AR vs Tavor questions.

SwL_Wildcat

SwL_Wildcat

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
22   0   0
Location
Any further west and I'd have to learn Japanese..
New here and I tried searching the forums for info but it does not appear there is a lot out there. Our minimum caliber in Alberta is 23 and I use a 243 all the time on everything from Wolf to Moose rarely needing a second shot for a kill. I work in the logging industry in Alberta and am exposed to wildlife on a daily basis. When I run across a pack of wolves with my bolt action 700 it's tough to drop more than 1. I was thinking about getting the Remington R-15/25 until I found out it was restricted. Why on earth the Remington is restricted and the Tavor is not I will never understand?!?! I now have a couple questions. The AR is restricted and variants lowers are restricted if they will accept an AR upper. If I have a upper/lower built with a different offset to the pivot pin so that it will NOT accept an "off the shelf" AR upper, because it would not pin up would that then not be considered a variant, and thus not be restricted if I installed a 18" or longer barrel? If that is the case I could order a 18" barrel chambered in 6x45 and a 5 round magazine and be legal to hunt correct? As a second option I could purchase a Tavor and rechamber to 6x45 in an 18" barrel and achieve the same results. What would be the best way to go? Would I have to change the pin offset on the AR or would just changing the pin diameter be enough?
 
SwL_Wildcat said:
Neither was the R-15/25... Now I know you going to say the lower is the same and it's a variant etc... Remington should have thought about that and made some change so you can't just slap on any old upper.
Click to expand...

Remington couldn't care less about the pathetic Canadian market. In a free country, one isn't limited by ignorant laws.

TDC
 
Remington would have been stupid to modify the design. Especially since it wouldn't have helped. HK modified the 416 into the MR223, and it is still considered a variant in Canada.

This despite the fact that in the MR223 FRT, the lab states the 416 upper drops into a M16 lower, conspicuously leaving out that fact that the MR223 upper does not.
 
CanAm said:
Remington would have been stupid to modify the design. Especially since it wouldn't have helped. HK modified the 416 into the MR223, and it is still considered a variant in Canada.

This despite the fact that in the MR223 FRT, the lab states the 416 upper drops into a M16 lower, conspicuously leaving out that fact that the MR223 upper does not.
Click to expand...

I don't mean to hi-jack here but is this MR223 being an AR variant 100% verified?? Do you have something official stating it is a variant and it's not just restricted due to barrel length? I only ask because I don't recall anything official ever being presented, just a lot of talk. Maybe I'm wrong.
 
Rule #1
Applying logic to the Firearms Act will cause you head to explode.

Rule #2
Licking the Chu wood stock of your M305 will cause your #### to fall off, just ask Hungry
 
SwL_Wildcat said:
The AR is restricted and variants lowers are restricted if they will accept an AR upper.
If I have a upper/lower built with a different offset to the pivot pin so that it will NOT accept an "off the shelf" AR upper, because it would not pin up would that then not be considered a variant, and thus not be restricted if I installed a 18" or longer barrel?
Click to expand...

I think the 'Variant' goes further than just the 'pins' lining up.
It also goes into the firing 'trigger' system and the gas system. Basically the way the gun operates.
If you can come up with a different fire control and gas system......go for it.
 
Variant, in practice, means nothing. There are at least 4 guns, off the top of my head, that are variants of named prohibs, yet are not prohib, and many which are not variants, and yet are classified as such.
 
So who would do the identification of a "homebuilt" and classify it? A local verifier, or would it have to get sent in to the CFO for verification? Although it's not part of the classification if I had it chambered in 6x45mm and a local verifier were to "classify" it he/she would be more likely to label it non-restricted due it being chambered in something that is not a commercially available round? I do have a restricted PAL, but I would like to have a choice in my non-restricted black gun... It might be just easier to rechamber a Tavor. Anyone know who makes barrels for the Tavor in Canada?
 
CanAm said:
Remington would have been stupid to modify the design. Especially since it wouldn't have helped. HK modified the 416 into the MR223, and it is still considered a variant in Canada.

This despite the fact that in the MR223 FRT, the lab states the 416 upper drops into a M16 lower, conspicuously leaving out that fact that the MR223 upper does not.
Click to expand...

Why would this be stupid on Remington’s part? You can buy an AR anywhere, everybody and their dog builds AR's. I have a bunch of stripped lowers here at home, but that's not the point. Remington has built its reputation on building fine HUNTING rifles. Why not change the design slightly so all 50 states, as well as Canada can purchase this and legally hunt with it? They ship them with 5 round magazines so there was SOME intent towards that point...
 
A slight design change would probably result in it being classed a "variant" making any investment in the process a total loss.

A major design change would be a massive investment followed, in all probability, by years of issues being fixed under warranty.

Gun companies exist to make money, not guns.
 
The states that don't permit the ownership or use of AR's or any other military style rifle aren't worth the effort. The rest of the 300 plus million residents of the US compensate for the loss of the lesser states. Canada, isn't worth the effort, as misanthropist has pointed out.

TDC
 
SwL_Wildcat said:
So who would do the identification of a "homebuilt" and classify it? A local verifier, or would it have to get sent in to the CFO for verification? Although it's not part of the classification if I had it chambered in 6x45mm and a local verifier were to "classify" it he/she would be more likely to label it non-restricted due it being chambered in something that is not a commercially available round? I do have a restricted PAL, but I would like to have a choice in my non-restricted black gun... It might be just easier to rechamber a Tavor. Anyone know who makes barrels for the Tavor in Canada?
Click to expand...
RCMP do the classifications of new firearms. The bullet it shoots means nothing (unless explosives, over 20mm, etc). It's all about how it operates, mostly. Are you talking about re-chambering a Tavor?

No one makes barrels for the Tavor in Canada.
 
So who would do the identification of a "homebuilt" and classify it? A local verifier, or would it have to get sent in to the CFO for verification?
Click to expand...
Verifier only verify against existing FRT #'s. The FRT lab assigns new FRT numbers.

Although it's not part of the classification if I had it chambered in 6x45mm and a local verifier were to "classify" it he/she would be more likely to label it non-restricted due it being chambered in something that is not a commercially available round?
Click to expand...
Calibre would have no affect, especially since the AR design lowers are not calibre dependent.

I do have a restricted PAL, but I would like to have a choice in my non-restricted black gun... It might be just easier to rechamber a Tavor. Anyone know who makes barrels for the Tavor in Canada?
Click to expand...
THe barrels is the easy part, it is the barrel extension that is tough. If the case head is the same,you could use the factory extension.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom