AR Sponsor
Posted: 7/11/2016 6:42:48 PM EDT
| I have a Rock River 9mm running a Hahn block. I wanted to replace the barrel with a shorter 10.5" for a pistol built. Are all 9mm barrels the same? I noticed on the Faxon website they list the barrel as compatible with Colt and Glock feed ramps. I assume the Rock River is a Colt style system. |
|
Quoted:
Yes, they should work. I will ask though, what is the current configuration of the weapon? Is a rifle? Because if it started life as a rifle you cannot make it into a pistol build legally using the same lower receiver. Thanks. As for the lower I'm using was originally a pistol lower and it's marked pistol too. |
|
Quoted:
Thanks. As for the lower I'm using was originally a pistol lower and it's marked pistol too. Quoted:
Quoted:
Yes, they should work. I will ask though, what is the current configuration of the weapon? Is a rifle? Because if it started life as a rifle you cannot make it into a pistol build legally using the same lower receiver. Thanks. As for the lower I'm using was originally a pistol lower and it's marked pistol too. All that goes out the window if you have (ever) mounted a buttstock assy. and fired from the shoulder. At that point it legally became a rifle and the only (legal) way back is an SBR stamp. |
|
No, all 9 mm barrels are not the same. The Brand Y 9 mm barrel I currently have has a significantly different chamber entry ramping angle and depth compared to the Brand X 9 mm barrel that I used to have. Brand X did not work well with "Colt style" (double feed mag) set ups but does work with "Glock style" (single feed). I've never tried Brand Y with single feed mags, but it works well with double feed.
MHO, YMMV, et cetera. |
|
Quoted: All that goes out the window if you have (ever) mounted a buttstock assy. and fired from the shoulder. At that point it legally became a rifle and the only (legal) way back is an SBR stamp. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Yes, they should work. I will ask though, what is the current configuration of the weapon? Is a rifle? Because if it started life as a rifle you cannot make it into a pistol build legally using the same lower receiver. Thanks. As for the lower I'm using was originally a pistol lower and it's marked pistol too. All that goes out the window if you have (ever) mounted a buttstock assy. and fired from the shoulder. At that point it legally became a rifle and the only (legal) way back is an SBR stamp. That is not correct. |
|
Quoted:
No, all 9 mm barrels are not the same. The Brand Y 9 mm barrel I currently have has a significantly different chamber entry ramping angle and depth compared to the Brand X 9 mm barrel that I used to have. Brand X did not work well with "Colt style" (double feed mag) set ups but does work with "Glock style" (single feed). I've never tried Brand Y with single feed mags, but it works well with double feed. MHO, YMMV, et cetera. Thanks for the info. I've done a few rifle builds but never a 9mm so sorry about the stupid questions. Here is a pic of the chamber.I'm assuming the feed ramps are on the mag block right and it looks to be a double. So I might be better off just having my 16" barrel cut down instead? 
|
|
Quoted: Thanks for the info. I've done a few rifle builds but never a 9mm so sorry about the stupid questions. Here is a pic of the chamber.I'm assuming the feed ramps are on the mag block right and it looks to be a double. So I might be better off just having my 16" barrel cut down instead? http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y260/kramervalentine/barrel_zpsehyrybcs.jpg Quoted: Quoted: No, all 9 mm barrels are not the same. The Brand Y 9 mm barrel I currently have has a significantly different chamber entry ramping angle and depth compared to the Brand X 9 mm barrel that I used to have. Brand X did not work well with "Colt style" (double feed mag) set ups but does work with "Glock style" (single feed). I've never tried Brand Y with single feed mags, but it works well with double feed. MHO, YMMV, et cetera. Thanks for the info. I've done a few rifle builds but never a 9mm so sorry about the stupid questions. Here is a pic of the chamber.I'm assuming the feed ramps are on the mag block right and it looks to be a double. So I might be better off just having my 16" barrel cut down instead? http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y260/kramervalentine/barrel_zpsehyrybcs.jpg That's a standard Colt style setup. Most aftermarket barrels will work fine, including the Faxon offerings. Sometimes some tweaking is needed to get everything working perfectly. Your current barrel has a certain degree of a "relief" cut taper around the mouth of the chamber, some manufacturers have a deeper cut here, some less of a cut. Some bolt/lower/mag block combos are more picky about this relief cut than others, and it can be a case-by-case thing where they differ. The Faxon barrel is compatible with your setup, whether it will run 100% out of the gate is impossible to say, but if it doesn't, generally the issue can be remedied. |
|
Quoted:
That is not correct. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yes, they should work. I will ask though, what is the current configuration of the weapon? Is a rifle? Because if it started life as a rifle you cannot make it into a pistol build legally using the same lower receiver. Thanks. As for the lower I'm using was originally a pistol lower and it's marked pistol too. All that goes out the window if you have (ever) mounted a buttstock assy. and fired from the shoulder. At that point it legally became a rifle and the only (legal) way back is an SBR stamp. That is not correct. You have some magic letter that states otherwise? Actually I would not be surprised, like calling the IRS and reading off the same question each time, and getting multiple conflicting answers. |
|
Quoted: You have some magic letter that states otherwise? Actually I would not be surprised, like calling the IRS and reading off the same question each time, and getting multiple conflicting answers. This was the subject at hand in the Thompson Center v. US supreme court case. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Thompson-Center_Arms_Co. Which lead to the release of this; read though it, particularly the "held further" statements at the end. https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/ruling/2011-4-pistols-configured-rifles-rifles-configured-pistols/download https://blog.princelaw.com/2011/8/2/batfe-ruling-2011-4-pistol-to-a-rifle-and-back-to-a-pistol/ And one more, the letter linked in the following post, page 2, question 2: http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_122/525036_Request___Scans_of_any_letters_from_the_BATFE__that_pertain_to_AR_pistols.html&page=3#i5911558 |
|
I see now. So it appears Melson actually did something as director other than sweat about F&F.
As of 2009 I was still being told that if an under 16" barreled upper was found that there had better be an assembled pistol config lower present. Also they cited the Thompson case and how that in there view it was allowed due to the specific markings and instructions that the shoulder stock was not to be attached without a 16" barrel. At that time they still held that if it (AR type receiver) was ever assembled as a rifle it was a one way trip. I'm out of the biz now so I don't pay as much attention. |
AR Sponsor