Strike Industries SI-2017 MP5 Thing

**Renegade** · 01-07-17, 12:12

Uglier than the POS Todd Bailey made.

**JoshNC** · 01-07-17, 12:20

Originally Posted by Fjallhrafn

MKEs and POFs have the 'swing hole', but the guns have been modified in such a manner as to preclude the easy installation of a select-fire trigger and housing. I see no reason why Strike Industries couldn't follow the paths of MKE and POF rather than doing as H&K still do or PTR-91, Inc (who probably do as they do because it was the easiest, least expensive way to manufacture an HK91 clone).

That would be a stupid decision because it makes this firearm worthless to registered HK sear/frame owners. It should have a standard semiauto shelf setup so that it is marketable to all comers. Also, it's not so much about the ability to install a FA FCG frame, as the block welded in the rear/bottom of the upper prevents installation of a FA bolt carrier. Even if one could install a FA lower/frame, the firearm would not function because the hammer could not be released from the automatic/safety sear.

**KalashniKEV** · 01-07-17, 13:51

Originally Posted by Slippers

Since the upper is the control part on HK firearms, I thought that hole was very similar to having the third hole on an AR15 lower receiver for an auto sear, right?

You guys are all off track.

It's not an MP5.
It's an SI-2017 and will be marked as such along with "Strike Industries," a serial number, and the city of manufacture.
It's not an MP5.

Originally Posted by JoshNC

The presence of the pushpin hole behind the magwell makes for a Machinegun receiver UNLESS there is a FA bolt carrier block within the receiver as is found on the POF and MKE imports or in the SP5K.

Not really.

The POF and latest import MKE guns will accept the front push pin, but still have a narrow shelf.

They also still have the FA block, but only as an import requirement. It's also been moved to a location that is easier to remove without damaging the weapon.

**SteyrAUG** · 01-07-17, 14:24

Originally Posted by KalashniKEV

You guys are all off track.

It's not an MP5.
It's an SI-2017 and will be marked as such along with "Strike Industries," a serial number, and the city of manufacture.
It's not an MP5.

Not sure you are following along. Doesn't matter if it's an HK or a SI, the phrase that pays is "readily convertible." And IF it uses a standard HK style bolt carrier you might be looking at a machine gun only.

Didn't see them on the SI website so I don't know if this is being offered as a semi or a select fire weapon.

**JoshNC** · 01-07-17, 14:41

Originally Posted by KalashniKEV

You guys are all off track.

It's not an MP5.
It's an SI-2017 and will be marked as such along with "Strike Industries," a serial number, and the city of manufacture.
It's not an MP5.

Not really.

The POF and latest import MKE guns will accept the front push pin, but still have a narrow shelf.

They also still have the FA block, but only as an import requirement. It's also been moved to a location that is easier to remove without damaging the weapon.

The FA carrier block is the key. ATF previously held that having a front pushpin even with a front shelf constituted making a MG. Hence why when installing a paddle mag release to a semi shelf receiver, ATF was very clear (in multiple letters) that only a blind pin hole could be drilled. The little tab/block on the rear of the magwell just behind the pushpin hole on the MKE/POF mp5s would not fly without the addition of the FA carrier block in the receiver.

There is an ATF letter floating around that deals with converting the MKE/POF type mp5 to use a HK semiauto shelf (so that a regustered sear may be used). In it, tech branch explicitly states that the FA carrier block may not be removed until AFTER the front pushpin hole has been covered by a standard wraparound shelf welded in place.

As for the SI mp5 project comment, it's mechanically an mp5 so the very well established ATF stance on the HK pattern roller delay series will apply to the SI offering. They have two options:
1. HK type semiauto shelf
2. MKE/POF type receiver FA carrier block with front pushpin.

I personally hope they go with option 1 and that this doesn't turn out to be a turd. Would be a neat addition as a sear/frame host.

**KalashniKEV** · 01-07-17, 15:37

Guys... no hate... but this is why the HK community is the worst.

There are always parts scientists who pop up to take the most extreme gun-grabbing interpretation of any topic... one that the Tech Branch probably couldn't even come up with no matter how hard they strained their pea brains.

There is no issue with the gun as is. It's not an MP5. It's the "SI-2017." It's not an MP5.

The CZ Scorpion does not have a FA block, neither does the Taurus CT9, or the B&T guns- and those are all imported.

They will submit drawings, maybe a sample, and they will get approval. Just watch.

How long will it last? Who knows?

