TRACT Optics

pre-2013 lower, folding stock, SBR platform

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • SigNerd

    Junior Member
    Feb 24, 2015
    84
    Hi all,

    I know that pre-2013 lowers have been discussed before, but none of the threads seemed to answer my specific question (generally they were about named assault long guns, this is about copycats, both the feature test and <29 inches OAL). MDSP’s guidance (PDF) says

    Yes, a lower receiver purchased prior to 10/1/2013 may be built into an assault long gun, provided there is compliance with federal and other State laws.

    Technically a copycat weapon is separate from an assault long gun (copycat being a separate category of assault weapon along with assault long gun and assault pistol), but based on the logic being applied I assume that it would equally apply to a copycat whose configuration wasn’t banned before 2013.

    1. I’m currently thinking of switching a pre-ban AR15 lower that’s collecting dust to a BRN-180 platform (no need for a buffer tube). Based on that wording, I assume it would be ok to set up the pre-ban lower in a way that would otherwise fail the feature test (say folding stock and flash hider), correct?

    2. With the speculation on braced pistols being forced to be SBR’ed or drop the brace (ATF expected to publish the final rule in December), what about the 3rd definition of a copycat: less than 29 inches OAL? Would registering it as an SBR “remanufacture” the lower such that it’s no longer pre-ban? Obviously the ATF won’t allow <29 inches to be registered because of the MD law and it sounds like a red tape nightmare to convince them otherwise. But assuming it doesn’t become “remanufactured”, could I figure out a configuration >29 inches (shouldn’t be hard) and then once I have the tax stamp in hand move back to a folding stock with <29 inches OAL (my understanding is that the ATF doesn’t require updating the registration info for OAL changes, but I could be wrong)?

    I’ll gladly clarify anything if anyone thinks I worded something poorly or just needs more info.


    Thanks
     
    I must state that this is my opinion and I'm no lawyer or that good at reading laws but according to the FSA2012 it's OAL being under 29" is illegal weather you got a tax stamp or not, unless that stamp was approved/received prior to 10/01/12.

    I have an MPAP92 with a 10" barrel with a folding stock that meets the 29" OAL requirement is their and option for you that works like that? OAL length is calculated with the stock fully extended/open what would the OAL be with a folding stock on that BRN 180 with 10.5" barrel?
     

    outrider58

    Pronouns: It, That
    MDS Supporter
    Jul 29, 2014
    40,832
    Any SBR approved after fsa 2013 has to meet the over 29" requirements because you are making a NEW gun. Doesn't matter when the lower was bought. What matters is when the stamp is issued.
     

    SigNerd

    Junior Member
    Feb 24, 2015
    84
    Ok, 29 inches isn't hard for me to make (and a collapsible stock with a folding adapter is more versatile than a skeleton folder), was just seeing what all I could get away with. :)

    If it gets a stamp now does that mean that I then have to pass the feature test on the "new" gun (pre-2013 lower, post-2013 stamped) or would it still be ok with the folding stock and flash hider?


    Thank you both
     

    holesonpaper

    Member
    Mar 10, 2017
    736
    Hazzard county
    I think you’ll need a brake or nothing

    I agree.. The form 1 indicates that you're manufacturing a SBR - which means you need to manufacturer based upon the current laws. If you had SBR'ed prior to 10/2013, then you could have done both.

    The folding stock counts as one evil device..
     

    SigNerd

    Junior Member
    Feb 24, 2015
    84
    Ah, the worst of all worlds. :)

    If that's the case*, then it sounds like it's best to keep my pre-2013 as an evil feature/named AW lower and use one of my newer lowers (or two if the ATF waives the fee) as the SBR platform. Then on those SBR lowers I could either have (1) a folder and only allow uppers with comps on it or (2) no folder and not worry about what's on the muzzle.


    * definitely looking for more opinions/thoughts in case the consensus is otherwise or someone happens to have documentation that says otherwise
     

    outrider58

    Pronouns: It, That
    MDS Supporter
    Jul 29, 2014
    40,832
    Ok, 29 inches isn't hard for me to make (and a collapsible stock with a folding adapter is more versatile than a skeleton folder), was just seeing what all I could get away with. :)

    If it gets a stamp now does that mean that I then have to pass the feature test on the "new" gun (pre-2013 lower, post-2013 stamped) or would it still be ok with the folding stock and flash hider?


    Thank you both
    I saw no restrictions regarding brakes or FHs on my F1. Two of mine have brakes/suppressors. Another, just a linear comp.

    If you put a LAW type folder on your gun, it doesn't count as a real folding stock. The gun can't be fire in the folded position. LAW folders and their ilk are GTG.
     

    SigNerd

    Junior Member
    Feb 24, 2015
    84
    I saw no restrictions regarding brakes or FHs on my F1. Two of mine have brakes/suppressors. Another, just a linear comp.

    If you put a LAW type folder on your gun, it doesn't count as a real folding stock. The gun can't be fire in the folded position. LAW folders and their ilk are GTG.
    In my case the LAW would still be a problem since the BRN-180 is short piston driven, it doesn't use the buffer tube at all (if using an ar15 lower you can put a picatinny stock adapter where the BT should go or just run an empty BT), so it would still function with the stock folded.

    Knowing is half the battle and the answers here helped a lot. I'll just leave the pre-2013 receiver for the 16" upper and use a newer lower to SBR keeping in mind the max 1 evil feature for the SBR.
     

    outrider58

    Pronouns: It, That
    MDS Supporter
    Jul 29, 2014
    40,832
    In my case the LAW would still be a problem since the BRN-180 is short piston driven, it doesn't use the buffer tube at all (if using an ar15 lower you can put a picatinny stock adapter where the BT should go or just run an empty BT), so it would still function with the stock folded.

    Knowing is half the battle and the answers here helped a lot. I'll just leave the pre-2013 receiver for the 16" upper and use a newer lower to SBR keeping in mind the max 1 evil feature for the SBR.
    I forgot about the BRN-180. You are dead set on putting the BRN in the SBR? SBRs without muzzle devices are very limiting and kind of negate the finer points of them, IMO.

    If it were my choice, and I'm just offering this up, I would put the BRN in the pre ban carbine with a muzzle device because it is legal and better suited(again, my humble opinion), and build the SBR with a muzzle device that will not only help dissipate the huge fireball, but will allow the addition of a suppressor in the future. That IMO, is where SBRs shine.

    Just something to consider.
     

    SigNerd

    Junior Member
    Feb 24, 2015
    84
    I forgot about the BRN-180. You are dead set on putting the BRN in the SBR? SBRs without muzzle devices are very limiting and kind of negate the finer points of them, IMO.

    If it were my choice, and I'm just offering this up, I would put the BRN in the pre ban carbine with a muzzle device because it is legal and better suited(again, my humble opinion), and build the SBR with a muzzle device that will not only help dissipate the huge fireball, but will allow the addition of a suppressor in the future. That IMO, is where SBRs shine.

    Just something to consider.
    Reason for the BRN-180 SBR is the BRN-180 pistols I already have that might have to be converted to SBRs or shot using a sling push/pull method based on the final brace rule.

    I'm not entirely dead set on the folding stock on the SBR (if I did I'd at least put a linear comp on it; peering through the absolute mud, they seem to generally not be considered a flash suppressor... but who knows lol). More likely I'd go with a proper flash hider (and likely an eventual suppressor), though, and stick with a collapsible stock. It'd still be a pretty compact package. One of the wire telescoping stocks like the Maxims (apparently weighted with gold based on the price) would be cool, but I doubt I'd find one that got me enough length to make the 29 inch minimum with a 10.5 inch barrel.

    Honestly, if the ATF doesn't waive the tax stamp fee (assuming they ban most braces), I might just go with the sling method and wait to see what the courts say.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    264,586
    Messages
    6,804,530
    Members
    31,185
    Latest member
    dreadysuperhero

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom