Armory Sponsor
Posted: 1/7/2008 12:00:51 PM EDT
|
Quick question. If you have the stock but don't own or possess a Glock are you OK legally? I know you need to have the Glock registered as an SBR before you have them in the same place, I just need opinions (I won't drag anyone into court with me) on having possession of the stock without the pistol until the pistol/SBR paperwork is done. I don't have a Glock Stock but have a chance to buy one. Thanks. |
|
Thanks, that's what I thought. Hmm, I guess the simplest way to do it is to have a family member or friend that doesn't own a gun to hold the stock while I buy a Glock, get it marked, and the paperwork clears. Any suggestions on someone to do the engraving on a Glock? edited for spelling |
That would be great but I doubt it. I guess I could buy the pistol from a manufacturer and let them register it, that might be the easiest thing to do if I can find one willing to do it. edited for fat fingers |
|
Do you know what kind of stock it is ? I have one that I got from DSA and IMO it sucks. I was wondering what else is out there ? This is what I have now: http://www.dsarms.com/prodinfo.asp?number=MSIGLR17 FWIW: buying a pistol already registered as an SBR is no easier than buying the pistol and registering it yourself as an SBR. The same process must be done. Although you would be doing a Form 4 instead of a Form 1 they are roughly the same. The only thing I can think of that would be easier is that you wouldn't have to get the pistol engraved. |
Here is another stock, I'm not sure which one I have a line on yet. I have contacted a Class 2 SOT to see if they will SBR a new Glock and then transfer it to me through a local Class 3 SOT. I'll let you know how it goes and what kind of stock I have once it arrives! |
|
That looks like the one I have. I got the one I have from DSA but they don't make it. This stock you mention looks like the same thing just sold by a different company. It is flimsy plastic. When you fire the gun, in my case a 9mm, you can feel the stock flex. Again, FWIW, I sort of regret registering a pistol as an SBR. My idea was to create the modern "Artillary Model" pistol. Back before the days of carbines and SMGs, armies often issued handguns like the Broomhandle Mauser, the Luger, and even 1911s with stocks. I thought it would be cool to come up with what a modern version of that would be like, so I made one out of my Glock 34. Obviously, I put the stock on it but also had a forward grip that attached to the rail and used a spare magazine for the vertical part. The gun had a Surefire light, AAC Evo9 suppressor, 33 round mags and an optic mount. When I got all done I thought it was a waste of time. The optic mount, stock, and forward grip were all cheap and flimsy. The pistol with the suppressor and the 33 round mags was cool enough and only required one stamp. |
Where on the gun or who did it ? Well, there has been a lot of discussion about that on gun boards. The frame is plastic but someone posted the actual law and in the end I decided, based on that information that it was OK to do the steel slide, so that is what I did. It is engraved on the slide. Who did it was a local guy. A guy I work with's wife has a horse tack business and does business with a guy that does engraving. So, I have had him do a couple things for me including this Glock and my Krink reciever. |
|
444, Sorry about that, I meant what part of the weapon did you have the engraving done. I have contacted a SOT who is willing to "manufacture" this for me, for what it is worth he also mentioned engraving the slide so that sounds like the way to go. I really appreciate the comments about the stock being "flimsy." I will wait until I get to handle the stock to decide if I am going to go forward on this project or not. It will end up just over a $1000 all told (including a threaded barrel) not counting a 9mm suppressor and related costs. I have fired a C96 Mauser with the stock and it is fun but at least it also has a historical value, I think you might be right that this would be a waste of money. How does the G34 do suppressed? I was leaning toward a G17 for this project myself. I guess the last question I have is do you know if the stock you have/had fit the larger frame Model 20 and 21? The Lone Wolf site says it does but I seen other ads for an identical stock saying it didn't fit the larger frames. Just curious. Thanks for your time! edited to add: as far as the stock fitting the larger frames I am just looking for an "educated guess", I wasn't implying that you might have actually put it on a not SBR'ed pistol. 
|
The 34 does very well suppressed. I don't think there would be any difference between it and a 17. Once you get the can, you can put it on anything. I have a barrel for my 17, 34, and 26 as well as a Browning Hi-Power. The only one that has high sights that allow me to see over the can however is the 34. FWIW, Lone Wolf barrels seem to be very good. I have two and have had no problems with them. The barrel I have for the 34 was made by BarSto: it took like six months to get and cost a small fortune. The Lone Wolf barrels are just as good for my purposes. I have no idea if the stock fits anything else or not. Since I thought it was a POS I not only wasn't even tempted to put it on anything else but it honestly never even occured to me. I don't have any Glocks other than 9mms, so I don't know if the frame size is the same, or different. I have a stock on a Luger and it is kind of cool. It is wood, so obviously it is far from flimsy. I also have a Ruger Mk.II stock, but it is sort of unique. It doesn't actually attach to the gun. The front of the stock is bent to exactly fit the back of the Mk.II frame. When you grip the gun, you are also holding on the stock. If you were to let go, the stock and the gun would fall as two completely seperate objects. The only thing holding them together is your hand. It actually works great and was a hell of an idea. It is a lot better than it probably sounds. |
|
444, So the factory G34 sights cleared your can? That's good to know. I have read about a stock like you describe for your Ruger MKII, I could see how that would work quite well. If you still have your SBR'ed Glock and want to try a different stock you may want to look here. They mention US customers so there has to be a way to import them, they look quite a bit sturdier then the other one. I thought their pepper spray attachment was an interesting idea. In an environment where you wouldn't have to worry about the legal ramification of pointing a weapon at someone having the immediate choice of lethal/non-lethal is interesting. Anyhow I figured I would share. Anyone know a source for those folding Glock stocks that look something like the Beretta 93R stock? |
No, the factory sights on the Glock 34 are NOT high enough to see over the can. I installed a set of aftermarkets sights that I bought from AAC specifically sold by them for use with a suppressor. That is the reason my other guns don't have them. Obviously, they stick up high and I don't think they would be all that practical to use with a carry gun, although they might be fine for all I know. I put them on my Glock 34 because: 1) I don't ever plan on carrying it, making it....2) my designated 9mm suppressed handgun. Over the years I have read a lot of stuff on-line about the fact that it isn't nessessary to see the sights blah blah blah. I like to be able to see, and use my sights. I CAN shoot my other guns and could make hits with them, but it certainly isn't as precise. I personally get no thrill out of just firing a gun. I have never been someone who does bumpfiring, hip shooting, or just making noise. I like precision accuracy or what passes for precision accuracy with something like a bone stock factory handgun and my meager skills. This requires sights. |
Armory Sponsor