Converting Restricted to Non Restricted

woodlotowner

woodlotowner

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Super GunNutz
Rating - 99.7%
591   2   2
Location
Haliburton County, Central Ontario
I may be late to the party here, but I see a nice looking AR style rifle for sale that has been converted from restricted to non-restricted. Is this a common undertaking and is it as simple as a barrel change or are there other components that must be replaced as well? If it is seemingly fairly straight forward (perhaps not inexpensive) to make the conversion, why don't manufacturers offer both versions of their rifles at the retail end? I do find the notion of a non-restricted AR style rifle to be a practical idea.
 
I am not quite following you, there are no AR type rifles converted to non restricted.

There are non restricted ARish receiver sets that were used to build most rifles. ATRS makes the Modern Sported receiver set and mccabbe makes the SLR receiver set that have a non restricted FRT, but if you install a short barrel it is restricted and must be registered as such which is a complete waste since the receiver sets will set you back $1000+ and you can buy a restricted AR receiver set for around $200.
You can not take an AR-15 and convert it though, all AR's and any rifle deemed a variant is restricted forever.

If you're talking about rifles like the Bushmaster ACR then yes, the conversion is easy, install an 18.5+ inch barrel and have it inspected by a certified firearms verifier, submit paperwork, wait 3 months, non restricted rifle is created. You can not go back and forth at will though so sell the restricted length barrel the rifle came with. The stock barrel is worth almost nothing though since even though it physically fits in an AR the gas port is the wrong size so it will not work without modifications.

Manufacturers don't offer both versions because most manufacturers are from the USA and they don't give a crap how stupid our gun laws are and we are too small of a market for them to worry about our problems.
 
Thanks, CR, for your very informative answer. Yes, it is indeed a Bushmaster ACR to which I was referring. I assumed the receiver sets were, in fact, permanently restricted by nature, but my general lack of knowledge in this area is now obvious to all. :) Personally I run a T-97 in 3 Gun and also use it for plinking here on the woodlot. Perhaps it is time I joined the AR group.
 
woodlotowner said:
Thanks, CR, for your very informative answer. Yes, it is indeed a Bushmaster ACR to which I was referring. I assumed the receiver sets were, in fact, permanently restricted by nature, but my general lack of knowledge in this area is now obvious to all. :) Personally I run a T-97 in 3 Gun and also use it for plinking here on the woodlot. Perhaps it is time I joined the AR group.
Click to expand...

ACR is a great platform as well, I own a converted non restricted tan one. I also have a Modern Sporter, either would serve you well on the woodlot but the Modern Sporter has the option to be built lighter than an ACR.
 
cr5 said:
ACR is a great platform as well, I own a converted non restricted tan one. I also have a Modern Sporter, either would serve you well on the woodlot but the Modern Sporter has the option to be built lighter than an ACR
Click to expand...

Not necessarily true unless you add the caveat of doing so at significantly less cost. I have seen super light ACR's but they cost a fortune to build with custom or modified everything except the upper reciever. Makes a $3k standard ACR look like a poverty platform.
 
This thread is a good illustration of how terms like "AR style" are meaningless. I would never have interpreted that phrase to mean Bushmaster ACR, which is nothing at all like an AR-15.
 
cr5 said:
Manufacturers don't offer both versions because most manufacturers are from the USA and they don't give a crap how stupid our gun laws are and we are too small of a market for them to worry about our problems.
Click to expand...

I dont agree on this,it look like many manifactuers begin de see the canadian market with non-restricted rifle,we are being watch from the south !
 
Curtis264 said:
I totally agree, an ACR has no relation to an AR-15
Click to expand...

It actually has a lot of similarities to an AR, the design took all the best pieces of the AR then blended in a short stroke piston and a lot of modularity and modern ergonomics. Unfortunately it came out at the wrong time and it's development and support were put on hold during the AR buying frenzy down south when Obama threatened to take them.

But in general it wouldn't be considered ARish compared to a Sporter or SLR now that those options are available.


Danfizz said:
I dont agree on this,it look like many manifactuers begin de see the canadian market with non-restricted rifle,we are being watch from the south !
Click to expand...

Mostly cases of our importers having a good relationship or creating one with the US manufacturers (or swiss in the case of the APC) and asking for a special model to be made for us, if it wasn't for certain companies working for us we would have nearly nothing up here other than Canadian made rifles.
 
