PDA

View Full Version : Hk Sr9


Omega13device
02-28-2007, 2:20 PM
Here's an interesting rifle for those of you into HKs...I believe it is off-list:

http://www.snipershide.net/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=105058&page=3#Post105058

Hunter
02-28-2007, 2:31 PM
Here's an interesting rifle for those of you into HKs...I believe it is off-list:

http://www.snipershide.net/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=105058&page=3#Post105058

Technically that rifle is in violation of 922(r) regs that were in full effect at the time of importation. To be free and clear of those regs, the rifle would need to have the PSG-1 trigger group and PSG-1 grip installed on it with the current MSG90 buttstock.

Why? Well these rifles were considered "sporting rifles" when built in that configuration (as SR9 (T) or (TC) ). This rifle was originally a SR9 that had a thumbhole stock on it to make it "sporting". The SR9(T) had the MSG-90 stock, that this one currently has, but it also had the psg-1 trigger and grip to be classified as a "target" aka "sporting" rifle. Without those items, it is a "non" sporting rifle.

rorschach
02-28-2007, 4:48 PM
Correct, unless it has the required US parts.

HK911, HK41 and HK43 are also offlist.

C123K_LoadMaster
02-28-2007, 7:43 PM
Here’s a SR9T

http://www.fototime.com/83F9F9581AFA813/standard.jpg

http://www.fototime.com/1482494C1176930/standard.jpg

Hunter
03-01-2007, 4:27 PM
Here’s a SR9T

http://www.fototime.com/83F9F9581AFA813/standard.jpg


With an incorrect forearm on it. The bipod forearm was not allowed as it took the rifles out of the "sporting" classifications. Stupid, but that is how it was ruled. Bipod=bad="non sporting" and there by violated 922(r) regulations. :rolleyes:

stag1500
03-12-2007, 3:49 PM
With an incorrect forearm on it. The bipod forearm was not allowed as it took the rifles out of the "sporting" classifications. Stupid, but that is how it was ruled. Bipod=bad="non sporting" and there by violated 922(r) regulations. :rolleyes:

I'm sure you're right, but why would the forearm matter so long as it is German made? I thought the trouble comes when you add American made parts to a rifle that was imported after 1989.

rorschach
03-12-2007, 4:53 PM
Bipods are a AW feature per 922r??

My HK911 came with a wide forearm with bipod slot in addition to the B&C and welded muzzle cap.

SafetyAgentMan
03-12-2007, 4:53 PM
Everybody just replaces the HK bipod with a Harris bipod. I get good accuracy with surplus ammo using the Harris bipod.

http://www.fototime.com/A31077A0A1C5BE1/standard.jpg

http://www.fototime.com/D468CD9108CECCB/standard.jpg

Hunter
03-12-2007, 5:28 PM
Bipods are a AW feature per 922r??

My HK911 came with a wide forearm with bipod slot in addition to the B&C and welded muzzle cap.

That is because someone swapped it after it left HK-USA. The whole issue with these rifles is that in order to actually sell them on the market, they either had to:

1) follow 922(r) regs that states it must have less than the magic 10 imported items

or

2) be in a "sporting" configuration with the 100% HK imported parts (talking about the 922(r) list here).

Well meeting #1 was not an option in 1989-1991 when these rifles and the SR9 series were brought out. So HK-USA had to configure these rifle as "sporting" rifles. By ATF definition at that time, it was determined that removal of the standard buttstock and forearm (since it could accept a military bipod) would then be considered "sporting". HK could either use a thumbhole stock, MSG90 or PSG1 buttstocks on these rifles. But in all cases they had to use a forearm without the military bipod mount on it. So they just had BC developed a new one for releasing the HK911s and then continue to use that same one on the SR9 rifles (std, T, and TC models all had the same forearm)

Also, you have to remember that in 1990 the harris bipod was not really used in the hunting and shooting sports as it is today. Back then, the HK military bipod was seen more as a "tactical" feature and not a "sporting" feature.

So the bottomline is that in order to avoid 922(r) entirely, these rifles (HK911 and SR9s) had to be "sporting" rifles and that was spelled out at the time to HK-USA as not using the std HK-91 furniture except for the pistol grip on these rifles.

On a side note, even Springfield Armory was hit with this on their SAR-8s. There was a period when they sold them with the HK-91 forearm but it had the bipod channel cut off!

Here is a little exerpt from the ATF that shows why option #2 for desiging a "sporting" rifle had to include removal of the bipod:

As a result of a 1989 study by the U.S. Treasury Department regarding the importability of
certain firearms, an import ban was placed on military-style firearms. This ban included not only
military-type firearms, but also extended to firearms with certain features that were considered to
be “nonsporting.”
Among such nonsporting features were the ability to accept a detachable magazine;
folding/telescoping stocks; separate pistol grips; and the ability to accept a bayonet, flash
suppressors, bipods, grenade launchers, and night sights.

One has to wonder how many "non sporting" features one could have and still be a "sporting" firearm. In the case of the SR9 and HK911, it meant having 2 "nonsporting" features out of the 8 listed.


I'm sure you're right, but why would the forearm matter so long as it is German made? I thought the trouble comes when you add American made parts to a rifle that was imported after 1989.


Actually it is just the opposite. If it has less than 10 imported items (from 922(r) list) then it can be configured anyway you want. On the otherhand, if it is 100% HK then it is limited to the configuration allowed...which is basically those configurations that fit the HK911, SR9, SR9T or SR9TC configurations.

If you are not familiar with 922(r) regs it basically says:

... an acceptably redesigned semiautomatic copy of nonsporting firearm must be limited to
using less than 10 of the imported parts listed in 27 CFR § 478.39(c). Otherwise, it is considered
to be assembled into a nonsporting configuration per the provisions of 18 U.S.C. 925(d)(3) and is
thus a violation of § 922(r).

rorschach
03-12-2007, 5:42 PM
I guess it doesnt matter now anyway, since I swapped in US parts on my 911 so I could ditch the butthole stock and sill barrel shroud.

+1 for the Harris bipod, I like them, they are a very useful tool, but they just look plain goofy on an HK rifle.