User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/22/2014 6:48:43 PM EDT
[#1]
I don't know about a RLL but with enough machining people have gotten post sample drop in auto sears to run. The ATF deemed the AR10's as a different platform, so if you put a registered LL in it you would build a post sample, so not useful for most people. For an 02/07 it could be done, but for them why not just drill the AR10 and be done with it? I owned a full auto AR10 before, not really as much fun as one would think.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2014 7:52:11 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted:
I can't seem to find a clear answer but are registered lightning links compatible with SR25s or other ar10 variants? Thanks Compatible or not, ATF considers it illegal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 7:46:13 AM EDT
[#3]
there is one guy on sub guns / gunbroker who advartises paddles to work with arma lite pattern ar-10, they are taller.... he will also mill carrier/lower for clearnce for your rll if you send it to him
but the word on this site has always been its a diffrent platform so it would be illegal.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2014 2:35:35 PM EDT
[#4]
Damn,
that's a bummer. Id love to have a full auto 308 battle rifle thats not a FAL. Thanks for the info guys. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2014 2:41:42 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Damn, that's a bummer. Id love to have a full auto 308 battle rifle thats not a FAL. Thanks for the info guys. HK 91+HK sear or trigger box. Or even 91-G3 RR conversion. The RRs haven't shot up in price as fast as the sears. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2014 6:26:38 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
HK 91+HK sear or trigger box. Or even 91-G3 RR conversion. The RRs haven't shot up in price as fast as the sears. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Damn, that's a bummer. Id love to have a full auto 308 battle rifle thats not a FAL. Thanks for the info guys. HK 91+HK sear or trigger box. Or even 91-G3 RR conversion. The RRs haven't shot up in price as fast as the sears. Or an M14 or BM59. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2014 6:29:15 PM EDT
[#7]
The BM59 is a sweet shooting MG - far more so than the M14.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2014 10:58:21 PM EDT
[#8]
Already got an HK sear pack on the way and its prepped for a hk21e and mp5s up the ass. Was looking for something a little more modern and lightweight and figured a full auto sr25 ecc would be tits!
Not digging the old school 308s made of wood, but I will check out the bm59. Thanks gents |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2014 1:50:00 AM EDT
[#9]
This would be my SR-25 replacement in the HK world. Put your sear in a SG-1 F/A set-trigger and you could have some real fun.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2014 2:05:43 PM EDT
[#10]
Alright what the hell is that awesome beast. So sexy looking.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2014 3:56:06 PM EDT
[#11]
I don't see a reason why you couldn't use a RLL in a Colt LE901. The 901 uses the same fire control geometry, buffer tube and stock, control layout, as well takes a standard AR15 5.56 upper should you wish to.
Ultimately, the LE901 is nothing more than an AR15 with a 308 sized mag well. If you can use an HK Sear in a HK23e or a DIAS in a AR47, AR45, or MGI Modular lower I don't see how a LE901 is that much different and is ultimately mechanically less different to a stock AR15 than an semi auto HK "E" xport version belt fed is from its 5.56 mag fed variant. I have personally never seen a letter stating that a RLL cant be used in an AR10 either. I believe a DIAS is more mechanically problematic in a AR10 due to the bigger rear lug and the sear trip geometry is higher up than an AR15. (and which is easily rememdied on a RLL by using a taller paddle) |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2014 6:18:25 PM EDT
[#12]
Pretty sure the AR10 letter has been posted here
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 7:03:40 PM EDT
[#13]
I don't understand why you couldn't? If when you bought you LL, RDIAS or RR M-16 if you register it in additional calibers, like people do on HK sears and I have seen done on M-16's then why couldn't you? At that point you have technical issues, which with say a colt 901 would just be the BCG being machine for either a LL or RDIAS, the rest of the FCG parts should just go in as a 901 used AR/M-16 FCG parts. Why would it be a no-no?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 7:26:42 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't understand why you couldn't? If when you bought you LL, RDIAS or RR M-16 if you register it in additional calibers, like people do on HK sears and I have seen done on M-16's then why couldn't you? At that point you have technical issues, which with say a colt 901 would just be the BCG being machine for either a LL or RDIAS, the rest of the FCG parts should just go in as a 901 used AR/M-16 FCG parts. Why would it be a no-no? ATF has ruled that an RDIAS or RLL in conjunction with a firearm it was not designed for constitutes a new, post-sample MG. The conversion device remains transferable and usable as designed, but the new combination is itself a new and illegal conversion. The 901 question has yet to be addressed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 8:02:47 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
ATF has ruled that an RDIAS or RLL in conjunction with a firearm it was not designed for constitutes a new, post-sample MG. The conversion device remains transferable and usable as designed, but the new combination is itself a new and illegal conversion. The 901 question has yet to be addressed. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I don't understand why you couldn't? If when you bought you LL, RDIAS or RR M-16 if you register it in additional calibers, like people do on HK sears and I have seen done on M-16's then why couldn't you? At that point you have technical issues, which with say a colt 901 would just be the BCG being machine for either a LL or RDIAS, the rest of the FCG parts should just go in as a 901 used AR/M-16 FCG parts. Why would it be a no-no? ATF has ruled that an RDIAS or RLL in conjunction with a firearm it was not designed for constitutes a new, post-sample MG. The conversion device remains transferable and usable as designed, but the new combination is itself a new and illegal conversion. The 901 question has yet to be addressed. If so why is S.A.B.R.E allowed to be sold? A M-16 upper for a MAC-10 registered lower is far more out of whack than a RDIAS in a AR-10? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/17/2014 8:29:28 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If so why is S.A.B.R.E allowed to be sold? A M-16 upper for a MAC-10 registered lower is far more out of whack than a RDIAS in a AR-10? http://i61.tinypic.com/nxot1w.jpg It uses the original MG receiver, not an MG conversion and does not adapt it to use the upper. Several similar MAC conversions have been classified as post samples previously however, like the M249 and RPK beltfed uppers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/18/2014 5:34:05 AM EDT
[#17]
What if I'm Joe, and when I registered my DIAS via Form 1 in 1985, I wrote "drop-in auto sear for AR15 and AR10 style firearms" in the Additional Description field?
What if someone bought that from Joe today? (Joe designed and made it.) |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/18/2014 6:07:44 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Compatible or not, ATF considers it illegal. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I can't seem to find a clear answer but are registered lightning links compatible with SR25s or other ar10 variants? Thanks Compatible or not, ATF considers it illegal. the same people consider immigrating without proper documentation illegal as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/18/2014 6:25:29 AM EDT
[#19]
AR10 Auto sears exist, but I don't know that any existed before '86.
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/18/2014 7:16:44 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
the same people consider immigrating without proper documentation illegal as well. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can't seem to find a clear answer but are registered lightning links compatible with SR25s or other ar10 variants? Thanks Compatible or not, ATF considers it illegal. the same people consider immigrating without proper documentation illegal as well. Except they actually enforce gun law |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/18/2014 8:01:34 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Except they actually enforce gun law Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can't seem to find a clear answer but are registered lightning links compatible with SR25s or other ar10 variants? Thanks Compatible or not, ATF considers it illegal. the same people consider immigrating without proper documentation illegal as well. Except they actually enforce gun law do they? not sure that word means what you think it means. The shotgun news gun was selling autosears publically for what like 20 years before he got caught up. wouldn't really call that enforcement |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/18/2014 1:43:23 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
do they? not sure that word means what you think it means. The shotgun news gun was selling autosears publically for what like 20 years before he got caught up. wouldn't really call that enforcement Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can't seem to find a clear answer but are registered lightning links compatible with SR25s or other ar10 variants? Thanks Compatible or not, ATF considers it illegal. the same people consider immigrating without proper documentation illegal as well. Except they actually enforce gun law do they? not sure that word means what you think it means. The shotgun news gun was selling autosears publically for what like 20 years before he got caught up. wouldn't really call that enforcement So if it's not 100% it's not enforcement 
Better tell Olofson that he didn't really get arrested. The difference is that they know illegals are coming in but many people in our legislative and legal system want them here. Border guard isn't going to let a bunch of illegals walk right past him just as a ATF agent or most local cops would be happy to cuff you up for shooting a un registered machine gun. Just because the administration then turns the illegals loose is not the border guards fault. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/18/2014 1:52:45 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: AR10 Auto sears exist, but I don't know that any existed before '86. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/18/2014 2:03:56 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I really like those designs, the fact it doesn't require any M16 parts is pretty cool. It's more of an autoconnector than a sear IMO. Well, it does require an M16 style bolt carrier, as opposed to the SP1 style carrier used by the RLL. This style of drop-in is in fact an auto connector. I've made that style trip for some of my DIASes so I could use them in other rifles without having to install an M16 FCG. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/18/2014 2:06:47 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well, it does require an M16 style bolt carrier, as opposed to the SP1 style carrier used by the RLL. This style of drop-in is in fact an auto connector. I've made that style trip for some of my DIASes so I could use them in other rifles without having to install an M16 FCG. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I really like those designs, the fact it doesn't require any M16 parts is pretty cool. It's more of an autoconnector than a sear IMO. Well, it does require an M16 style bolt carrier, as opposed to the SP1 style carrier used by the RLL. This style of drop-in is in fact an auto connector. I've made that style trip for some of my DIASes so I could use them in other rifles without having to install an M16 FCG. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/18/2014 2:30:24 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I guess I should have mentioned the carrier, these days they are pretty standard though. Any issues with extra wear on the DIAS body when using them as an auto connector? I haven't noticed any real wear on my aluminum DIAS body from using the auto connector style trip. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/18/2014 2:35:21 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I haven't noticed any real wear on my aluminum DIAS body from using the auto connector style trip. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I guess I should have mentioned the carrier, these days they are pretty standard though. Any issues with extra wear on the DIAS body when using them as an auto connector? I haven't noticed any real wear on my aluminum DIAS body from using the auto connector style trip. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/18/2014 4:15:31 PM EDT
[#28]
There should be less stress, because it's simply releasing the disconnector, as opposed to catching and holding the hammer back like a normal DIAS does.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2014 1:21:55 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It uses the original MG receiver, not an MG conversion and does not adapt it to use the upper. Several similar MAC conversions have been classified as post samples previously however, like the M249 and RPK beltfed uppers. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If so why is S.A.B.R.E allowed to be sold? A M-16 upper for a MAC-10 registered lower is far more out of whack than a RDIAS in a AR-10? http://i61.tinypic.com/nxot1w.jpg It uses the original MG receiver, not an MG conversion and does not adapt it to use the upper. Several similar MAC conversions have been classified as post samples previously however, like the M249 and RPK beltfed uppers. Not true. The SABRE requires receiver modification. They is no difference between an AR15 and AR10 using the same RLL. It's all just personal opinion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/19/2014 2:20:53 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not true. The SABRE requires receiver modification. They is no difference between an AR15 and AR10 using the same RLL. It's all just personal opinion. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If so why is S.A.B.R.E allowed to be sold? A M-16 upper for a MAC-10 registered lower is far more out of whack than a RDIAS in a AR-10? http://i61.tinypic.com/nxot1w.jpg It uses the original MG receiver, not an MG conversion and does not adapt it to use the upper. Several similar MAC conversions have been classified as post samples previously however, like the M249 and RPK beltfed uppers. Not true. The SABRE requires receiver modification. They is no difference between an AR15 and AR10 using the same RLL. It's all just personal opinion. I'm aware of the hole - I have two of the saber556 uppers myself. For what it's worth, it's the same mod that's been used by "slow fire" conversions in the past, which mounted an AR style telestock to the M10/M11 in the same manner while keeping it 45/9/380 and mag fed through the pistol grip. If you want a more complete précis on why ATF allowed the sabre but disallowed the beltfed conversions, you'd have to write them and ask. As you noted, it's just their (ATF's) opinion, although unfortunately as an administrative agency of the executive branch, it is indeed their opinion which matters in this case unless and until a judge says otherwise. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
