We have all these threads now bouncing around about the MOE gun, the new Rogers stock, etc. In each people are saying they like, or don’t like, what Colt is doing. So I’d like to hear what you’d like to see from Colt. Do away with the Sporter name? Offer mid-length gas systems? Go after the 3-gun market? Offer replica guns?
It can be specific or general, entirely up to you. Ideally we’d like to see some explanation of WHY you want what you do.
I would like to see a permanent end to their baby-shit games with receiver blocks, double screw front hinges, over or undersized axis pins, and whatever other “modifications” they make to the civilian model to supposedly differentiate it from the “bad old” military model. One reason I gave up my AR’s twelve or thirteen years ago is because I was tired of messing with the double screw front hinge.
What I’ve seen recently is promising, but I won’t have total confidence that Colt is finally joining the party until their so-called “sporter” says “M4” on the receiver.
It would be helpful going forward in this thread if we tried to keep up to date and go with information that is at least less than a decade old. Every time people cite those kinds of issues, that haven’t been issues for a very long time, it perpetuates the idea that it is current information.
I posted this on FB earlier:
So some guy on M4C posted that Colt should simply offer civilian clone versions of the M4 SOPMOD, mk18, M16A2 and A4. I agree! In addition they could offer the 6933 and 6720 with DD RIS or Omega systems installed.
The LE6945 is almost good, but it needs to lose the folding front sight for a lo pro GB, extend the mono rail another 1.5", add QD sockets near the receiver, and use an iMod, SOPMOD, or CAR N-1 stock. Use the A1 grip with an Ergo Gapper as the “placeholder” instead of the A2.
Additional thoughts new to this thread: I can’t see the 7.62/5.56 convertible rifle being popular with civilians - just offer a dedicated 7.62 rifle. EMod stocks are already deemed worthy by Colt (IAR submission I believe) so put those to good use.
The SP6920 is clearly roll marked “Sporter M4” on the receiver.
Every thing you just mentioned. Offer uppers with options (mid-length gas, LP gas blocks, pencil barrels, etc and lowers) so you have options. Basically what BCM does but I would accept a much more limited offering than BCM as far as barrel/rail configurations and options. Also, absolutely no non standard spec additions (receiver blocks, etc). I would also like a straight up semi-auto version of the m16a4.
I bet they could put a serious hurting on BCM, DD, etc if they did this.
(I would also like to see a 70 series option for all their 1911’s, but that is another topic.)
I would like to see barrels that are made in what seems to be more durable ways than their existing button rifled, chrome lined: either hammer forged and chrome lined, or nitrided steel inside and out (whether hammer forged, button, or cut rifled - it isn’t clear whether hammer forging still has a benefit over button rifling if you are then doing nitriding).
I would like to see a midlength gas system on 16" barrels, even though I’ve read the explanations of why it may not matter much when the gas port is properly sized.
I would like to see basically a licensed copy of the LMT MRP design, offering both monolithic benefits and relatively quick and easy barrel changes.
I would like to see the lower revised to something like Noveske’s flared, forged design, as much for the integral trigger guard as anything else. I just can’t see the benefit of a flip-down trigger guard over an enlarged permanent guard, and I can’t name any other modern rifle (or, for that matter, any obsolete rifle) that uses a flip-down guard like the M16/M4/AR design.
But the word “sporter” is still there…
I know it’s nitpicking but it speaks to their mentality.
I guess if it says “sporter” on it then I shouldn’t plan on using it for defense, right, Colt?
Sell Complete Uppers!
Colt should also offer to sell the uppers for all the rifles they sell. They started doing that with the 6920 and 6940 which is a good start. If you want a 6720 light weight upper it is a no go 
For those of us in ban states, it allows us to get the most of the rifle without having to pay the seller mark up on gun broker because of scarcity when someone splits up an upper from a lower.
IMHO many people have quality built lowers and are not interested in acquiring more rifles but would buy Colt uppers.
The issue isn’t that people don’t want to buy Colt lowers, its that to get a Colt lower you have to buy some variant AR15 that you already own (6920) or an awkward variant that you would never own (6940)
The 694x series with a 9" rail (or 10 or 12 in the 6940) and a low pro GB with QD sockets (this sounds familiar) priced below $1,200 would sell like hot cakes.
Unlike some, I prefer the midlength gas system but only because of the increased handguard length. It kind of sucks to pay a grand for a rifle, only to have to shave the FSP and spend another $300 on a longer rail system when I would be glad with a midlength-length MOE handguard set.
Move on past the M4 profile barrel. It offers the civilan shooter nothing. I understand other do it too, still I hate it.
Companies like Noveske and Centurion have come up with function based profiles. I would like colt to do the same.
I understand some civilians are fan boys and want it to look just like what they have in the army, fine still offer it. It should just be the exception not the norm.
Make SOPMOD clone guns, M16A1, M16A2, and M16A4 clones, produce Mk. 18 Mod. 0, and Mod. 01 guns.
Then sell an SCW conversion kit, buffer system, stock system, and BCG.
16" barrels with midlength gas. Carbine gas systems have their place and they function fine on a 16" barrel, but I think the simple change to midlength gas on a 16" barrel brings some advantages to the table, with no disadvantages in the commercial market.
Not a product, but I would like to see an information based marketing campaign from Colt (basis for a school project actually)
If Colt fought the gun-store bullshit with the facts of its design vs the lesser manufacturers and its possession of the TDP, along with 200 years of experience and 30 million firearms, they could bury their competition. I don’t think Colt can or wants to compete with some one like DD, thats not their market. Colt’s competition is the likes of Bushmaster and DPMS and their “milspec navy seal” bullshit.
A monolith with 9" and 10" and 12" rails and 10.3", 11.5", and 14.5", 16", and 20" barrels respectively. This would need to have a removal bottom rail for cleaning with anti rotation female sling sockets in the correct areas. Make tools available to change the barrel.
Clones of MK18 (both variants), M16A4, M16A2
Keep:
6920
6720
6520
6933
6921
6450
Keep Match Target HBAR postban line for service match shooters.
Eliminate:
6721
Add:
Semi auto version of SCW in SBR
Flattop 9mm SBR
Flattop 5.56 with 14.5 pencil barrel
Until these things happen, they will keep being fucked.
I’d love to see some of the reliability enhancements they designed and proposed make their way into a factory rifle. If they could do it using a barrel similar to Noveske’s proprietary profile with mid-length gas they would really have something.
6920 and 6921 versions of the SOPMOD Block II w/ the DD RIS already installed. Factory A4s and/or SDMs would sell.
I know a lot of guys would love a retro A1 rifle. Maybe done as a periodic limited production.
I think the CM901, the 6940P, SCW, 6920 MOE, allowing distributors to sell the LE line, factory SBRs, etc… shows Colt is going in a pretty good direction for modern civilian shooters.
The m,4 profile gives me irrational fits of rage. It is so stupid on a civvy gun…
One of (the many) reasons I barfed up a big chuck of cash for a noveske n4 barrel was to avoid it.
Would love to see colt offer smarter barrel profiles.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Non-NFA 6921s (say, pinned A2 with 14.7 barrel)
Lose the finger bump on the A2 grip.
Contemporary monolithic design without a folding FS/GB. Bury that GB under the rail. Fore and aft QD sling swivels.
Ambi lower. As in a true ambi lower, not just crap stuck on a standard lower. Give the magwell a good bevel while your’re at it.
No 1/9 barrels. 1/8 or 1/7 for everything, and get some “precision-y” oriented barrels…
No silly grenade launcher mounting cuts on the barrel.
Fix your triggers. Half the ones fresh from Colt are about 9lbs and feel like dragging a chain link fence down a gravel driveway.
Release full lower parts kits at a reasonable price.
Demonstrate some desire to sell to the “civilian” market by giving us what we constantly buy elsewhere instead of developing weird little quirky “fixes” to things nobody cares about.
They could easily look at LMT, BCM, and DD and see where they are missing the boat, but sometimes I think they are so behind the times they haven’t yet heard of the internet.
A single Colt rep here (or even on TOS) could gather enough information in a single day to please a large portion of the market, and the fact that they do not is a bit weird to me.
Is a better numbering system for their rifles, and an easier to navigate website.
I like what they are doing with Magpul, It would be great if they would partner with other companies… Troy, KA etc to build rifles with those products as well. More quality options for ready made rifles for the consumer is never a bad idea.
Heck, as long as they keep producing good quality rifles, I guess I dont have anything to complain about. Hard to beat the simplicity of a good stock 6920…
**** EDIT TO ADD****
I happen to like the grenade launcher cut out… it makes me feel like (I know this is irrational) its more of a fighting rifle!