PPSh 41 build--Shotgun News

Michael J said:
Hello, new guy here,
Click to expand...

Tiriaq has already called it, but Hi (and Bye) Spencer.

The problem with all your theories are that they have to pass through the RCMP sooner or later. Your views of where the goalposts are are likely not where the RCMP believe they are, and even if they are, just as you are about to score a TD, they will move.

It must be time consuming to be having to keep changing your IP address, and making up new profiles all the time.
 
Oh okay, well just applying what i have learned and read on some non-canadian forums, and seeing if the same loophole would apply here too. Guess not :(...

stencollector said:
It must be time consuming to be having to keep changing your IP address, and making up new profiles all the time.
Click to expand...

Is this comment directed for me, or somebody else? Umm, is it a joke, or are mistaking me for somebody?
 
stencollector said:
Some of us may be mistaking you for someone else. If you are not a know it all Limey from Northern Sask, then accept my apology.
Click to expand...

Thought maybe this forum was just a tough crowd lol! Absolutely no problem sir :D. Just a question, who is this "Limey" character?


If you would like to verify my identity, feel free to lookup my post count and/or forum signup dates on either the 2 forums in my signature, i can assure any non-believers that i have been "michael j" for a while ;)!

edit: sorry if it came off as "know it all", but in most cases, i have trained myself to describe things, as if speaking to 5 year olds. This is no offense to any of you, its just, most people i talk to about guns, don't know jack themselves lol. So, not only do i provide my "ideas", but i like to provide enough information , to sort of help non-gun-enthusiasts get the idea of what i am saying. I guess that is not required here, as you all seem to know the laws well enough, that i don't have to explain anything, to try to support my proposed theories :).
 
Last edited:
Whatever.

So if the design was used for the original trigger system, except the capability for F/A fire wasn't built into the design, does anyone think the CFC verifiers would tolerate it?

I get the idea they don't even like internal similarities. I guess it would have to be altered enough that original F/A internals couldn't be fitted.
 
H Wally said:
I get the idea they don't even like internal similarities. I guess it would have to be altered enough that original F/A internals couldn't be fitted.
Click to expand...

Not sure how this would be done in canada, but for most sa smg's produced on gun building forums (primarily tube based guns), from what i've seen, semi auto designs do incorporate reduced id's. Bolts are then turned down to fit reduced id's. Another method would be to use some sort of "rail" method. This looks more complicated, and i'm not entirely sure how this works.

I asked around about the ppsh41's, and there are 2 semi auto designs apparently (probably more, but this is just what i read). One uses a hammer setup, while the other uses a different means of striking the firing pin onto cartridge. The hammer-based designs apparently are the ones that do not misfire or mess up as often as the other design.
Hope this helps whoever is wanting to build this a little bit.
 
H Wally said:
Whatever.

So if the design was used for the original trigger system, except the capability for F/A fire wasn't built into the design, does anyone think the CFC verifiers would tolerate it?
Click to expand...

I think they would have no choice if it were built with a new receiver, and could not 'easily' be converted to full auto.

A firearm built to the above standards would be a civilian version that meets the criteria set by the CFC.
 
:)well you know what they say about assuming......:D


IF you would prefer to NOT lose your face to a bolt (a heavy bolt at that) flying back thru the reciever you would not use plastic


the rear also holds the upper reciever down in place under some pressure

I would be very concerned useing anything but a 1 piece reciever
 
I think this whole closed bolt & reduced ID thing is a US requirement that the firearm NOT be easy to convert to full auto. I can't find any law in Canada with those requirements. In fact the CFC may not like it but I'm sure you could build an open bolt SMG that was just like a CA SMG, BUT because it was a brand new receiver and had NEVER fired full auto, it would be legal. Remember the CA stuff is illegal due to the fact it was at one time a machine gun, NOT because its easy to convert back to full auto. For an example of this think of those legal open bolt stens & MP38 which are very close to a CA Sten or MP38.
 
I thought they would just argue the design was unacceptable because it was too close to the original, as I don't think they actually need to give a good reason to deny acceptance (aka, ruling Dragunov as an ak variant, that MP5 .22 as a prohib H&K variant even though it's certainly not etc).

That could well be their influence on my thought simply because they don't like it though.

Basically what you're saying is that it's possible a fixed pin open firing PPSH bolt could be acceptable if the trigger assembly were only capable of semi auto, and none of the parts were original PPSH right?
 
Last edited:
Yes. It could be. A possibility. Not a given. Don't think of this in terms of the AK business. The AK is a named prohib. There are others. You cannot build something that would be deemed a variant of a named prohib.
 
Mmm. I assumed the ppsh was a named prohib. Yet another case of assuming!

Any chance mags for these could be found somewhere/imported? I know there isn't a market for them, but would be interesting.

Alternatively I guess if a mock drum mag were made, you could build it to take pistol mags.
 
I bet Marstar can supply 5/whatever magazines.
Go to the CFC website, you can look up all the named prohibs.
 
MarkdevCanada said:
I think this whole closed bolt & reduced ID thing is a US requirement that the firearm NOT be easy to convert to full auto. I can't find any law in Canada with those requirements. In fact the CFC may not like it but I'm sure you could build an open bolt SMG that was just like a CA SMG, BUT because it was a brand new receiver and had NEVER fired full auto, it would be legal. Remember the CA stuff is illegal due to the fact it was at one time a machine gun, NOT because its easy to convert back to full auto. For an example of this think of those legal open bolt stens & MP38 which are very close to a CA Sten or MP38.
Click to expand...

Hmmmmm. Once again - what's the actual rules in regards to this? IE - if one were to make a completely new design of sub gun that fired from open bolt with fixed pin, and only capable of doing it for semi auto, would there be any rules they could cite for not allowing it?

From there, if it happend to look like something else externally, well, that'd be coincidence wouldn't it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom