My STEN project...

Given that a stripped Mk. II/V magazine housing is deemed to be the receiver, any part thereof would be part of a receiver.
The magazine housing of the BD-3008 is deemed to be the receiver. Based on this interpretation, the magazine housing box of a Mk. III Sten would be the receiver, even if separate from the tubular casing.
Probably the best thing to do would be to get a ruling. Bill Etter is the senior tech. and would be the person to ask.
US BATFE will accept a rewelded receiver as new construction. The RCMP will not.
 
tiriaq said:
Given that a stripped Mk. II/V magazine housing is deemed to be the receiver, any part thereof would be part of a receiver.
Click to expand...

Do you know for sure it's only the stripped mag housing that's the receiver ?

if that is the case then all that needs to be made to register a sten is the box section tube and the tube that slides over the receiver, much the same as AR 15 lowers.
 
Isn't that what NavyShooter did in this thread? Registered the mag. housing as a stripped receiver, and then subsequently had the registration amended to reflect that there was now a complete firearm?
There are a couple of potential complications though.
What is the stripped receiver registered as? A restricted firearm using the SAS operating system? This is what NavyShooter did, and he has posted the related FRT number - for a restricted firearm using the SAS mechanism.
What if the intent was to complete the firearm using the SAS mechanism, but with a 18.6" barrel. This would require creation of a new FRT entry, for a non-restricted firearm. Would the FRT number be the same, but with a new -x number to denote a variation?
Suppose the stripped receiver was registered as using the SAS system. What if the firearm were then completed with a different operating system? The FRT entry for the SAS mechanism would no longer be relevant, and a different FRT number would have to be created.
If a stripped mag. housing was registered as a SAS system receiver, and was subsequently assembled as a complete firearm which did not use the SAS system, the registration would be fraudulent. Falsification of a registration is an offence, is it not?
Do I know for sure that its only the stripped mag. housing that is the receiver? As far as I know, that is the current interpretation that is being applied.
A call to Bill Etter would determine exactly what the position of the RCMP is.
 
This had been a most interesting thread. I applaud your skills and perseverance on the project. Myself, I can’t hammer a nail without it
bending, so the watch you manufacture a workable firearm that I once fired, was a wonder in itself.

Cheers

Mike
 
I think the easiest route to legaly building something OTHER than an SAS3 Sten would be to register the stripped receiver using the existing number to get it on the books and then consult the RCMP and CFO when you are nearing completion of the build of the rest of the gun. Bear in mind that if the RCMP lab doesn't like it, it WILL get confiscated. This is a risk an open-bolt builder will have to realize and accept.

The more I look into it, I think the in addiiton to modified internals, a semi builder will probably also have to weld the trigger and maybe sear pins permanently into the gun so that the disconnector cannot be tampered with in the future.
 
claven

as you likely know the rcmp require it to not be readily convertable to FA

like my 1919 semi

the ORIG bolt the sear slot was milled out to a larger size for semi, making the install of orig FA sear IMPOSSIBLE. the bolt is also thinner as the reciever is thinner then the orig

unaltered FA parts will not fit

so for the sten open bolt a smaller dia bolt/tube would be best and make your own trigger group up so FA is not easy to do

this way unaltered FA parts could not just be swapped in at will and should keep rcmp happy but you never know untill they examine it and make a ruleing
 
Claven2 said:
I think the easiest route to legaly building something OTHER than an SAS3 Sten would be to register the stripped receiver using the existing number to get it on the books and then consult the RCMP and CFO when you are nearing completion of the build of the rest of the gun. Bear in mind that if the RCMP lab doesn't like it, it WILL get confiscated. This is a risk an open-bolt builder will have to realize and accept.
Click to expand...

Confiscatethe uncontrolled parts ?

Claven2 said:
The more I look into it, I think the in addiiton to modified internals, a semi builder will probably also have to weld the trigger and maybe sear pins permanently into the gun so that the disconnector cannot be tampered with in the future.
Click to expand...

That makes sense and it is easy to do.
 
contact148:

Actually, I hope to be able to use an original unaltered bolt. My design will not depend upon the bolt to determine its status as full or semi auto, rather all my mods will be to the fire control group.

Basically, I have welded in blocks to prevent the sear slot from being filed out to the FA size. I have also lathed out the selector switch so it can't press on the disconnector and pinned and welded it into the receiver so it cannot be removed and an unaltered one installed.

Once the gun is bead blasted and the internals cleaned up, I intend to tack weld the trigger pin and sear pin to the receiver housing so that these parts cannot be removed and swapped around, altered, etc.

I do not intend to weld the cover on, as I suspect the RCMP will want to inspect he internals. If they give me any grief over the cover being removable, I will weld it on too to further prevent tampering, but I think they will want to see the internals first.

Bear in mind, I am not advising anyone to follow the above plan. It is not aproved yet and may never be, but I certainly intend to find out if this acceptable or not by submitting it for an FRT number.

Sadly, I'm stalled at present as I'm missing some key parts and the usual supplier is in Afghanistan until the new year...
 
contact148 said:
SNIP ... the rcmp require it to not be readily convertable to FA

like my 1919 semi

the ORIG bolt the sear slot was milled out to a larger size for semi, making the install of orig FA sear IMPOSSIBLE. the bolt is also thinner as the reciever is thinner then the orig

unaltered FA parts will not fit ... SNIP
Click to expand...

contact148 would you decide to make a tutorial on that M1919 build, I'd love to ask you permission to translate it either here, or on milsurps and on a french forum called extreme-precision.forum-2007.com/ .

The SA Sten tut I am presently working on has brought a lot of viewers on the french forum and I hope, a few on milsurps too.


J. Savoie
 
J. Savoie said:
contact148 would you decide to make a tutorial on that M1919 build, I'd love to ask you permission to translate it either here, or on milsurps and on a french forum called extreme-precision.forum-2007.com/ .

The SA Sten tut I am presently working on has brought a lot of viewers on the french forum and I hope, a few on milsurps too.


J. Savoie
Click to expand...


I did NOT build my own 1919 semi I was merly pointing out the mods done to make it not readily convertable to FA

POB

he cant just build an open bolt gun and go play

NO open bolt stens are approved by the rcmp yet. while yes he could build one once he had permission it would NO longer be an SAS sten and would have to be submitted to the rcmp for testing and a new FRT# would have to be created this would take months to a year or MORE

navyshooter whats the gun doing/not doing?? maybe just neds adjustment
 
Last edited:
This is a sten

bd3008_rohr


http://www.ssd-weapon.com/engl_web/produkte_en/bd3008_en/bd3008_en.htm
 
Last edited:
You could use your magwell on one of those, cut a bolt in half give it a twist and weld it together and your good to go
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom