wobblinwheel

So technically, which way the mount is facing doesn't make any difference, as long as the locating pin in the mount fits in the slots.....I thought that sounded a little STRANGE! The mount on mine fits the same either way.

What is the difference between a Weaver and a Picatinny mount? I was reading some reviews on a Walther PS 22 red dot sight (which I have), and one guy said to reverse the mount (which I did, but for appearance reasons). Anyway, this fellow says that the mount facing one way is Weaver, but reversed it is a Picatinny. I don't get it. Can anyone explain? By the way, the mount on this sight is a cantilever, single-point mounting. Does that have anything to do with it? Just curious.

What is the difference between a bunch of Pigmies and a female track team??? The Pigmies are a "cunning bunch of RUNTS"!

The spring-loaded detent for the rear take-down pin is located in the trigger housing, not in the pin (#33 in parts diagram, 1 of 5 used). The SLOT for it is in the pin. Not doubting that the grip could have an effect on how things tighten up, but just wanted to point out that there IS a detent ball assembly for both pins to help keep them from falling out.

I would be my guess that it's the "monkey-metal" (very soft) trigger-group housing that the tensioned-barrel is pulling against. Got a feeling that over a short period of time, and a fair amount of shooting, that the pin holes could elongate somewhat. I wouldn't think this would affect barrel tension as it pulls against the breech area. I actually like the idea of being able to break the gun down WITHOUT constantly having to loosen the suppressor. I think it's best to torque it down where it belongs and leave it alone as long as possible. The tension on the barrel does have a marked affect on your accuracy!

I've noticed the same with mine. I used to have to loosen the flash suppressor (as per owner's manual) and then tap out the pins. Now I can simply push them out with my fingers WITHOUT loosening the suppressor. Can't figure this one out, as I haven't been taking them out enough to wallow out the holes. I hope it doesn't get any looser! The pins do have detents to keep them from falling out, though.

I have found that my Colt M4 LOVES Winchester bulk "555's" ($19 at Wally-World) AND Winchester Subsonics. The subsonics have a unique 40gr. "Truncated Cone" bullet design that chambers EXTREMELY WELL in the Colt. The really large hollow-point cavity makes a really nice "SPLAT" when it hits something, and the fact that they're SUBSONIC works well with suppression and improves accuracy. The only problem with the subsonics is they are a bit pricey, at $4.00 a box. Cheaper-than-Dirt has them for $2.97 a box, but the shipping costs negate the cost-effectiveness. The Winchesters also seem to have a more consistent bullet diameter that insures reliable chambering, even with a dirty barrel.

It looks like I'm getting a little better at tightening my groups a bit shooting lefty. I think if I can re-train myself to instinctively grab the grip with my left hand, the rest comes easier. so far, every time I pick up the rifle, I grab the grip with my right hand, then I have to think about it and switch hands (eyes, and shoulders). That's when it gets awkward! Since I installed the Badger extended charging-handle latch, I find I can fairly easily tilt the rifle over to the right and actuate the handle with my right hand, grabbing it with my last two fingers. I actually think I might be getting a "grip" on this! It does do my heart good to know that one of the reasons I can't afford health care is because the United States is diligently trying to cure AIDS and HUNGER in AFRICA. Obviously, they deserve it more than we do!!??

I have seen these same stocks advertised in different magazines for up to $200.00! The only difference I can see is they have the internal water-tight storage tubes already in them. You can easily see on the Umarex (Walther) stock that it was made to accept such a tube on each side. I paid about $50.00 for the stock (Cheaper than dirt) and about 50 cents for the rubber hose. Not a bad deal in my book!

While shortening the firing-pin spring on the Colt surely improves the "light-strike" situation, another thing to look out for is the possibility of the rounds not chambering fully. The Colt has an unusually small and tapered CHAMBER, not letting some brands of ammo to chamber completely all the time. Some CCI bullets have an unusual contour that will "stick" in the chamber, as does most Remington. Remington is usually the result of POOR quality-control, whereas The CCI's (Velocitors and Subsonics for sure) are just made that way. Keeping your chamber REALLY CLEAN can help, but not for long. I have found that Federal & Winchester HV's chamber really well, and the Winchester Sub-sonics do too. Aguilla sometimes is sporadic, buts works MOST of the time. A bent Q-tip and some powder-solvent is a good thing to have on hand at the range!

Since the cataract in my right eye appears to be getting WORSE, and I don't see me coming up with the cash to get it fixed any time soon, I have been trying to learn to shoot my Colt/Umarex M4 left-handed (using my left eye, of course). Let me tell you, it is awkward as HELL! It's almost like wiping your ASS with the wrong hand......almost feels like somebody ELSE is doing it! I am consistently shooting to the LEFT, even though I know my scope is zeroed. Somebody said something about "parallax here, but I don't know exactly what that means. Also, I seem to shoot LOW a lot too. Have any of you tried to do this and had good results? Know any "tricks"? Also, has anyone heard of a LEFT-HANDED charging-handle (latch on the RIGHT side) for the Colt? This getting old and blind shit, without any insurance, is for the &*^%@#! BIRDS!!

