Czechpoint VZ58 Builds?!?!

[cz671]

If your wondering about why their still using chrome lined barrels....well maybe dan from czechpoint got the last original batches from csa or other source that are originally chrome lined...why nitrate when it comes chrome already?  If your wondering about czechpoint chromelined barrels accuracy, here's a group I shot doing a side by side compare with my cz USA vz and vz2008 back in 2011
This is a 10 shot group at 50y,  vz USA cz58 using a vortex sparc reddot



Not the best group, but not bad from A chromelined barrel

[jb2sea]

Do you have the results from the VZ2008?

[RSR]

To be clear, I'm not saying chrome lined barrels are bad.  I'm saying they're no longer the best based upon available options.  Especially US made chrome lined barrels where the chrome is pretty thin...  A lot of the times, nitriding a barrel will completely displace the chrome...

Secondly, with 922r, the VZ2008 and CSA VZ58s have the same number of US made parts.  It's just a question of which parts.  Century uses a US made barrel and receiver.  The Czech guns don't...

Thirdly, I don't like that Czechpoint is the importer, distributor, and sole retailer of these CSA weapons.  As consumers, that's not in our best interest, especially if you're wanting the VZ58 to be more than niche weapon (niche weapons have expensive and limited accessories, etc -- the VZ2008 has done wonders for making folks like manticore actually look at producing things domestically, especially now that Canada has largely ceased VZ58 product manufacture/importation...). 

And to be clear, I'm not saying boycott Czechpoint as that's not a realistic option...  But if I were spending Czechpoint money, I'd personally go the custom build option w/ a CNC Warrior receiver...  And I plan to as my VZ2008 barrels reach their ends of life...  The only gun Czechpoint currently offers that peaks my interest are the carbine pistols, but with the latest Sig Brace letters, I'm waiting as I'm not necessarily sure that it's worth the SBR hassle for me...

[jb2sea]

I'm betting that one ATF letter is killing pistol sales right now! 

I had planned to build a second AR pistol.  But no way I'm taking that chance until things get cleared up with the Sig Brace.  My money will go into other things until that mess is all cleared up.

[RSR]

I'm betting that one ATF letter is killing pistol sales right now! 

I had planned to build a second AR pistol.  But no way I'm taking that chance until things get cleared up with the Sig Brace.  My money will go into other things until that mess is all cleared up.

Same boat.

[Franz Maurer]

I'm betting that one ATF letter is killing pistol sales right now! 

I had planned to build a second AR pistol.  But no way I'm taking that chance until things get cleared up with the Sig Brace.  My money will go into other things until that mess is all cleared up.

Would you please elaborate

What atf letter is that ?

[RSR]

The sum/majority/all of the latest letters coming out of ATF Tech Branch say that mounting pistol braces to one's shoulder is converting the weapon to an SBR, making an illegal SBR...  The only letter I've seen to the contrary is the one that originally allowed sig to sell their first brace/bring it to market... 
The main scary thing here is the "constructive possession" angle rather than necessarily mounting to one's shoulder as that can be avoided if the law changes...  Just owning a sig brace could potentially make you guilty of felony...

Lastest:

Just saw this today:
http://gunssavelives.net/gun-industry/breaking-atf-issues-new-opinion-letter-stating-that-shouldering-sig-brace-is-illegal/

BREAKING: ATF Issues New Opinion Letter Stating That Shouldering Sig Brace Could Be Illegal
DECEMBER 26 2014
[...]
However, several recent letters, including the one that just emerged in the last 24 hours, tends to show that the ATF is changing their tune on shouldering arm braces.
Here is the letter in question which was posted AR15.com earlier today (however the letter seems to be from November). Note paragraph 5 of the 2nd page:
[...]

The Sig Sauer SB-15 pistol stabilizing brace is designed so that a shooter would insert his or her forearm into the device while gripping the pistol's handgrip -- then tighten the Velcro straps for additional support and retention.  As designed, the device provides the shooter with additional support of a firearm while it is still held and operated with one hand  Consequently, a Sig SB-15 shoting brace is not designed or intended for firing a weapon from the shoulder.

