Shouldering Arm Braces.

[root]

:rockout:

Fair warning, root . . . I'm gonna kiss you on the lips the next time I see you.

Attached is another version of the letter. It's three pages rather than one, your choice which one you want. This mofo is getting printed and put in my range bag, for damned sure!

Took us 8 posts to go gay. We are slipping.

[XDM9cWA]

anybody here want to write the ATF and ask an opinion on making the M92 with the brace into a firearm by adding a VFG?
I'm not really sure how to go about doing that..

Well, are you welding a muzzle device on it to ensure you are at 26" or better?

no.. it's already 26.5 inches with the stock barrel and century brace attached..

[root]

anybody here want to write the ATF and ask an opinion on making the M92 with the brace into a firearm by adding a VFG?
I'm not really sure how to go about doing that..

Well, are you welding a muzzle device on it to ensure you are at 26" or better?

no.. it's already 26.5 inches with the stock barrel and century brace attached..

Is it? I never sat down to measure it. Well then, the only question becomes if the brace is attached enough for the ATF.

That would be what you would want to focus on in the letter.

[XDM9cWA]

anybody here want to write the ATF and ask an opinion on making the M92 with the brace into a firearm by adding a VFG?
I'm not really sure how to go about doing that..

Well, are you welding a muzzle device on it to ensure you are at 26" or better?

no.. it's already 26.5 inches with the stock barrel and century brace attached..

Is it? I never sat down to measure it. Well then, the only question becomes if the brace is attached enough for the ATF.

That would be what you would want to focus on in the letter.

exactly...

I got curious when I stored it in the safe and it was almost as tall as my bull pups.. got the tape measure and got a bit over 26 inches.. probably even more like 26.7 with the muzzle device removed...

@Root -- care to send the letter to the ATF?

key point is -- does the VFG negate the purpose of the brace? -- personally I don't think so. you can shoot the rifle with the brace in one arm and the other arm as a support..

and the other issue, is do they consider the brace attached appropriately since it's only pressure fitted or should it be welded/screwed into place for it to count...

from what I know even if the stock is quick release, as long as it's not left in the illegal configuration, there is no issue... but as it is, the ATF can make up their own decisions, so it would be nice if we had an official statement..

thanks in advance..

[A.O.]

Or we can just muster all however many million strong we are as gun owners and abolish all these stupid laws...

[never_to_much]

Or we can just muster all however many million strong we are as gun owners and abolish all these stupid laws...

Love the idea and I wish it could happen.

[MadPick]

Here's a good video related to the recent ATF ruling about shouldering the wrist brace:

[A.O.]

I'm still in the, "Don't flaunt it" crowd. I love the brace on my AR pistol. Still thinking I'm going to go form 1 on my AK. The brace is less stable and comes loos after 2 mags on the AK. Also, it puts my cheek rest quite a bit lower than on my AR. YRMV

[XDM9cWA]

. The brace is less stable and comes loos after 2 mags on the AK. Also, it puts my cheek rest quite a bit lower than on my AR. YRMV

not sure why yours is coming loose.. we rocked at least 5 magazines through, rapid fire to the point the handguards were steaming and it didn't get loose at all...

and while everybody has a different body profile, the cheekweld and LOP is just perfect for me with the brace.. YMMV

[A.O.]

I've tightened my grip screw so tight that I'm worried it's gonna strip. In retrospect, I don't understand why they did a fork design instead of a hole shaped like the pistol grip mount. Maybe there is too much variance in them to standardize it.

[XDM9cWA]

I've tightened my grip screw so tight that I'm worried it's gonna strip. In retrospect, I don't understand why they did a fork design instead of a hole shaped like the pistol grip mount. Maybe there is too much variance in them to standardize it.

interesting... maybe getting some sandpaper and roughing up the plate on the brace may help? mine has held on really well...

I would put some high temp epoxy between the plate and receiver if you're really worried..

as for the fork design, has to do with the M92 PAP's.. they can't accept the hole designs, only the fork.. and that's kinda the market for these...

which AK are you using it on?

[A.O.]

It's a pap. Just can't seem to keep it tight. I'm seriously looking at moving forward with my conversion though, so it's a temporary fix.

[XDM9cWA]

It's a pap. Just can't seem to keep it tight. I'm seriously looking at moving forward with my conversion though, so it's a temporary fix.

a side folder would really be nice on these...

[Fungunnin]

this part is very important... the brace as designed and manufactured is considered a brace...

modifying it in any way other than what the manufacturer sold it as and designed it to be installed, even as simple as adding a filler or a spacer or any other item that changes the original design/application including trying to move it back so it sticks out rearwards more than normal, can be construed as you modifying the part and therefore you are now the manufacturer of a redesigned/modified part that is based off the original item...

The approved item is the rubber brace itself. Regardless of how you have it mounted, as long as it still functions as intended by the manufacture and is in its original configuration then you are not manufacturing anything new.

Sent from my Motorola Flip phone.

[XDM9cWA]

this part is very important... the brace as designed and manufactured is considered a brace...

modifying it in any way other than what the manufacturer sold it as and designed it to be installed, even as simple as adding a filler or a spacer or any other item that changes the original design/application including trying to move it back so it sticks out rearwards more than normal, can be construed as you modifying the part and therefore you are now the manufacturer of a redesigned/modified part that is based off the original item...

The approved item is the rubber brace itself. Regardless of how you have it mounted, as long as it still functions as intended by the manufacture and is in its original configuration then you are not manufacturing anything new.

Sent from my Motorola Flip phone.

No disagreement there... Just don't modify it by adding pieces or changing it physically...

How you mount it is your call... Probably ok but I'm not going to keep pushing the envelope... Feel free to do so