Solvent trap suppressors - Some basic questions

The whole form 1 of a solvent trap is done as far as I know. The atf is saying that "solvent traps" were already silencers, therfore illegal. You now have to basically prove that you have a lathe and are making it from raw product.

RockRat64 said:

You now have to basically prove that you have a lathe and are making it from raw product.

Click to expand...

How do they do this, do I send them a photo of me and my lathe or do they come over Mar-a-lago style and check it out?

I like this quote from the linked article though.

Therefore, the ATF considered it to be a suppressor. Most solvent traps are not sold with dimpled ends.

Click to expand...

FWIW I don’t know of any silencer sold with a dimpled end…all the ones I have bought have through holes.

I do wonder how many solvent traps have ever caught solvent though.

It’s like bump stocks, “braces” and non shotgun, shotguns like the shockwave and tac14, meet the letter of the law while stomping on the intentions. Just a matter of time before the “non gun people” writers of the laws add enough stuff to get the results they originally wanted. No need to change the laws either, just “interpret” them in a way you achieve desired results.

The ATF has a long history of “flip flopping” or saying something is legal, then when it’s well known to be a sound choice, yank the plug.

gunsrfun1 said:

Just started researching these, and the idea of building one (legally) interests me somewhat. But after searching the web for more info, I have some reservations. Can I get some answers to the following:
1) Are there any reputable vendors that sell quality solvent trap kits?

Click to expand...

Reputable as in will they ship what you paid for? Yes.
Reputable as in are they really selling a solvent trap? No.

It doesn't take a law degree or rocket scientist to know that the whole solvent trap nonsense was a weak attempt at getting a 99% silencer shipped to you without ATF approval.

I've read about a few, but it seems like the good ones have segued over to fully built suppressor manufacturing and no longer sell solvent traps. There seems to be an "underground" industry of vendors, but the companies I come across strike me as lower-end quality with little or no customer service. (Most don't even list a phone number.)

Click to expand...

There may be reasons that they are "underground". I would proceed with caution.

I realize the ATF is going after these companies, but being legal,

Click to expand...

Well, ATF and the USAO rarely pick fights they cant win. If they were legal there would be no reason to prosecute.

2) While I understand the concept of building one, I could use a start-to-finish tutorial to fill in some blanks. I can't seem to find one anywhere, either on Youtube or elsewhere. Do these how-to videos exist anywhere?
Having seen tons of videos on 80% builds, I expected there would be more info on solvent traps. But it seems pretty sparse.
Thanks. I might have some follow-up questions, depending on your answers to the above.

Click to expand...

https://www.ar15.com/forums/Armory/Silencers-Build-It-Yourself/55/

jmorris said:

How do they do this, do I send them a photo of me and my lathe or do they come over Mar-a-lago style and check it out?

Click to expand...

ATF considers most of those solvent traps to be a silencer, albiet unfinished. Remember, there is no "80%" in federal law. A piece of steel, plastic or aluminum is not a firearm unless it is a firearm. Where that line is drawn is up to ATF to determine.

I do wonder how many solvent traps have ever caught solvent though.

Click to expand...

Not near as many as the number of arm braces that were actually used as arm braces on pistols.

It’s like bump stocks, “braces” and non shotgun, shotguns like the shockwave and tac14, meet the letter of the law while stomping on the intentions.

Click to expand...

Not exactly.
Bump stocks did not meet the definition of "machine gun" until Trump ordered ATF to rewrite the definition of "machine gun" to include bump stocks.
Arm braces for pistols relied on an ATF determination letter that was sketchy from day one. I think ATF erred in that original determination letter. But based on that letter, ATF opened the floodgates on crappy shoulder stocks being renamed "arm brace". This newest restriction is clearly to slam that gate shut. I'll bet less than 1% of arm braces attached to a pistol are actually used as an arm brace.

Just a matter of time before the “non gun people” writers of the laws add enough stuff to get the results they originally wanted. No need to change the laws either, just “interpret” them in a way you achieve desired results.

Click to expand...

Its the Law of Unintended Consequences.

The ATF has a long history of “flip flopping” or saying something is legal, then when it’s well known to be a sound choice, yank the plug.

Click to expand...

ATF regulations are not voluminous, difficult to read or chock full of legalese. Its the "determination letters" that cause problems. A determination letter is not law or regulation, but the opinion of ATF's staff lawyers. And as those staff lawyers change over time, so do their interpretations of federal law and ATF regulations.

If you submit a plastic hamster tube asking "is this a silencer?" They'll send back a letter explaining federal law, with citations to that law as well as the applicable ATF regulation. Somewhere in that letter they'll say "this hamster tube by itself is not a silencer", then they'll add "but if attached to a firearm to decrease the report or sound it may be subject to the requirements of the NFA". So if you go and crank out ten thousand hamster tubes, advertise in gun magazines showing that ATF letter saying "by itself not a silencer".......yet you attach it to your pistol and shoot through it.......do you have an unregistered silencer? You may not find out for weeks or months if not years.

Two guns that ATF never had a request for determination?
SIG displayed a firearm with a unique monocore muzzle brake at SHOT Show in 2013. It took about minute before someone said "hey, that muzzle brake is identical to the monocore baffles of SIGs integral silencers!" Yeah. ATF saw it too and shut them down. https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/appeals-court-sig-muzzle-brake-suppressor-component/

Taurus displayed a 28ga revolver at SHOT in 2011..........and oh my how stupid. Yeah, it, like the SIG above was removed from display the first day of SHOT.

dogtown tom said:

ATF considers most of those solvent traps to be a silencer, albiet unfinished. Remember, there is no "80%" in federal law. A piece of steel, plastic or aluminum is not a firearm unless it is a firearm. Where that line is drawn is up to ATF to determine.




If you submit a plastic hamster tube asking "is this a silencer?" They'll send back a letter explaining federal law, with citations to that law as well as the applicable ATF regulation. Somewhere in that letter they'll say "this hamster tube by itself is not a silencer", then they'll add "but if attached to a firearm to decrease the report or sound it may be subject to the requirements of the NFA". So if you go and crank out ten thousand hamster tubes, advertise in gun magazines showing that ATF letter saying "by itself not a silencer".......yet you attach it to your pistol and shoot through it.......do you have an unregistered silencer? You may not find out for weeks or months if not years.

.

Click to expand...

But if you leave a hamster in the tube, you can claim it as a Therapy Pet.!
Don't forget the official form!

N555 said:

First of all Dogtowntom sells form4 silencers and hates solvent traps more than anyone on the Internet.

Click to expand...

Horsehockey. That you came to that conclusion means you haven't really read my posts.
I hate those who mislead consumers with sketchy sales pitches on "solvent traps"
I hate those who give advice that would cause the ignorant to violate federal law.
I hate the National Firearms Act.

I LOVE the idea of Form 1 silencer builds. Just as I do Form 1 SBS and SBR's. I steer customers every day to AR15.com Build It Yourself subforum.

If your solvent trap has a hole through the baffles like this one, yeah that's kind of a silencer.

Click to expand...

"kind of a silencer"?
Dude, just stop. You ain't helping anyone but ATF.

File a Form 1.
Procure stock.
Make suppressor.

That is still how it works.

(Blather removed.)

Thinking about number five…
… before we don’t get to do this anymore…

The new frame/receiver definition rule (which included silencers) that goes into effect on Aug 24th 2022 along with the ATF going after sellers of solvent traps has made things even more confusing than it was before.

I agree that the solvent traps was definitely poking the bear even more so than arm braces. And the solvent traps are really no different than the Glock full auto slide cover plates that are sold as "for air soft use only". Both will get you federal prison time.

I can also tell you that there is no way I would trust a home built solvent trap/suppressor unless it was made using a lathe by a competent machinist. You have to get everything perfect otherwise it will change the point of impact and/or you will get baffle strikes.

While it has been 30+ years since I made any suppressors, I did make and work on them as a machinist in the Army. And everything was done on a lathe.

Bottom line; if you want to make a suppressor on a Form 1 from scratch or by using a solvent trap them you need to file a Form 1 before ever having components in your possession to stay out of trouble.

With e-file dropping wait times under a year, and the fed cracking down on traps, I wouldn't fool with one. UNLESS or until some of the court cases that have come from the epa smackdown carry over to the atf and some rules are rolled back.

RockRat64 said:

You now have to basically prove that you have a lathe and are making it from raw product.

Click to expand...

I am still stuck on how they intend to do this.

If I call and ask them if I can start on my Form 1 build while I wait for it to be approved, they will tell me absolutely NOT. That would be illegal as submission isn’t approval.

So, are they going to entrap me?

“Dear Sir, We need a video of you making silencer parts, showing the equipment and raw materials before and during machining, please make sure we can make out your face too. This will ensure to us, that you can in fact proceed.

Thanks,

management.”

Proof, one can do something, generally comes from doing it.

Not like a “solvent trap” is the only way to “skin the cat”, there were flash light based cans before, even the oil filter adapter garbage.

Next it will be old motorcycle forks…



It’s a tube with threads on one end, lots of applications for that feature that’s not muffling firearms reports.

12Bravo20 said:

....Bottom line; if you want to make a suppressor on a Form 1 from scratch or by using a solvent trap them you need to file a Form 1 before ever having components in your possession to stay out of trouble.

Click to expand...

Absolutely this.
There are posts in that AR15 subforum about the language to use when you are asked to provide photos and a description of the materials you will use.

If you have none, you cannot describe them or take photos.
If you have a solvent trap, you will likely get denied like the others.

jmorris said:

I am still stuck on how they intend to do this.

If I call and ask them if I can start on my Form 1 build while I wait for it to be approved, they will tell me absolutely NOT. That would be illegal as submission isn’t approval.

So, are they going to entrap me?

“Dear Sir, We need a video of you making silencer parts, showing the equipment and raw materials before and during machining, please make sure we can make out your face too. This will ensure to us, that you can in fact proceed.

Thanks,

management.”

Click to expand...

They want to see if the applicant has a 99% silencer....ie a solvent trap with everything completed except the drilling of the bore. Those seem to get immediately denied with little or no explanation.

Not like a “solvent trap” is the only way to “skin the cat”, there were flash light based cans before, even the oil filter adapter garbage.

Click to expand...

True. But a Maglight is already a flashlight and to be honest solvent traps and fuel filters are neither.

It’s a tube with threads on one end, lots of applications for that feature that’s not muffling firearms reports.

Click to expand...

Which is perfectly fine.
ATF wised up to the fact that solvent traps and fuel filters were being sold expressly for the purpose of making a homemade silencer and with no real intent as a fuel filter or solvent trap. That's why the owners of Diversified Machine plead guilty.

Well, I just filed, payed for, and sent in my prints for a Form 1 suppressor. I sent a picture of my lathe and the bits of scrap I’m going to use. Many just state they have a lathe and where they got the material. It was easier for me to take a picture than import a Word document to my phone.

This is my fifth one. I don’t foresee any issues.
If there are any, I’ll let you know, @gunsrfun1.

Diversified Maine should have had a lawyer on retainer.
We all should have a lawyer on retainer.
It is far better to pay your debt to your lawyer than to pay your debit to society. Especially if it's a victimless gun violation based on a history and tradition of racism.

DM should not have been breaking the law.
I know I don’t plead guilty if I’m not. I personally received an end cap from them with a hole worn in it from the machining. That is verboten. As well as drilling and assembling the whole thing for others.
Even if your dad wants to help in the shop, he is, by law, unable to do so.

I believe we should not have to retain a lawyer just to make it through a day in this country. There should not be a sect of humans whose sole job is to barter your life away at some other authority. I don’t like needing humans. Researching, understanding and following the law helps.

Lots of people plea guilty when they're not because they do not have the resources to defend them selves in court and they figure they have a better chance pleading guilty to one charge instead of fighting a dozen charges.
For example the auto key card case. In the middle of the night they changed their collective mind and started charging people with something the atf said was legal. One of the auto key card guys pled guilty for doing nothing wrong. Then the atf tried charging Matthew hoover who lives in Wisconsin (in Matthew hoover vs USA) with even sketchyer charges all the way in Florida, just so that he had to travel to Florida to defend him self. But he raised a ton of money and last update is the atf filed to dismiss the case.
Now why would the ATF file to dismiss if Matthew hoover was really guilty of some far reaching conspiracy to distribute machine guns all over the country?

Demi-human said:

As well as drilling and assembling the whole thing for others.
Even if your dad wants to help in the shop, he is, by law, unable to do so.

Click to expand...

Not true at all. Another person can absolutely build a Form 1 suppressor, in part or whole, for you, as long as you are physically present to maintain dominion and control over the parts throughout the process.

This differs from the making of unregistered personal GCA firearms, where ATF 2015-1 applies. NFA Form 1 "making" of a firearm is a completely different set of rules.

But the dominion and control aspect is the crux of it. If you leave your silencer or silencer parts with an unlicensed individual, or if your silencer parts are made by that person in your absence, an NFA violation has occurred.

Demi-human said:

Researching, understanding and following the law helps.

Click to expand...

It helps a lot more if it’s not a moving target…

My neighbor has a body shop. He uses solvents. I asked him if he uses solvent traps. He said no. Just water and contaminant traps on his air lines. Solvents goes in the trash can that he dumps from his paint guns. Or any of the prep ones on a rag. So with that being said. It there a real world use for these traps? Other than a cheap suppressor ?

dogtown tom said:

Two guns that ATF never had a request for determination?
SIG displayed a firearm with a unique monocore muzzle brake at SHOT Show in 2013. It took about minute before someone said "hey, that muzzle brake is identical to the monocore baffles of SIGs integral silencers!" Yeah. ATF saw it too and shut them down. https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/appeals-court-sig-muzzle-brake-suppressor-component/

Click to expand...

IIRC the GSG-5 carbines had a similar “problem” except they had the “can” part vs the guts. Had also sold some 13,000 of them too before hand.