Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
4/25/2017 7:42:44 PM
Posted: 5/26/2002 7:32:09 PM EDT
This is gogogadgets. I want to thank everybody for their support of the FAB-10 receiver. I thought I would report that one particular customer who bought a FAB-10 was at a local range and had a little problem with some form of law enforcement officer. The officer did not have a clue about the law. The owner of the FAB-10 did not have his approval letter on him so of course they did not take his word and took the weapon until he provided them with the approval letter. They wouldn't make a call to DOJ to find out for themselves. The next day the customer went to the police station with his letter. They then called DOJ and promptly released the firearm back to the customer. I thought that was a very positive sign. That has been the only incident that I'm aware of. As far as the FAB-10 not being a perfect alternative, that's true. It's just the best alternative available at this time. I felt that when in need it's better to have a ten round .223 accurate rifle than to have certain parts of your lower anatomy in your hands. As a target shooter, I have never concerned myself with 30 round magazines. Me and my buddies shoot 200 to 300 yard distances at squirrels and ground hogs. We've never seen too many critters hang around for 29 misses. I felt that with the FAB-10 shooters would focus more on accuracy rather than volume. That was my intentions from the start and I hope that it has been of value for shooters who like the AR-15 type rifle. Thanks. Craig
Link Posted: 5/26/2002 8:21:37 PM EDT
Wait a freaking minute!!

You mean to tell me a LEO took his AR15 from the range?? I have never seen any LEO aproach anyone at any range about the legality of any rifle. What range was this? I sure as hell wouldn't go to that range.

Their is no reason for any LEO to ask about the legality of an AR15 or to ask to see papers!! Are you sure you are being told the whole story?

Sgtar15
Link Posted: 5/26/2002 8:33:08 PM EDT
Sounds like another doo-gooder Barney Fife on the job!!
Link Posted: 5/26/2002 8:35:54 PM EDT
I don't know if I'm reading into your post or not. If I am, I apologize. But, at first and second read, I find your attitude about 30 rounders appalling. Now it may be 30 rounders in Kalifornia...oh..but it doesn't concern you because you only use 10 rounders. So you don't worry about it. Tomorrow some misinformed and inappropriately motivated legislator decides it's your 10 rounders they want to ban now. Those guys who only shoot 5 round mags (if they exist) aren't concerned about your loss, they only do fivers...ad nauseum. Your rights are being denied illegally..fight back.
Link Posted: 5/26/2002 11:45:53 PM EDT
CA cops love gun control.

But I would never by a FAB 10.

I'd get an M1A, and feal good that I have a rifle of superior firepower that is not an assault weapon under CA rules. (would still have to sneak in the mags)
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 1:05:19 AM EDT
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 1:23:36 AM EDT
Hey CMS, I hope it's all working out well for you. At the shows around these parts your product sure draws a LOT of attention.

Did you get my e-mail about doing a FAB-10 type lower receiver in 7.62x51mm? I think that there is a market out there (in CA) for these.
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 5:25:43 AM EDT
Us folks in Commieformula have an unique problem.
I look at the FAB10 as an abortion of a great rifle.
I also understand they are helping us out in a big way. There are many (and a new generation)that will not have a chance to own an AR and this is a small step closer.
What he says aboot hicaps may seem like he doesn`t care, I think he does care.
We do have to be very careful we don`t start down the road that hunters and shotgunners muddy.
I wont buy one because .........to be honest I would get angry everytime I looked at it. Nothing against the company but the principal just don`t sit right with me.
Again, I applaud that the company has offered us a small hope.

But it smacks of defeat to me
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 7:00:00 AM EDT
First, I have the utmost respect for originator of the FAB-10. However, there are some safety issues with this product that I can see. With the new bill that Perata is pushing through to allow manufacturer lawsuits, one AD or DF can result in a door-closing lawsuit.

Even if this doesn't happen, if Perata's bill goes through, gogogadget may lose insurance just because of the bill. Thus, my conclusion is the long-term viability of a CA legal, commerically produced is not good. Unless there is a drastic change in the political landscape or major ruling by the US Supreme Court.

Ultimately, I think it comes down to the guy or gal with the mill in the garage who mills their own CA-legal type lower.
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 7:21:40 AM EDT
"safety issues" ?
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 7:48:28 AM EDT
"safety issues" ?, use your brain-power and come up with some. I will give you a couple of hints, I'm thinking of two safety issues. The first one is no bolt catch. There's already been one documented AD because the guy couldn't tell if rifle was empty or not due to no bolt catch. Now with a little imagination, what kind of lawyer would file suit if that AD hit someone? My guess is many.
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 8:44:27 AM EDT

The first one is no bolt catch.

That's a safety issue? I've fired more semi-autos without a bolt catch than not. I guess they're dangerous and need to be banned.

What's the second? I hope it's better than the first one.z
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 9:48:59 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Rich314:
Us folks in Commieformula have an unique problem.
I look at the FAB10 as an abortion of a great rifle.
I also understand they are helping us out in a big way. There are many (and a new generation)that will not have a chance to own an AR and this is a small step closer.
What he says aboot hicaps may seem like he doesn`t care, I think he does care.
We do have to be very careful we don`t start down the road that hunters and shotgunners muddy.
I wont buy one because .........to be honest I would get angry everytime I looked at it. Nothing against the company but the principal just don`t sit right with me.
Again, I applaud that the company has offered us a small hope.

But it smacks of defeat to me



I guess I look at it as more hope than defeat. A pre-ban AR is also an abortion in some respects since it has no auto/burst capability. A post-ban is even more so, although many rationalize this as being ok, because they didn't need those features anyway. That kind of thinking needs to be avoided. It is good that it makes people angry, because that will motivate them. It worked for me, I didn't even own a gun until a few days after Davis signed SB23. I hope lots of people buy FAB-10s, and get them for their kids at an appropriate age too. If nothing else, they will be a constant reminder that they're being screwed. I also like the fact that it can make enforcement of AW registration more difficult. If alot of these get out there, it will not be as obvious from a distance that a person has a AW, or just something that looks like an AW.

Regarding the safety issue, if someone has an AD because they didn't know their weapon was loaded, then they were not handling it safely, and bear 100% of the responsibility for the consequences. Period. But I don't suppose they would let me sit on a jury in such a case.
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 2:10:39 PM EDT

Originally Posted By stator:
"safety issues" ?, use your brain-power and come up with some. I will give you a couple of hints, I'm thinking of two safety issues. The first one is no bolt catch. There's already been one documented AD because the guy couldn't tell if rifle was empty or not due to no bolt catch. Now with a little imagination, what kind of lawyer would file suit if that AD hit someone? My guess is many.



A bolt catch is not a safety. What would a bolt catch have to do with knowing whether a rifle is loaded or not?

As I understand the purpose of the bolt catch it is to "catch the bolt" following the last shot from a magazine allowing you to slap an new magazine into place and then to release the bolt. It is one, not a safety, nor should it be used as one. And two gives no indication of a loaded chamber.

I don't know anything about the design of the rifle other than what little can be gathered from a single photograph on the web sight. I will however buy one soon and see what's up.

I am still puzzled as to how the lack of a bolt catch can cause an accidental discharge which is normally caused by a moron with their finger in the trigger guard and a loaded rifle .

If the FAB-10 uses a standard AR upper slam fires might be possible with high primers and commerical vice military primer cups but then that's no more a risk than any other of the several million AR's already sold.

Is there a second hint due us or did I miss something?
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 2:35:13 PM EDT
I am glad to see that people are pushing Kali-ban laws to the limit, proving once again that the ban is nothing more than harassment.


Still, (not to knock the product) I'd rather move as a solution. Which is what I did. Kalifornia is a lost cause.
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 5:33:52 PM EDT

Originally Posted By stator:use your brain-power and come up with some. I will give you a couple of hints, I'm thinking of two safety issues. The first one is no bolt catch.


