Evolution of the USGI XM-3 Bipod Case and Colt Supplied AccessoriesBy Reed Rupp

March 2017

Over the years, there has been a lot of confusion and debate over the evolution of the XM-3 Bipod case and, in general, the early accessories of the Colt Armalite AR-15/M-16 series weapons as issued to the U.S. Military during Vietnam, especially within the Retro AR community.

To help clarify and put it in chronological order, I have compiled the most accurate data to date. It has been compiled though multiple sources, examining historical evidence found in period photos and original manuals, publications, and manufacturer contract documents over a 10+ year time span.

From the Beginning

Thanks to the work of many individuals and collectors over the last decade for adding their knowledge; presenting the puzzle pieces to put the sketchy history of these now obscure items out thereto the world so that we may finally put it into something coherent. At the date of writing this, it is not meant to be the end all history of the items. There could still be prototypes and undocumented examples that could pop up. My intent is to sort out what is and what isn't based on the wealth of data and facts that is currently available, in addition to personal knowledge of manufacturing techniques anddesign progression.

Before we really dig into each item, we have to dive back to the origins of these accessories. When the AR-15 was adopted and sub labeled as the XM16 and M16 series family by the US Military, the government required that Colt supply all accessories with the weapons under the contracts until proper contracts could be written and additional manufacturers take over. This includes Slings, Bayonets, Bipod Cases, Bipods, and Cleaning tools. This makes one wonder, since it has been said by military personnel of the time that “the M-16 originally never was issued with a cleaning kit because it was supposed to clean itself.”, but the contract and delivery orders prove that wrong (and we all know now know how dirty the platform gets). They were provided when shipped. The question remains, off topic, why weren't they issued?

The Pouch: What is....The 1st Pattern (short pocket)

This example (and photo) of a NOS 1st pattern pouch belongs to OlGunner on the ar15.com retro forum.

From photo evidence, solid dates of testing prototypes, early advisors, early TMs, publications, and the complexity of the construction, we can safely assume that this pattern is the actual first pattern pouch. The base construction of the pouch is comprised of 2 pieces of canvas equal in length (with 2 pleat style bartacks at bottom front corner folds) , a 2 1/4” piece of webbing to attach the slide keeper (commonly now known as an ALICE clip), and 3 separate pieces of 3/4” edge binding. Two pieces of the edge binding is sewn along the top edge of both the front and back pieces of canvas. After sewing the 2 canvas pieces together, it is finished up with edge binding starting at the top of the pouch on one side and ending at the other, forming a horse shoe, or “U” shape. The short rod pocket and flap is attached prior to joining both halves. These were manufactured sterile with no markings or inspector stamps. You can identify that the rear “Alice” keeper webbing is 2 1/4” by looking at the clip itself. Thewebbing nearly fills the inside of the clip. We know that these clips were also used on the M-1956 pouches, such as the Canteen cover, which also give the same size gap distances with the clip.The 2 1/4” webbing is sewn down with a single “Box X” pattern tack on either side of the pouch.

Notice gap distance with the clip and webbing, “U” Construction, and single “Box X” stitches on either side

Rarity Scale: High. Only around a dozen are known to be in collections or have turned up for sale. There are surely still additional ones out there. The total production number of the 601 and 602 rifle is almost exactly 33,500. As the vast majority of the production of these models went to the Air Force, it is possible that they were never issued out to Airmen and are stashed away with the Ark of the Covenant in a secret hanger at Wright Pattern somewhere. I joke, but depending, they could still be in storage somewhere like the warehouse of Civil War Union Underwear surplussed off through DRMO in the early 1990s. It ALSO could be that the Army contracts were the only ones actually specifying that these accessories be provided by Colt. IF that is the case, it would explain the rarity due to the Army only getting around 3,000 601 and 602 rifles with the majority going to South East Asia never to return OR to come home and visited Captain Crunch decades later. As these accessories are considered expendable, it’s also a safe bet most went to a garbage dump when worn out. The 2 most recent sales of this style of pouch known by the author, around 2012 sold for $450 and one in January 2015 sold for$530 on eBay.

Production Time frame: Circa 1960-1964, these have been spotted in photos, in use, as late as early 66. Most famous pictures of one is 2 Photos of Captain Vernon Gillespie in the Dec 1964 issue of LIFE.

The 2nd pattern (long pocket)

Picture of the 2nd pattern Long pocket pouch: Authors collectionAt the time of the adoption of the XM16E1 in late 1964 we see the Tech Manuals change and

start showing the 2nd pattern Long Pocket pouch. The long 3 piece (long type) M11 cleaning rod was adopted in October 1964 per the Spec Drawings, so it is safe to say that is when the pouch was changed.

The 2nd pattern pouch simplifies the construction, saves on materials, and cuts corners in severalways from the previous design to expedite production for the large purchase order of XM16E1s by the Army.

