Colt Expanse M4

[gmerkt]

I mentioned this rifle in another thread, so I thought I would expand (pun) on it a little.

The Colt Expanse was a company effort to make an entry level rifle to compete with other lower cost AR platforms being offered at the time, circa 2016.

History of the Colt Expanse and the “Colt Lowers” that were sold the past year > AR Discussions > AR15.COM

Colt Expanse Lower Story:As I assume many know, Colt created the Expanse line to compete with the low cost AR-15s that are on the market. To do this they created what I think most of us thought was a

www.ar15.com

Colt now claims they didn't make these. But look at the label on the box mine came in:










There was a dealer in Lynnwood, Wash. who had a pallet load of these and he was selling them for $550. Plus, you there was a Colt rebate that went with it whereby they would send you a Truglo red dot sight and another 30 round magazine free. The last picture shows the little red dot sight mounted on the rifle.

Read More

 

[Stomper]

I mentioned this rifle in another thread, so I thought I would expand (pun) on it a little.

The Colt Expanse was a company effort to make an entry level rifle to compete with other lower cost AR platforms being offered at the time, circa 2016.

History of the Colt Expanse and the “Colt Lowers” that were sold the past year > AR Discussions > AR15.COM

Colt Expanse Lower Story:As I assume many know, Colt created the Expanse line to compete with the low cost AR-15s that are on the market. To do this they created what I think most of us thought was a

www.ar15.com

Colt now claims they didn't make these. But look at the label on the box mine came in:

View attachment 2249498


View attachment 2249499

View attachment 2249500

View attachment 2249501View attachment 2249502

There was a dealer in Lynnwood, Wash. who had a pallet load of these and he was selling them for $550. Plus, you there was a Colt rebate that went with it whereby they would send you a Truglo red dot sight and another 30 round magazine free. The last picture shows the little red dot sight mounted on the rifle.

That's a decent looking specimen. I'd be curious to see how they milled out the lower receiver, especially towards the rear take-down pin area.

 

[gmerkt]

That's a decent looking specimen. I'd be curious to see how they milled out the lower receiver, especially towards the rear take-down pin area.

I'd open it up and take a picture of it, but I no longer own it. I had it about two years, then moved it along. I mainly bought it because it was a "deal." There was nothing wrong with it, mostly I didn't like that Smith Ent. flash suppressor. Which I guess was used to get the bbl. to legal length. The short bbl. was a heavy one. I've seen other pictures of similar models with the normal "birdcage" suppressor on them. It's been suggested that there were variations within this model number, the supposition being that excess parts were being used up. The first version of this, the 1000 model, lacked the dust cover over the ejection port. After reading through that linked article above, my takeaway is that the "Colt" affiliate that assembled these was not legally connected to the "real" Colt firm, just doing this project for them. Colt denies that these receivers were made "by" them. Just for laughs, I ran it through the Colt Serial Number Lookup, no record. But that isn't unique. Colt likes to forget some things. Like Series 70 Government Model .45's built on left-over .22 Ace frames. For example.

 

[red442joe]

Tagged

 

[orygun]

I have an M4 Carbine, an LE6920, that is very close to the gun in the OP with a 16" barrel.
A couple of things are kinda strange. I tried to look up the serial number on Colt's website, but came up with nothing. The box serial number matches the gun, but the box says .223 cal and the frame is marked 5.56mm. The box is also marked 2013 Configuration.

 

[gmerkt]

A couple of things are kinda strange. I tried to look up the serial number on Colt's website, but came up with nothing. The box serial number matches the gun, but the box says .223 cal and the frame is marked 5.56mm.

Maybe Colt doesn't link the SN lookup to any of their AR series firearms. I have an MT6551, it won't come up. Just now, I attempted to look up an SP1, it wouldn't come up either.

The MT6551 says .223 on the lower receiver, but the bbl. says 5.56 NATO. From a practical standpoint, I think the bbl. markings are what's important.

 

[orygun]

The MT6551 says .223 on the lower receiver, but the bbl. says 5.56 NATO. From a practical standpoint, I think the bbl. markings are what's important.

This would be my thinking, too. I'll pull the handguards and check.

DOH! I pulled the handguards and found it's stamped on the exposed section of the barrel!
5.56mm NATO 1/7

 

[gmerkt]

I pulled the handguards and found it's stamped on the exposed section of the barrel!
5.56mm NATO 1/7

That's one thing about having had cataract surgery. I can see for miles now without glasses. BUT: I need glasses and lots of light to see stuff up close. I had to get a flashlight to read the barrel on the MT6551. It's also a 1/7, and now I remember that's why I kept that rifle when I was downsizing AR's a few years ago.

The Bushmaster that I also kept has a 1/9 5.56mm barrel. With the 5.56mm barrel, I don't have to think about what kind of bullet I'm using. I have three sporting rifles with .223 chambers, those don't like military profile bullets, I have to make sure I shoot sporting bullets through those. My shelf of .223/5.56mm ammo is divided so they are kept separate.

 

[orygun]

I have two ARs. That's the extent of our .223/5.56 rifles. I, too would rather have 5.56 chambers than .223 in guns like this. The 1/7 twist is a good thing, if you ask me. I don't know what the twist is in my SBR and will soon check.

 

[Medic!]

Who owns colt this week?


They probably didn't make much of anything?