it was clean and put together properly. So I look forward to this thread and folks eventually pointing out any differences or similarities the semi-auto product has to the military version.
I know what you mean abut not paying attention at the time... wish I would have paid more mind to the details and taken pics of all my issued weapons. I have pretty good recollection of those I carried everyday for a year plus that I can reconstruct the details from memory and research

Why not the AN/PEQ-15? Well at least the ATPIAL-C, that way you can get to the 95% of "what I carried"
L3/ Insight ATPIAL-C Class1/3R IR Laser ? Tactical Night Vision Company

Not cheap but its available
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
12,030 Posts
....

Just for a nice touch you could also get a faux sear pin engraved to give it that little something extra
Not to nitpick but IIRC just marking the place for the sear pin makes the lower a machine gun as far as the ATF is concerned. You know, why mark it unless you are going to drill it type of thing, regardless if it is for nostalgia or not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,600 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
hk,

Thats an interesting perspective.Out of curiosity what reference presents this as I haven't seen it before but have seen numerous faux sear pins and sear blocks... i don't have this on any of mine because its not worth the expense for me but perhaps putting the faux pin engraving a few thousandths out of position would negate this and still look legit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
143 Posts
Why not the AN/PEQ-15? Well at least the ATPIAL-C, that way you can get to the 95% of "what I carried"
L3/ Insight ATPIAL-C Class1/3R IR Laser ? Tactical Night Vision Company

Not cheap but its available
Haha, yeah because it's not cheap! Plus then I'd have to buy NVG's to make sure it even works. ;) It's actually not what I carried, the USMC issued the M16A2 to me, that was the current rifle at the time. But I can dig the notion of building what they carry now. I'm sure they made those changes because they improved the weapon.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top