OAL and telescoping/folding stock

H

hkr

Regular
Rating - 100%
17   0   0
Location
CR
I saw mention of this in another thread but didn't want to hijack it. They were talking about an underfolding stock on a survival rifle that would cover the trigger guard to prevent it being fired in the folded position, and that it could therefor be less than 26" folded and remain non-restricted.

From my reading of the law, that sounds like it would be ok. Which got me thinking about the telescoping shotgun stock I designed last year but didn't make because it involved too much complex machining. At that time I was designing it to have a collapsed OAL of 26". But now I realize I could make it even more compact if it collapsed so that the sides of the hollow stock covered the trigger guard, and only exposed the trigger after the stock had reached 26". It would have to be designed so that the stock couldn't be removed without also removing the pistol grip. So some parts would have to be welded or riveted to accomplish this I guess.

Do you guys think this would work to retain non-restricted status in a more compact package? Or could they argue that it strays too far from the intent of the law, if it can be deployed to extended, fireable position rapidly with one hand?

I have a dream. A dream of carrying a non-restricted 8.5" grizzly in a drop leg holster :D.
 
i discussed this with a firearms technician and he was of the opinion that it would be legal but he wanted to see the finished product before committing to a definite answer .i think the idea is sound from a legal point of view.perhaps a pivoting stock might work but the stumbling block is to get it non functional before the 26 inch length is reached.the toz 106 works on this principle but the cfc tells me it is restricted.there was a single shot gun manufactured in the states that folded in two and was non functional so that is another avenue to be explored .make a stock and let the firearms techs have a look. the worst they can do is say no.if you get something made up you might have a marketable product.
 
Interesting, thanks for that info. Maybe the toz can function with the stock only partly folded and that's why it's restricted. I wonder if locking the safety on would be considered sufficient, if the stock couldn't be retracted with the safety off. I'd hate to put a bunch of work into something that wasn't going to be approved but I guess I could make something more easily if I wasn't concerned about aesthetics just to get the mechanism verified.

On another length related note, I know you can only legally attain a shorter barrel if it is manufactured, but has that changed with the demise of the registry? How would they be able to tell the difference between a barrel that was cleanly modified and a shorter factory one that was purchased used?
 
i put a remington factory 870 barrel in a lathe and removed all of the markings on it and after i had finished i had a unique piece but i lacked the chamber length markings and the remington name . this barrel is legal length at 18.5. if it was made in a shorter length it would also be legal but there is no way on earth that i would remove the markings as you would have a tough time proving you had not cut it down.removal of the registry does not effect the law on barrel length. do not do it as it is jail time if convicted .
 
Fair enough I'm not planning on doing this as I don't have any length to cut on my 14". But I still don't get how they would distinguish between a factory short barrel and a cut off one, when there are short barrels commercially available and the only markings on it are '12GA 3"'? Is the onus on you to prove it by having a receipt etc. for the barrel? And is the reverse then possible, that they could claim you cut it down when it's actually a factory short?
 
how much shorter could you get it than 26" if collapsed???
would an extra few inches be worth:

1. more complex design
2. *possible* legal issues based on LEO 'interpretation'
3. inability to be fired when folded

?
 
It would depend on the firearm in question and your length requirements I suppose. Assuming the grip was fixed, then on my 14" barrel the total length would be around 24". 22.5" for a 12.5" barrel and 18.5" for an 8.5" barrel. If the grip also slid forward (granted more complex) then you could knock off another 2" from those numbers probably.

I realize there is something to be said for simplicity when it comes to a firearm you are depending on to function 100%, so that is a valid point. As is the risk of legal issues even if you were ok in the end - no one wants to go through that. I guess you would have to weigh those factors against the final design and length and decide if it was worth it.

I don't see the inability to fire when folded as a drawback. Obviously it would slow your reaction time but if I was in a situation where I may need it I would have it already extended and be carrying it or have it slung.

For myself, the factory stock makes the oal 34", and I can't put a folding stock on because it will be too short. So for this particular firearm I could just make the slide stop at 26" and the 2-4" less probably wouldn't be worth it. But if it's successful then I would pick up an 8.5" grizzly and install it on that, making the length reduction more significant and potentially worth the drawbacks you mentioned. There are some areas where I have hiked or plan on hiking that I can't openly carry at the start or on certain sections. And the shorter it is the easier it is to slip into the pack. So if I could build this successfully then it would be worth it to me.

Edit: Also, I think this could have even more potential for length reduction on a firearm with a shorter action than the 870. I was surprised I hadn't seen this done before given the interest in shorties and skill of some of the members here. And I have been lurking for a while, despite my low post count :).
 
Can you get written confirmation that the CFO or firearms techs approve of a specific modification? If you had a signed letter that says they (RCMP for all intensive purposes) approves of your specific design then you would be gtg. Failing that, it would be up to the LEO to decide if your legal or not. At least until court, if it goes that far. I would call the CFO and talk to them about it. We can sit here and speculate all we want but in the end we dont make the decisions.
 
Good point. I will call them next week. I would definitely try to get something in writing once I had a prototype built, but I suspect they wouldn't commit without actually having it to look at, based on what farmer47 said. But can't hurt to ask.

Does anyone know if they do need to look at it in person, would I have to ship it to New Brunswick or are there techs at each provincial CFO office?
 
I got the green light to build a prototype! Called the CFC today and spoke with a tech. I'm paraphrasing but he said that as long as the gun doesn't fire with a round in the chamber and the stock collapsed that it's acceptable. Also that permanence isn't an issue - the mechanism can be screwed on, it doesn't have to be welded or riveted. I double checked on this point, and he said they only evaluate the firearm in its assembled form, and as for how easy it is to remove the lockout mechanism, "we don't get into that". Obviously if you used duct tape or something, they would probably take issue with that ;). He said as long as it's not a bullpup, "we're pretty relaxed". Reminded me that I would still have to follow the rules re barrel length, and wished me good luck (hopefully not sarcastically!).

I forgot to ask about the process for approval once I have a prototype built, and about getting written approval to cover myself if I ever have to explain it to LE. Will call back about that later this week, can only sit on hold for so long in a day.

This made my monday, gotta love loopholes :D.

Edit: I also mentioned a few of the different ways of preventing the firearm from firing that I have been considering and he didn't jump on any of them as being unacceptable. So I think they just chamber a round and pull the trigger with the stock closed (or as soon as it retracts past 26", which is significant from a design perspective), and if it doesn't fire you are good to go. Anyone know a good patent lawyer? jk..kind of.
 
Man, overwhelmed with too many projects on the go... anyway, this one is still in the works. Got a Hogue pistol grip to build on. And picked up a few different profiles of aluminum today to try for the rails. I'm leaning towards the round, I think it'll look better.

Either way, planning on having the rail in line with the bore, so recoil goes straight back and so that the action can be opened and closed with the stock collapsed.

Also came up with a new idea for guiding the rail. Instead of a hole that guides it, there could be a slot cut for a guide piece to go inside, sort of like a single t-track. This will keep things slimmer and cleaner looking.

rail1.jpg


SDC11619.jpg


SDC11623.jpg


SDC11625.jpg


SDC11627.jpg


SDC11628.jpg


SDC11630.jpg


SDC11631.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom