AR Sponsor
Posted: 6/29/2014 10:03:00 AM EDT
|
So I have been looking at this SIG arm brace and it seems like a cool concept, but I don't like the way it actually braces your arm [when you use it as intended]. What I think would be more comfortable [for me] would be if the molded portion, instead of resembling an upside down horseshoe, resembled a J so the retention and adjustment that is now provided by a strap on the bottom, would be provided by a strap on the side instead. I saw the thread where the guy was talking about making his own and the consensus seems so far that while SIG might be currently approved to make these, *you* [Joe CITTIZIN] would probably be in for it if you made your own.
But what about modifying a existing part. Does it's tenuous status as a currently legal arm brace affect whether or not you could modify it? If one were to modify it as I proposed, and the ATF changes their minds, would it be covered also, or would that be too much like having your cake and eating it too? |
|
Quoted:
tolerant aren't we. Quoted:
Quoted:
It's a stupid idea. No modification you could do, would make your idea practical, therefore, why bother? Unless your arm was half blown off, maybe you could carve it to fit your nub more precisely? In that case, have at it. tolerant aren't we. I didn't mean to sound intolerant. I fully support the op's right to do whatever he wants to with his property. However, I Suspect that the ATF might be less open minded. It just doesn't seem worth it. That's all. |
| Have you looked at the newest version? http://sigforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/430601935/m/5610049153 |
|
I think there would be a difference from mods that solely turn it more into a stock...only for looks...or tuning it more so to fit a given shooter. Of course somethings could go both ways, and maybe somewhat subjective.
And I did stay at a holiday Inn last night. |
|
Quoted:
I think there would be a difference from mods that solely turn it more into a stock...only for looks...or tuning it more so to fit a given shooter. Of course somethings could go both ways, and maybe somewhat subjective. And I did stay at a holiday Inn last night. But,......did you not post a pic of YOUR modified Sig brace? No very smart in a lot of people's point of view. |
|
Quoted:
But,......did you not post a pic of YOUR modified Sig brace? No very smart in a lot of people's point of view. Quoted:
Quoted:
I think there would be a difference from mods that solely turn it more into a stock...only for looks...or tuning it more so to fit a given shooter. Of course somethings could go both ways, and maybe somewhat subjective. And I did stay at a holiday Inn last night. But,......did you not post a pic of YOUR modified Sig brace? No very smart in a lot of people's point of view. You mean this one? .5" cut off the bottom edge of the flaps and a tiny bit of a sharp corner off where the arm goes thru. I put that under the "to fit a given shooter better" category. Absolutely nothing done to make it a more effective as a stock. Yes, some may think that its not smart. Fair enough. But you also know what they say about opinions. 
|
|
And you know what they say about common sense...........
Use your head, if you are going to go against the grain of the ATF, be smarter than to post pics on the web. No too smart,......but it's your arse, not mine. Modifying the brace in any way, nullifies the ATF letter. |
|
The totally legal, "improper" use of the SB-15 and SB-47 is what it is all about and has nothing to do with "wanna be SBRs". I installed an SB-47 today and it is rock solid. My AR pistol build with an SB-15 will be done soon and I am sure it will be just as good.
The brace makes AR and AK pistols into guns that can be shot just like a rifle, only it's not a rifle and the BATFE says so. It doesn't matter how it was designed and intended to be used as long as the ruling from the feds says it can legally be shouldered. It's so ugly its beautiful. Given the option of a plain pistol tube or the brace, I will take the brace every time. Oh, and to the OP, I agree with the others who recommend against modifying the brace from the original configuration that was approved. |
|
Quoted: You mean this one? .5" cut off the bottom edge of the flaps and a tiny bit of a sharp corner off where the arm goes thru. I put that under the "to fit a given shooter better" category. Absolutely nothing done to make it a more effective as a stock. Yes, some may think that its not smart. Fair enough. But you also know what they say about opinions.
<a href="http://s35.photobucket.com/user/hipower90hipower/media/SampWE1911WC1871_zps0589036b.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d161/hipower90hipower/SampWE1911WC1871_zps0589036b.jpg</a> It comes down to what you could articulate to a Federal jury. If you think you can explain your modifications to a jury of your peers, then you're good to go. BATFE, like all law enforcement, doesn't go after anything they think they can't win. YMMV. |
|
Quoted:
I personally never had an issue shooting my AR pistol with the buffer tube. Other than looks and a wanna be SBR, I don't understand the Sig Brace other than if someone actually used it as intended. It's butt fucking ugly  Regardless of personal preferences in aesthetics, Functionally ( when shouldered) a pistol equipped with a an SB15 is far superior to shouldering a plain pistol extension. If this was not a fact the buttstock on every AR regardless of barrel length would look like a pistol extension. As far as wannabe goes. ... what is the difference between these two bullet launchers? 
|
|
Quoted:
Regardless of personal preferences in aesthetics, Functionally ( when shouldered) a pistol equipped with a an SB15 is far superior to shouldering a plain pistol extension. If this was not a fact the buttstock on every AR regardless of barrel length would look like a pistol extension. As far as wannabe goes. ... what is the difference between these two bullet launchers? http://looserounds.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/0013.jpg http://i.imgur.com/p6rKquBl.jpg Quoted:
Quoted:
I personally never had an issue shooting my AR pistol with the buffer tube. Other than looks and a wanna be SBR, I don't understand the Sig Brace other than if someone actually used it as intended. It's butt fucking ugly Regardless of personal preferences in aesthetics, Functionally ( when shouldered) a pistol equipped with a an SB15 is far superior to shouldering a plain pistol extension. If this was not a fact the buttstock on every AR regardless of barrel length would look like a pistol extension. As far as wannabe goes. ... what is the difference between these two bullet launchers? http://looserounds.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/0013.jpg http://i.imgur.com/p6rKquBl.jpg One is a functional, adjustable, stable stock. One is a comparatively flimsy butt ugly appendage on the end resembling a stock in shape. If it works for you then it works. I sincerely hope the ATF doesn't decide to reverse their decision and guys get stuck with these $200 "braces" 
|
|
Quoted:
........ One is a comparatively flimsy butt ugly appendage on the end resembling a stock in shape............... You don't know what you're talking about. There is nothing flimsy about it when you have it up to your shoulder, comparatively or otherwise. It makes an AR pistol far more stable to shoot than using just a standard AR pistol tube. |
|
Quoted:
One is a functional, adjustable, stable stock. One is a comparatively flimsy butt ugly appendage on the end resembling a stock in shape. If it works for you then it works. I sincerely hope the ATF doesn't decide to reverse their decision and guys get stuck with these $200 "braces" Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I personally never had an issue shooting my AR pistol with the buffer tube. Other than looks and a wanna be SBR, I don't understand the Sig Brace other than if someone actually used it as intended. It's butt fucking ugly Regardless of personal preferences in aesthetics, Functionally ( when shouldered) a pistol equipped with a an SB15 is far superior to shouldering a plain pistol extension. If this was not a fact the buttstock on every AR regardless of barrel length would look like a pistol extension. As far as wannabe goes. ... what is the difference between these two bullet launchers? http://looserounds.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/0013.jpg http://i.imgur.com/p6rKquBl.jpg One is a functional, adjustable, stable stock. One is a comparatively flimsy butt ugly appendage on the end resembling a stock in shape. If it works for you then it works. I sincerely hope the ATF doesn't decide to reverse their decision and guys get stuck with these $200 "braces" Not even close to 200.00 and can cross state lines with out permission. |
|
Quoted:
One is a functional, adjustable, stable stock. One is a comparatively flimsy butt ugly appendage on the end resembling a stock in shape. If it works for you then it works. I sincerely hope the ATF doesn't decide to reverse their decision and guys get stuck with these $200 "braces" Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I personally never had an issue shooting my AR pistol with the buffer tube. Other than looks and a wanna be SBR, I don't understand the Sig Brace other than if someone actually used it as intended. It's butt fucking ugly Regardless of personal preferences in aesthetics, Functionally ( when shouldered) a pistol equipped with a an SB15 is far superior to shouldering a plain pistol extension. If this was not a fact the buttstock on every AR regardless of barrel length would look like a pistol extension. As far as wannabe goes. ... what is the difference between these two bullet launchers? http://looserounds.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/0013.jpg http://i.imgur.com/p6rKquBl.jpg One is a functional, adjustable, stable stock. One is a comparatively flimsy butt ugly appendage on the end resembling a stock in shape. If it works for you then it works. I sincerely hope the ATF doesn't decide to reverse their decision and guys get stuck with these $200 "braces" The brace costs $105. They are about as flimsy as an 8 ply tire. You obviously have no direct experience with the item as you don't know the price or its physical properties. It seems you hate the way they look and won't use them because of their appearance. Your choice but that is no reason to misrepresent the product. |
|
Quoted:
..........................Now I might be mistaken but I would assume the flaps open for your arm and the straps are used to tighten said flaps. Sounds just as strong as any stock to me.  So you've formulated this uninformed opinion without ever handling one. Priceless.
|
Pretty much, yes.
Not much chance I'll ever handle one. I actually paid a $200 tax stamp for my SBR's. As stated, I have no problem shooting my AR pistols with the foam covered tube. I will say I admire the inventor. I remember when he first posted these as a way for "disabled shooters" to secure the AR pistol. That took some thought as a way to slide it by the ATF. Now that's "priceless" But like I said, if it works for you, go for it. |
|
Quoted:
Pretty much, yes.
Not much chance I'll ever handle one. I actually paid a $200 tax stamp for my SBR's. As stated, I have no problem shooting my AR pistols with the foam covered tube. I will say I admire the inventor. I remember when he first posted these as a way for "disabled shooters" to secure the AR pistol. That took some thought as a way to slide it by the ATF. Now that's "priceless" But like I said, if it works for you, go for it. Never let the facts get in the way of a good story. I too have paid the stamp for an SBR. Big deal. But unlike you, I put my skepticism aside and actually evaluated this product instead of ignorantly criticizing it without ever having one in my hands. And guess what I found? It works well. And as far as "sliding by the ATF", they are the ones that made that decision, not the inventor or end user. |
|
Quoted:
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story. I too have paid the stamp for an SBR. Big deal. But unlike you, I put my skepticism aside and actually evaluated this product instead of ignorantly criticizing it without ever having one in my hands. And guess what I found? It works well. And as far as "sliding by the ATF", they are the ones that made that decision, not the inventor or end user. Quoted:
Quoted:
Pretty much, yes.
Not much chance I'll ever handle one. I actually paid a $200 tax stamp for my SBR's. As stated, I have no problem shooting my AR pistols with the foam covered tube. I will say I admire the inventor. I remember when he first posted these as a way for "disabled shooters" to secure the AR pistol. That took some thought as a way to slide it by the ATF. Now that's "priceless" But like I said, if it works for you, go for it. Never let the facts get in the way of a good story. I too have paid the stamp for an SBR. Big deal. But unlike you, I put my skepticism aside and actually evaluated this product instead of ignorantly criticizing it without ever having one in my hands. And guess what I found? It works well. And as far as "sliding by the ATF", they are the ones that made that decision, not the inventor or end user. I too followed the ARFCOM sacred rule and got both |
| I have both SBR's and a AR pistol with the brace. Last year I had to move to California (work) from Florida, and left my four SBR's in my trust until I buy property in Nevada. I bought a Sig Brace for one of my AR Pistols, and it fits solid, close to a stock. IMHO I like it very much. Would I rather have a stock? Of course, but this is a damn good compromise |
|
Quoted:
Looks like you can buy the kit for $162! Well there you go. Now I might be mistaken but I would assume the flaps open for your arm and the straps are used to tighten said flaps. Sounds just as strong as any stock to me.
$162 worth of wanna be butt ugly.  You do that a lot don't you? 
I see what the problem is now. This product is an option with much less logistical red tape to achieve roughly the same goal... so you must ridicule it in order to make your $200 donations to the ATF more palatable. No problem man. But you should stay in the sbr forum so you dont have to deal with this abomination called the SB15. I don't see pistol owners over there moaning about how offended they are about collapsible stocks. Get over it man its just a hunk of rubber instead of plastic
|
| I wouldn't modify one personally, but if it didn't quite fit, then to each his own. Shadowcop, i would rather have a sbr just because the stock would be light and streamlined. Unfortunately since i farm and live in Illinois, making it impossible to move to a free state, the sb15 is my closest thing to sbr. If i lived in indiana and someone was rolling with a sb15(Indiana resident), i would probably laugh at them to. Criticizing everyone,everywhere, for using a sig brace is just ignorant. Not everyone lives in sbr state like u . Now having said all this after using the brace i find it solid and just as useable as a ctr or str stock. At this point i would rather be able to get a can than sbr stamp. |
|
Quoted:
I personally never had an issue shooting my AR pistol with the buffer tube. Other than looks and a wanna be SBR, I don't understand the Sig Brace other than if someone actually used it as intended. It's butt fucking ugly I don't know why you guys even fall into a disscusion with a poster like this who is obviously an agitator? It defies common sense to say that an AR pistol is more comfortable shooting with a bare tube than with the brace on it! Yeh it ani't pretty but it works,period. But this guy has over 16 thousand posts so he must know what he's talking about.
|
|
Quoted:
I don't know why you guys even fall into a disscusion with a poster like this who is obviously an agitator? It defies common sense to say that an AR pistol is more comfortable shooting with a bare tube than with the brace on it! Yeh it ani't pretty but it works,period. But this guy has over 16 thousand posts so he must know what he's talking about. Quoted:
Quoted:
I personally never had an issue shooting my AR pistol with the buffer tube. Other than looks and a wanna be SBR, I don't understand the Sig Brace other than if someone actually used it as intended. It's butt fucking ugly I don't know why you guys even fall into a disscusion with a poster like this who is obviously an agitator? It defies common sense to say that an AR pistol is more comfortable shooting with a bare tube than with the brace on it! Yeh it ani't pretty but it works,period. But this guy has over 16 thousand posts so he must know what he's talking about. The discussion is for the benefit of those who may not know about the product or are unsure of what they really want. At the end of the day it's a personal choice but sometimes it helps to hear input from others. And sometimes it's just agitating.
|
|
Quoted:
Don't see why more just do not use a rifle extension with a comfy rubber cover, streamline and light. While the brace works, and is very firm it does weigh in close to a small tire. It is heavy, but it balances well with my 11.5" 7.62x39. I have resisted taking pictures of my firearms, but I will take one of this pistol and post it. It feels great, and has become my favorite thing to shoot. 
Edit: crappy pic of pistol |
|
Just to be clear, *if* I purchase one of these it will not be to <wink, wink> get around a $200 tax stamp, despite what some of the rest of the geniuses are doing. I actually want it for it's ostensible purpose, but have thick forearms and want both easier in/out and a more relaxed hold. I made a PVC J-hook and stuck it on my arm with a standard AR pistol, and it worked well enough to be a proof of concept.
Very rough photochop (paint): 
I occasionally do some Long Range Handgun Shooting and I was thinking an AR pistol in something larger than 6mm like 300BLK might really work great. I have used a Contender (7-30 waters) and a Savage (308)before, and have looked at XP100's but I like the idea of being different [and it's not like I am in contention to win, my best finish is 5th sportsman..] |
| I don't get the "very heavy" comments. Yes, its(only) aprox 2-4oz heavier then the lightest stocks avail, but its still lighter then many other stocks that frequent this forum. Guys bitch about it, but have no issues with their fat-barreled 8-10lb carbines. My recently built 2nd Sig braced pistol is a tic over 6lbs. The other is a bit over 7lbs. Balance is fine. |
|
OP, just keep in mind that it doesn't matter what your intentions are, the only thing that matters is that the Sig Brace is specifically described in the ATF approval letter, and any alterations to the brace will make the letter null and void concerning your altered brace.
Just doesn't seem worth the risk to me. |
| I love mine! I run my carbine with stock in the second hole so the sig brace is only about a .5" shorter. To be clear, it's mounted on the JP Enterprise's pistol buffer tube which has a knurled section that sets the brace a little ways from the receiver. That being said, it feels pretty damn good. Ugly? Maybe but I am not the most handsome MFer either. |
|
Quoted:
Just to be clear, *if* I purchase one of these it will not be to <wink, wink> get around a $200 tax stamp, despite what some of the rest of the geniuses are doing. I actually want it for it's ostensible purpose, but have thick forearms and want both easier in/out and a more relaxed hold. I made a PVC J-hook and stuck it on my arm with a standard AR pistol, and it worked well enough to be a proof of concept. Very rough photochop (paint): http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff153/barrysuperhawk/th1HTBEA9L.jpg I occasionally do some Long Range Handgun Shooting and I was thinking an AR pistol in something larger than 6mm like 300BLK might really work great. I have used a Contender (7-30 waters) and a Savage (308)before, and have looked at XP100's but I like the idea of being different [and it's not like I am in contention to win, my best finish is 5th sportsman..] Modifying the SIG Brace in any way, shape, form, or fashion nullifies the legality of the brace. Is it really worth it? |
|
Quoted:
Modifying the SIG Brace in any way, shape, form, or fashion nullifies the legality of the brace. Is it really worth it? Quoted:
Quoted:
Just to be clear, *if* I purchase one of these it will not be to <wink, wink> get around a $200 tax stamp, despite what some of the rest of the geniuses are doing. I actually want it for it's ostensible purpose, but have thick forearms and want both easier in/out and a more relaxed hold. I made a PVC J-hook and stuck it on my arm with a standard AR pistol, and it worked well enough to be a proof of concept. Very rough photochop (paint): http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff153/barrysuperhawk/th1HTBEA9L.jpg I occasionally do some Long Range Handgun Shooting and I was thinking an AR pistol in something larger than 6mm like 300BLK might really work great. I have used a Contender (7-30 waters) and a Savage (308)before, and have looked at XP100's but I like the idea of being different [and it's not like I am in contention to win, my best finish is 5th sportsman..] Modifying the SIG Brace in any way, shape, form, or fashion nullifies the legality of the brace. Is it really worth it? It's gonna be pretty hard for BATFE to go after him if he's using the brace as it was intended. Now, if you convert a SIG brace so it's collapsible, or turn it into a bump fire stock, that might not fly. What can you articulate to a Federal jury? Given he can demonstrate how he's using it, and how his guns are so big he needed to modify, I bet he's good. Say you are the BATFE agent. What would you say to a jury to convict him? "OMG, he cut off part of his arm brace! That's not approved!" |
|
Quoted:
OP, just keep in mind that it doesn't matter what your intentions are, the only thing that matters is that the Sig Brace is specifically described in the ATF approval letter, and any alterations to the brace will make the letter null and void concerning your altered brace. Just doesn't seem worth the risk to me. This is what was approved by the letter and submitted with the sample brace. 
To claim it wasn't "modified" from what was originally approved is to laugh. For one thing it was not even a "foam type rubber" when released -- if it had been it wouldn't have been suitable for firing from the shoulder in the first place, not firm enough.. Didn't sit flush with back of the tube. Lordy, it certainly wasn't mounted even further back off the tube like many now do, with or without commercially sold spacers, even a buffer tube, to allow specifically that. It had open channel on top. It wasn't black, or FDE.. Didn't include any kind of adapter to fit on an AK pistol. Etc, etc. We can debate this sort of thing indefinitely, but I'd opine that as long as it retains the functionality of being able to be secured around the forearm, it would pass muster. Otherwise seem surely the ATF would have already gone after some of the commercially sold items allowing it to be "modified" already. - OS |
|
Question posed in 2012 in another forum to the inventor about the different appearance:
Are those most recent ones made of the same materials? They appear to be of hard plasic with chin support - if so you probably know better than me where that would take you... Other than that, really applaud your effort - good luck! Quotes from the inventor: The Whole thing is made of Medical Grade Rubber. The "Chin Supports" dont change anything, as the product is intended and designed to fire the AR15 pistol with one hand. How would you put your chin on there once the SB15 is strapped to your arm? Now if you use it to fire from the shoulder that would be an inappropriate use of my product. Not illegal but not what I designed it for. It's the same as using a buffer tube to shoot from the shoulder...it's not illegal, but do people shoot it that way? Of course! I can assure you that the first piece that I sent to the ATF and the Last one you see are exactly the same, except that one is black and is Aesthetically different, but the material is exactly the same. I have spoken with the ATF and they have cleared me to change the "Aesthetics" as long as the design and intention has not changed. Putting a chin rest on the AR pistol does not change the definition of the pistol either. In fact the ATF has already ruled that a CAA Saddle can be place on a buffer tube because it is not intended or designed to allow you to fire the pistol from the shoulder. And again, if you use my product the way I've designed, you wont be able to use it as a chin rest. Can you inappropriately use my product...absolutely yes. Can you inappropriately use a buffer tube as a stock...absolutely yes again...but that is not illegal. |
|
Quoted:
...I can assure you that the first piece that I sent to the ATF and the Last one you see are exactly the same, except that one is black and is Aesthetically different, but the material is exactly the same Yes, I've seen that quote too and I'm for sure not gonna diss Alex in any way. Perhaps it's the "same material" in the sense that water and ice is, differing only by the processing. 
- OS |
|
Quoted:
It's gonna be pretty hard for BATFE to go after him if he's using the brace as it was intended. Now, if you convert a SIG brace so it's collapsible, or turn it into a bump fire stock, that might not fly. What can you articulate to a Federal jury? Given he can demonstrate how he's using it, and how his guns are so big he needed to modify, I bet he's good. Say you are the BATFE agent. What would you say to a jury to convict him? "OMG, he cut off part of his arm brace! That's not approved!" Quoted:
Quoted:
Modifying the SIG Brace in any way, shape, form, or fashion nullifies the legality of the brace. Is it really worth it? It's gonna be pretty hard for BATFE to go after him if he's using the brace as it was intended. Now, if you convert a SIG brace so it's collapsible, or turn it into a bump fire stock, that might not fly. What can you articulate to a Federal jury? Given he can demonstrate how he's using it, and how his guns are so big he needed to modify, I bet he's good. Say you are the BATFE agent. What would you say to a jury to convict him? "OMG, he cut off part of his arm brace! That's not approved!" This is my thinking too, but I am not an expert in anything. Actually my goal would be to be able to relax my fingers enough to allow the pistol to be supported from the web of my hand/wrist, and the hook under my forearm, without the forearm portion being tight enough to introduce my pulse into the crosshair.. |
|
Quoted:
This is my thinking too, but I am not an expert in anything. Actually my goal would be to be able to relax my fingers enough to allow the pistol to be supported from the web of my hand/wrist, and the hook under my forearm, without the forearm portion being tight enough to introduce my pulse into the crosshair.. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Modifying the SIG Brace in any way, shape, form, or fashion nullifies the legality of the brace. Is it really worth it? It's gonna be pretty hard for BATFE to go after him if he's using the brace as it was intended. Now, if you convert a SIG brace so it's collapsible, or turn it into a bump fire stock, that might not fly. What can you articulate to a Federal jury? Given he can demonstrate how he's using it, and how his guns are so big he needed to modify, I bet he's good. Say you are the BATFE agent. What would you say to a jury to convict him? "OMG, he cut off part of his arm brace! That's not approved!" This is my thinking too, but I am not an expert in anything. Actually my goal would be to be able to relax my fingers enough to allow the pistol to be supported from the web of my hand/wrist, and the hook under my forearm, without the forearm portion being tight enough to introduce my pulse into the crosshair.. Maybe some additional padding? Or padding, and additional velcro straps that tie the whole thing down to your arm if the factory straps aren't long enough. |
AR Sponsor