Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: M92 SBR

  1. #1
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    18

    M92 SBR

    when you sbr an m92 pap does it then have to be 922r ccompliant ? I already know the answer I just have to have professional input .
    Last edited by AMVET47; 12-09-2012 at 10:46 PM.

  2. #2
    Guns Network Contributor 04/2013 El Laton Caliente's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    In the East Texas woods
    Posts
    6,124
    No, it is NFA...

  3. #3
    Administrator imanaknut's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Indiana, a state that is trying to remain free.
    Posts
    10,759
    Actually ATF issued two rulings. One said NFA trumps all, another later statement said that a newly made SBR still has to meet the sporting purpose clause of the new second amendment under the latest interpretation by ATF.

    My suggestion, contact ATF and get a statement in writing to keep with the firearm.

  4. #4
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    18
    Thanks El Laton Caliente ! Hot Brass !!

  5. #5
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    18
    Surprise surprise, ATF confusion on one issue. Will get a statement (confusing ) from our friends at the BATFE ! Thanks imanaknut !
    Last edited by AMVET47; 12-09-2012 at 10:10 PM.

  6. #6
    Administrator imanaknut's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Indiana, a state that is trying to remain free.
    Posts
    10,759
    It really got a few of us (actually a lot of us) really torqued after ATF first said NFA supersedes all and then decide that even if you have the tax stamp, changing the configuration of an otherwise non-importable weapon based on it's "sporting purpose" does in fact come under the parts count stupidity even if it is allowed by the tax stamp.




    What about "shall not be infringed" are they having such a hard time understanding??????

  7. #7
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    18
    imanaknut, what do you think about the usmachinegun.com simple conversion using only the pistol grip screw to hold the whole side folder assembly in place ?

  8. #8
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    18
    They really don't care. They have the power. And of course, they will abuse it !!

  9. #9
    Administrator imanaknut's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Indiana, a state that is trying to remain free.
    Posts
    10,759
    Never tried that conversion. As I remember the M92, it is an underfolder so the only way to hold the stock on is with the grip screw unless you replace the rear trunion.

    Again, not seeing it, does the tang on the stock that attaches by the grip screw go under the receiver so that you don't have to remove the rear cover plate? And what do you use to cover the folder holes?

    Can you believe an AK variant that I am actually not familiar with!

  10. #10
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    18
    The M92 I bought is the 100% Yugo pistol import. Putting an underfolder on it is problematic because of the awkward placement of the serial number on the left rear side of the receiver and the confusion from our friends at BATFE over placement of such even though you technically become the maker of the weapon under NFA.



    Where in the Second Amendment is there any mention of sporting purposes. The Second Amendment confirms our right to protect our lives and property, and resist a leviathon , power hungry government , which we're witnessing today !

  11. #11
    Administrator imanaknut's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Indiana, a state that is trying to remain free.
    Posts
    10,759
    Now knowing that yours it the pistol version, using the stock that bolts on using the pistol grip screw makes a lot of sense. I just don't know how strong something like that would be, and would it stand up to a lot of use, but it does look good.

  12. #12
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    18
    I don't see how that single bolt can hold up to any kind of serious use. Who can I go to for an alternative ?

  13. #13
    Administrator imanaknut's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Indiana, a state that is trying to remain free.
    Posts
    10,759
    My 2 cents is that if you are going to go through the paperwork of the NFA to get your tax stamp, you might as well go all the way and remove the pistol rear cover and install a rear trunion that can accept a standard stock, or a rear trunion to go with the stock of your choice if not standard.

  14. #14
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by AMVET47 View Post
    imanaknut, what do you think about the usmachinegun.com simple conversion using only the pistol grip screw to hold the whole side folder assembly in place ?

    OK, most important sentence of my reply: I have NEVER used the USMG stock adapter for the M92PAP. Now, with that in mind, I HAVE used the USMG stock adapter for the M11 both the full auto and a SBR'd semi of a friends. I was impressed with both. The full auto (mine) came with a screw that was a little too short, but it was a common thread pitch and I found a nice shiny button head just like it but longer at Lowes

    On another AK site I have heard folks say - the problem using Mike's (USMG) adapter on the M92 is that if u look at the rear of that pistol u will notice it is not square. It has an under cut angle to it. The adapter, however, is square. This means u will have a gap at one end of the union area between the rear of the gun and the adapter. This could weaken it or just peeve the owner OR it could do nothing. Personally, I've had enough good experience with his adapter on other guns that I would give it a try
    Last edited by 2Munkeez; 05-04-2013 at 02:35 PM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •