Henry Tatro M16

[nuge]

Just took delivery of H.T. XXXXX4 Colt M16A2 and pretty excited about it. It’s in great shape, sometimes you just get lucky. Been wanting one of these for a long time. After playing around for years with rdias driven, 9mm configured AR15s - now the real deal. Looking forward to shooting it and doing lots of experiments. Pics later...

 

[A&S Conversions]

Congratulations. As I recall Colt registering 100 9mm subguns before the '86 ban. Had you ever tried a Colt 9mm carbine with the subgun upper with your DIAS? I bought a LEO ONLY 9mm marked carbine and use it with the subgun and DOE uppers. I liked that there is no sear block and the lower uses the larger diameter fire control. I had M60Joe ream out a couple of M16 fire control for use in that lower. That is probably as close as I will get to what you found. Again, congratulations on the find.

Scott

 

[nuge]

Thanks Scott. Never had tried a colt carbine set up, but definitely a good way to go. All of my experience has been with Bushmaster and POF lowers with crossfire blocks. I will be trying a few different things to see how well I can get the straight blowback to perform in terms of RPM and smoothness. Here are some pics.

 

[mattnh]

I didn't know the HT stood for Henry Tatro - that makes sense - I always wondered why the Colt SN on these was so odd (I've got an RO635)...
http://www.smallarmsreview.com/display.article.cfm?idarticles=3431

 

[nuge]

I didn't know the HT stood for Henry Tatro - that makes sense - I always wondered why the Colt SN on these was so odd (I've got an RO635)...
http://www.smallarmsreview.com/display.article.cfm?idarticles=3431

Agreed - thread title bears explanation. My paperwork originally had model as M16A2 (RO635), but was shortened by ATF to just M16A2 with my transfer. Then there is the A1 vs A2 style receiver for the Colt SMG even though both are called A2... Very interesting piece and history.

 

[nuge]

Congratulations. As I recall Colt registering 100 9mm subguns before the '86 ban. Had you ever tried a Colt 9mm carbine with the subgun upper with your DIAS? I bought a LEO ONLY 9mm marked carbine and use it with the subgun and DOE uppers. I liked that there is no sear block and the lower uses the larger diameter fire control. I had M60Joe ream out a couple of M16 fire control for use in that lower. That is probably as close as I will get to what you found. Again, congratulations on the find.

Scott

I think your LEO carbine approach is the optimum RDIAS configuration, plus the machined FC parts from Joe are to prevent trigger slap and wear and tear on the pins I believe. Are you using a ramped, weighted bolt/carrier with your set up? I will be experimenting with that for sure. Also IIRC you have a custom bbl for suppressing your DOE, maybe tri lug? I want to look into that since I have acquired an early / experimental version of a DOE upper shown below that has an even shorter than standard BBL. This upper is what I would use for DOE suppression, but will need a custom bbl of course...

 

[Bret]

Nuge, pictures are not showing (at least for me).

 

[nuge]

Bret - thanks for head up, you should be able to see them now...

 

[Bret]

I think your LEO carbine approach is the optimum RDIAS configuration, plus the machined FC parts from Joe are to prevent trigger slap and wear and tear on the pins I believe.

So are you saying that it's possible to configure 9mm M16's so that pins won't wear more than what's typical for a 5.56x45? I've always wanted one, but have been told to stay away because the pin wear will ruin your investment.

 

[sniperdoc]

Dude, that's SWEET! Are you gonna eventually put a a DOE Upper on it, or leave it as-is?

 

[nuge]

So are you saying that it's possible to configure 9mm M16's so that pins won't wear more than what's typical for a 5.56x45? I've always wanted one, but have been told to stay away because the pin wear will ruin your investment.

Yes for the most part. But the severity of the condition depends on a lot of variables and you may or may not have a problem depending on the particular unit or set up. In the case of my new (to me) colt smg there are no outward signs of pin wear such as egging of the pin holes or damage to the disconnector. But when I run it for the first time I will look for "trigger slap" which is a tell tale sign of serious stress on the pins from the hammer over traveling and hitting the disconnector during blow back.

There are remedies, one of which I have direct experience. It is based on some minor machining to the hammer, disconnector, and trigger. It's a patented method (now expired) and relatively easy to have done. Do a search of the net for "trigger slap" or check out this local thread from a few years back: http://www.uzitalk.com/forums/showthread.php?78723-Trigger-slap-normal-for-a-9mm-blow-back-upper&highlight=treigger+slap

 

[nuge]

Dude, that's SWEET! Are you gonna eventually put a a DOE Upper on it, or leave it as-is?

Thanks sniperdoc. That's the beauty of the M16/AR15 platform, right? I plan to run several configs including the doe upper. I also have a 20 years old replica of a KAC suppressed upper which I will try out on it...

 

[sniperdoc]

The AR15/M16, while not designed to be "Modular",
has definitely became popular for that particular feature!

 

[nuge]

The AR15/M16, while not designed to be "Modular",
has definitely became popular for that particular feature!

True. I'll be starting with this set of uppers for the H.T.16. The one in the center is an integrally suppressed upper done by a local C2, and clones the Knight's system from back in the day...

 

[Fishman]

True. I'll be starting with this set of uppers for the H.T.16. The one in the center is an integrally suppressed upper done by a local C2, and clones the Knight's system from back in the day...

That top one reminds me a lot of one of my integral uppers

 

[mattnh]

The DOE uppers are pretty unique looking.
Was there some reason they designed a totally new upper for them?

 

[sniperdoc]

The DOE uppers are pretty unique looking.
Was there some reason they designed a totally new upper for them?

According to what I've read, it was designed to be compact enough to be easy to get into and out of vehicles with.

 

[nuge]

Took the HT M16 out for a spin today. Very pleased with its performance. Baselined the rpm with all uppers and all fell in the 650 - 720 range. This surprised me as I thought it would be higher. Flawless function for the day which included many FA many strings. Absolutely NO trigger slap, and that's in its OEM state!! Very controllable for a 9MM M16. Lowest RPM was with the DOE upper. The smoothest (and quietest) was with the heavy integrally suppressed upper. Will post some of the numbers a little later...

 

[nuge]

Is this performance typical of the OEM Colt SMGs? If so, and if I had known, I would have made the move a lot sooner. Glad to finally and personally test one out. Here's a pic from the field.

 

[nuge]

As far as the smoothness this unit is a good as any of the RDIAS driven ones that I have tried to optimize with custom bolts and FCG components to eliminate slap. But it is not of course MP5 smooth - its a Colt SMG not an MP5, and if I want MP5 smooth I'll shoot one of those. But in the case of the intregally suppressed upper config. (#4 below) - I think that set-up may give an MP5SD a run for its money for smoothness. At least I intend to try a side by side comparison some day.