PDA

View Full Version : Question about FA parts in an AR.


maddog
05-18-2009, 6:37 PM
I read this posted here on this forum.
Could someone explain what this means?
Thanks


"Having the FA BCG in your upper is asking for trouble! It only takes some DA somewhere with an agenda to ruin your life (EX: Nifong). IMHO, having ANY FA part in your AR has the potential to come back and bite you in the a__! I'd recommend a SA BCG ASAP! "

6172crew
05-18-2009, 6:41 PM
I read this posted here on this forum.
Could someone explain what this means?
Thanks


"Having the FA BCG in your upper is asking for trouble! It only takes some DA somewhere with an agenda to ruin your life (EX: Nifong). IMHO, having ANY FA part in your AR has the potential to come back and bite you in the a__! I'd recommend a SA BCG ASAP! "

Mine came from the factory with them.:confused:

NRAhighpowershooter
05-18-2009, 6:42 PM
FUD pure and simple..............

Barney Gumble
05-18-2009, 6:51 PM
I read this posted here on this forum.
Could someone explain what this means?
Thanks


"Having the FA BCG in your upper is asking for trouble! It only takes some DA somewhere with an agenda to ruin your life (EX: Nifong). IMHO, having ANY FA part in your AR has the potential to come back and bite you in the a__! I'd recommend a SA BCG ASAP! "

It's BS from someone who hasn't done their homework.

383green
05-18-2009, 6:58 PM
I believe that the above answers are correct. However, just in case you were actually asking what "FA BCG" means:

"FA" = fully automatic, i.e. referring to one of the components which are different in a semi-auto AR15 than they are in a full-auto M16.

"BCG" = bolt carrier group.

The bolt carrier in an M16 is shaped a bit differently than the ones you'll generally find in an AR15. The M16 ones have a portion on the bottom which is intended to trip the M16's auto sear when the bolt goes into battery. Most AR15 bolt carrier have that portion of the bolt carrier machined away such that they would not trip the auto sear if installed in an M16. However, it's my understanding that some manufacturer(s), at some time(s), shipped semi-auto AR15 rifles intended for the US civilian market with the M16 style of bolt carrier installed. It's also my understanding that ATF was/is OK with that.

In contrast, certain other M16 parts are strict no-nos, including the selector, hammer, disconnectors, auto sear, or the extra hole for the auto sear in the lower receiver.

Somebody please correct me if I've mis-stated anything... I've never touched a real M16 so far.

1859sharps
05-18-2009, 7:03 PM
Two part answer.

Part one. don't put full auto parts in your semi auto rifle. they just might do what they are supposed to do at the most inappropriate time.

Part two. Bolt carrier. does not apply to thoughts from part one.


Nothing dangerous or illegal about putting a "full auto" bolt carrier into your rifle.

While the full auto parts need the "full auto" bolt carrier to work, the full auto bolt carrier by it's self does not enable your rifle to fire full auto.

Some manufactures were catching heat back in the day because it was "easy" to convert a semi to full. Some truth, but not as much as the propaganda would have you believe. So they created the "semi auto" bolt carrier for political reasons. at least that is my memory from the early 90's.

bwiese
05-18-2009, 8:08 PM
1859Sharps has the right info.

lomalinda
05-18-2009, 8:17 PM
If your rifle double-tapped and people nearby thought it was modified for FA, would having the FA bolt help make the case against you?

Personally, if you're going to say that people shouldn't have fake cans or 10/30 mags, it seems like going the extra step and getting a SA bolt would make sense, too.

Prob applies to AK builds, too, unless SA bolts aren't available in the first place.

DDT
05-18-2009, 9:02 PM
If your rifle double-tapped and people nearby thought it was modified for FA, would having the FA bolt help make the case against you?

No.



Personally, if you're going to say that people shouldn't have fake cans or 10/30 mags, it seems like going the extra step and getting a SA bolt would make sense, too.

FA and SA bolts look the same in the normal operation of a firearm. The other items make the gun look like an assault weapon.


Prob applies to AK builds, too, unless SA bolts aren't available in the first place.

Don't know nuttin' 'bout AKs.

HotRails
05-18-2009, 10:30 PM
Prob applies to AK builds, too, unless SA bolts aren't available in the first place.

Most AK's are built from foreign imported parts kits that all have the auto sear trip on the bolt carrier. As has been stated before, having this does not altar the rifles function in any way.

B Strong
05-19-2009, 6:11 AM
Two part answer.

Part one. don't put full auto parts in your semi auto rifle. they just might do what they are supposed to do at the most inappropriate time.

Part two. Bolt carrier. does not apply to thoughts from part one.


Nothing dangerous or illegal about putting a "full auto" bolt carrier into your rifle.

While the full auto parts need the "full auto" bolt carrier to work, the full auto bolt carrier by it's self does not enable your rifle to fire full auto.

Some manufactures were catching heat back in the day because it was "easy" to convert a semi to full. Some truth, but not as much as the propaganda would have you believe. So they created the "semi auto" bolt carrier for political reasons. at least that is my memory from the early 90's.

Correct.

Assembling a semi-auto rifle with a FA bolt carrier will not facilitate FA function by itself.

There is one absolute exception though.

A full auto (open) bolt for the Uzi carbine that has been "slotted" to fit the semi-auto version without modification to the receiver is an NFA weapon into and of itself.

r08ert209cali
05-19-2009, 6:20 AM
no other happy parts or holes good to go.

Just a question but if yo had a fa bcg and the extra hole and selector but none of the others that would be risky right? Is the extra hole alone bad news?

WHenderson
05-19-2009, 7:29 AM
In contrast, certain other M16 parts are strict no-nos, including the selector, hammer, disconnectors, auto sear, or the extra hole for the auto sear in the lower receiver.



Why is the auto sear hole in an AR-15 lower receiver a no-no? It's just a hole. It can't produce multiple rounds fired with a single pull of the trigger.

383green
05-19-2009, 9:04 AM
Why is the auto sear hole in an AR-15 lower receiver a no-no? It's just a hole. It can't produce multiple rounds fired with a single pull of the trigger.

The same could be said of the auto sear, or the auto disconnector, or the auto selector. Any one of them, by itself, won't make the rifle go FA. Still, if I am not mistaken, possessing any one of them along with an AR15 would be considered constructive possession of a machinegun by the BATFE.

Now, I could be mistaken about the legal status of the "go fast" hole itself (just as there is some confusion out there about the legal status of the FA BCG), but I think it's a no-no. As far as I know, no legal AR15 manufacturer includes that hole in their AR15 receivers, and its presence would indicate that the receiver itself was manufactured as a FA M16 receiver. If an owner drilled that hole into a regular AR15 receiver, I think that could be used as evidence that they were trying to convert their AR15 into a FA weapon.

Somebody please correct me if you have specific and supportable information about the legal status of the auto sear hole.

383green
05-19-2009, 9:12 AM
no other happy parts or holes good to go.

Just a question but if yo had a fa bcg and the extra hole and selector but none of the others that would be risky right? Is the extra hole alone bad news?


I could be mistaken, but I think that the FA selector is one of the restricted "happy parts", even though it won't make the rifle go FA without the other FA parts in place.

I'm less certain about the extra hole, but I think it's bad to have, too.

Marking the (unused) FA position on the receiver, i.e. "AUTO", "SHTF", "FUN" "ZOMBIES" etc. is perfectly legal... but is also asking for unwanted and unneeded trouble at this time, according to the folks here who understand what's going on in CA much better than I do. It has been advised that marking the unused FA position is a bad idea at this time.