Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

Comments

15 comments

Date Votes
  • JudgeColt
    First of all, all Colt receivers are forged, not cast (a caste is social class in India). Second, it is illegal to build a rifle in pre-ban configuration now, no matter when the receiver and parts were made. The complete rifle in pre-ban configuration had to have been in existance on 9-13-94, and has to have remained complete since then in order to be legal now. If the receiver and the forbidden parts are ever separated, the receiver loses its "grandfathered" status.

    However, this receiver MAY be an exception. (Do NOT rely on my speculation about its legality.) I believe this particular lower will generate some debate as to whether it has lost its pre-ban character because, as it exists right now, it has two of the forbidden features, the "conspicious pistol grip" and the "collapsible stock." Those two features are two of the characteristics that define an "assault weapon." They do not have to be added to this receiver (assuming the collapsible stock was on this receiver on 9-13-94.) to make it into an "assault weapon." In the common case, a bare receiver made before 9-13-94 exists and someone wants to add two or more of the forbidden features to it, which clearly constitutes manufacture of a "assault weapon" as the (silly) law is being interpreted.

    What do you think assault weapons law experts?

    As a practical matter, you can buy a complete pre-ban SP1 Colt for not too much more and eliminate the problem. Unless you already have the complete upper, the cost of adding a pre-ban upper assembly to the cost of this receiver will put you about at where SP1 Colts sell.
    0
  • snarlgard
    it certinaly looks like an sp1
    dont forget to use triangular handgards on the upper
    with the extendable buttstock it should be considered preban
    but you might want to check up on the law just to make certian

    SMILE...MAKE EM WONDER WHAT YOUR UP TO
    0
  • bama55
    Snarlguard-

    Brain fade has kicked in, but didn't the Colt SP-1 Shorty's
    come with round handguards? I do remember seeing photo's of
    shorty's in military use with triangular handguards, but not
    the civilian model.

    Don't send flowers when I die. Send money now, I can buy more ammo.
    0
  • snarlgard
    dont know about the shortys but the 16" and above had the trangular handguards

    SMILE...MAKE EM WONDER WHAT YOUR UP TO
    0
  • bama55
    I have a 20" with tri handguards, but seems I recall a friend had
    a SP-1 16" with round handguards back in the late 70's. I know I
    looked for the short tri handguards around 1991 for a Oly 16" I had
    and couldn't find any. Like I said "brain fade has set in".

    Don't send flowers when I die. Send money now, I can buy more ammo.
    0
  • nmyers
    JudgeColt gave an excellent explanation of illegal SAW's and how they can be grandfathered. The questions & answers on pages 145-146 of Federal Firearms Regulations Reference Guide (ATF 5300.4) indicate to me that this particular receiver has lost its "grandfathered" status, and it would be illegal to assemble it to pre-ban configuration.

    Of course, the logic of doing this project eludes me. Why would you want to put $1,500-2,000 into a rifle that is 1) illegal, and 2) a mixed-parts mongrel? There is no intrinsic value to a flash hider, bayonet lug, and collapsible stock; the real value of preban guns to collectors is that they were legally assembled BY THE MANUFACTURER before the ban. Those people who buy/assemble mixed-parts mongrels for big bucks will soon learn that they wasted their money.

    Does BATF have teams out there looking for preban violations? Not likely. But, what's the point of assembling a mongrel that doesn't really do anything for you? For that same $990+, you can buy a brand new in-the-box postban that you can have pride in and which will give you a lifetime of good shooting.

    I also question why a lower that is supposed to have only a few rounds fired through it is missing its upper. That bothers me, and I would be reluctant to buy it without a good explanation.

    Neal
    0
  • JudgeColt
    Neal, I did a little checking for the source you mention, and could not find it. (I did not take much time.) I did run onto a statement saying that a receiver cannot be a SAW because it does not possess the requisite forbidden features. This one does by virtue of the pistol grip and collapsible stock.

    Could you give a link or better ideintification of the language you use to interpret that this lower cannot be assembled into a complete rifle now? (I tend to agree that it cannot, but am not sure and cannot cite the song and verse.)
    0
  • kimberkid
    I could be mistaken, but I thought all the SporterII's had the mag release fence and sear block ... something about this ad doesn't seem right. Also I copied the pic into a graphics program, it has been altered at least with a "blur", however you can make out a "2" in the model line like would be consistant with "A-2" ... not Sporter II ... I tend to beleive this item is being mis-repersented, but could be wrong ... still, there are a few complete SP1's up for auction in the $1000-$1200 range ...

    ======================================================
    Just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you!kimberkid@gunbroker.zzn.com
    0
  • nmyers
    Government lawyers aren't any smarter than us, and often don't understand the regs as well as we do. But, they have unlimited time and manpower, so it's pretty rare for us to win arguments against them.

    My belief that assembling the listed lower to preban configuration is not legal is based on FFRRG (ATF P5300.4) p 146 O10:
    "If a person is in possession of a frame or receiver for semiautomatic assault weapon on the date of enactment, may the person acquire the rest of the parts and assemble a complete semiautomatic assault weapon?]
    No. It is unlawful to make such a weapon after the law's effective date."

    If the Judge means that this firearm is already "made", and thus grandfathered, that may be so. I'm sure ATF would argue that since it is obviously not complete, as documented by the auction listing, completing it would "making it" in violation of the law. It could go either way; I just wouldn't want to be standing in a federal court with my freedom on the line hoping that my lawyer could out-argue the prosecution team.

    Remember ATF's unofficial motto: "Arrest now, litigate later."

    Neal
    0
  • v35
    I believe a s/n check would show the receiver was sold as a complete gun. That it was taken apart for cleaning or storage and reassembled at a later date, maybe with custom parts should be outside the intent of the restrictions. This receiver was a complete "Assault Rifle" before the cutoff date so who is to say the existing COLT preban upper is not the original. If not, so what.
    In any event, the marginal utility of a bayonet stud and flash hider is not worth the premium.
    At that price, it's an Untouchable Caste, forged or not.
    0
  • gmccon
    Actually guys, here's the link I meant to post. I know all Colts are forged. Now that I look at this one again, it appears forged: http://www.gunbroker.com/auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=4932958

    I have a couple prebans. One was NIB, the other was old and all original. Can I send the older one off to Fulton-Armory.com (http://www.fulton-armory.com/M16Parts2.htm), for example, and have them go through the gun as they advertise they will do, and upgrade any and all parts, as necessary, including my upper receiver, etc.?

    greg

    be ready
    0
  • JudgeColt
    The reason "so what" is not a good answer in regard to this incomplete lower is because assembling this lower into a complete rifle now may be (probably is) a major crime. It makes no difference whether it was a complete rifle when it left Colt. (I think it had to be because I do not believe Colt sold just lowers at that time, but one never says never with Colt.) It has now been separated from the components that make it a complete rifle, and it cannot now legally be returned to pre-ban status.

    While a bayonet lug may have no practical value, it is one of the "forbidden" features that signify a pre-ban rifle. To many, myself included, that is the key, not the lug itself. Pre-ban rifles have extra collector value, and one can modify them with other forbidden features without breaking the silly law.

    KK, when the A2 Sporter was introduced, it did not have the fence, nor was it blocked. That came later. There used to be a site that had a chart with all the variations on it, but my link to it fails when I try it.

    I agree, this lower is now of the Untouchable Caste, unless it is cheap enough to make it really economical to build a post-ban rifle on it.
    0
  • gmccon
    Then why all the preban lowers out there for $1K plus?

    be ready
    0
  • nmyers
    Greg, I looked at the link to the other lower, but the comments given above about legality & excessively high price still apply.

    Don't worry about "forged" or "cast": the AR lower is not a stressed part, so the method used to make it is not nearly as important as the quality and reputation of the manufacturer.

    I don't understand where you are going with this talk about sending a valuable preban rifle to an armorer for "update". Your rifles are fine as is. Any "update" would destroy the collector value, not to mention > $1,000 of your money. As a rule, people only send out an AR for an "update" if 1) the upper is shot out, or 2) they want to accurize it for match shooting.

    Neal
    0
  • boeboe
    I believe that it only takes two qualifying assault weapons evil features (along with the ability to accept detatchable mags) to qualify a rifle as an assault rifle. This has two, which is all that is needed. Assuming it really was assembled in assault weapon configuration prior to the ban, it should be legal as an assault weapon now.

    It only take TWO of the following, plus the ability to accept detatchable mags:

    Bayonet Lug
    Pistol Grip
    Grenade Launcher
    Folding/Collapsible Stock
    Flash Hider, or a threaded barrel able to accept one.

    This now has tow of these items, if it existed like this (or similar assault weapon configuration) before the ban, it's good now.

    Example: You cannot fine a rifle made now with tow of these features. Springfield Armory removed the bayonet lug on the M1a and left the flash hider. The AK 47's now made just have a pistol grip, that's all.

    Having said that, I think the price is rediculously high. I'd find a nice, complete AR15 clone in true assault weapon configuration that was really MIL-SPEC compatable for that kind of money.

    To err is human, to moo is bovine.
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity

Didn’t find what you’re looking for?