That looks better'n my ole lady!

I also used Testors enamel model paint, well-thinned, and a small paint brush. After psint dried, used a cloth LIGHTLY dampened with "Goo-Gone", and briskly rubbed the overage off. I found the secret for success by using VERY LITTLE solvent, and a lot of RUBBING. You don't want to disolve the paint in the grooves with too much solvent.

This is what I do when I can't sleep...

I get great results from the Winchester 555's in my Colt M4 carbine. They have bigger hollow-points than the Federal. They really "splat" when they hit something! They cost $19-somethin' at local Wally-world.

After participating in this forum for the last few months, after buying my Colt/Umarex M4 Carbine, it has suddenly dawned on me WHY I bought it! My only rifle I owned at the time was an antique US Springfield .45-70 "trapdoor" rifle. Not much good for "plinking" at about $2.00 a shot! So I decided to buy a .22, but I wanted to find the one I bought back in the MID 1970'S. Somewhere around 1977, I was really into black powder replica shooting. That's when I picked up my first NAVY ARMS catalog. At this time these guys made replica firearms of just about ANYTHING. Believe it or not Navy Arms made .22 caliber replicas of the original Colt M-16 rifle AND the AK-47! I bought the M-16, and my brother bought the AK. Obviously, the Viet-Nam War had a lot to do with this. Somewhere over the years, we both wound up selling our rifles, but I do remember the Navy Arms M-16 was a really FUN gun to shoot. I remember it looked IDENTICAL to the first M-16 rifles used in the jungle. How many of you knew a company was making a "TACTICAL" .22 m-16 RIFLE IN 1977?? Maybe it didn't catch on because we didn't know what the hell 'TACTICAL" was back then! (or why we wanted one).

You mean TTP? Camo or Black?

They're not serious...right?? Wonder what other "Tactical" things we can come up with? I know we ALL ought to have some interesting ideas on THIS!!

One of the more popular mail-order outfits had "TACTICAL SUNGLASSES" on sale the other day!! I think they said they were "STEAMING HOT"!! By the way, what is "cmmg"?

I think nowadays, you can stamp the word "TACTICAL" on a steaming TURD and sell it for a high price!!

The CCI "Velocitors" and the subsonics (I don't know about the others) have a slightly LONGER bore-contact area on the bullet itself. While I believe this would contribute to better accuracy, they seem to have difficulty chambering in some semi-auto's. Many semi-auto chambers that appear to shoot just about ANYTHING have a measurably larger and sometimes longer chamber. The Colt/Umarex definately does NOT.

Actually, I didn't intend to ream the chamber, mainly just to see how "snug" the chamber really is. The rifle shoots quite well using Federal or Winchester HV ammo, however the suppressor doesn't work too well when the bullet breaks the sound barrier. Problem is, local gun shop only carries Remington and CCI subsonics, and BOTH of them start sticking in the chamber after a few rounds, The Remington due to inconsistent bullet diameters, and the CCI due to the extended contact area of the bullet. The CCI subsonics shoot really well, and pack a good "punch" due to the heavier bullet, so a SLIGHT reaming might help chambering. No "burrs" in the chamber as I don't dry-fire, even though I'm not sure it's likely to happen due to the design of the firing pin (I believe the pin would strike the face of the breech, and not the mouth of the chamber). Also, "short-cycling" is not an issue, as the bullets are clearly STICKING in the chamber after going in about half way. I honestly believe a slightly larger chamber bore wouldn't hurt the Colt at all, and it wouldn't be so intolerant of different types of ammo. If I could find the proper finishing reamer, I just might be tempted to try it.

i recently bought a box of CCI 40gr subsonic hollow points. They seem to group really well, HOWEVER, due to the shape and unusually snug fit of the bullet in the chamber, I often experience frequent failure to feeds as the bullet won't go into chamber fully, especially if the rifle is even SLIGHTLY dirty. It appears the Colt/Umarex has an undersize chamber, and is really FINICKY about what you feed it. I even borrowed a finishing reamer for the chamber, but the PILOT wouldn't even fit the BORE! The dimensions of the Walther barrel seem be more like a "match grade" than a semi-auto! Any other Colt-owners out there experience this?

Funny thing....I emailed Anna Dalton @ Umarex, and she responded that she new of NO UPGRADES on current models! I specifically mentioned the working dust cover, the 90 deg. safety, AND the possibility of a stronger bolt spring (as has been mentioned before). She also stated that any "possible upgrades" would probably not occur until sometime next year. And she said if there WERE any such upgrades, they would definitely NOT work on any current models! I'm sure, if any of you are familiar with the safety mechanism, to make it 90 deg would only require relocating the notches and detent holes on the cam. Could be retrofit, don't care about the "stamping" on the receiver housing. If I could figure out how to post the email, I would. Apparently the new improvements are a "SECRET"!?

Don't you mean "upper" receiver? It does seem in order to have a solid barrel, you would have to have a re-designed upper receiver assembly. I can't IMAGINE what that would cost!