AK Sponsor
Posted: 6/5/2010 2:14:03 PM EDT
|
Don Bell has been sold out on these for a while so I was happy to see one for sale at a local funshow this morning.
Picked the assembly up for $30. Seems complete, and a fair deal at that price point. 'Bout all I can recall about them is they like to mate with plain old muzzle nuts. Does anyone recall how much Don was selling these for ??? Does $25 sound right ??? Also, are there any "issues" one should be aware of prior to mounting on - say - a NHM-90 ??? I've s "slotted" lower forearm 'round here somewhere which I'll be using in conjunction with this clamp on. Gee, should be something like those cheezy neckties we had as kids that don't require any knotting ... |
|
You know, comrades, if Ago-Fidelis had not posted the clink to the GB auction I, your humble servant, would not have believed the price offered and accepted for the item.
Stunning. No, ridiculous is more like it. Thanks guys for the additional poop on my new contraption. I do appreciate it. Best regards. |
|
Thanks, MosterCat, for recalling what Don Bell of Omega was selling these clamp ons for. They have been sold out for a year or so and there can be no new stock thanks to hangups in Washington D.C.
I was thinking they used to be offered for $25. And so was almost relunctant to buy at the proffered $40 price from a very nice man at a local fun show. Yet after chatting with the seller andafter picking the thing up, setting it down, picking it up, the gent offered it for $30. Who would turn that deal down? Thanks all for the input. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
newb question, but isn't it illegal to add a bayonet to a rifle that has never had one? no its ok That depends on when the rifle was imported. Adding one to a rifle imported prior to 11/30/90 does not affect the legality of the rifle. Adding one to a rifle imported after that date requires complying with 922(r) - no more than 10 foreign made parts. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
newb question, but isn't it illegal to add a bayonet to a rifle that has never had one? no its ok That depends on when the rifle was imported. Adding one to a rifle imported prior to 11/30/90 does not affect the legality of the rifle. Adding one to a rifle imported after that date requires complying with 922(r) - no more than 10 foreign made parts. Now that is a new tidbit of info for me. Not doubting it, just wasn't aware of the bayo's place in all of the regulations. I'm familiar with how to gain and maintain 922(r) compliance and which parts count towards the parts count, but not all of the ins and outs surrounding when it is neccessary. So, I take it that if you add any of the "evil" parts that were originally removed to comply with the import regs, you will then need to reach full 922(r) compliance to remain legal? I've always known about this in regard to doing away with the thumbhole stocks but I've never really thought through all of the other implications. Since a bayo isn't on "the list" I never thought about it. I mean, the usual MD, PG, buttstock type of conversion parts are all on "the list" so I've never really considered other parts that could come into play. This would include bayos and/or their lugs, muzzle devices, threaded muzzles, PGs? What am I forgetting, and how does this affect the use of 30 round magazines? My MAKs originally came with the 5 round "sporter" mags, so even though it was not part of the later Hi-Cap magazine ban, was the 5 round "sporter" magazines part of the import regs? If so, does this mean that technically to be legal you could only use them until the rifle was made compliant? I didn't think so before, but now you've thrown me a curve. Damn, and I thought I understood all of this stuff already |
|
Quoted:
Think of it in terms of the "altering the original configuration" concept. I understand what you are saying, but is a clamped on accessory really altering the original configuration? Of course I guess it falls under the "shoulder thing that goes up" category, huh? I guess it's really a moot point anyway since if I were to install a clamp on bayo, it wouldn't to an original configuration MAK anyway. And if I were doing a deban, it would be compliant. This subject just threw me for a curve I guess. |
|
Quoted:
Think of it in terms of the "altering the original configuration" concept. That's it. People get caught up in the "evil features" concept from the AWB, but 922(r) prohibits assembling a rifle that hasn't been approved for importation under the "sporting use" language in the law.Those words were always in the statute, but during the administration of Bush the First (June 1989) the "sporting use" requirement was reinterpreted. Basically, if the rifle can't be imported today you can't build one today with more than 10 foreign parts. Since a rifle with an attached bayonet can't be imported today (unless it's a C&R) you can't add an attached bayonet without comp0lying with 922(r). |
|
Ah, so I guess that explains all of the SKSs I see in shops with no bayo, but with a SKS bayo and attachment bolt lying right beside it.
I just never gave it much thought before this thread came up. I knew all about the other stuff like PG configurations, etc, just never thought about the clamp on bayo being an issue. I'm still a bit confused about the mag issue though. Since the 5 round sporter mags, to my understanding, were part of the importation requirements that also affect the bayo, PG, etc, it would seem to me that the higher capacity, non-sporting mags would sorta be in the same area as the bayo. I mean magazine parts are specifically named in the parts lists used for the 922(r) regs so it would stand to reason that they could be construed to be part of the "assembling" a non-importable rifle definition. Even though 30 round mags were not prohibited at that point, none of the "sporters" imported then came in with them to my knowledge since they were considered to be of a non-sporting nature. |
|
You cannot legally put a large capacity magazine on an SKS that was imported after 11/30/90 without complying with 922 (r).
Of course, because the regulation regarding rifles imported before that date is an exception to the general rule, it's up to you to prove when the rifle was imported. That can be difficult or even impossible in the case of a rifle bought second hand. |
|
Quoted:
You cannot legally put a large capacity magazine on an SKS that was imported after 11/30/90 without complying with 922 (r). Of course, because the regulation regarding rifles imported before that date is an exception to the general rule, it's up to you to prove when the rifle was imported. That can be difficult or even impossible in the case of a rifle bought second hand. Well, I was speaking specifically about the AKs in regard to the mags. I was just referring to the SKSs because I've been seeing them sold with bayos unattached and sitting along side. Si, I just thought this new (to me) info explained it. Sorry for the confusion in my post. I don't own an SKS, but since the original mags aren't really removable, I didn't think it mattered about the SKSs so much anyway. But, if I understand you correctly, wouldn't this really apply to the AK, since you are adding a removeable box magazine that is of a capacity to be considered "non-sporting"? If so, then I've been illegal everytime I've inserted a 30 round mag into my unconverted MAKs, if I ever actually did. That's what confused me. It just seems that if attaching a clamp on bayo required 922 compliance, then a "non-sporting" 30 round mag would as well. Ah hell, I guess it's not that big of a deal in reality, but if I'm understanding this new stuff that I never considered before, it adds a whole new twist on things. I had prreviously only considered such things as going from a thumbhole to a PG configuration and threading the muzzles. |
|
You haven't altered the configuration of a MAK 90 by inserting a standard (20, 30, etc. shot) magazine. It accepted those magazines when it was imported. Since you haven't altered the configuration, you don't need to comply with 922(r).
Again, the key is the configuration in which the rifle was imported. As long as the rifle stays the way it was when it was imported 922(r) does not apply. If the configuration is changed to one which was not approved for importation you cannot assemble it using more than 10 foreign parts on the list. As far as the bayonets for SKSs are concerned, selling them is not prohibited. For a time importing them was legal ,so long as they weren't attached. But installing one on a rifle that was imported without a bayonet attached is prohibited unless you comply with 922(r). |
|
Ah ha, now I think I get it. The thing that had me was that the MAKs were imported with the 5 rd mags so they met the "sporter rifle" definition. That, coupled with the fact that the 922(r) compliance parts list also includes mag parts had me thinking around in circles I suppose. I guess I just had it in my mind that putting a "non-sporting" mag in the rifle changed it, by definition, to a non-sporting firearm, which, in my mind was changing the configuration that allowed it to be imported under the import regulations of the day. Sort of like putting a milsurp, imported mag in a rifle that needs US mag content to comply, it doesn't change the real configuration of the rifle one iota, except where compliance is concerned.
Ah hell, it doesn't matter, I'm limiting the foreign content on all of mine so that they are compliant, no matter how I have them set up or which mags I use. This is why I play it safe, too confusing and I don't want to tempt fate that my understanding and interpretation is wrong or will disagree with an LEO, if it were ever to become an issue for whatever reason. I've never owned an SKS, so I'm not familiar with thier particular complaince issues at all. I just know that I've seen some for sell recently with the bayos installed and others with it included but removed. Never looked into it so was a bit perplexed. ETA: Sorry for the thread Hi-jick. |
|
Guys, unfortunately, sadly, bitterly I have bad news: Omega Weapons Systems (they'ver a website, google it) has been "sold out" on this item for six- to nine months.
As they're ChiCom I wouldn't hold my breath any more will be imported. Give 'em a call at 520/889-8895 for more info. I got lucky and found mine at a local fun show. |
| Keep in mind that locating such bayonets in Hong Kong is one thing, but for sellers to ship from there is extremely risky due to Hong Kong/Chinese postal and Customs authorities. You really roll the dice when spending a great deal of money a bayonet from there. |
|
Quoted:
Keep in mind that locating such bayonets in Hong Kong is one thing, but for sellers to ship from there is extremely risky due to Hong Kong/Chinese postal and Customs authorities. You really roll the dice when spending a great deal of money a bayonet from there. Hmm, I just contacted him via fleabay about this item. 
|
AK Sponsor