Anyone Here Ever Purchased a new lever action (1892) Receiver? Building a Mares Leg

[VE2RF]

I was wondering if anyone here has ever been able to purchase a new, unused receiver from Rossi/Puma or anyone else who has manufactured an 1892(or even 1894) clone ?

Here's the reason I'm asking:

I've built AR's, I love working on guns and mechanical things(especially Chrysler Musclecars), and I would like to build a Mare's Leg.


To the best of my understanding of the law, the following is true:

If a person wants to cut down the barrel and stock on an existing 1892 lever action rifle, they must first apply to the ATF for a manufacturer's license and in addition you must purchase a tax stamp for an NFA weapon. I believe the manufacturer's license is somewhere around $700 and the Tax stamp is the usual $200 ATF tax stamp.

However, if a person purchases a new, pre-built receiver transferred through their FFL, they could then build the receiver as a pistol. It would then be legal, because you use a receiver which has never been a rifle, and you're building your own pistol off of a receiver that has ATF paperwork and been legally transferred.

To the best of my knowledge, that is how JB Customs has produced their Mare's Leg pistols. For the first run, he acquired unused, new Winchester receivers and built the first series off those receivers. Later, he purchased new receivers from Rossi/Puma has been building them off of those receivers.

I fully realize it would be far less hassle, far cheaper, and far quicker to buy one finished from JB Customs but I enjoy working on guns and anything mechanical, and it provides me a real sense of accomplishment when I get a project finished.

So, has anyone here ever purchased a new receiver from Rossi or Puma or any of their branded reps- like IAR or EMF ? Or even a non-1892 lever action receiver from someone like Henry or the like ?

Again, I'm well aware of the need to use an FFL for any transfers, and I'm becoming better versed with the ATF regs by the day.

I look forward to responses.

 

[Nickotym]

I may be wrong, so listen to what others say, but I don't believe you need a manufacturer's license to assemble a gun on a premfg reciever ( or even on a legal 80% receiver). Also if you are building a pistol you would not need a $200 stamp, only if you are building a SBR do you need the tax stamp. Otherwise the Ruger Charger (pistol built on 10/22 receiver by Ruger) would need a tax stamp to transfer.

As you are buying the receiver through an FFL, it is a normal firearm that needs no special requirements to transfer.

 

[wdlsguy]

If a person wants to cut down the barrel and stock on an existing 1892 lever action rifle, they must first apply to the ATF for a manufacturer's license and in addition you must purchase a tax stamp for an NFA weapon. I believe the manufacturer's license is somewhere around $700 and the Tax stamp is the usual $200 ATF tax stamp.

An FFL is not required. You do need an approved Form 1 ($200 tax) though.

If you want to do a pistol build, you should study the AR Pistols forum at ar15.com, particularly the ATF letter & pistol builds thread.

 

[dfariswheel]

The problem is, none of the manufacturers will sell just a receiver.
The receivers they build are built as rifle receivers.

 

[Hypnogator]

I don't believe you need a manufacturer's license to assemble a gun on a premfg reciever

Right! Otherwise lots of us will be in a world of hurt for building ARs on stripped lowers, then.

I may be wrong, so listen to what others say

You're spot on.

 

[VE2RF]

DFariswheel: I think you're probably correct, and that's why I've never tried this project before. However, I'm going to do everything I can to verify that none of the manufacturers will sell an individual receiver.

If they won't, I will confirm that, and post back when I do confirm it.

If they will, I think myself and some others would be interested in undertaking the process.


To Other Responders:

If I had purchased a completed lever-gun and wanted to shorten both barrel and stock, I was saying that I would have needed an FFL-holder to transfer the weapon to my person if I purchased it from a gun store or from an out-of-state seller. I was under the impression I would have further needed the ATF manufacturer's license in addition to the NFA Tax Stamp.

Thank you for letting me know that I do not need the manufacturer's license. I was under the impression that I would need the license, due to the fact that I would be constructing an NFA weapon and buying an NFA stamp.

I had interpreted what I had read in the ATF codes to mean that the reason that AR-15 builders didn't need a manufacturer's license if they build an AR-15, is that they're building a semi-auto rifle which isn't covered under the NFA.


Further clarification:

With regards to buying a finished receiver-only from Marlin, Rossi/Puma, or Henry, the reason I wanted it is because I would have only had to have a person with an FFL transfer me the receiver. I understood that such a purchase would have enabled me to build the receiver originally as a pistol, and thus it would not be a shortened rifle, and I would avoid having to purchase a manufacturer's license and I would avoid having to purchase a $200 tax stamp. I'm restating this because I thought my original post was clear, but it apparently needs further clarification. I apologize for any confusion I may have created. The last thing I wanted in this thread is to cause any misunderstandings or create misinformation.

The AR-15 pistol ATF response seems to confirm that if I can purchase an unbuilt receiver from an OEM manufacturer and have it transferred into my name by an FFL holder, I can build a pistol legally without being a manufacturer and without the 200 tax stamp. This is what I had gathered from reading about the code and how it's been applied. It's a very good feeling to see that from the ATF in regards to the AR-15 pistol. Thanks for posting that link !

Thank you all for the responses, and I appreciate the information that has been shared.

I will try to post back what I find out from any of the respective receiver manufacturers.

Take care.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

I sure hope you can do it, because I think it would be a very interesting project. I think that a mare's leg built on a PUMP gun in .357 mag or .45 colt (like the Taurus thunderbolt) would be the shiz-nizzle.

 

[rcmodel]

It's possible, cause this guys doing it.
http://www.jbcustom.com/new-mares.htm

But you would probably have to buy receivers in mass quanity like he does to get just one.

And I fail to see the advantage of a lever-action pistol holding six shots, when a six-shot revolver holds the same.

rcmodel

 

[goon]

I don't know about the $200 fee, but I'd think that if you can find an already "finished" reciever, well it's already finished.
Someone already built the "gun" because the reciever is what the ATF considers the gun, right?
All you're doing is adding parts, like the guys who build AR's and FAL's on finished recievers.
Definitely get clarification, but logic would suggest...

 

[rcmodel]

Logic goes out the window when the ATF is involved.

If it was ever a finished rifle receiver, it is always a rifle receiver.

rcmodel

 

[Ultima-Ratio]

BATF Loophole?

Hello, I read on the other forum that BATF may well allow a certain serial number block of the old 1892s that are called Trappers and came factory with 14 &15" barrels.

Checking now as there will likely be a HUGE rush to buy that certain serial block of 1892s.....BATF now sez they no longer need SBR tax stamps and are now under C&R only!!!!!!

 

[Sam1911]

Hey Ultima,

Could you post some links on this topic? Is this a specific serial number of ORIGINAL 1892s? If so, I don't think they'd need much help in being "in demand" as such original guns already fetch quite a premium.

Or is it possible that there will be REPRO 1892s with a serial number run which could be allowed to be built as 14"-ers?

This would be COOOL!

Thanks!

_Sam

[EDIT:] Are you referring to this list? http://www.shelfspace.com/~c-r-ffl/sec3.html That calls out specific ORIGINAL guns by specific serial number. These aren't guns that could be built as SBRs, but guns that WERE built as SBRs and are now being taken off the registry lists as of such value and rarity that they are highly unlikely to be used as weapons. A LOT cheaper to get a repro 1892, file the paperwork, and cut it down than to buy one of these originals for a living forune!

 

[Ultima-Ratio]

SAM-

Old 1892s can still be had cheaper than a new Rossi IF one looks.

Here's the link

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=300176

 

[Gator]

Checking now as there will likely be a HUGE rush to buy that certain serial block of 1892s.....BATF now sez they no longer need SBR tax stamps and are now under C&R only!!!!!!

Maybe a small rush of very rich gun collectors. There are few of those rifles and they go for BIG money. Way to much money for anyone to chop them, which would return them to NFA classification anyway!

 

[Ultima-Ratio]

Gator, according to the blue book over a million 1892s were produced, personally I've seen more than a few of these in operable condition offered at under $500.00 bucks.

The point of my post was that it appears the NFA classification has been removed for certain serial number blocks, I will attempt to to both identify the serial range and the "rumored" ATF ruling..

 

[Gator]

Ultima, I was responding to your post about short barreled 92s removed from the NFA list. I made no statement about 92s in general being particularly rare or valuable. How many of those over a million 92s had 14" or 15" barrels? And how many are still around? And how many are specifically listed, by serial number, on the C&R list? That is why those few 92s are worth so much.

 

[Sam1911]

Indeed, if it is just the Winchesters and Marlins on this list:http://www.shelfspace.com/~c-r-ffl/sec3.html then there are precious few indeed. I haven't added them all up but it looks like under 100 (200 at the very most) total rifles from both manufacturers.

That would make the prices high indeed!

_Sam