Sterling Police Carbine

S

Spencer

BANNED
BANNED
BANNED
Rating - 97.3%
36   1   0
Can anyone tell me the difference between the trigger mechanism of a select fire sterling and the police carbine ?

I'm toying with the idea of putting one of these together.

Thanks:)
 
Yes I would like to know to!! I think they may be the same, except no full-auto selection on the police sterling. I have been told that the police sterling just got missed out during the original prohib-listing, but Stencollector should know for sure as he ( I think) has one.
 
spencer I think the problem lies in that YOU are NOT sterling so unless the entire gun was manufacture by sterling as a semiauto your SOL


its the same as building your own "valmet" your NOT valmet and therfore its prohib and youve manufactured a prohib device

I had one it was fun got bored and sold it years ago as far as trigger group I cant recall
 
Sterling semi auto and full auto trigger packs are extremely similar. The only difference is the semi automatic inner change lever, and the engraving of the words "single shot" on the housing.

I have a Cdn SMG C1 trigger pack which was converted to single shot which I use for a spare on my Police Carbine. Drops right in and works fine. Wilke was selling these a few years back, and although advertised as Sterling paks, really were not.

All the sterling trigger packs interchange (although the functions are different) with the possible exception of the closed bolt packs. There was a small step in the mk6, 7C and 8 (and of course the 9) which would not allow the mk4 trigger packs to fit into those guns. As well the pack allowed the bolt to go forward but not the firing pin block.

Sterling parts are around, and a much lighter magwell than the stens, so it should be easier to fabricate. The real delay will be, like with all of these guns, the approval from the firearms lab as a semi auto only gun. Possibly with a non-removeable pack which has some unique characteristics so as not to allow a full auto pack to be installed, one might be OK. Otherwise, the removal of the pack results in a runaway gun.

Making a closed bolt sterling would likely be unacceptable, since the closed bolt guns are prohibited by name, along with any variants.
 
stencollector said:
Sterling parts are around, and a much lighter magwell than the stens, so it should be easier to fabricate. The real delay will be, like with all of these guns, the approval from the firearms lab as a semi auto only gun.
Click to expand...

They must surely be approved already, yours is right ?:confused:
 
Mine is a factory Sterling, not a homebuilt.

If you look up Sterling police carbine in the FRT, you will see that they are only restricted. You will also note that the FRT says something like "they met the conditions for being ruled a semi auto at that time", which kind of indicates that they would look at the same gun twice today.

There was a period of time where the UZIs were all being siezed because the trigger pack out of a toy (replica) UZI could be dropped into the semi auto UZIs and make the gun go fast. Not sure why the Sterling Mk4 did not get caught up in that. Perhaps, since the mks 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 8 and 9 were all prohibited for one reason or another, they simply missed it.
 
Juster said:
http://www.cfc-cafc.gc.ca/factsheets/r&p_e.asp
Former Prohibited Weapons Order No. 12 (in effect since October 1, 1992)

...

The STEN isn't prohib by variant as far as I know.
Click to expand...


You missed this tidbit-

Definition of a Prohibited Firearm
The Criminal Code states that a prohibited firearm is:

a handgun with a barrel length of 105 mm (4.1 inches) or less;
a handgun designed or adapted to discharge 25 or 32 calibre ammunition;
a rifle or shotgun that has been altered to make it less than 660 mm (26 inches) in overall length;
a rifle or shotgun that has been altered to make the barrel length less than 457 mm (18 inches) where the overall firearm length is 660 mm (26 inches) or more;
an automatic firearm and a converted automatic firearm;
any firearm prescribed as prohibited.
 
As Glen has pointed out, the sten and many of the sterlings are prohibited because they were C/As. The stens are pretty cut and dry, and we have covered that subject to death on this forum. Sterlings are not quite so simple, since some are/were C/As, some are prohibited because of their integral silencers (the sterling Mk5 police carbine), and some are prohibited by name because they were variants of the mk6 closed bolt sterlings, which were caught up in the "nasty looking guns" which got prohibited in the mid 90s.

The lanchester would be a good gun to make as a semi, except that the parts kits for them are very difficult to find, even a dewat is worth close to 1K these days, and the brass cast magwell would be a bugger to try and copy.
 
The obvious thing to do would be to get a written ruling that a homemade clone of the Sterling Police Carbine would be accepted. A new FRT entry would have to be created, because the firearm would obviously not be a "Sterling Police Carbine", and registerable as such, the SPC being a specific model of firearm manufactured only by a specific company. Give George a call.
As far as a Lanchester magazine housing goes, the only practical way to produce one would be to have the piece cast. First, locate a foundry that would be prepared to fool around with a one-off, or very low production project. A foundry that specialized in bronze art castings/statuary might be a good start, rather a production oriented one. The pattern could be made from wax. The waxes used for investment casting are available in different hardnesses. A pattern could be carved, formed, fused together. It would be necessary to leave a bit of extra wax to allow for final machining and fitting. Making a wax original would likely be easier than producing the patterns for sand or shell casting.
 
As far as why certain guns were put on the original "list" has little to do with their function or mechanical operation. If you look at the original California State assault weapons ban list, our Canadian list mirrored it make, model, and almost serial number. They were identical. Our 'powers that be' had a ban list ready to go, and they used it. We have, of course, added a few to ours since, but the first guns prohibed and named in the Order in Counsels, were the listed guns in California.
 
Spencer said:
If a new reciever is built for a semi auto only then it is not a converted auto, it's a new semi auto.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It is a newly made gun which may resemble something else.
The exact wording of the law is critical; if a named firearm is prohibited, like a Thompson or AK, a clone cannot be made. If something is prohibited because of 12(2) or 12(3) status, but is not specifically named, then there is a good chance that a clone could be made and registered.
 
tiriaq said:
Exactly. It is a newly made gun which may resemble something else.
The exact wording of the law is critical; if a named firearm is prohibited, like a Thompson or AK, a clone cannot be made. If something is prohibited because of 12(2) or 12(3) status, but is not specifically named, then there is a good chance that a clone could be made and registered.
Click to expand...

To expand, if one is making a replica of the Sterling Police Carbine, it needs to be clear that the gun follows the specific differences in the gun that make it unique from the prohibited versions.

(Which if I understand correctly, pretty much is only the trigger housing)
 
Its only the trigger mechanism module that has any modifications at all. A military unit can be swapped in, no more effort than field stripping. Whether this would satisfy the powers that be, who knows? The FRT entry for the SPC points out that the original smg markings can often be read on the magazine housing, and the selector quadrant.
As has been mentionned above, the SPC is a bit of a special case that appears to have fallen through the cracks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom