• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    United States

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About jbntex

  • Rank
    Basic Training

Personal Information

  • City and State Austin, Texas
  1. I will take the two AUG 9mm Mags. PM sent to your inbox with contact details or email me at jbntex at texxxxas dot net. (remove the extra x'es in texas) James
  2. Anyone heard from Bill Fleming?

    I spoke with Bill about a month ago on the phone. He seemed like he was doing fine but I didn't ask him about his personal life, etc. Not sure if this helps or not.
  3. Steyr AUG 9mm conversion kit question

    The 9mm AUG kit I bought direct from Pete Athens maybe 4ish years ago and the carrier came with the anti-bounce rods and springs installed. I actually bought a set of anti-bounce rods and springs for the 9mm kit, fully expecting to have to mod them for semi-auto stock use and install them into the 9mm carrier. However when I pulled the thruster caps off the 9mm carrier...out popped two anti-bounce rods and anti-bounce rod springs, already modified by Steyr for use with a semi-auto stock. All I had to change out was the semi-auto cocking piece for a full auto cocking piece so I could use my transferable Qualified sear based hammer pack. On AUGs there is no difference now-a-days between a semi-carrier and a full auto carrier other than the full auto carrier has the anti-bounce rods and the full auto cocking piece installed. The full auto stocks and carrier used to run a fatter guide rod diameter but everything has transitioned to the narrow diameter guide rod setup. Keep in mind, it is critical that you do not use any carrier that has unmodified full auto anti-bounce rods installed with a semi-auto stock. The full auto stock guide rods are ~140mm vs. ~165mm in a semi-stock. If you run a carrier (either 9mm or 5.56) with full length anti-bounce rods and springs installed you will damage the stock and/or the spring in the carrier as you will have a stack up tolerance issue. With unmodded anti-bounce rods and springs in a carrier and installed in the semi stock, the carrier will not be able to come all the way back on the recoil stroke and bottom out on the little ~5mm thick donut shaped buffers at the base of the stock guide rods like its supposed to. Instead the longer semi-auto stock guide rods will crush the springs inside the carrier thruster tubes in short order or potentially damage the stock guide rods. If you want to run a carrier with anti-bounce rods installed inside a semi-stock with ~165mm length guide rods you need to trim ~1" off the anti-bounce rods and also trim the semi-auto recoil spring (as they are also longer) to make room for the anti-bounce rods, anti-bounce rod springs, and the longer semi-auto guide rods when the carrier is fully compressed on the recoil stroke. Its a pretty straight forward modification, but some folks are under the impression can buy a complete full auto carrier and then drop it into a semi-stock which isn't the case. So to answer your specific questions: Yes in my experience some of the semi 9mm kits come with the anti-bounce rods installed. That said it certainly isn't a bad idea to check to make sure they are actually in there if you plan to run it with a sear. Its also not a bad idea to make sure the stack up tolerance is correct and the carrier can come all the way back to the donut buffers are the base of the stock guide rods. Keep in mind, you can't use the charging handle to check this stack up tolerance as the charging handle cant pull the carrier far enough to the rear to bottom it out like it does when firing. However, you can remove the receiver, remove the hammer pack, install just the carrier in the stock. Then push the carrier back manually and make sure it can go all the way back and hits the buffers vs. stopping short while looking through the rear of the stock with the hammer pack removed. Other than that you just need to add the full auto cocking piece to the carrier. I actually use the polymer 5.56 cocking piece as the 9MM specific one is steel and I didnt want to beat up my sear with a steel cocking piece. I have had no issues with using the full auto polymer 5.56 cocking piece with the 9mm kit.
  4. I can only presume this is the ad in question. sturmgewehr.com/forums/index.php?/topic/12830-smith-wesson-76-cr/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Smith & Wesson 76 C&R 9mm SMG with one (1) S&W magazine. Both in excellent condition. Form 4. Former NYS DCS weapon. The weapon has a new grip, the original grip is included. $12,000 /$100.00 shipped. Shipped directly to C&R collector on Form 4 or Form 4 person to person Nevada. No returns or exchanges. Any questions please PM me. Thank you for looking. Sold pending funds Alan FFL/SOT ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- The seller is clearly an FFL/SOT based of his signature line. The seller doesn't say anything about the gun being brokered or not part of his business inventory, only that is it eligible for a direct C&R Form 4 transfer (which is a benefit to some folks who want it on their C&R license) and or course it can Form 4 transfer to an individual in State (granted what transferable isn't able to). Looking at the ad I would presume its eligible for a Form 3 transfer given he prominently states he is an FFL/SOT.... that said, the ad is a bit ambiguous with all of the "Form 4" language mixed in which is irrelevant to the transaction in my opinion. If this Smith is being brokered or is legally owned by a somebody other than the entity that holds a FFL/SOT license the advertisement should clearly state that. Granted if I was looking to buy this gun I would ask the seller up front if the firearms is eligible for a F3 transfer to my FFL/SOT before agreeing to buy the gun. Looking at the past transfer paperwork is no guarantee on how it will transfer going forward. i.e. just because it last transferred on a F3 is no guarantee of a future tax free transfer and just because it transferred to the dealer inventory via a Form 4 doesn't mean it won't transfer tax free on a F3 to the next buyer. If the gun is registered to Alan personally and Alan is a sole prop FFL/SOT, than it can go on a F3. (even if Alan acquired the gun from the former owner via a Form 4) If the gun is registered to the legal entity "POLLC" (of which Alan is the managing member) and POLLC also holds the FFL/SOT than it can go on a F3 as well. If the gun is registered to Alan personally "as an individual" who also just happens to be a managing member of an LLC that also happens to have an FFL/SOT license than its going on a tax paid Form 4 as the legal transferor isn't an FFL/SOT. If the gun is registered to the legal entity "POLLC" which is unlicensed but Alan is a Sole Prop FFL/SOT than again its going on a F4 again as the transferor isnt an FFL/SOT. If Alan or POLLC is brokering the gun for an unrelated 3rd party who is also unlicensed than it will go on a tax paid Form 4. In this case Kimber should contact Alan and ask who is the legal registrant of the Smith76, is the legal registrant a current FFL/SOT, and is the Smith76 eligible for a tax free Form 3 transfer.
  5. I have bought multiple machineguns over the past 20 years from an out of State FFL/SOT that were transferred to the current FFL/SOT/Dealer owner via a tax paid Form 4 and then ultimately transferred to my in-State FFL/SOT on a tax free Form 3. I actually just bought another machinegun just last week under this exact scenario. The dealer bought the gun from an unlicensed individual via a F4 a couple years back but the gun is currently transferring to my FFL/SOT dealer in Texas via a F3. As long as the current owner/registrant is an FFL/SOT and your dealer is an FFL/SOT it will go on a tax free ATF Form 3. If the transferring dealer utilizes the ATF e-form system it will probably take less than a week for an approval. To quote Dan Shea "machineguns are not on forms" what matters is the FFL/SOT status of the parties executing the transfer. Think of it this way, if it was true that machineguns "were on Forms" and any machinegun that historically transferred on a tax paid Form 4 was now no longer eligible for a Form 3 transfer in the future... than at this point 30+ years later there would be almost no machineguns left that could transfer on a Form 3 as probably 99% of machineguns out there have bounced through a tax paid Form 4 transfer at some point in their history. However, yet today the majority of transferable machineguns are still advertised as eligible for a fast and tax free Form 3 transfer. How is that possible...... its not because there are piles of 30 to 90 year old transferable that have remained exclusively on Form 3 transfers for their entire lifespan......its because they are currently owned by an FFL/SOT holding dealer and it makes no difference what type of transfer or "form" they acquired the gun on. The dealer you bought the gun from should also be able to explain/confirm all of this.
  6. If the gun is currently owned/registered to a FFL/SOT it would transfer to you FFL (assuming your FFL is also an SOT) on a tax free Form 3. What form it transferred to the current owner on is irrelevant as to how it will transfer to your FFL. As example if the gun had transferred to the current owner on a Form 3 and then he gave up his SOT last year, it would need to go to your FFL on a tax paid Form 4. Conversely (and what appears to be your case) the current owner acquired it on a tax paid Form 4, either because he didnt have an FFL/SOT at the time or he bought it locally from the previous owner who was also not a FFL/SOT. (Form 3s are only for transfers when both the transferee and transferor are both FFL/SOTs.) So it would be Out of State FFL/SOT -> Form 3 to your FFL/SOT -> Tax Paid Form 4 to your Gun Trust. Your other example, assuming you get a C&R FFL and the gun in question is C&R eligible would be for the current FFL/SOT to transfer the gun directly to you via a tax paid Form 4. You would then transfer the gun from yourself (as an C&R Licensed Individual) to your Gun Trust via another Tax Paid Form 4. My personal take is the best option is to have the current FFL/SOT owner E-Form 3 it to your FFL/SOT which is going to take probably less than a week and then transfer it to your Gun Trust directly via a Form 4 which is going to take 8 to 12 months. Plus you will get the gun to you locally at your FFL for you to inspect, etc. in days vs. months. vs. paying for the gun now and not seeing it for up to a year. The other C&R license direct Form 4 option is going to take pretty much just as long as that initial out of State Form 4 to your C&R license will take 8 to 12 months and have you pay two transfer taxes in the process to bounce it through you first and then to your Gun Trust. I guess technically this option may save you a few days not waiting on a Form 3 to clear. However if I had the choice of waiting 1 week for the Form 3 to my local dealer and then 10 months to me....or.... leaving the gun with the seller for 10 months waiting a C&R eligible Form 4 transfer to me, I always want to get the gun to my dealer ASAP who I trust and where I can inspect the gun for issues right away vs finding out about a problem January next year. Hope this helps.
  7. WTS Belt-Fed MK46 M249 $7850 (only one left)

