X-Products Can Cannon/Modern Varmint hybrid

[Marilius]

Ok, hear me out. This thing uses a standard AR upper, in Canada makes it essentially restricted. Although financially, it's stupid, but, do you folks think it possible that removing the launcher and blank firing barrel from the can cannon and mounting them on your modern varmint upper would result in a non restricted can cannon?

[alberta tactical rifle]

Ok, hear me out. This thing uses a standard AR upper, in Canada makes it essentially restricted. Although financially, it's stupid, but, do you folks think it possible that removing the launcher and blank firing barrel from the can cannon and mounting them on your modern varmint upper would result in a non restricted can cannon?

The legal classification would be anyone's guess. Personally I think the SFSS/RCMP would consider it restricted due to barrel length, as it appears to be well under the 18.5" that is generally the situation for NR status on semi auto rifles. Trying to out guess the SFSS/RCMP is impossible.
The biggest problem I see is that the Varmint does not employ a standard AR15 barrel extension.
The other part of the equation is that we have no interest in risking the current legal status our rifles have.

[Marilius]

Just thought I'd toss the idea out there. I really want a Can Cannon, but being restricted is a non starter. Thanks for the reply though.

[AMET]

Just thought I'd toss the idea out there. I really want a Can Cannon, but being restricted is a non starter. Thanks for the reply though.

Just make a potato cannon.....i don't know if they are considered a regulated device.

[Patriot762x51]

I made a Can Cannon out of a Rem 870 shorty 8.5'' Barrel.

[Pumpingravel]

Wouldn't one of your non-restricted lowers (same as for the DA-50) work?

[Arm&Gun]

Might fly (pun intended). I think X products replaced the can cannon original barrel with something ported so that it didn't constitute as a short barreled rifle with the BATF. I think it's now just a gas release system. Wouldn't be rifled or anything either. On the same logic, 37mm launchers aren't regulated, hilti guns aren't regulated, etc etc. I understand not wanting to risk the atrs lower, there should be common ground somewhere though, perhaps a nr DA lower as mentioned above. Honestly making a bolt action variant would save us some grief, and given the intended use I don't think that would compromise the functionality.

[alberta tactical rifle]

Wouldn't one of your non-restricted lowers (same as for the DA-50) work?

Only if we were to make a dedicated upper for the DA50 style lower. It would require a few hundred orders to warrant the investment to make a dedicated upper.
Maybe if Canada Ammo were to have a smaller boltface made to replace their 50 cal bolt head it would be feasible? Then again how many guys would be willing to put out 3 grand to waste some cans of pop?