.50BMG Belt Fed Group buy... interest? (So-cal)

[ptoguy2002]

I'd probably be in for a complete gun.
If understand correctly, the M2 is the std heavy barrel, and the M3 is the lighter aircraft version?

I'd probably be up for an M2 if possible.
Who makes em besides allied armament and TNW?

[Hunter]

Please define 80%. What work is left to do on the side plate?

The unfinished M3/M2 RHSP that have been sold as 80% in the past, have been profiled, slots cut, denial islands (semi-auto) milled and some key rivet holes placed. The remaining work still needed are the rest of the rivet holes and countersink of the holes, plus any engraving. Halo does offer a very precise drilling rig one can rent for those without a mill. But if a mill is handy, then it is a snap. Some have dye-inked the plates and very carefully marked the various holes to be drilled and then drilled with a drill press. Doable, just have to be very careful and take one's time to not get a hole off.

I know KMP will only sell these unfinished plates thru a FFL now, ever since the run in Halo had with the 1919A4 RHSP and the SF ATF office(nothing ever came from it other than to nip the sales). So on that note, Halo is also only selling them thru a FFL as well, but he maynot be up and running just yet since he is moving his shop to a larger place with new equipment. My personal preference have been the Halo made plates, they really are a notch above the KMP in finish/profile plus Halo can engrave them then and there. KMP doesn't engrave so one has to then send the plate to another FFL/engraver and pay a lot more ($125+ and shipping costs) than what Halo charges ($65). But to be fair to KMP, I understand the latest runs (last 9 months, but I haven't seen them personally to confirm) have corrected the profile differences so it really boils down to just finish and engraving services. Both run in the $325-$350 range at last look without engraving costs.

[Hunter]

I'd probably be in for a complete gun.
If understand correctly, the M2 is the std heavy barrel, and the M3 is the lighter aircraft version?

I'd probably be up for an M2 if possible.
Who makes em besides allied armament and TNW?

The M2HB is indeed the heavy ground version and the M3AC is the lighter AC version. However, true M2HB kits are almost extinct (looking at $5500+ for parts alone these days if you do find a set). So what has been occuring is taking the M3AC kits and putting on the M2HB barrel/support front end, putting on modified "M3" spade grips and M2HB sights. Doing this one ends up with what has been called M3HBs. Functionally the same as the M2HB, but does use M3 internal parts. M3AC kits are in the $3500-$4000 range (still need RHSP, machine work, and rivits).

For builders, TNW and Allied are really the only two large commercial operations running a business on these guns. The next outfit is Cental Wisconsin Armory (CWA)http://www.dragonm50.com/index.html, but the owner is on duty in Iraq presently. But his work is unapproachable and far above TNW / AA quality service. The next inline is John Mcguire who is a builder of top reputation for the 1919's; M2hb; M3HB weapons. He is a one man shop and it takes a while (months), but his work is also at the top end and in the same class as Ed's at CWA. Just doesn't get any better than these two guys. Both of these guys charge $1000-$1200 to just build your kit on your RHSP.

The last builder to consider is Sam Alvarez at T&S but he only builds on his own 100% RHSP and they are the cat's meow as well (right there with Halo's in fit/finish/engraving) but he also adds induction harding as the orginal GI plates were done. His costs are also 2x others. Since these are semi-auto and use 4140 steel, the extra harding of the plates tail ends are not necessary, but Sam is of a different opinion and his are the most faithful reproduction to the USGI original specs. He also only produces small runs and it may take months before he makes a run of plates. http://www.99main.com/~heavymg/

[daves100]

plate

might be in on a buy for a plate or 2 of i can find a FFL in the san diego area to do a transfer. depends on the price for the parts kits if i'm in on that

[tankerman]

Any idea why they don't finish them since they are requiring an FFL transfer?

Sounds like a PIA to purchase a side plate that still needs to be machined and still have to go through an FFL.

The unfinished M3/M2 RHSP that have been sold as 80% in the past, have been profiled, slots cut, denial islands (semi-auto) milled and some key rivet holes placed. The remaining work still needed are the rest of the rivet holes and countersink of the holes, plus any engraving. Halo does offer a very precise drilling rig one can rent for those without a mill. But if a mill is handy, then it is a snap. Some have dye-inked the plates and very carefully marked the various holes to be drilled and then drilled with a drill press. Doable, just have to be very careful and take one's time to not get a hole off.

I know KMP will only sell these unfinished plates thru a FFL now, ever since the run in Halo had with the 1919A4 RHSP and the SF ATF office(nothing ever came from it other than to nip the sales). So on that note, Halo is also only selling them thru a FFL as well, but he maynot be up and running just yet since he is moving his shop to a larger place with new equipment. My personal preference have been the Halo made plates, they really are a notch above the KMP in finish/profile plus Halo can engrave them then and there. KMP doesn't engrave so one has to then send the plate to another FFL/engraver and pay a lot more ($125+ and shipping costs) than what Halo charges ($65). But to be fair to KMP, I understand the latest runs (last 9 months, but I haven't seen them personally to confirm) have corrected the profile differences so it really boils down to just finish and engraving services. Both run in the $325-$350 range at last look without engraving costs.

[CALI-gula]

So, now that we've determined that it is infact 100% legal to buy/sell/own/operate a .50BMG crew served weapon, I think its time we did a group buy on them.

"We've" determined, and I agree with the "we", however has there been any comment from the "they" on this? It sounds like I missed some definitive information or resolution that capped the doubts with a 100% without question answer. Point me to the thread/link as I have not been around as much lately - searched, and still didn't find a measurement to yield 100% legal calibration.

I see it the way you see it; I agree. I've read all the arguments. However, I think the "They" is still seeing "rifle" as anything with "rifling" and anything with "rifling" in .50BMG as a .50BMG rifle, shoulder fired or not. If we now have something different from that from BOF/DOJ, let me know (other than law citing crew served weapon definition which does not address AB-50/.50BMG concerns).

Because of the above ambiguity about "rifle = rifling", I still don't see the definitive 100% on this like we had with OLLs/OLRs and gripless/bullet button definitions. I still see about a 50% argument.

[dotchoy]

Pulled this from wikipedia
[edit] Exceptions
The law does not apply to the law enforcement officers with permission from their employing agencies.[3]

Exceptions are granted to rifles classified as antiques or Curio and Relics as defined by the BATFE.[3]

Out-of-state owners may bring .50 BMG rifles into the state for shooting competitions.[3]

Limited exceptions are granted for exhibitions, displays, and education projects sponsored by law enforcement or government agencies.[3]

It is still possible to legally purchase a .50 BMG firearm in the state of California. The law specifically prohibits rifles, not all firearms. Firearms such as a semi-automatic M2HB (the semi-auto version of the M2 Browning Machinegun) are not rifles since they are not designed to be fired from the shoulder. Since it is not a rifle, it is not subject to the restrictions of the .50 Caliber BMG Regulation Act of 2004

[Hunter]

Any idea why they don't finish them since they are requiring an FFL transfer?

Sounds like a PIA to purchase a side plate that still needs to be machined and still have to go through an FFL.

Most guys want to mate up the plate with the trunion, top plate and bottom plates. In theory they should be a direct/perfect fit but a lot of these M2HB and M3AC kits have seen a rebuilt process or two in their lives. So one might find a hole off slightly. Also the demilling process can damage holes as well in these items.

But the bigger reason is costs. I know KMP doesn't want to bother adding in the extra holes for the current price. If he raised the price to say T&S price of $600 plate then it he might do it. When they first started selling these, KMP's original 80% plates were $500 each but then Halo started selling his of higher quality for $325 and KMP dropped to be competive.

True 100% are out there, just not for the $350 price range. Allied sells theirs for the $400 -$500 range. T&S for $600 or so.


Bottomline is if machining the 80% to 100% is an issue in itself, well I would say one needs to have someone else do their build for them. Otherwords, even if one has a 100% plate to work with, the actual build is a lot more intensive than banging together a 1919A4 box. So if one is going to pay someone to have their kit built, then go with the 80% as the build cost is the same either way.

Edit to Add:

The other issue with a true 100% plate is that the buyer must be able to specify upfront what kind of internals they want to use. Be it M3AC parts or M2HB parts or a combo of these parts for a hybrid M3HB. The reason being is the M3AC systems will have the depressors mounted to the inside of the plates where on the M2 buffer they are integral to the body and therefore less holes/rivets in the RHSP. On an 80% plate, this is not an issue as the depressor holes have not been drilled. Also one must understand what type of barrel lock spring will be use, for a M2HB it is one style/type and for the M3AC barrel it is different type. This effects the RHSP as well due to the holes or lack of and the location/size of the spring recess cut on the inside of the plate.

On picking a RHSP style, one must also understand if the RHSP is profiled externally for M2 or M3 due to the ability to use a M3 backplate if going the M3AC or M3HB route with M3 internals. Also it is nice to make sure it matches the LHSP to function and to look proper. Guns with M3 LHSP but with a M2HB RHSP stick out like a sore thumb in my book, but then I'm picky. And visa-versa M3 RHSP do not look proper on true M2 top / bottom /LHSP combos either.

[dotchoy]

Coles has complete m2's for $8500 and m3's for $7,500. 11,000 sounds a bit steep.

[AJAX22]

Coles has complete m2's for $8500 and m3's for $7,500. 11,000 sounds a bit steep.

It probably is a bit steep, but I only just started looking into this, if we can get them for 7,500 ro 8,500 I'm all for it.

I just didn't want to lowball the price when I pitched the idea, People don't like to be surprised with stuff that costs more than they had budgeted. If it costs less, well I'm sure they can live with that

[OCArmory]

The only thing i would be worried about would be taking it to someone to have it built and since it is only 80% complete they would consider it manufacturing a new fire arm. Meaning another waiting period and DROS fee? I would be much happier with a 100% plate even if it cost a little more

[CALI-gula]

Pulled this from wikipedia
[edit] .... The law specifically prohibits rifles, not all firearms. Firearms such as a semi-automatic M2HB (the semi-auto version of the M2 Browning Machinegun) are not rifles since they are not designed to be fired from the shoulder. Since it is not a rifle, it is not subject to the restrictions of the .50 Caliber BMG Regulation Act of 2004

Well, I wouldn't cite Wikipedia on this issue - I would preferably defer to CA law. In any case, I know all this, and have been around for the entire issue. I was attacking AB2222 and AB50 before most people here on Calguns knew either existed (until they went clamouring to buy a .50BMG rifle last minute in December before AB50 became law) and FULLY understand the "fired from the shoulder" difference... (and as we see it). But, that was not my question. My inquiry still remains as to who gave the go and determination that "in fact it is 100% legal to buy/sell/own/operate a .50BMG crew served weapon" - just us? I agree with it, but is there anything from the BOF/DOJ slating that? Do we have any tests or letters like we had with the OLL/OLR issue? Does CA law honor the shoulder fired weapon aspect or do they revert to "rifling" as meaning rifle? Do they consider anything to have rifling a rifle? I'm still seeing a 50/50 ambiguity on this one.

And why would anyone be selling unfinished plates as serial numbered receivers? Sounds like a CYA safety net to me.

[Hunter]

Well, I wouldn't cite Wikipedia on this issue - I would preferably defer to CA law. In any case, I know all this, and have been around for the entire issue. I was attacking AB2222 and AB50 before most people here on Calguns knew either existed (until they went clamouring to buy a .50BMG rifle last minute in December before AB50 became law) and FULLY understand the "fired from the shoulder" difference... (and as we see it).

CALI-gula, you and I both have been around the same block on this. I owned my first .50 since 2000 and was fighting the AB50 long before I even knew about Calgun.net .

But, that was not my question. My inquiry still remains as to who gave the go and determination that "in fact it is 100% legal to buy/sell/own/operate a .50BMG crew served weapon" - just us? I agree with it, but is there anything from the BOF/DOJ slating that?
Do we have any tests or letters like we had with the OLL/OLR issue?

There is nothing in the form of a clear concise letter saying YES from the DOJ on this matter. On the otherhand they will not say it is illegal either and I have tried many avenues to that effect. After lots, and I mean lots of correspondence they know we are on the correct path with this approach and they donot want to open any flood gates on the matter with a letter. I had given them all the opportunity to stop a transfer if they deemed it illegal and they didn't. Talk to our favorite Firearm attorney on the forum and they will support this view as well.

