Electronic Arms is developing a 10-22 based bullpup rifle. It is 10-22 compatible in that it takes 10-22 magazines, barrels, bolts, hammers, mainsprings, sears, etc - basically, the parts people upgrade and replace.

Interesting features include:

Fire-by-wire electronic trigger, with adjustable travel down to 0.1 millimeter (four thousands of an inch), and pull weight down to 10 grams (less than half an ounce).

Full CNC machined receiver and barrel-block bedding system

Takedown stock that separates into two main parts with a single bolt - and the wrench is included in the battery compartment. In the takedown state, the scope or red dot sight stays mounted to the barrel, so no loss of zero during takedown.

Adjustable telescoping stock for adjustable Length of Pull.

This already has a thread on the AR-15.com bullpup section but I thought I would post here for the 10-22 crowd. The goal is to have this in production in time for Christmas and the next SHOT show. If you like the design, please "like" Electronic Arms on facebook.
http://i611.photobucket.com/albums/tt194/BulZiPhoto/left_lowres.jpg

http://i611.photobucket.com/albums/tt194/BulZiPhoto/takedown_cropped_lowres.jpg

How long before the ATF declares it a machine gun part?

Please clarify. This is a semiautomatic gun, not a machine gun. One shot per pull.

Your sarcasm meter needs calibration. also, would be good to check your .gov-is-screwy gauge as well

eta: DO WANT

This is only about the fiftieth time that someone has replied to a thread after less than two minutes of contemplation that electronic triggers on semiautos are illegal.

That is a common misconception. Electronic triggers on semiautos are perfectly legal, provided they are one-shot-per-pull.

The Matchguns MG2E, Pardini SP1-E, and Walther SSP-E are all semiauto pistols with electronic triggers, some of which have been available for over a decade. Many ATF letters have been published that confirm the legality of electronic triggers on semiautos.

http://m.imgur.com/a/vt2Qz
The link above is a fairly recent atf tech branch letter. Question 21 and answer 21 make it pretty clear that atf considers 1 shot per pull electronic triggers on semiauto rifles legal, even in the context of ar-15 rifles.

Where this could possibly run afoul of tech branch is the 'readily convertible" definition.

If you make a fire-by-wire trigger that only fires once per trigger pull, but it's ridiculously simple to modify it to fire more than once per trigger pull, then the trigger system will likely be classified as a machinegun for being readily convertible, same as open-bolt semi autos in the 1980s.

The way around that is to prevent the fire-by-wire system from being easy to modify, but you'd need submissions to tech branch to verify any such design before starting to sell it.

Yes, but this is true of any semiautomatic gun. The legal standard isn't ridiculousness, it is readiness. This is one-shot-per-pull and is no less difficult to convert than any of the many commercially-available electronic trigger'd guns. To do so, you have to alter what is there, and add parts, etc etc.

As is well known, most semiautomatics can be very easily converted to automatic fire by a knowledgeable person with the proper equipment. Shoelaces can be used to convert a certain rifle. That is illegal, but that doesn't mean that owning that particular rifle plus shoes with laces is illegal.

Similarly, drop in auto sears can convert AR's to auto. That doesn't make AR's illegal, it makes auto sears illegal.

ATF has no problems with semiauto electronic triggers.

I guarantee if you try to ship a semi auto electronic trigger with a jumper labelled "semi auto only" installed, and simply removing it renders the electronic trigger into a 10ms cycle full auto trigger, it will be classified as a machinegun.

If you don't label it, but it's evident?  who knows?

If you don't even make a jumper, but someone can study the circuit and cut a trace or snip a wire?  who knows?

Companies don't like lawsuits or costly recalls. Your legal mileage may vary.

ETA: Anyone with the requisite knowledge can already convert any semi auto, electronic or mechanical, to full auto.  ATF's "readily convertible" classification seems aimed at keeping the less-knowledgeable from doing so TOO easily.

Yes, having any provision at all for full auto fire would be illegal, labelled or otherwise, evident or obscured. That is not unique to electronic triggers, though.

Similarly, it would be illegal to make a purely mechanical semiauto with a dimple that says, "drill here and place a pin for full auto fire" or "file this doohickey and clip this spring"

This bullpup has no such features. It is pure one-shot-per-pull plain vanilla semiauto, just like all the other legal electronic semiauto guns on the market. There are no microcontrollers, no jumpers, no Konami codes, no hidden modes. Just a really nice semiauto trigger, probably nicer than any you have ever shot before.

I don't know how these threads keep getting sidetracked into discussions of electronic trigger legality. Please read up on the actual ATF regulations regarding electronic triggered semiautos before suggesting that they are somehow more legally tenuous than other semiautomatic guns.

By all means, do not modify a gun to fire more than one shot per trigger function. It is illegal.

Walther SSP-E  
http://i611.photobucket.com/albums/tt194/BulZiPhoto/imagejpg1-1.jpg

Pardini SP1-E
http://i611.photobucket.com/albums/tt194/BulZiPhoto/PardiniSP1-E.jpg

MatchGuns MG2E
http://i611.photobucket.com/albums/tt194/BulZiPhoto/imagejpg1.jpg

All of these electronic triggered semiauto guns are completely legal. There is nothing unique about an electronic trigger from an ATF legal/regulatory perspective. If it is semiauto only, it is legal.

No, not for me, but in general, yes.

The point I'm trying to impart is that each of these manufacturers have carefully designed their fire by wire system so that they are not "readily convertible", or they wouldn't be selling them.

Simply saying "a fire by wire electronic trigger system is legal" is at once truthful and obscuring, since it elides the legalities required to get such a system approved.

A fire by wire system is not in itself illegal, but it is FRAUGHT with pitfalls for the unaware.

How about this:

1) Please give a specific example of a real-world semiauto electronic trigger that somehow didn't meet ATF approval and was pulled from the market.

2) Please explain to me or anyone else how the Tech Branch letter linked above in this very thread does not state very clearly that electronic triggers are presumptively legal, barring any of the absurd and contrived "readily restored" scenarios described in the earlier posts.

Q21 "Can an unlicensed individual legally modify the firing mechanism within a non-NFA firearm so that the trigger is 'fly-by-wire'?  Meaning each trigger pull is converted to electrical pulses which travel electronically to the striker or hammer, which is released electronically?

A21 "Yes; As long as the single function of the trigger results in a pulse which creates only a single shot."

3) Can you provide a link to an ATF tech branch letter, older or newer, which contradicts this very clear and minimally conditional answer?

I would argue that any modification to any gun is "FRAUGHT with pitfalls for the unaware" - both legally and safety-wise.

Please give us actual examples of these pitfalls, perhaps someone who was arrested or had an electronic gun seized. I can provide several examples of people with non-electronic guns who were arrested, so I guess by comparison purely mechanical guns must be equally fraught. How, specifically, are electronic guns more fraught?

Do your own research, sir.  I caution, and you can't gainsay my cautions.  

Beyond that:  welcome to arfcom.  

I have provided the "readily convertible nexus" as a reasonable fulcrum for your own assertions, including the blanket reclassification of open bolt semi-autos in 1980.  If you have actual examples of 'readily convertible" electronic semi auto trigger activators which have been promulgated in commerce, or anything relating to submitting your own fire-by-wire system to ATF tech branch for classification that refutes my cautionary assertions, I'd be interested in reading them.

i decline your invitation to research your own assertions for you.

Unfortunately this interesting topic has to be locked.