M4 Clone Thread

File: 1471178676807.jpg (650KB, 1690x927px) Image search: [Google]

650KB, 1690x927px

what about range queens?

>>31016686
Holy shit that is high tier autism

>>31016653

M4 Clone

>PSA

>>31016720

Not OP, but brand doesn't matter, unless that roll-mark means something to you /sperg

File: 1289009450736.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>31016653
Considering buying a 6920 for the M4 rollmark and putting a Colt ambi selector/side sling mount/MATECH/RAS on it for an M4A1 build.
Could buy the FNH collector, but desu I like the Colt/M4 rollmark more for the novelty and the actual Colt TDP.
Only downside seems to be the 16" vs 14.5" pinned barrel, otherwise the price is about the same.

Probably would like to buy another 6920 upper eventually and put an RIS II FSP on it for a block II upper clone...

>>31016771

Looks nice, desu, but does the roll mark matter that much to you? I'd personally take the 14.5" with pinned A2 over the 16", it's more of a not-so-cloned M4, in my humble opinion

>>31016764

The whole point of cloning is to sperg the fuck out.

>The hood ornament doesn't matter, I know it says Toyota, but it's all Rolls Royce under the hood baby.

File: M4A1_ACOG.jpg (24KB, 501x202px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 501x202px

>>31016816
>but does the roll mark matter that much to you?
Kind of. This is purely a clone build for me and a lower to host clone uppers with, so having the Colt and M4 rollmark on it is a nice bonus for authenticity.
>I'd personally take the 14.5" with pinned A2 over the 16"
Yeah, this part kind of sucks because either way the barrel isn't exact. I could buy a 6921, but I really don't want to SBR it right off the bat and have to wait.

CAR stock>M4 stock either way though...

>>31016686
>East Asians
>Moaning gracefully
pick one

>>31016863

Well, you're entitled to your opinion, I personally don't think the roll-mark matters. If you really want to sperg, then you should be going for an FN lower, since Colt lost the contract. *poof* doesn't matter.

>>31016915

Know the difference between M4gery and clone builds. Once you let standards drop, it's a slippery slope. The giggle switch and barrel length is probably the only things people can forgive because 14.5 + a2x looks like shit. 14.7 + A2 is alright. 16" 6920 is acceptable because it's at least Colt, but it looks like shit for a clone.

File: download.jpg (6KB, 245x206px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 245x206px

>>31016868
CAR stock>M4 stock either way though...

File: image.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>31016653
inb4 it uploads upside down or some shit

>>31016963
>Roll mark >>> correct barrel length
Nigger, one clone builder to another, your priorities are so out of order it's hilarious

>>31017039
>Roll mark >>> correct barrel length
That's true though.
You can have a 16" barrel cut and reprofiled for an M4A1, with or without a pinned birdcage.
Or you can just buy a 6921 to begin with if you're willing to SBR it.
And even if you do neither, the gun won't look all that off.

That PSA/Spike's rollmark is always going to look like dogshit when you turn it over and see it though, and you have no way of covering it up or changing it.

>>31017073
>>31016963
>>31016863
>>31016720
post your build

OP here, I learned something new about /k/, lol... Very similar to /b/. I suppose I'll stick to m4carbine and arfcom, you lot have fun here!

>>31017199
it was one retard who won't even post his gun, dude.

File: 2016-08-17 05.15.15 1_resized_1.jpg (1MB, 1885x1060px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1885x1060px

>>31016653
>>31016764
>>31017086
Not who you were responding to, but FN, Colt, or bust.

M4 clones a best

>>31017199
Good riddance faggot

>>31016868
>CAR stock>M4 stock either way though...

I'd love to find a colt fiberlite CAR stock for a decent price. Until then I'll take SOPMOD over anything else

File: 2016-08-16 04.49.12 1_resized_1.jpg (2MB, 2656x1494px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2656x1494px

>>31017199
Stick around pls, I need more M4 clone buddies

File: image.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

Um hello

File: image.jpg (2MB, 3332x1684px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3332x1684px

>>31016653

>>31017039

I didn't outline a black or white choice. I explained that unless you go SBR, you'll have 3 options that have downsides. You can always cut and re-profile a 16" Colt barrel, but you'll never turn a PSA rollmark into a Colt one.

>>31017086

I don't have a clone build.

>>31017210

Nice rilfe but not a clone. The ACOG is wrong. What barrel length? FN15 TDP is all fucked up.

>>31017233
>>31017210
>M4 clone
>MOE instead of A2 grip
>B5 SOPMOD instead of LMT
>FDE TA31 instead of black
>TA31 in Triji mount instead of ARMS
>952 instead of M600
Out, OUT! REEEEE!

>>31017199

Stick to m4carbine for your "safe space."

If you post your "clone" on arfcom, you're going to get railed harder than /k/. I dare you to try it and post results. They are even more autistic over there friend. People spend $300 for a taupe KAC front sight and more for a 4 pronged surefire FH over there.

Lurk more newfag.

>>31016771
Fuck this is rad. I'd say get the proper sling loops and an ambi safety and it's golden.

I really want a havoc 37mm launcher for mine

File: 6a012876c6c7fb970c01b7c7a989e5970b-800wi.gif (450KB, 384x210px) Image search: [Google]

450KB, 384x210px

>>31017324
>I don't have a clone build.

>>31017255
I want

>>31017324
14.7" pinned/welded. M8, the ecos has been issued.

>>31017333
>M4 clone
yes
>MOE instead of A2 grip
Plenty of people swap out their grips and A2 a shit
>B5 SOPMOD instead of LMT
B5 has supplied the military and have been issued
>FDE TA31 instead of black
ECOS only comes in FDE
>TA31 in Triji mount instead of ARMS
Bobro mount > ARMS and is what the ECOS comes with
>952 instead of M600
952 is correct

>>31016816
>>31016771
>>31017348

I think that's airsoft m8. Look at BCG. If real, then it has 3rd pin.

>>31017352

I don't think you know how greentext works new friend.

>can't lay egg = not knowing what eggs taste like

>don't have clone build = not knowing what a clone build should be

>being this stupid

>>31017385
Fuck, I even noticed that the BCG looked weird. I didn't notice the third hole until you sid something.

>>31016963
>mid length barrel
>carbine gas
somethings aren't acceptable.

>>31017378

Look, not to take away from your very expensive and very nice rifle, but it's not a standard issue "m4 or m4a1 clone." Unless you're going for a special snowflake special forces issue.

Forgetting about FN15 specs, your ACOG is not TA31RCO.
>RMR
>Miad
>SOPMOD stock

Again, nice rifle. Very close to clone, but not clone. By definition, clone beings exact copy, barring NFA shit.

>>31017385
>I don't have a clone build, but lemme just shit up this thread about clone builds

>>31017441
Hey, buddy, if all you're going to do is shit on other people without even having anything of your own to contribute, for the sake of this thread, you're better off just git.

>>31017446

How did I shit it up? Look at all these people posting m4geries. You think those are clones too?
>>31017317
>>31017255
>>31017021
>>31016771

Why don't you blame these people?

If I stated facts wrong, correct me, but I'm not wrong about cloning accuracy. No one said OP's rifle is shit, just not a clone.

>>31017441
The way I see it is that people were able to switch shit out, SOPMOD stocks have been issued, the A2 grips suck, and the TA31ECOS was a better choice for me and has been issued. Sure it may not be standard issue, but it's what I'd do to it if it were issued to me. That's at least how I see it. Also, I consider it to be a M4A1 clone, but perhaps not standard issue. It's the closest thing to a M4 clone I've seen in this thread so far too.

That said it's only an M4 until I get my stamp back and it becomes a MK18

>>31017466
>Why don't you blame these people?
people actually posting pictures of rifles, proper clone attempts or otherwise >>> some smartass that does nothing but critique and doesn't even have his own to post

File: image.jpg (197KB, 959x1024px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 959x1024px

Is this chart accurate

>>31017441
Lots of things that aren't "standard issue" manage to make their way onto issue rifles, so having something that is not standard, but repeatedly documented as being used in conjunction with the rifle in question, is hardly something to chastise.

>>31017463
>>31017565

It's criticism. No one is chastising him. Quit being children. OP said clone thread, didn't post clone. He's 95% correct, people offer opinions. No one is personally attacking him.

>>31017463
>>31017488

I don't like short handguards or non-freefloat barels, so I don't have a m4 clone. Critique is critique. I'm not bashing anyone's rifle here, only the babies that go reeeeeeeeeeee get out of safe space thread reeeeeee.

Look at this guy >>31017468
he did a good job.

>>31017565

Yes. You an argue that one time there's this 1 guy in this and that unit that has a special rifle, but it's not the prevalent case. If you're happy with it it's fine, but you can't claim it's standard issue. 99% of issued rifles will have waffle stock and a2 grip.

>>31017764
> but you can't claim it's standard issue
no one is saying it is you noncontributing autistic mongoloid

File: 20160804_163846_resized.jpg (970KB, 1885x1058px) Image search: [Google]

970KB, 1885x1058px

>>31017764
I'm not >>31017565 but I never once said that my M4 clone is a standard issue clone. Everything that's on it has been seen out in the wild and if people are free to change what they don't like, I don't see why I can't and still call it a clone.

The SOPMOD stock is considered a standard along with the CAR and waffle stocks. Like I said, the A2 grip a shit. As for the TA31ECOS, it's out there, it's been issued.

I'm not complaining about what you said, I just wasn't set on building a standard issue clone. Hell, I still have the waffle stock and A2 grip that I could put on it and could pick up a used CompM2/M68 for dirt cheap. I just don't want to.

File: Colt Eagle.jpg (2MB, 2988x1681px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2988x1681px

>mfw people have the wrong rollmark

:^)

>>31017784

If you're not being autistic, you don't belong in a clone thread. Next you're going to tell me an MCX is an m4a1 clone because they look a like. You are literally no better than liberals who ban guns based on general looks.

>>31017834

The ECOS is more of a Brit SAS thing though. I'm jelly as fuck. But I disagree that it has been out in the wild. Also, most units won't even allow you to change the grip, let alone a stock or a sight. This varies from units, but most will dictate what you can have. That goes for standard army/marines.

SOCOM is looser because of the SOPMOD program, and oper8or status.

>>31018269

Nice pony. Is that XM4A10+20?

OP here. I'm proud to say it looks like I've spurred one of the biggest 'sperg fests in recent memory.

To the sperglord splitting hair's over "m4gery vs. Clone" ... Semantics, bruh.

The M4 is not a weapons model, in spite of Colt's decision to name their contract rifle "M4". The term is a military designation for the weapon system, and by the very logic of the system (not the weapon's brand) being produced for contract by different brands (FNH, Colt, Bushmaster) your point is moot.

> E5 with some time in
> Had a laugh with supply E7
> We actually checked the TM on the rifle systems
> Nowhere does it mention brand.
> Specifically lists as M4 weapon system, not manufacturer.
> Roll marks be dammed
> TM refers to the furniture, BUIS, FSB, flash hider, 6-position stock and the internals by their NSN and description

Enjoy your 'Colt marks'. To everyone else who posted and contributed in a fun way, thanks for the posts.

OP out! Night folks.

>>31018694

Thanks for your cervix OP.

>Not all military personnel are knowledgeable about weapons

You should stay, and maybe we can both learn something from each other.

M4 is a military designation as well as a Colt trademark until they lost a court case. That's why HK M4 was renamed to HK416, and FN has FN15. No one else really calls their M4gery M4s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M4_carbine#Trademark_issues

Colt and the US government own the technical data package or TDP for the M4carbine. That's why most manufacturers claim "mil spec" but not TDP spec. That includes FN15s because they can't legally use the TDP to build commercial rifles. Only Colt can do that.

I don't know if they changed the TDP for new M4 Carbines that FN makes, but the Colt ones as far as I know will have 4 position stocks. SOCOM has some 6 position ones for mk18s but SOCOM is SOCOM.

The PSA dig was just memes, but your rifle beside the rollmark is very close to a clone, more so than many rifles posted. Unless PSA's vendor has TDP, their lowers will be slightly different from Colts because TDP specifies a proprietary process of making the rifles.

https://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/817221__ARCHIVED_THREAD____Who_has_military_contracts.html&page=1

Scroll to bottom to have a look at full auto rollmarks of various makes.

File: 20160319_003125.jpg (348KB, 1200x525px) Image search: [Google]

348KB, 1200x525px

>doesn't have a Diemaco stamp
Plebeians swerve.

>>31018890

Show your charging handle notch pls.

File: 20160817_204413.jpg (3MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x1836px

>>31018980

>>31019079

No steel clip reinforcement? Must be when Colt ran out of parts and had to borrows some Colt Canada uppers.

But still that looks almost brand new? How?

>>31017497
No. I think the grips are wrong on the a1's

>>31019163
No steel clip on this upper. From a brief search that seems to be a Gen II upper thing (?).

I can't tell you why it looks almost new, must not have been used. The only thing on it is some minor handling/storage marks.

>>31016653
What rails do yall have? Is this KAC?