Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sten kit build

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sten kit build

    I would like to build a display/dummy gun from a sten mkIII kit. I would like it to look fairly authentic, which I think I can do with not too much problem.

    What I need to know is what criteria do I need to follow so that I can't be accused of trying to rebuild a full-auto weapon.

    For example welding the barrel shut--I'm guessing that wouldn't be enough.

    Any info would be appreciated.


  • #2
    welding the barrel shut wouldn't protect you from a charge of possession of a MG reciever.

    I built a dummy gun using PVC pipe for the reciever, and it looked good and you could operate the bolt and insert a mag. I sold it at a gunshow for $100. Looking back, I could have gotten myself in trouble, since I didn't clear it with ATF. It would have been suicidal to shoot, but that didn't stop them from prosecuting bob stewert.

    I have been tossing around the idea of putting one together as a single shot by building a tube to less than 80%, not cutting out the mag port, cutting off the feed lips from a mag, and welding it into the mag well.

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks for the info ISC.

      When you say building a tube to less than 80%, do you mean a shorter tube? Is 80% or less considered a non-MG receiver?

      I like your idea of cutting off the feed lips and welding in the mag--that wouldn't interfere with the appearance of the gun.

      I too thought of using a PVC pipe as a phony receiver.

      Also does the ATF publish any guidlines for building dummy guns, or do they need to be contacted on a case by case basis?

      Sorry about all the questions, I just want to get this right.

      Comment


      • #4
        <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>When you say building a tube to less than 80%, do you mean a shorter tube? Is 80% or less considered a non-MG receiver?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
        Anything more than 80% complete is considered close enough to be a real receiver.

        <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Also does the ATF publish any guidlines for building dummy guns, or do they need to be contacted on a case by case basis?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
        None of which I am aware. They probably need to be contacted with your specific plans. People run into problems when they make something that is "readily convertible". It may not work, but may be made to work with a little more work, and are thus machine guns under the statutory definition.

        <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Sorry about all the questions, I just want to get this right.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
        Don't be sorry. Nothing worse than trying to beat a rap for an unregistered MG when you weren't trying to build one in the first place.

        Have you looked for Philadelphia Ordnance? They already may make ATF approved dummy receivers.

        Comment


        • #5
          Thanks, that gives me a little more to go on. Btw, forgive my ignorance, but who is Bob Stewert and what exactly did he do?

          Comment


          • #6
            Bob Stewart owned Maadi-Griffin, the company that was building the 50 caliber rifle kits. Bob didn't do what we have described here. i.e. Send a sample to the ATF to make sure it really wasn't a gun. The ATF found that they were able to quickly restore the kit to a state where a round could be discharged (albeit unsafely), so they argued that the kit was close enough to a complete firearm to be a firearm.

            Bob was raided and they found firearms and unregistered MGs in his house, for which Bob has already been busted once. Bob's been bad and now he's in jail. Don't be a Bob.

            Comment


            • #7
              <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>...Bob was raided and they found firearms and unregistered MGs in his house, <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

              Providing that you actually believe the murderous BATF.
              They seem to always find "machineguns" when they raid someone, especially if they kill them in the process.
              JMHO

              Comment


              • #8
                <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pa.Patriot:
                Providing that you actually believe the murderous BATF. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                Good point. However, my original point still stands. If he had submitted a sample kit for inspection, just as every other entity does, they would have told him what to do to get it classified as a non-gun and all this crap could have easily been avoided.

                Comment


                • #9
                  <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> If he had submitted a sample kit for inspection, just as every other entity does, they would have told him what to do to get it classified as a non-gun and all this crap could have easily been avoided.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


                  Also true but of course they all should not have to submit anything in the first place. :P

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pa.Patriot:
                    Also true but of course they all should not have to submit anything in the first place. :P<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                    In a perfect world, you are right.

                    The the real world, if you submit a sample and the braniacs at the ATF can't figure out how to do something bad with it, they issue an approval letter. If at a later date somebody figures out how to convert it easily, the letter gets you out of legal hot water. Consider it a "get out of jail free" card.

                    From what I've read, Bob Stewart knew about the 80% complete ruling for receivers, but never sought to ask the ATF if they had the same opinion. I'm sure Bob considered the ATF to be "murderous thugs who would bust you for anything at the drop of a hat", yet he gave them all the rope they needed to hang him.

                    I'm sure there are some ATF agents working overtime trying to bust people for stupid, trivial crap. However, the "I shouldn't have to do this" argument won't keep you out of jail. It's far better to learn how to play the game better than them.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      you can build a semi auto version there are kits to do that but oyu have to have a 16 inch barrel. I guess they sell that to. Ebay has 4130 receiver tube at 60% completed on auction at about $25.00 with the templetes to finish the job some web sites will help you make the bolt semi-auto can show you how to weld the sear into semi-auto but still have to have a 16 inch barrel to be legal but that takes away from the looks. Or you can just build it to spec. (full auto) and just bury it in your yard and wait for the day that the **** hits the fan. These are just my opinions and not to be taken seriously, yea thats what I mean.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I have read (and I can't remember where) the ATF definition of a dummy Sten. It involves a solid aluminum bar in place of the receiver. As I understand it, they feel that any form of tube (maybe even PVC) could be converted to a full-auto receiver with less than 8 hours of work. The 8 hour time was determined in some court case several years ago.

                        About two years ago I saw a Sten parts kit at a gunshow. A couple of aisles away, another vendor had tubes with the templates for the holes bonded on. I looked at the tubes and decide I could cut and finish one in about three hours with a drill, a dremel and a file. Welding the thing together would take another hour.

                        I carefully wiped my fingerprints off the tube and put it back on the table.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          welding the selecter in place isn't enough, it has to fire from a closed bolt too. By going the single shot route, you can avoid the barrel length issue by making it a pistol only (a felony to install the stock). A semiauto would be defined as an assault pistol due to its weight, but the single shot gets around that.

                          I will probably look into it someday, in the meantime I think I'll order a couple Mk III kits while they are cheap. I wonder how hard it would be to convert a mk III into a Mk II?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ISC:
                            welding the selecter in place isn't enough, it has to fire from a closed bolt too. By going the single shot route, you can avoid the barrel length issue by making it a pistol only (a felony to install the stock). A semiauto would be defined as an assault pistol due to its weight, but the single shot gets around that.

                            I will probably look into it someday, in the meantime I think I'll order a couple Mk III kits while they are cheap. I wonder how hard it would be to convert a mk III into a Mk II?
                            <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                            If you decide to make it a pistol, you have to weld the pistol grip to the lower - it has to be permenantly afixed.

                            Another idea might be to drill/mill out the fixed firing pin on the bolt and adapt it to an AR15 firing pin, then re-work the trigger group to take AR15 trigger/hammer so it will fire from the closed bolt, and add a welded barrel extension to the barrel to make it 16 inches in length, then you'd have a cheap fun 9mm carbine to shoot.

                            ------------------
                            DEO VINDICE!
                            Motstå

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              If your going to go through all this trouble I'd just buy something else that would be fun like a mac 11/9

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X