Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
11/20/2019 5:07:11 PM
Posted: 10/23/2006 12:17:44 PM EST
Greetings folks,

Have been looking into taking a Steyr USR and converting it into an AUG A2 and have come up with some questions I'd like to run by the folks here.

Is it possible to order an A2 stock from Steyr or ADI to replace the USR stock?

Is it possible to order the picatinny rail adapter to replace the factory sight from Steyr or ADI?

I've heard that you can replace old stocks of an A2 with new stocks from Steyr as long as the previous stock was destroyed or turned over to the importer or manufacturer and the new stock had the same serial number or forms were filed to show the serial number change by the manufacture or importer. Am I WAY off or is that about right?

Also, I wonder if you would even have to destroy or turn over the USR stock as it was made to be non-sporting and came in before Clinton signed the extension to the ban?

Of course, I'll be looking into this more to make certain, but I'd love your opinions and if possible links to support them and inform me.

THANKS
Link Posted: 10/23/2006 7:02:23 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/23/2006 7:08:28 PM EST by Homeinvader]

Originally Posted By SilentType:

I've heard that you can replace old stocks of an A2 with new stocks from Steyr as long as the previous stock was destroyed or turned over to the importer or manufacturer and the new stock had the same serial number or forms were filed to show the serial number change by the manufacture or importer. Am I WAY off or is that about right?

THANKS


You are correct in the process, but you are using "stock" here where you should be using "receiver." The process you laid out is for the legal replacement of a damaged or destroyed receiver, not a stock. A stock is a stock, not a firearm, so there is no legal impediment to changing stocks as much as you like in general.

However, in this case, using an AUG stock on your USR would be changing the configuration of the gun in a manner that is illegal. Your USR stock has a thumbhole for a reason. While an AUG stock would fit your USR receiver, it would not be legal to use an AUG stock unless you complied with 922r by swapping out a certain number of original USR parts for US-made parts. This is not possible at the moment as no one makes US-made AUG parts. There are rumors of Steyr AUGs being made here, but with the impending regime change here in the US, many plans are being rethought.

The idea of replacing your USR receiver is legally possible if Steyr USA would help you out, but replacing it with an AUG receiver would not be legal as it's a different model entirely despite the near identical design.

There are/were a lot of imported ADI and Steyr AUG A2 "repair and replacement" receivers imported a couple years ago, but there was a lot of bad information and rampant speculation on how they could be legally used. If you owned an actual AUG and wanted a replacement or spare receiver, these are legal to use for that reason. They are illegal to use in a new build of any type nor can they be used to replace a USR receiver.

If you want an AUG A2, then your best bet is to sell the USR entirely and look for tone of the 100 or so legally imported complete A2 guns done through PJS Investments. These are the only A2s of clean, legit legality. An AUG A2 that did not have matching serial numbered parts throughout is highly suspect to being an illegally built A2 using one of these "repair and replacement" receivers. Doesn't mean such a gun is illegal, but it had better have at least documented proof that the original A1 receiver was destroyed if not providing the actual destoryed or intact original receiver. Without either matching numbers throughout or a verifiable connection to the original A1 receiver it replaced, it's a walk-away.
Link Posted: 10/23/2006 7:28:44 PM EST
+1 to the above.

922 is also why you can't thread your USR barrel and install a flash supressor.
Link Posted: 10/24/2006 5:19:16 AM EST
What you are describing is not legal as the previous poster stated. You have to retain the tabbed USR stock and the non threaded barrel. What you can do to your USR is:

Purchase the picatinny rail attachment, as the USR is in fact an A2 type receiver. The optical sight on the USR just slides off(when the weapon is taken down..) and you slide the pic rail on.

Add a quick release button for the barrel.

If it was that easy to make an A2 AUG the real ones wouldnt be 5K dollars...
Link Posted: 10/24/2006 5:41:45 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/24/2006 5:42:15 AM EST by scottryan]
The easiest way would be just to register it as an SBR on a Form 1 then you can do whatever you want with it.
Link Posted: 10/24/2006 6:31:49 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/24/2006 6:32:47 AM EST by Spade]

Originally Posted By scottryan:
The easiest way would be just to register it as an SBR on a Form 1 then you can do whatever you want with it.


+1

I saw one where a guy did that. Then he just cut the thumbhole out, dyed it and got the barrel threaded. If you do the plastic work right you can never tell it wasn't an AUGA2.

Link Posted: 10/24/2006 7:35:40 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/24/2006 7:36:45 AM EST by HK_DUDE]

The easiest way would be just to register it as an SBR on a Form 1 then you can do whatever you want with it.


The golden ticket......good answer.

The $200 fee would seem minimal compared to the parts you would have to buy....if they were actually available.


SBR it and buy one of the AR15 mag acceptable stocks that doesn't have the dumbass thumbhole in it.
Link Posted: 10/24/2006 7:46:02 AM EST

Originally Posted By Homeinvader:
They are illegal to use in a new build of any type nor can they be used to replace a USR receiver.



Sorry, wrong answer.

R/R receivers are legal to use to build new firearms as long as they comply with 922(r), whether by using US parts or registering them as NFA weapons.

I have an ATF letter regarding R/R SIG 550 receivers that states this, and there is a letter posted on one of the AUG websites that does as well.

I also don't see any reason you couldn't replace a USR receiver with a R/R A2 receiver, although it would be pointless to do so. The R/R receivers have a "RPL" serial number and they are not marked with a model number just like any other AUG receiver.



Just get the ultimate AUG compliance part...a Qualified or Fleming trigger pack. Then you can really do whatever you want with your USR.
Link Posted: 10/24/2006 8:11:13 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/24/2006 8:32:35 AM EST by Homeinvader]

Originally Posted By STG77:

Originally Posted By Homeinvader:
They are illegal to use in a new build of any type nor can they be used to replace a USR receiver.



Sorry, wrong answer.

R/R receivers are legal to use to build new firearms as long as they comply with 922(r), whether by using US parts or registering them as NFA weapons.

I have an ATF letter regarding R/R SIG 550 receivers that states this, and there is a letter posted on one of the AUG websites that does as well.

I also don't see any reason you couldn't replace a USR receiver with a R/R A2 receiver, although it would be pointless to do so. The R/R receivers have a "RPL" serial number and they are not marked with a model number just like any other AUG receiver.



Just get the ultimate AUG compliance part...a Qualified or Fleming trigger pack. Then you can really do whatever you want with your USR.


ATF letters are not worth much as we've seen over and over here. And they're not worth anything to anyone other than the addessee. Read the Mark Barnes article on these R/R receivers in SAR from a couple months ago, goes over this in detail and includes a letter from ATF General Counsel about this very subject. You cannot legally Form 1 a R/R receiver. The letters you refer to, one of which is my own in fact, are void with the new ATF position and policy described in the Barnes article. Just read it.
Link Posted: 10/24/2006 8:26:26 AM EST

Originally Posted By Homeinvader:

Originally Posted By STG77:

Originally Posted By Homeinvader:
They are illegal to use in a new build of any type nor can they be used to replace a USR receiver.



Sorry, wrong answer.

R/R receivers are legal to use to build new firearms as long as they comply with 922(r), whether by using US parts or registering them as NFA weapons.

I have an ATF letter regarding R/R SIG 550 receivers that states this, and there is a letter posted on one of the AUG websites that does as well.

I also don't see any reason you couldn't replace a USR receiver with a R/R A2 receiver, although it would be pointless to do so. The R/R receivers have a "RPL" serial number and they are not marked with a model number just like any other AUG receiver.



Just get the ultimate AUG compliance part...a Qualified or Fleming trigger pack. Then you can really do whatever you want with your USR.


Read the Mark Barnes article on this in SAR from a couple months, goes over it in detail.



I could care less what an article in SAR says, I have a LETTER FROM ATF TECH BRANCH saying it is legal to build on a R/R receiver.

It's no different than building with a "repair or replacement" parts kit. Are the thousands of AKs and FALs built with those parts kits not legal either? Whatever
Link Posted: 10/24/2006 9:27:50 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/24/2006 9:28:01 AM EST by scottryan]

Originally Posted By Spade:

Originally Posted By scottryan:
The easiest way would be just to register it as an SBR on a Form 1 then you can do whatever you want with it.


+1

I saw one where a guy did that. Then he just cut the thumbhole out, dyed it and got the barrel threaded. If you do the plastic work right you can never tell it wasn't an AUGA2.



It would be easier to dump the USR thumbhole stock on the EE, Gunbroker, or eGay and just get a regular AUG stock.
Link Posted: 10/24/2006 9:29:51 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/24/2006 9:33:25 AM EST by scottryan]

Originally Posted By Homeinvader:

Originally Posted By STG77:

Originally Posted By Homeinvader:
They are illegal to use in a new build of any type nor can they be used to replace a USR receiver.



Sorry, wrong answer.

R/R receivers are legal to use to build new firearms as long as they comply with 922(r), whether by using US parts or registering them as NFA weapons.

I have an ATF letter regarding R/R SIG 550 receivers that states this, and there is a letter posted on one of the AUG websites that does as well.

I also don't see any reason you couldn't replace a USR receiver with a R/R A2 receiver, although it would be pointless to do so. The R/R receivers have a "RPL" serial number and they are not marked with a model number just like any other AUG receiver.



Just get the ultimate AUG compliance part...a Qualified or Fleming trigger pack. Then you can really do whatever you want with your USR.


ATF letters are not worth much as we've seen over and over here. And they're not worth anything to anyone other than the addessee. Read the Mark Barnes article on these R/R receivers in SAR from a couple months ago, goes over this in detail and includes a letter from ATF General Counsel about this very subject. You cannot legally Form 1 a R/R receiver. The letters you refer to, one of which is my own in fact, are void with the new ATF position and policy described in the Barnes article. Just read it.


It is an ATF letter clarifying the already exsisting law. It is not an opinion letter that applies to only one person.

A import firearm can be registered as an non sporting SBR and thus get around the import restrictions. This is law.

A import receiver can be used with US parts to build a firearm. This is law. It is also the same situation that lets Century arms sell AKs and CETMEs and lets everyone use parts kits as STG77 already stated.
Link Posted: 10/24/2006 11:03:09 AM EST

Originally Posted By scottryan:

It is an ATF letter clarifying the already exsisting law. It is not an opinion letter that applies to only one person.

A import firearm can be registered as an non sporting SBR and thus get around the import restrictions. This is law.

A import receiver can be used with US parts to build a firearm. This is law. It is also the same situation that lets Century arms sell AKs and CETMEs and lets everyone use parts kits as STG77 already stated.



Nope. Letters only apply to the person they're addresed to, quoted law or not.

Just read the Barnes article, stop digging into an old postion.
Link Posted: 10/24/2006 11:05:41 AM EST
Thanks guys...I'll look into the SBR route and see if that is possible. I was after all just looking to be pointed in the right direction not for 100% legal advice.

Some folks raised the possibility of cutting the thumbhole out...would this risk weakening the pistol grip area? I've never cut a rifle like that.
Link Posted: 10/24/2006 1:39:28 PM EST

Originally Posted By SilentType:
Thanks guys...I'll look into the SBR route and see if that is possible. I was after all just looking to be pointed in the right direction not for 100% legal advice.

Some folks raised the possibility of cutting the thumbhole out...would this risk weakening the pistol grip area? I've never cut a rifle like that.


You are 100% on Form 1ing your USR to avoid the 922r issue, completely legal as 922r does not apply to Title I guns with the only exception being the use of applicable receivers or complete guns imported after the various "sporting purpose" bans went into effect, which would include "Repair or Replacement" receivers or otherwise banned semi-autos imported as sales samples to LE and law enforcement or for their official use. Since your USR made it in prior, 922r would not apply once the Form 1 is approved.

Milling away the thumbhole is fine after the Form 1 is approved and would do nothing to the integrity of the USR stock, but you might as well just get yourself an AUG stock and save yourself the trouble.
Link Posted: 10/24/2006 2:01:49 PM EST

Originally Posted By STG77:

I could care less what an article in SAR says, I have a LETTER FROM ATF TECH BRANCH saying it is legal to build on a R/R receiver.

It's no different than building with a "repair or replacement" parts kit. Are the thousands of AKs and FALs built with those parts kits not legal either? Whatever


Your letter - and I hope it's YOUR letter as in addressed to you - has become obsolete unfortunately. The opinions in ANY government position letter are subject to change at any time if they are even correct to begin with at all.

As for the second part, it's completely different for the AK and FAL receivers you mention. Using one of these to build a complete NFA weapon on a Form 1 is legal because the "firearm," either complete or as a stripped receiver, was not subject to any import restrictions as it was made domestically. Creating an SBR out of a post-ban "Repair or Replacement" receiver or a post ban, but otherwise semi-auto complete firearm is creating an unimportable NFA firearm, creating what is effectively a Pre-May Dealer Sample.
Link Posted: 10/24/2006 2:02:02 PM EST
Thanks Homeinvader.
Link Posted: 10/24/2006 4:00:54 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/24/2006 4:02:57 PM EST by scottryan]
.
Link Posted: 10/24/2006 4:05:59 PM EST

Originally Posted By Homeinvader:

Originally Posted By STG77:

I could care less what an article in SAR says, I have a LETTER FROM ATF TECH BRANCH saying it is legal to build on a R/R receiver.

It's no different than building with a "repair or replacement" parts kit. Are the thousands of AKs and FALs built with those parts kits not legal either? Whatever


Your letter - and I hope it's YOUR letter as in addressed to you - has become obsolete unfortunately. The opinions in ANY government position letter are subject to change at any time if they are even correct to begin with at all.

As for the second part, it's completely different for the AK and FAL receivers you mention. Using one of these to build a complete NFA weapon on a Form 1 is legal because the "firearm," either complete or as a stripped receiver, was not subject to any import restrictions as it was made domestically. Creating an SBR out of a post-ban "Repair or Replacement" receiver or a post ban, but otherwise semi-auto complete firearm is creating an unimportable NFA firearm, creating what is effectively a Pre-May Dealer Sample.


Pre May dealer sample of a SBR

That only applies to MGs.
Link Posted: 10/25/2006 9:18:16 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/25/2006 10:13:00 AM EST by Homeinvader]

Originally Posted By scottryan:

Pre May dealer sample of a SBR

That only applies to MGs.


No. NFA devices or firearms cannot be imported for transfer to civilians, but they may be imported by dealers for purposes of sales samples or for sale to official end-users or for research purposes. All non-MG imported NFA firearms to include any imported SBR or SBS, any imported suppressor, any imported DD have precisely the same restrictions and conditions as a pre-May Dealer Sample MG.

This is precisely why you may own a Colt M203, but not an HK 40mm grenade launcher and why Benelli M1Super90 Entry model shotguns arrive in the US as Title 1 shotguns that are Form 2'd domestically rather than imported as an SBS. An Entry model would effectively become a Pre Sample if it came in with the short barrel.

ETA: This is the heart of the problem with these R/R AUG and SIG receivers. These came in under very restrictive conditions as "Repair or Replacement," not as simply "stripped receivers" because the resulting new firearm is unimportable. If they are unimportable as Title I guns, then to Form 1 them (which is an oxymoron) creates an unimportable NFA firearm, hence you cannot Form 1 them at all.

Semi-auto AUGs and SIGs have been imported for a long time for sale to official end users. If the above were incorrect or did not apply, then the whole idea of importing R/R receivers would not have been necessary as there would have been a clear legal path to ownership of complete weapons in banned configuration. All of these post-ban imported semi-auto AUGs, SIGs, HKs, etc could have been either stripped with their receivers being sold to civilians as R/R receivers or they could have been Form 2'd by their importers into transferable SBRs for sale to anyone. And if it could be Form 2d it into a transferable NFA firearm and shed its imported and restricted status then you could have then had it removed from the registry and had yourself a domestically-manufactured Title I Steyr AUG in banned configuration, for example.

Sorry if I hurt anyone's brain, just trying to illustrate that if this was not correct or did not apply, then we would have long-since been enjoying an uninterrupted flow of precisely the same weapons that were banned from importation in 1989. The NFA is not a path to legality for an unimportable Title I firearm.
Link Posted: 10/29/2006 3:26:35 PM EST
Ok I'm not up on NFA regulations so maybe I'm missing something. It's ok to import a Benelli M1 with a 18" barrel and cut it to 14" and make a NFA SBS but not take an imported USR and cut it and make it a NFA SBR? What's the difference? Both are making an NFA weapon out of imported parts.
Link Posted: 10/29/2006 5:49:39 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/29/2006 6:36:23 PM EST by Homeinvader]

Originally Posted By gunnut284:
Ok I'm not up on NFA regulations so maybe I'm missing something. It's ok to import a Benelli M1 with a 18" barrel and cut it to 14" and make a NFA SBS but not take an imported USR and cut it and make it a NFA SBR? What's the difference? Both are making an NFA weapon out of imported parts.


No, you CAN do that. The USR was imported before the last of the various "Sporting Purposes" bans, so it's legal to SBR it and disregard 922r. Basically, any non-importable firearm that has been imported under an exemption or exception to the "Sporting Purpose" regulation is a firearm that cannot become a transferable Title II firearm.

An imported firearm MUST have come into the country directly through the "Sporting Purpose" regulation in complete configuration, not around it through exception or exemption, for it to be eligible to become a transferable NFA firearm, something you could Form 1. Any Form 6 condition to the firearm's transfer, possession, configuration or use constitutes an "exception" or "exemption" depending on what the actual conditions are and this makes the firearm either completely non-ownable for a civilian or of "restricted-use" like the "Repair or Replacement" AUG and SIG receivers.

Firearms that fall into this category have until recently been guns you and I cannot own anyway (LE or gov't use, sales samples for that end, etc), even if Title I. The law and regulation has never had to be interpreted for its applicability to civilians because never before has a "restricted-use" firearm ever been legal for civilians to own. The AUG and SIG "Repair and Replacement" receivers mark the first time this has happened.
Link Posted: 10/29/2006 7:00:11 PM EST
I can tell you that there is alot of contradiction here and much truth.

Mark Barnes, the name stated in one of the posts, is the foremost firearms lawyer in DC. He resides on the several boards and counsels many firearms importers and manufacturers, I being on of them several years ago.

The USR(TM), technically, should never have been imported. I have a letter from imports branch addressed to me that states USR's were still importable, very recently, only to be followed up less than a year later to be recounted. There is no prohibition that we know of that states you cannot thread a USR(TM) barrel, but you cannot remove the web from the stock.

TPD was originated to build compliance parts for the USR(TM) so one could remove the web. You need nine US parts to replace the foreign parts to be compliant, I have a letter dated just two months old that states this. It is true this letter applies to me and TPD, but that does not mean it is uncompliant for the rest of the US. It means it is addressed to me.

R and R receivers can be used in a 922(r) compliant build at this time. At this time. The parts TPD is manufacturing will allow an individual with a USR(TM) to add a Nato stock or with one of Pete's US AUG style stocks and a US magazine. Pete is making the magazine, we have access to Steyr NATO stocks and AUG style stocks. When you see "style stock" it means we are staying away from TM terms.

NFA typically does not release the end user from any 922(r) compliance, especially SBR, as this has been interpreted in all manner of fashions. That is not to say we are firearms lawyers, the onous is on the end user. Again why we are making compliance parts.

Most of this is moot as many parts and rifles will be available in the next several weeks.

Link Posted: 10/29/2006 8:09:21 PM EST

Originally Posted By TPDSOT:

NFA typically does not release the end user from any 922(r) compliance, especially SBR, as this has been interpreted in all manner of fashions. That is not to say we are firearms lawyers, the onous is on the end user. Again why we are making compliance parts.



NFA has ALWAYS released the gun from 922r compliance, this has never been in dispute by either the firearms community or the ATF. I believe you are referring to the AWB and it's applicability to SBR or AOW, though the expiration of the AWB has made this point moot. Under the AWB, an NFA weapon that was not a machine gun still had to comply with AWB provisions. A Form 1 DID NOT permit more than 2 banned features on a post-ban gun.

That being said, I'm glad to hear someone is finally making US parts for the AUG.
Link Posted: 10/30/2006 8:35:16 AM EST

Originally Posted By Homeinvader:

Originally Posted By TPDSOT:

NFA typically does not release the end user from any 922(r) compliance, especially SBR, as this has been interpreted in all manner of fashions. That is not to say we are firearms lawyers, the onous is on the end user. Again why we are making compliance parts.



NFA has ALWAYS released the gun from 922r compliance, this has never been in dispute by either the firearms community or the ATF. I believe you are referring to the AWB and it's applicability to SBR or AOW, though the expiration of the AWB has made this point moot. Under the AWB, an NFA weapon that was not a machine gun still had to comply with AWB provisions. A Form 1 DID NOT permit more than 2 banned features on a post-ban gun.

That being said, I'm glad to hear someone is finally making US parts for the AUG.


We understand the AWB implications, but we approached ATFE with the above topic and got a different response. Now that is not to say you are not correct in fact as we see it now it is. This was about 4 years ago when getting response from ATFE took 12-18 months, no kidding! Half the time you could tell from the letter sent they did not understand what you were trying to do. I had a letter concernign the AUG(TM) go back to their main counsel 3 times, unheard of. Took 18 months to get a response saying we could build the AUG(TM) and use foreign receivers.

Gore changed all that.

Thanks for the encouragement we are just about there on everything, save for the receiver which is still in prototype phase, but runs.

TPDSOT
Top Top