Springfield 9mm EMP 3" roaster?

[glideher]

hey all,
friend of mine purchased a springfield 9mm 3" EMP in California, on the case there is a sticker that says "not on CA DOJ roaster" is there a reason for this, as far as we know the pistol is CA compliant.
any help would be appreciated.

[Pupulepeter]

Did he already take possession of the firearm?

[SkyHawk]

Those stickers mean nothing and seem to get put on boxes at random.

[glideher]

yes he has the firearm already purchased and loving it, just the sticker on the box is strange

[Pofoo]

Springfield did a major screw up a few yrs ago and changed the gun a bit but kept the same model no.
So, technically, they were not Ca. compliant. A manufacturer cannot change anything on the compliant pistols.
I think that they deleted the key lock, that wasn't a Ca necessity, but it was on the original pistol that they submitted.
It was a major cluster fu*k a few yrs ago. I don't know if it's ever been straightened out. I believe that only the one with the key lock on the grip is actually approved by Ca. DOJ, even thought you may find both models with the same model #.

[glideher]

interesting, yes this does not have the keylock, i also checked online and it states the EMP 3" is Cal compliant https://grabagun.com/springfield-105.html

Springfield did a major screw up a few yrs ago and changed the gun a bit but kept the same model no.
So, technically, they were not Ca. compliant. A manufacturer cannot change anything on the compliant pistols.
I think that they deleted the key lock, that wasn't a Ca necessity, but it was on the original pistol that they submitted.
It was a major cluster fu*k a few yrs ago. I don't know if it's ever been straightened out. I believe that only the one with the key lock on the grip is actually approved by Ca. DOJ, even thought you may find both models with the same model #.

[M76]

dibs on his other guns

[elSquid]

IIRC, there was also a non-roster variant that had G10 grips.

-- Michael

[glideher]

hmm that could have been it, the G10 grips was the 4" barrel i believe, and they must have used the same case as the 3" perhaps

IIRC, there was also a non-roster variant that had G10 grips.

-- Michael

[dfletcher]

I bought an EMP about 5 years back. The issue was SA used a "Series 70" mechanism (no FP block) and to cut the story short, a titanium FP and strong FP spring led to ignition problems. The case by case fix was replacing the titanium FP with an EMP specific steel one, which may or may not have made the (modified) EMP unable to pass a drop test.

I don't know if these fixes were done wholesale or used in all 3" 9mm EMPs after a certain date. This is the only issue I can think of that could be stretched to suppose a 3" 9mm EMP isn't CA compliant.

As mentioned, the simple answer is that label is slapped on all boxes or on that one by mistake, or that the box was for the steel framed 40 cal EMP which never was CA compliant.

He's got the gun, that's what counts.

[climber32]

Springfield did a major screw up a few yrs ago and changed the gun a bit but kept the same model no.
So, technically, they were not Ca. compliant. A manufacturer cannot change anything on the compliant pistols.
I think that they deleted the key lock, that wasn't a Ca necessity, but it was on the original pistol that they submitted.
It was a major cluster fu*k a few yrs ago. I don't know if it's ever been straightened out. I believe that only the one with the key lock on the grip is actually approved by Ca. DOJ, even thought you may find both models with the same model #.

Well, that explains much. Thank you for this information.

I tracked down an EMP-4 CCC that I just love. I bet your buddy with be happy with his OP. The 3" version if such a great little CCW piece.

[glideher]

awesome, thanks for all the great replies, i will pass on this information to him, and might even pick one up for myself, looks like a nifty little guy, cant go wrong with a 9mm short bull barrel

[kcheung2]

I'd pay extra just for that sticker.