Anybody seen these yet?
- Thread starter Three50seven
- Start date
Help Support Ruger Forum:
PASS!
Interesting in that it's a GUN as far as the BATF is concerned, since on the Ruger pistols the serial number is on the upper receiver rather than on the lower grip frame. Not hardly a "pistol upgrade".
Usually these "conversion" thingies are just stuff you attach to your serial-numbered receiver, making them available directly from the manufacturer by mail. These will have to be purchased from an FFL dealer.
Unless I'm missing something . . .
:?
Edited for spelling.
Usually these "conversion" thingies are just stuff you attach to your serial-numbered receiver, making them available directly from the manufacturer by mail. These will have to be purchased from an FFL dealer.
Unless I'm missing something . . .
:?
Edited for spelling.
You'd think they would list that ... FFL required.... as well as some kind of suggested price at least.
I wonder what the folded down length is?
I wonder what the folded down length is?
. . . or the similar "Man From U.N.C.L.E." version.
Geezer
Single-Sixer
These will never sell. People don't like taking their Rugers apart.
Geezer":1c3hv5e5 said:
I'm not so sure...
I don't think people mind taking them apart, as much as getting them back together the first couple of times! :wink:
Three50seven
Buckeye
Its a cool idea IMO, but its still only got a 10rnd capacity, and it'll probably be insanely expensive, so I'll most likely pass as well.
As P.T. Barnum is widely credited with saying..... "There's a sucker born every minute". Get a 10/22 with a "tactical" stock of some variety and a "hangs way down there" magazine for a whole lot less money.
Better yet..... Keep your RST/MarkI/MarkII, get a 10/22 and leave it as-is, and have 2 functional firearms for less money.
I dunno.... maybe I'm just a cranky old fart, but that's STUPID.
Better yet..... Keep your RST/MarkI/MarkII, get a 10/22 and leave it as-is, and have 2 functional firearms for less money.
I dunno.... maybe I'm just a cranky old fart, but that's STUPID.
Flash
Buckeye
oh my god, does that bring back memories. I also had the breif case that shot the bullets out the front.Snake45":ks2p8519 said:Maybe it's for guys who never had one of these as a kid. :wink:
I'm not sure how it is set up as I did not think a MkII and a 22/45 could interchange the receivers. They claim it fits all the grip frames.
I'll keep my MkII and my 10/22. If I want tactical I'll go for the 10/22 route and use my High Cap 50 round mags...
I'll keep my MkII and my 10/22. If I want tactical I'll go for the 10/22 route and use my High Cap 50 round mags...
mohavesam
Hawkeye
Looks like it's high quality-made. Kinda like the Feather Industries 22 concept. Doesn't look like it comprimises reliability, and it could be something neat for small game hunting, eh? The uit does not use the Ruger receiver, rather it replaces the receiver/barrel but uses the bolt, grip, and innards, etc. Therefore it is sold as a serial-numbered gun.
Ares makes high-quality stuff for the AR market, and I have no doubt this conversion is the same. I'm a bit surprised at the curmudgeon-like responses ? As if Ruger pistols are something not-to-be tinkered with or something? C'MON.
With all the 10/22 aftermarket stuff out there sometimes reaching the "boring, what else ya got?" category, the only real question is: why not?
I want one.
:!: :!: :!:
Ares makes high-quality stuff for the AR market, and I have no doubt this conversion is the same. I'm a bit surprised at the curmudgeon-like responses ? As if Ruger pistols are something not-to-be tinkered with or something? C'MON.
With all the 10/22 aftermarket stuff out there sometimes reaching the "boring, what else ya got?" category, the only real question is: why not?
I want one.
:!: :!: :!:
CraigC
Hawkeye
It's definitely interesting!
toysoldier
Hunter
I wonder why it took so long to get something like this on the market? Replacement receiver/barrel units have been out there for some time. I'd actually sketched something like this a few years ago, but I'm not a machinist, so it stayed on paper. Without the pickaninny rail, it would look more like a skinny M3. It could also be made to more closely resemble a Sten or Thompson. With pimped-up 10/22's all the rage, I'm surprised at the negative responses. Wish I could remember the .22 pistol/carbine unit that was sold about 30 years ago.
dfletcher
Blackhawk
Once the handgun is configured as a rifle it can not be reconfigured as a handgun, per ATF. See attached letter from ATF:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/show ... p?t=227314
I have a Mech Tech carbine, based on the same principle, but used an old Federal Ordnance 1911 frame and keep it configured as a rifle only.
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/show ... p?t=227314
I have a Mech Tech carbine, based on the same principle, but used an old Federal Ordnance 1911 frame and keep it configured as a rifle only.
Well, there's a ten-page thread associated with that link, that gets pretty involved. I'm not at all certain the ATF letter referenced applies to this gadget.
If nothing else, this "kit" does not provide a way to "put a shoulder stock on a pistol-length firearm", which is what the ATF is really concerned about. With this kit and a Ruger pistol you can either have a normal pistol or a carbine of legal proportions. There's no way to assemble an illegal configuration short of modifying parts, which I'd say is outside the discussion at hand.
This is just my take on it, and if a real-life lawyer (which I ain't) would like to straighten me out, I'll surely pay attention.
:mrgreen:
If nothing else, this "kit" does not provide a way to "put a shoulder stock on a pistol-length firearm", which is what the ATF is really concerned about. With this kit and a Ruger pistol you can either have a normal pistol or a carbine of legal proportions. There's no way to assemble an illegal configuration short of modifying parts, which I'd say is outside the discussion at hand.
This is just my take on it, and if a real-life lawyer (which I ain't) would like to straighten me out, I'll surely pay attention.
:mrgreen:
dfletcher
Blackhawk
Ale-8(1)":2hhax7ut said:
I can't figure out how to separate the actual letter or that one posting from the link - a little computer handicapped so to speak - but question 1 of the letter references turning a pistol (in their example, a T/C) into a rifle and then back and I think that's the case with this conversion.
A totally antiquated law, I think, and one that has been overtaken by modern gun manufacturing.
A Mark I/II/III top half is the serial-numbered part; it IS the handgun, legally.
This thing would also be serial numbered, transferred on 4473 and IAW applicable local and state law; it IS a rifle, legally, whether it has a fire control system and magazine well attached or not.
The pistol grip of a Ruger MK I/II/III is an uncontrolled part and can be sold across state lines, even by mail. The ATF has no business declaring what you can or cannot attach this uncontrolled part to.
This thing would also be serial numbered, transferred on 4473 and IAW applicable local and state law; it IS a rifle, legally, whether it has a fire control system and magazine well attached or not.
The pistol grip of a Ruger MK I/II/III is an uncontrolled part and can be sold across state lines, even by mail. The ATF has no business declaring what you can or cannot attach this uncontrolled part to.
