User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 2:40:19 PM EDT
[#1]
The ATF will say whatever they want, but my understanding is that a pistol is measured in the most collapsed/folded position.
The only real way to be sure is to measure from the end of your buffer tube to the end of your muzzle threads. Edit: To answer your question, you can mount the brace wherever you want, but the mounting location doesn't factor into the OAL calculation for vertical grip addition (except, maybe, if it's mounted in the most forward possible position, but even that would be gray area). |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 2:43:34 PM EDT
[#2]
I didn't know they had done any final rules yet?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 2:44:41 PM EDT
[#3]
It doesn't include the brace. If you have an adj, it would be to rear of receiver ext. If folding, it would be measured collapsed.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 2:48:45 PM EDT
[#4]
Keep in mind the ATF's proposed new points system of rules for braces is still not fully known, and may change a lot when it possibly goes into effect later this year.
But, based on the known current opinion of the ATF, the measured distance from the front face of the trigger and the rear most edge of the brace (aka, the "length of pull") cannot exceed 13.5 inches. They feel that longer than that and it's too long to be used as a brace on your forearm and implies you mean to use it as a stock. That was based on some letter they wrote a few years ago, and since then I personally don't know of any case where they've had to make that argument, so take it for what it is. There are also some braces still sold openly that as designed can be adjusted to exceed this limit in common configurations. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 3:10:09 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted: I am building an AR pistol with a 10.5" barrel. I have the pistol buffer tube, but want to install a "brace" to that tube. It cannot adjust back and forth - it is fixed in position, attached via allen screws that tighten it town against the tube to prevent movement. Am I allowed to mount it back a bit on the pistol tube, or must it be mounted all the way forward on the tube? If I mount it in the position I want, with the 10.5" barrel, the overall length of the weapon would be 29 inches... Please advise - I know I can't put a forward vertical grip on it, but is what I describe above a problem? For the moment, no....assuming you are using a standard length (pistol) buffer tube and the brace when attached at the rear-most position does not exceed an LOP of 13.5" or greater. When the proposal drops, who knows. That same weapon may or may not be an SBR based on a bunch of unrelated items. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 5:46:47 PM EDT
[#6]
Basically, I've got a pistol buffer tube of normal length that is completely round.
The "brace" is like a blade that slips over the buffer tube and two Allen screws act to "clamp" it to the tube. If you mount it all the way forward, then it completely covers the buffer tube. I think that's what you're supposed to do. However, I want to pull it further back on the tube about three inches, to where the first screw is near the end of the tube, and "clamp" it on there. Hopefully that explains better what I'm wanting to do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 5:56:04 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Basically, I've got a pistol buffer tube of normal length that is completely round. The "brace" is like a blade that slips over the buffer tube and two Allen screws act to "clamp" it to the tube. If you mount it all the way forward, then it completely covers the buffer tube. I think that's what you're supposed to do. However, I want to pull it further back on the tube about three inches, to where the first screw is near the end of the tube, and "clamp" it on there. Hopefully that explains better what I'm wanting to do. I think everybody understood. If the brace passes the first part of the worksheet, there is another part where LOP will cost you points, increasing the points as the LOP increases. I think panthermark figured out that you needed to be under 12.5" LOP to make it under the wire. I prefer a little more but can make that work. I am also considering the same type of brace and tube as you are. There are a couple of varieties but I think I have settled on this one. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 5:56:41 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Basically, I've got a pistol buffer tube of normal length that is completely round. The "brace" is like a blade that slips over the buffer tube and two Allen screws act to "clamp" it to the tube. If you mount it all the way forward, then it completely covers the buffer tube. I think that's what you're supposed to do. However, I want to pull it further back on the tube about three inches, to where the first screw is near the end of the tube, and "clamp" it on there. Hopefully that explains better what I'm wanting to do. Right, sounds you have a blade style brace similar to a Shockwave, only it uses a round tube (without the little idents a Shockwave tube has). You have two measurements to take. The first is from the end of the buffer tube to the end of the barrel threads (or muzzle device if permanently attached). It should be less than 26 inches. As of right now, it can be longer than that, and still considered a Pistol as long as it does not have a VFG. This could change slightly when the proposal hits, as it implies anything longer than 26 inches will not be eligible to have brace. The second is with the brace as far back on the tube as it will go. You have to measure (in a horizontal line) the distance between the middle of the trigger and the edge of the brace. It cannot be 13.5 inches or longer. This will change when the proposal hits as their will be a demerit point system based on LOP and all kinds of other dumb crap. Technically pistols don't have LOP....but the AFT will AFT. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/7/2022 6:22:18 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think everybody understood. If the brace passes the first part of the worksheet, there is another part where LOP will cost you points, increasing the points as the LOP increases. I think panthermark figured out that you needed to be under 12.5" LOP to make it under the wire. I prefer a little more but can make that work. I am also considering the same type of brace and tube as you are. There are a couple of varieties but I think I have settled on this one. https://i.imgur.com/sGf65FC.jpg Yeah, I think the Shockwave Blades will have to be pinned at just under 12 1/2" inches if it is used with the buffer tube that comes with them because of the 1 demerit point hit for the round tube having little idents (if pinning ends up being allowed). This assumes it has a strap. The AFT measured the max LOP on a Shockwave at 13 1/4 inches in the proposal. They basically auto-failed a brace they they already approved because of the 1 point hit for the tube, and the 3 point hit on the LOP.  I'm curious to hear what the max LOP is on the blade that the OP has since there will not be a 1 point hit for the indents in the buffer tube. OP: One more thing....if/when this proposal goes through, you will also have to take into account things light iron/back-up sights, hand stops, magnifiers and things like that. If your brace ends up with a max LOP in the 12.5 to 13.5 range (and you have a strap), that will use up all of your demerit points, and you won't be able to have anything else except an unlimited eye relief red dot. And don't forget to weight your weapon.  I can see a lot of people ignoring this proposal because of how useless and confusing it is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2022 5:11:34 AM EDT
[#10]
Under the new rules, it sounds like slapping a rifle-length buffer on a 10.5" and going braceless is the way to go if you want to stay legal.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2022 11:01:17 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Under the new rules, it sounds like slapping a rifle-length buffer on a 10.5" and going braceless is the way to go if you want to stay legal. There are extended 9" pistol tubes out there if you want to retain the ability to clamp a brace on it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2022 5:23:17 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Under the new rules, it sounds like slapping a rifle-length buffer on a 10.5" and going braceless is the way to go if you want to stay legal. You can do that today. I have an extended pistol tube I just picked up for poops and giggles just to take measurements....but I never got around to installing it to measure. I also ordered a foam cover for it (it is the UTG Pro tube meant to hold a Tailhook Mod 1). I guess I could stick my cane tip on my extended buffer tube....but I'll pass on that "for now".  |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2022 8:45:06 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You can do that today. I have an extended pistol tube I just picked up for poops and giggles just to take measurements....but I never got around to installing it to measure. I also ordered a foam cover for it (it is the UTG Pro tube meant to hold a Tailhook Mod 1). I guess I could stick my cane tip on my extended buffer tube....but I'll pass on that "for now". https://i.imgur.com/z70K8wi.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Under the new rules, it sounds like slapping a rifle-length buffer on a 10.5" and going braceless is the way to go if you want to stay legal. You can do that today. I have an extended pistol tube I just picked up for poops and giggles just to take measurements....but I never got around to installing it to measure. I also ordered a foam cover for it (it is the UTG Pro tube meant to hold a Tailhook Mod 1). I guess I could stick my cane tip on my extended buffer tube....but I'll pass on that "for now". https://i.imgur.com/z70K8wi.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2022 2:43:25 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Seems I recall a year or so ago when atf was changing up how to measure they stated that an extended tube is no longer acceptable if all it does is add extra length without any aid in mechanical function. Do you have any actual directive on this. It would be akin to disallowing a pinned and welded flash hider to make a 16" barrel length as it does not aid in "mechanical function" |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/10/2022 5:56:36 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Seems I recall a year or so ago when atf was changing up how to measure they stated that an extended tube is no longer acceptable if all it does is add extra length without any aid in mechanical function. I don't remember this changing, but I have not paid much attention to extended buffer tubes until now. However, I do not that a change was made a few years ago in regards to measuring length with LAW folders. That is what led to pistol measurements being measured from the end of the buffer tube (brace removed) on weapons without folders, and from the folded position on weapons with folders. Do you by chance have a link for that? With that said, an extended buffer tube plus a tennis ball or cane tip of whatever isn't a brace issue. That falls more along the lines of "what is a stock". |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/11/2022 8:17:12 AM EDT
[#16]
This isn't the one but it also mentions extended receiver extensions, Prince Law though was were I recall reading about extended tubes. Bottom of page 7, attachment methods.
https://princelaw.files.wordpress.com/2020/12/atf-federal-register-notice-objective-factors-for-classifying-stablizing-braces-draft-12-16-20.pdf |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/11/2022 10:44:32 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This isn't the one but it also mentions extended receiver extensions, Prince Law though was were I recall reading about extended tubes. Bottom of page 7, attachment methods. https://princelaw.files.wordpress.com/2020/12/atf-federal-register-notice-objective-factors-for-classifying-stablizing-braces-draft-12-16-20.pdf Again, that has to do with brace applications. We are talking tube with no brace. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/11/2022 10:46:58 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This isn't the one but it also mentions extended receiver extensions, Prince Law though was were I recall reading about extended tubes. Bottom of page 7, attachment methods. https://princelaw.files.wordpress.com/2020/12/atf-federal-register-notice-objective-factors-for-classifying-stablizing-braces-draft-12-16-20.pdf I believe that was the original brace ban proposal that came out late 2020 (following the AFT crap with the Honey Badger pistol). That proposal was so bad, the AFT pulled it from public review after a few weeks. But either way, it it still revolves around a weapon with a brace installed. https://blog.princelaw.com/2020/12/23/atf-withdrawals-notice-and-request-for-comment-regarding-objective-factors-for-classifying-weapons-with-stabilizing-braces/ It might be out there, but I have not seen anything written specifically about measuring pistols running extended buffer tubes without braces. Are you thinking of this article by chance? https://blog.princelaw.com/2019/07/05/atf-rescinds-prior-methods-to-measure-a-firearms-overall-length-when-equipped-with-a-stabilizing-brace/ Edit: Added link Double edit: Are you thinking about this issue with the Blackbeard pistol and cheek rest? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/11/2022 12:59:14 PM EDT
[#19]
Since it is not law...do what you want. When it actually is a law, then we can worry about it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:04:14 AM EDT
[#20]
Hmmm and here I am about to start another build and I am leaning toward pistol build.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 10:38:55 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hmmm and here I am about to start another build and I am leaning toward pistol build. You can certainly do that, I just wouldn't put a $100+ adjustable brace on it just yet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 11:47:24 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You can certainly do that, I just wouldn't put a $100+ adjustable brace on it just yet. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Hmmm and here I am about to start another build and I am leaning toward pistol build. You can certainly do that, I just wouldn't put a $100+ adjustable brace on it just yet. I am running out of fucks to give. Stocked up on toilet paper and food right as the plandemic hit but did not stock up on fucks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:20:16 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I am running out of fucks to give. Stocked up on toilet paper and food right as the plandemic hit but did not stock up on fucks. I'm with ya. I don't shoot on public ranges so I do as I please. But it is fun to debate the merits or lack thereof. If the time comes that I am forced to use my weapon in the public square, no fucks will be given as to the type of stock nor barrel length. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 12:48:27 PM EDT
[#24]
My understanding is as follows:
Length of Pull (measured from trigger to the end of the stock in fully extended position) must be less than 13.5 inches. They sell "length of pull limiters". So by adding a brace you just need to make sure your brace at its longest point in its most extended position possible does not exceed 13.5+ inches from the trigger. You may also add a vertical foregrip to your ar pistol if the overall length is 26 inches or more. This is measured from the barrel (!!NOT including the Flash Hider!!) to the end of the BUFFER TUBE (!!NOT the end of the brace - Take off the brace to measure!!) Disclaimer: Check the laws for county/state/federal yourself/contact a lawyer. I am not a lawyer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 1:41:19 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My understanding is as follows: Length of Pull (measured from trigger to the end of the stock in fully extended position) must be less than 13.5 inches. They sell "length of pull limiters". So by adding a brace you just need to make sure your brace at its longest point in its most extended position possible does not exceed 13.5+ inches from the trigger. You may also add a vertical foregrip to your ar pistol if the overall length is 26 inches or more. This is measured from the barrel (!!NOT including the Flash Hider!!) to the end of the BUFFER TUBE (!!NOT the end of the brace - Take off the brace to measure!!) Disclaimer: Check the laws for county/state/federal yourself/contact a lawyer. I am not a lawyer. There is a lot more to it that that. Any brace that is "adjustable" will not pass the first part of the workwheet, instant fail. If you add a vertical foregrip you are indicating it is intended to be held with two hands which is also a fail. Over 26" = no longer eligible for a brace as too long to be a "pistol" This is all according to AFT, and not common sense |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 2:03:26 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My understanding is as follows: Length of Pull (measured from trigger to the end of the stock in fully extended position) must be less than 13.5 inches. They sell "length of pull limiters". So by adding a brace you just need to make sure your brace at its longest point in its most extended position possible does not exceed 13.5+ inches from the trigger. You may also add a vertical foregrip to your ar pistol if the overall length is 26 inches or more. This is measured from the barrel (!!NOT including the Flash Hider!!) to the end of the BUFFER TUBE (!!NOT the end of the brace - Take off the brace to measure!!) Disclaimer: Check the laws for county/state/federal yourself/contact a lawyer. I am not a lawyer. For the moment, you are correct on the maximum length of pull allowed. Come August, there will be a ton more BS to deal with. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 8:02:51 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There is a lot more to it that that. Any brace that is "adjustable" will not pass the first part of the workwheet, instant fail. If you add a vertical foregrip you are indicating it is intended to be held with two hands which is also a fail. Over 26" = no longer eligible for a brace as too long to be a "pistol" This is all according to AFT, and not common sense Quote HistoryQuoted: There is a lot more to it that that. Any brace that is "adjustable" will not pass the first part of the workwheet, instant fail. If you add a vertical foregrip you are indicating it is intended to be held with two hands which is also a fail. Over 26" = no longer eligible for a brace as too long to be a "pistol" This is all according to AFT, and not common sense Are you talking about current law or the new proposal? I believe this is accurate as of this moment, and my AR pistol has been built to these specifications. So if you know something I don't, I'm all ears. Quoted: For the moment, you are correct on the maximum length of pull allowed. Come August, there will be a ton more BS to deal with. Correct. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2022 9:05:37 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Are you talking about current law or the new proposal? I believe this is accurate as of this moment, and my AR pistol has been built to these specifications. So if you know something I don't, I'm all ears. Which is what this thread is about  |
|
|
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.
