YAGT: OMG I love guns

[irishScott]

Are you serious? Hahahaha! If you don't care for AR pistols that's fine (I actually didn't either, I used to think they were stupid honestly) but comparing them to a Desert Eagle is just silly.

I've got nothing against them. Just saying that at the end of the day, like Desert Eagles, they rank pretty low on the practicality scale and pretty high on the "I want a big fucking handgun like Arnold" scale. Which is cool, but it makes them the low hanging fruit for the gun control crowd.

 

[RampantAndroid]

I don't think they'll go that far, AR-15s are too popular and too big an industry. Even the ATF wouldn't be able to stand against the uproar congress would raise.

Much more likely is it'll be used as a springboard to attack AR-15 pistols, which are far less widespread and often seen as superfluous over-the-top toys even by many gun owners.

I can totally see an attempt to outlaw rifle rounds in pistols. On the face of it I doubt I'd care beyond the "one small step at a time" problem. I have a friend who had a 300blk pistol and I played with it...and found its ergonomics BEYOND clownish. It's one thing to have a pistol; another to have a pistol with a giant tube sticking back (come on guys, get the Olympic Arms OA93 or similar if you're going to do this crap.)

Thing is AR Pistols aren't in AR land, they're in pistol land. It's an AR-15 that sacrifices control and muzzle velocity for the sole purpose of being an oversized, big-boy pistol. It isn't a sub-machine gun because that would use a pistol caliber.

They're basically Desert Eagles, only chambered in a more testosterone-pumping caliber.

Are you serious? Hahahaha! If you don't care for AR pistols that's fine (I actually didn't either, I used to think they were stupid honestly) but comparing them to a Desert Eagle is just silly.

Really? The DE is worse than carrying a S&W Model 29 with a 6.5 inch barrel. I can at least get the Dirty Harry holster for that breaks easily. The M29 is at least a reliable gun. The DE is known to have issues with some ammo...and isn't really a service gun. The AR pistol is an unwieldy contraption; the tube just gets in the way, it's less controllable, heavier....etc. The best you can say is that it's the best way to get a 30 round mag (or more) into a pistol.

At the end of the day, we all know the AR pistol, in civilian hands, was an attempt to get an SBR where SBRs were not legal. Many states (including mine) now allow SBRs. So go get your SBR. The only plus here is that you can convert a pistol to a rifle...just not a rifle to a pistol.

Yeah, a Desert Eagle, while stupid, still functions as a handgun.

AR pistols are useless as anything other than SBR's for those who refuse to bother with a tax stamp. And those days are gone, unless you wanna ram a buffer tube into your shoulder*.

*if you do, please post it all over the internet so I can laugh when the ATF just outlaws AR pistols altogether.

Everyone knew what was being done wasn't legal. It isn't a surprise...poke the bees nest and you'll get...

 

[Zargon]

the arm braces makes the ar pistol VERY controllable

its also nice to be able to build the pistol, make sure you like the gun, before spending 200 on a tax stamp for a SBR.

 

[highland145]

the arm braces makes the ar pistol VERY controllable
its also nice to be able to build the pistol, make sure you like the gun, before spending 200 on a tax stamp for a SBR.

Wasn't there something recently that the ATF was bitching about them, wanting to outlaw them?

 

[Kelvrick]

Yeah, a Desert Eagle, while stupid, still functions as a handgun.

AR pistols are useless as anything other than SBR's for those who refuse to bother with a tax stamp. And those days are gone, unless you wanna ram a buffer tube into your shoulder*.

*if you do, please post it all over the internet so I can laugh when the ATF just outlaws AR pistols altogether.

I'd love to be able to pay for the tax stamp, but I'm in California.

 

[Merad]

Wasn't there something recently that the ATF was bitching about them, wanting to outlaw them?

Not outlaw. People were using the arm brace as a stock and a lot of them were basically rubbing it in the ATFs face. So the ATF turned around a few weeks ago and said that if you want to shoulder your arm brace you are making a SBR and need a tax stamp.

 

[highland145]

Not outlaw. People were using the arm brace as a stock and a lot of them were basically rubbing it in the ATFs face. So the ATF turned around a few weeks ago and said that if you want to shoulder your arm brace you are making a SBR and need a tax stamp.

Thanks

 

[rudeguy]

Decided to blow off some steam at the range. Shot off 250 rounds.

Tried to hit a bullseye at 25 yards and didn't even come close. But I did 3 full speed mag dumps into a full size zombie target and every shot was in the kill zone.

 

[phucheneh]

Decided to blow off some steam at the range. Shot off 250 rounds.

Tried to hit a bullseye at 25 yards and didn't even come close. But I did 3 full speed mag dumps into a full size zombie target and every shot was in the kill zone.

:thumbsup:

25 yards is no joke. In a five round group, I'm doing good to get them all in a 12" circle with maybe one or two within a couple inches of the bullseye. I've actually hit a bit of a wall and have had trouble improving past that. Some days, I'm actually way worse.

If you can get all your rounds into center mass at that range, you're doing better than most.

The real reason I opened this thread up was to give a big giant thumbs up for Eagle Imports (who represents Bersa, MetroArms, and now Grand Power in the US). Apparently, the first batch of X-Caliburs brought into the US all have bum rear sights...some kind of assembly issue results in the windage adjustment coming loose and stripping internally.

I called them up, got an immediate answer from a live person, and it then took less than five minutes for them to confirm that they had replacement rear sights in stock and take down my info. My new sight will be in the mail on Monday. Awesome customer service.

 

[phucheneh]

Not outlaw. People were using the arm brace as a stock and a lot of them were basically rubbing it in the ATFs face. So the ATF turned around a few weeks ago and said that if you want to shoulder your arm brace you are making a SBR and need a tax stamp.

Are you sure? I saw the revised response to the Sig brace a few weeks ago, but I have heard since then that they are now just a 100% no-go. Maybe this was just incorrect word-of-mouth; I need to do some checking...

Oh, and Kelvrick, that sucks. I forgot than California doesn't follow the same rules as everyone else; in TN, stuff like SBR's and suppressors are no big deal, so long as you're prepared to wait a month or two and pay the 200 bucks.

edit: Okay, yeah, looks like Sig braces are still legal for sale; nobody's pulling them off the shelves or anything. Which makes some sense, since it would be like gun shops stopping the sale of SBR uppers (as in, 'SBR length; I know an upper itself does not constitute an NFA item).

Personally, though, I would not touch one with a ten foot pole. It would be like owning a smorgasboard of different AR parts...rifle lowers, pistol lowers, short uppers...yeah, yeah, as long as you don't assemble them in an illegal way, you should be fine. And even if you did, it's not like a silent alarm goes off to notify the ATF.

...but 'constructive intent' is a sonofabitch, and I do not have any interest in opening myself up to even the remote possibility of being prosecuted for that shit. If I owned an AR pistol, it would be of the Olympic no-buffer-tube design, as shown above. For the same reason that if I owned a legit SBR, it would stay assembled and in a locked gun case at all times, just so there could be no questions about its parts being used with anything else. Call me a patsy to 'the man' if you want; I simply just still have an appreciation for the vast amount of firearms freedom I have, even if it does include some stupid rules that I want to make sure I never find myself on the wrong side of.

For these same reasons, I would never bother owning something like the foreign-made semi-auto SMG's (I know that's a silly way to word it, but stuff like the PPS-43 still says 'SMG' in my head) with a tack-welded folding stock. Essentially, if I'm shooting it at the range and the tack weld breaks, I could theoretically be put in fucking jail for it...fuck. that.

 

[RampantAndroid]

the arm braces makes the ar pistol VERY controllable

its also nice to be able to build the pistol, make sure you like the gun, before spending 200 on a tax stamp for a SBR.

IE, you wanted to use the Sig arm brace illegally. If true, great. You're in the group of people making things WORSE.

Wasn't there something recently that the ATF was bitching about them, wanting to outlaw them?

They basically said "it's fine if used as an arm brace, and using it as a buttstock constitutes turning the gun into an SBR." Interestingly enough though, if you put the buttstock against your shoulder, that act - with no other action taken to change the AR pistol, changes the firearm from a pistol to a rifle...and you cannot legally turn a rifle into a pistol.

So everyone who used the sig arm brace as a buttstock has "manufactured" an SBR...and is not paying the tax stamp (and it becomes illegal to conceal the gun from that point forward.)

 

[Kelvrick]

Are you sure? I saw the revised response to the Sig brace a few weeks ago, but I have heard since then that they are now just a 100% no-go. Maybe this was just incorrect word-of-mouth; I need to do some checking...

Oh, and Kelvrick, that sucks. I forgot than California doesn't follow the same rules as everyone else; in TN, stuff like SBR's and suppressors are no big deal, so long as you're prepared to wait a month or two and pay the 200 bucks.

edit: Okay, yeah, looks like Sig braces are still legal for sale; nobody's pulling them off the shelves or anything. Which makes some sense, since it would be like gun shops stopping the sale of SBR uppers (as in, 'SBR length; I know an upper itself does not constitute an NFA item).

Personally, though, I would not touch one with a ten foot pole. It would be like owning a smorgasboard of different AR parts...rifle lowers, pistol lowers, short uppers...yeah, yeah, as long as you don't assemble them in an illegal way, you should be fine. And even if you did, it's not like a silent alarm goes off to notify the ATF.

...but 'constructive intent' is a sonofabitch, and I do not have any interest in opening myself up to even the remote possibility of being prosecuted for that shit. If I owned an AR pistol, it would be of the Olympic no-buffer-tube design, as shown above. For the same reason that if I owned a legit SBR, it would stay assembled and in a locked gun case at all times, just so there could be no questions about its parts being used with anything else. Call me a patsy to 'the man' if you want; I simply just still have an appreciation for the vast amount of firearms freedom I have, even if it does include some stupid rules that I want to make sure I never find myself on the wrong side of.

For these same reasons, I would never bother owning something like the foreign-made semi-auto SMG's (I know that's a silly way to word it, but stuff like the PPS-43 still says 'SMG' in my head) with a tack-welded folding stock. Essentially, if I'm shooting it at the range and the tack weld breaks, I could theoretically be put in fucking jail for it...fuck. that.

Do you guys have constructive intent in other states too? I thought it was just a California thing. We are advised to not have a barreled upper under 16" if you didn't have a pistol lower to go with it because it could fall under constructive intent as an assault weapon here in CA.

I wouldn't mind paying the tax stamp on a suppressor either. It would make it easier on my ears. And I already double up at indoor ranges.

 

[phucheneh]

Me too. I went yesterday and forgot that my stash of earplugs wasn't in my bag; .45ACP was killing me with just earmuffs until I got used to it (read: probably went a little bit deaf).

I'm pretty sure constructive intent is federal law. Even gun manufacturers have been nabbed for it in the past (Thompson, or whoever makes 'Thompsons,' I guess, is the one I've heard of).

 

[phucheneh]

Here we go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thompson_Center_Arms#Thompson.2FCenter_Arms_and_the_Supreme_Court

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of not being retarded. Surprisingly. But the caveat is that you have to have a distinct purpose for all the components that could, in theory, be assembled into an NFA item. To me, that means that if there is an AR stock in my house, there's gotta be a rifle for it, too. Owning an AR pistol and having, say, and old cheapy M4 stock at the bottom of your 'spare parts' box could very well get you thrown in jail, should the perfect storm occur (i.e. your house is legally searched for some reason).

Again...for the exact same reason...I just would not touch a Sig brace.

edit: Hell, in my case, I have tons of airsoft stuff based around AR looks. So if I owned a real-steel AR pistol, I'd probably also have compatible stocks, foregrips, ect lying around. Bad juju.

 

[RampantAndroid]

IE, you wanted to use the Sig arm brace illegally. If true, great. You're in the group of people making things WORSE.



They basically said "it's fine if used as an arm brace, and using it as a buttstock constitutes turning the gun into an SBR." Interestingly enough though, if you put the buttstock against your shoulder, that act - with no other action taken to change the AR pistol, changes the firearm from a pistol to a rifle...and you cannot legally turn a rifle into a pistol.

So everyone who used the sig arm brace as a buttstock has "manufactured" an SBR...and is not paying the tax stamp (and it becomes illegal to conceal the gun from that point forward.)

Actually, seems I'm wrong here:
http://www.atf.gov/files/regulations-rulings/rulings/atf-rulings/atf-ruling-2011-4.pdf

A firearm, as defined by 26
U.S.C. 5845(a)(3) and (a)(4), is not made when a pistol is attached to a part or parts
designed to convert the pistol into a rifle with a barrel or barrels of 16 inches or more in
length, and the parts are later unassembled in a configuration not regulated under the
NFA (e.g., as a pistol).

That legalese...

 

[Kelvrick]

Here we go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thompson_Center_Arms#Thompson.2FCenter_Arms_and_the_Supreme_Court

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of not being retarded. Surprisingly. But the caveat is that you have to have a distinct purpose for all the components that could, in theory, be assembled into an NFA item. To me, that means that if there is an AR stock in my house, there's gotta be a rifle for it, too. Owning an AR pistol and having, say, and old cheapy M4 stock at the bottom of your 'spare parts' box could very well get you thrown in jail, should the perfect storm occur (i.e. your house is legally searched for some reason).

Again...for the exact same reason...I just would not touch a Sig brace.

edit: Hell, in my case, I have tons of airsoft stuff based around AR looks. So if I owned a real-steel AR pistol, I'd probably also have compatible stocks, foregrips, ect lying around. Bad juju.

I believe that would be the conservative way of looking at it. I would say having an AR pistol and an old stock in your spare parts bin and NOT having a regular ar-15 rifle would be constructive intent, as there is no legal way for you to use that stock.

I tried to negate it a bit by buying a "dedicated" pistol buffer tube that a regular stock won't fit on, though. Then I staked it on.

 

[Zargon]

IE, you wanted to use the Sig arm brace illegally. If true, great. You're in the group of people making things WORSE.

huh?

I strapped it to my arm, as you are supposed to, and it makes it very easy to shoot

honestly better than using it as a buttstock. because yeah I did that too, because I wanted to see how it was shooting and it was before the ATF said don't do that


what I was talking about was legally building and using one as a pistol, to make sure I LIKE THE GUN, before spending the cash on a stamp for it

I transferred my entire last round of lowers, as pistols, not rifles. which is actually what the IL State Police Firearms office is suggesting to do with bare lowers, so that you cant ever accidentally make a rifle a pistol, and since I wasn't in a hurry the extra wait wasn't a big deal

 

[MongGrel]

So basically, if I took this .223 10 inch barrel ...

and stuck on something like this ....

https://secure.tcarms.com/store/con...14-and-ampquot-lop-composite-cat-no-7628.html

I guess I all ready have one Bull black fore grip on the .22 LR

https://secure.tcarms.com/store/stocks-and-forends/long-gun-buttstocks/

I could just do all kinds of silly things with it ?

That would be one silly single shot SBR, a good scope would be as long as the barrel

That and would make a really far out .410 short shotgun, with the other barrel.

Find a short 12 gauge even odder, but never messed with a butt stock on it.

Not sure I'd even be tempted to, but is half what they are made to do I suppose, might get a butt stock just for grins and giggles.

I imagine are many better looking ones out there.

 

[MongGrel]

I guess I'd just never really looked at them that way.

I know they were using them even for long range hunting out west long ago with extended barrels, part of the reason I even bought it, had just not messed with the idea much.

Probably won't, haven't even shot it in awhile.

If anyone came in the house, I'd still be just going for one of the .357's

 

[phucheneh]

So I keep fucking around with the idea of branching out and buying a new gun of a totally different platform, and I think I've finally gotten it into my head that I really should have a 1911.

I've been reading around on all the usual suspects. RIA and other Phillipines manufacturers, the Turks, the few budget American 1911's (pretty short list: Ruger).

Until you get up to the $600+ mark with the SR1911, everything seems to fall into strange-conflicting-review-land. Every single thing you see written about an Armscorp, or a Regent/Tisas, ect, falls into two categories:

1) Best 1911 ever! Fit and finish is immaculate! Trigger like a racegun! Should cost four times more!

2) Piece of fucking shit. Made of Chinese pot metal. Rattles like an American-made car. Broke six times in four months, plus it raped my sister.

It's starting to wear on me. However, I think I have come to a decision: MetroArms American Classic II. Just a mildly enhanced version of the older 'American Classic' or Bersa Firestorm 1911. It helps that these are imported by Eagle (same as Bersa and now Grand Power), who I've found to have very good customer service.

Can't find a single bad thing said about it, other than a few nitpicks about needing to buy better mags (I can live with that) or change out minor parts like the mag catch (prolly just pickiness). Frame is cast, which is to be expected, but they actually specify 4140 (i.e. 'chromoly') steel. Slide is forged, which really doesn't seem that abnormal to me, but I can't find another <$500 1911 with that particular feature. Hell, the more basic version is only ~400, even.

Any reason I should spend my ~450 bucks on something else?

 

[CurseTheSky]

I've seen far too many budget 1911s that ended up being a thorn in peoples' sides. Yes, there are some diamonds in the rough, but if you're not one of the lucky ones, you're going to get stuck with something that just doesn't run right. Then what good is it?

For 1911s, I highly recommend spending $600 at the minimum (even including the used market). Ruger's offering is supposed to be pretty good, but I personally would go for Springfield Armory, or preferably, Colt. The 1911 platform just isn't somthing to cheap out on. If you want to spend $450 and be guaranteed to get a good, reliable pistol, get a Glock, M&P, or similar.

 

[phucheneh]

Even if I was made of money, I wouldn't buy a Colt.

I just really have a hard time believing that Turks, Italians, Czechs, Slovaks, ect can build DA/SA 9mm's that you can buy for $300-400 that are practically bombproof, yet NO ONE can competently copy a 100 year old .45 design for less than ~$650.

My suspicion is that the 1911 market and associated information is simply much more heavily skewed by OFWG's than any other segment. "Hoo-urr, dem Fillipean guns is shit, buy Amurican made! *holds up $1200 100% cast Para*"

 

[adairusmc]

Very nice.

I like wood on bolt actions, but very nice.

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

Thanks. I really like that hogue overmold, but I am eventually going to get a chassis to put it in, probably after I get a better scope for it.

I did spend some time on the reloading bench this weekend, loading some .308 match loads. I had a recipe that works in all of my other .308's well, that I am hoping works well in this, so I loaded up 500 of them yesterday (44g IMR 4064, 168g Amax, Winchester LR primer, 2.800" OAL). I have probably 2000 of those loaded up with sierra matchkings and another 500 that I had before this batch with the Amax, and they have all been extremely accurate in any .308 I have tried them in. They are a bit hot for my m1a's though, so I do not shoot them in that rifle.

 

[RampantAndroid]

I've seen far too many budget 1911s that ended up being a thorn in peoples' sides. Yes, there are some diamonds in the rough, but if you're not one of the lucky ones, you're going to get stuck with something that just doesn't run right. Then what good is it?

For 1911s, I highly recommend spending $600 at the minimum (even including the used market). Ruger's offering is supposed to be pretty good, but I personally would go for Springfield Armory, or preferably, Colt. The 1911 platform just isn't somthing to cheap out on. If you want to spend $450 and be guaranteed to get a good, reliable pistol, get a Glock, M&P, or similar.

You know, I went through this looking for a model 1897...Norinco makes a replica that is parkerized (originals were blued) and the Chinese version is quite literally a copy of a Winchester original shotgun...but they just didn't get it right, it seems. Some reviews raved. Others said it would work fine if a 1897 smith worked to smooth some stuff out. Others just said the metal was crap and it should be avoided. The best answer was "originals are better"...despite the originals dating back well over 50 years. My specific specimen is 104 years old, and according to someone who handled a Chinese made knockoff, mine is a MUCH better gun.

It isn't that you get what you pay for - original 1897s are often cheaper. But you should heed warnings. When 50% of all people say the gun is crap, there is probably something to their complaints. I'd buy an RIA if I wanted a full size (but would prefer a Springfield) - but I wouldn't use it for defense. That role goes to my $1000+ Dan Wesson (which has fed every round I've thrown at it flawlessly. Ejected them fine too.)

 

[RampantAndroid]

Even if I was made of money, I wouldn't buy a Colt.

I just really have a hard time believing that Turks, Italians, Czechs, Slovaks, ect can build DA/SA 9mm's that you can buy for $300-400 that are practically bombproof, yet NO ONE can competently copy a 100 year old .45 design for less than ~$650.

My suspicion is that the 1911 market and associated information is simply much more heavily skewed by OFWG's than any other segment. "Hoo-urr, dem Fillipean guns is shit, buy Amurican made! *holds up $1200 100% cast Para*"

Newer designs are meant to not require the tolerances needed for 1911s. They also use Polymers. Guns these days are meant to be mass produced. 60 years ago, a lot more hand fitting happened. Most Garands had their stocks hand finished and fitted. The M14 failed as a gun in part due to supply issues.

My point is simply: a 1911 is just a more expensive gun. The manufacturs making the overly cheap ones will be trying to cut corners. That's not to say you should only look at $3,000 nighthawks, but bottom of the barrel is just that.