Shrike 5.56 legality????

[SouthCoastTargets]

It's still just a part.

It's inherently CA legal. Your guy doesn't need to make any changes at all.

yes but wouldn't you rather have it on a pistol grip rather than a featureless?

i would think id have a hard time selling those to people because how many really truly have featureless AR-15's as opposed to the EBR's with features. maybe i'll carry both, i just think people would truly rather have one with a pistol grip.

all you other guys out there please tell me, would you buy that upper if you could, especially if it was in the $1200-$1500 price range? and would you prefer a model that goes on a featureless rifle, or one that could go on a rifle with features?

[Rukus]

I'd buy a shrike type upper for 1200 in a heartbeat. All the ones I've found have been at least 5,000 or more. Featureless would be better as there's no point in having a maglocked belt fed IMO.

In fact I'd run it with spade grips, so as to avoid the rifle laws altogether.

Is your plan to use surplus unmodified links?

[SouthCoastTargets]

Is your plan to use surplus unmodified links?

Don't know yet, figured we'd be using 249 links, i will post more on that as the project progresses.

im glad to hear that you would buy one in that price range, i have a sneaking suspicion your not the only one. what did surprise me is the fact that you would go featureless. but thats why im here asking these questions i want to get a feel for the market

[freonr22]

yes but wouldn't you rather have it on a pistol grip rather than a featureless?

i would think id have a hard time selling those to people because how many really truly have featureless AR-15's as opposed to the EBR's with features. maybe i'll carry both, i just think people would truly rather have one with a pistol grip.

all you other guys out there please tell me, would you buy that upper if you could, especially if it was in the $1200-$1500 price range? and would you prefer a model that goes on a featureless rifle, or one that could go on a rifle with features?

I would prefer a spade grip non shoulder fired featureless

[nick]

what about modifying it so that in order to put a fresh belt in you had to use a "tool". something similar to a bullet button type of design?

i should clarify that im not buying a shrike, i am working with a guy to design a shrike alternative (there are tons of problems with the shrike, from availability to price, to function.) most of our sales will be in free states, however i want to make a california legal version, hence why i was asking if anybody would want one in the price range i originally quoted. im trying to see if there is a market here, and what it would take to make it possible, i will eventually consult a laywer on this but i wanted to get a general feel for the direction on this project before shelling out some serious cash for a lawyer.

If you need a tool to detach a belt (remember the DETACHABLE part, so attaching the belt without a tool is fine, DETACHING it without a tool is not), you should be good. Frankly, for a setup like this, featureless seems to be the way to go.

[nick]

I have played with a genuine Shrike. They ACTUALLY exist. Seriously.

Anyways, as an upper, they are legal in CA. Period. Parts is parts.

To legally install one on a lower in CA you would either have to make the firearm featureless, or install some kind of lock that would prevent you from opening the top cover without the use of a tool to "detach" the magazine (read: belt).

Then of course you would also require a bullet button on the lower since it can still accept and fire from AR magazines.

Don't use belts or magazines above 10rd's or you have committed a felony.

Gotta block the belt from falling out somehow, too.

[nick]

then that would make the browning 1919 illegal, or the Browning Ma deuce illegal. It is 100% legal, it is the linked ammo that count as the magazine

Nope. M1919A4 and M2 aren't centerfire RIFLES, they're AOWs (no shoulder stock). Add an A6 stock to that M1919, and then you're right - it's illegal without being featureless ot having a "beltlock".

[nick]

I own about a 1000 5.56x45mm links and several 200 round SAW drums.
Left overs from the 90s, when the Gov let me play with M-249s.
They just sit in my garage, rusting away.

So oil them

[ke6guj]

Nope. M1919A4 and M2 aren't centerfire RIFLES, they're AOWs (no shoulder stock).

close. There are just title 1 firearms, an "other". They are not Title 2 "any other Weapon" firearms. If they were, you'd need a tax stamp to own one.

Add an A6 stock to that M1919, and then you're right - it's illegal without being featureless ot having a "beltlock".

A 1919a6 is still featureless unless you add a flash hider to it. CADOJ has said that the grip is not a pistol grip that protrudes below the action, it is behind the action.

[nick]

So close...

[saki302]

My uncle in NC actually received his shrike earlier this year (shrike + M16 lower = heaven on earth). My other uncle here is still waiting

Don't forget the registered AW owner market- we can put whatever upper we want (followign federal law) on our lowers.

At $1200-1500, they'll sell like hotcakes.

Make a standard upper, let the entrpreneurs in CA make a mag lock kit for them after- as things go now, it takes a bout 2-3 months for the machinists to come up with a solution (always seems awfully quick IMO).

-Dave

[CHS]

Make a standard upper, let the entrpreneurs in CA make a mag lock kit for them after- as things go now, it takes a bout 2-3 months for the machinists to come up with a solution (always seems awfully quick IMO).

This is what I would recommend.

They're already legal as-is. Let someone else come up with a CA-compliance magazine lock for people that want to run them on guns with features.

[SouthCoastTargets]

My uncle in NC actually received his shrike earlier this year (shrike + M16 lower = heaven on earth). My other uncle here is still waiting

Don't forget the registered AW owner market- we can put whatever upper we want (followign federal law) on our lowers.

At $1200-1500, they'll sell like hotcakes.

Make a standard upper, let the entrpreneurs in CA make a mag lock kit for them after- as things go now, it takes a bout 2-3 months for the machinists to come up with a solution (always seems awfully quick IMO).

-Dave

i didnt even think about the AW market but i figure those rifles are very few and far between. but the great thing about the shrike is there is nothing permanent about it, just drop it on and pop it off in 10 seconds. So I'm sure this would be big with the AW owners.

i appreciate all the feedback im getting here, i will continue to monitor this thread and respond but as of now im going to basically say that i will go ahead and sell the ones for featureless rifles to start and then if the market demands it i will create a version that can go on a rifle with "evil".

the one problem is that i would still have to make a "CA" version for featureless because our "shrike" (we still have not named it yet) was going to have a flash hider. but removing that is WAY easier than creating a belt lock of some kind.

now here is one more question, what about making a "shrike" in .308 that can fit on an AR-15 lower (AR10's are not all uniform like AR15's are) would there be problems with that because the lower is registered in 5.56? what about a lower registered under multiple calibers?

[CHS]

now here is one more question, what about making a "shrike" in .308 that can fit on an AR-15 lower (AR10's are not all uniform like AR15's are) would there be problems with that because the lower is registered in 5.56? what about a lower registered under multiple calibers?

Legally it would make no difference.

There is no such thing as your lower being "registered" in a caliber. The caliber markings that MAY be on a lower are legally meaningless as well. All that matters is what's on the barrel (and that's for safety, not legal compliance).

Caliber markings on firearms are informational in nature, not legal.

[SouthCoastTargets]

Legally it would make no difference.

There is no such thing as your lower being "registered" in a caliber. The caliber markings that MAY be on a lower are legally meaningless as well. All that matters is what's on the barrel (and that's for safety, not legal compliance).

Caliber markings on firearms are informational in nature, not legal.

basically what you said was true to my home state of oregon (im recent CA transplant) didnt know if it was different here. that's why i asked. would anybody be interested in a .308 model for the AR15 lower???

once again i fully appreciate all the feedback you guys are giving me, i know im brainstorming here on an open forum, but why not do it with my intended market?