Smith

I know a great Head Hunter here in Nashville. Bryan Jarosemich-  Executive Recruiter at Group II/ President Nashville Office PM and I will give you his details.

[quote name="Jon_L" post="1144887" timestamp="1398962081"]Has anyone heard of the Manticore Nightbrake Muzzle compensator? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Io2wilwieY0&src_vid=XHgtv2X9RvQ&feature=iv&annotation_id=annotation_877655[/quote] Manticore is a great company. The NightBrake is highly regarded by the AK pistol crowd where recoil manageability is needed. I have run them on several AK pistols and they flat out work.

I've ordered several things from them over the years and never had a problem.

Love the Uzi. I'd really like to get another one.

Here's my latest project while I'm waiting on the Manticore handguard. I gave a shot at the Asura's copy of the Zenit B-10 to see how it would work. I got the Asura becasue i didn't want to spend on the real one without knowing if it were even possible. Let's just say it doesn't fit with out a good deal of work. While this one "fits" I could do a lot better on a second attempt now that I know all the parts that have to be modified. Top is an old beat up Yugo handguard that I painted to match to see if i liked it. BTW - the handguard itself is a very well made copy of the Zenit for less. I love the ergonomics. It is very thin and handles well. The light rail on the side is a bit out of spec. The gaps are too narrow, but a little file work can fix that. i suspect that the Zenit rail would not have this problem.

I personally like the DPMS Levang comp. It works really well and doesn't cost a fortune. The Kaw is similar but I haven't tried it.

Sure send me a pm

We'll got mine and I really like it. Mine did not have the "See All" in the optic view. Just the triangle and line. Unfortunately, the way the mount works by sliding into the rail won't work with my m92 since the rail is blocked on the ends. So, if someone wants to try it out let me know as I don't have anything to put it on. Otherwise, I think it would be a great light weight optic.

Could you get a picture of how much you removed?

Send me a PM and I'll get you hooked up at The Standard. It's my families.  http://www.smithhousenashville.com/ I can probably arrange you guys to get in the private cigar club and a few other niceties. Won't get any nicer or more exclusive in downtown. Beats all the other high end places year after year as the go to high end exclusive restaurant.

I hear what you're saying, but I'm figuring these are like super iron sights and if I can't see iron sights I wouldn't see these. I also figure if I can't see iron sights I can't see the target so I don't really have a problem with that aspect. I'm also assuming that if I'm clearing the house with a flashlight, I'm point shooting anyway so it's a mute point IMO.    I guess they could insert a tritium vial like on the TFO's on future models and it would light up for those low light scenario's.   Either way since I have never shot in total darkness, don't plan to, and am a huge fan of FO, I think I will like this for my M92.

Well, I grabbed one to try on the m92 pap. Running a Fastfire 3 on it atm. I think this idea may work.

Yep, Apex or Robertrtg. Might even want to call them if they don't have one listed. They'll know where one is, if it is available.

It's not unclear, but I believe we were trying to answer a question not be ATF legal experts. In regards to the OP's question he could assemble the barrel as long as he left the stock off and didn't have it laying around without a legal purpose and be fine, which was his question. Why is that so unclear? ;)

Correct as long as it is not assembled in violation of NFA rules. So, configuration not possession is still the determining factor? So in the case of the OP as long as the stock is not assembled then he arguably has a pistol? When his paperwork comes back he can then assemble the stock and have an SBR.

The last ATF letter I read said that the interpretation was based only on configured guns, so that in the case of the Thompson Center parts alone were not currently deemed constructive intent. I know that was the long standing interpretation, but I believe it was modified. I'll have to find the letter. 

So, yeah that's clear ;)

What did you not like about the TFO's. I love those sights.

If I'm not mistaken you could assemble the whole front end and leave the back end or put a pistol rear trunnion in and then change it out later. There is no longer the "constructive intent" interpreted like it was before the Thomspon clarifications. I believe they look at as configured.

This. I think it's just part of the growing process. It definitely is different from when it was smaller and everyone knew everyone. Now it's hard to joke with folks or be humorously politically incorrect without people getting bent out of shape or taking things too seriously. There's are benefits and drawbacks to both, but I do miss the former.

http://youtu.be/wNRFumI2ch0

Depending on conditions, it is an excellent canoeing river. Grew up on that river and it still holds a lot of memories for me.

This is about the best comparison I I've ever seen. In most of the objective test I've read the Battle Comp is much hype, big price, and poor performance. I really like the YHM 5C2. http://vuurwapenblog.com/2013/10/03/ar15-muzzle-brakeflash-hidercompensator-comparison-part-1/

Have you thought about a Fastfire III or is the ckeek weld too high?

add me to #12