[ARCHIVED THREAD] - I recently examined and tested an Arizona Regulator three position FRT (Page 1 of 8)
Posted: 9/4/2025 12:58:56 PM EDT
|
I did examine and test an Arizona Regulator three position Forced Reset Trigger system that was thoughtfully provided by a member of ARFCOM. -By way of full disclosure I have taken 01ZULU/JD to task over his "trade mark" flag. As I was a friend of the late Mike Vanderboegh. I knew it was NOT invented by 01ZULU/JD. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Percenters He never did respond to my technical questions here. His demeanor was off putting and sometimes sort of obnoxious. Facts outweigh any personality issues I may have with 01ZULU/JD etc. I took a bunch of photos yesterday and still have to write everything up...However my initial finding are below.  That being said; The AZR is a forced reset trigger system and not a DIAS. -It appears to most likely violate Rare Breed/ABC's current patents. (ref Atrius Inter Partes Review No.: 2025–1473) can be found here: https://developer.uspto.gov/ptab-web/#/search/documents?proceedingNumber=IPR2025-01473 Pg 32 of the above: "Ex.1003, ¶61. c. FRT Mode Lastly, Fig.6B below shows safety selector 110 in FRT mode. Narrow semi- circular portion 116 of safety selector 110 allows the tail portion of trigger member 38 to move on both sides of narrow portion 116, thus, allowing trigger 38 to rotate. However, narrow portion 116 contacts tail 66 of disconnector 60, thus preventing disconnector hook 64 from engaging hammer hook 53. Ex.1001, 8:54– 65; Fig.6A. The manner in which the disconnector is disengaged is identical to that of a standard M-16 in auto mode. Ex.1003, ¶62. " It functions exactly like Rare Breeds system in that when functioning in the Forced Reset mode it omits the disconnector mechanically from the trigger system. It instead forces the trigger forward for the hammer to catch on the main sear surface between each round fired. Even in semi mode the trigger is forced forward (reset) but the disconnector is NOT mechanically omitted from the system and you must release the trigger and then squeeze the trigger again to fire each round. By way of comparison: The Super Safety on the other hand does not override or omit the function of the disconnector (and thus why mostly likely does not infringe on Rare Breeds patents). Just as 01ZULU stated on AR15.com the Arizona Regulator system can function without any disconnector and still force the reset of the trigger. I tested this with replacing the supplied M16 trigger, disconnector, and safety and installed a semi hammer, trigger, no disconnector, and semi safety selector and it functioned as a forced reset only system with the safety functioning as designed.  When the AZR cam module is removed from the three position system and tested results on the FRT or Auto position of the safety were single fires with live rounds in the chamber with light primer strikes (hammer follow through malfunction) and one two round burst out of multiple attempts to make it function without the cam module. The same malfunction can be induced by removing ANY disconnector from ANY AR15 style firearm. Many FAL rifles are in circulation that have a three position safety and do the same thing put in the third position without the rest of the required parts to function normally and safely. It has a much higher rate of fire with the module installed rather than when omitted and had NO malfunctions noted. (Why would you logically removed it? What logical purpose would it serve?) Other than ATF fantastic claims in US v. Olofson aside (read that false claims), there is no obvious utility in removing an integral part of a trigger system that fires at the same RPM of a MG to induce a malfunction that will have a LOWER rate of fire...Good luck with that ATF. It would be highly recommended to not remove the module from any firearm that has the system installed to prevent any appearance of impropriety with ATF, (meaning no "multiple module ready hosts for one module). |
|
Quoted:  Attached File Very Interesting reading. Thank You O.P. for your testing and post. Bigger_Hammer 
|
Thank you. Mine works well Forced reset trigger drills |
|
As does mine |
|
Quoted: Excellent write-up. It's always good to get the opinion of a SME when it comes to potential gray areas of the law. I may have missed it in a previous thread, but have you given your thoughts on his 2 position units? It's an FRT. My second test without a disconnector I refer to in my original post proves that. The three position version had everyone nervous because of the M-16 parts being used. (and why Rare Breed/ABC most likely went to a one piece modular unit) to remove any appearance or similarity with M-16 fire control. |
|
Quoted: It's an FRT. My second test without a disconnector I refer to in my original post proves that. The three position version had everyone nervous because of the M-16 parts being used. (and why Rare Breed/ABC most likely went to a one piece modular unit) to remove any appearance or similarity with M-16 fire control. Quoted: Quoted: Excellent write-up. It's always good to get the opinion of a SME when it comes to potential gray areas of the law. I may have missed it in a previous thread, but have you given your thoughts on his 2 position units? It's an FRT. My second test without a disconnector I refer to in my original post proves that. The three position version had everyone nervous because of the M-16 parts being used. (and why Rare Breed/ABC most likely went to a one piece modular unit) to remove any appearance or similarity with M-16 fire control. Thank you for the follow-up. The 2 position FRT seemed legally solid from the get-go, but I can understand how the 3 position FRT could make some people nervous. Many of us remember when ANY M16 part was basically considered taboo. I especially appreciate you testing it with the module removed, as that definitely seemed to be the biggest concern. How does the 2 position FRT fare in regards to Rare Breed's patent claims? It seems unique enough that it should be safe, but I'd love to hear your opinion on it. |
|
Quoted: Careful, don't pull a Cap'nRob...  Quoted: Quoted: OP, do you have any expertise or qualifications to render an opinion on the legality? Your analysis mirrors my own, I just want to know if yours has any extra weight other than simple logic. Careful, don't pull a Cap'nRob... I just want to know if OP's opinion is authoritative. I hope it is, but I don't know him. I really want the 3 position AZR to be kosher. |
|
Dear OP... We have a FRT subforum https://www.ar15.com/forums/AR-15/Rate-of-Fire-Triggers/130/ Suggest you delete your post here in GD, and start your thread there, or request a mod to move it there. Also...Rare Breed can go fuck themselves, since they have decided to be assholes by sending out their lawyer letters to any and all folks involved in the FRT/SS market. That includes folks building Hoffman Super Safeties components, which are nothing like a Rare Breed FRT in any way. RB is doing bad guy shit, and if you support RB in this endeavor in any way, you are a bad person too. . |
|
Quoted: OP, do you have any expertise or qualifications to render an opinion on the legality? Your analysis mirrors my own, I just want to know if yours has any extra weight other than simple logic. "You Serious Clark?" You could say I have an extensive CV and have qualified as an expert in firearms manufacturing and design in almost every US judicial circuit. There are lots of firearms I have designed and many members here know of my work in the last 25 years. Oh, and the ATF Hates me. They have used Confidential Informants when I sue them in Federal Court to garner ligation strategy. (among many other dirty tricks over the years).  |
|
Quoted: I just want to know if OP's opinion is authoritative. I hope it is, but I don't know him. I really want the 3 position AZR to be kosher. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: OP, do you have any expertise or qualifications to render an opinion on the legality? Your analysis mirrors my own, I just want to know if yours has any extra weight other than simple logic. Careful, don't pull a Cap'nRob... I just want to know if OP's opinion is authoritative. I hope it is, but I don't know him. I really want the 3 position AZR to be kosher. I will let him post his credentials if he so chooses, but don't worry, he's legit. 
|
|
Quoted: "You Serious Clark?" You could say I have an extensive CV and have qualified as an expert in firearms manufacturing and design in almost every US judicial circuit. There are lots of firearms I have designed and many members here know of my work in the 25 years. Oh, and the ATF Hates me. They have used Confidential Informants when I sue them in Federal Court to garner ligation strategy. (among many other dirty tricks over the years). https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/169738/p_41_43_001-3618959.jpg Quoted: Quoted: OP, do you have any expertise or qualifications to render an opinion on the legality? Your analysis mirrors my own, I just want to know if yours has any extra weight other than simple logic. "You Serious Clark?" You could say I have an extensive CV and have qualified as an expert in firearms manufacturing and design in almost every US judicial circuit. There are lots of firearms I have designed and many members here know of my work in the 25 years. Oh, and the ATF Hates me. They have used Confidential Informants when I sue them in Federal Court to garner ligation strategy. (among many other dirty tricks over the years). https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/169738/p_41_43_001-3618959.jpg I tried to phrase it as politely as possible. I don't know you. Thank you for your work in this field. |
|
Quoted: Dear OP... We have a FRT subforum https://www.ar15.com/forums/AR-15/Rate-of-Fire-Triggers/130/ Suggest you delete your post here in GD, and start your thread there, or request a mod to move it there. Also...Rare Breed can go fuck themselves, since they have decided to be assholes by sending out their lawyer letters to any and all folks involved in the FRT/SS market. That includes folks building Hoffman Super Safeties components, which are nothing like a Rare Breed FRT in any way. RB is doing bad guy shit, and if you support RB in this endeavor in any way, you are a bad person too. . There's no reason to hide this thread in the basement...  Tech might keep things more civil, but this is information that EVERYONE in GD should be made aware of. |
|
Quoted: When the AZR cam module is removed from the three position system and tested results on the FRT or Auto position of the safety were single fires with live rounds in the chamber with light primer strikes (hammer follow through malfunction) and one two round burst out of multiple attempts to make it function without the cam module. The same malfunction can be induced by removing ANY disconnector from ANY AR15 style firearm. Many FAL rifles are in circulation that have a three position safety and do the same thing put in the third position without the rest of the required parts to function normally and safely. Am i reading this correctly? Do you did achieve a 2 round burst? 
