Checkout this "MG34" ....

[P90Puma]

...

Wait, why did I post this in black rifles?

 

[bfiles]

isnt that the tnw mg34??????

and isnt wolverine bringing these in, in 2013???

 

[bfiles]

Oppps, my bad, just realized that its an upper on an AR lower, coooool!!!!!

 

[P90Puma]

Oppps, my bad, just realized that its an upper on an AR lower, coooool!!!!!

bingo!

http//www.brpguns.com/categories/Semi-Auto-Firearms/XMG-Belt%252dFed-AR%252d15%7B47%7DM16-Upper-Receiver/

 

[Wantabe_ Warrior]

O_O Oh. My. God. That is awesome!

 

[canucklehead]

5 round belts...LAME!!!!!

Restricted....LAME!!!!!

8mm Mauser (?)...if so SUPERLAME!!!!

Cool if you're in the USA...not cool up here (IMHO).

 

[Armedsask]

Send me one and I'll flange it up to work on an AR180B lower.

 

[Leonidas]

5 round belts...LAME!!!!!

nope...

 

[canucklehead]

I realize the real mg34 wouldn't be limited to five, but itd be hard to argue this 'firearm' is designed before 1945.

And since the 'firearm' is actually an Ar15 (the lower) I think it'd be even tougher.

Id love to be wrong...is there already a 'ruling' or something official on this?

 

[polkey]

Its not the firearm that has to be pre 1945, its the belts/links that have to be.

 

[fenceline]

Oh the awesome!

 

[ipscgraz]

interest piqued for sure...

Next thing will be a scope mount on a rail for it.

 

[AK]

This is so 10 years ago. I have videos of this thing being test fired before Youtube even existed.

 

[Chuck3436]

This is so 10 years ago. I have videos of this thing being test fired before Youtube even existed.

Then WHY CAN'T WE BUY ONE RIGHT NOW?

 

[rivetc78]

and isnt wolverine bringing these in, in 2013???

No. They are going to sell them.

Someone else is 'Bringing Them In"

 

[2bad4u2]

How can it be anything other than an AR? The lower receiver is the part that is serialized. By definition of law it is an AR regardless of what "upper receiver" is mounted to it.

 

[Conte]

Oh sweet. It's available in 308.

No clear answer on the belt tho, but if it works with certain older models, might be good to go for a loophole. . . not that I could afford to enjoy shooting off a belt of 308. My range session would last all of 10 minutes.

 

[2bad4u2]

Oh sweet. It's available in 308.

No clear answer on the belt tho, but if it works with certain older models, might be good to go for a loophole. . . not that I could afford to enjoy shooting off a belt of 308. My range session would last all of 10 minutes.

It's actually very clear. The firearm itself is an AR not a MG-34. You're limited to 5-rounds. Unless of course there's some kind of loophole regarding disintegrating links that I'm not aware of. Ckoth belts are no doubt limited. It would be useless with a 5-round capacity.

 

[P90Puma]

It's actually very clear. The firearm itself is an AR not a MG-34. You're limited to 5-rounds. Unless of course there's some kind of loophole regarding disintegrating links that I'm not aware of. Ckoth belts are no doubt limited. It would be useless with a 5-round capacity.

2.6k posts and total disinformation.

Magazine/Links are regulated to the firearm they are FOR, not used in. As posted before mg34 links are obviously pre 1945 design and therefore G2G.

 

[tiriaq]

MG34/42 used non-disintegrating belts. Generally 50 round sections that could be connected.
The belts are in the clear, no matter whether original German or post-war Yugoslav for the M53.
Use of these belts in that creation should be akin to used LAR agazines in an AR.
The use of 7.62x51 links is less clear.