Cost to convert Garand to full auto


PDA






RCBS
August 15, 2011, 09:45 AM
It it a reasonable thing to do or is there something illogical about it beside money?

Not counting the gun, how expensive is the licensing and gunsmithing?

If you enjoyed reading about "Cost to convert Garand to full auto" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
.45Guy
August 15, 2011, 09:47 AM
How much will it cost to invent a time machine to take you back to 1985?

colt1911fan
August 15, 2011, 09:48 AM
I never even thought about that this has my attention. But where a new machine gun cant be manufactured for the public anymore I dont think it possible. Someone who knows more then I do will be along soon.

jogar80
August 15, 2011, 09:55 AM
Don't know how intensive an operation it would be to make the conversion, but it would be an illegal machine gun either way. The rifle in question would have had to be registered as a machine gun before 1984 for it to be a legal conversion today.

MtnCreek
August 15, 2011, 10:00 AM
Assuming it is possible to make a FA Garand, it can be legally done. All you need is a type 07 FFL, SOT 2 tax stamp, ITAR registration and a demo letter from a Gov agency. Simple!:)

Sam1911
August 15, 2011, 10:02 AM
It it a reasonable thing to do or is there something illogical about it beside money?An 8-round full-auto seems to be a bit illogical, but that's up to the user, I guess.

Not counting the gun, how expensive is the licensing and gunsmithing? It is perfectly legal to build a full-auto firearm or to convert one to full-auto. However, that work must be done by a Special Occupational Tax Class 02 manufacturer (who must first hold a Type 007 or 010 Federal Firearms License as a manufacturer).

Also, and more importantly, that gun can never be owned or possessed by anyone who is not a Class 02 manufacturer, Class 03 dealer, or a government agency.

In other words, as a "private citizen" you CANNOT do this. Since 1986 the registry of full-auto guns in private hands has been closed, meaning that you cannot register a new "transferrable" machine gun. You can buy, sell, trade, etc. those in the registry before that date, but cannot add one more to that list. That's why the prices are so astronomically high. Lots of demand, very limited supply.

The costs to set yourself up as an FFL manufacturer and SOT 02, including paying the license fees, insurances, state business license fees, ITAR fees, etc. would run many tens of thousands of dollars and take quite some time. And, you will only be granted those licenses if you are going to be actually "in the business of" making guns for a living. Improving your own collection of toys is not a valid reason.

CraigC
August 15, 2011, 10:03 AM
If you had the proper licensing to do this, you wouldn't be here asking the question. That said, I can't imagine that an 8rd full auto would be much fun.

Carl N. Brown
August 15, 2011, 10:06 AM
May 19, 1986, the NFA registry was closed to new machine guns for private owners.

I suppose if a government agency (police) showed an interest, a properly licensed manufacturer could build an example.

Full auto M1 Garands were experimented with by Army ordnance in WWII and abandoned as a bad idea (see WHB Smith, "Small Arms of the World"). Quite frankly, full auto in .30-06 or 7.62 NATO in a nine pound rifle is not controllable. When Colt made a police version of the 1918 BAR to compete against the Thompson submachine gun, the Colt Monitor was kept at a minimum of sixteen pounds with a Cutts compensator (recoil brake) for controllability.

Jim Watson
August 15, 2011, 10:07 AM
The T20 series LOOKED like full auto M1s but had a lot of changes to design and construction. The T22s from Remington were closer to M1s but still not just a simple conversion to full auto, at least after the first prototypes to let them know what they were dealing with.

A moot point, it would not be a legal project for private ownership.
You would have to be a licensed manufacturer and there would be hoops to jump through even if you were. There is a lot of legal maneuvering behind the scenes on SoG that they don't bore the casual viewer with.

valnar
August 15, 2011, 10:30 AM
That said, I can't imagine that an 8rd full auto would be much fun.

I agree. I don't see the point. Maybe a different gun....sure. ;)

I don't think I would want to feed ($$) the habit of a full-auto .30-06 nor would my shoulder appreciate it. If anything, a M16 or Tommy gun would be more fun, but same restrictions as pointed out above apply.

USAF_Vet
August 15, 2011, 11:30 AM
Cost to convert Garand to full auto

10 years in Club Fed :D

Bubbles
August 15, 2011, 11:55 AM
It is perfectly legal to build a full-auto firearm or to convert one to full-auto. However, that work must be done by a Special Occupational Tax Class 02 manufacturer (who must first hold a Type 007 or 010 Federal Firearms License as a manufacturer).
Hey, I'm not a spy. ;) It's Type 07 and 10, not 007 and 010.
http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-5310-12.pdf

Sam1911
August 15, 2011, 12:07 PM
:) Got happy with the zeros there, didn't I? :)

56hawk
August 15, 2011, 12:18 PM
Other than the paperwork, less than $1:

http://www.saysuncle.com/2006/02/25/registering_my_fingers/

Otherwise couldn't you realistically buy a transferable M14, a M1 Garand and do a bunch of machining to fit the two together.

Sam1911
August 15, 2011, 12:27 PM
Otherwise couldn't you realistically buy a transferable M14, a M1 Garand and do a bunch of machining to fit the two together.Physically, probably.

Logically? Ugh...why? Take a $20,000 sought-after original gun and turn it into a franken-toy that no one in their right mind would take a chance on? (Actually, you could grab a cheaper registered "reweld" and then re-re-weld it onto a Garand...I guess.)

Legally, probably not. The ATF has gotten a lot stricter on what counts as legal repair work. Cutting a receiver in half and welding on parts of another gun is probably not going to pass their approval. But you just never know.

Sunray
August 15, 2011, 02:04 PM
"...10 years in Club Fed..." Believe there's a 6 figure fine too.

1KPerDay
August 15, 2011, 04:19 PM
Otherwise couldn't you realistically buy a transferable M14, a M1 Garand and do a bunch of machining to fit the two together.
You should be beaten unconscious with a warm squash for even suggesting the destruction of a transferable M14. :D

TaxPhd
August 15, 2011, 06:30 PM
Assuming it is possible to make a FA Garand, it can be legally done. All you need is a type 07 FFL, SOT 2 tax stamp, ITAR registration and a demo letter from a Gov agency. Simple!:)
07/2 doesn't require a demo letter to make a machinegun.

Ian
August 15, 2011, 08:59 PM
Sadly, there is a legal limit to how much you can modify a machine gun before it becomes legally a new machine gun that must re-registered. This is why you don't see rifle-caliber uppers for Mac-10s, for instance. Or why you can't legally adapt a registered FNC sear for use in an AR. Not a regulation based on any good reason, but just to prevent people from making creative use of the limited supply of transferable guns.

FIVETWOSEVEN
August 15, 2011, 09:45 PM
I think if you add a upper to a MAC 10, you could legally fire rifle rounds. After all you can change a M16 to fire 9mm.

Ian
August 15, 2011, 10:28 PM
The difference is that ARs were offered from the factory in both rifle and SMG configuration. Not so with Macs. Ergo, you can legally convert the AR to rifle calibers but not the Mac. Not my logic, this is ATF logic.

Jim K
August 15, 2011, 10:59 PM
Legalities aside, and the obvious limitations of the original magazine, the change is neither impossible nor especially difficult for someone with access to a decent machine shop. The two basic methods are the M14 method, with the selector switch at the rear, and the Beretta BM59 method, with the selector at the front. The latter would be the easier to use for a conversion.

Actually, converting the M1 to use a BAR magazine has been done too, but so much metal has to be removed from the receiver that I have never felt the conversion is a good idea. Converting to 7.62 NATO and using an M14 magazine is more feasible and many so-called "Tanker Garands" were converted that way, some to FA (when sales to individuals was still legal).

The real problem, again legalilties aside, is that a full auto M1 in the original caliber would be uncontrollable and too light even for bipod use.

Jim

medalguy
August 15, 2011, 11:36 PM
Jim is right. I have a Winchester M14 and I don't even like to shoot it FA. It's not really controllable at all in FA. That's one of the big reasons the Army converted to the M16. I also had a BAR at one time, shot it a few times, and got rid of it. The only fun and controllable weapon in 30-06 is a 1919 BMG on a tripod.

A Garand in FA? Pretty ridiculous unless it's just to see if it could be done.

leadcounsel
August 15, 2011, 11:51 PM
Putting aside the cost and legal aspects for a second...

An 8 round full auto shoulder fired .30-06??:what::what:

Have fun...

Shadow 7D
August 16, 2011, 12:28 AM
'BLAPPT' 'Ting' ....cr.crunch click.. BLAPPT Ting...

Bill_Rights
August 16, 2011, 01:05 AM
What Carl N. Brown said. And others. Muzzle rise in FA would make it useless. IIRC, even the FN FAL in .308 Win/NATO 7.62 was so useless in FA that the UK armed forces issued only SA versions.

We've all been taking you seriously. Is this question a joke? Troll's bait? In any case, the answers you've gotten were well informed, serious and a credit to THR, I think anyway.

TenMillimaster
August 16, 2011, 01:25 AM
If you could modify a garand to somehow use a registered sear of some sort, maybe you'd be ok on the books... wouldn't converting a BM59 be marginally more useful with the box mag?

MrM4
August 16, 2011, 11:53 PM
You can not take a legal transferable sear from something else such as a HK or a FNC and put in a differant type of host such as a Grand or a M1a.

FIVETWOSEVEN
August 17, 2011, 12:22 AM
The difference is that ARs were offered from the factory in both rifle and SMG configuration. Not so with Macs. Ergo, you can legally convert the AR to rifle calibers but not the Mac. Not my logic, this is ATF logic.

Care to share where this was stated?

Rail Driver
August 17, 2011, 02:07 AM
I think a 2 shot burst garand would be quite awesome, personally... No need for full auto on that gun though.

Shadow 7D
August 17, 2011, 02:27 AM
Why not just buy a FA m-14?
after all it's a garand with a box mag in .308 instead of 30.06

jojo200517
August 17, 2011, 02:53 AM
TO the original poster. It could cost you a few cents until you get caught and then theres the 10 year stay at club fed extended stay, along with the nice hefty fine. Oh and you loose ya toy. As far as legally making one into a machine gun? I don't really see the point even and the costs would become quiet high quiet fast. I suppose they could be offset by your new business as a firearms manufacture, but it still won't be cheap.
Quote:
The difference is that ARs were offered from the factory in both rifle and SMG configuration. Not so with Macs. Ergo, you can legally convert the AR to rifle calibers but not the Mac. Not my logic, this is ATF logic.
Care to share where this was stated?

I care for anyone to share how you would get a rifle caliber to feed in a MAC. It seems the grip would be a bit short for this. I also demand to know where the person that can do this was when I was trying to get that crappy semi auto vulcan hess mac 10 to feed anything.

Before anyone shouts 5.7x28 it would be a little long but it'd be pretty close and I gotta wonder how many of them little boogers would fit in a mag the length of a 30 round .45acp mac 10 mag. I'd almost be tempted to buy something like that if price was right and 5.7x28 was more affordable. I can definitely see it being more controllable in rapid fire. Heck with a stock and a rifle length barrel you'd have a nifty new carbine. A man has gotta dream of something right?

GoingQuiet
August 17, 2011, 03:11 AM
Assuming it is possible to make a FA Garand, it can be legally done. All you need is a type 07 FFL, SOT 2 tax stamp, ITAR registration and a demo letter from a Gov agency. Simple!:)
07's do not need demo letters to make machineguns.

Ian
August 17, 2011, 07:37 AM
The idea isn't to use the magazine well on the Mac, but to use the Mac lower as a registered fullauto trigger mechanism, just like a beltfed upper on an AR.

http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/1498DSC00680_JPG.jpg

I don't have paper from ATF in front of me - my understanding of the legal issues in this area comes from reading discussions with reasonably knowledgeable folks.

forindooruseonly
August 17, 2011, 09:35 AM
Quote:
The difference is that ARs were offered from the factory in both rifle and SMG configuration. Not so with Macs. Ergo, you can legally convert the AR to rifle calibers but not the Mac. Not my logic, this is ATF logic.
Care to share where this was stated?

There have been a couple of uppers for MACS that never got ATF approval IIRC. The MAC section on Uzitalk.com had some really good info on this, but I haven't looked in a while.

Jim Watson
August 17, 2011, 10:36 AM
I think a 2 shot burst garand would be quite awesome, personally... No need for full auto on that gun though.

I recall an M1A trigger group that was set a little too fine and would double pretty regularly. That was thought to be a lot of fun. It was passed around and tried in several guns until somebody realized it was illegal and got it fixed.

forindooruseonly
August 17, 2011, 12:14 PM
The M-14 I shot could let loose two or three round bursts depending on how good you were with the trigger, but unless the target was really close the second and third bullet would be over the target. That gun was much fun though!

Sav .250
August 17, 2011, 12:48 PM
Is there a point to this or is it just ...........

forindooruseonly
August 17, 2011, 01:32 PM
Is there a point to this or is it just ...........

Of course not. Did you really expect new and revolutionary comments after the question was answered in the first 5 posts?

MtnCreek
August 17, 2011, 02:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MtnCreek
Assuming it is possible to make a FA Garand, it can be legally done. All you need is a type 07 FFL, SOT 2 tax stamp, ITAR registration and a demo letter from a Gov agency. Simple!
07/2 doesn't require a demo letter to make a machinegun.

My Bad. You’re correct.

Sam1911
August 17, 2011, 03:23 PM
There have been a couple of uppers for MACS that never got ATF approval IIRC. The MAC section on Uzitalk.com had some really good info on this, but I haven't looked in a while.

There is a company down where I used to live, called "BRP Guns" that USED to specialize in adapter/conversion kits for registered M-16 lowers that would mate them to MG-34s and -42s. I watched the owner test-fire one at my old club once and spent a while talking to him about it. Seems they were popular with some of the reenacting set as, so long as the rear/bottom of the gun wasn't visible to the viewer, they appeared to be quite correct and worked very well.

But they don't list that product or service any more -- don't even mention it on their website (http://www.brpguns.com/) -- and I had heard (yes, just through the grapevine) that was because the ATF decided such conversions went too far afield of the original design and became a "new" machine gun. Thus illegal.

Now they only specialize in Stemple kit guns which are swappable into different configurations of submachine guns. Different calibers, different donor parts kits, etc -- but not major transformations from sub-gun into crew-served belt-fed.

Sam1911
August 17, 2011, 03:27 PM
Actually, here's an article (http://www.brpguns.com/content/StempleSuomi.pdf) reprinted from Shotgun News on BRP Guns and how they make their Stemple 76/45 conversion guns work with other famous submachine gun parts kits.

There are clues in the article about what the ATF has to say about the issue.

Arkansas Paul
August 17, 2011, 03:50 PM
Sounds like a job for Red Jacket. :uhoh:

Sorry. Couldn't believe someone hadn't already took that shot.

Jim K
August 23, 2011, 01:19 PM
"adapter/conversion kits for registered M-16 lowers that would mate them to MG-34s and -42s."

That I would like to see, as the M16 doesn't work anything like the German guns. Sure he didn't just put a fake barrel jacket on an AR15?

Jim

Sam1911
August 23, 2011, 01:40 PM
Agreed! I don't know exactly how they got that to work, and as I said, they've stopped making them and are now just selling off the parts kits. You could always drop them an email and ask. Not sure they'd exactly tell you how to do it, though. :)

If you enjoyed reading about "Cost to convert Garand to full auto" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!