AR 15 Upper SBR that does not require a stamp

Rootmanslim

Active Member
223 10.5" with 16" bbl extension. Set up with GEMTECH quickloc adpter to mount suppressor. Complete w/both and charging handle. NOT a firearm, no FFL required.

$200.00 delivered. SOLD, SOLD, SOLD

 
Last edited:

Ian

Well-Known Member
So the handguard is a permanent part of the barrel? Who produced that?
 

Rootmanslim

Active Member
The way it works is:

The barrel nut is pinned and welded to the barrel
The HG is pinned and welded to the bbl nut.
So all three become one and cannot be taken apart short of destroying them.

Meets ATF criteria on "barrel extension".

So you end up with a suppressed 223 (using a GEMTECH ONE) with a short OAL.

Here's a pic of it installed with the can in place. Above it is a like unit in 300 B/O w/o can installed.

 
Last edited:

Kevin Stenberg

Well-Known Member
So a normal barrel-nut-forarm are put together like normal. Then either welded or pinned together. And since the fore arm is of legal length. You don't have to have it licensed
 

Ian

Well-Known Member
I understood that ATF's FTB has been rejecting the idea of a "permanently attached" handguard as a muzzle extension for the AR platform for a lot of years, which is why I asked. ATF wanted devices that extended the barrel length to be attached to the muzzle, not the other end. Plus there were issues proving that the three pieces were made inseparable due to the handguard covering up any evidence of pinning/welding/soldering of the barrel to the standard barrel extension.

The FTB also would like to see ventilations in any extension shroud attached to the muzzle, since it's "too easy" to stuff it full of steel wool or freeze plugs and hose-clamp a split tomato sauce can over it (or whatever). When you see commercial versions they are invariably attached to the muzzle, ventilated, and have no threads on the inside or outside of the muzzle end of the extension "cage", and this is not by accident. I don't see any commercial units configured with a handguard as a barrel extension, and there is a reason for that, too.

I've made a couple of these a few years ago, one in 300 BLK and one for the .458 Socom, by permanently attaching a ventilated 4140 steel shroud to the muzzle just like this: https://midstatefirearms.com/BMS-556-223-Upper-105-welded-Suppressor-Shroud-Legal-16-bms-556.htm I got the idea from Tactical Solution's 10/22 rimfire barrels. I guess I wasted my time and money on that when I could have done what you did.
 
Last edited:

Ian

Well-Known Member
By the way, that's a heck of a deal and I my interest was very much piqued for a minute but I doubt I could convince the IOI here that it wasn't a pistol with a permanently-attached handguard, hence my questions.
 

Sig556r

Active Member
Wouldn't gamble a day in court with that definition of a "barrel extension"
ATF criteria change with the political wind... bumpstocks comes to mind
 

Rootmanslim

Active Member
So those of you who say "no" base your opinion on at what point on the barrel the extension is attached ?

The intent of the regulation is to ensure that the upper does not have a short OAL, i.e. be an SBR.

As the upper I am selling has an OAL identical to a 16" bbl, and cannot be disassembled w/o destroying it, any reasonable person would agree that it passes. BTW, it has been to the range with LEOs and FBI there, wearing the can and garnering much interest. No one has yet slapped the cuffs on me. I suppose to do the "belt and suspenders" approach a large washer could have been welded to the bbl under the GEMTECH quick lock adapter and the washer welded to the HG. I live in a free state where LEOs don't spend much time trying to pick the fly poop out of the pepper. Most places where they do ban suppressors so the whole exercise would be pointless.

Anyway, it works as well as suppressing any 223 does.