Does CA law honor the shoulder fired weapon aspect or do they revert to "rifling" as meaning rifle?

Now this aspect, I have indeed gotten a clear written confirmation that CA-DOJ uses one and only one definition for what is a "rifle" in this state. You will only find that in print under PC 12020(a)(20) and even there it only states "for this section". But I have pushed this matter and at least to my personnal satisfaction I am comfortable that there is indeed only one definition. Again I do have that part in writing.

Do they consider anything to have rifling a rifle? I'm still seeing a 50/50 ambiguity on this one.

See above comment.

And why would anyone be selling unfinished plates as serial numbered receivers? Sounds like a CYA safety net to me.

Yes, you are right on that. The current builders got gun shy over the 1919A4 80% plate issue and decided that they will only ship them to FFLs for transfer. Pure CYA, but once they are transfered as a Firearm with serial number, they can indeed be treated as such.

Basically I see this as the same we see the bullet button. DOJ will not approve that item, but the written text "must use a tool to be detachable" is black and white. The same here on the definition of a rifle being a "shoulder fired" weapon. I would like to see any DA try to prove a 84lb weapon is a shoulder fired weapon when it only has spade grips to hold onto. I challenge anyone to touch the receiver lower or the barrel support after letting a few rounds go down range. If you do, you will leave skin behind.

Now, even though this is a legal and defendable stance, it still doesn't mean that some BLM or other LEO will not see a M2HB as an unregistered AW and seize it. Just ask BWO and others since then on the OLL side of things. Just when it finally appears the state's various LEOs are learning of the OLL legalities, and the coast seems to be getting clearer, we then have these BLM officers coming out of left field taking OLLs and it starts all over.

So anyone getting into the M2HB arena must be fully prepared for some possible confrontation with various LEOs, at least until this is as public as the OLL. There will never be a DOJ approval letter to show any LEO upfront on the matter, only the written text of the law and any subsequent court cases that might arise.

[CALI-gula]

There is nothing in the form of a clear concise letter saying YES from the DOJ on this matter. On the otherhand they will not say it is illegal either and I have tried many avenues to that effect. After lots, and I mean lots of correspondence they know we are on the correct path with this approach and they donot want to open any flood gates on the matter with a letter. I had given them all the opportunity to stop a transfer if they deemed it illegal and they didn't. Talk to our favorite Firearm attorney on the forum and they will support this view as well.

Now this aspect, I have indeed gotten a clear written confirmation that CA-DOJ uses one and only one defintion for what is a "rifle" in this state. You will only find that in print under PC 12020(a)(20) and even there it only states "for this section". But I have pushed this matter and at least to my personnal satisfaction I am comfortable that there is indeed only one definition. Again I do have that part in writting.

Thanks Hunter;

Everything you quoted and noted are exactly pieces and parts I have already discussed and searched, here on Calguns and off this board as well. Understand, I wasn't trying to be difficult, just looking exactly for what you gave me.

To hear that you have done diligence to try to get BOF/DOJ to respond IS the satisfaction I am looking to find, as it parallels their lame silence on the issue as they had put forth on OLL's and OLR's - it's the attempt at an answer, and the act of putting them on notice to receive no reply, is what I had been wondering about, as it tells me they know they are wrong. It gives me a warmer feeling inside than if the only determination was just us doing some thinking and thunking in our armchairs. And I also appreciate making people aware that we are still in a "leap at your own risk" mode as that still should be a footnote in the first post. A new Matt Corwin railroading by "one of the 58 DA's" could arise out of this quite easily; a message to be prepared and aware should still be conveyed.

ALl sounds good to me! Thanks again!

.

[AJAX22]

Thanks for doing the legwork on chasing down the explanation for why it is legal Hunter.

People should understand that this is pushing the envelope, but the law is prety dang clear on this (at least it is clear enough for my personal satisfaction and that of the FFL's involved)

I need a Ma Deuce like I need a miniature pink poodle, but I want to flex my rights, I want to do so publicly and I suspect that others want to do so as well.

I can't afford a complete gun, I can't afford a boxed receiver... but right now, while I still am a CA resident, I can afford a side plate... and thats a start.