New Colt CR6920 Initial Impressions

[MattyD380]

As you may or may not know, there's been some "controversy" lately on the newest iteration of Colt's 6920 rifles. The consensus is that Colt stopped making a lot of the components in-house when they reintroduced the 6920s a year or so ago... likely because they have fewer military contracts, and it probably makes more financial sense to outsource components. "CR" has (apparently) replaced the "LE" prefix to distinguish the post-2019 6920s vs. the previous ones.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hf43zByGu9U&t=477s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNXD_LUT61M

In any case... I bought one. On sale for $899 at my LGS. Why not? Figured I'd share some initial impressions...



Caveat: This is my first AR. So, I don't exactly have rich context/experience as a basis of comparison. But I saw at least one thread here on the 6920s (and the requisite "controversy") so, I figured some might have interest. Plus, I have some questions of my own...

Appearance

The rifle looks and feels really nice. The finish looks good to me. And, other than a slightly rattly stock, it seems solidly put together. I can't detect any play/movement between the upper and lower. The bolt cycles smoothly (as far as I can tell) and the safety gives a nice positive snick. The trigger is... about what I'd expect for mil-spec. Some creep and a fairly heavy wall. But I'm not complaining.

Markings

I'm not an expert on the markings, but, as some pointed out, the new markings on the CRs (or lack thereof) are different from what you'd get on the LEs. I didn't take the hand guard off to see the barrel marking, but my research (which consists of Youtube videos and forum lurking) suggests that at least some of the barrels are being made by "Rosco." Never heard of them, but I guess they make good-quality, mil-spec parts... so... works for me. The hammer is marked "F3" and the military "cage code" appears on the barrel and the upper. The mag well is simply marked "CARBINE." Some people seem to be gravely offended by this; I guess it used to say "M4" or something about "restricted LE use." I don't really care one way or another as long as the rifle works.



Function

Before shooting, I stripped the bolt & carrier, cleaned it, lubed it with basic gun oil. Didn't clean the bore (because I didn't have a rod that fit). I scrounged up some ammo locally and put 100 rounds through it (some 5.56, some .223). No problems whatsoever. I realize that's not a lot, but, it's a start. It was a blast to shoot. Did some double and triple taps. Ran great. Most of the groups are at 15 yards, top left is 25 yards. Keep in mind I've never shot an AR on paper, so I was trying to get a sense of the sight picture.



Feed Ramps

Here's where I have a bit of a question (concern?). After shooting, I noticed what looked like wear on the feed ramps--like, bare metal, where the finish was worn off. You can see it here; it's mainly on the little wedge that separates the two feed ramps.



Research reveals that others have noticed this same kinda thing on newer Colts; the consensus is that the ramps are actually being "de-burred" by hand at the factory and then not refinished: https://www.1911forum.com/threads/co....998064/page-3

I'm guessing that's what I'm seeing in that photo? Anyone know anything about this? Is this normal for ARs? Or Colt ARs?

At the end of the day, I really don't care as long as the rifle is 100% reliable and it stays that way. I bought the Colt because I wanted a rugged, no-BS, mil-spec rifle. Maybe it's actually a "value added" feature that increases reliability? Or maybe not... I just don't know.

Anyway...

I've got 500 rounds of 5.56 coming soon. So, I'll be shooting it some more in the near future.

Thanks for reading.

[HCM]

As you may or may not know, there's been some "controversy" lately on the newest iteration of Colt's 6920 rifles. The consensus is that Colt stopped making a lot of the components in-house when they reintroduced the 6920s a year or so ago... likely because they have fewer military contracts, and it probably makes more financial sense to outsource components. "CR" has (apparently) replaced the "LE" prefix to distinguish the post-2019 6920s vs. the previous ones.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hf43zByGu9U&t=477s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNXD_LUT61M

In any case... I bought one. On sale for $899 at my LGS. Why not? Figured I'd share some initial impressions...



Caveat: This is my first AR. So, I don't exactly have rich context/experience as a basis of comparison. But I saw at least one thread here on the 6920s (and the requisite "controversy") so, I figured some might have interest. Plus, I have some questions of my own...

Appearance

The rifle looks and feels really nice. The finish looks good to me. And, other than a slightly rattly stock, it seems solidly put together. I can't detect any play/movement between the upper and lower. The bolt cycles smoothly (as far as I can tell) and the safety gives a nice positive snick. The trigger is... about what I'd expect for mil-spec. Some creep and a fairly heavy wall. But I'm not complaining.

Markings

I'm not an expert on the markings, but, as some pointed out, the new markings on the CRs (or lack thereof) are different from what you'd get on the LEs. I didn't take the hand guard off to see the barrel marking, but my research (which consists of Youtube videos and forum lurking) suggests that at least some of the barrels are being made by "Rosco." Never heard of them, but I guess they make good-quality, mil-spec parts... so... works for me. The hammer is marked "F3" and the military "cage code" appears on the barrel and the upper. The mag well is simply marked "CARBINE." Some people seem to be gravely offended by this; I guess it used to say "M4" or something about "restricted LE use." I don't really care one way or another as long as the rifle works.



Function

Before shooting, I stripped the bolt & carrier, cleaned it, lubed it with basic gun oil. Didn't clean the bore (because I didn't have a rod that fit). I scrounged up some ammo locally and put 100 rounds through it (some 5.56, some .223). No problems whatsoever. I realize that's not a lot, but, it's a start. It was a blast to shoot. Did some double and triple taps. Ran great. Most of the groups are at 15 yards, top left is 25 yards. Keep in mind I've never shot an AR on paper, so I was trying to get a sense of the sight picture.



Feed Ramps

Here's where I have a bit of a question (concern?). After shooting, I noticed what looked like wear on the feed ramps--like, bare metal, where the finish was worn off. You can see it here; it's mainly on the little wedge that separates the two feed ramps.



Research reveals that others have noticed this same kinda thing on newer Colts; the consensus is that the ramps are actually being "de-burred" by hand at the factory and then not refinished: https://www.1911forum.com/threads/co....998064/page-3

I'm guessing that's what I'm seeing in that photo? Anyone know anything about this? Is this normal for ARs? Or Colt ARs?

At the end of the day, I really don't care as long as the rifle is 100% reliable and it stays that way. I bought the Colt because I wanted a rugged, no-BS, mil-spec rifle. Maybe it's actually a "value added" feature that increases reliability? Or maybe not... I just don't know.

Anyway...

I've got 500 rounds of 5.56 coming soon. So, I'll be shooting it some more in the near future.

Thanks for reading.

Cool.

Your feed ramps are normal.

Rosco is a decent barrel maker. They OEM for other companies. This is far from the first time colt has outsourced OEM A.R. 15 barrels. Many colts have barrels that were actually made by Green Mountain.

This so-called controversy basically involves collectors and wanna be collectors whining about markings and whether or not the parts are made in the house by colt. Truth is as long as it is a mil spec for cage code part it doesn’t matter.

Ironically most of the “Colts” In-service with the US military are actually wearing uppers made by DS arms (the FAL people) via the M4A1 upgrade program. It’s no different than all of the M1 grands, M1 carbines and 1911 pistol’s rebuilt after World War II in Korea.

[Joe in PNG]

Could you post a photo of the top of the bolt, so we can see what the gas key staking looks like?

[DDTSGM]

The hammer is marked "F3" and the military "cage code" appears on the barrel and the upper.

Matty - If the barrel has a cage code marking on it, that should tell you for sure. Rosco's cage code is 72CS5. Green Mountain has used two - 5ZX15 and 66GJ0

I'd also like to offer a suggestion for cleaning equipment. I've gone almost exclusively to this bore squeegee system:

https://rogersshootingschool.com/col...leaning-system

As well as these:

https://www.amazon.com/Real-Avid-Cha.../dp/B07YL75ZHR

https://www.amazon.com/Real-Avid-223...00IOF6610?th=1

Those things, a couple of toothbrushes and an old tee-shirt and you are good to go.

I generally stick with Slip 200 EWL for lube, but everyone has opinions on that and I certainly have a bunch of different brands on the shelf. https://slip2000.com/pages/about-ewl...pons-lubricant

[MattyD380]

Cool.

Your feed ramps are normal.

Rosco is a decent barrel maker. They OEM for other companies. This is far from the first time colt has outsourced OEM A.R. 15 barrels. Many colts have barrels that were actually made by Green Mountain.

This so-called controversy basically involves collectors and wanna be collectors whining about markings and whether or not the parts are made in the house by colt. Truth is as long as it is a mil spec for cage code part it doesn’t matter.

Ironically most of the “Colts” In-service with the US military are actually wearing uppers made by DS arms (the FAL people) via the M4A1 upgrade program. It’s no different than all of the M1 grands, M1 carbines and 1911 pistol’s rebuilt after World War II in Korea.

Awesome. Thanks for the perspective.

With that reassurance on the feed ramp, I'm 100% satisfied with the purchase... so far. Looking forward to putting a lot more rounds through it.

As far as the whole outsourcing "controversy"... I got the sense that--outsourced or not--the parts used were still subject to meeting mil-spec standards (the military's TDP, right?). I don't know if that's entirely true, but, all the anecdotal reports I read said that new CRs ran well and were well made. That's what I was looking for. And mine seems to support that.

[MattyD380]

Could you post a photo of the top of the bolt, so we can see what the gas key staking looks like?

Curious to hear your take on it, actually. I guess it looks all right? Seems like there’s a decent amount metal peened into the rivets? But I dunno…

[Joe in PNG]

I'm no real expert on the subject- and hope some of the real experts will chime in... but it looks the images I've seen of a proper job.

[rd62]

Looks like good staking to me too. But I'm also no expert.

[OlongJohnson]

@Lost River posted some Colt stakes over here:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....=1#post1021636

[MattyD380]

Matty - If the barrel has a cage code marking on it, that should tell you for sure. Rosco's cage code is 72CS5. Green Mountain has used two - 5ZX15 and 66GJ0

I'd also like to offer a suggestion for cleaning equipment. I've gone almost exclusively to this bore squeegee system:

https://rogersshootingschool.com/col...leaning-system

As well as these:

https://www.amazon.com/Real-Avid-Cha.../dp/B07YL75ZHR

https://www.amazon.com/Real-Avid-223...00IOF6610?th=1

Those things, a couple of toothbrushes and an old tee-shirt and you are good to go.

I generally stick with Slip 200 EWL for lube, but everyone has opinions on that and I certainly have a bunch of different brands on the shelf. https://slip2000.com/pages/about-ewl...pons-lubricant

Hmm. Maybe I’m misinterpreting what a cage code actually is. “13929” appears on both the top of the barrel and the upper receiver. I take it that’s not a cage code?

Thanks for tips on cleaning equipment. Those squeegees look promising. I grabbed one of these at Sportsman’s warehouse:

I mean, I’ve always considered myself a… man of vision… 😎