PDA

View Full Version : Valmet question


tankerman
02-15-2008, 1:43 PM
Lets take a look at Valmet.

These are all Roberti-Roos AW Listed
The M-76 S and Hunter Rifle, M-62 S, M-71 S, M-78 S

With regards to the M-76
What about these variations?
Are they actaul model name changing variations?
M76T (tubular butt-stock), the M76F (folding butt-stock), the M76P (plastic butt-stock), and the M76W (wooden butt-stock).


Some manufacturers on the R/R AW List have (ALL) list next to some of their models. So, what does the "S" mean that's next to these R/R listed Valmet rifles? Does it stand for series? Are all M-76 series rifles covered by Roberti-Roos, even though it does not say "All" next to the model? Or does M-76s = plural, meaning all?

Are the Valmet M-76 receivers all stamped "S" and the T,F,P,W additional, example M76S-F?

Made in 4 different calibers
7.62 Russian
7.62 NATO
5.56 NATO
.222

Since no caliber is listed on R/R AW List, if the caliber is marked as a model variation/change would that mean they are legal to transfer?

Did Sako also produce some of this family of rifles? No Sako's are listed.

Thanks for the help.

bwiese
02-15-2008, 2:44 PM
Tankerman,

You indeed are exposing yet another post-Harrott unclarity on the RR & Kasler lists.

In theory, M76 vs M76S vs M76T etc. are separate models since one descriptor does not describe the other - and if M76 were to describe the others, it would form a "series", and then would require specific listing.

But I think the Valmet case you use as an example falls into the "readily defendable" category, but not necessarily "recommended conduct" given it's so close and too close for comfort.

I'd be comfortable with owning (mythical) "mix & match" OLL combinations like a Colt XM15 or a Bushmaster AR15. But asserting a Valment M76S isn't listed, when an M76 is, is a bit more aggressive.

Also, no "all" term was used in the Valmets; a listing entry like "Colt Match Target (all)" would most likely be regarded as covering such variations like "Colt Match Target Competition HBar II". One could argue that this was a (sub)series as well - but it could evolve into a "Son of Harrott" case.

I will note that DOJ's Iggy was heard to have stated that the Colt Match Targets that Evan's Gunsmithing/GBSales welded up wouldn't be considered "listed" because they were really Colt MT6700s or MT6450s (or whatever). [This was a bit before the Nov 2006 4-5hr DOJ meeting dealing with Evan's AR issues, where how far Iggy went off the reservation was discussed, and apparently a special manufacturing permit was given to him to help reverse course and re-mark any 'listed' guns.] By that standard, a plain ol' "Colt AR15" is not listed either because it's really an R6000, R6600, etc.]

Caliber usually is not a model designation except in rare instances. Some of the RAAC Saiga rifles actually have the caliber designation as part of the model "Saiga 308" and "Saiga 223". Aside from RAAC Saigas not being a banned make/model combination, the fact that some of these guns are denoted by model "Saiga NNN" is a further distinction.

tankerman
02-15-2008, 3:58 PM
But if the State does use minor model/name changes - (dashes), alphabetical/numerical suffixes etc.. to describe what is an approved handgun and what is not.

Would that also not show that the state does in fact distinguish between various models of firearms by acknowledging minor naming changes?

When in fact most of these changes refer mostly to nothing more than changes in colors, coatings, sights etc...

Steyr_223
02-16-2008, 9:16 AM
Valmet 308 Hunter model..So this is legal..Hmm..

http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=92197536

http://www.pdmall.com/1/1/1%207509.jpg

Model M78 looks to evil to be legal..

http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=92154708

http://san1.atlanta.gbhinc.com/GB/092154000/92154708/pix2760905125.jpg

Addax
02-16-2008, 10:48 AM
With the Valmet Rifles in the 76 series, that is cutting it even closer, too close for comfort in my opinion. Since the mfg. Valmet and the model 76 is listed, and the difference being 1 letter after the 76 might not be a significant difference in a court room even though they may have a different stock configuration.

If it was Valmet 99 Sporter, or Valmet M-766 Sporter, or even M-766 and maybe it used a thumbhole sporter stock or had a muzzle brake installed and a sporter stock configuration, then you could have a little more to go on in case you were defending yourself.

Think of the HK91 and the HK911, there is only 1 numeral difference between both models, but the 911 has the thumbhole stock, no flash hider and that is more of a sporter configuration.

virulosity
02-16-2008, 11:53 AM
If you have a good lawyer you will be fine. If you don't have a lawyer, you still might be fine as long as you don't get yourself into a situation where a LEO would want to read the markings on your receiver. And make sure you contact your FFL so that you know what they are comfortable with before you make a purchase.

jdberger
02-16-2008, 12:04 PM
But if the State does use minor model/name changes - (dashes), alphabetical/numerical suffixes etc.. to describe what is an approved handgun and what is not.

Would that also not show that the state does in fact distinguish between various models of firearms by acknowledging minor naming changes?

When in fact most of these changes refer mostly to nothing more than changes in colors, coatings, sights etc...

My thoughts exactly....of course, getting a judge to agree that the naming and approval/denial conventions are ignorant and capricious is likely an expensive proposition.

I wonder if something legally pre-emptive could be done about this without exposing someone to prosecution....

bwiese
02-16-2008, 12:22 PM
But if the State does use minor model/name changes - (dashes), alphabetical/numerical suffixes etc... to describe what is an approved handgun and what is not.

Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't.

The Roster allows, say, an S&W 686-8 but not a 686-4. They're appreciably the same.

Basically they use the model # that was submitted by the mfgr.

I will note that Glocks have had substantial redesigns over their lifespans (called Gen I... Gen III) even though they have the same model name. This could well trigger another Harrott-like case.

I believe various Glock-related situations will come to bear in further drama relating to the Roster of approved handguns.

In addition, we have conflict because we have some (perhaps casual) statement from DOJ that the Olympic exemption list - which exempts S&W Model 52s - encompasses Model 52-2s.

So we're in an interesting state of lack of uniformity & confusion brought to us by the loving incompetents at the DOJ.

My overall sentiments for listed vs off-list AW models: don't rely on 'submodel' variations or small suffix changes to differentiate; don't play trivial 'name games'.

If Firepower, Inc. Model X39 is banned by name, I'd not try to acquire a very similar Firepower, Inc. "X39 Sporter" or "X39S" that was appreciably similar. I'd feel perfectly safe, however, buying a Firepower X40, or Q22, etc.

I'd not feel good about getting a Colt AR15 Supermatch or a Bushmaster XM15 Tactical, even though there's no "all" postpended. I'd have no problem buying a "Bushmaster AR15" or a "Colt XM15", however. And I would not try to play games with missing vs. mistakenly included hyphenations ("AR-15" vs. "AR15"). Some of this crap, regardless of
Harrott, just doesn't pass the smell test. You don't wanna end up on the margins of Harrott, having to fight "son-of-Harrott" or have to risk going thru an expensive appeals process.

virulosity
02-16-2008, 5:05 PM
Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't.

The Roster allows, say, an S&W 686-8 but not a 686-4. They're appreciably the same.

Basically they use the model # that was submitted by the mfgr.

I will note that Glocks have had substantial redesigns over their lifespans (called Gen I... Gen III) even though they have the same model name. This could well trigger another Harrott-like case.

I believe various Glock-related situations will come to bear in further drama relating to the Roster of approved handguns.

In addition, we have conflict because we have some (perhaps casual) statement from DOJ that the Olympic exemption list - which exempts S&W Model 52s - encompasses Model 52-2s.

So we're in an interesting state of lack of uniformity & confusion brought to us by the loving incompetents at the DOJ.

My overall sentiments for listed vs off-list AW models: don't rely on 'submodel' variations or small suffix changes to differentiate; don't play trivial 'name games'.

If Firepower, Inc. Model X39 is banned by name, I'd not try to acquire a very similar Firepower, Inc. "X39 Sporter" or "X39S" that was appreciably similar. I'd feel perfectly safe, however, buying a Firepower X40, or Q22, etc.

I'd not feel good about getting a Colt AR15 Supermatch or a Bushmaster XM15 Tactical, even though there's no "all" postpended. I'd have no problem buying a "Bushmaster AR15" or a "Colt XM15", however. And I would not try to play games with missing vs. mistakenly included hyphenations ("AR-15" vs. "AR15"). Some of this crap, regardless of
Harrott, just doesn't pass the smell test. You don't wanna end up on the margins of Harrott, having to fight "son-of-Harrott" or have to risk going thru an expensive appeals process.

You make an interesting point about how specific a model name is depends on whether its a rifle or a handgun. Or in reality it just depends on whether it benefits the DOJ or not.

bwiese
02-16-2008, 6:24 PM
You make an interesting point about how specific a model name is depends on whether its a rifle or a handgun. Or in reality it just depends on whether it benefits the DOJ or not.

Yes, one would think there should be the same listing standards for any list of guns promulgated by legislation or DOJ.