The Body is made up of 2 pieces of canvas with the front piece being shorter than the rear, 1 piece of 2” webbing for the “alice” keeper, and 2 pieces of 3/4” edge binding. The rod pocket flap is attached to the front body prior to attaching the 3/4” edge binding along the top edge. The front and rear are sewn together and then the edge binding is attached starting at the bottom, going all the way around the pouch clockwise ending overlapping where it began making a rectangle. The edge binding forms an “O” as opposed to the 1st patterns “U”. The 2” keeper webbing leaves a noticeably larger gap in comparison to the 2 1/4” webbing used on the 1st pattern. This style is also sewn down with a single “Box X” pattern tack on either side of the pouch like the 1st pattern. This pouch is also sterile of markings.

Notice gap distance with the clip and webbing, “O” style Construction, and single “Box X” stitches on either side

Rarity scale: Uncommon, but still turn up fairly frequently as they were produced in large numbers despite the shortest production run time. Usually run in the $50-100 range when the seller knows what it is.Production Time Frame: 64-66

The 3rd pattern case is commonly found on the surplus market today and are marked and dated from 67 to the mid-70s. The nylon model with no pocket came out in the late 70’s / early 80’s. The3rd pattern has a snap closure top and zipper cleaning rod pocket. By the time these came out, most GIs were not carrying them in the field any longer and leaving them back on base due to thenon-necessity nature of the bipod itself and added “dead weight”. For this reason, the stand alone cleaning kit pouch was developed and begun being manufactured in 1968. It also explains why so many NOS ones are still available. Pictures of them in use is even sparser than other models.

Rarity Scale: Extremely common and can be found for under $25 NOS.

What isn't...The “No Pocket” Pouch

Pouch (and photo) belongs to VietnamGear.com

There is a pouch presented claiming to be a “1st pattern” with no pocket. While the pouch is a curious piece, and on what I would call the side of rare, I do not believe that this is an early pattern, based on the construction of the known patterns and dates they were adopted. While logically one would come to the conclusion that a “no pocket” would pre-date a “short pocket”, there is no evidence to date that would support that claim.

Why the “no pocket” pouch appears to be later than the “short pocket”: If you look closely at their pictures, one can immediately tell that the pouch is of the

construction style of the known 2nd pattern “long pockets” (Oct 1964 to Mid-late 1966) in every way, shape, and form with the exception of the obvious missing pocket and the “stacked double box X” pattern on the rear “alice” keeper webbing.

Notice gap distance with the clip and webbing is similar to the 1st model but has later “O” style Construction, and doublestack “Box X” stitches on either side not present on any known short or long pocket pouches. Also the offset sized front and

rear canvas identical to the “long pocket”.

There has never been any reference to this “no pocket” in any official or unofficial DOD or Coltdocuments, manuals, prototype photos or other photos of the era to the date of writing this article showing this “no pocket” design. Zippo, nodda. The only one ever seen is on a popular gear reference site. It appears that information has been referenced as fact from old internet speculation. (This is not in any way knocking the reference site. It's an amazing quick reference site! Kudos to the owner for the hard work and research!)

Author’s Note: “It’s not logical from a design or manufacturing standpoint that Colt (or the DOD) would manufacture a simplified design first for prototype rifles, and when production started, make it more complex (costly) in both material and time on the production line (short pocket), then revert back to the “no pocket” body design for the “long pocket” roughly 4-5 years later.”

What this means, is one of many possibilities, with the exception that it is definitely not for the early AR (pre 1960) prototypes. It’s possible that it was a cutting room pattern sample for the new 2nd pattern design in late 1964. That would explain why it still uses 2 1/4” webbing and has an odd stacked “box x” tacks. There would be no sense to add the rod pocket on a pattern sample as the only thing that changed was the length from the short pocket. Nothing to prototype in that aspect. It is also possible that it was made only for an extremely limited time and provided by Colt with export rifles to other countries. As no others have cropped up that seems unlikely. It could also be that it was made here to specs requested by a friendly foreign country that was intending to adopt the rifle and similarly M-1956style web gear, such as Australia. Interestingly as it is not as well known by most U.S. collectors, the first delivery of Aussie M-1956 webbing was made here in the U.S.. It's also very possible it is for an entirely different weapon sold commercially by Colt or Armalite. I find the cutting room sample 2 nd pattern (long pocket) most likely and plausible. Speculation of what it is, is still on going, but we know what it isn't... a 1st pattern (pre-short pocket).

The “No pocket with a rod pocket flap sewn to the back canvas to be used as a retainer for thebipod”

(No picture available)

These cropped up around 2006-08 from an import dealer of either gun parts (such as Numrich) or a small Army/Navy surplus dealer for around $20. As of this writing I cannot find pictures of these again,and do not entirely recall the base construction pattern but at the time they cropped up, everyone got alljumpy on the Retro AR Forum about them. As these do not pop up in anyone’s pictures or references anymore, I think everyone got the picture that they were not a Colt or USGI thing. I believe that these models is where the myth and internet speculation of a USGI “no pocket” design came from.

