300 BLK pistol build... possible?

[outrider58]

There are a LOT of definitions that are antiquated. For most, congress passed a law decades ago, abdicated their responsibility to update or repeal that law by leaving it open to wide interpretation. Then you end up with the ATF making up rules to raid businesses and arrest people over, and it ends up in the courts to clarify the definition.

AR15 lowers(and potentially other split receiver firearms) don't meet the definition of a "firearm", and they have dropped charges aggainst people for posessing or manufacturing them unlawfully. Most regs around "80% receivers" isn't based in law, it's ATF's made up criteria. For the most part by law something is a firearm / receiver or it isn't, basically 100% or 0%.

...as we all await the decision regarding 80% constructions. The ATFE, in their normal fashion, shoot first, aim second.
Thanks for the info alucard.

 

[alucard0822]

...as we all await the decision regarding 80% constructions. The ATFE, in their normal fashion, shoot first, aim second.
Thanks for the info alucard.

from the ATF

“80% receiver,” “80% finished,” “80% complete” and “unfinished receiver” are all terms referring to an item that some may believe has not yet reached a stage of manufacture that meets the definition of "firearm frame" or "receiver" according to the Gun Control Act (GCA). These are not statutory terms and ATF does not use or endorse them.

current US law

Federal Firearms Act. 15 U.S.C. Chapter 18.

Firearm. Any weapon, including a starter gun, which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; the frame or receiver of any such weapon; any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or any destructive device; but the term shall not include an antique firearm. In the case of a licensed collector, the term shall mean only curios and relics.

Firearm frame or receiver. That part of a firearm which provides housing for the hammer, bolt or breechblock, and firing mechanism, and which is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel.

an object that meets the definition of a "Receiver" is also a "firearm". Problem currently swirling around in the courts is the actual legal definition keeps getting interpreted as a housing for the FCG AND hammer AND the bolt or breechblock, not FCG OR hammer OR Breechblock OR bolt. An AR lower houses the FCG and hammer, but not the bolt, and the ATF keeps dropping cases where people are getting arrested for unlawfully selling lowers or making them from 80%s to avoid full 100% lowers from being treated like 80%s are now. Of course GLOCK and most other handgun lowers are similarly not a firearm or receiver by statute(many no longer have the seemingly required "hammer"), same with 10/22s, FALs, M14/M1, mini14/30, in fact most every serialized stripped receiver for most every firearm sold today. So that is the risk, if they keep pushing the line on definitions written nearly 100 years ago, all it takes is a couple court decisions before you can order most any firearm in 2 separate 100% functional parts (where neither on their own contains both the bolt/slide with the FCG) to your house, slap them together for personal use, and the whole FFL licensing, ATF racket becomes obsolete.

One GREAT thing to come out of bumpstocks and braces is that the industry is getting good at pushing the line back on regulations, and as the regulators keep walking out further and further from the law they claim to be basing those regulations on, the better chance we have of revolutionary breakthroughs in 2A freedoms. It pours attention, money, innovation, and popularity into technology that was not accounted for in the antiquated laws. It also backs the argument that NFA device like SBR-ish braced pistols and MG-ish binary/bump devices are in common use, and the law itself is at risk of getting hammered with a good SCOTUS decision.

 

[Shore88]

Why not build the upper from parts you source , so it is exactly what you want?

Being my first attempt at the lower I really don’t feel confident enough to attempt the upper. I need a vise and some extra tools for one thing. I feel I can complete the lower without the vise. It just seems there’s less room for error on the part that goes boom. I’ll keep looking at videos though and maybe change my mind.

 

[DaemonAssassin]

Being my first attempt at the lower I really don’t feel confident enough to attempt the upper. I need a vise and some extra tools for one thing. I feel I can complete the lower without the vise. It just seems there’s less room for error on the part that goes boom. I’ll keep looking at videos though and maybe change my mind.

There are more than a few members here that have all the tools to build a complete rifle from just parts. Sometimes all you have to do is ask for help.

 

[Shore88]

There are more than a few members here that have all the tools to build a complete rifle from just parts. Sometimes all you have to do is ask for help.

Thanks. That’s always an option. I guess I’m trying to take the easy way out. I appreciate the offer. I’ll keep looking and then decide what I want to do. I’ll see how the lower goes first. To be honest, if PSA had not nixed my purchase of the complete rifle I probably wouldn’t be having this conversation. The AR I wanted is completely legal in MD. I’ll get there.

 

[outrider58]

Will a 1:8 twist on 16” barrel hold those 200+ grain sub sonics steady? With or without a suppressor?

I don't see why not. Of course, the barrel would be the deciding factor.

Like that idiot spambot that got banned the other day said, "start with a barrel". Well, on that, I can agree. When I build an upper, I start with a good barrel and bolt carrier. Everything else is personal preference after that.

 

[Shore88]

I don't see why not. Of course, the barrel would be the deciding factor.

Like that idiot spambot that got banned the other day said, "start with a barrel". Well, on that, I can agree. When I build an upper, I start with a good barrel and bolt carrier. Everything else is personal preference after that.

I’m kind of leaning towards the Nitride barrels over the phosphate, or parkerized, seems to be more corrosion resistant. And they look really nice in my opinion. Any thoughts? I know you were probably talking about the quality of the machining. Any thoughts to a nitride BCG as well?

 

[outrider58]

I’m kind of leaning towards the Nitride barrels over the phosphate, or parkerized, seems to be more corrosion resistant. And they look really nice in my opinion. Any thoughts? I know you were probably talking about the quality of the machining. Any thoughts to a nitride BCG as well?

Phosphate is suposed to be a little more durable, though not as pretty as nitride. For BCGs, again, phosphate is more durable, but the most important thing to me is a carrier that is chrome lined as well as the gas key, and that the gas key is properly staked and is attached with grade 8 screws.

Barrels can be nitrided. I usually go with match grade at least. I won't scrimp on the barrel. Some of mine are chrome-lined. Some hammer forged. Some are stainless steel. It all depends on the amount of shooting I plan on doing with the particular gun. I don't shoot competitively so I'm not too concerned about burning a barrel out too soon. Pre COVID, you could get a good barrel for around $275-$450. My feeling is, the barrel and bolt are the business end of the gun. It needs quality parts. This is why you build it yourself. Anyone can buy a $350 complete upper and slap it onto a lower. They will likely end up with exactly what they paid for.

 

[Shore88]

Phosphate is suposed to be a little more durable, though not as pretty as nitride. For BCGs, again, phosphate is more durable, but the most important thing to me is a carrier that is chrome lined as well as the gas key, and that the gas key is properly staked and is attached with grade 8 screws.

Barrels can be nitrided. I usually go with match grade at least. I won't scrimp on the barrel. Some of mine are chrome-lined. Some hammer forged. Some are stainless steel. It all depends on the amount of shooting I plan on doing with the particular gun. I don't shoot competitively so I'm not too concerned about burning a barrel out too soon. Pre COVID, you could get a good barrel for around $275-$450. My feeling is, the barrel and bolt are the business end of the gun. It needs quality parts. This is why you build it yourself. Anyone can buy a $350 complete upper and slap it onto a lower. They will likely end up with exactly what they paid for.

Good advice. Much appreciated!

 

[alucard0822]

Phosphate is suposed to be a little more durable, though not as pretty as nitride. For BCGs, again, phosphate is more durable, but the most important thing to me is a carrier that is chrome lined as well as the gas key, and that the gas key is properly staked and is attached with grade 8 screws.

Barrels can be nitrided. I usually go with match grade at least. I won't scrimp on the barrel. Some of mine are chrome-lined. Some hammer forged. Some are stainless steel. It all depends on the amount of shooting I plan on doing with the particular gun. I don't shoot competitively so I'm not too concerned about burning a barrel out too soon. Pre COVID, you could get a good barrel for around $275-$450. My feeling is, the barrel and bolt are the business end of the gun. It needs quality parts. This is why you build it yourself. Anyone can buy a $350 complete upper and slap it onto a lower. They will likely end up with exactly what they paid for.

Mil-spec is manganese phosphate on the outside, chrome on the inside. Phosphate is thick and tough, but is porus, and needs to soak up oil to actually provide corrosion resistance. Chrome adds material through electrolytic deposition, and usually needs the bore to be oversized, then chrome builds up to get back to spec. Nitride penetrates the steel and essentially case hardens it, then black oxide is blasted to coat it. Nitride/ black oxide is harder, more abrasion resistant,, and tougher, but much thinner, so not a huge difference in wear resistance for semis, but much easier to care for. Chrome is thicker, and more heat resistant, so harder to damage, and holds up to FA mag dumps better. Phosphate is thick enough that it is harder to damage, and if maintained with oil,, more corrosion resistant( less so if not kept oiled)Unless you are building something specialty, or full auto, nitride is the better way to go IMO.

 

[outobie]

Only applies to rifles, not pistols.

Your friend's SBR is fine if it is pre Oct 2013 (shorter than 29" OAL), or the suppressor is permanently attached (Barrel shorter than 16" but OAL of 29" or greater)

Why does it seem wrong to you?

it seemed wrong to me because I didn't think you could have a folding stock on an SBR...wouldn't the folding stock make it way too short? with the folding stock and short barrel it was waay under 29" OAL? but I guess what you are saying is that if it was pre 2013 then the 29" OAL doesn't apply?

the other thing that struck me as wrong was having a folding stock and a suppressor...I thought it was one or the other but not both.

I want to make one of my own that is similar but don't know what I can and can't do. building a pistol seems to offer more flexibility than an SBR.

here's what I think I'd like to do...build a pistol with a 10" barrel, and QD mounted suppressor and pistol brace.

Can I put a folding brace on my pistol build?


what about same scenario in an SBR? 10" barrel QD mount suppressor, folding rifle stock. Looks like I will need to pin an weld the flash hider/muzzle brake to get to 29" LOA.

Question...if I wanted a folding stock could I do that if I used a muzzle brake rather than a flash hider? the law tactical folder adds about 0.5 inches to the buffer length...does the length get measured with the folder folded or fixed in place and fully extended?

What about using my suppressor mounted to a brake, can I still use a folding stock?

 

[outrider58]

it seemed wrong to me because I didn't think you could have a folding stock on an SBR...wouldn't the folding stock make it way too short? with the folding stock and short barrel it was waay under 29" OAL? but I guess what you are saying is that if it was pre 2013 then the 29" OAL doesn't apply?


the other thing that struck me as wrong was having a folding stock and a suppressor...I thought it was one or the other but not both.


I want to make one of my own that is similar but don't know what I can and can't do. building a pistol seems to offer more flexibility than an SBR.

here's what I think I'd like to do...build a pistol with a 10" barrel, and QD mounted suppressor and pistol brace.

Can I put a folding stock on my pistol build?


what about same scenario in an SBR? 10" barrel QD mount suppressor, rifle stock. Looks like I will need to pin an weld the flash hider/muzzle brake to get to 29" LOA.

Question...if I wanted a folding stock could I do that if I used a muzzle brake rather than a flash hider? the law tactical folder adds about 0.5 inches to the buffer length...does the length get measured with the folder folded or fixed in place and fully extended?

What about using my suppressor mounted to a brake, can I still use a folding stock?

Exactly
While there is a minimum OAL for SBRs in Md., that only applies to SBRs made or purchased after 10/1/13.

There are no minimum lengths for "pistols" as of yet in Md, so you can put as short a barrel on your Ar, AK, MP5, etc pistol, whether you build it yourself or buy one already built.

I've never thought about putting a folder on an SBR. Admittedly, I wasn't sure if it was an evil feature or not(post 2013). Another nuance about SBRs in Md., they are considered both a rifle and or a pistol, depending on the statute. More Merryland mud thrown in our eyes. All stocks on SBRs are measure fully extended.

Folders are perfectly legal on pistols because pistols, by their very nature, do not have stocks. Braces are not stocks.

 

[dblas]

it seemed wrong to me because I didn't think you could have a folding stock on an SBR...wouldn't the folding stock make it way too short? with the folding stock and short barrel it was waay under 29" OAL? but I guess what you are saying is that if it was pre 2013 then the 29" OAL doesn't apply?

The measurement is with the stock fully extended, it doesn't matter how short it is with the stock fully collapsed (collapsable stock) or folded (folding stock), ATF only cares about full length. And if the folding stock is on an AR build does his AR still shoot while folded? If not then it's not a folding stock, it's technically a break-down stock, meant to make the rifle smaller for storage.

the other thing that struck me as wrong was having a folding stock and a suppressor...I thought it was one or the other but not both.

A suppressor is NOT an evil feature.

I want to make one of my own that is similar but don't know what I can and can't do. building a pistol seems to offer more flexibility than an SBR.

here's what I think I'd like to do...build a pistol with a 10" barrel, and QD mounted suppressor and pistol brace.

There's nothing difficult about this, you are reading way too much into it.

Can I put a folding stock on my pistol build?

It depends on the folding mechanism. If you can shoot the firearms while it is folded, then no, because then you have a rifle. If you can't shoot the firearm while folded then it should be OK, because it is designed for storage.

what about same scenario in an SBR? 10" barrel QD mount suppressor, rifle stock. Looks like I will need to pin an weld the flash hider/muzzle brake to get to 29" LOA.

10.5" barrel will be fine and are standard for .300 BO so no need to pin the suppressor.

Question...if I wanted a folding stock could I do that if I used a muzzle brake rather than a flash hider? the law tactical folder adds about 0.5 inches to the buffer length...does the length get measured with the folder folded or fixed in place and fully extended?

What about using my suppressor mounted to a brake, can I still use a folding stock?

The law tactical adapter doesn't count as a folding stock, you can't shoot the AR with it folded, so it doesn't count. And again, a suppressor is NOT an evil feature, yes you can use a muzzle break.QD device instead of a flash hider.

 

[Shore88]

^^^This

To expand on this a little;

Ed's point is, it is illegal to convert a rifle(any gun transferred as such) into a pistol. You would be making a short barreled rifle(SBR) and that is only legal with the appropriate tax stamp(NFA).

So yes, you can build a pistol AR, but only on a lower that did not start out as a rifle. A standard receiver extension(buffer tube) is okay, be it carbine type, rifle type, or pistol type. You can never put a rifle stock of any kind on that extension, as it exists as a pistol, but any of the approved pistol braces are fine.

You can, at any time, convert your pistol into a rifle having a barrel length 16" or longer, and then convert it back to pistol. That is legal.

Having a change of heart(plans) for the moment. I just ordered a rifle build kit. With a Mil-spec buffer assembly. If I build to lower but don’t install the rifle butt stock I can call it a pistol and place a pistol upper on it? And then change it later on to a rifle if I so desire?

 

[outrider58]

Having a change of heart(plans) for the moment. I just ordered a rifle build kit. With a Mil-spec buffer assembly. If I build to lower but don’t install the rifle butt stock I can call it a pistol and place a pistol upper on it? And then change it later on to a rifle if I so desire?

In my view, once you put the buffer tube on, you can call it a pistol lower.

 

[dblas]

Having a change of heart(plans) for the moment. I just ordered a rifle build kit. With a Mil-spec buffer assembly. If I build to lower but don’t install the rifle butt stock I can call it a pistol and place a pistol upper on it? And then change it later on to a rifle if I so desire?

It's not a pistol until you put a pistol buffer tube on it.

 

[outrider58]

It's not a pistol until you put a pistol buffer tube on it.

Standard milspec buffer tube is fine. Many braces are made for those.

 

[Bob A]

If a person had a pre-201 lower as yet unbuilt, would an SBR built on it be eligible for the <29" OAL?

 

[outrider58]

If a person had a pre-201 lower as yet unbuilt, would an SBR built on it be eligible for the <29" OAL?

No. When you "make" an sbr, you are making a new gun and all current laws apply. Now, if you got your form 1 approved before 10/1/2013 and are finally getting around to build it, you are within the law to do so.
IANAL

 

[Shore88]

Standard milspec buffer tube is fine. Many braces are made for those.

I agree. Lots of them on sale in pistol kits. Along with the pistol braces that fit them.