Who is buying a Type81?

Hitzy said:
The original import way back was based on the story that they were completed receivers but never assembled therefore could not be c/a. The RCMP was fine with this for a decade then reversed course. The majority of these guns are probably this configuration.
Click to expand...

Not exactly, RCMP with someone's help found that indeed 2005 and 2006 marked receivers were never assembled, however later one were pulled from select-auto rifles, thus 2005 and 2006 rifles kept their classification, but later were declared prohibited as converted auto. In this case RCMP lab is not be blamed.
 
cranswick said:
no, but the cover has been posted online...

20017828_1534183896642010_1180825125224272289_o.jpg
Click to expand...

Just got mine! Thanks P&D!
 
Horilka said:
Not exactly, RCMP with someone's help found that indeed 2005 and 2006 marked receivers were never assembled, however later one were pulled from select-auto rifles, thus 2005 and 2006 rifles kept their classification, but later were declared prohibited as converted auto. In this case RCMP lab is not be blamed.
Click to expand...

The receivers are identical f/a receivers regardless, which is what the RCMP are using now to deem rifles prohibited. The only thing that saved all those guns was the CPC GOV at the time.
I had one from the very first batch of VZ58's imported, and it was a joke... completely used and abused with a big blob of epoxy where the fun parts use to go. No big secret what they were.
 
Hitzy said:
The receivers are identical f/a receivers regardless, which is what the RCMP are using now to deem rifles prohibited. The only thing that saved all those guns was the CPC GOV at the time.
I had one from the very first batch of VZ58's imported, and it was a joke... completely used and abused with a big blob of epoxy where the fun parts use to go. No big secret what they were.
Click to expand...

Receivers are identical physically, but not legally. That's the point. Once fully assembled into SA receiver will be deemed prohibited. Same receiver never assembled will remain just a part, and if manufacturer finishes it into semi, then it's a legal semi.

Sorry that I went off topic.
 
cranswick said:
do you have a subscription? Or did you pick it up somewhere? I gotta go check my mail box...
Click to expand...

I have been phoning P&D Enterprises asking about the "caliber magazine", a confusing inquiry I am thinking, if you are a gun store. They had some today, so I went over at lunch and got a copy. Great LGS in Edmonton.
 
Those groups are... unimpressive

Perhaps the practical accuracy is better than an AK, but the mechanical accuracy doesn't appear to be. :confused:
 
Claven2 said:
Without optics, how do we know the tester isn't just a mediocre shot? :)
Click to expand...
that's what I'm saying...

Hitzy said:
You don't cover your target with the front sight post when shooting irons...
Click to expand...
I never said that you would...the point is it's nearly impossible to achieve 1-2 moa on irons for most people...so when people are saying 5 moa is trash, it sure is but on iron sights and unknown shooting conditions I.e. From a bench, vice, etc. 5 moa means nothing to me...I can shoot 5 moa all day long with an sks from a bench and bag with irons...without optics it's not even worth reporting really.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom