Cost to convert Garand to full auto

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

RCBS

Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
12
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?
 
How much will it cost to invent a time machine to take you back to 1985?
 
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.
 
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.
 
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!:)
 
It it a reasonable thing to do or is there something illogical about it beside money?
Click to expand...
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?
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
That said, I can't imagine that an 8rd full auto would be much fun.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Otherwise couldn't you realistically buy a transferable M14, a M1 Garand and do a bunch of machining to fit the two together.
Click to expand...
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.
 
MtnCreek said:
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!:)
Click to expand...
07/2 doesn't require a demo letter to make a machinegun.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Total cost to own / manufacture post-1986 full auto guns?
Replies
4
Views
1K
mopar92
M
F
  • Locked
Sons of Guns and Full Autos
Replies
5
Views
1K
wcoats
W
S
  • Locked
Modification to Full Auto
Replies
13
Views
12K
USAF_Vet
U
hq
  • Locked
GSG5 full auto, closed bolt conversion?
Replies
10
Views
14K
josiewales
J
N
  • Locked
Full Auto to Burst
Replies
10
Views
2K
AlexanderA
A
Back
Top