Armory Sponsor
Posted: 12/20/2005 11:00:08 AM EDT
|
Where could I get one of these? i just found out about them tonight so i am a noob here. Info on owning one is what I need. |
|
As close as us 'mere mortals' can get would be a converted USC, and they don't come cheap. www.hdps.org/htm/3.htm |
I hear there's one on the EE and seller is a great guy...  CLICK ME!!!! 
|
|
While there are no civilian-legal factory UMPs, there are three companies that are offering UMP conversions using USC carbines. The three are HDPS, Top Notch and Tactical Excellence. Having heard form various folks who have dealt with these companies, I haven't heard a single complaint about any of them. I went with Tactical Excellence for mine, and just got it back last week. Here is a thread on HKPRO.com with pics and more info. Also, if you do a search on HKPRO you will find a ton of info on this topic. In short, HDPS and Top Notch offer conversions on existing guns or the complete package, while Tactical Excellence requires that you provide your own gun and conversion parts. HKPRO Thread Thanks, James |
|
Don't get confused between GG conversions and UMP conversions. Some folks have a conversion that uses GG mags and it is not the same as the better UMP conversions. Obviously the mags are different, the lower is different, the angle the mags insert into the lower is different, there isn't a bolt hold open feature and there isn't a paddle mag release. In short, GG conversion does not equal UMP conversion. If you want a UMP conversion gun, I would go the Tactical Excellence or HDPS route. The Top Notch conversion is nice but they alter the UMP lower which takes away from the accuracy of the conversion. By accuracy, I mean "look". I made mine by sourcing my own parts. If you look they aren't nearly as expensive as the HDPS parts. I bought my lower for $300, the mags were $45 - $55, the barrel was $400 but I sold the USC barrel for $400 so it was a wash, the stock was $120. By the time you buy all of the 922r compliance parts, you'd be better off paying the $200 Tax for a Form 1 since NFA weapns are not ound by 922r.  Bomber |
i heard that rumor too.... it's still a great platform regardless of lower. low recoil, low wear, very accurate. I jus tsold mine, but wouldn't hesitate to buy another when I have the cash again... |
SBRs are still under 922(r) AOW and MG are the only 2 that are 'exempt'... |
|
SBR are exempt for 922. Only MG and AOW were exempt from the former assault weapon ban. ATF letter on the subject. www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/atf_letter3.txt ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Washington, D.C. 20226 MAR 22, 1994 LE:F:FE:RLB 3312.5 Mr XXX Address City, State Dear Mr. XXX: This refers to your letter of February 28, 1994, in which you inquire as to whether the making of certain National Firearm Act (NFA) weapons is prohibited by Title 18 United States Code (U.S.C.), Chapter 44, Section 922(r). The weapon in question is a FN/FAL type firearm having a barrel length of less than 16 inches which is assembled from an imported British L1A1 parts kit and a domestically manufactured frame or receiver. Title 18 U.S.C., Chapter 44, Section 922(r) provides that it shall be unlawful for any person to assemble from imported parts any semiautomatic rifle or shotgun which is identical to any rifle or shotgun prohibited from importation under 18 U.S.C., Chapter 44, Section 925(d)(3), as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes. However, the Bureau has previously determined that the lawful making of an NFA weapon would not violate Section 922(r), since the section only addresses the assembly of "nonsporting" firearms, and not the making of NFA weapons. Therefore, the lawful making of a short barreled rifle would not be precluded by Section 922(r). If you decide to proceed with your project, it will be necessary for you to obtain prior approval by first submitting an ATF Form 1 (Application To Make and Register a Firearm) and paying the appropriate $200 making tax. Additional information relative to this procedure may be obtained from the following source: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms NFA Branch, Room 5300 650 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington DC 20026 We trust that the foregoing was responsive to your inquiry. If we may be of any further assistance, please contact us. Sincerely yours, [signed] Edward M. Owen, Jr. Chief, Firearms Technology Branch |
That's your opinion. The ones I've shot were very solid, accurate, light weight and simple to tear down, and clean. In addition, a 45 trumps a 9MM anyday. In reality calling one better than the other is like arguing Glocks vs Sigs. YMMV. Bomber |
| Bomber, the biggest problem was that they recoil more than an M4. The one I shot had a can and an M900 and it still took a lot of effort to control. The sights were actually better than an MP5, but they are crude in comparison to an M4. The controls were surprisingly easy. The mag was enormous. All in all, I'd take a CQB-R over a UMP any day, unless I required silence. |
I would not disagree about taking an M4 CQB anyday as I would. It's probably an ergonomic thing but I find it fairly controllable. I'm definitely not married to them as I prefer M4s anyday. I also like the classic look of the MP5 and would love to have one in 10mm. The UMP mags are huge but you gotta love 25 rounds og 45 acp. The gun is also very light weight. From a subgun perspective, I think it is a very viable option but as you said, a 10.5 in M4 would be better. Bomber |
Armory Sponsor