Safety begins and ends with the user. There's no mechanical device in the world that would prevent stupidity.

Do you own an AK or FNC a similar weapon without a bolt catch?
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 6:13:42 PM EDT
This is gogogadgets. Apparently I came across wrong. Given the choice between a fixed mag and detachable mag, I would prefer a detachable magazine just like everyone else. In the role of self defense, if any of you have ever been shot at, I prefer a 30 rounder or 50 rounder any day. What I was getting at is that for hunting or target shooting the ten round capacity is not that big a deal in that respect. I too am as pissed off as any of you about our laws concerning assault weapons. If the law were to change tomorrow back to the way it was, it wouldn't hurt my feelings at all. The FAB-10 was never about making money off a bad situation. If that were the case, I would have put the money and time into something lucrative. It was all about being able to utilize all of the fine target accessories for the AR15 type rifles. As far as the shooter who had his rifle taken from him, I can only assume he was telling me the truth on the phone because he needed me to fax him a copy of the approval letter to show law enforcement. He said he couldn't find his copy. He may have been stiffing me but it surely didn't seem like it. As far as the bolt catch, there is two reasons there isn't one. First the gun cannot be pivoted open to load with the bolt in the rear position. The gun cannot be closed with the bolt in the rear position either so the possibility of a slam fire when the gun is closed is impossible. Second in order to utilize a stripper guide, I had to use the area where the bolt catch is normally located. At some ranges they require a plastic chamber flag to insure that bolts are open during target changes. Again, the FAB-10 was not meant for everyone. I did not expect that 100 percent of the shooters would do somersaults over it. It's just the best option at this time. In approximately two months I will have an upper receiver that will solve the problems of loading and bolt catch. I can't solve the 10 round problem. That's up to all of you to vote and register as many people as you can to elect the right legislators so that some day we can turn things around. Thanks.
Craig
Link Posted: 5/27/2002 6:29:33 PM EDT
Craig,

You sound like an upright guy and I support you 100%. Best of luck on your lowers. You are pushing the envelope and we all owe you a thanks.

Link Posted: 5/27/2002 8:49:39 PM EDT
Hey CMS... i just picked up one of ur FAB10s from LandG weaponry..its one beautiful MOFO..good job...

Now i have a question....because the magazine is attached.....and not detachable..aren't we allowed to have all the pre ban evil features?? Ive been asking a LOT of people about this and it seems to be one helluva gray area..in fact its driving me nuts...

i purchased a collapsible stock for it...
and planning to get a pre ban style upper with flash hider just because i feel its better than a muzzle brake...
Yea..as for the bolt catch..who the hell needs one? Learn your gun, and if u practice safety, one is not necessary (AK's dont have bolt catches) As for the stripper guide, i bought the little doo hickey and seems to work easily...

Word of advice for those who own a FAB10, don't put 10 bullets into the mag....9 is more reliable...ive had some horrid expereinces with a bullet and half trying to pop into the chamber. As for shooting and so on, works great, no problems.

Thanks CMS, you've opened up a neat little world for me and others who didnt own an AR before the year 2000. And thankfully, the price is more than fair, (fab10 receiever plus all other parts = 900 dollars...not bad at all)
This little baby gives me a way to give Perat and Feinste1n the finger. =D
Link Posted: 5/28/2002 7:02:15 AM EDT
Without a detatchable magazine, it is not an 'assault weapon' under PRK law. Pre-ban features therefore are no longer evil...go for it. Barrel can't be shorter than 16 inches measured with a stick to the face of a locked bolt, overall length needs to be 30 inches or more.

-hanko


Now i have a question....because the magazine is attached.....and not detachable..aren't we allowed to have all the pre ban evil features?? Ive been asking a LOT of people about this and it seems to be one helluva gray area..in fact its driving me nuts...

Link Posted: 5/28/2002 12:02:08 PM EDT
stator, use your brain, always check it see if your gun is loaded, assume that it is always loaded.
Top Top