Any 7"ish plain round pistol tube or even a 6-position tube would be "legal" as I understand it.  When screwed into the receiver it should measure about 6-1/2" from the rear of the receiver to the butt of the buffer tube.  Unless there is a rifle extension on there with a rifle buffer, you should be able to use the existing buffer and spring.  Do you have a pic?

Good bye.

Thanks! I might have one of those lying around in a box. No pics yet. Going to get it this weekend. I'm told it's carbine length gas and H2 buffer w/spring. Has the Spikes extended tube that stops inside at 7.5 inches, The outside is 9 inches or around that I guess.

Page 162. A standard pistol buffer tube 6-6.5". For that, it would have to be from the End-Plate/Castle nut.

Negative. Smooth 6"-6.5" pistol tube only.
No 6 position or any other position adjustable tubes. Any tube that has notches or indents or indexes for "any" adjustable anything that "could" have a shouldering or cheek weld surface added to it is a no go. It can not in anyway have any design features in common with the use of a shouldering surface of any kind.

Serious question, Can you show me that?  Based on 20 + years of AR pistols yes, you can run a naked "carbine" buffer tube. What i have seen in this ruling is yes but no brace or stock around that doesn't have a host to put it on.


Not flaming, just want to see if you've found something I've missed.

Can you point to where it says is has to be a "pistol" tube or are you just regurgitating other's asmmuption that you read on the interwebs?

And where in the document did you read this?  There is no mention of the buffer tube in the compliance criteria.  The only place I see a reference to the buffer tube itself is on page 248 with respect to a suggestion that the cost analysis should have included the cost of replacing the buffer tube:

I know I have posted the following photos several times here on ARFCOM and also over on The High Road forum too. But I will post them again. I measured both a 6 position carbine buffer tube and a smooth pistol buffer tube.

Carbine buffer tube.

Attached File
Attached File


Smooth pistol buffer tube

Attached File
Attached File


Now remember that one can have a different measurement than what I got. This is due to manufacturing tolerances along with tolerance stacking.

The location of the buffer retaining pin can and does vary on lowers which will effect how far a buffer tube needs to be screwed into the receiver.

There is no set industry wide standard for the overall length of smooth buffer tubes.

You can also have a difference in thickness of the end plate which can effect OAL of the buffer tube.

And it has yet to be determined exactly how the ATF is measuring buffer tubes at this time. Are they measuring from the back of the receiver, from the end plate, or from the castle nut?

And as you can see, a 6 position carbine buffer tube is over the stated 6-6 1/2" length no mater how it is measured.

And therein lies the problem. Beyond the somewhat quantifiable barrel length of 16 inches little else is specifically defined by Congress. How this is all not unconstitutional due to vagueness is beyond me. When you are deciding a criminal infraction where tolerance stacking can be an issue you have a problem.

This is what I was referring to in my post on the previous page.  Several of us already have NFA items. This attorney, Tim Forshey, seems to think that if you have your AR pistols in a gun trust you will easily be able to file a Form 1 and register them as SBRs without paying the normal $200 fee.  The fact that he shows his SBR and suppressor makes him seem a little more credible.  Check out the two videos below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yv3fR3H-PbM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIylbzUYZQ8

    The vagueness is by design.  The law is vague and the agency is left to define it in the CFRs.  (Rule making)  even with,90% of comments against it, they went ahead anyway.  The comments are a farce, always have been.
 It's vagueness is a deterent for the law abiding from stepping anywhere near the line.   It gives officer discretion and also plea bargin leverage since it adds to a stack of charges (legitimate or not) and also leaves it up to a judge or jury to decide if it gets pushed.  Sue for false charges, abuse of power?  Laughable unless you have deep pockets, and if you do, they don't usually push it.

 As hard as you may try to abide by the rules, if you are in their sights, you are screwed.  You will be charged with an illegal SBR even if it's a pinned and welded 14.5 barrel, 6 3/8" tube, etc.
  Hell, people have been charged with having an illegal machine gun and supressor for those 22lr MP5 looking rifles.  "Tell it to the judge"  "you shouldn't have something that looks like that so it's your own damn fault" ( cop sentiments)

  They will rake you over the coals and ruin your reputation, ruin you financially, turn friends and family on you, whether they think they can get a conviction or not.  That's how it works.  The message is sent and you are broken.
  What's the conviction rate for the FBI?  45% or something?  If conviction rate was the goal, they'd be much less feared.  
  They convicted a "terrorist" for possessing a machine gun when he was at a range and rented it.  Remember that?  

 I spent a career around this crap. It's all horseshit for sure.  
 Push back is needed, but there is no money in it for lawyers and the Feds know this.  If this rule affected the oil industry, their rollout would have been completely different (very deep pockets)
    So, In the meantime it gives the illusion of them doing something, helps them politically and gets them funding, builds their little agency empires, maybe even an SES spot in the future.  Even though they know it will get struck down later (or maybe not, that's your problem) makes no difference to them, since they'll have moved on by then.

  Comply, don't comply, they don't give a shit. When you get caught up in the net, it won't matter if you did anyway, they'll find something because it'll look bad if they don't.  Avoid the nets.

 I don't care about the nets and efiled for a stribog to see what they say about the foreign made parts issue.  I also filed an 80% AR I built with a brace.  
 The Stribog application sent me the coversheet email for fingerprints and is listed as submitted.  The 80% application got flagged and is "pending review".  I figure that will get rejected.    
 I'll post an update for the morbidly curious.

 

 
 
 

Ask yourself why shotgun barrels can't be 16".

https://www.youtube.com/live/DPCkHpWu3Yo?feature=share

Like porn. Can't define it but I know it when I see it.

You're on it as far as vagueness being governments big weapon. Like I've mentioned with the FAA and its huge book of very technical rules. When asked how many contracts the cut-off is where someone is engaged in private versus common carriage the FAA doesn't specifically say. Big difference in government regulations for the operator hinges on whether it's considered private or common carriage. Big government likes to screw with you whenever they feel like and with unlimited taxpayer funds and vague if any definitions they can do as they please. Of course, the penalties generally don't involve prison like the NFA/ATF dumpster fire.

I cited it in my post, page 162 of the Rule. That came from my notes from reading the whole document last weekend. But you're correct, the page doesn't state "pistol" tube. The example diagram on the page 163 however does, which is what threw me off.

Honestly, the way it is worded and vague can thow anybody off.  Intentionally so I believe.  If you look on page 248 you will see where any standard buffer tube "currently" installed on the pistol can remain.  I was looking specifically for this information but can understand how it could be missed since it is only two sentences and the only place in that 293 page doc where it is addressed.

I have read toil I am blue so I haven’t read this one.

But I have read it doesn’t affect all braces but then they double speak.

Is the Shockwave is it legal or what?

Can you get the free ha ha tax stamp for a home built?
Thanks

I was looking at a MCK, which will likely be considered a SBR once a
pistol is inserted, it does not have a serial number or many identifying markings.

Would owners be required to show a pic of their inserted pistol?

This is going to take a while for everything to get sorted.

Correct.  But I believe the 6 to 6-1/2 inch measurement is intended to remove extended round pistol tubes and rifle receiver extensions from consideration and has nothing to do with 6-pos buffer tubes.

In other news many Sheriffs Departments here in Oklahoma are refusing to enforce the brace rule and in fact the Oklahoma County Sheriff stated:

“To be clear, should any of our deputies come in contact with anyone possessing/ owning any short barreled weapons with a ‘stabilizing brace’ or other rearward attachments, we will take no action, unless the weapon is used in the commission of a crime,”

Good on him.

So...
It has to meet the minimum requirement of 64oz?
My KelTec CP33 is 2lb 6.3oz with the brace, I guess its good to go according to the "Worksheet"? Or am I missing something?
The worksheet says to weigh with accessories removed, they call the brace an accessory on the worksheet, so we weigh without the brace? I need to weigh some other items.

https://www.wsaw.com/2023/01/24/atf-issues-120-day-grace-period-point-system-pistol-braces/

Forget the worksheet. It is not part of the new “rule” they’re scheduled to put out.

The Kel-Tec CP33 does not qualify for the amnesty Form 1 since it does not require a buffer tube to function. The same goes for the Ruger Charger, AK pistols, or any other pistols that does not need a buffer tube to function. This is clearly stated in the  ATF 2021R-08F Factoring Criteria document.

https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/docs/undefined/factoringcriteriaforfirearmswithattachedstabilizingbracespdf/download

And here is a document that gives examples of what the ATF considers a SBR. Which include any pistol that does not require a buffer tube to function that also has a brace attached.

https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/docs/undefined/bracefinalruleguidance-commerciallypdf/download

Except where on page 143 and 144 where it shows buffer tubes that are in common use with pistol braces and states that with these type of extensions....

"The adjustability of an attachment that uses a rifle receiver extension with the ability to lock in various positions provides fixed horizontal support. Horizontal support means that an individual can place pressure on the rear of the device when firing the weapon without the device or attachment sliding forward. This feature is common with adjustable shoulder stocks."

So while the word "plain" is not mentioned, I'd ask myself if the ATF were capable of looking at a tube with the adjustable notches and not try to speculate and insinuate that you might still might be trying to have a brace or stock secretly? Personally, I don't find plain tubes to be that expensive to warrant the chance you get an idiot agent looking at your weapon.

So, if my AK IS less than 64oz?
And anything else that doesn’t use a buffer tube? I didn’t read the 300 pages of BS,but plan to.

Are we supposed to cut off the extension on a S&W M&P15-22?

That is referring to the device attached to a buffer tube and not the tube itself.  From page 248

?   Pretty sure basically nothing in this post is true.    Go to second link.  Go to page 22.  Observe heavy looking SBR AK with folding brace.  It's amnestied if you want to register it.  The amnesty is to cover ATF ass so they can call this their "grandfather" of all the braced firearms they let happen through their own wupsies.   Buffer tube is one form of gun with braces; not the exclusive requirement to be amnestied to have a brace.  Or did I miss something?  Tell you what - show me where I missed the part where they the Foreberance only applies to firearms that rely on a buffer tube to function.  

Short-answer: zip tie an armbrace to any short barreled anything that's rifled that you have, and you're going to get an forebarance stamp for it, if you want.  I'm hoping someone does a Ruger LCP, personally.   I can see the EE posting now:  Short Barrel Rifle Ruger LCP .380 ForSale.  All NFA rules apply.  (No trades please).

Have you read either document that I linked above?

In the end, you can believe me or not along with believing what those documents state.

The following phots are screen shots of the Commercially available firearms equipped with a "stabilizing brace" that are short-barreled rifles* document found here: https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/docs/undefined/bracefinalruleguidance-commerciallypdf/download

Attached File


Attached File


Note that these are just a couple of examples that are shown.

And also read pages 80-81 of the Factoring Criteria document where it talks about AK's and the SB47 brace.

https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/docs/undefined/factoringcriteriaforfirearmswithattachedstabilizingbracespdf/download

I'll leave it to you make your own decisions are ready all 292 pages of the Factoring Criteria document.

This whole post (and ATF's recent documents above) support what @lazyengineer is saying, not what you're saying.

The AK pistols do not need receiver extensions to function.
ATF is saying your braced pistol (of any kind, buffer tube or not) is now becoming a SBR.

ATF basically states you can register any braced pistol that's in your possession (which would include constructive possession) on the date their final rule is published in the Federal Register. Currently that is anticipated to be Tuesday the 31st. From whatever ends up being the publication date, you have 120 days to submit registration, but they seem to already be letting people register.

Realistically, they have no idea what you actually possess braces for. You could register every pistol you have that's got any potential to accept a brace (and maybe some that don't.) You could register stripped receivers. Not that they want you to, but I'm sure somebody is probably even going to register guns that left the factory as rifles. They may not even reject those; who knows?

If it left the factory as a pistol or stripped receiver and there's ever been a brace capable of attaching to it, you'll almost certainly be approved. They're not even asking for photos of the complete firearm.

Good question.  Does the receiver extension contain a spring to manage bolt motion like an AR or is it blocked off and the bolt and spring contained entirely in the receiver?  

Based on the document (one example below,) I'd say you would either need to:

1. register it,
2. cut the extension off (if it's integral with the lower receiver and can't b unscrewed,)
3. replace the short barrel with a 16" barrel.
4. submit the weapon after removing the brace part, to the ATF for a ruling (not clear if you'd get it back after the 120 days expires if they said it was still an SBR(maybe you could still register but would have to pay the tax,)
5. unlikely choice, destroy the weapon.  

The ATF may not be aware of this particular model (until now) and to the casual observer, it would look like an AR pistol if you removed the brace part but relying on ignorance is probably a bad long-term strategy.  

page 107
Even if a weapon is equipped with an accessory, component, or other rearward attachment (e.g.,a “stabilizing brace”) that provides surface area that allows shouldering of the weapon, under the rule, whether the accessory, component, or other rearward attachment is necessary for the cycle of operations needs to be considered in determining whether a firearm is designed, made, and intended to be fired from the shoulder.

You guys are putting an awful lot of faith in an organization that can barely interpret the very rules they write.

Yep, to paraphrase Miranda "anything you publish can, and will, be used against you"

The 120 days is supposed to start on the 30th of January, 2023

This came out of the revised ATF questions and answers concerning the new brace rule.  Just what does it mean if I want to SBR my braced HK SP5, in relationship to 922r?  Do I need American parts or not?

"9. I possess a pistol, which was imported and then subsequently equipped with a stabilizing brace. Does 18 U.S.C.   922(r) apply to my firearm?
No. Section 922(r), in relevant part, makes it unlawful to assemble from imported parts a semiautomatic rifle that is otherwise not importable. The implementing regulations of the GCA at 27 CFR 478.39 provides that a person may not assemble a semiautomatic rifle using more than 10 of the imported parts listed in the relevant paragraphs of the regulation. As discussed in section IV.B.8.e of the final rule, the criminal violation under section 922(r) is for the "assembly" of the semiautomatic rifle; therefore, no modification of such firearm would cure the 922(r) violation because the "assembly" has already occurred. Accordingly, a person with an imported pistol that was subsequently equipped with a "stabilizing brace" will have the same options as anyone else under the final rule. Should that person choose to register the firearm, no further modification of the firearm with domestic parts is required."

Thank the lort. I have a 13" ACE that I SBR'd last year that I was wondering about

just throwing this out... to convert a standard carbine buffer tube... for a no stock attachment tube less than 6 1/2" from end of lower and 6 1/4" from end plate....mill the bottom lug off..... run the castle nut all the way to the end of threads, remove the index lug in the end plate, shorten the threaded end one thread longer than flush with the inside of the receiver,... hand trim length to retain the buffer detent...tighten the castle nut

may need to shorten the buffer itself

waiting for exact maximum buffer tube requirements...

And why do that when a standard 6-position buffer tube is fine as is?

again, I'm looking at options... until I have exact values for allowable length of pull and buffer tube length I wish to take numbers they have actually used rather than comments about  no cost to comply....how is constructive intent not a problem if the bottom lug and adjustment holes are retained?

Nothing wrong with playing it safe until we get more clarifications on how the ATF is measuring buffer tubes, what their max LOP is, or if a carbine buffer tube is okay or not.

In the end, do what you feel comfortable with doing.

Because if you get busted at a drug deal and have a stock or armbrace zipped into the case with it, they will call the 'constructive intent' on the charge pile-on next week.  Otherwise, pretty much no reason to bother - as ATF basically said themselves.