A SFA carbine - take 2

[Skribs]

Several months ago, I asked if a SFA carbine is a good idea, such as one that uses a Glock 17 frame for the lower receiver of a 9mm carbine. There is actually a product like this out there, and like the Glock pistol it includes no manual safety. Many people said if used solely as a range toy (and only loaded at the range) it might be a fun toy, but to consider it a serious gun there were two problems:

1) The trigger would not be good for accuracy at all.
2) With the trigger guard uncovered when the rifle is slung (most common method of carrying a long gun), the trigger safety would prove ineffective when something gets caught in the trigger guard, leading to safety issue.

My response to the first point was that if the weapon isn't needed at long ranges, the small decrease in accuracy from going from a crisp single-action trigger to a striker trigger would not be a problem. However, I did not have an answer to #2. I was reading a thread asking about the XD grip safeties in the handguns: autoloaders section, and I flashed back to the SFA carbine thread, and realized I had the answer.

Instead of Glock, what if an upper was made, designed to go on the XD or XDm frame. It might not be the best target weapon at 200 yards, but it would certainly do the job at 10 yards or less, and the grip safety would keep the trigger safe (well, about as safe as a manual safety) without requiring that extra step.

Or do I just live in a fantasy world (that is entirely possible).

 

[CmdrSlander]

Several months ago, I asked if a SFA carbine is a good idea, such as one that uses a Glock 17 frame for the lower receiver of a 9mm carbine. There is actually a product like this out there, and like the Glock pistol it includes no manual safety. Many people said if used solely as a range toy (and only loaded at the range) it might be a fun toy, but to consider it a serious gun there were two problems:

1) The trigger would not be good for accuracy at all.
2) With the trigger guard uncovered when the rifle is slung (most common method of carrying a long gun), the trigger safety would prove ineffective when something gets caught in the trigger guard, leading to safety issue.

My response to the first point was that if the weapon isn't needed at long ranges, the small decrease in accuracy from going from a crisp single-action trigger to a striker trigger would not be a problem. However, I did not have an answer to #2. I was reading a thread asking about the XD grip safeties in the handguns: autoloaders section, and I flashed back to the SFA carbine thread, and realized I had the answer.

Instead of Glock, what if an upper was made, designed to go on the XD or XDm frame. It might not be the best target weapon at 200 yards, but it would certainly do the job at 10 yards or less, and the grip safety would keep the trigger safe (well, about as safe as a manual safety) without requiring that extra step.

Or do I just live in a fantasy world (that is entirely possible).

I like it, maybe also a classic, Thompson SMG inspired upper for M1911s as well?

Would these be NFA weapons?

 

[USAF_Vet]

I like it, maybe also a classic, Thompson SMG inspired upper for M1911s as well?

Would these be NFA weapons?

They would not be NFA, provided they had 16"+ barrels and were 26" overall.

A pistol can be converted to a rifle without any legal issues. And it can be changed back to a pistol just as easily and just as legally.

 

[Skribs]

The upper, in my mind, would include a 16 inch barrel and a stock, so it would not be NFA. Unless it was full auto.

Something like http://mechtechsys.com/glock.php except for XD/XDm.

The idea of combining it with a 1911 would negate my long-gun-without-a-manual-safety idea.

 

[Risky]

You could safely carry the rifle slung in 'condition 3', magazine inserted with no round chambered. Its fairly easy to go from condition 3 to condition 1 when you need to... but reversing is more complicated and definitely not as easy as a positive safety.