Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Posted: 12/29/2001 1:35:22 PM EST
Was borred today so I (cheaply)souped up one of my M1 carbines. I made the scout type mount with a metal handguard and a weaver type base. Base is secure on the handguard but the handguard has some play on the rifle. Probably going to cause some accuracy problems, even at carbine ranges.

Has anyone else been sucessful in making this kind of mount. I know B-Square makes one but with a "Mono-Mount with 1" intregal rings". I'd rather it be a weaver base.
http://images.prosperpoint.com/2392/120633-2.jpg
Link Posted: 12/29/2001 2:16:14 PM EST
I don't have much interestin the scout type mount but I am interested in any comment you may have on the Choate pistol grip stock.

I've been considering buying at least one of these for my M1 carbine, maybe another for my wifes rifle if she likes mine. Any problems that aren't apparent that you encountered? Did it fit right, just out of the box or not?

The only thing about this stock that I can see I'd prefer to be different is the profile. I'd like it to look like the mini-14 stock, more boxy and with the notched butt area.

Nice looking rifle anyway!

Don in Ohio

Link Posted: 12/29/2001 2:29:57 PM EST
That pistol grip stock is cool and all, but it makes it a post-ban assault weapon and is big time illegal. The bayonet lug and the detachable magazine are 2 evil features, the pistol grip makes it 3. Cool, but don't let the BATF catch you with it.
Link Posted: 12/29/2001 2:50:23 PM EST
[Last Edit: 12/29/2001 2:52:51 PM EST by cybersniper]
?How can it be post-ban when the gun was made in 1944? You can put all the evil features on a 1992 AR15. If what your saying is true all I have to do is put a type2(no lug) barrel band on it.

As for the stock. I have the same opinion. I like the pistol grip but dont like the overall look. Fit is alittle tight, but no modification needed.
Link Posted: 12/29/2001 3:24:11 PM EST

Originally Posted By cybersniper:
?How can it be post-ban when the gun was made in 1944? You can put all the evil features on a 1992 AR15. If what your saying is true all I have to do is put a type2(no lug) barrel band on it.

As for the stock. I have the same opinion. I like the pistol grip but dont like the overall look. Fit is alittle tight, but no modification needed.



It didn't have 3 evil features prior to you putting that stock on it, so unless you put that stock on it before 1994 it is an illegal assault weapon. It only had 2 evil features before the new stock, so it wasn't grandfathered, now it has 3.

It doesn't matter when the weapon was manufactured if it didn't have the 3 evil features before '94 it wasn't an assault rifle before the ban. If you had a M1A1 paratrooper's carbine it would be another story, but I don't think that particular rifle is an M1A1.

That rifle isn't anything like a '92 AR-15 because the AR had at least 3 evil features before the ban and was therefor considered an assault weapon and was grandfathered.

Basic gist of the '94 law: If it didn't have 3 evil features before the ban it wasn't an assault weapon. Adding more "assault weapon" features that would bring the total number of evil features over 3 after '94 is assembling an assault weapon.

As for putting a type 2 barrel on the rifle, that's right. Without the bayonat lug it only has 2 evil features and is legal.
Link Posted: 12/29/2001 3:34:50 PM EST
The government must want us all to be lawyers or something. This pre-post stuff is nuts (of which Im sure has been commented on numberus times already). Thank you for the clarification. A type 2 band is now on it. Acctully its a cut down type 3. Dont worry collectors it wasnt an original, it was a post WWII part. Thank god I had one. Still looks pretty cool though.
Top Top