Is it still C&R if it has a new stock?

[Backon4]

Bought a mosin and an ATI stock, Will this still be C&R? Plan on getting another in better condition to let sit for a while. Just wanted to make a pig gun with this one.

[xd shooter]

I would think since it is not in original condition that is is no longer C&R.

Where are you hunting? Need some help??

[Garufa]

With the ATI stock, no longer C&R. If the stock was a new "replacement" made to the original design it would not affect status.

ATF Online - Firearms - Frequently Asked Questions - Curios & Relics

[DaveTN]

From the ATF...

Q: What modifications can be made on C&R firearms without changing their C&R classification?

The definition for curio or relic (“C & R”) firearms found in 27 CFR § 478.11 does not specifically state that a firearm must be in its original condition to be classified as a C&R firearm. However, ATF Ruling 85-10, which discusses the importation of military C&R firearms, notes that they must be in original configuration and adds that a receiver is not a C&R item. Combining this ruling and the definition of C&R firearms, the Firearms Technology Branch (FTB) has concluded that a firearm must be in its original condition to be considered a C&R weapon.

It is also the opinion of FTB, however, that a minor change such as the addition of scope mounts, non-original sights, or sling swivels would not remove a firearm from its original condition. Moreover, we have determined that replacing particular firearms parts with new parts that are made to the original design would also be acceptable-for example, replacing a cracked M1 Grand stock with a new wooden stock of the same design, but replacing the original firearm stock with a plastic stock would change its classification as a C&R item.

Edited November 24, 2010 by DaveTN
Beat to the punch. I obviously haven’t had as much coffee as Garufa yet.

[DMark]

Interesting how the Firearms Technology Branch of the ATF can take a regulation about the importation of military C&R firearms and then somehow apply it to a U.S. made weapon already in the country (the M1 example).

[Backon4]

Well here is a pic of it anyway. Either way I like it and it's gonna stay.

This is my PIG SLAYER

[/url

No hunting for me yet but plan on giving it a try next year. Only hunting I've done is squirrel and that was 20+ years ago.

[DaveTN]

Interesting how the Firearms Technology Branch of the ATF can take a regulation about the importation of military C&R firearms and then somehow apply it to a U.S. made weapon already in the country (the M1 example).

An M1 Grand must be an import; because it wasn’t made here.

[Guest mr_b8908]

An M1 Grand must be an import; because it wasn’t made here.

M1 Garands/Carbines were made here, but they were exported in large numbers to allied countries as aid and then imported to sale on the civilia market by the CMP and other importers. Although there ware some M1's that were made by Beretta I believe.

[DaveTN]

M1 Garands/Carbines were made here, but they were exported in large numbers to allied countries as aid and then imported to sale on the civilia market by the CMP and other importers. Although there ware some M1's that were made by Beretta I believe.

Sorry I was being facetious. Even though the rifle name is commonly mispronounced there is no “M1 Grandâ€. I found it amusing that the ATF was making rules about rifles that they can’t even spell the names of properly.

[kb4ns]

Another thing I'll throw in here. If you have a C&R gun that you modify (i.e. replace stock with a synthetic one) and it loses its C&R status, you HAVE TO LOG IT OUT of your bound book. I was curious about that a couple of years back and wrote the ATF Firearms Technology Branch for clarification. If anyone is really curious, PM me and I can dig the letter out and scan it.

[1gewehr]

Firearms Technology Branch is full of it, again. The section of law defining a C&R is in the same section of law which defines a firearm as being the 'frame or receiver'. The rules on importation are in an entirely different section of Federal code and have no impact on firearms that are already in the US. ATF is wrong on this, but won't admit it. Also, keep in mind that an ATF opinion or ruling is NOT the law.

This is not the first time that ATF has doen something like this. You might have heard that 'once a machine gun, always a machine gun'. Again, total legal garbage. ATF still tries to use this in court, but has yet to win a case with that argument. If it cannot fire two or more shots with a single function of the trigger, or be readily converted to do so, it is NOT a machine gun, regardless of past history.

I could go on with other examples, as well.

[Guest HvyMtl]

So. If I replace the stock, it is not C&R, but if the Russian Arsenal did, it still is...

How about this? If I replace the stock, then just before I sell it, replace the original stock: Is it still C&R, or due to the act of stock replacement, it is not?

Or if I just temporarily replace the stock and swap original to new and back?

Sounds like a poor BATFE decision.

[Guest mr_b8908]

So. If I replace the stock, it is not C&R, but if the Russian Arsenal did, it still is...

How about this? If I replace the stock, then just before I sell it, replace the original stock: Is it still C&R, or due to the act of stock replacement, it is not?

Or if I just temporarily replace the stock and swap original to new and back?

Sounds like a poor BATFE decision.

They are just trying to weed out the tacti-cool sks's etc with all of the "cool" add-ons from being sold as C&R, but if it is in an "original" configuration it can be sold as C&R. It sounds like they are trying to say something similar to the good ole' motto, "Once a machine gun always a machine gun." If it is conerted back to

original configuration it can be sold as a C&R

[Guest tommy_marise]

The gun itself is still old right?