The Junior G-man letter writers managed to get a floppy SBR stock recognized for what it was shortly after it was approved. They also convinced the BATFE that the mag holder on a Glockeroni might potentially be used as a foregrip and needed to be deleted before approval- so maybe you're right, it could get smacked down for revision.

Now that you mention it, the hobby-grade commercial builders are probably starting a letter writing campaign against this right now- could you imagine if a dude could put together a functioning gun that used the roller lock system for a decent price?

They've already lost so much once licensed production came in AND the new "pistols."

**JoshNC** · 01-07-17, 15:55

Originally Posted by KalashniKEV

Guys... no hate... but this is why the HK community is the worst.

There are always parts scientists who pop up to take the most extreme gun-grabbing interpretation of any topic... one that the Tech Branch probably couldn't even come up with no matter how hard they strained their pea brains.

There is no issue with the gun as is. It's not an MP5. It's the "SI-2017." It's not an MP5.

The CZ Scorpion does not have a FA block, neither does the Taurus CT9, or the B&T guns- and those are all imported.

They will submit drawings, maybe a sample, and they will get approval. Just watch.

How long will it last? Who knows?

The Junior G-man letter writers managed to get a floppy SBR stock recognized for what it was shortly after it was approved. They also convinced the BATFE that the mag holder on a Glockeroni might potentially be used as a foregrip and needed to be deleted before approval- so maybe you're right, it could get smacked down for revision.

Now that you mention it, the hobby-grade commercial builders are probably starting a letter writing campaign against this right now- could you imagine if a dude could put together a functioning gun that used the roller lock system for a decent price?

They've already lost so much once licensed production came in AND the new "pistols."

Actually B&T semiauto receivers differ slightly from fullauto receivers to prevent conversion to fullauto. Have you compared a fullauto to a semiauto Scorpion? Can you confirm there is no difference? Is there a fullauto CT9? If there are no FA variants then there is no FA block needed.

I'm not advocating letter writing to the ATF. Nothing good will come of it and it is to be avoided by all but manufacturers in my opinion. The SI is an MP5 variant. They advertise it as such. A letter needn't be written because ATF opinion on the mp5 (and all roller delays) is very well established.

**SteyrAUG** · 01-07-17, 16:20

Originally Posted by KalashniKEV

Guys... no hate... but this is why the HK community is the worst.

There are always parts scientists who pop up to take the most extreme gun-grabbing interpretation of any topic... one that the Tech Branch probably couldn't even come up with no matter how hard they strained their pea brains.

Does not matter. A SW5 is also not a MP5, but if TB made them with a push pin hole and it accepted a standard bolt carrier, it's a post sample.

NFA technology branch really doesn't care of it's a Colt, Bushmaster, ASA, Olympic or home build with a Nodak Spud, if you drill a sear pin hole you have a machine gun. Same holds true for any HK type weapon, ATF has a long history of this.

Try this one on, if you have a HK94 registered receiver conversion that was done prior to 1986, but it is a clip and pin setup for the trigger group, you can't even drill a receiver hole on that gun even though the receiver is already a registered machine gun and transferable. ATF has stated specifically if you drill the hole after the fact, it renders the entire thing a "post sample" machine gun that cannot be owned by a private individual nor can it be transferred to a private individual.

Personally, I would love to be wrong, that GM9 might be ugly as sin, but it's starting to grow on me as I really don't have a SD type SBR and would very much like one. If you have info showing this thing to be a semi auto Title I firearm then I'd love to see it. Based on the drawings, I'm looking at machine gun receivers.

**JoshNC** · 01-07-17, 17:57

Originally Posted by SteyrAUG

Does not matter. A SW5 is also not a MP5, but if TB made them with a push pin hole and it accepted a standard bolt carrier, it's a post sample.

NFA technology branch really doesn't care of it's a Colt, Bushmaster, ASA, Olympic or home build with a Nodak Spud, if you drill a sear pin hole you have a machine gun. Same holds true for any HK type weapon, ATF has a long history of this.

Try this one on, if you have a HK94 registered receiver conversion that was done prior to 1986, but it is a clip and pin setup for the trigger group, you can't even drill a receiver hole on that gun even though the receiver is already a registered machine gun and transferable. ATF has stated specifically if you drill the hole after the fact, it renders the entire thing a "post sample" machine gun that cannot be owned by a private individual nor can it be transferred to a private individual.

Personally, I would love to be wrong, that GM9 might be ugly as sin, but it's starting to grow on me as I really don't have a SD type SBR and would very much like one. If you have info showing this thing to be a semi auto Title I firearm then I'd love to see it. Based on the drawings, I'm looking at machine gun receivers.

Exactly.