If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
I like that stock.
Nice looking rig. You list a BCM M-16 BCG. M16 BCG are different than AR 15 and quite recognizable. Any machine gun part makes a MG out of an otherwise legal rifle as far as BATF is concerned. I bought a preban upper on NES that came with one and had to replace it, I would think twice about that choice.
Nice looking rig. You list a BCM M-16 BCG. M16 BCG are different than AR 15 and quite recognizable. Any machine gun part makes a MG out of an otherwise legal rifle as far as BATF is concerned. I bought a preban upper on NES that came with one and had to replace it, I would think twice about that choice.
Those Mossberg 500 Combos are a helluva deal aren't they? Did you get the scope with it as well? I need to pick up another lower and the Spikes look really nice. Are you going to do 7.62x39? What are you going to do with the Stag? Love the 317 as well - nice haul!
Thanks for your compliment, but on your assertion that an M-16 BCG is illegal in an AR-15, you are completely wrong. The M-16 BCG is in use in AR-15 rifles, (namely M4 clones) by a variety of manufacturers including Colt, Noveske, BCM, LMT etc. The M-16 Bolt carrier is different than the AR-15 in that the bolt carrier activates the hammer - not the firing pin. It makes M4-type rifles more reliable, by slowing down the cycling of the bolt with the short gas system, thus improving reliability. It is not part of the lower receiver and is highlighted by the BATFE as a machinegun part when combined with a lower fire control parts set, which I am not now, never have, nor never will be in possession of - that would be illegal.
Lets end this "Internet Myth" here and now. Kindly show me where the use of an M-16 bolt carrier group in an AR-15 is illegal. Not "advises against", but illegal. Show us the way on that one, then please forward it to Colt legal, (among a myriad of others) - they have a shitload of civilian M4 copies to recall....
Hey Mark, not to start a pissing match or anything but what do you make of this? This comes from Bushmaster's own catalog and it clearly states if your rifle contains "even one M16 component it is a machine gun". Either Bushmaster is incorrect or that internet myth is not a myth.
My Latest: Mossberg 500; Striped Spikes lower; Stag Tactical lower; and a 317 for the wife.
I'm going to make the Spikes a 7.62 since it is a multi-cal lower, with an A2 configuration; The upper is currently on order from Model 1 sales (12-16 week wait).
The Stag lower will probably end up with a M4 upper with a few goodies.
*IMG*
My Latest: Mossberg 500; Striped Spikes lower; Stag Tactical lower; and a 317 for the wife.
I'm going to make the Spikes a 7.62 since it is a multi-cal lower, with an A2 configuration; The upper is currently on order from Model 1 sales (12-16 week wait).
The Stag lower will probably end up with a M4 upper with a few goodies.
Here are a couple of items I picked up this month.
These two pics are a standard off list lower (California law) sporting a Monster man grip and a AR57 upper on top.
It fires the 5.7x28 round from a 10, 30 or 50 round mag.
Im sorry man, i know thats what you have to do to own an AR but that thing is hideous. I do think the upper is cool though.
Nice looking rig. You list a BCM M-16 BCG. M16 BCG are different than AR 15 and quite recognizable. Any machine gun part makes a MG out of an otherwise legal rifle as far as BATF is concerned.
Cite please. I can see your point if it had M16 fire control parts in it, but an M16 BCG alone is not enough to make it anywhere near a "machine gun".
-Mike
Finally got my new safe set up wth the help of 1776 and my son inlaw Grant who is a green member.
SIZE 84 ' HIGH ,60 " WIDE AND 30" DEEP weight over 6000 lds.
Fire proof for 4 hours in 1500 degree fire!!
Thanks for looking
Fred
This may be of help..
We can only inform you that if this installation were to create a firearm that fires automatically, it would be a machinegun as defined; conversely, if it did not result in the production of a weapon that shoots automatically, it would be lawful to possess and make.
Hey Fred, was it much trouble getting that thing up to the 2nd floor?