Agree regarding the ACR. But for the modern sporter or the SLR, it seems like they just cut the upper and lower differently, and bam. Not-a-AR.
 
Danfizz said:
These are base on the AR 102 that is non restricted.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. Only the BCL102 and very distantly the Stag10 are.

The ATRS MS is based on the ATRS MV, which is based on the ATRS MH, which is it's own unique design not based solely on any particular design before that. It is it's own rifle, and in no way a successor of the AR102.

The MDI SLR skipped all the steps of what ATRS did, and instead just went ahead ad made an AR like reciever set, and it really is as simple as being designed to have reciever halves that are incompatible with the corresponding opposite AR-15 reciever half. That and a solid story of it's lineage and marketing not having any references to being an AR-15 successor/variant in any way.

Where as 102 NR based status' rely on being a direct variant/successor to the 102 design, otherwise they may be called a upscaled AR15 like most modern AR10's are.

Establishing a NR status for an AR like platform in Canada requires your literature, marketing and official statement on lineage to be bullet proof.

The Sig MCX probably could have enjoyed the similar freedom had MD Charlton and Sig had their ducks in a row, but sig heavily marketed the MCX as a new revolution to the AR design which is a non-starter.
 
I think we should explain to some of these guys why the AR15 is restricted. First of all we are talking about AR15 firearms as controlled by the registered FRT number and not all these non restricted AR15 look alike firearms that similar in appearance but will not take M16 full auto or multi round burst fire control parts or upper receivers. It is the ease of converting a AR15 to full auto by dropping in auto M16 parts with or without minor machining (with proper tools or a die grinder where the internal lower receiver is forged with material to block depending on model series) the installation of full auto or burst fire control parts. About twenty years ago in the US there was even a stamped credit card like piece of metal that could be dropped into a AR15 receiver that would allow full auto fire and to purchase it in the US on each would have to pay the full auto tax in order to purchase it. If you do not know what I am talking about look up full auto/silencer tax stamp. Therefore wether it’s a AR15 or some other rifle or military rife that was originally configured in full auto is the reason #1 why the semi auto versions are restricted in Canada and cannot be converted to non restricted. On an interesting note twenty five or more years ago I bought from a friend two AR15 SP1 rifles one fired and one not with consecutive serial numbers. I shot the fired one and eventually sold it to a friend and started to fire the unfired one. The very first time I fired it it went or tried to go full auto two shot only. Clear it and the same the second time. A RCMP friend shooting beside me opened it up and couldn’t see an issue. I got a conveyance permit and took it to a known AR gunsmith at the time and he opened it up at the time and started to chuckle. He pulled the fire control group out and went over to a cabinet and got a part and installed it and handed the old part to me and explained Colt screwed up on assembly and had installed one full auto part but because it had a semi auto bolt and what ever else it would catch it and stop it after firing two shots. Now if it had a full auto bolt and another few pieces I would of been able to rock and roll. Newer receivers are forged with additional material to prevent the dropping in of full auto parts for some types of firearms and therefore may be non restricted but not the AR15. Of course barrel length is another issue on even a M1 carbine but as I performed once I ordered a legal length barrel from Brownells and had a gunsmith install then had the firearms officer inspect and measured here in town then was able to receive a letter from the RCMP and was changed from restricted to non restricted which just came to me why I was able to do this because there was a small amount of full auto M2 carbines built? If there are any mistakes in my explanation please chim in experts. —-Dieseldog!
 
The little piece was called a drop in auto sear, you could buy them for 100.00, but you also needed the full auto fire control components to make it work, like full auto bolt, disconnect, trigger and safety. The drop in auto sear was held in place by the rear take down pin that holds the receiver groups together
 
dieseldog said:
It is the ease of converting a AR15 to full auto by dropping in auto M16 parts with or without minor machining...
Click to expand...

I have no comment on your technical history here but it has nothing whatever to do with the current legal status of the AR-15. In 1994 the Liberals declared an intent to prohibit all semi-automatic centerfire rifles then on the market that featured detachable magazines and pistol grips. This encompassed almost 90 models of rifles, of course including the AR-15.

The Dominion of Canada Rifle Association stood up in protest that prohibition of the AR-15 would be a major blow, and was supported by the Department of National Defense. Thus the AR-15, and only the AR-15, was granted an exemption and allowed to retain its then-current status, which was restricted.

All this stuff about drop in parts and lightning links and how the receiver was forged was never part of the discussion.

Also, please learn to use paragraphs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom