To SBR or not SBR, that is the question

[Dolomite_supafly]

So I recently purchased a M85 "Krinkov" pistol. I have had it less than a week and I am already getting the urge to SBR it like a real Krinkov should be.

It seems like the best of all worlds because it is chambered in 223 so I can reload if need be and no import ban will ever affect 223 availability. I am also seriously considering building a barrel in 300BO so I can suppress it.

I will have a folding buffer tube setup done this week and considering a Sig brace in the interim but that is a lot of cost for a gun that will be a SBR. The Sig brace works great for a stock but does not look the part.

I am just trying to figure out a reason not to SBR it. And then the other question is whether to do a trust or not.

Edited July 28, 2014 by Dolomite_supafly

[jcluff]

Does the krinkov screw up the brass on ejection? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[JeffL]

I'd only SBR it if I could put a correct folding triangle stock on it. Really that would be the only reason I'd buy one.

[Dolomite_supafly]

Manticore makes a very, very nice stock that mimics the Krinkov.

 

The Manticore is on the top and an original Krinkov on the bottom.

This picture was pulled from here:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_2_611/245372_Manticore_triangle_stock_vs_a_krink_stock____side_by_side_pics_.html

And there are plenty of other comparison photos. For the money the Manticore cannot be beat.

 

My gun does not ding the brass at all.

[JeffL]

Guess that settles it then. John Wells is very reasonable on his prices for setting up a trust. I'm hoping to get my first stamp (Form 1 SBR) within a month or two.

[reed1285]

DO IT!! you can also buy a real krink parts kit. GB usually has a few listed. I want to do this eventually one day myself. 

[Dolomite_supafly]

Why buy a real kit when I have a gun that works 100% now and only needs a $160 stock to play the part.

 

Edited July 28, 2014 by Dolomite_supafly

[reed1285]

Crap, lost my train of thought for a minute! for some reason I had building one on my brain.

Edited July 28, 2014 by reed1285

[John Wells]

That does look pretty sweet.  I agree with your thought that the sig brace would look out of place.  Let me know if you have questions on to trust or not to trust (form1 is back online for e-file).

[Dolomite_supafly]

I do have a question.

 

I do have a trust and I am looking for someone to review it. How much would you charge to review the trust?

[Rock Nova]

I would SBR it. I have an M92 that I bought for the sole purpose of SBRing. I went with the CNC Warrior M92 carbine. They weld on a fake can to make it legal, attach a folding stock (I went the M4 stock route because I'm in love with the B5 Bravo) and make it 922r compliant. As soon as it gets approved, I'll just cut the pin weld on the fake can and attach a muzzle device and it will be done.

[Oh Shoot]

I would SBR it. I have an M92 that I bought for the sole purpose of SBRing. I went with the CNC Warrior M92 carbine. They weld on a fake can to make it legal, attach a folding stock (I went the M4 stock route because I'm in love with the B5 Bravo) and make it 922r compliant. As soon as it gets approved, I'll just cut the pin weld on the fake can and attach a muzzle device and it will be done.

 

Really? If  you make it a rifle after import, it is same as for original import rules for rifles then? I've seen no mention of that from all the folks who have SBR'd them on other forums?

 

Meaning, it was my understanding that it doesn't matter what you do to a pistol after the fact of retail sale, since the pistol was not subject to 922r in the first place.

 

- OS

Edited August 5, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[R1100R]

I would SBR it. I have an M92 that I bought for the sole purpose of SBRing. I went with the CNC Warrior M92 carbine. They weld on a fake can to make it legal, attach a folding stock (I went the M4 stock route because I'm in love with the B5 Bravo) and make it 922r compliant. As soon as it gets approved, I'll just cut the pin weld on the fake can and attach a muzzle device and it will be done.

 

 

This is the route I went also. The Bonesteel stock is nice. CNC did all the work, so it is 922r compliant.

 

I'm also going to be calling Mr. Wells soon to set up a trust. I want to SBR my M92 and get a .22 silencer.

Edited August 5, 2014 by R1100R

[Rock Nova]

Really? If  you make it a rifle after import, it is same as for original import rules for rifles then? I've seen no mention of that from all the folks who have SBR'd them on other forums?

 

Meaning, it was my understanding that it doesn't matter what you do to a pistol after the fact of retail sale, since the pistol was not subject to 922r in the first place.

 

- OS

My understanding was that 922r applied to all imported center fire rifles and once you SBR that pistol, it is no longer a pistol as you have made a rifle as the Form 1 is an "Application to Make and Register a Firearm".

 

But I could be wrong. And I would have probably swapped out the trigger to the Tapco G2 anyway and so the CNC Warrior piston is just a bonus to me.

Edited August 5, 2014 by Rock Nova

[Oh Shoot]

My understanding was that 922r applied to all imported center fire rifles and once you SBR that pistol, it is no longer a pistol as you have made a rifle as the Form 1 is an "Application to Make and Register a Firearm".

 

But I could be wrong. And I would have probably swapped out the trigger to the Tapco G2 anyway and so the CNC Warrior piston is just a bonus to me.

 

After looking around a bit, seems rather a 50/50 question. Apparently ATF has never issued a clear cut ruling or letter about whether 922r applies to a pistol converted to rifle (whether an SBR or non-NFA rifle config), and conflicting gray letters exist that seem to support both sides.

 

Every time I think I might want to SBR something, I just read a discussion or two about all the intricacies and limitations both before and after, and I forget about it again. :)

 

The SIG brace is heaven sent for very very close to the same end result and no limitations how it's used, stored, lent, or inherited, etc,  and no limitations on where you take it either. Plus 200 clams for a long wait avoided from the gitgo.

 

- OS

Edited August 5, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[Dolomite_supafly]

Somewhere on the internet there is an opinion by the ATF that states once a firearm becomes a NFA item it no longer needs to meet 922r compliance.

[hipower]

After looking around a bit, seems rather a 50/50 question. Apparently ATF has never issued a clear cut ruling or letter about whether 922r applies to a pistol converted to rifle (whether an SBR or non-NFA rifle config), and conflicting gray letters exist that seem to support both sides.
 
Every time I think I might want to SBR something, I just read a discussion or two about all the intricacies and limitations both before and after, and I forget about it again. :)
 
The SIG brace is heaven sent for very very close to the same end result and no limitations how it's used, stored, lent, or inherited, etc,  and no limitations on where you take it either. Plus 200 clams for a long wait avoided from the gitgo.
 
- OS

Damn I really hate to agree with you, Oh Shoot; (LOL) but that's the conclusion I'm coming to as well. These Arm Braces are really pretty stiff and sturdy, especially with the Velcro strap cinched in tightly.

I've really wanted to do an SBR rifle, but it looks like I'm just too cheap to do it. And I hated the wait on my can.

[Twitch]

After looking around a bit, seems rather a 50/50 question. Apparently ATF has never issued a clear cut ruling or letter about whether 922r applies to a pistol converted to rifle (whether an SBR or non-NFA rifle config), and conflicting gray letters exist that seem to support both sides.

 

Every time I think I might want to SBR something, I just read a discussion or two about all the intricacies and limitations both before and after, and I forget about it again. :)

 

The SIG brace is heaven sent for very very close to the same end result and no limitations how it's used, stored, lent, or inherited, etc,  and no limitations on where you take it either. Plus 200 clams for a long wait avoided from the gitgo.

 

- OS

 

Until they change their mind.

 

On the subject of 922r compliance with SBRs imported as pistols, I've seen an opinion from the ATF that it would indeed have to meet the parts requirement (dated 2009).

[Guest ab28]

Yeah, I'd definitely put a stock on it. Not sure why they are considered pistols. It's not a pistol, it's a rifle with the stock removed(or never installed). Guess it's just a purely legal definition, though. 

[Oh Shoot]

On the subject of 922r compliance with SBRs imported as pistols, I've seen an opinion from the ATF that it would indeed have to meet the parts requirement (dated 2009).

 

See whut I mean, Vern? Dol says he's seen the opposite.

 

A simple search on the topic reveals many forum discussions pointing to various letters, none of which I've read seem truly definitive.

 

My fave was some guy who called several different ATF field offices, and got "what's 922r" from them all. :)

 

 

Btw, have decided on KISS treatment on mine. I like the idea of having a very compact .30 caliber bludgeon.

Only things I changed were adding sling adapter and Eclipse flash hider, and blacking out the white stuff on the rear sight.



Admittedly, a stock or brace opens up a whole other level of ergonomics and accuracy though -- and I might have gone full tilt boogie with mods, but I had already scratched that itch with AR pistol.  Ya never know though, I might eventually succumb to it on this puppy too. :)

 

- OS

Edited August 6, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[Dolomite_supafly]

I did some research and there is a 2009 opinion that states you must be in compliance with 922r, even if you are going to SBR. I was reading a previous opinion letter.

 

It isn't that hard to get the correct parts count with these. All I need now is a stock and a use made FCG to meet compliance, even with foreign magazines. Well I just looked and the booster I bought is foreign made so I will have to replace it as well or just make sure to always use US made magazines.

 

Here is the most current letter.

Edited August 7, 2014 by Dolomite_supafly

[Oh Shoot]

Still don't know if that's really definitive about starting with a pistol, though.

 

What about all the NFA registered Glock and Uzi SBRs out there that started as legally imported pistols with no US parts?  Not enough US made parts  to satisfy 922r even exist AFAIK.

 

- OS

[Dolomite_supafly]

I will give the ATF a call.

[Dolomite_supafly]

Called and they said it s a gray area whether a pistol must be 922r compliant after registering as an SBR. They said I would need to write a letter to be 100% positive but they did say they would err on the side of caution and make sure it was 922r compliant because you ARE assembling a firearm that is not able to able to be imported in its configuration as a rifle. So I guess when a person makes a rifle using foreign parts, even if those parts are already a pistol, it must have the parts count for 922r compliance.

 

For me it isn't a big deal. It will add about $30 to the build.

[dcloudy777]

Did you do your own trust or did you pay an attorney?