Jump to content

jjrphs

Seaman
  • Posts

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

jjrphs last won the day on October 23 2023

jjrphs had the most liked content!

Reputation

9 Neutral

About jjrphs

Personal Information

  • City and State
    Emerald City, OZ

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'm a little late to your query... Gary's Bunker in North Royalton, OH picked up where M60Joe left off and has the setup / tooling to do the barrel work you're wanting without popping the barrel out of the receiver...saving both money and time. I can personally vouch that Gary's work is top notch. He can be reached through his website GARY'S BUNKER
  2. Geoff Herring made some "nutsack" lowers years ago when he was 1st developing the Shrike upper. He did not release any of those lowers that I'm aware of, IIRC for fear that ATF would view these "nutsack" lowers as just a fire-control / grip assembly and not a "receiver" like a standard AR15/M16 lower. From what I recall, Geoff's rationale for not selling "nutsack" lowers was that, with his upper in combination with "just a grip frame" (no feed portal / magazine well to feed the Shrike upper), ATF would then rule the Shrike upper as a Title 1 firearm. To my knowledge Geoff still will not offer a "nutsack" lower. What's at stake if ATF were to re-classify the MCR / Shrike upper as a Title 1 firearm? IMO, at stake are these uppers falling down the same "rabbit hole" as BRP's XMG upper, where ATF has indicated in writing that using an XMG in conjunction with a Lightning Link, RDIAS or RR M16 magically turns it into a Post Sample. That ruling killed the XMG and another avenue of versatility for transferable M16 owners. It would probably do same to the "Shrike" upper. Some have already gone down this road with (RDIAS or Lightening Links) and some of the single-shot lowers that were produced in the past (myself included). From what I've seen, most have kept their projects pretty low key and under the radar. I have personally never posted pics of my setup on the interwebs for the above reasons. It would probably be smart to do same with this project, lest we risk another XMG-type ruling.
  3. FYI...there are several Serbu S/S's on GunBroker for sale
  4. Just curious, what is your basis for this statement? I've known and done business with Ruben for more than a couple decades and I've never heard this. My understanding is Ruben doesn't list anything until it's in his physical possession. Other vendors, to their own admission, such as Midwest Tactical on the other hand, do in fact broker and list machine guns not in stock / their possession.
  5. A few days over 4 months. I was not happy, but the examiner assured me the transfer would be approved upon their return, so there is that.
  6. Just wanted to post a data point on my Form 4 to a Dealer which was just kicked back. ATF's current Form 4 .pdf is editable and the platform I use for the few transfers I do. I recently (well, back in August) sold an item to an out of state individual. In filling out ATF's editable Form 4, I used the electronic signature function embedded in the form, just as I had on a couple other past transfers. Much to my surprise, I receive both copies of the Form 4 back with an error letter stating the forms had not been signed. I finally get the examiner on the phone and explain to her the electronic signature function is an option in ATF's own editable .pdf form, and that my two previous transfers with electronic signatures went through fine. No dice says my she-examiner. Apparently and according to her, electronic signatures are only accepted on eForms and it must be a facsimile of the transferor's real signature. Not a digital block-letter signature stamp. So, if you're using the ATF's editable Form 4 .pdf, you run the risk of having your form kicked back if you don't put an ink signature on it.
  7. Someone sure is Hell-Bent on being a test case!
  8. Correct. Whether the Uzi was shipped Registered mail or Priority Mail by a 3rd party as Rory stated, there's no way the cost was $200. It would be really dumb to ship via Priority Mail with a $5k upper limit on coverage for a higher cost. I've shipped Registered Mail many times for items insured for double the value of that Uzi and the total cost was in $75 neighborhood. That's been a while and rates may have gone up a bit, but not $200. Maybe the 3rd party kept the difference. Regardless, I'd be a little miffed on the $$ and the principle were I the buyer.
  9. I read this as an impatient 1st time newbie complaining about a veteran user/owner not doing all in his power to prevent 1st time buyer's snowflake from melting. It appears pretty much all the complaints were answered. Yes, snowflake, you need an extra top cover. Yes, snowflake, unless the seller is a liar, you got the other mags before you made your post. Yes, snowflake, if you run crap ammo, you'll get crap results. The only issue I don't understand is the shipping. Did the seller charge the buyer $200 for overnight shipping and then ship registered mail and derived a substantial discount on shipping that wasn't passed along? If so, the seller needs to sack-up and refund the buyer the difference.
  10. I assume you're looking for a Colt 4-way kit. DPMS also made a 4-way kit. Colt 4-Way Kit on GB Colt 4-Way Kit by Specialized Armament
  11. jjrphs

    Item sold

    What is the model designation listed in box 4d? Thanks in advance
  12. Who is the manufacturer listed on the form of your HK sears? Can you post pics of the sears themselves?
  13. Sorry guy...but you don't know what in the h*ll you're talking about. Do yourself a favor and read Tom Hoel's "THE MECHANICS OF THE HECKLER & KOCH NFA CONVERSIONS" from Small Arms Reveiw. It's not hard to find and it will help you understand HK conversions. IIRC...Hoel wrote a similar piece on Uzis as well...I suggest you read that one too. Good luck.
  14. The sear you reference is a "trigger" sear, of course...found in every HK 9x firearm (semis, sear guns, factory full autos etc. etc. etc.) The unserialized full auto conversion sear can be clearly seen in pics 5 & 6, installed in the pack. It is of the variety where the trip is integral to the full auto sear...several makers made their conversion sears this way back in the day to include HTA, Ciener and David's Gun Room. The OP would need to clarify his pics, but I suspect some of the parts you question are extras or spares. The point is with a Registered Receiver with clip-on lower, the BATF considers the unserialized full auto sear a conversion device in and of itself...and cannot be separated from the registered receiver...just like a unserialized slotted bolt can't be separated from its RR Uzi. Thus, it's permanently married to the gun...unlike a registered (Fleming, Qualified or S&H) sear which is "married" to an unregistered short bbl'd host which can be divorced, once the short bbl'd host is registered. No play on words.
  15. You both would be wrong. The receiver is the registered component, correct...but without alteration. The gun's conversion to full auto is accomplished via a non-serialized conversion sear. And yes, that non-serialized conversion sear is permanently married to the receiver...married to that unaltered receiver in exactly the same way a slotted conversion bolt is married to a registered receiver Uzi.
×
×
  • Create New...