Kel-Tec Update Statement

Well I for one delighted to see that there is some logic behind the 7.62 vs. .308 issue.
I was beginning to think it was some sort of retarded emotional stupidity that was driving all this export nonsense.

Pesky terrorists...
 
Ok, so this brings up the obvious question... How hard would these be to re-head space so they can do both? My understanding is the civilian ammunition is on average higher pressure than the nato round, and the civilian round is .013 longer at the case shoulder. So pressure wise it should be safe, the only question i guess would be legality, which i am pretty sure isnt an issue either once on our side of the border.
 
jcoulson64 said:
Ok, so this brings up the obvious question... How hard would these be to re-head space so they can do both? My understanding is the civilian ammunition is on average higher pressure than the nato round, and the civilian round is .013 longer at the case shoulder. So pressure wise it should be safe, the only question i guess would be legality, which i am pretty sure isnt an issue either once on our side of the border.
Click to expand...

As far as I've heard you can use surplus (mil spec) 7.62 in a .308 chambered gun just fine, like using .223 in a 5.56 chambered gun.


This is making me want to sell my USC/UMP conversion to get an RFB
eek.gif


ETA

proflui said:
What is the price range for the RFB?
Click to expand...

in the other thread, its stated to be around 2500.
 
rfb to be restricted???

I was reading on the kel-tech owners groupe forum and they were saying so
?

any idea guys?
 
rally guy said:
rfb to be restricted???

I was reading on the kel-tech owners groupe forum and they were saying so
?

any idea guys?
Click to expand...

The only way the RFB can be restricted is if the OAL or barrel is too short (and that's not the info that's been given), they determine it's an AR variant, or the CPC uses OIC to name it restricted.

That's it.

The Firearms Lab can f**k around, but they can't (completely) make it up as they go along.
 
just called to inquire about kel tec firearms in relationship with our firearms act. apparently they said it was a militarized style weapon and there for restricted, meaning i could own one possibly but never go in the woods with it.

how do you like that? they don't like the look of it, THE LOOK. what really gets me it that they went on to say there was nothing that could be done by the manufacturer, consumer, or appeal to have this reclassified as non-restricted. because they don't like the way it looks, that really burns my bottom!

Jeux sans frontieres, #####!

its not even in our act, with good reason
sub section 3.a "firearms may also be restricted if we don't like the way it looks" inconceivable!

first thing i've ever been annoyed enough to raise a stink over, and i will!
Click to expand...

from: kel-tech owners groupe forum

:s
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom