[ARCHIVED THREAD] - I recently examined and tested an Arizona Regulator three position FRT (Page 7 of 8)
|
Quoted: That's insulting. Shame on you. I don't work for RB, have any stock in RB, or any affiliation with them whatsoever. I just call it how I see it. I watched the video, I tried to imagine hiw I might have reacted in their shoes, facing that kind of prison time, and as disappointed as I was that they didn't take it all the way, I understand why they did it. Very soon RB is going to have a tough choice to make. |
|
I love this dude. |
|
Quoted: I love this dude. Hopefully he gets more info than when I did a FOIA about the ATF trying to repeatedly raid me and getting denied a warrant by the judge....I especially appreciate that NFA tax documents related to my trust that at the time was literally my name...are not related to me. So a trust is actually the person possessing the item unless it isn't. Nice logic.   
|
|
|
Quoted: More than a few people here have begged him to stop self-sabotaging and given him good advice. Would to God he listened to it. Quoted: Quoted: I was going to buy one, then I got to the website. It reminds me of the Always Sunny in Philadelphia episode where Charlie is trying to connect the dots. More than a few people here have begged him to stop self-sabotaging and given him good advice. Would to God he listened to it. Crazy people don't know they're crazy imo. I'd be happy to IM you the barrel of monkeys I found and you'd understand lol. |
|
Quoted: Thank you to Historic Firearms for posting this. Bill Gates is documented for strangeness, but nobody has stopped buying computers. If anything this product shows how out of spec many manufacturers really are. Of over 8 AR uppers only 1 pocket fit his product. Bear Creek. Took some fiddling but the product really works. GForce 9mm Jawbone and DTI lower on a 30 TOK KAK upper. Both pockets were too small. Milspec is a total industry joke. Are they really out of spec though? Without the TDP/drawing he wouldn't know how small it might get. With the drawing he would have seen there's pretty wide tolerances on the auto sear relief. ETA: It looks like the upper "lip" sits in that pocket to locate it. It's convenient, but maybe not the best choice if you need something to locate pretty consistently (or even fit properly) since the original purpose of that pocket didn't require tight tolerances. I think it's more likely it shows he either doesn't understand what milspec means or doesn't actually know the specs. |
|
Quoted: I’ll continue to shit on RB because they agreed to the deal that they did. They weren’t forced to take that deal but instead likely did because it would help bolster their position in the market by being king shit. They knew they had the government by the balls and they could have finished this once and for all which would have likely had even bigger ripple effects but they didn’t. They took the chickenshit way out. Quoted: Quoted: I think they backed down because if it had continued and went to SCOTUS and RB prevailed, FRTs might end up being ruled as protected under the 2A where congress couldn't even touch them. This way if RB breaches the settlement agreement the DOJ can still go after FRTs, no? There is still the Cargill precedent on our side, but it would be starting from scratch in court. Everyone shitting on RB for sticking to the terms of the settlement needs to realize they are making damn sure they can't be found in breach of it so that the government can't go after the FRTs - ALL of them. If they have to make a big show of suing everyone under the sun to stay in compliance with the contract, so be it. It's the only thing stopping the DOJ from going after all FRTs as MGs. You also have to remember that we can't have nationwide injunctions anymore. So if RB is found in breach of the settlement because they didn't file enough patent lawsuits, there will be nothing stopping a "Turn them all in or destroy them by making 3 cuts here, here and here" order from the ATF like they did with bumpstocks. And where are bumpstocks today after Cargill? They used to be hanging on the shelves of major retailers like Cabelas. Now? Nowhere. I get that FRTs are far superior in every way, and nobody wants a bumpstock when they could have an FRT. But still. No big retailer, even very pro-2A ones like Palmetto, is willing to touch these with a 10 foot pole. No one wants to be left holding the bag with a bunch of inventory made illegal with the stroke of a pen. And that's what WILL happen if everyone shitting on RB for patent lawsuits get their way. The DOJ finds RB in breach of the settlement and then they are no longer prevented from going after FRTs as machine guns. Yes, they will have to explain to the court how they are MGs in light of Cargill. But while that happens, you will be ordered to destroy or surrender your FRTs. It will take years in court, and it will likely happen during the next dem administration when all these agencies have the leash taken off and are out for revenge. I’ll continue to shit on RB because they agreed to the deal that they did. They weren’t forced to take that deal but instead likely did because it would help bolster their position in the market by being king shit. They knew they had the government by the balls and they could have finished this once and for all which would have likely had even bigger ripple effects but they didn’t. They took the chickenshit way out. Question: In addition to everything else, what's the best deal that RB's lawyers could get from the Federal Government? Answer: A monopoly on FRT's. There's no way the Federal Government came up with that idea on their own. RB's lawyers worked that sweet heart monopoly deal into the agreement. The Jame's Reeve's interview (24m33s) makes me believe that even further.  EXCLUSIVE: Inside the FRT Settlement with Rare Breed DeMonico "If I'm going to be honest, I don't know why they asked for it, but I was quick to give it to them." Oh come on. I will say good job at memorizing what your lawyer told you to say. But don't piss on me and tell me it's raining. I bet a FOI would also reveal that RB's lawyers got that monopoly / enforce the patent section added to the agreement. |
