Colt All American Model 2000 Review

[Lex mala, lex nulla 28-Dec-1991 1614]

It isn't often when a "customer" gets to scoop the gun rags on a story,
but it looks like I have that opportunity. Many of you will remember
that at last year's SHOT Show Colt' introduced a revolutionary new auto
pistol. That pistol, the Colt All American Model 2000, was actually
designed by Knight's Armament. The design team was lead by Reed Knight
and included M-16/AR-15 designer Gene Stoner. Articles on the prototypes
were all the rage in the Spring of 1991, and Colt promised delivery that
sum
mer.

In early September, technically still summer, Colt started shipping a
"First Edition" M2000. The first edition differs from the expected
volume product in one major and a few minor ways. As announced the M2000
is supposed to have a Glock-like polymer frame. The first edition models
shipped with an aluminum frame. The minor differences are things like
"First Edition" stamped on the slide, smooth wood grips (vs the expected
checkered plastic), and serial numbers starting with the letters RK
(for
Reed Knight). According to some of the stories back in the spring, Colt
insisted on a polymer frame to get the manufacturing costs low enough to
compete with Glock et al. So, in the eyes of some in the industry, the
failure of Colt to ship a polymer-framed gun almost a year after
announcement means it has "botched" the M2000s introduction. Only time
will tell if this is really the case.

I really didn't want a 9mm handgun and I wasn't sure I really wanted, or
had a use for, an M2000. But,
after the second time I saw one of the
First Edition M2000s I decided I had to have it. I'm also not one for
"collecting" non-shootable guns. The result is this review!

First a refresher for those who don't know much about the M2000. Colt
has not been a major factor in the law enforcement market for some number
of years. That market has been moving steadily to semi-autos, primarily
of the Double Action first shot, Single Action subsequent shot variety.
For various reasons beyond the scope of th
is review, the last couple of
years have seen growing resistance to the DA/SA semi-auto and a move to
the Double-Action Only auto for police use. In addition the Glock, which
bears some relationship to the Double-Action Only style, has become the
single most popular law-enforcement firearm purchase.

Reed Knight apparently saw that trend and was designing a double-action
only semi-auto that was tuned to have the feel of a double-action
revolver. By using a unique design he wanted to overcome the t
rigger
problems of existing DAO guns. Somehow Knight and Colt got together and
Colt purchased the rights to the design.

The design has numerous unique features including a rotating bolt
(similar to the AR-15), the trigger (which uses rollers) and striker
system, etc. I won't go into an advanced description of those here
(they were covered extensively in the fall gun rag articles). But, I
will mention them when relevent to the review. For now, consider that
the M2000 is a DAO high-capacity semi
-auto using a striker-style firing
mechanism.

One reason I decided to purchase the First Edition was the workmanship.
It was nicely blued, no tool marks, with perfect fit (no gaps, etc.).
Dry firing the trigger showed it to be has advertised. It is a smooth
double-action like pull that stacks slightly before breaking. One local
revolver guru (he's a Second Chance Master Blaster and won the Canadian
IPSC Nationals years ago) described the trigger pull as "it's a Colt
revolver...a Trooper Mark III
". My less experienced view was that its
about as nice a double-action pull as you get right out of the box.

One of the things I like about the M2000 is the feel of the grips. They
are small enough, despite the 15 round capacity of the magazine, for
medium size hands (and maybe small hands). I compared them to a TZ-75,
also known for relatively small grips, and discovered they are at least
1/4" thinner (side to side) and maybe as much as 1/2" shorter (front to
rear). Others who handled the gun
also commented on how comfortable the
grip size was.

The M2000 comes in a plastic carrying case that is a step above Glock's
"tupperware-like" box. It is the first Colt semi-auto to be shipped with
two magazines as well as a magazine loader. The magazines come complete
with decent extended base pads. A cleaning brush, like a two
ended odd shaped toothbrush, is also included. The manual is better
written than that shipped with other Colt's. And, Colt included a
customer survey for First Editio
n customers. If one considers the M2000
indicative of a change in business practices by Colt, then they certainly
are going in the right direction!

Before heading out to the range with the M2000 I stripped it down. This
can be done without any tools, unless you want to clean the extractor.
One nice thing is that there are no springs under tension that you have
to deal with and the trigger assembly just lifts out of the gun for
cleaning. The extractor can be placed in a special cleaning position
by
taking a screwdriver and pushing it up towards the top of the slide. I
considered posting more details about stripping the gun, but it sounded
more complicated than it is. I'll say this...I am mechanically inept but
I can disassemble the gun in a few seconds and reassemble it in under a
minute...and that's with only two attempts to date.

The patch I ran through the gun before shooting it came out almost clean
and there was no excessive build up of grease as the M2000 came from the
factory. I
cleaned and lubricated it and headed off to the range.

The gun was fired by myself and several friends, including a Master class
IPSC shooter. I used 4 different types of ammo, a total of 200 rounds,
to get an initial feel for the reliability of the gun. These included
Fiocci 147 and 158gr FMJ, Ten-X 115gr FMJ, and CCI Blazer 115gr JHP.
There were no feeding problems throughout the 200 rounds, but we did have
some other problems with the Fiocci ammo. The primers in a few rounds of
the Fiocci f
ailed to detonate even though the firing pin hits looked
reasonable. No similar problems occured with the Ten-X or Blazer
ammunition, which made us wonder about the sensitivity (or lack thereof)
of the Fiocci primers. We also had a few cases where the slide failed to
lock back with the Fiocci ammo and after some experimentation started to
wonder about its consistency. We were able to intentionally (but not
consistently) cause the slide to not lock back by limp wristing the
Fiocci ammo. We tried t
his with the Ten-X as well but the slide always
locked back as expected.

While fighting with the Fiocci ammo we had the opportunity to try one of
the M2000s unique features. The trigger mechanism does NOT rely on
cycling the slide for its operation. It is thus possible to pull the
trigger a second time on the same round. In a few cases this did indeed
detonate the Fiocci primer. In the end we had 3 rounds that never fired.
I'll eventually try them in a more conventional pistol to see if the
M2
000 firing pin hits are just too light for them.

As a defensive oriented arm, we didn't try any serious accuracy shooting
with the M2000. At the 7-10 yard ranges that are "distant" by most gun
fight scenarios, off-hand sub-1" groups were clearly possible. In rapid
fire at that distance it was easy to keep all rounds in the A zone of an
IPSC target. At 50 feet this was also possible. At 25 yards it took a
fair amount of concentration and a sedate pace to keep the shots in the A
zone. Unfortunat
ely, our previously mentioned revolver ace didn't shoot
the M2000. He probably could have achieved a tight group at 25 yards,
but none of the rest of us could really take advantage of the M2000s
potential.

As IPSC shooters we all tried double-tapping targets with the M2000.
Well, it'll never be competitive with single action semi-autos (or
Glocks) at this particular competitive skill. Spring changes could
lighten up the trigger pull to make it more competitive, but the pull
will always be long.
Competitions such as NRA Action Pistol or PPC,
where speed is a less critical component and revolvers dominate even
today, is where the spring changes might make sense.

Recoil was one of the more interesting aspects of the M2000. There was
virtually no rearward movement and muzzle rise was slight. The most
noticeable attribute of the recoil of the M2000 is the torque imparted to
the gun by the rotating bolt. In rapid fire even this wasn't noticeable,
but if you slowed down and followed the reco
il after touching off a
round, you felt and saw the gun twisting. The feeling is not at all
unpleasant and the overall "recoil" impression the gun leaves is very
low.

At the end of the shooting session I stripped the M2000 again just to
show people how its done and let them examine the internal workings. I
also had to answer the "so, is this the most complicated handgun ever
built" question. Actually, this design is deceptively simple and doesn't
depend on a buch of perfectly hand-tuned bearing
surfaces. And,
unlike most handguns, the "field" strip gives access to most of the
mechanism that in 1911s (and other Browning-pattern handguns) require a
detail strip. My only other comment on this is that there was no crud
buildup of any kind. Normally I find that even after just a couple
hundred rounds there is some crud on the feed ramp of a gun, but not this
one.

This is going to be a gun that people either love or hate, mostly
depending on your opinion of Double-Action Only. With that i
ssue aside,
I think Colt has none nearly everything right with this gun. It shoots
reliably right out of the box and needs no gunsmithing. Fit and finish
are excellent. Magazine design looks good. The high visability white-dot
sights are today's standard for combat handguns. The packaging is first
rate. The grips are the most comfortable the industry has yet produced.
For a DAO semi-auto, the Colt M2000 is the gun to beat.

There are, of course, things I'd like to see Colt offer. Other calibe
rs,
promised for the future, are at the top of the list. I really wanted
this gun in .40 S&W, which I imagine they'll announce at the upcoming
SHOT Show. Adjustable sights and a competition-trigger (not for IPSC,
but for revolver-neutral competitions like NRA Action Pistol, PPC, etc.)
would be nice options. And, of course, they need to start shipping the
high volume, polymer frame, version.

Although the M2000 is primarily aimed at the law enforcement market, I
can see it playing a home defense
role for many civilians. In
particular, it should appeal to those who have stuck with the revolver
because of simplicity of operation. The M2000 has only one operating
control lacking in the revolver, the need to cycle the slide to chamber a
round. With that done, its as ready for action as a revolver and just as
easy to make safe. You just take your finger out of the trigger guard.

[Roy Stuart Levin]

In a review of new Colt American 2000 our newsgroup commentator notes:

"...This is going to be a gun that people either love or hate, mostly

depending on your opinion of Double-Action Only. With that

issue aside,

I think Colt has none nearly everything right with this gun. It shoots
reliably right out of the box and needs no gunsmithing. Fit and finish
are excellent. Magazine design looks good. The high visability white-dot
sights are today's standard for combat handguns. The packaging is first
rate. The grips are the most comfortable the industry has yet produced.
For a DAO semi-auto, the Colt M2000 is the gun to beat.

There are, of course, things I'd like to see Colt offer. Other calibe
rs,
promised for the future, are at the top of the list. I really wanted
this gun in .40 S&W, which I imagine they'll announce at the upcoming
SHOT Show. Adjustable sights and a competition-trigger (not for IPSC,
but for revolver-neutral competitions like NRA Action Pistol, PPC, etc.)
would be nice options. And, of course, they need to start shipping the
high volume, polymer frame, version.

Although the M2000 is primarily aimed at the law enforcement market, I
can see it playing a home defense
role for many civilians. In
particular, it should appeal to those who have stuck with the revolver

because of simplicity of operation...etc."

Thanks for the review, well done. I also noted the reviews and write-ups of
this much acclaimed "breakthrough" pistol in the gun rags when it first
broke into public attention.

One of the things that was "implied" by some of the reviewers in the gun rags
was that this rotating bolt lockup design had a fantastic inherent strength,
better than the moving bolt Browning 911 style. Some early reviewers indicated
that the inherent strength of the design would make editions of this style of
pistol very feasible in hotter calibers, not only the .40SW which you our
reviewer yearns for, but EVEN .45acp which a lot of us love.

Anybody hear any news or know any design engineers who had looked at the
possibility of this great design in the beloved .45acp?

By the by, as a total aside I had a chance to shoot both the Glock 21 .45acp
and the model 23 compact .40SW at a local range last week. My experience:
(I am by no means a competition class combat or IPSC shooter, just a duffer
who enjoys combat style pistols):
The Glock 21 .45acp is a BIG pistol. I could handle the grips alright though
my hands happen to be rather small. This is a tribute to the inherently
comfortable design by Glock. The only real problem was and this may NOT
be the fault of the pistol, but rather of the range issue reloads I used,
was that the ejected cases kept ricocheting (sp?) off the target track motor
and range shielding above my shooting station in this indoor range and falling
down on the top of my head. This really bothered me and I started to develop
an anticipatory flinch. I always expected the ejects to fly off to the right
not almost straight up over head as in this case. It may be the particular
load. As a result I did not relax to enjoy shooting the weapon. It seemed
to group pretty well even with my flinch, but I tended to shoot a little low
as I tensed my grip and neck muscles before each shot.

There was one misfire and I noted that the round's primer had been heavily
indented so I will assign that fault to the range reloads. There were no
failures to feed. The weapon is big but light as are all Glocks. Opinion:
couldn't formulate a fair one due to my problems with the spent cases rebounding
on my head.

Glock 23: Loved it. It grouped, seemed to have a lot less recoil with the
range reloads, the cases were all marked Winchester 40SW and looked like fully
jacketed flat tipped cone shaped bullets, (are these SWC?) I don't know all
the bullet shape terminologies but the range bag said: "40SW 180gr TMJ"
whatever TMJ means. The .45acp bag read 45acp 230gr TMJ but the bullets were
regular jacketed round ball, not the flattened cone shape of the .40SW although
both bags said TMJ.

The Glock 23 was small, light like all Glocks, had a marked white post which
I like, and was no trouble to control. The spent cases all seemed to fly in
back of me to my right and did not ricochet off of the range stand at all.
I shot fairly good groups and thoroghly relaxed with the pistol at ranges
of 7 and 15 yards, including some rapid fire. Both pistols had the great
Glock round indicators on the magazine to let me know how many I had in
the magazines. I think the 23 holds something like 13 + 1 or maybe that's the
21 and the 23 holds even more, I forget.

The trigger pull of both was acceptible for me, but the smaller size of the
23 let me relax more and feel like I had more control of the weapon. I used
the two hand weaver stance.