Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 74

Thread: Tnw m2/m3hb eta

  1. #31
    GunNutz stencollector's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    shilo MB, the armpit of Canada
    Posts
    4,389
    When the first TNW M2s and M1919s came in, the CFC accepted them as being new production because the right side plate was new, which the US BATF deemed to be the receiver. I recall someone on this board building a semi auto M1919 to the same specs and the CFC saying it would be deemed a converted auto as they felt the right side plate was not enough. Perhaps this is a way for the RCMP to stop more of these from coming into the country?

    I am just speculating here, but it would not surprise me if this was the situation.

    I wish this would sort itself out. Looks like I won't be seeing my M2 this shooting season....hopefully next year?

  2. #32
    Pound of Fire
    Super Moderator
    Jay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ottawa, Ontario
    Posts
    15,106
    Quote Originally Posted by stencollector View Post
    When the first TNW M2s and M1919s came in, the CFC accepted them as being new production because the right side plate was new, which the US BATF deemed to be the receiver. I recall someone on this board building a semi auto M1919 to the same specs and the CFC saying it would be deemed a converted auto as they felt the right side plate was not enough. Perhaps this is a way for the RCMP to stop more of these from coming into the country?

    I am just speculating here, but it would not surprise me if this was the situation.

    I wish this would sort itself out. Looks like I won't be seeing my M2 this shooting season....hopefully next year?
    Read this post;


    Quote Originally Posted by alberta tactical rifle View Post
    All 3 questions do not matter. We spent a TON of money on both 1919s and M2s doing EXACTLY what TNW did by replacing the side plate and trigger, modifying the bolt, yadda, yadda, yadda. We waited 2 years for the RCMP lab to classify these and on both counts they were classified as PROHIBITED, the reason stated was they were deemed "converted auto" which frankly although I feel it is crap given that TNW has the identical guns in this country that are classed as NON restricted.
    We were counseled by William Etter ( guru in charge at RCMP lab) that if we were to make the 5 sides of the box that comprises the action, the rest was good to go.

    We have side plates for the M2s already built to TNWs specs. Be happy to sell some.
    Exporting the parts from the US is problematic as they are parts designed for "weapons of war"
    SO now we are debating whether to invest many more thousands of dollars into making 1919s and M2s, I think this answers question 3 quite well.
    Found in this thread; http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum...de-plate-plans

    Not sure what to make of all of it...

    Regards
    Jay
    Wing Nut

    "No man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Thomas Jefferson.

  3. #33
    CGN Ultra frequent flyer mildcustom2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Surrey, B.C.
    Posts
    4,676
    Quote Originally Posted by Beezer View Post
    The thing is, how can they prove a part is or is not NOS? I have seen used parts that looked like NOS once they were blasted and reparkerized. Unless the part is really worn it is virtually impossible to tell the difference. Even a newly manufactured part can look like an original part once it has been parkerized.

    Who did you contact in Ottawa as I wouldn't mind finding a few things out myself in regards to TNW 1919s and M2HBs now being classified as converted-autos?
    I have never said the current 1919's or M2HB's in Canada are classified or under review as converted auto, in fact it was because of an accusation by another forum member as to reclassification in another thread that I contacted Ottawa for clarification. I was told this claim by the forum member here was 100% false and I was sent the FRT reports for the TNW manufactured 1919 and Valkyrie Arms 1919's.

    The current TNW 1919's and M2HB's are not considered converted auto because they are made from new old stock surplus parts kits. These parts kits were never assembled therefore are new parts. However if someone was to make one or an M37 for example from a demilled Israeli Parts Kit which has its components stamped as such for origin this would be considered a full auto. If any one of the 5 parts the Firearms lab in Ottawa considers to be part of the receiver are made from this demilled auto firearm it would then be considered a converted auto.

    Try to remember the guns North Sylva is trying to sell here are different models than the original 1919's and M2HB. They are M37's and M3's and therefore have to pass a new set of inspections by the firearms lab in Ottawa to get a new FRT number. They can just suddenly decide they don't want Canadians to have access to high capacity belt fed semi autos and deem them prohibited.

    It's a stupid BS law that they use to justify there position. You take a full auto 1919 or M2HB and remove the right side plate and install a semi auto one, machine the bolt etc for semi auto and it would be no different than a approved semi auto version. Again its just BS crap laws of this a$$ backwards country.

  4. #34
    CGN Ultra frequent flyer mildcustom2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Surrey, B.C.
    Posts
    4,676
    Directly from the email correspondence.


    Both the TNW and the Valkyrie Arms semi-automatic versions of the Browning M1919A4 firearm are "in service", so your information is false.

    What this means is that neither FRT record has been "pulled", neither has had a legal class change and both have been and continue to be available for use. All FRT records are subject to review, improvement and or modification to add specific detail or further explain comments contained in the records. This process does not constitute "pulled" nor does it prevent transactions from taking place such as transfer and registration.

    Be aware that should you wish to build your own version of a semi-automatic Browning M1919A4 Machine Gun that each and every example will require be inspection and the following criterion will be applied:

    a) - the five sided box consisting of top and bottom plates, left and right side plates and the front trunnion block is the receiver/frame for all purposes of the Criminal Code, Section 2 definition of "firearm"; and,

    b) - the classification of this firearm as a semi automatic firearm is based on the presumption that none of the original five (5) receiver components were reused. This is what RCMP - SFSS understood to be the meaning of the claim by the manufacturer that the firearm is a "newly manufactured as a semi-automatic firearm".

    c) - when the start point is a full automatic firearm and the component of the receiver/frame with the manufacturer information and serial number stamped or inscribed upon it is a purpose-built "semi-automatic" component and any of the remaining portions of the original five (5) receiver components of the full automatic receiver/frame is incorporated into the firearm, the resulting firearm is a "converted automatic" firearm.
    d) - the Criminal Code PART III, Section 84 para (c) definition - prohibited firearm means, "an automatic firearm, whether or not it has been altered to discharge only one projectile with one pressure of the trigger".
    Hope this helps.

    William Etter

    William (Bill) Etter
    Chief Firearms Technologist
    Specialized Firearms Support Services
    Firearms Investigative & Enforcement Services Directorate
    RCMP - CFP
    Specialized Policing Services

  5. #35
    CGN Ultra frequent flyer mildcustom2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Surrey, B.C.
    Posts
    4,676
    Oops. Post error.

  6. #36
    GunNutz stencollector's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    shilo MB, the armpit of Canada
    Posts
    4,389
    Quote Originally Posted by mildcustom2 View Post

    b) - the classification of this firearm as a semi automatic firearm is based on the presumption that none of the original five (5) receiver components were reused. This is what RCMP - SFSS understood to be the meaning of the claim by the manufacturer that the firearm is a "newly manufactured as a semi-automatic firearm".
    [/B]
    I somehow doubt the RCMP lab would have not known what was involved in the manufacture of the TNW Brownings. Since a new right side plate was all that was required in the US (along with internal modifications) how can they now claim that they believe all the 5 sides of the TNW receivers are all new manfacture.

    This does not bode well for TNW owners I fear. That the RCMP are currently turning a blind eye to it for now, while claiming that they currently believe it is all new, should not make an owner feel real secure.

  7. #37
    CGN Ultra frequent flyer mildcustom2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Surrey, B.C.
    Posts
    4,676
    Quote Originally Posted by stencollector View Post
    I somehow doubt the RCMP lab would have not known what was involved in the manufacture of the TNW Brownings. Since a new right side plate was all that was required in the US (along with internal modifications) how can they now claim that they believe all the 5 sides of the TNW receivers are all new manfacture.

    This does not bode well for TNW owners I fear. That the RCMP are currently turning a blind eye to it for now, while claiming that they currently believe it is all new, should not make an owner feel real secure.
    The number of TNW 1919's and M2HB's in this country is so minute that they are not interested in reclassification. There's like 40 1919's in the country to the best of my knowledge. There's no sense trying to start reclassification fear mongering. It's not gonna fly as I have direct reassurance from Ottawa its a non issue.

    Keeping in mind that this firearm is classed non restricted and not traceable. You gonna turn in a 6000$ rifle for free? I don't think so. They won't win this one ever.


    Just means guys like me can ask more money for our firearm in the future if I ever wanted to sell it.

  8. #38
    CGN Ultra frequent flyer mildcustom2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Surrey, B.C.
    Posts
    4,676
    Quote Originally Posted by stencollector View Post
    I somehow doubt the RCMP lab would have not known what was involved in the manufacture of the TNW Brownings. Since a new right side plate was all that was required in the US (along with internal modifications) how can they now claim that they believe all the 5 sides of the TNW receivers are all new manfacture.

    This does not bode well for TNW owners I fear. That the RCMP are currently turning a blind eye to it for now, while claiming that they currently believe it is all new, should not make an owner feel real secure.
    Also as I stated the existing TNW 1919's were made from new old stock USGI surplus parts kits. This means they were never assembled into a complete firearm. Therefore they do not fall under converted auto, they are brand new manufactured firearms. The reason TNW has discontinued production of the 1919 is because they ran out of surplus NOS parts kits. It's on the firearms lab to prove they weren't made from new parts at this point as they already issued the FRT report and number.

  9. #39
    GunNutz stencollector's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    shilo MB, the armpit of Canada
    Posts
    4,389
    It is a fair bit higher than 40. Seems to me that when I looked at the online FRT that the Ottawa sun posted, there were some 37 of the 30-06 M1919s still in stock at Marstar. Marstar also claimed some time ago that they imported 10 of the M2s, but I could only find 3 of them on the Ottawa sun site.

    The RCMP have re-classified smaller batches of guns before, and it did not seem to bother them. The BD3008 and BD38s are examples. What I suspect is that the conservatives have put pressure on the RCMP over the re classifications, because it stirs up #### with the conservative support base (ie: us). But under a different government, or at another time, it will be the turn of the TNWs.

  10. #40
    GunNutz stencollector's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    shilo MB, the armpit of Canada
    Posts
    4,389
    Quote Originally Posted by mildcustom2 View Post
    Also as I stated the existing TNW 1919's were made from new old stock USGI surplus parts kits. This means they were never assembled into a complete firearm. Therefore they do not fall under converted auto, they are brand new manufactured firearms. The reason TNW has discontinued production of the 1919 is because they ran out of surplus NOS parts kits. It's on the firearms lab to prove they weren't made from new parts at this point as they already issued the FRT report and number.

    Sure, we can leave it at that. That should buy us a couple years.

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •