Seeking advice on starting semi-auto collection

[JoshNC]

So... it it meaningful at all if the barrel is made in the same year, and that the person who made the barrel stamped it with the German/Swiss bizarre date cipher?

Not to me.

Plus the added expense of milling and installing the paddle that should have been there all along... and then a neckbeard brace to top it off???

Whatever makes folks happy, but I'll never understand it.

I'd also rather have a SAR-1 than a Saiga, so I'm sure that's equally insane to folks of a different perspective.

HK Parts makes a drop-in roller tip paddle mag specifically made for the SP5K. $250. Installed in the comfort of one's home.

[RetroRevolver77]

HK Parts makes a drop-in roller tip paddle mag specifically made for the SP5K. $250. Installed in the comfort of one's home.

I paid an assload of money for my new in the box SP89 just because the new SP5K's had bolt carrier restrictions for FA conversion and thought the semi shelf were goofy. Now I realize that I should have just bought one of these SP5K's and had the carrier welded up if I needed it for a registered Sear. However I decided to not get the Sear so it's a moot point now. Good to know about this paddle release.

[JoshNC]

I paid an assload of money for my new in the box SP89 just because the new SP5K's had bolt carrier restrictions for FA conversion and thought the semi shelf were goofy. Now I realize that I should have just bought one of these SP5K's and had the carrier welded up if I needed it for a registered Sear.

In my estimation there is no reason to pay a premium for the SP89 now that the SP5K is available. Both require 922(r) compliance if SBRd. Now the HK94 I believe is worth the premium. No need for 922(r) parts is but one of the many attributes that make it far more desirable than other options.

However I decided to not get the Sear so it's a moot point now. Good to know about this paddle release.

Yes, I know...been active in the HKPro discussion re: sears.

[RetroRevolver77]

In my estimation there is no reason to pay a premium for the SP89 now that the SP5K is available. Both require 922(r) compliance if SBRd. Now the HK94 I believe is worth the premium. No need for 922(r) parts is but one of the many attributes that make it far more desirable than other options.




Yes, I know...been active in the HKPro discussion re: sears.

Yah, I'm still in the old camp where any NFA registered item is non-sporting anyway- so 922r shouldn't apply, this is according to the BATFE's old opinion letter. Same applies if you add a registered Sear into a host, 922r doesn't apply because the Sear is an NFA registered item. Yet somehow an SBR being an NFA registered item, also equally non-sporting unto itself- is now subject to 922r? Doesn't make sense and is a contradiction to their position that an NFA registered Sear somehow negates the 922r compliance aspects of the host weapon yet an NFA registered SBR does not.

[JoshNC]

Yah, I'm still in the old camp where any NFA registered item is non-sporting anyway- so 922r shouldn't apply, this is according to the BATFE's old opinion letter. Same applies if you add a registered Sear into a host, 922r doesn't apply because the Sear is an NFA registered item. Yet somehow an SBR being an NFA registered item, also equally non-sporting unto itself- is now subject to 922r? Doesn't make sense and is a contradiction to their position that an NFA registered Sear somehow negates the 922r compliance aspects of the host weapon yet an NFA registered SBR does not.

A sear is a MG and trumps all other. Just as during the Clinton 94 semiauto ban, the addition of a sear allowed a post-94 host to be full featured. I agree with you that once title-2, 922(r) should no longer apply. Unfortunately all of the opinion letters supporting this were addressed to individuals, while the current (IMO incorrect) opinion was published as a general ATF statement letter. I believe it is incorrect, yet I don't care to be the test case. So I comply with 922(r).

[RetroRevolver77]

A sear is a MG and trumps all other. Just as during the Clinton 94 semiauto ban, the addition of a sear allowed a post-94 host to be full featured. I agree with you that once title-2, 922(r) should no longer apply. Unfortunately all of the opinion letters supporting this were addressed to individuals, while the current (IMO incorrect) opinion was published as a general ATF statement letter. I believe it is incorrect, yet I don't care to be the test case. So I comply with 922(r).

Seems like a good issue to bring to the Supreme Court.


7n6

[tog]

Sig AMT 308
Sig 510/stgw.57
FN FNC
FN FAL (1 heavy barrel, 1 standard, 1 para)
1941 Johnson (Not post WWII, but it rocks)
BM 59
BM 62
AR10
Good M1A (I say good because there are junk rifles out there)
These are some of the rifles I wanted back in the day, especially the amt.

[shalazaar]

I'd take a serious look at a Bren 805. So far I am really liking mine. Its a shooter and I haven't had any issues with it. Although they haven't been released yet, they're also making 300 BLK barrels for them, so you can run multiple calibers on the same platform. My only issue with it is accuracy at distance (I'm running the pistol version), but a lot of different platforms share that issue. I think a 805 is definitely worth the money.

[JoshNC]

Sig AMT 308
Sig 510/stgw.57
FN FNC
FN FAL (1 heavy barrel, 1 standard, 1 para)
1941 Johnson (Not post WWII, but it rocks)
BM 59
BM 62
AR10
Good M1A (I say good because there are junk rifles out there)
These are some of the rifles I wanted back in the day, especially the amt.

That's a solid mostly pre-89 collectible semiauto list. You're missing a SIG 550, 551, and 552 or 553 on that list though.

[call_me_ski]

I would say it wouldn't be complete without an HK roller locked gun of some flavor on it as well.