PDA

View Full Version : Deleted


MaceWindu
08-09-2007, 12:09 PM
Deleted...

Calguns2000
08-09-2007, 1:13 PM
Wasn't the 6.8 spc round developed around 2003?

mzimmers
08-09-2007, 3:11 PM
This is a topic of interest to me. If the opportunity presented itself, I would probably avail myself of rebuild kits for my old 6.8 magazines in all capacities (20, 30, or whatever).

On a related note, I'm curious as to what modifications if any need to be made to 5.56 magazines to successfull accommodate the Ruger .204. If anyone has any knowledge of this I'd appreciate hearing about it.

Thanks...

SVRider
08-09-2007, 6:20 PM
If you use the 6.8 SPC body and any part of your pre-2000 5.56 (30) round magazine, you should have ZIPPO problems since technically you are "repairing/ rebuilding" a pre-2000 magazine...:)

Mace

Do you know for sure this is OK? I was considering doing the same for some Grendel mags if I bought an upper, but then ran into a question of the "repair parts" not being able to change caliber....they had to be caliber specific replacements. Can you verify this is OK?

Thx...

ryang
08-09-2007, 7:05 PM
If you use the 6.8 SPC body and any part of your pre-2000 5.56 (30) round magazine, you should have ZIPPO problems since technically you are "repairing/ rebuilding" a pre-2000 magazine...Oh gods no. Look, I realize you don't think "mere citizens" can write the DOJ and ask about magazine legalities, but you really should consider it in this case. I'm pretty sure you aren't going to take my word that what you're suggesting is most definitely a felony: illegal manufacture of a hi-cap mag.

Carbide
08-09-2007, 10:24 PM
a "10rd" Beowulf mag which is really a 30rd 223 mag is legal isn't it? What's the difference here, 30rd 223 mags hold how many 6.8 rds?

bwiese
08-09-2007, 11:24 PM
I have great great great concerns that rebuilding a hicap 223 into a hicap 6.8SPC mag may not be legal. At best it's at the edge of the law.

You're essentially creating a new magazine for a new application the old one did not serve/cover.

As I understand it also, 6.8SPC mags do not work well/properly/at all for 223/5.56, so you don't have any cover that it's still a 223/5.56 mag. If the latter were the case - and it worked 100% - you might have some cover.

Unless I had an opinion letter signed by senior DOJ staff - and I don't mean an infamous "Iggy letter"' or from a DOJ clerical person that writes replies and basically just recites guidebook information and not complete law - I would not touch this with a 10 foot pole. And I would not rely on any cop opinion, etc.

Mace, you're a great guy, but I think you're a bit far afield on this one.
(What material do you even have that would guide you to say this was legal? You're reading way to much into the DOJ's "repair parts for magazines are legal" letters if you're going by that.)

MaceWindu
08-09-2007, 11:46 PM
10-4 Bill. Consider this thread closed...


Mace

Digighost112
08-09-2007, 11:48 PM
10-4 Bill. Consider this thread closed...


Mace

Still looks open to me.