Armory Sponsor
Posted: 6/12/2013 8:07:44 PM EDT
| Awhile ago there was some company that made 45 deg semi selectors and we urged them to make a select fire version but they were wringing their hands over some legal hoohaa. Anyone know if they, or anyone else ever did? I really want some. |
|
It was Battle Arms Development.
I think they made an ambidextrous the full auto selectors with no issues, I tried to get them to make one for the 4-way colt system but they wouldn't. Here is their products page: I don't see a short throw M16 selector though. http://shop.battlearmsdevelopment.com/main.sc |
|
Quoted:
Awhile ago there was some company that made 45 deg semi selectors and we urged them to make a select fire version but they were wringing their hands over some legal hoohaa. Anyone know if they, or anyone else ever did? I really want some. They have made it, and are in the "testing / lending some out" phase. Safe is normal, 45 to semi, and full is normal. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Awhile ago there was some company that made 45 deg semi selectors and we urged them to make a select fire version but they were wringing their hands over some legal hoohaa. Anyone know if they, or anyone else ever did? I really want some. They have made it, and are in the "testing / lending some out" phase. Safe is normal, 45 to semi, and full is normal. So... like a year later still not available, and in that configuration I wouldn't waste my money. Well that is good news. |
|
They decided against the 0-45-90 version because of potential safety as well as legal issues. Somebody unfamiliar with that selector who flips it to 90 degrees for semi-auto would be in for a (potentially dangerous) surprise when it fired in full auto.
The initial prototypes were 0-45-180, but they changed to 0-50-180 for the production version. I think they're in a bit of a jam concerning them since they have to sell them with the "lawyer pin" installed to protect themselves from litigation. Unlike the semi auto 45 (50) degree selector, there are no (transferable) receivers to put them in, and nobody is going to modify a transferable lower to accept one. That means the only use for them outside of law enforcement is to people they know will have to modify them in a way that voids the warranty to be usable. If they sell them KNOWING that, that might make them liable in some way anyway. Of course, I'm not a lawyer and that's just my opinion. I really do like the 45(50) degree selector after getting used to it though. Fast switching between safe/semi without having to shift your firing grip. Switching to full auto is no different than with the regular selector, but for me, full auto is not something that I need to rapidly switch in and out of, like I would with semi-auto, in say a carbine class. -bob |
|
Quoted:
They decided against the 0-45-90 version because of potential safety as well as legal issues. Somebody unfamiliar with that selector who flips it to 90 degrees for semi-auto would be in for a (potentially dangerous) surprise when it fired in full auto. The initial prototypes were 0-45-180, but they changed to 0-50-180 for the production version. I think they're in a bit of a jam concerning them since they have to sell them with the "lawyer pin" installed to protect themselves from litigation. Unlike the semi auto 45 (50) degree selector, there are no (transferable) receivers to put them in, and nobody is going to modify a transferable lower to accept one. That means the only use for them outside of law enforcement is to people they know will have to modify them in a way that voids the warranty to be usable. If they sell them KNOWING that, that might make them liable in some way anyway. Of course, I'm not a lawyer and that's just my opinion. I really do like the 45(50) degree selector after getting used to it though. Fast switching between safe/semi without having to shift your firing grip. Switching to full auto is no different than with the regular selector, but for me, full auto is not something that I need to rapidly switch in and out of, like I would with semi-auto, in say a carbine class. -bob Yeah I remember them saying all that a year ago. They are basically wrong about everything you conveyed though; in my less than humble opinion. |
|
Quoted:there are no (transferable) receivers to put them in, and nobody is going to modify a transferable lower to accept one.
There are DIAS users who have no problem modifying their host lowers, and many a SOT dealer and mfg who don't mind munging up a post sample. |
Armory Sponsor