Forest and R580R,
As an FAL owner with the before mentioned Tapco brake I am well aware of the issue regarding this product. At the end of the day, the brake was ruled to be exactly that...a brake and not a flash suppresor or grenade launching platform.www.tapco.com/product_information.asp?number=FAL2006&back=yes&dept=19&last=18
The Wilson product was tested by BATF as well as the manufacturer, and was proved to not significantly reduce the flash signature of the weapon. Also as you no doubt have noted by it's physical construction, it is incapable of firing the ubiquitous rilfe grenade.
I find it odd that BM does sell other brakes such as the mini-comp, the AK brake etc. Yet they seem to resist selling a product,(the Wilson Combat Brake), that has passed every challange thrown at it by BATF. This strikes me as odd. When I get these little feelings, I have the natural inclination to want to follow the money trail.
BM is not alone in this. It apears Armalite is the same way. I have to suspect that the margins enjoyed by a manufacturer are such that it is simply unprofitable to OEM this part. As most of us hate the idea of a naked AR-15 rifle barrel. Frankly, no other answer makes sense to me.
As a businessman, I do not hold BM in contempt for this mind you. But please don't cloak your decision to not support the Wilson product under the guise of compliance concerns. It doesn't pass the smell test with me.
Just my thoughts....