LF Browning M2 Side plate plans

Beezer said:
So basically, because the guns you submitted for inspection would have your companies name on them as the manufacturer and not TNW's, they were not exempt, even though they were done to TNW's specs?
Click to expand...

In a nutshell YES. My own 1919 was a TNW and on several parts were other makers markings and numbers , but the side plate was clearly marked TNW.
SO thinking rationally I figured good enough for them , good enough for me so purchased a bunch of 1919s and M2s and assorted parts. We made 100% identical side plates to the TNW 1s except we put our name on them, as at that time the registry was still in force, submitted them and were denied NON restricted classification.
We "could" have marked them as TNWs and sold them easily now that the registry is done, but I will not go there. I hate soap on a rope and just do not play well enough with others in confined spaces to play those kind of games.
 
Well I wonder how this is going to affect those that currently have semi-auto 1919s or M2s and how do they protect themself from wrongful seizure or arrest when they are questioned about their gun, which was completely legal to own as a non-restricted till the RCMP changed their minds.

Another example of why the RCMP's powers need to be reigned in.
 
CanAm said:
Thanx. Are those for the semi version? I cannot seem to access them.
Click to expand...

trevj said:
You need to be a paid up subscriber to get into their library.

If you scrounge around the web, like as not you will find the same files elsewhere, either as a zip file collection, or as stand alone files.
As to being for a semi, likely not. I figure if you are able to make the plates, you are likely able to mod the plans to make them semi-only, no?

FWIW I got a nice set of plans as the first hit when I searched M2 side plate on Google images. Back linking up the file tree found me a directory with a bunch of good stuff in it.

Cheers
Trev
Click to expand...

Yes, you do have to pay. However, the vast wealth of knowledge that is easily and safely accessible is astounding. Well worth the small fee, in my opinion.
 
Info I just posted in another thread with my correspondence between myself and William Etter a few weeks ago. It's regarding 1919's but applies to M2HB's too.

Directly from the email correspondence.


Both the TNW and the Valkyrie Arms semi-automatic versions of the Browning M1919A4 firearm are "in service", so your information is false.

What this means is that neither FRT record has been "pulled", neither has had a legal class change and both have been and continue to be available for use. All FRT records are subject to review, improvement and or modification to add specific detail or further explain comments contained in the records. This process does not constitute "pulled" nor does it prevent transactions from taking place such as transfer and registration.

Be aware that should you wish to build your own version of a semi-automatic Browning M1919A4 Machine Gun that each and every example will require be inspection and the following criterion will be applied:

a) - the five sided box consisting of top and bottom plates, left and right side plates and the front trunnion block is the receiver/frame for all purposes of the Criminal Code, Section 2 definition of "firearm"; and,

b) - the classification of this firearm as a semi automatic firearm is based on the presumption that none of the original five (5) receiver components were reused. This is what RCMP - SFSS understood to be the meaning of the claim by the manufacturer that the firearm is a "newly manufactured as a semi-automatic firearm".

c) - when the start point is a full automatic firearm and the component of the receiver/frame with the manufacturer information and serial number stamped or inscribed upon it is a purpose-built "semi-automatic" component and any of the remaining portions of the original five (5) receiver components of the full automatic receiver/frame is incorporated into the firearm, the resulting firearm is a "converted automatic" firearm.
d) - the Criminal Code PART III, Section 84 para (c) definition - prohibited firearm means, "an automatic firearm, whether or not it has been altered to discharge only one projectile with one pressure of the trigger".
Hope this helps.

William Etter

William (Bill) Etter
Chief Firearms Technologist
Specialized Firearms Support Services
Firearms Investigative & Enforcement Services Directorate
RCMP - CFP
Specialized Policing Services
 
I have a set of drawings for the semi auto side plate and full assembly manual on building a semi auto 1919. I picked it up off Ebay. There may be some thing similar for the M2HB too.
 
mildcustom2 said:
Info I just posted in another thread with my correspondence between myself and William Etter a few weeks ago. It's regarding 1919's but applies to M2HB's too.

Directly from the email correspondence.


Both the TNW and the Valkyrie Arms semi-automatic versions of the Browning M1919A4 firearm are "in service", so your information is false.

What this means is that neither FRT record has been "pulled", neither has had a legal class change and both have been and continue to be available for use. All FRT records are subject to review, improvement and or modification to add specific detail or further explain comments contained in the records. This process does not constitute "pulled" nor does it prevent transactions from taking place such as transfer and registration.

Be aware that should you wish to build your own version of a semi-automatic Browning M1919A4 Machine Gun that each and every example will require be inspection and the following criterion will be applied:

a) - the five sided box consisting of top and bottom plates, left and right side plates and the front trunnion block is the receiver/frame for all purposes of the Criminal Code, Section 2 definition of "firearm"; and,

b) - the classification of this firearm as a semi automatic firearm is based on the presumption that none of the original five (5) receiver components were reused. This is what RCMP - SFSS understood to be the meaning of the claim by the manufacturer that the firearm is a "newly manufactured as a semi-automatic firearm".

c) - when the start point is a full automatic firearm and the component of the receiver/frame with the manufacturer information and serial number stamped or inscribed upon it is a purpose-built "semi-automatic" component and any of the remaining portions of the original five (5) receiver components of the full automatic receiver/frame is incorporated into the firearm, the resulting firearm is a "converted automatic" firearm.
d) - the Criminal Code PART III, Section 84 para (c) definition - prohibited firearm means, "an automatic firearm, whether or not it has been altered to discharge only one projectile with one pressure of the trigger".
Hope this helps.

William Etter

William (Bill) Etter
Chief Firearms Technologist
Specialized Firearms Support Services
Firearms Investigative & Enforcement Services Directorate
RCMP - CFP
Specialized Policing Services
Click to expand...


The issues I see, as it pertains to the TNW 1919, are with (b) and (c). TNW never used NOS or newly manufactured top plates, bottom plates, trunnions or left side plates in any of their guns. That may be abit different these days, as quality 1919 surplus parts have been getting harder to find, so they might have started to manufacture some of those parts, but not all. Same applies for guns built by US Ordnance Inc. or Rapid Fire. Both which have FRT#s for their semi 1919s. Knowing this, that would mean all TNW 1919's currently in Canada would be converted-autos, going by the letter from William Etter. I wonder how they plan to deal with this situation? Obvioulsy they will not grant the people with semi 1919's 12(3) status on their PALs. Will they issue exemption letters to all those people? They are opening up a whole can of worms with this.

Not sure why they do not follow the BATF ruling where the RSP is classified as the firearm. It is dead simple to understand.
 
Beezer said:
The issues I see, as it pertains to the TNW 1919, are with (b) and (c). TNW never used NOS or newly manufactured top plates, bottom plates, trunnions or left side plates in any of their guns. That may be abit different these days, as quality 1919 surplus parts have been getting harder to find, so they might have started to manufacture some of those parts, but not all. Same applies for guns built by US Ordnance Inc. or Rapid Fire. Both which have FRT#s for their semi 1919s. Knowing this, that would mean all TNW 1919's currently in Canada would be converted-autos, going by the letter from William Etter. I wonder how they plan to deal with this situation? Obvioulsy they will not grant the people with semi 1919's 12(3) status on their PALs. Will they issue exemption letters to all those people? They are opening up a whole can of worms with this.

Not sure why they do not follow the BATF ruling where the RSP is classified as the firearm. It is dead simple to understand.
Click to expand...

All TNW manufactured 1919's were made from brand new unassembled USGI surplus parts kits that were never assembled. They bought a pile of them at auction. Therefore because they are all new parts that were never assembled to make a full auto firearm by the Firearms Labs ingenious deduction they are not considered a converted auto.

It's just another example of how stupid our firearms laws are. You can take a full auto 1919, pull out the ride side plate and rivet in a new semi side plate, machine the internals for semi auto and side by side and dimensionally it would be exactly the same as a TNW semi auto made 1919 from new USGI parts.
 
Yes, but are we just going by the word from TNW that they were NOS parts? How could we really be sure?

I wish I had access to a TNW gun so I could have a closer look at it.
 
Alright you guys are on your own. I can't keep this up when your jumping between two threads about the same crap.

Believe what you wanna believe. I'm gonna keep having fun shooting my 1919. ;)
 
Well that sucks dog balls.

I really wanted to look into rebuilding a Russian M1910 Maxim into semi.
Apparently, there are warehouses full in eastern Europe.

So, if I understand W. Etter's letter to mildcustom2, and mc2's explanation of the TNW loose parts build,
then replacing the RSP with an altered semi-only version is now not legal.

But, if I replace the other 4 plates WITH IDENTICAL COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL FA plates, and a fifth Semi-only RSP, that is fine.

NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with true safety, only another roadblock to legal non-violent collectors.
 
tootall said:
Well that sucks dog balls.

I really wanted to look into rebuilding a Russian M1910 Maxim into semi.
Apparently, there are warehouses full in eastern Europe.

So, if I understand W. Etter's letter to mildcustom2, and mc2's explanation of the TNW loose parts build,
then replacing the RSP with an altered semi-only version is now not legal.

But, if I replace the other 4 plates WITH IDENTICAL COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL FA plates, and a fifth Semi-only RSP, that is fine.

NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with true safety, only another roadblock to legal non-violent collectors.
Click to expand...

That's 100% correct. If we had drawings for all the external receiver parts, top, bottom, sides and I believe trunion and manufactured them from new materials we could make our own brand of 1919a4 Semi Auto that would get an FRT number. However if you use any one of the 5 receiver parts from a full auto gun to make the receiver its " technically " as they see it a converted auto. Yet side by side the two would be 100% identical.

Our fine stupid laws at its best.
 
mildcustom2 said:
Sure, I'll do that. Me and TooTall out blasting away with my 1919 having some fun.
Click to expand...

That was cruel.... LOL



CanAm said:
Thanks, looks like some good info in there.
Click to expand...

My pleasure. :)




Now this is not directed at anyone, but I thought I would share this bit of info. I just looked through the FRT Report for the TNW 1919a4 and nowhere in the report does it state that newly manufactured or NOS parts were used by the manufacture.

On page 2 of the report, under the heading "Remarks", the last line reads, "-the manufacturer uses surplus US parts to build the receivers / frames into complete firearms." Surplus is not the same as NOS in my mind and I think many would agree with this.

The reports for the US Ordnance Inc. and Valkyrie Arms also stated the same thing.
 
Beezer said:
That was cruel.... LOL





My pleasure. :)




Now this is not directed at anyone, but I thought I would share this bit of info. I just looked through the FRT Report for the TNW 1919a4 and nowhere in the report does it state that newly manufactured or NOS parts were used by the manufacture.

On page 2 of the report, under the heading "Remarks", the last line reads, "-the manufacturer uses surplus US parts to build the receivers / frames into complete firearms." Surplus is not the same as NOS in my mind and I think many would agree with this.

The reports for the US Ordnance Inc. and Valkyrie Arms also stated the same thing.
Click to expand...

Oh boy f:P:

Anyone that knows anything about 1919's knows that the 1919 was supplied to the United States in parts kit form. These parts kits were auctioned off when no longer required. You think the US is gonna spend the time and money to take apart 1919's and then sell the surplus used parts?

Definition of surplus: An amount of something left over when requirements have been met; an excess of production or supply over demand.

Surplus doesn't mean used, it can be a " surplus " of new items just like all the nice shiney new surplus ammo coming over from china.

Definition of NOS ( New Old Stock ): A term used to describe parts, generally accepted to mean original manufacturer new parts (and not reproductions or later new production...

Tell me where it says in the report it's made from used parts. If its made from new parts then these are considered NOS ( new old stock ). Very very few new production parts are made for the 1919 currently. Anything that's new is New Old Stock. Heck you can't even get newly manufactured barrels for them.

Your grasping at straws.
 
Last edited:
Not grasping at straws. There are "NOS surplus parts" and "used surplus parts". A part does not have to be new and unused to be considered surplus. The report does not mention that used parts were used, but it also does not state new parts were used either. The word "surplus" does not automatically refer to new stock, just stock that is no longer needed. If you buy a surplus WW2 rifle from the EE, is it going to be new. Odds are it will be used, but it is still classified as surplus.

As for barrels, there actually was a company in the US that made brand new 8mm barrels for the 1919 from blanks, since there was a demand for 8mm barrels, but not enough surplus barrels to meet the demand.


Oh well. We can agree to disagree. One thing we can agree on, is that the RCMP tech branch has screwed things up again.
 
CanAm said:
Thanx. Are those for the semi version? I cannot seem to access them.
Click to expand...

I don't actually know. It does not say anywhere on the site whether they are military prints or semi prints.

It is worth noting that they have complete 1919A4 prints on the site as well. Complete right down to every pin and rivet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom