Protonex Technology Corp

A 1963 Colt AR-15 Advertisment


I’m digging the tag line at the end, “If you’re a hunter, camper, or collector, you’ll want the AR-15 Sporter.”

Tags:

23 Responses to “A 1963 Colt AR-15 Advertisment”

  1. SoloDallas says:

    The beauty.

  2. Ed says:

    Funny, when all you hear on TV from that “side” is: “these are weapons of war, not meant for hunting!”

  3. Gerard says:

    The AR has been part of American arms ownership as long as most other classic arms and is much more popular. Let’s all rally around and defend America’s rifle.

  4. Chuck says:

    That price!

  5. Brent says:

    That’s approximately $1,500 in 2016 dollars. And it doesn’t even have M-LOK or collapsing stock? No thanks.

    • Paul says:

      This is a rant from Ivan Chesnokov but I think the sentiment applies here as well LOL:

      “WHY YOU WANT RAIL FOR KALASHNIKOV? IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH AS PROCURED FROM IZHEVSK MECHANICAL WORKS? YOU THINK NEEDS IMPROVEMENT? THEN MAYBE YOU FIND JOB WITH ARMY OF RUSSIA! YOU HAVE DRINKS WITH MIKHAIL KALASHNIKOV, TRADE STORY OF MANY WEAPONS DESIGNED AND DETAILS OF SCHOOL FOR ENGINEERING!

      OR MAYBE YOU NOT DO THIS. PROBABLY IS BECAUSE YOU NEVER DESIGN WEAPON IN WHOLE LIFE. YOU LOOK AT FINE RUSSIAN RIFLE, THINK IT NEED CRAZY SHIT STICK ON ALL SIDES OF WEAPON. YOU HAVE DISEASE OF AMERICAN CAPITALIST, CHANGE THING THAT IS FINE FOR NO REASON EXCEPT TO LOOK DIFFERENT FROM COMRADE. YOU PUT CHEAP FLASHLIGHT OF CHINESE SLAVE FACTORY ON ONE SIDE, YOU PUT BAD SCOPE OF AMERICAN MIDDLE WEST ON OTHER SIDE, YOU PUT FRONT PISTOL GRIP ON BOTTOM SO YOU ARE LIKE AMERICAN MOVIE GUY JOHN RAMBO. MAYBE YOU PUT SEX DILDO ON TOP TO FUCK YOURSELF IN ASSHOLE FOR MAKING SHAMEFUL TRAVESTY OF RIFLE OF MIKHAIL KALASHNIKOV, NO?

      RIFLE IS FINE. YOU FUCK IT, IT ONLY GET HEAVY AND YOU STILL NO HIT LARGEST SIDE OF BARN. GO TO FIRING RANGE, PRACTICE WITH MANY MAGAZINE OF CARTRIDGE. THEN YOU NOT NEED DUMB SHIT PUT ON SIDE OF RIFLE.”

  6. The classic AR-15 design still looks incredibly futuristic, the only other rifle that looks to me in the same category is the STEYR AUG.

    But of course, no civilian needs one of these weapons of war!!

  7. Mr.E.G. says:

    Or what’s even more rich is the assertion that in only the past few years has the NRA, the gun manufacturers, and presumably the Illuminati conspired to rebrand this engine of death as a target shooting or hunting rifle.

  8. rotorhd says:

    To the AR, AK, SKS haters,

    The M-14/Mini-14 has been around longer and has the same capabilities but isn’t as scary looking…… Weapons of war….. Oh my……

    • P.J. says:

      And ironically the Mini-14 was designed to look like the M-14, which was a “weapon of war.”

  9. Hubb says:

    Cut the BS fellas! That thing has a Bayonet Lug on it so it is a WEAPON OF WAR!

  10. Grump says:

    Awesome.

  11. Ace says:

    So going by this ad the AR-15 was available for civilian ownership before the M-16 was issued to the Army?

  12. FrankButler says:

    This post is not accurate. The AR-15 was based on the AR-10 which is a 7.62×51mm NATO battle rifle.
    After Armalite sold it to Colt, they made it semi-automatic and marketed it to civilians and police.

    So, yes, it was developed as a military weapon.

    • SSD says:

      What are you talking about? So you’re say that this 1963 advertisement from Colt is a fabrication?

      • Mr.E.G. says:

        I think we’re missing the bigger point of “who cares?” It’s not necessary to defend our right to own a small caliber rifle based on the intentions of its designers.

  13. Joel Mobley says:

    In 1963 at Tan Son Nhut, Vietnam I had an opportunity to handle and fire a Colt/Armalite AR15 which was selectable for semi or full automatic. Lots of the men who were armed with them didn’t like them because of the bullets instability. In the jungle the found that a small branch, vine or similar thing would deflect the already unstable round causing a miss of the target.