how is this not a SBR?

Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

Because what looks like a butt stock is actually a forearm brace.

If you look closely you will see that it isn't adjustable, if you tried to use it as a BS you would have about an 8-9 in LOP.

I may or may not be understanding this correctly, but technically that "stock" is not a stock; it's an arm brace. It has a strap that wraps around your forearm to stabilize the firearm.

edit; TCB beat me to it.

see the "stock" you actually put your arm through it not shoulder it.

Small arms..... I'd like to see it in action, definately want though!

if you tried to use it as a BS you would have about an 8-9 in LOP.

Click to expand...

I've wondered if this and a set of NFL shoulder pads would be seen as "constructive possession" by our fine new head of the BATFE

If you squared up on it, you could use it as a stock well enough. A lot of people shoot that way with the stock fully collapsed, or close to it, and some even like a fixed short "entry" stock about that length for CQB carbines.

It' not an SBR because ATF says it's not. Until they decide to change their minds, of course.

Pretty clever. It gives three points of contact without the paperwork although i'm sure its not as effective as a real stock.

henschman said:

If you squared up on it, you could use it as a stock well enough. A lot of people shoot that way with the stock fully collapsed, or close to it, and some even like a fixed short "entry" stock about that length for CQB carbines.

Click to expand...

No, some of the advertising pics of it are deceptive...probably not intentionally but still...

I handled one installed on a Draco at the NRA Houston show, it's shorter than a fully collapsed stock.

t

how is this not a SBR?

Click to expand...

Because pistols are not rifles. It would have to be a rifle in order to then be an SBR.

See also: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=721789

...I would think this will cause issues at ranges if anyone saw it

Click to expand...

Like what?

Of all the gun owners that I'm acquainted with, I'd estimate that fewer than 5% even know what an SBR is, what an AR pistol is, or know the legality of buying a silencer. Even when I come across a gent at the range with a machinegun or a SBR/SBS, I don't pester him to show me his tax stamp. Those who don't know enough, won't know there could be an issue. Those who know enough, don't assume every single NFA item at the range is an illicit object.

Same reason this is a pistol:

http://www.rossiusa.com/product-list.cfm?category=17

"Of all the gun owners that I'm acquainted with, I'd estimate that fewer than 5% even know what an SBR is, what an AR pistol is, or know the legality of buying a silencer. Even when I come across a gent at the range with a machinegun or a SBR/SBS, I don't pester him to show me his tax stamp. Those who don't know enough, won't know there could be an issue. Those who know enough, don't assume every single NFA item at the range is an illicit object." CoRoMo

This unfortunately is true. A lot of guys that come into my barber shop think that suppressors full autos and such are illegal or they think you have to have a class 3 license to own one. I do my best to educate those who are willing to learn but some people think they know it all and you can't tell them any different.

Ian hit the nail on the head. I guarantee that the item has not been adjudicated. ATF aproval, as that ad misleadingly puts it, is most likely an opinion letter out of some NRA tech branch and carries no force of law and is an opinion that can be changed at a whim. $200 is not a lot of money. If one wants an SBR, one is better served to get a real one and put a useful length stock on it (yes I know in some states there are more issues).

NFA items around my parts require your paperwork if you want to shoot at public ranges. If you want to show up with something that is going to raise eyebrows you should probably show up with some documentation that proves what you are shooting is legit.

adelbridge said:

NFA items around my parts require your paperwork if you want to shoot at public ranges. If you want to show up with something that is going to raise eyebrows you should probably show up with some documentation that proves what you are shooting is legit.

Click to expand...

Original in your gun safe and a xerox in your pocket.

Here in Texas, the stamp is a "defense to prosecution". Yes, a LEO can haul you in but presentation of the stamp in court trumps the charge.

t

Because it is a Sig USA 556 and you'll spend so much time trying to get Sig to take it back and fix it, you'll never get to shoot it?
Just my experiance with Sig 556 products, YMMV.

Girodin said:

Ian hit the nail on the head. I guarantee that the item has not been adjudicated. ATF aproval, as that ad misleadingly puts it, is most likely an opinion letter out of some NRA tech branch and carries no force of law and is an opinion that can be changed at a whim. $200 is not a lot of money. If one wants an SBR, one is better served to get a real one and put a useful length stock on it (yes I know in some states there are more issues).

Click to expand...

No, there is a letter from the ATF out there. They ruled that it is not a stock because it is only made of foam. Just padding for a forearm brace that happens to look kinda like an M4 stock.

Girodin said:

Ian hit the nail on the head. I guarantee that the item has not been adjudicated.

Click to expand...

Century and Sig both displayed them in their booths at the Houston NRA show, doubt either one of them are fools. Century had them both loose and installed, Sig had them installed on several weapons.

t

Here is a you tube video of the SIGTac SB15 Stabilizing Brace on a Sig Sauer P556 Classic Pistol
One hand shooting is stabilizing by the arm grip


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsqy73wE5Eo

Here is a you tube video of the SIGTac SB15 Stabilizing Brace on a Sig Sauer P556 Classic Pistol
One hand shooting is stabilizing by the arm grip

Click to expand...

Now it makes sense! I could not understand how what looked like a butt stock stabalized a pistol without touching the shoulder.

If the ATF says it is not a duck . . .



Mike

I have given these a close look, shouldered a pistol built using one. It definitely functions as a buttstock. In fact the idea of an "arm brace" is rather silly because it works better as a buttstock (though a bit short) than an arm brace imo. I'm VERY surprised the ATF gave the go ahead. They claim it's not designed to be fired from the shoulder? I know the ATF made up some conflicting rules and regs, but geez. You don't look at it and say "oh my arm goes through here" but rather, "wow, this buttstock is a bit short". It's a buttstock, not an arm brace but I like the way they appear to have sneaked it past the man for the time being anyhow.

My real question is if I installed one on an AK pistol would it be an SBR even though the basis for it's invention is the installation on the buffer tube? Does the SIG 556 have a buffer tube? I don't believe it does. Their letter would suggest I could indeed install it on an AK pistol and be legit. To me it seems like a good way to get your wires crossed up with the law, regardless of the weapon it's used on.

I'm VERY surprised the ATF gave the go ahead

Click to expand...

Maybe the ATF is tired of the 40,000 plus NFA form application back log.