|
Quoted: That's insulting. Shame on you. I don't work for RB, have any stock in RB, or any affiliation with them whatsoever. I just call it how I see it. I watched the video, I tried to imagine hiw I might have reacted in their shoes, facing that kind of prison time, and as disappointed as I was that they didn't take it all the way, I understand why they did it. Quoted: Quoted: So is Rare Breed paying the legal fees for everyone they're trying to screw over in an attempt to protect their own hide?  They're deliberately going above and beyond what their agreement required of them, and everyone here knows it. You just happen to be one of the few here dishonest enough to refuse to admit it. I don't work for RB, have any stock in RB, or any affiliation with them whatsoever. I just call it how I see it. I watched the video, I tried to imagine hiw I might have reacted in their shoes, facing that kind of prison time, and as disappointed as I was that they didn't take it all the way, I understand why they did it. Regardless, the 5th Circuit decision and DOJs decision to drop it's appeal of their decision is what is keeping ATF from persecuting any/all forced reset devices, not Rare Breed's settlement. 
|
|
Quoted: Question: In addition to everything else, what's the best deal that RB's lawyers could get from the Federal Government? Answer: A monopoly on FRT's. There's no way the Federal Government came up with that idea on their own. RB's lawyers worked that sweet heart monopoly deal into the agreement. The Jame's Reeve's interview (24m33s) makes me believe that even further.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qtoLBHTNpIDeMonico "If I'm going to be honest, I don't know why they asked for it, but I was quick to give it to them." Oh come on. I will say good job at memorizing what your lawyer told you to say. But don't piss on me and tell me it's raining. I bet a FOI would also reveal that RB's lawyers got that monopoly / enforce the patent section added to the agreement. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I think they backed down because if it had continued and went to SCOTUS and RB prevailed, FRTs might end up being ruled as protected under the 2A where congress couldn't even touch them. This way if RB breaches the settlement agreement the DOJ can still go after FRTs, no? There is still the Cargill precedent on our side, but it would be starting from scratch in court. Everyone shitting on RB for sticking to the terms of the settlement needs to realize they are making damn sure they can't be found in breach of it so that the government can't go after the FRTs - ALL of them. If they have to make a big show of suing everyone under the sun to stay in compliance with the contract, so be it. It's the only thing stopping the DOJ from going after all FRTs as MGs. You also have to remember that we can't have nationwide injunctions anymore. So if RB is found in breach of the settlement because they didn't file enough patent lawsuits, there will be nothing stopping a "Turn them all in or destroy them by making 3 cuts here, here and here" order from the ATF like they did with bumpstocks. And where are bumpstocks today after Cargill? They used to be hanging on the shelves of major retailers like Cabelas. Now? Nowhere. I get that FRTs are far superior in every way, and nobody wants a bumpstock when they could have an FRT. But still. No big retailer, even very pro-2A ones like Palmetto, is willing to touch these with a 10 foot pole. No one wants to be left holding the bag with a bunch of inventory made illegal with the stroke of a pen. And that's what WILL happen if everyone shitting on RB for patent lawsuits get their way. The DOJ finds RB in breach of the settlement and then they are no longer prevented from going after FRTs as machine guns. Yes, they will have to explain to the court how they are MGs in light of Cargill. But while that happens, you will be ordered to destroy or surrender your FRTs. It will take years in court, and it will likely happen during the next dem administration when all these agencies have the leash taken off and are out for revenge. I’ll continue to shit on RB because they agreed to the deal that they did. They weren’t forced to take that deal but instead likely did because it would help bolster their position in the market by being king shit. They knew they had the government by the balls and they could have finished this once and for all which would have likely had even bigger ripple effects but they didn’t. They took the chickenshit way out. Question: In addition to everything else, what's the best deal that RB's lawyers could get from the Federal Government? Answer: A monopoly on FRT's. There's no way the Federal Government came up with that idea on their own. RB's lawyers worked that sweet heart monopoly deal into the agreement. The Jame's Reeve's interview (24m33s) makes me believe that even further. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qtoLBHTNpIDeMonico "If I'm going to be honest, I don't know why they asked for it, but I was quick to give it to them." Oh come on. I will say good job at memorizing what your lawyer told you to say. But don't piss on me and tell me it's raining. I bet a FOI would also reveal that RB's lawyers got that monopoly / enforce the patent section added to the agreement. I would say that's a very safe bet. I was for RB before that interview and my opinion turned very much against them after, also before the lawsuit rodeo kicked into high gear. |
|
Quoted: My inner drama Llama would like a peek inside that barrel.  Quoted: Quoted: Crazy people don't know they're crazy imo. I'd be happy to IM you the barrel of monkeys I found and you'd understand lol. My inner drama Llama would like a peek inside that barrel. Same
|
|
Quoted: Holy crap. it's a full on, 100% caps lock on, stream of "I'm so smart I can do whatever I want" rambling. Lol Quoted: Quoted: My inner drama Llama would like a peek inside that barrel. Holy crap. it's a full on, 100% caps lock on, stream of "I'm so smart I can do whatever I want" rambling. Lol That's why no one will remember your name.
|
|
Quoted: You were warned.... Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Crazy people don't know they're crazy imo. I'd be happy to IM you the barrel of monkeys I found and you'd understand lol. My inner drama Llama would like a peek inside that barrel. Same You were warned.... Now I wanna look inside that barrel
|
|
Quoted: Regardless, the 5th Circuit decision and DOJs decision to drop it's appeal of their decision is what is keeping ATF from persecuting any/all forced reset devices, not Rare Breed's settlement. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/125898/Screenshot_2025-09-10_133249-3622064.png |
|
Quoted: That reads like it only enjoins them from enforcement against RB, and not the public at large, unless there's more that got cut off in that picture. There is a lot more... You can read the whole thing here: Judge Reed O'Connor's July 2024 decision    This all went down almost a year before the Rare Breed/ABC group DOJ settlement. With respect to only enjoining ATF from the parties who filed suit; Equal protection under the law would become an issue with any enforcement, also entrapment by estoppel would also become an issue, as Judge Reed O'Connor is a federal judge (THE govt. authority on matters of law). You might remember Judge O'Connor. He was quoted by SCOTUS in the bump stock case. He was the federal judge who understood mechanically what was going on with them and compares Forced Reset Triggers with a bump stock in his decision. In fact: A bump stock is a form of "Forced Reset". Instead of forcing the trigger forward it forces the entire action backward to force the reset of the trigger. |
|
Quoted: You were warned.... Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Crazy people don't know they're crazy imo. I'd be happy to IM you the barrel of monkeys I found and you'd understand lol. My inner drama Llama would like a peek inside that barrel. Same You were warned.... At this point, if I ever buy one of these things, I'm going to have it mailed to someone else. Because I really don't want that guy having my home address. |
|
Quoted: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/125898/Screenshot_2025-09-10_133249-3622064.png There is a lot more... You can read the whole thing here: Judge Reed O'Connor's July 2024 decision https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/169738/background_NGAR_5th_circuit-3622399.png https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/169738/FRT_definition_1_NGAR_5th_circuit-3622400.png https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/169738/FRT_definition_2_NGAR_5th_circuit-3622401.png This all went down almost a year before the Rare Breed/ABC group DOJ settlement. With respect to only enjoining ATF from the parties who filed suit; Equal protection under the law would become an issue with any enforcement, also entrapment by estoppel would also become an issue, as Judge Reed O'Connor is a federal judge (THE govt. authority on matters of law). You might remember Judge O'Connor. He was quoted by SCOTUS in the bump stock case. He was the federal judge who understood mechanically what was going on with them and compares Forced Reset Triggers with a bump stock in his decision. In fact: A bump stock is a form of "Forced Reset". Instead of forcing the trigger forward it forces the entire action backward to force the reset of the trigger. Quoted: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/125898/Screenshot_2025-09-10_133249-3622064.png Quoted: That reads like it only enjoins them from enforcement against RB, and not the public at large, unless there's more that got cut off in that picture. There is a lot more... You can read the whole thing here: Judge Reed O'Connor's July 2024 decision https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/169738/background_NGAR_5th_circuit-3622399.png https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/169738/FRT_definition_1_NGAR_5th_circuit-3622400.png https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/169738/FRT_definition_2_NGAR_5th_circuit-3622401.png This all went down almost a year before the Rare Breed/ABC group DOJ settlement. With respect to only enjoining ATF from the parties who filed suit; Equal protection under the law would become an issue with any enforcement, also entrapment by estoppel would also become an issue, as Judge Reed O'Connor is a federal judge (THE govt. authority on matters of law). You might remember Judge O'Connor. He was quoted by SCOTUS in the bump stock case. He was the federal judge who understood mechanically what was going on with them and compares Forced Reset Triggers with a bump stock in his decision. In fact: A bump stock is a form of "Forced Reset". Instead of forcing the trigger forward it forces the entire action backward to force the reset of the trigger. 
|
|
I just picked one up and installed it. I was interested from the get go but this thread convinced me. I haven't had a chance to live fire (not sure where I can other than out in the open desert) but it function tests properly. Being left handed I'd have loved an ambi selector, but I've gotten used to the righty selectors, so no big deal. It really was a drop it. Remove all the original FCG, put in the AZR parts and close it up. JD sounds to me like someone who's out of fucks to give and no longer cares what anyone thinks. Maybe not the best guy to be the face of his business, but I'm sure he and I could have a beer and relate. |
|
Quoted: In fact: A bump stock is a form of "Forced Reset". Instead of forcing the trigger forward it forces the entire action backward to force the reset of the trigger. Making your words bigger doesn't make them true. Bump firing works by releasing the pressure the finger applies to the trigger. A bump stock helps the shooter do this but there are other ways to accomplish the same thing. The trigger is not "forced" to reset during bump firing any more than it's "forced" to reset during slow fire. The firearm's trigger resets as designed when pressure is released from the trigger, regardless if it's Bubba bump firing with the help of his belt loop or Jerry Miculek doing his thing. |
|
Quoted: I just picked one up and installed it. I was interested from the get go but this thread convinced me. I haven't had a chance to live fire (not sure where I can other than out in the open desert) but it function tests properly. Being left handed I'd have loved an ambi selector, but I've gotten used to the righty selectors, so no big deal. It really was a drop it. Remove all the original FCG, put in the AZR parts and close it up. JD sounds to me like someone who's out of fucks to give and no longer cares what anyone thinks. Maybe not the best guy to be the face of his business, but I'm sure he and I could have a beer and relate. You can install any mil spec 3 position selector to accommodate your genetic defect. 
|
|
Quoted: Do you know if this applies to FCD’s ASF-SFQ? (Fingers crossed it’s a yes) Quoted: Quoted: You can install any mil spec 3 position selector to accommodate your genetic defect. Do you know if this applies to FCD’s ASF-SFQ? (Fingers crossed it’s a yes) That will work with the 3 position Arizona Regulator. It uses a standard M16 safety/selector. The comments on that page about it needing work to make it run with an FRT are for the Rare Breed/Delta Team Tactical FRT. |
|
Quoted: That will work with the 3 position Arizona Regulator. It uses a standard M16 safety/selector. The comments on that page about it needing work to make it run with an FRT are for the Rare Breed/Delta Team Tactical FRT. Thanks, I saw that but didn’t want to assume anything… I also asked the man himself @duffy I think I got the answer I was hoping for!
|
|
So.a.Google.search says the Rare Breed Forced Rest trigger is patent 12,038,247 ok, so lets go look https://patents.google.com/patent/US12038247B2/en?oq=12%2c038%2c247 It's an extensive (and expensive) patent. And yes, per the Reeves interview, a patent is by design a monopoly and is supposed to be enforced. that's not wrong nor henious to do. So the patent has several independent claims (hence being an expensive one - price goes up). Are Super Safetys and other FRT's a violation of the RBT patent? I havent studied with great care (i'm drinking a beer in a bar in Mexico right now), but its not immediately obvious to me that they are not falling under at least one or more of those independent claims. I look forward to someone reading those claims and tell me a Super Safety isn't also being described. Because to me, it kind of looks like it is. You're not a dick for defending your patent. But that's your fight, not mine - if someone else is selling the same thing for 1/3 your prices and I'm not a patent attorny certain I'm violating it, that's your problem. Go tell a judge you are an Illegal seeking deportation protection if you want instant court service. ---------- As to henious ATF/RBT deal.. I guess we'll see. To me it's the obvious face value of if ATF can force RBT to enforce patent they now have one throat to choke. And others can be harassed by being in violation. And ATF knows RBT monopoly = $500 triggers = rare cottage industry level sales. Otherwise PSA will be offering it as a $75 upgrade and they will become very prolific. Notice they are not and all options are still cottage industry suppliers. RBT said Hell yes, because RBT spent real money on their suit and their patent expenses. Of course they want a monopoly as sole supplier on only route to legal Full Auto. You wouldn't? That's called business. |
|
Quoted: As long as it works with TDP spec M16 safety, it should work with ours, but to be on the safe side, use the conventional layout 0-90-180 ASF-SF or ASF-SFQ, not the short throw till we can test it Test will be shortly on the ASF-SFQ, as soon as you ship it! *check email* Crap, he shipped it about 4 minutes after I ordered it!
|
|
Quoted: Test will be shortly on the ASF-SFQ, as soon as you ship it! *check email* Crap, he shipped it about 4 minutes after I ordered it! Quoted: Quoted: As long as it works with TDP spec M16 safety, it should work with ours, but to be on the safe side, use the conventional layout 0-90-180 ASF-SF or ASF-SFQ, not the short throw till we can test it Test will be shortly on the ASF-SFQ, as soon as you ship it! *check email* Crap, he shipped it about 4 minutes after I ordered it! Is that a 0-60-120? Or 0-45-90? |
|
Ran 3 of the Schmiesser 60 rd mags and a Magpul D60 through my 3 position on Friday. A few guys at the range wanted to try it. Told them if they had the 5.56 on hand, go for it. 3 of them laughed their asses off after firing it. One guy had the "Not sure if this is legal" look on his face but tried it anyway. The 1st 3 said they were ordering one a piece ASAP. |
|
Quoted: Ran 3 of the Schmiesser 60 rd mags and a Magpul D60 through my 3 position on Friday. A few guys at the range wanted to try it. Told them if they had the 5.56 on hand, go for it. 3 of them laughed their asses off after firing it. One guy had the "Not sure if this is legal" look on his face but tried it anyway. The 1st 3 said they were ordering one a piece ASAP. You're doing the Lord's own work. The name of the game with these is PROLIFERATION. |
|
Quoted: Ive started getting my 3pos one to shoot in the forced reset mode while in the semi position. I haven't had the time to break it down but so far there's nothing glaringly out of place. Any ideas? Does it do it in every AR you have? If it's only doing it in one, it might be a tolerance issue now that it's broken in. How many rounds through yours? I have about 270 through mine with no issues going FRT in semi. The Regulator piece in the upper is basically stuck in the pocket and doesn't move (very tight fit). |
|
Quoted: Ive started getting my 3pos one to shoot in the forced reset mode while in the semi position. I haven't had the time to break it down but so far there's nothing glaringly out of place. Any ideas? Try a longer/stronger disco spring. The disco might be jumping out of engagement with the trigger when the bolt slams. Function check first by dropping the bolt hard from lock in semi with the trigger held back. |
|
Quoted: Try a longer/stronger disco spring. The disco might be jumping out of engagement with the trigger when the bolt slams. Function check first by dropping the bolt hard from lock in semi with the trigger held back. I've only seen the reduced power disconnector spring offered by Wolf Springs, and standard disconnector springs. Where do you go for longer/stronger disconnector springs? |
|
Quoted: Try a longer/stronger disco spring. The disco might be jumping out of engagement with the trigger when the bolt slams. Function check first by dropping the bolt hard from lock in semi with the trigger held back. What about if it also will sometimes binary on release, in semi mode? |
|
Quoted: Just look at the one that came with it and one you have laying around. You might be surprised. I noticed the difference between the the AZR disco spring and a milspec one when I was diagnosing mine (I installed the hammer spring in backwards lol). Eta: It’s funny that we're taking about this. I'm at the range right now and mine started bursting in SEMI. I pulled the Regulator out of the gun and it's fine now. |
My all time favorite frt so far   An FRT That's NOT A Trigger! |