View Full Version : I'm going there!
01-07-2006, 03:32 AM
OK guys, I need some factual info. Not armchair lawyer stuff. Facts backed up by documentation.
There are alot of aluminum barrel extentions being sold for the M92 and other krink variants. Most of which are solely blind pinned and not welded. The way I read it was that "they are to be welded, silver soldered with 1100 degree solder, or blind pinned and welded"
No mention of a blind pin that cannot be removed without machining.
Has the manufacturers of these designs had them approved as barrel extensions without welding or solder? If so, do they have a letter from tech branch stating that? These are questions needing some factual answers. If these are not attached by an approved method, they WOULD be consider an illegal SBR, and some unknowing builder would go to jail for an unscroupulas manufacturers negligence.
01-07-2006, 12:04 PM
Red Jacket Firearms
01-07-2006, 12:19 PM
I've looked at Vector , Ohio Rapid, and Vulcan guns that have an aluminum extension . All were either blind pinned or set-screwed with the set-screw filled in with weld of some sort. They could be removed by destorying the piece , then again , so could the length of a barrel be shortened with a hacksaw in about 2 minutes.
01-07-2006, 12:28 PM
Point taken Will, but the Boys at BATFTB have set a standard of how THEY want these extensions to be attached. I think the aluminum extensions apply to the spirit of the law, but not to the letter of the law. And you being a Class II must see my point and concern? When they come knocking it better be to the letter or someone is going to be in trouble. Do you know if anyone has submitted drawings and got a reply back from Tech branch?
Red Jacket Firearms
01-07-2006, 12:39 PM
no i don't . I do think that if they were gunna "come a knocking" over alum. ext's they would have started it years ago . I'm a bit cowardly when it comes to the ATF , just like with building the AK pistols , I didn't get in any hurry to put them out there , but rather let braver souls go ahead of me and thoroughly test the waters
01-07-2006, 02:53 PM
Hey Scott, TGrove, and others,
Can you give us some answers? Have these extensions been blessed? I am in the market for one but want to make sure they are OK with the TB guys in VA.
Let us know here if they are, or are not.
01-07-2006, 09:18 PM
I can tell you what I have read about the blind pinning, which repeats what I posted many moons ago. To be clear, "captive" blind pinning (or a set screw!) where the pin can't be removed (read: welded over or in the case of a pin simply pressed perpendicular without an opening on the opposite side) is an approved method to secure barrel extensions in a permanent fashion.
You asked for documentation, and I know I read a scanned letter stating this about AR barrels (the 14.5" barrels). I have since lost the link to that web page and now cannot find the letter. The letter was specific in the size of the blind pin (or set screw), and specific as to the depth of the pin in the barrel and/or sight base. 3/32" comes to mind. Nowhere did the letter say "steel" vs. "aluminum".
I would pay money to find that scanned letter again! I even asked around on AR15.com and no one replied. No idea where to find more information, except to compose another letter to BATFE. :dunno:
Apparently Bushmaster does (or did) their AR brakes with blind pins. That may be a source for documentation?
01-08-2006, 12:54 AM
Yes I think an up to date letter may be the solution. But what about the scenario that I submit a letter and drawings outlining the current method being used, and BATFTB reponds with a NO-GO? Then we will have a clarification, but may not be the one that everyone wants.
01-08-2006, 12:47 PM
OK, one more try to get the makers to let us know if these have been a submitted design?
01-08-2006, 01:58 PM
I'm with Jerry.
I definitely remember the ATF letter OKing blind pinning.
Edit: I can't find it. PM one pat at the other site. He does a great job of keeping up with this stuff.