PDA

View Full Version : Mech Tech Conversions


kstrongsyj
04-06-2009, 5:33 AM
http://mechtechsys.com/index.html

OK, I get that this in its standard configuration would create an assault rifle. My question, if I figured out how to pin the mag in the pistol frame, would this become a legal setup?

Also, would owning it, assembled with a lower, create any problems?

Thanks CG'ers.

odesskiy
04-06-2009, 6:34 AM
If you pin the mag, how are you going to load it?

http://mechtechsys.com/index.html

OK, I get that this in its standard configuration would create an assault rifle. My question, if I figured out how to pin the mag in the pistol frame, would this become a legal setup?

Also, would owning it, assembled with a lower, create any problems?

Thanks CG'ers.

DRH
04-06-2009, 7:44 AM
Actually a pistol can be converted back and forth from rifle to pistol. The "once a rifle always a rifle" is in regards to frames and receivers. If you have a virgin reciever it can never be a pistol if it has been assembled as a rifle (unless you SBR it and pay the tax).

dfletcher
04-06-2009, 8:52 AM
Actually a pistol can be converted back and forth from rifle to pistol. The "once a rifle always a rifle" is in regards to frames and receivers. If you have a virgin reciever it can never be a pistol if it has been assembled as a rifle (unless you SBR it and pay the tax).

Not true - here's a link to a previous thread with the ATF info letter.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=124598&highlight=reconfigure+encore&page=3

ATF still takes the position that once configured as a rifle a firearm can not be reconfigured as a handgun. That goes for ARs, T/Cs (except for those specific kits mentioned in the letter) and 1911s, etc. The theory behind the Mech Tech is that folks supposedly buy a 1911 (or Glock) frame and commit it to rifle status. Supposedly.

kstrongsyj
04-06-2009, 8:37 PM
So if I dedicated a Glock for this it could be legal? From what I am seeing, I may not have to pin the mag as it loads in the grip??

ke6guj
04-06-2009, 8:50 PM
I'd like to see the documentation for that. It would make me very happy if you could provide that. :thumbsup:+1. I have repeatedly asked Mech-tech if they had any documentation, and on the one occasion they did respond, they though my question was interesting and that they would look into it, and asked me to as well. When I responded with the ATF letters that conflicted with their advertising, I never heard back.


. The theory behind the Mech Tech is that folks supposedly buy a 1911 (or Glock) frame and commit it to rifle status. Supposedly.Not according to Mech-Tech. Nowhere on their site do I see them say that. Other people who have read the T/C ruling and ATF letters say that that is the smart thing to do.


So if I dedicated a Glock for this it could be legal? From what I am seeing, I may not have to pin the mag as it loads in the grip??it would be a rifle AW at that point since it would be a semi-auto detachable-mag'ed center-fire rifle with a pistol girp. Loading through the grip only matters for pistol AW status, not rifle.

DRH
04-06-2009, 10:40 PM
I'd like to see the documentation for that. It would make me very happy if you could provide that. :thumbsup:

From the list of NFA info in Bardwel's fine NFA library:
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/law.html

You have a very similar product to the mech-tech conversion approved by the ATF as a non NFA weapon -

Revenue ruling 59-340 pistol convertibility into rifle.
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/rr_59340.txt


Here is another applicable ruling and the text is below with the relevant portions highlighted

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/rr_61203.txt

Revenue Ruling 61-203 shoulder stocked pistols

A hand gun of the Luger or semi-automatic Mauser type, as
well as the Fiala Arms and Equipment Company, Inc., .22
caliber pistol, with a barrel of less than 16 inches in length
is a "firearm," if it has an attached or attachable shoulder
stock.
However, where a hand gun of this type has a barrel of 16
inches or more in length, it is not a "firearm" even though
such weapon has an attached or attachable shoulder stock.

Advice has been requested, whether semi-automatic hand guns,
such as Luger and Mauser pistols, and single shot .22 caliber
pistols made by the Fiala Arms and Equipment Company, Inc., with
attached or attachable shoulder stocks are "firearms" as defined in
section 5848(1) of the National Firearms Act (Chapter 53 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1954).
Basically such types of weapons were originally designed as
pistols. However, they are also designed to function as rifles
which shoulder stocks are attached.
Section 5848(1) of the National Firearms Act defines the term
"firearm" as follows:

The term "firearm" means a shotgun having a barrel or barrels
of less than 18 inches in length, or a rifle having a barrel
or barrels of less than 16 inches in length, or any weapon
made from a rifle or shotgun (whether by alteration,
modification, or otherwise) if such weapon as modified has an
overall length of less than 26 inches, or any other weapon,
except a pistol or revolver, from which a shot is discharged
by an explosive if such weapon is capable of being concealed
on the person, or a machine gun, and includes a muffler or
silencer for any firearm whether or not such firearm is
included within the foregoing definition.

Accordingly, a handgun of the Luger or semi-automatic Mauser
type, as well as the Fiala Arms and Equipment Company, Inc., .22
caliber pistol, with a barrel of less than 16 inches in length, is
held to be a "firearm," as that term is defined in section 5848(1)
of the Act, if such weapon has an attached or attachable shoulder
stock. See also Rev. Rul. 61-45, C.B. 1961-1, 663.
Conversely, where one of the above described pistols has a
barrel of 16 inches or more in length, it is held not to be a
"firearm," within the definition of 5848(1) of the Act, even though
such weapon has an attached or attachable shoulder stock. With the
shoulder stock attached such weapon is a rifle. When the shoulder
stock is detached, such weapon is a pistol, and is deemed not to
have been made from a rifle. On the other hand, certain types of weapons are not designed
to function as pistols. This category includes semi-automatic
weapons with folding shoulder stocks such as the U. S. Carbine,
caliber .30, model MIAI, and the Marble Game Getter Gun. These
weapons were originally designed to fire from the shoulder.
Therefore, any such weapon with a folding shoulder stock is
held not to be a "firearm," as that term is defined in section
5848(1) of the Act, if it has either a rifled barrel of 16 inches
or more in length or a combination of a rifled and smooth bore
barrels of 18 inches or more in length. However, if the shoulder
stock is removed from such a weapon it will be classified as a
"firearm," as that terms is defined in section 5848(1) of the Act,
if its overall length is less than 26 inches.


I hope this helps clear up the matter.

I forgot to add that I have a mechtech conversion for my registered Glock 23 and you would be better to spend your money on a different carbine (something easier to disassemble/clean and a tad more reliable)

kstrongsyj
04-07-2009, 5:40 AM
I forgot to add that I have a mechtech conversion for my registered Glock 23 and you would be better to spend your money on a different carbine (something easier to disassemble/clean and a tad more reliable)

Can you ellaborate here? What problems have you had with it?

I read and read and re read this post, and I think I got it....If I want to use one of these, the best/safest/most legal practice is to dedicate a lower receiver to it, and cut off the mag release into a bullet button. So my next question is, if I have a registered Glock, and convert it permanently to this rifle system, do I have to do anything to change the status of the frame being registered as a pistol?

kstrongsyj
04-07-2009, 5:55 AM
Or what about this.....

If I had an FFL out of state put a Glock receiver on a mech tech, convert to bullet button, and ship it in, would be a "rifle" and be DROS'd as such? Eliminating the question what so ever....

DRH
04-07-2009, 9:31 AM
Can you ellaborate here? What problems have you had with it?

I read and read and re read this post, and I think I got it....If I want to use one of these, the best/safest/most legal practice is to dedicate a lower receiver to it, and cut off the mag release into a bullet button. So my next question is, if I have a registered Glock, and convert it permanently to this rifle system, do I have to do anything to change the status of the frame being registered as a pistol?

The upper is extremely hard to disassemble for cleaning without damaging the springs. After a hundred rounds or so the firing pin would stick and cause failures to feed. When I said I had a registered Glock, I meant registered assault weapon not a registered pistol. The above rulings outline the legality of converting a pistol into a rifle and back into a pistol. The one piece design of the mechtech upper eliminates the constructive possession issues encountered with other weapon system conversions like the uzi pistol. If you really want one just modify the magazine release to require a tool and limit yourself to 10 rounds or less. The conversion does not need to be permanent. Maybe with a little more time and tweaking the Mechtech could become reliable but I would never use it as a defensive weapon.

dfletcher
04-08-2009, 7:51 AM
The upper is extremely hard to disassemble for cleaning without damaging the springs. After a hundred rounds or so the firing pin would stick and cause failures to feed. When I said I had a registered Glock, I meant registered assault weapon not a registered pistol. The above rulings outline the legality of converting a pistol into a rifle and back into a pistol. The one piece design of the mechtech upper eliminates the constructive possession issues encountered with other weapon system conversions like the uzi pistol. If you really want one just modify the magazine release to require a tool and limit yourself to 10 rounds or less. The conversion does not need to be permanent. Maybe with a little more time and tweaking the Mechtech could become reliable but I would never use it as a defensive weapon.


