Semi-Sten: CFC AND RCMP approved and Home at Last

[tiriaq]

IF, and this is a big IF, a foundry could be found which was prepared to do the castings, bolts could be made by investment casting. Final finishing could be done by conventional machining, but the feed horns, and other areas requiring milling could be cast in. Of course, the castings are no better than the dies used to produce the waxes.
Most foundries capable of producing quality steel pieces aren't interested in messing around with relatively short custom runs.

 

[Claven2]

The bronze ones would be the easiest to cast as you could sand cast them in a home foundry, but realistically, unless you are making a big quantity, it would be easier to jig your lathe and mill and machine them.

 

[stencollector]

Even if you did find a mill to run you off 100 bolts, could you imagine the cost? There are already guys complaining on this thread that a closed bolt semi sten is going to cost them $600-800 to make.

 

[tiriaq]

Seamless tubing was not commonly used for UK Sten manufacture. Producing seamless tubing was a manufacturing bottleneck in WW2 Britain. Seamed tubes were far more common. A section of seamed tube could be used, or a flat punched out complete with cutouts, and then rolled and welded. Lines Brothers used the standing seam for their Mk. III production. The standing seam no doubt suited Lines' production facilities. They developed the Mk. III and submitted it; it was not developed at the request of the British MOD. The standing seam was convenient for manufacturing purposes, but was also functional. In addition to producing a front sight, the rear end of the rib engages the head casing at the rear sight, serving to index the tube to the head casing. This would contribute to rapid assembly, the parts would be self indexing.
For reproduction purposes, various tubing products are available. One US CGN member has reported that his Mk. II was assembled using tube from Speedy Muffler. DOM tube, which is usually a seamed product could be used, as could seamless.
A closed bolt action could contribute to enhanced accuracy at the cost of a loss of authenticity. Drilling, tapping, altering a bolt handle, and mounting a commercial scope will enhance the shooting properties of an ex-service rifle, but will also destroy its authenticity and originality. Its really a matter of choices.

 

[UCSPanther]

"I should point out that a M3 receiver can't be machined, it has to be formed in dies that are not available, otherwise it should be doable. Too cost prohibitive to make the dies though.

A Lanchester requires a mould and the ability to melt and pour wax. A one-off should be doable by sand-casting IF you have a dewat to use as a pattern.

The MP38 receiver is possible to make, but would be EXTREMELY difficult to machine. Think big CNC knee mill, expensive dividing head, lots of tooling, a big, long lathe and hours upon hours to do a "one-off". Cheaper and easier to just buy the SSD made one, unless you have a big CNC mill and the talen to program such a complex part.

The MP40 is a stamped part. Again, I suspect that it would be difficult to build properly, though you could probably machine a reasonable facsimile from seamless tubing... but then parts kit availability enters into things."

Where there's a will, there's a way. Remember that they did make the parts and tooling for these guns back in the old days when CNC milling machines were something that was only out of a science fiction movie at the time.

The lancaster would be a neat one to make a semi-auto repro of, but finding a dewat might be hard because the gun itself was never made in large quantities and therefore, quite rare.

 

[tiriaq]

This only indexes the reciever tube, not the barrel. I bore sighted mine before fixing the collars and found that it was a mile out. I had the original type "rivets" which really don't do an awfull lot, and decided not to use them as they do nothing to centre the collars in the reciever tube. I found by using steel pop rivets I could centre the collars properly and get the barrel precisely aligned. They are also much stronger than the original rivets as they pull from either side. The original rivets really just studs. I soldered the collars as win the originals when I had everything set up properly ( I had the stuff at hand ) but I am sure that it's not necessary.

For manufacturing purposes it indexes the mechanical components, sights on top, seaar opening properly aligned with the trigger group, magazine housing at 90 degrees to the head casing assembly, bolt tracks properly relative to the trigger group. When you stripped the remains of the casing off the barrel collars, and removed the barrel, did you notice that the original drive rivets were expanded on the inside, as well as being domed on the outside? They weren't just poked into holes. The collars are a pretty tight fit in the original casing, I don't think that the collars could be shifted at all for barrel alignment. Generally speaking, casing to collars to barrel fit was sufficiently concentric that p.o.i. was usually within acceptable limits. There were concerns about zeroing issues with the Mk. III, some guns just were way off, and there was no fix. Another problem with IIIs was that the barrel would loosen in the collars, and could rotate when fired. This gave really erratic zero. The III was phased out of production because basically there were too many issues resulting from its basic design. The Mk. II was considered superior to the III, the V better than either.

 

[tiriaq]

Before automation, factories depended on large numbers of machine tools, many of which performed only a single operaton, and a lot of personnel. In the book, "The Bren Gun Saga" there are photos of the machine floor of Enfield and Long Branch. LB was very modern for its time, most machines were individually powered, with their own electric motors. Enfield was still operating with overhead shafting and leather belts. Turret lathes, screw machines, and self feeding lathes were state of the art. Some of the machines used by H&R when they were filling their M-14 contract were made in the 19th century.
There is a world of difference though between manufacuring something, and making a one-off reproduction.
There are all sorts of historic arms which would be worth reproducing. It just isn't that easy.
A MP-18 is a milestone in small arms evolution. A repro could even use original snail drums or Luger magazines. But even though it uses a tubular receiver, making a reproduction would be a challenge.
The BD-3008 is about as elemental a repeating firearm as has ever been made. And the high quality German repro is $2500. Sure they could be made and sold for a lot less, IF the demand was there for thousands of them.

 

[MRCLARK]

There is no reason an M3 replica couldn't be made with seamless tubing. No it wouldn't be historically perfect but it would look and work just fine. The Valkrie Arms M3 is made from tubing. Beggars shouldn't be choosers.

I'd take one

 

[tiriaq]

Hope she was the one holding your Mk. III!
The problem was getting the attention to detail. Lines frequently requested a relaxation of tolerances to facilitate quantity production. They did make over 800 000 of these in less than 2 years. As tooling wore, it became more difficult to hold spec. Production was very organized, and these guns weren't set up by hand, and lovingly adjusted. If a Mk. III barrel was damaged, the gun was not rebarrelled, it was broken for salvage. The barrels were just trapped between the collars, they weren't really fixed to anything. If a barrel did come loose, a tack weld would be the remedy. I don't know if this was authorized or not.

 

[Claven2]

I wear a variety of her clothing when she is not around.

I'm SOOO not going there - you just made it TOO easy.

 

[hedgehog]

 

[aftermidnight]

the only thing scarier than those shorts is that 'yum yum' smile...lol

 

[tiriaq]

If it had not been deemed acceptable I would not have made it.

That is encouraging - in Stencollector's experience, the Mk. II magazine housing was deemed to be the receiver, and this delayed the final registration of his SAS.
In contrast, the Mk. III magazine housing is not deemed to be either the receiver, nor part of the receiver.
This makes a Mk. III reproduction much easier to make than a Mk. II, assuming a parts kit is at hand.

 

[J. Savoie]

Spencer, if you do get your Sten registered properly (for good), you'll open the way for many other Mk3 SAS for sure! Even though it won't be historically accurate, I'd make one with an 18½ '' bbl and a fake silencer (Unless being legally possible to have a shorter bbl as the total lenght of an 18½ inches bbled Sten will be more than 23 inches.

Well, Lets see how it all come to be. I'm a patient man


J. Savoie

 

[Claven2]

Problem with the MkIII semi-auto is that the only way to get a MkIII kit is to buy a $400 dewat from collector's source and rob the back half off it. Then you still need to source an original bolt. Good luck - this is near impossible for most of us. Building a bolt is maybe easier?

 

[Suputin]

To be honest I don't want a silencer anyway.

HERETIC! .... Burn the heretic before he breeds!

The only "license" to get a silencer that I know of is to be an LEO. It's a prohibited device in the firearms act, not a restricted licensable item.

Thats not exactly true. Any government entity from any of the three levels of government may purchase, possess and use silencers. All they need is a Public Agency Number. As well there is a "Prohibited Devices" section available for a Firearms Business Licence. I'm not sure of how they decide who gets this approval but I am pretty sure most of the museums in the country have it. There are a number of business licencees in the country that I am aware of that are licenced to deal in sound suppressors.

FWIW I have 4 sten bolts. Two bronze and two steel. But I'm not selling.

 

[tiriaq]

Stencollector's SAS is a semi auto carbine recognised with a FRT number. The parts used in this particular version would therefore not be parts for a prohibited firearm, but parts for a restricted semi auto. This is the Canadian end of things.
The US State Dept. couldn't are less about Cdn. import rules. As far as they are concerned machine gun parts are machine gun parts, and are subject to US export controls.
At least a Cdn. import permit could be obtained, which might make getting a US export permit possible. But there have been all sorts of reports recently about US authorities just refusing to issue export permits, even though the goods could theoretically be exported if approved.

 

[Suputin]

You only extended the bolt bent and made the cover difficult to remove??!?!!!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!? That's it?!!??

So how is that any different from my 12(3) Sten that I can't take to the range?

IF your gun gets approved as restricted, I think most of the 12(3) Stens in the country would get "converted" to whatever standard your gun is so that owners can take them to the range. I have another 12(3) to keep me in the club but I'd love to be able to take my Sten out for some excercise ... it has been too long.

If the RCMP drop in a normal bolt (and they would), your gun will drop into "go-fast mode". You are admitting as much yourself on another site!!!

There are at least 4 ways to get an open bolt "semi" Sten to fire FA.

 

[tiriaq]

HERETIC! .... Burn the heretic before he breeds!


Thats not exactly true. Any government entity from any of the three levels of government may purchase, possess and use silencers. All they need is a Public Agency Number. As well there is a "Prohibited Devices" section available for a Firearms Business Licence. I'm not sure of how they decide who gets this approval but I am pretty sure most of the museums in the country have it. There are a number of business licencees in the country that I am aware of that are licenced to deal in sound suppressors.

FWIW I have 4 sten bolts. Two bronze and two steel. But I'm not selling.

An individual LEO cannot get a licence, although his agency would be eligible.
There are various categories of business licence authorizatons for the various prohibited devices. I used to have a number of different ones on my licence, never did bother with an authorization for suppressors. Was licenced to gunsmith or sell on consignment all classes of prohib. firearms, though.

Do you have examples of bolt types of bronze bolts? The carbine my friend had used the variation with the simplified feed rails. Interestingly, the bolt was fine, free from wear, but the stamped sear had to be welded over and repaired to stop doubling.

 

[contact148]

the us federal government considers ALL machinegun parts to be just that machinegun parts

you CANNOT export from the us sten parts or ANY other MG part without paperwork

simply saying its for a semiauto version is NOT legal

as stated elsewhere I could NOT I repeat NOT get an export permit for a rivit for my semiauto 1919 the state derpartment gives export permits for MG parts/kits ONLY to LEO or government endusers

it is NOT LEGAL even if its 50 cents the $100.00 limit does NOT apply to MG parts also (does not apply to most gun parts for that matter)

you face fines up into the hundreds of thousands $$$ decades in jail, loss of your car/truck and being banned from the us

canada has also signed the ITAR

Please speak to someone in the
firearms support services branch
royal canadian mounted police

they have been dealing/testing all the homebuilt semi auto versions of FA guns speak to the man in charge