|
|
Quoted: If you mean the third position of the safety selector, Yes. It does push down the disconnector. (Just as the Rare Breed version does the same thing but with different hardware). https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/169738/three_position_safety-3618964.png Quoted: Quoted: Does the third position of a M16 trigger also push down the disconnector? If you mean the third position of the safety selector, Yes. It does push down the disconnector. (Just as the Rare Breed version does the same thing but with different hardware). https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/169738/three_position_safety-3618964.png Great pic and yes I meant the 3-pos safety. So if the mil-spec M16 trigger 3 position safety mechanism is what is being used in the AZR combat trigger, how can it be in violation of rare breeds use of the same mechanism? |
|
Quoted: Dear OP... We have a FRT subforum https://www.ar15.com/forums/AR-15/Rate-of-Fire-Triggers/130/ Suggest you delete your post here in GD, and start your thread there, or request a mod to move it there. |
|
Quoted: Am i reading this correctly? Do you did achieve a 2 round burst? Only when I strayed away from the "designed and intended" function of the device. I (as an FFL07/SOT) INTENDED to induce a malfunction to test what "could" happen. Why would anybody outside of a testing scenario even attempt that? That would be stupidity. You do need an AZR to embrace that particular flavor of stupid. I know you were playing devils advocate with your post and I wanted to play along as I am sure ATF is no doubt paying close attention.... Should they decide do an "Olofson" this post had better show up in the discovery under US v. Brady. |
|
Quoted:Dear OP...We have a FRT subforum https://www.ar15.com/forums/AR-15/Rate-of-Fire-Triggers/130/ Suggest you delete your post here in GD, and start your thread there, or request a mod to move it there. Also...Rare Breed can go fuck themselves, since they have decided to be assholes by sending out their lawyer letters to any and all folks involved in the FRT/SS market. That includes folks building Hoffman Super Safeties components, which are nothing like a Rare Breed FRT in any way. RB is doing bad guy shit, and if you support RB in this endeavor in any way, you are a bad person too.. 
|
|
Quoted: I tried to phrase it as politely as possible. I don't know you. Thank you for your work in this field. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: OP, do you have any expertise or qualifications to render an opinion on the legality? Your analysis mirrors my own, I just want to know if yours has any extra weight other than simple logic. "You Serious Clark?" You could say I have an extensive CV and have qualified as an expert in firearms manufacturing and design in almost every US judicial circuit. There are lots of firearms I have designed and many members here know of my work in the 25 years. Oh, and the ATF Hates me. They have used Confidential Informants when I sue them in Federal Court to garner ligation strategy. (among many other dirty tricks over the years). https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/169738/p_41_43_001-3618959.jpg I tried to phrase it as politely as possible. I don't know you. Thank you for your work in this field. It's a fair question. On the question of "Is this a machine gun?" he's basically what Mr.Higgs is to "is this a particle or wave?" If anything AZR should be thanking him for taking the time to do this, as his experience and credentials together with an explanation that's comprehensible will have far more impact on potential customer decision making than anything AZR would say in support/defense of the product's legality. |
|
Quoted: ... -It appears to most likely violate Rare Breed/ABC's current patents. (ref Atrius Inter Partes Review No.: 2025–1473) can be found here: https://developer.uspto.gov/ptab-web/#/search/documents?proceedingNumber=IPR2025-01473 Pg 32 of the above: "Ex.1003, ¶61. c. FRT Mode Lastly, Fig.6B below shows safety selector 110 in FRT mode. Narrow semi- circular portion 116 of safety selector 110 allows the tail portion of trigger member 38 to move on both sides of narrow portion 116, thus, allowing trigger 38 to rotate. However, narrow portion 116 contacts tail 66 of disconnector 60, thus preventing disconnector hook 64 from engaging hammer hook 53. Ex.1001, 8:54– 65; Fig.6A. The manner in which the disconnector is disengaged is identical to that of a standard M-16 in auto mode. Ex.1003, ¶62. " ... Thanks for the write-up! One (semi off-topic) nit: Exhibit 1003 is a provisional patent application. Applications (including their drawings and descriptions) do not define the patented (protected) work. The claims (as interpreted in light of the application), and only the claims of an issued patent demarcate what is patented (and therefore protected). At first blush (i.e. without a thorough reading), claim 4 of the issued patent¹ and its dependent claims are restricted to comprising, "a housing having transversely aligned pairs of openings for receiving hammer and trigger assembly pins." As far as I can tell, neither the SS, nor any of the AZR designs have that. The AZR's "housing" (if it can be called that) does not have openings for hammer and trigger assembly pins. If that's true, it essentially leaves claim 1 and its dependent claims as potentially defining a protected invention as applied to housing-less FRT designs. I'll leave an analysis of whether the SS, AZR, or similar designs fall within claim 1 and its dependents as an exercise to readers. *[ducks]*Thanks again for the great write-up, and I look forward to additional detail. --- ¹ I believe this is US10,514,223, which is often cited in the litigation as, "the '223 patent." Either this was a USPTO Easter egg, or ... |
|
Quoted: It's a fair question. On the question of "Is this a machine gun?" he's basically what Mr.Higgs is to "is this a particle or wave?" If anything AZR should be thanking him for taking the time to do this, as his experience and credentials together with an explanation that's comprehensible will have far more impact on potential customer decision making than anything AZR would say in support/defense of the product's legality. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: OP, do you have any expertise or qualifications to render an opinion on the legality? Your analysis mirrors my own, I just want to know if yours has any extra weight other than simple logic. "You Serious Clark?" You could say I have an extensive CV and have qualified as an expert in firearms manufacturing and design in almost every US judicial circuit. There are lots of firearms I have designed and many members here know of my work in the 25 years. Oh, and the ATF Hates me. They have used Confidential Informants when I sue them in Federal Court to garner ligation strategy. (among many other dirty tricks over the years). https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/169738/p_41_43_001-3618959.jpg I tried to phrase it as politely as possible. I don't know you. Thank you for your work in this field. It's a fair question. On the question of "Is this a machine gun?" he's basically what Mr.Higgs is to "is this a particle or wave?" If anything AZR should be thanking him for taking the time to do this, as his experience and credentials together with an explanation that's comprehensible will have far more impact on potential customer decision making than anything AZR would say in support/defense of the product's legality. Attached File |
|
Quoted: I just want to know if OP's opinion is authoritative. I hope it is, but I don't know him. I really want the 3 position AZR to be kosher. Len Savage (OP) is one of the most authoritative technical firearms experts in the country. He is the guy you hire as the expert in federal court cases. Also, thanks Len! |
|
Quoted: OP, do you have any expertise or qualifications to render an opinion on the legality? Your analysis mirrors my own, I just want to know if yours has any extra weight other than simple logic. OP has served as an expert witness in several high profile firearms cases in federal courts. |
|
Quoted: Great pic and yes I meant the 3-pos safety. So if the mil-spec M16 trigger 3 position safety medhanism is what is being used in the AZR combat trigger, how can it be in violation of rare breeds use of the same mechanism? From the document in the original post showing Rare Breeds patent photos:  
|
|
Quoted: Len Savage (OP) is one of the most authoritative technical firearms experts in the country. He is the guy you hire as the expert in federal court cases. Also, thanks Len! Quoted: Quoted: I just want to know if OP's opinion is authoritative. I hope it is, but I don't know him. I really want the 3 position AZR to be kosher. Len Savage (OP) is one of the most authoritative technical firearms experts in the country. He is the guy you hire as the expert in federal court cases. Also, thanks Len! Does this analysis change your opinion on the device? |
|
We need to have a talk about your videography skills. |