While similar in appearance to USGI 1st and 2nd patterns (short and long pockets), the one thing that sticks out like a sore thumb on these (besides the retainer flap at the top of the pouch) is the color and weave of the canvas and edge binding. The body was not OD7 but an odd pea green and not as well finished as Mil-spec fabric. It similarly had Non-spec, odd, almost neon green colored HBT like wovenedge binding. It was very reminiscent to Aussie made M-1956 gear, though actual origins are at this time still unknown.

Reproductions

So far, at the time of this writing, there has only been a single company to make reproductions of the 1 st pattern short pocket XM-3 pouch. Made by Jayhawk Military Textiles in February 2017. A limited production run of 40 were made. Components included NOS 1960’s dated Webbing and Hardware and current manufactured mil-spec OD-7 Canvas. Unlike the originals, this reproduction is marked on the rear canvas with a period style lot number “-17-” to signify the year they were made. The “Alice” Keeper webbing is 2” (the same as 2nd pattern “long pockets”) as a built in “tell” to aid in detection as areproduction. Another “tell” feature is the rod pocket flap. It is made from the same Mil-spec webbing as originals but instead of being a “type 1” it is a “type 2”. While “type 2” is the same width, weave, and appearance as “type 1” webbing, it is actually about double the thickness.

Additional Accessories Information

The below spreadsheet is thus far the most accurate quick reference database for the early AR-15/M-16 series platform accessories. What is not included currently is the bayonets (which need to be researchedmore by the author of this article) and the slings, which there are 3 known era USGI issue types. The Colt manufactured 601/602 sling (closely resembles the M-1 sling but without the slide adjuster buckle and is made from OD-7 waist belt weave webbing); The M-1 Sling of WWII vintage in OD-7; and the nylon M-1 sling. It should be mentioned that neither the Air Force model 604 nor the XM carbines are included on this chart but the timeline dates would still apply equally. Some early SP-1 rifles were shipped with early GI style accessories, in some cases almost identical to its USGI counterparts with very very minor differences. Because of the shortage of production documentation on these early SP-1 rifles, it's hard to figure out what is a USGI manufacturer variant or Civilian. Cleaning rods are a good example of this. (Aluminum blackened 4 rod type VS Steel Parkerized 4 rod type)

COLT/ ARMALITE ACCESSORIES VIETNAM WAR

RIFLE 601YEARS 60-62CASEBIPOD PIVOT PIN 2 C ClipsBIPOD MARKS unmarked

Cleaning tip Short Type – 1 7/8”Bore Brush YesChamber Brush No

ROD MODEL N/AROD METAL Aluminum – Most likely 6065 – blackenedROD LENGTHS 4 total = x3: 7 7/8” ; x1: 6 1/8”KNURLING 1 7/8THREAD 8/32THREAD STEP none

RIFLE 602YEARS 63CASE 1st Pattern Short PocketBIPOD PIVOT PIN 1 C ClipBIPOD MARKS Colt Armalite

Cleaning tip Short Type – 1 7/8”Bore Brush YesChamber Brush No

ROD MODEL N/AROD METAL Aluminum – Most likely 6065 – blackenedROD LENGTHS 4 total = x3: 7 7/8” ; x1: 6 1/8”KNURLING 1 7/8THREAD 8/32THREAD STEP none

RIFLE 602/603YEARS 64 - 66CASE 2nd Pattern Long PocketBIPOD PIVOT PIN 1 C ClipBIPOD MARKS Early: Colt Armalite / Late: Colt

Cleaning tip M11 - Short Type – 1 7/8” M11e1: Longer type - 3 1/4”Bore Brush YesChamber Brush M11 No, M11E1 Yes

ROD MODEL M11 (1964) FSN 1005-070-7812ROD METAL Steel ParkedROD LENGTHS x3 total : x1: 11 1/2 ” ; x2: 9 1/2”KNURLING 1 7/8THREAD 8/32THREAD STEP none

ROD MODEL M11e1 (1966) FSN 1005-903-1295ROD METAL Steel ParkedROD LENGTHS x3 total : x1: 11 1/2 ” ; x2: 8 7/8”KNURLING 1 7/8 w/ bare ring in centerTHREAD 8/36THREAD STEP Yes – 1/4”

* In 66 the 2” adaptor piece was introduced to use 8/36 thread cleaning tools on 8/32 rods

RIFLE M16A1YEARS 67 until end of warCASE 3rd pattern closed top with zipper pocketBIPOD PIVOT PIN rivetBIPOD MARKS Colt

Cleaning tip M11e2: Longer type - 3 1/4”Bore Brush YesChamber Brush Yes

ROD MODEL M11e2 (T- Handel) (1967) FSN 1005-999-2035ROD METAL Steel ParkedROD LENGTHS x3 total : x1: 11 1/2 ” ; x2: 9 1/2”KNURLING NoneTHREAD 8/36THREAD STEP Yes – 1/4”

1st pattern Short pocket