If it’s actually pitted and greasy/gummy even after cleaning it…
It sounds like active corrosion.
Possibly an error in the process of the phosphate treatment? I don’t know much (anything) about phosphate coating.
I have a rough Colt carrier too. It looks like jonconsiglio’s. Appears to me that it was cut with a dull tool, or an improper feed speed and then blasted with a real coarse media to somewhat cover the tool marks. Definitely not for purdy boys! :eek:
Ya know, you might be on to something here.
Well let me say this. Irregardless of the so-called “pitted bolt” there is a segment of the gun community “the gay ass fit and finish” crowd that is more concerned about little nics, blemishes and scuffs than they they are about the weapons functionality.
If anything thinks that this also doesn’t contribute to the overall cost of the weapon, I can assure you it’s not true. The time and hours wasted along with the items rejected in fact add several dollars to the cost.
Wrong. It’s fine because we know that the overall quality of Colt and their track record of performance are what really counts. In addition we have yet to see any pics nor has the OP dropped by for an update…
First off, let me say, I’d rather have a functional rifle than a pretty one. But, times are tough. For me to drop a grand on a rifle, requires me to spend a lot of time away from the fam. So any imperfections in the F&F should come from me. That’s like having your plumbing run outside your wall… it looks like damnit, but it’s functional.
completely different things and you cannot compare them.
Colt builds their civilian rifles like they do their military ones, and the big military does not care about a few dings
Grant, I was not aware of this. Is Colt moving part of its operations to Florida? Where? Let me guess; somewhere close to Knights Armament near Titusville?
All of the posts going pro or con can incite us to be less than civil. The bottom line,
The OP can notify Colt Mfg. and let them know of his concerns with the finish of his carrier and take it from there before posting here of his dissatisfaction with said finish. Then the OP can post the results of Colt’s decision, good or bad here.
Buy a Colt carrier from Specialized Armament and keep the original for a spare.
Just live with it, put it through it’s paces, and post the findings here.
There’s probably a fourth, but I can’t think that far! 
Anyone in the firearms field that is over the age of 45 and has kept up with the goings on at Colt knows about their many problems. You can try to intimidate people by calling them childish names for telling the truth but it just does not wash.
They never updated their revolvers… Smith and Ruger took their market share.
They rode on the back of the 1911, never adjusting to the wants of the market…Sringfield, Kimber, and now just about everyone else has taken that from them.
The AR platform… The political correctness of different size pins, half moon bolt carriers, pined in sear blocks, etc. Until recently, still carving onto the side “Restricted for Le / military only”, has all shown a blatant disregard for the civilian market. Even Bushmaster never did any of this. So…they lost much of the civilian market to all the other AR makers. But, they did not care because they still had the big prize, the military contract.
But, what goes around comes around. Guess what…they loose the military contract and all of a sudden they wake up and realize that they might just need the civilian market after all.
They finally offer civilians a rifle as close to the military model as possible. They even take the “Le / military only” jargon off. They come out with new models. They even sell out their dealer’s by selling to Walmart. Wow, it’s amazing how dependent they must had become on the military over the years to do this. At the rate that they are going, it’s only a matter of time before they really start cutting corners on civilian rifles. They will have to. Because when you sell to Walmart, they expect a better deal, then a better deal, and then an even better deal. So the supplier has to cheapen their product. Can you say, "So much for following the TDP in regards to civilian rifles". Colt realizes that the vast majority of firearm buyers have never even heard of the TDP.
And, as far as fit and finish goes. Most civilians do care about fit and finish. They are not willing to accept the old "It’s a Colt and it meets the TDP, so live with it " mentality. Like I said, most do not know what the TDP is anyway. I for one hope that Colt wakes up, because I do believe that they could recapture the AR civilian market that they have lost over the last 20 or so years if they are smart.
Sadly, because of the stranglehold the union has on them it probably will not happen.
So much ignorance…
They will not do that as long as they want to bid on gov work. I have done construction on bases in FL and every contractor was still union and paid a “minimum” national average wage for each position.
I’ve never really inspected my pony…perhaps I should check f&f…I keep hearing about it and maybe I’m just ignorant…it’s happened before
Wow, just wow…
OP
Are you going to post any pictures to support your claims?
For you F&F people out there:
Is the F&F more important than function?
If the rifle functions 100% but the F&F isn’t “Purty”, does that mean that the rifle is a failure?
looks like tool marks
If it was any other rifle, you wouldn’t have gotten the same gun (meaning one that was built to the TDP).
No, $1k for a Col AR isn’t expensive. It is a deal!
C4
Colt already has a facility in FL.
C4
You might be suprised about what happens. 
C4
Especially about the quality of the MARSOC guns on your part. I wouldn’t be bragging about Colt’s execution of that one.
From what I know, Colt attempted to save some weight on the gun and that is why it failed. So there was really nothing mechanically wrong with the gun, it was just an error (with good intentions) and has been resolved.
C4
Which is why I mentioned the M45. Colt made a mistake, be it for good intentions, and then fixed their error.