MPX featureless. Would this work?

[1911su16b870]

That brings us to something I have been thinking about. Can you argue that the rifle does not have a flash hider just because it is covered? The law says nothing about it actually being functional

I have personally witnessed a three prong flash hider on a 556 rifle work as intended. Then you add a "blast jacket", "warden" or "pyro" style "linear blast diverter/brake" attachment to that 3-prong and - now there is a definite flash!

[damngato]

What about one of these?

http://www.usmachinegun.com/proddetail.php?prod=SK-MPXV

[kustomkat1950]

Take all six off....wait.

[spoof145]

Try it and see. Shoot it before and after. See what the difference is.
You can always buy something else, there are several 3" or longer muzzle breaks you can get, and just pay a gun smith to remove current, then pin and weld the new one.

[AGFNTB]

Try it and see. Shoot it before and after. See what the difference is.
You can always buy something else, there are several 3" or longer muzzle breaks you can get, and just pay a gun smith to remove current, then pin and weld the new one.

Can you name any pf these 3" or longer 9mm muzzle brakes in 5/8-24? I can only find 2.6 - 2.7". Actually need a 3.5"

[IVC]

Because it would just be 2 prongs extending off a barrel connecting to a circle.

Would that still serve as a flash hider?

The problem is that the law doesn't define "flash hider" and even the DOJ doesn't know how to tell if something is a flash hider or a muzzle brake. In the past, they would go off of *marketing material* (that's not a joke - if the manufacturer calls it a "flash hider," flash hider it is).

If you remove prongs you might have a case arguing it's no longer a flash hider, but the DA can equally well go off of what the original device was and claim it's still a flash hider. Since there is no objective test to determine it either way, you could do a live demonstration showing it doesn't function as a flash hider and still get in trouble.

Remember, the legislators defined "flash hider" an evil feature under the belief that it makes shooter less visible to the police. Flash hider does exactly the opposite - makes shooter more visible, just doesn't blind him at night. Should you take chances with such a device under such a flawed law?

[AGFNTB]

Here is where I am on my featureless MPX project. I found a muzzle brake long enough with the 5/8-24 threads for the carbine. I have reached back out to the muzzle brake manufacturer to see if he can make a modified version that will fit the MPX barrel properly.

[Sinister_Rounds]

@AGFNTB can you provide manufacturer info once you hear back? I like the look of this MB and it fits the bill.

Thanks

[The Gleam]

Because it would just be 2 prongs extending off a barrel connecting to a circle.

Would that still serve as a flash hider?

Looking at it as is, I have to wonder how good of a flash-hider it is in the first place. See links below to some "flash-hider testing" that proved many were just crap that looked tacti-cool on the end of the gun.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...ider-shootout/

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...hiding-test-2/

[Firstcruise79]

My initial thought is that the final product would be similar to this.

[IMG][/IMG]

From what I understand, LEO look at the end of the muzzle device to help identify it. A large opening (larger than bullet diameter) indicates it is likely a flash hider. Muzzle brakes/compensators are the same diameter as projectile.

In your case it would still have a large opening

[AGFNTB]

UPDATE:

The manufacturer of the muzzle brake never responded to emails or their own 'custom request' form. So, I made a rough drawing in CAD and had someone make an extension.

The extension is 3.5" long, milled correctly to fit over the 'shoulder' of the MPX barrel, and is the proper 5/8-24 threads. When installed the barrel length measures 16.2" using a rod down the barrel on the closed bolt. My MPX is now officially featurelless with no flash hider, Magpul MIAD with Exile Backfin, and fixed stock.

OAL is ~32.6"

[ar15barrels]

That brings us to something I have been thinking about. Can you argue that the rifle does not have a flash hider just because it is covered? The law says nothing about it actually being functional

The ATF tells importers of SKS carbines with a grenade launcher that they can weld a sleeve over the grenade launcher and it is no longer considered a grenade launcher.
The sleeve STOPS it from functioning as a grenade launcher.

A flash suppressor with a sleeve welded over it would no longer function as a flash suppressor.