• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Are Kahr/AO M1 carbine parts GI spec'ed?

Joined
Aug 9, 2006
Messages
16,912
Likes
796
Location
BIOT
Feedback: 15 / 0 / 0
I'm trying to order parts to built up my barreled receiver. With some stuff I'm going for original parts but the prices on bolts are a little ridiculous. Kahr's selling stripped flat bolts for $50 and complete round bolts for $63, and they're new. Obviously not original, but if they'll work I'd rather go with new bolts as they're cheaper and will probably not fail the field gauge like one of my old ones.

Are these GI specs? Wouldn't mind getting a front sight assembly and flip rear sight off them either if they'll fit on my QH barreled receiver.
 
They might be the same spec, but I wouldn't wish an AO M1 carbine
on my worst enemy. Maybe they've improved them, but I've heard
from more than one person that they're junk. I held one
that was at a consignment rack at a store, and I wasn't impressed
by the parts quality at all. I think a lot of the parts are crappy
castings, too.

-Mike
 
I know that the complete guns are supposed to be crap, but considering that I'm just looking for a bolt to make this carbine functional (I have two that I know are functional, a new arrival Rockola that looks OK but that I haven't inspected/headspaced yet) and an IBM that's perfect except for a bolt that closes on the field gauge (passes with bolts from the other two), I'm trying to cut the costs a bit (since I need two bolts plus all the parts to finish a barreled action except for the stock, it'll cost a bit and take a while)

So basically, if the bolt is made to fit GI carbines and it works alright, I'm willing to go on the Kahr, but if it won't fit, then screw it.
 
Is there a conspiracy against this company I didn't get a memo on?

I have seen AO take a lot of bashing here, IMO undeservingly so. I have both the WWII 1911A1 and the M1 carbine. The only issue I ever had with the 1911 was a broken extractor after about 40 or so rounds of the one time I used steel cased Wolf ammo. I dropped it off in Worcester and they had it back to me via UPS in about 4 days (the lady there was very helpful, pleasant & friendly). I haven’t had a problem with it since. I have put about 4000 to 5000 rounds through it over the last 4 years (shooting the factory recommended 230 ball). The front sight hasn't fallen off. The rear sight doesn't move. It goes into battery and its accurate. It puts bullets where I want them to go.

The M1 Carbine is beautifully made for what it is,, a $600-$700 carbine. I got it about a year ago and only put a few hundred rounds through it, but it hits where I point it and is a lot of fun to shoot. The trigger is stiff, but I am confidant that it will smooth out the more I shoot it. I haven't really shot past 100m but with the groups I have shot at 50 to 75m, I am sure it can out shoot the capabilities of the ammo

Sorry but my experience with AO and their products just doesn't match the criticism.
 
http://www.auto-ordnance.com/pr_ar0506.html

The only change I'd like to see are "ao" markings added on some of the parts, such as the rear sight, bolt and safety, so collectors in the future will not mistake Auto-Ordnance's modern-made parts for original ones. As a matter of fact, Auto-Ordnance is seriously thinking about offering many of its modern remakes of early parts to consumers.
 
I was planning on building this one as in the early style even though it's a later serial number, just because it's mine and I can do what I want with it. I don't considering it Bubba'ed in that way since it's still in an original configuration, just not the correct one for this receiver's manufactured date.

Type I barrel band, flip rear sight, push safety. I'll try to get the trigger housing assembly with a type I QH sear as well... Ordering a slide is probably a crapshoot but hopefully I'll get the earlier model. Flat bolt (probably an AO since it sounds like at the very least they're functional). I read one horror story of a KB due to inadequate headspace (due to the barrel not being properly finished/reamed apparently) but I'll be sure to get a go-gauge before I shoot this one anyway.

Need a coupla paychecks first, though. If anyone has extra carbine bolts, trigger housings, or other parts lying around, I'm in the market for at least one of everything.
 
I owned a WWII 1911a1 from AO, that I consistently got 2 failures to feed per magazine until a local smith polished the feed ramp and tightened the extractor. And yes, I was shooting ball ammo. The only reason I haven't sold it yet, is because it was a gift from the girlfriend.
 
I owned a WWII 1911a1 from AO, that I consistently got 2 failures to feed per magazine until a local smith polished the feed ramp and tightened the extractor. And yes, I was shooting ball ammo. The only reason I haven't sold it yet, is because it was a gift from the girlfriend.

On one hand, that sucks about the AO.

On the other hand, she got a sister?
 
Is there a conspiracy against this company I didn't get a memo on?

I have seen AO take a lot of bashing here, IMO undeservingly so.

So, when a manufacturer screws up in a big way, like what they did with Zombi's gun, we shouldn't discuss it- because it was just a fluke of some sort, a one in a million thing, and never happened to anyone else, right? [laugh]

For a bit of perspective, I own a variety of guns made by about 7 different manufacturers, and if I got concerned every time someone came up with a concern, problem, gripe, whine, etc about a product I owned, I'd quickly be checking myself into the funny farm. [laugh] There's an unwritten law... doesn't matter what object you have, what car, computer, etc... someone will hate it, sometimes for legit reasons, and sometimes for stupid ones.

FWIW, Here's my direct and indirect experience with the
AO1911s....