I never had a problem with my 1911 version - but I wasn't too keen on cleaning it, so maybe a slightly dirty MT is a reliable MT. Clearly in the "fun gun" category. BTW, have you seen prices on the Marlin 9mm & 45 ACP? Folks want $550.00 to $900.00 for these things - hardwood stocks, plastic housings and crappy triggers. I paid $299.00 for mine & had to think twice about it.

Regarding the "handgun to rifle & back" issue, I recall the Unique set up and would be very interested in the ATF position on that specifically as it seems to closely mirror the Mech Tech. My bet would be that since the handgun and "upper" were made by the same manufacturer, they are OK just as only the T/C kits are OK. Just a guess.

But here's why I think the ATF letter is most relevent. Although the fellow asked a question about an Uzi, ATF referenced the SCOTUS T/C decision which involved taking a handgun frame with a less than 16" bbl, attaching a shoulder stock and a greater than 16" bbl to create a rifle, then reconfiguring back to a handgun. The letter addresses the act of reconfiguring, not just the status of the firearm as reconfigured. So the letter comes from the governmental agency most involved with firearm enforcement addressing a question that most closely reflects what would be done with a handgun and the Mech Tech.

No doubt ATF are being absolute weasels on this issue. In stating the T/C kits alone were OK but other identical T/Cs are not OK for reconfiguration, ATF in effect takes the position that this SCOTUS ruling applies to only the folks bringing that case - it's the equivilent of asserting an age discrimination decision applies only to the 66 year old bringing the case & not to other 66 year olds in the same situation.

I think there's progress to be made, considering the current make up of the court. If T/C made & packaged another handgun/rifle kit it should have protection. Maybe Rossi or H & R would make handgun frame & barrel versions of their interchangable barrel rifles.

The whole configuration issue seems antiquated and harkens back to days of sawed off barrels and stocks and NFA 1934. The technology that allows us to readily switch out barrels and frames and stocks has I think outstripped these 75 year old laws.

Mulay El Raisuli
04-09-2009, 6:27 AM
I never had a problem with my 1911 version - but I wasn't too keen on cleaning it, so maybe a slightly dirty MT is a reliable MT. Clearly in the "fun gun" category. BTW, have you seen prices on the Marlin 9mm & 45 ACP? Folks want $550.00 to $900.00 for these things - hardwood stocks, plastic housings and crappy triggers. I paid $299.00 for mine & had to think twice about it.


Could you please define "fun gun" for me? Do you mean good only for fun, & not for serious use? There aren't many .45ACP carbines out there since Marlin stopped making theirs & I have a strong desire for one. But your comments, along with DRH's have me re-thinking this. The legalities don't bother me as I have no problems with dedicating a frame to the project, but I would like to have something that can be depended upon at the end of the exercise.

Is there anyone else here with one? Someone who can add to the discussion about the thing's reliability?

The Raisuli

dfletcher
04-09-2009, 8:02 AM
Could you please define "fun gun" for me? Do you mean good only for fun, & not for serious use? There aren't many .45ACP carbines out there since Marlin stopped making theirs & I have a strong desire for one. But your comments, along with DRH's have me re-thinking this. The legalities don't bother me as I have no problems with dedicating a frame to the project, but I would like to have something that can be depended upon at the end of the exercise.

Is there anyone else here with one? Someone who can add to the discussion about the thing's reliability?

The Raisuli

I use mine for plinking and 50 yd target shooting at whatever the biggest shoot 'n see target is I happen to have at my range bag. I pretty much always use 230 FMJ - which probably wouldn't be a best choice for self defense as compared to JHPs. Even then, I notice different brands of 230 FMJ have very different points of impact. My guess is it groups 2" or so @ 50 yds.