    Unless somebody out there has a determination letter from the BATFE in their pocket and isn't publishing it, than my take is that ultimately nobody really knows where the BATFE stands in regards to these MGA guns when combined with an transferable HK Sear. Apparently even the manufacturer claims to not even really know. As already mentioned, the historical precedent from the BATFE tech branch is that they have taken a dim view of putting a conversion sears into a firearm that they deem “outside” of the family it was intended for or using a registered receiver as a conversion device on another firearm. The industry has many historical examples of denials by the BATFE of these types of host/sear/receiver combination requests However, the BATFE has also published some letters seemingly to the contrary stating a DIAS can go into a LE901 or a AUG Sear could “maybe” go into a PS90. In this specific use case the purchaser of one of these MGA guns is taking on all the risk at both a financial level (purchasing an $8K host gun that could become an expensive semi-auto wall hanger if an unfavorable ruling publically came to light) as well as the legal ramifications if caught and prosecuted. This is why many transferable sear owners are extremely skeptical of purchasing these guns to use as a HK Sear Host. The folks in the best position to clear this up in my estimation is the manufacturer (MGA) They know the detailed mechanics of the gun, have dealt with the ATF on approval for the semi auto host classification, are FFL/SOTs, and could easily send in an example host gun with an HK sear installed with a request for a determination. MGA are also the ones with the most to gain financially should they take the steps to clear up this issue with an ultimately positive outcome. If MGAs determination request was denied the next step should they choose to fight the ruling would be a court case. This is something that to the best of my knowledge nobody has really cared to invest the time and money to fight the BATFE on one of these “sear outside the family” type of rulings.
  8. WTS Belt-Fed MK46 M249 $7850 (only one left)

    I don’t think anybody in the NFA community doubts that a Fleming style HK conversion sear could be mechanically installed onto an MGA MK46 Semi-Auto Host gun and convert it into a machinegun. However, the general consensus within the HK collecting community, (based on numerous historical BATFE Technical Branch letters) is that “Transferable” machinegun conversion sears can only be used within the firearm host family they were originally designed for. In this particular case, transferable HK conversion sears are believed to be legally limited to HK 9X “style” roller-locked hosts per BATFE historical precedent, unless permission is otherwise specified. Without clear documentation that this sear/host combination is legal and that no post-sample machinegun is created in the process, most transferable HK conversion sear and box owners (whom are also not current FFL/SOTs) are skeptical of the legality of this arrangement. My impression is that you would sell a boatload of your semi-auto M249/MK46 guns if your company obtained a BATFE Tech Branch determination letter, clearly stating that transferable HK conversion sears (or boxes) could legally be used in conjunction with MGA belt-fed host guns. I know I would buy one if I knew for sure it the arrangement was legal. Hope this helps answer your question