I own a gun built off the frame of one of those guns. The frame is fine, it is very durable. It does lead me to wonder, why the previous owner built a racegun off of that particular frame... monetarily speaking, the act of doing so makes no sense, unless his AO 1911 was a POS and he was just trying to recover some of his costs by reusing the frame......

I've run into at least 3 people (other than Zombi's posting) that have had serious problems with these guns. One was that guy who posted the pic of his messed up barrel on a gun board- maybe it was THR or someplace like that, I forget offhand. That one threw me for a loop- that's how bad the fitting was.

I've seen one run live before at a pin shoot... it worked fine about 98% of the time, but seemed to jam once in awhile too, all while digesting factory 230 gr hardball.

I ran into another person at (FS?) that I was talking about 1911s with... he said he had an AO but gave up on it after sending it back to the factory twice and still not getting the intermittent jams resolved.

As a point of balance, I also have run into a couple of people who
said they had no problem with their AO1911s. It would appear to me that the QC on these guns must "blow hot and cold". If you're lucky, you get a perfectly good working firearm. If you're not lucky (like what happened to Zombi) you get something which is a dog.

I realize every manufacturer sends out a dud once in awhile, but the dud rate just seems a lot higher than what I'd consider normal with the AO 1911. It might just be appearances, too, given
that the sample rate for that gun in MA is probably pretty small
overall.

I have both the WWII 1911A1 and the M1 carbine. The only issue I ever had with the 1911 was a broken extractor after about 40 or so rounds of the one time I used steel cased Wolf ammo.

I generally don't like wolf, but there's no real reason it should have "hurt" the extractor- you probably just got a bum extractor. Remember that, long ago, the mil-spec 230 gr .45 ACP ball loading was often loaded in a steel cased cartridge.

I dropped it off in Worcester and they had it back to me via UPS in about 4 days (the lady there was very helpful, pleasant & friendly). I haven’t had a problem with it since. I have put about 4000 to 5000 rounds through it over the last 4 years (shooting the factory recommended 230 ball). The front sight hasn't fallen off. The rear sight doesn't move. It goes into battery and its accurate. It puts bullets where I want them to go.

I'm glad you have a pistol that works to your satisfaction. It's also good to know that their CS is decent. A friend of mine had trouble with his thompson and they fixed it promptly... and FWIW,
I don't hear of very many issues with those, overall.

The M1 Carbine is beautifully made for what it is,, a $600-$700 carbine. I got it about a year ago and only put a few hundred rounds through it, but it hits where I point it and is a lot of fun to shoot. The trigger is stiff, but I am confidant that it will smooth out the more I shoot it. I haven't really shot past 100m but with the groups I have shot at 50 to 75m, I am sure it can out shoot the capabilities of the ammo
Maybe they're making them a lot better now, but I asked lots of questions about these guns, to a lot of different people, as I was really interested in an M1 carbine at the time... and I was consistently getting reports of "stay the hell away from it" or "I bought one and it was a pile of crap" etc... At first I only took these claims with a grain of salt, and was skeptical... then when I held one in my hands, I realized why that commentary was made... the rifle just seemed like it was not the same level of quality as the USGI one sitting a row over from it. For starters, the wood seemed like it was inferior, the action felt funny, and the trigger
was terrible.

Edit: After doing some limited research, this product does seem to have changed manufacturing- Kahr actually makes it now instead of the crappy IAI product it used to be. Maybe THAT was the rifle that I held. Given that, I might be willing to give the product another look. Maybe they've turned over a new leaf- but I'll say one thing, they certainly didn't do anything for their image by being associated with that IAI product.

Sorry but my experience with AO and their products just doesn't match the criticism.

That's fine, you're obviously entitled to your opinion.... that's
what we're here for. [grin]

FWIW I am not critical of all their products, but it is readily apparent to me, especially with the 1911s, that they have some serious QC issues at play to be letting guns out the door like the
one that Zombi got. I guess his gun was made on a friday at 4:50 pm or something. [laugh]

I hear a LOT of positive comments about the Thompsons they
make, etc. Most of the people I know that own them generally
don't have very many bad things to say about them.

Some of all of this is why I sometimes get cold feet about
recommending anything to anyone anymore. Murphys law almost
says that someone will have better or worse luck than I do with
something. [laugh]

-Mike
 
Vellnueve, I can not answer your question about the parts being mil spec, but for what its worth, a while back on one of the shooting shows on the outdoor channel, the host was at the factory in Worcester, and I remember the guy that was being interviewed stating that dimensions from original plans were entered into the computerized machinery, thus making all the parts interchangeable with originals. But like I said, it was a while ago, so I could be wrong.

I must have been lucky with my 1911. I have upgraded to a SW1911PD last month, black with the tactical rail. I got a couple of Chip McCormick 10 round power mags for it and I am still waiting on the free holster. I don't have a light or laser sight for it, but someday,,, I'll keep the AO. With the new S&W, I guess I should put the AO in semi retirement before it goes bad and my love for it spoils.

But damn it, the M1 is still one fine carbine! (btw, mine is the one with the walnut stock)
 
I'm not writing off AO because of my experiences. If they can put the front sight back on, and it doesn't blow off the next time I take it shooting, and it doesn't shoot 8" low, I'll be happy. Not too much to ask, right?
 
Back
Top Bottom