Consequently, the attachment of the SB-15 to an AR-type pistol alone; would not change the classification of the pistol to an SBR.  However, if this device, un-modified or modified; is assembled to a pistol and used as a shoulder stock, thus designing or redesigning or making or remaking of a weapon design to be fired from the shoulder; this assembly would constitute the making of a "rifle" as defined in 18 U.S.C. Section 921(a)(7).
[...]
Further, if this device, un-modified or modified; is assembled to a pistol and used as a shoulder stock, in the designing or redesigning or making or remaking of a weapon designed to be fired from the shoulder, which incorporates a barrel length of less than 16 inches; this assemble would constitute the making of a "a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length"; an NFA firearm as defined in 26 U.S.C., Section 5845(a)(3).

[...]
It would seem that all recent letters to the ATF are getting a similar response in regards to braces ? the ATF isn?t cool with it.
[...]
Once again, these are just opinion letters. The real test would come in a criminal court if someone was caught shouldering an AR pistol and arrested.

Click through for more: http://gunssavelives.net/gun-industry/breaking-atf-issues-new-opinion-letter-stating-that-shouldering-sig-brace-is-illegal/

One prior:

I don't think this writer fully understands the ATF shotgun brace decision -- scroll back a few pages for a more nuanced, and I think accurate, discussion of the facts there...

Regardless more of the same on mounting a pistol brace to your shoulder being considered "converting" the weapon to a different class -- this time from a non-NFA to a NFA class vs the shotgun which was from one NFA class to another...

AR Pistol Braces Get Even More Confusing Following Latest ATF Letter
12/20/14

Like the recent shotgun letter, this letter seems to show that the ATF may be backtracking on their original ?intent and use? decisions. The new letter states the following [emphasis added by the ATF]:

Based on our evaluation, FTISB finds that the submitted forearm brace, when attached to a pistol is a ?firearm? subject to the GCA provisions; however, it is not a ?firearm? as defined by the NFA provided that the Blade AR Pistol Stabilizer is used as originally designed and NOT as a shoulder stock.

Of course, as everyone knows ATF letters only apply to the individual products they are referencing. However, it is an interesting datapoint that might show a general change in position from the ATF on forearm braces. I?m not trying to tell anyone what is/is not legal or trying to read the ATF?s mind, just passing along data points.

Click through for more: http://gunssavelives.net/gun-industry/ar-pistol-braces-get-even-more-confusing-following-latest-atf-letter/

And the shotgun one:

ATF changed their mind about the brace on a Shotgun, not on a pistol. I don't see them changing their minds soon.

That particular instance also involved a forward grip on the shotgun, which a SBS can't have.  I you're absolutely right about the brace on a pistol.

The guy already had an "any other weapon" NFA class weapon, for which a foregrip is allowed.  The ATF said mounting the Sig brace to one's shoulder, not to the weapon, is what effectively changed the class from an "any other weapon" to "short barrel shotgun."  Further discussion follows.

Here's the letter in question: http://www.shootingsportsretailer.com/2014/11/19/could-this-mean-the-end-of-the-sig-brace/

I read this as a gamechanger:

However, should an individual utilize the SigTac SB15 pistol staabilizing brace on the submitted sample as a shoulder stock to fire the weapon from the shoulder, this firearm would be classified as a "short-barreled shotgun" as defined in the NFA, 26 U.S.C. SS 5845(a)(1) because the brace has then been made or remade, designed or redesigned form its originally intended purpose.

The letter is now stating that using the Sig Brace as a stock is now in fact for all intents converting the firearm into a separate category NFA firearm per the ATF's view. Whether it's a shotgun or a pistol AR really shouldn't matter in how the ATF interprets the use of this accessory...
To reiterate, it's not the presence of the brace on the weapon, it's the mounting of the brace to the shoulder that resulted it in changing categories. 

My summation of the letter from what can be seen:
What it looks like in this case was that the guy had a legal Any Other Weapon, "AOW." He then asked guidance on adding the Sig Brace. The shotgun would remain an AOW with the Sig Brace installed and used as designed. But use the sig brace as a "stock" (mounting to the shoulder) on the AOW and the AOW in question would then become a Short Barrel Shotgun, "SBS", and you would be in violation of the NFA unless you had in fact registered as a SBS rather than an AOW. So again, just mounting the brace to the shoulder is in effect "converting" your weapon.
Now to what degree the $5 AOW stamp vs the $200 SBS NFA tax stamps affected is unknown... But what is known is that just the act of a mounting a weapon equipped to one's shoulder with a stabilizing brace now at least converts it to a different weapon classification in this particular case per the ATF's most recent ruling. And if previous rulings hold -- if you've ever mounted the Sig Brace to your shoulder, the weapon will forever need to maintain an SBS registration, even if you remove the Sig Brace... Not doing so, or not having a SBS registration prior to mounting to your shoulder, means your committing a felony that the ATF could document, prosecute, and result in you forever losing your ability to order firearms. (Or if you document those actions for them through phone pics or videos, or anything touched by the NSA, all they'd have to do is prosecute.)

AND, IMO this is major, it opens anyone with a sig brace on their weapon to possible charges of "intent to manufacture an illegal weapon" should the ATF decide to make your life miserable.  So if you have a shotgun "pistol" and also own a sig brace you're playing with fire.  Just like if you own an AR and M16 full auto FCG components...

And that's before we even start to worry about mission creep, etc...

More background on ATF shotgun classification:

Previously, shotguns could have barrels of less than 18" in length if they never had a buttstock attached -- b/c only if a shotgun is sold with a buttstock attached does the ATF define it as a "shotgun." Like how you register AR receivers as a pistol but once converted to or registered as a rifle you can't convert back to a pistol w/o filing paperwork with the ATF...
Here's more on the previous shotgun rulings: http://shockwavetechnologies.com/site/?page_id=88
EDIT: Cached version: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:tsRTVeYUL-gJ:shockwavetechnologies.com/site/%3Fpage_id%3D88+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

I get a lot of questions from customers about the ?new? ATF ruling regarding pistol-grip-only (PGO) firearms with 14? barrels that aren?t considered NFA items.

Well, first off, let me say, it?s not a new ruling. It?s the same position that ATF has always taken regarding PGO firearms that fire a fixed shotgun shell that have NEVER had a buttstock attached to them?they?re NOT shotguns! They?re simply firearms. As such, they don?t necessarily need to have 18?+ barrels on them to remain out of the purview of the NFA.

You see, the very definition of a ?shotgun? requires that it be ?designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder?? Without a buttstock ever having been fitted to the PGO firearms in question, they can?t be fired from the shoulder and are therefore not shotguns. Hence, with a 14? barrel, they can?t be considered short-barreled shotguns, as they aren?t shotguns to begin with. Read the full definition of a shotgun here. http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/usc.cgi?ACTION=RETRIEVE&FILE=$$xa$$busc26.wais&start=20391331&SIZE=9737&TYPE=TEXT

PGO firearms that remain longer than 26? in overall length also can?t be defined as AOWs. That?s because the term ?any other weapon? (AOW) means ?any weapon or device capable of being concealed on the person?? And ATF maintains that to be concealed, the firearm needs to be shorter than 26?. Read the full definition of an AOW here. http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/usc.cgi?ACTION=RETRIEVE&FILE=$$xa$$busc26.wais&start=20391331&SIZE=9737&TYPE=TEXT

More on the subject is available in these two letters to Len Savage?the guy who will be making a lot of these non-NFA firearms in the coming months and years:

July 20, 2010 letter from NFA Tech Branch to Mr. Len Savage http://www.nfaoa.org/documents/PistolGrippedShotgunLike.pdf
October 27, 2010 letter from NFA Tech Branch to Mr. Len Savage http://www.nfaoa.org/documents/testttt20001.pdf
Page 1 of third letter  http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d90/rusticarts/RedactedPg1.jpg
Page 2 of third letter http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d90/rusticarts/redactedPg2.jpg
All that said, I?m not a firearms attorney. And I?m not offering legal advice here. I am simply relating things the way I understand them. Be sure you check with all the appropriate agencies.

Now, a pistol-grip-only Mossberg 500 with a 14? barrel and the Raptor Grip installed measures 26.5? in overall length (measured parallel to the bore).

?Marty

So putting the sig brace on a less than 18" barrel shotgun with no buttstock but an overall length of at least 26" -- generally defined as a "firearm" per ATF -- is okay. But mount that Sig brace quipped firearm to you shoulder then it becomes a "shotgun" (or at least apparently per this ruling/letter).

And Black Aces (the guy the letter is too) is doing a lot of innovative shotgun stuff and likely interfaces with the ATF quite frequently on those mods, so it doesn't appear to be some yahoo just wanting to pull the fire alarm: http://www.blackacestactical.com/

[cz671]

Do you have the results from the VZ2008?

Yes I do

[cz671]

I'm betting that one ATF letter is killing pistol sales right now! 

I had planned to build a second AR pistol.  But no way I'm taking that chance until things get cleared up with the Sig Brace.  My money will go into other things until that mess is all cleared up.

Would you please elaborate

What atf letter is that ?

As usual Mac does a great job explaining the current issues regarding the sig brace.  Don't know what's so hard to understand it's sold as an "arm brace". Not shoulder brace/stock

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TYx3A80aBi0

[RSR]

Don't know what's so hard to understand it's sold as an "arm brace". Not shoulder brace/stock

B/c previously they said no matter how the braces were used, including as stocks, they were legal as the ATF did not classify them as stocks and accordingly using them as stocks is not "made or remade, designed or redesigned"  -- most recent letters directly contradict very transparent previous advisement and say in fact mounting to shoulder is now "made or remade, designed or redesigned"

Here's the previous letter:


In MAC's video, go to 7:20 and watch/listen for a minute or so, and then take a look at the latest sig brace:



No more cheek weld enhancement and much less area to absorb recoil into your shoulder on the rear and a complete loss of the typical stock "look."   I think he's spot on for the reclassification speculation...  Which he disagrees with...

Here's the gen 1 for comparison:





Choose or not believe his "fabrication" speculation.  I also think he's reading the letter as the way he wants to read it...  But perhaps I'm overly skeptical...

And I agree with his assessment that buying the brace on a pistol from the factory with a letter for that specific pistol is the way to go...  Building yourself (anything perhaps but an AR15 pistol...) by putting an AR pistol tube on some other "pistol" just so you can install the sig brace, does seem dicey...  Buffer tubes are required for an AR15 to function, not so on many other "pistols."

The thorsden cheek weld setups still look like options though as their purpose is "cheek weld" for the purpose of better aligning sight/sight picture on the pistol tube and not to put to ones shoulder...  And they have ATF letters covering their use on at least the AR platform...  Their letter: http://siterepository.s3.amazonaws.com/2675/atf_responce_letter.pdf

Q5: Would our buffer tube cover with cheek rise cause an AR pistol to be classified as a
short barreted rifle under the National Firearms Act or would it be classified as simply a
cheek rise along with other similar products?
A5: Shoulder stocks normally attach to the receiver of a shoulder-fired firearm.
However, in the case of an AR-type frrearm, such stocks attach to the buffer tube. The
shoulder stock provides a means for the shooter to support the firearm and easily aim it.
FTB finds that the depicted "cheek rest" is not designed to support the AR-15 pistol in
the shoulder of the shooter during firing but, rather, to rest against the shooter's cheek.
Consequently, the attachment of the cheek rest to the AR-type pistol would not change
the classification of the pistol to SBR.

More on their cheek rest setup:

Just came across this -- looks like a great option as well:





Image source and good read: http://www.recoilweb.com/friday-night-gun-porn-compliant-ar-option-and-an-ar-pistol-43401.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHyIoxD8Y1A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NE-JYbgigVw

Stock tube cover -- $26.99 to $36.99 (more expensive having quick detach sling connects)
Saddle adapter kit -- $18.99
Saddle -- $26.49

Should ~$80-$100 delivered.  That is cheaper than the Sig Brace...

http://www.thordsencustoms.com/shop/AR-PISTOL.htm

[jb2sea]

Exactly correct.

They tell us it's OK.  The pistol/Sig brace market explodes.  No telling how many of these things have been sold in the last 10 months.  Now they seem to be backstroking.  What are all the guys with pistols/Sig braces supposed to do if they do in fact say it's not legal? 

I'd love to see us push for getting rid of these stupid SBR rules.  And suppressors too, while we're at it.  Both are very antiquated laws. 

[CitizenPete]

Thordsen has been sold out.  The only thing stopping me from purchasing my next pistol is the availability of the pistol in the US -- if the Thordsen tube is not an option I will SBR it.  Whatever.

Still (STILL) waiting for my tax stamps for my first SBR and suppressor.

[CitizenPete]

Not the best group, but not bad from A chromelined barrel

Better than any group I have ever shot    Impressive in my book -- I couldn't find the tenth hole.

[m3scott]

Do you have the results from the VZ2008?

Yes I do

Will you post said results? 

[cz671]

Do you have the results from the VZ2008?

Yes I do

Will you post said results?

If anything will start a new thread, seems were getting off track on this thread

Back on topic

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/01/05/czechpoint-now-producing-vz-58-rifles-house/