Since using the MT requires a 10 round pinned mag & already having Mini 14s and M1 carbines, M1A with detach hi caps if I were to use a carbine for defense I'd use one of those.

Take a look at the wire stocked version:http://www.mechtechsys.com/

That's the model (with some extras) that I have, with the wire stock pinned open. But that entire wire stock can be removed & what's left? A semi auto handgun with a 16 1/4" bbl. The question I would have is does the front end constitute some sort of shroud or 2nd grip that puts it in AW category? The barrel isn't threaded. I suppose if you were to assemble the unit with a handgun, then remove the wire stock you've created an SBR. But since the unit without a gun attached is nothing, you can remove the wire stock, then attach the handgun and have a fairly potent & compact defense gun - end result is the same gun as would be had with an SBR, if a person wanted that sort of thing. And since it's simply a long barreled handgun, you could use hi caps.

Anyway, my 1911 version is reliable. I suppose if you get it running with suitable ammo and don't mind the pinned mag set up it would work fine for defense.

El Gato
04-09-2009, 8:34 AM
Interesting...
so the thing is too complicated to clean easily....
always wondered...
Also wondered if a Monster Man type arrangement could be done so that I could use my hi-caps....and then switch it back to handgun etc...
I have the stick mags for the 9mm and while it is not something that works real well for target shooting... the heavy mag causes the gun to swing under recoil... it would be just dandy in a rifle...MM grip and glock lower... I'm just thinkin'....

dfletcher
04-09-2009, 11:54 AM
Interesting...
so the thing is too complicated to clean easily....
always wondered...
Also wondered if a Monster Man type arrangement could be done so that I could use my hi-caps....and then switch it back to handgun etc...
I have the stick mags for the 9mm and while it is not something that works real well for target shooting... the heavy mag causes the gun to swing under recoil... it would be just dandy in a rifle...MM grip and glock lower... I'm just thinkin'....

Not too complicated, just tedious if you take the "guts" out of the housing unit to clean which to me is a bit over eager. I think you can do a very good job of cleaning without taking the thing apart that much. But again, no one ever accused me of cleaning a gun "too much".

With a 1911 you could probably use a main spring housing unit with an MMG "wing" arrangement, for me that's a bit too much of a pain.

DarkHorse
04-09-2009, 2:15 PM
Plus, w/ a 1911 wouldn't you have to address the grip safety, if creating a MMG-type setup?

Mulay El Raisuli
04-10-2009, 7:39 AM
I use mine for plinking and 50 yd target shooting at whatever the biggest shoot 'n see target is I happen to have at my range bag. I pretty much always use 230 FMJ - which probably wouldn't be a best choice for self defense as compared to JHPs. Even then, I notice different brands of 230 FMJ have very different points of impact. My guess is it groups 2" or so @ 50 yds.

Since using the MT requires a 10 round pinned mag & already having Mini 14s and M1 carbines, M1A with detach hi caps if I were to use a carbine for defense I'd use one of those.

Take a look at the wire stocked version:http://www.mechtechsys.com/

That's the model (with some extras) that I have, with the wire stock pinned open. But that entire wire stock can be removed & what's left? A semi auto handgun with a 16 1/4" bbl. The question I would have is does the front end constitute some sort of shroud or 2nd grip that puts it in AW category? The barrel isn't threaded. I suppose if you were to assemble the unit with a handgun, then remove the wire stock you've created an SBR. But since the unit without a gun attached is nothing, you can remove the wire stock, then attach the handgun and have a fairly potent & compact defense gun - end result is the same gun as would be had with an SBR, if a person wanted that sort of thing. And since it's simply a long barreled handgun, you could use hi caps.

Anyway, my 1911 version is reliable. I suppose if you get it running with suitable ammo and don't mind the pinned mag set up it would work fine for defense.


That's all good to know. I was primarily worried about reliability. And, 2in groups @ 50yds is good enough for me. That's better than I can do with a handgun.

My thought was the unit with the M4 stock so my nieces & nephews could shoot it. Also, I was thinking of holding off until I either leave the PRK or the law changes to where the thing is legal. Then I wouldn't have to pin the magazine & such.

The Raisuli