User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/30/2015 5:39:10 PM EDT
[#1]
resubmit and email ted clutter all the pertinent info and hope he's still fixing them right away
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2015 6:00:38 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted:
My eform for SBR was declined for in complete serial #. I didn't include the prefix on my QC10 lower, Is there a quick fix so I don't have to resubmit the form again? Thanks...Larry Yes, but no. You'll have to resubmit, pay again, and you'll get a refund. Follow these instructions |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2015 6:53:53 PM EDT
[#3]
Don't forget to email Ted. And your refund will take 4 months.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2015 8:07:22 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And your refund will take 4 months. Not necessarily. I know multiple people that have gotten them back in <3 weeks recently. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2015 8:13:16 PM EDT
[#5]
Thanks for the info, I have resubmitted my form and emailed Mr Clutter.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2015 8:38:54 PM EDT
[#6]
Quoted:
My eform for SBR was declined for in complete serial #. I didn't include the prefix on my QC10 lower, Is there a quick fix so I don't have to resubmit the form again? Thanks...Larry Can you be more specific about what you left out? I'm curious what prefix you didn't use and why you chose not to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2015 1:46:34 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Don't forget to email Ted. And your refund will take 4 months. I received mine 2 weeks after being declined a month ago. Ted approved the new app within 8hrs 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2015 6:44:04 PM EDT
[#8]
Thanks for all the info, I resubmitted , emailed Ted Clutter and was approved today. Thanks again...Latty
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2015 6:50:31 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Can you be more specific about what you left out? I'm curious what prefix you didn't use and why you chose not to. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
My eform for SBR was declined for in complete serial #. I didn't include the prefix on my QC10 lower, Is there a quick fix so I don't have to resubmit the form again? Thanks...Larry Can you be more specific about what you left out? I'm curious what prefix you didn't use and why you chose not to. I left the CLT9MM off of the serial number. I ASSumed it was only the model number since it only appears once on the lower and is separated by a large space from the numbers. In another post another person was approved with just the number. I was not so lucky. But am now approved and all is good... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2015 8:04:42 PM EDT
[#10]
I think you were right the first time around. I'm pretty sure "CLT9MM" is just the model and not part of the serial number.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2015 8:38:20 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think you were right the first time around. I'm pretty sure "CLT9MM" it's just the model and not part of the serial number. I thought so too. Others have been approved both ways. But, if you think about it, a QC10 Glock lower could have the same serial number as the Colt lower. Thus you need the model used as a serial number prefix to make them different. Just my guess. I am just happy to have my stamp and be on my way to finish her up.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/2/2015 10:34:33 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I thought so too. Others have been approved both ways. But, if you think about it, a QC10 Glock lower could have the same serial number as the Colt lower. Thus you need the model used as a serial number prefix to make them different. Just my guess. I am just happy to have my stamp and be on my way to finish her up.... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I think you were right the first time around. I'm pretty sure "CLT9MM" it's just the model and not part of the serial number. I thought so too. Others have been approved both ways. But, if you think about it, a QC10 Glock lower could have the same serial number as the Colt lower. Thus you need the model used as a serial number prefix to make them different. Just my guess. I am just happy to have my stamp and be on my way to finish her up.... It's very clear. As mentioned in another thread, QC10 has answered this in the FAQ on their website. I am submitting this lower under a Form 1 to the ATF, what do I put as the model and serial number? The Model is either going to be “GSF”, “GLF”, or “CLT9MM.” The Serial Number will be “GSF #####”, “GLF #####”, or “CLT9MM #####” exactly as shown, no dashes. And it makes no difference that that two manufacturers have the same SN. You just can't have a manufacturer make two with the same SN. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2015 7:08:51 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's very clear. As mentioned in another thread, QC10 has answered this in the FAQ on their website. I am submitting this lower under a Form 1 to the ATF, what do I put as the model and serial number? The Model is either going to be “GSF”, “GLF”, or “CLT9MM.” The Serial Number will be “GSF #####”, “GLF #####”, or “CLT9MM #####” exactly as shown, no dashes. And it makes no difference that that two manufacturers have the same SN. You just can't have a manufacturer make two with the same SN. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I think you were right the first time around. I'm pretty sure "CLT9MM" it's just the model and not part of the serial number. I thought so too. Others have been approved both ways. But, if you think about it, a QC10 Glock lower could have the same serial number as the Colt lower. Thus you need the model used as a serial number prefix to make them different. Just my guess. I am just happy to have my stamp and be on my way to finish her up.... It's very clear. As mentioned in another thread, QC10 has answered this in the FAQ on their website. I am submitting this lower under a Form 1 to the ATF, what do I put as the model and serial number? The Model is either going to be “GSF”, “GLF”, or “CLT9MM.” The Serial Number will be “GSF #####”, “GLF #####”, or “CLT9MM #####” exactly as shown, no dashes. And it makes no difference that that two manufacturers have the same SN. You just can't have a manufacturer make two with the same SN. Clear as mud if you didn't see the other thread or their FAQ answer. Would have never even given it a second thought based on the way they mark the receiver. "CLT9MM" only appears once on the receiver followed by a space and then a numeric serial number. Go figure....... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2015 7:37:46 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Clear as mud if you didn't see the other thread or their FAQ answer. Would have never even given it a second thought based on the way they mark the receiver. "CLT9MM" only appears once on the receiver followed by a space and then a numeric serial number. Go figure....... Oh, don't get me wrong...I completely agree it's confusing when looking at the lower. However, you (or at least I think it was you, I didn't look before hitting Reply) stated you thought he had it right the first time. He didn't. QC has given a perfectly clear answer on their website. If I owned one of the lowers and was going to file it, I definitely would've check with them first...as none of the pieces of info have a "label" engraved. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2015 7:48:44 PM EDT
[#15]
Can't a mfgr make duplicate serial numbers on different models? For example, could a Ruger 10/22 have the same SN and a GP100?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2015 6:22:25 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh, don't get me wrong...I completely agree it's confusing when looking at the lower. However, you (or at least I think it was you, I didn't look before hitting Reply) stated you thought he had it right the first time. He didn't. QC has given a perfectly clear answer on their website. If I owned one of the lowers and was going to file it, I definitely would've check with them first...as none of the pieces of info have a "label" engraved. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Clear as mud if you didn't see the other thread or their FAQ answer. Would have never even given it a second thought based on the way they mark the receiver. "CLT9MM" only appears once on the receiver followed by a space and then a numeric serial number. Go figure....... Oh, don't get me wrong...I completely agree it's confusing when looking at the lower. However, you (or at least I think it was you, I didn't look before hitting Reply) stated you thought he had it right the first time. He didn't. QC has given a perfectly clear answer on their website. If I owned one of the lowers and was going to file it, I definitely would've check with them first...as none of the pieces of info have a "label" engraved. I don't want to beat a dead horse, but another forum member had his approved with only the number. No big deal now though, I resubmitted and was approver in a day.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2015 10:50:23 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't want to beat a dead horse, but another forum member had his approved with only the number. No big deal now though, I resubmitted and was approver in a day.... Same thing happened with the Spike's lowers that had an SBR prefix. Like this: 
There are Approved forms out there with the SBR (the correct way) as well as without...numerals only. There were also examiners that Disapproved forms with and without the prefix. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/4/2015 11:16:30 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Same thing happened with the Spike's lowers that had an SBR prefix. Like this: http://i751.photobucket.com/albums/xx151/thegreghorton/Mobile%20Uploads/25AC15A0-0AC3-41F1-9855-A637750AEF1E_zps49wpmzip.jpg There are Approved forms out there with the SBR (the correct way) as well as without...numerals only. There were also examiners that Disapproved forms with and without the prefix. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I don't want to beat a dead horse, but another forum member had his approved with only the number. No big deal now though, I resubmitted and was approver in a day.... Same thing happened with the Spike's lowers that had an SBR prefix. Like this: http://i751.photobucket.com/albums/xx151/thegreghorton/Mobile%20Uploads/25AC15A0-0AC3-41F1-9855-A637750AEF1E_zps49wpmzip.jpg There are Approved forms out there with the SBR (the correct way) as well as without...numerals only. There were also examiners that Disapproved forms with and without the prefix. My spikes SBR was approved with the SBR-XXXX letters in the serial number |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2015 7:10:15 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Same thing happened with the Spike's lowers that had an SBR prefix. Like this: http://i751.photobucket.com/albums/xx151/thegreghorton/Mobile%20Uploads/25AC15A0-0AC3-41F1-9855-A637750AEF1E_zps49wpmzip.jpg There are Approved forms out there with the SBR (the correct way) as well as without...numerals only. There were also examiners that Disapproved forms with and without the prefix. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I don't want to beat a dead horse, but another forum member had his approved with only the number. No big deal now though, I resubmitted and was approver in a day.... Same thing happened with the Spike's lowers that had an SBR prefix. Like this: http://i751.photobucket.com/albums/xx151/thegreghorton/Mobile%20Uploads/25AC15A0-0AC3-41F1-9855-A637750AEF1E_zps49wpmzip.jpg There are Approved forms out there with the SBR (the correct way) as well as without...numerals only. There were also examiners that Disapproved forms with and without the prefix. Not sure that's an apples to apples comparison but it does offer the same level of confusion. The Spikes lower has a model designation clearly listed on a separate line. "SBR" is not the model number where the QC10 lower has "CLT9MM" stamped once on the same line and serves as both the model # and as part of the serial number. Pretty jacked up way of marking the lower. But to your point within the Spikes example, knowing SBR is part of the serial number, does that make the model "MOD-ST15" or is it just "ST15"? (rhetorical question) go figure. The same could be said for the caliber. They just didn't think through how the markings could be interrupted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/5/2015 10:56:16 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not sure that's an apples to apples comparison but it does offer the same level of confusion. The Spikes lower has a model designation clearly listed on a separate line. "SBR" is not the model number where the QC10 lower has "CLT9MM" stamped once on the same line and serves as both the model # and as part of the serial number. Pretty jacked up way of marking the lower. But to your point within the Spikes example, knowing SBR is part of the serial number, does that make the model "MOD-ST15" or is it just "ST15"? (rhetorical question) go figure. The same could be said for the caliber. They just didn't think through how the markings could be interrupted. Model is definitely just ST15. The reason I said it was the same thing is there were forms approved both ways, and forms Disapproved both ways...not necessarily because the confusion was identical. The dumb thing about the Spike's situation is if was SAR or SCR, it would've never been an issue. Some knucklehead examiner(s) decided that SBR must've been intended as a label, like MOD and CAL. 
|
|
|
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.
