SIG Brace vs. SBR

[wally]

I've both in AK and AR versions and can make a case for either.

L to R:
Zastava PAP M85NP 5.56 pistol with SB-47 brace, uses AR mags.
Mini Draco 7.62 SBR with ACE side folder stock.
QuarterCircle 10 Glock mag 9mm AR pistol with SB-15 Gen II brace.
CMMG 9mm SBR with MagPul CTR stock.

For the AR you save maybe $100 with the brace compared to building the same thing without the brace and paying the $200 NFA tax since the brace and extended buffer tube runs about $200 whereas the CTR and MilSpec buffer tube runs about $100.

For the AK the savings are better since the SB-47 runs about $125 and the stock and mounting hardware start around $200, add in the NFA tax and the AK version can be almost $300 less expensive.

For an AR, if you live where the LEO sign off is no problem, or you are have a trust for suppressors (or plan to) the SBR route would be my recommendation.

For the AK since the potential cost savings are greater, it pretty much depends on how much you want a folding stock or prefer the "cleaner" look of the SBR.


We've had these out with a variety of shooters, experienced and inexperienced and all agree there is no significant difference when shooting unless you like the CTR stock fully extended. However all would prefer getting the SBR until I explained the NFA requirements for doing so.

 

[aubie515]

It's not all about saving money. At least not in my case.

PA is NFA friendly and I have NFA items. I don't want to have to complete paperwork to get permission to cross state lines. I also do not need to wait to get approval.

I can carry my pistol loaded in my vehicle in PA and I am unable to do that with a rifle.

I'm not sure what your thread poses that already wasn't address in the other brace threads.

Like to SBR...go for you...don't like it and go brace route...good for you.

Different strokes for different folks.

 

[wally]

I'm not sure what your thread poses that already wasn't address in the other brace threads.

Mostly just an excuse to post a photo showing the new Gen II brace and some of the options side by side.

 

[Phaedrus/69]

Good looking collection! I do agree that the brace does have one advantage in some situations since the gun technically remains a pistol. Good for car carry loaded, etc. But I'd rather shoot a gun with a real stock.

 

[Tirod]

A gun having a "real stock" means one with a flat vertical surface to apply at the shoulder - the phase I've seen used by the ATF to describe the 'trip wire' of what constitutes a stock. Looking over what is used for the AR, that's not much. And with web gear, a plate carrier, or armor, even less is needed.

The issue some might have would be mounting the toe of the stock on the shoulder to raise the sight line for squared up use and a more vertical neck angle. The brace offers that for a pistol.

In either case an appropriate level of "flat vertical surface" can be arranged (now) which the shooter can use, or, not. Plenty have chosen to just use the buffer tube.

What is left is how the legal provisions affect your use, or what you appreciate in use. We may never actually have it loaded in the front seat ready to hand as a pistol, but in many jurisdictions, we can. As compared to transporting a Short Barreled Rifle, which requires written permission from the ATF to renew annually, and likely keeping it unloaded, cased, and stored in the rear of the vehicle - it's a rifle. That provision in law is commonly accepted to prevent the unsafe act of road hunting, ie, shooting from a vehicle while "in traffic" where a passing car could be struck.

Basically, the pistol falls under the ever broadening rules of conduct governing CCW, while the rifle suffers from the bias against alternate hunting methods that urban dwellers impose on the rural cousins.

No, I don't road hunt and don't encourage it. What I see is a lot a bias against it, as a tool to prevent carrying a loaded rifle, and the anti gun crowd was given a win by most conservation departments on that one.

This is where the shooter, general public, and ATF never saw it coming, the unintended consequences of trying to force how to handle firearms under certain circumstances thru legislation. Drive down a country road with a loaded rifle in the front seat with you, in season, and you are as guilty of road hunting as owning a GI full auto sear and AR15 under the constructive possession argument. The real disadvantage is that there are hundreds of thousands of LEO's who can enforce the anti loaded rifle law on the road every day of that hunting season. Nobody would necessarily know if you owned the full auto parts, if ever, until your inheritors opened up your sock drawer.

Under the circumstances I would rather have the pistol than the rifle - simply because one is appreciated, or will be determined to be more legal than the other anytime it's in my car. The stock does make that much difference - and being legal, too, as many who recommend having copies of the SBR paperwork with you keep repeating.

It's a matter of the money for some of us, but also a matter of the government making it this way. If we have to jump thru this hoop to prevent their enforcement, ok. Not having a stock, tho, really isn't that big a deal. The relative accuracy is not effectively impacted - stocks don't radically make a AR become magically twice as accurate. Practice does, tho, and that's where $300 worth of ammo would have more impact. 700 rounds of practice ammo would get you nearly thru a weekend carbine course.

It's why some see the SBR stamp as more male enhancement that a real advantage.

 

[Phaedrus/69]

I agree with you for the most part, Tirod. The "brace" makes a huge amount of sense given how the law reads. I was just saying that I like a real stock more than the Sig brace. I've never fired a gun with the brace on, just handled one at the LGS. It did work/feel pretty good but not as good as a proper stock. Still I'd much rather have an M4gery with the Sig brace than my Ruger LCR in a gunfight!

 

[USAF_Vet]

I've both in AK and AR versions and can make a case for either.

L to R:
Zastava PAP M85NP 5.56 pistol with SB-47 brace, uses AR mags.
Mini Draco 7.62 SBR with ACE side folder stock.
QuarterCircle 10 Glock mag 9mm AR pistol with SB-15 Gen II brace.
CMMG 9mm SBR with MagPul CTR stock.

For the AR you save maybe $100 with the brace compared to building the same thing without the brace and paying the $200 NFA tax since the brace and extended buffer tube runs about $200 whereas the CTR and MilSpec buffer tube runs about $100.

For the AK the savings are better since the SB-47 runs about $125 and the stock and mounting hardware start around $200, add in the NFA tax and the AK version can be almost $300 less expensive.

For an AR, if you live where the LEO sign off is no problem, or you are have a trust for suppressors (or plan to) the SBR route would be my recommendation.

For the AK since the potential cost savings are greater, it pretty much depends on how much you want a folding stock or prefer the "cleaner" look of the SBR.


We've had these out with a variety of shooters, experienced and inexperienced and all agree there is no significant difference when shooting unless you like the CTR stock fully extended. However all would prefer getting the SBR until I explained the NFA requirements for doing so.

Shooting them side by side in a heads up comparison, how do the ergos feel on the AR platforms? Does the actual solid stock perform better than the SB-15 GII?

I'm in a state that, like post #2, is NFA friendly, but I can carry a loaded pistol in my car with a CPL, but not a rifle. I don't travel much, but if I did cross state lines, I'd prefer to just go and not give it a second thought and not worry about a big bro permission slip.

the downside is that the gun will be registered either way. The pistol will be registered with the state police for their useless money sucking worthless database that should be obliterated with extreme prejudice, or it'll be registered as an SBR with both big brother and little brother (fed and state)

Facing a registry either way, in my case, the SB-15 is both cheaper and only gets placed on one registry. I also don't have to worry about applying and waiting for the stamp.

But on the other hand, if the extra $100 and a months wait (e-filing is apparently pretty fast these days) grants me much better balancing, handling and ergonomics for a SBR, I can work a few hours extra overtime and cover the difference.

 

[pjeski]

I've always felt an important distinction is you can't put a VFG on a pistol with a sig brace.

 

[wally]

Shooting them side by side in a heads up comparison, how do the ergos feel on the AR platforms?

Virtually identical unless you pull the CTR stock out past the third setting.

Does the actual solid stock perform better than the SB-15 GII?

No, judging by the way shooters of varying skill levels hit steel plates with them. The lack of adjustment could make a significant difference with a scope and eye relief, but red dots or irons are the norm with these.

I've always felt an important distinction is you can't put a VFG on a pistol with a sig brace.

Yes if you require a short barrel and VFG then the SBR is what you need. But I've never warmed up to using VFGs, I end up either just using them as a "hand stop" or have them so far back I might well just hold the mag well.


As I said I can make a case for either and am grateful I can afford to have both.

 

[bikemutt]

I was told by LGS yesterday that ATF is getting set to make shouldering a pistol unlawful. The guy isn't a BS-er but he may be ill-informed. I'll see if I can get some more info.

 

[Ranger Roberts]

I was told by LGS yesterday that ATF is getting set to make shouldering a pistol unlawful. The guy isn't a BS-er but he may be ill-informed. I'll see if I can get some more info.

I wonder if it is because they recently ruled the Sig Arm Brace was a no-go on an AR style shotgun? I read it somewhere on THR but the thread got merged and I'm not sure where it ended up. I think Ryanxia posted about it.

 

[P226]

I have both. And the SBR is 100 times better than the Sig brace. I ran the brace on a Sig P556 for 6 weeks while waiting for the form 1 to be approved. It works but I only see it for non SBR states. I already had a Ar-15,Ak as SBR's before the Sig P556 so it was a let me see if this a way to go in the future. For me it's just not as comfortable as a stock,with a little bit of flex .

I'm also hearing that due to the shotgun brace ruling that shooting the shotgun from the shoulder is illegal ,they "may" reverse their ruling that shooting pistols from the shoulder is legal, also due to the two hand use of shooting with the brace. I hope they don't change it .

 

[<*(((><]

I don't think there will be any precedent set on AR15 pistols just because of the ruling on a shotgun. If they start telling us "how we can shoot our weapons" we are in serious trouble.

And the whole idea of the pistol brace being banned because you are using two hands to shoot is the dumbest argument. How often do you shoot your actual bottom loader, revolver, etc pistol with one hand other than one hand training .

In regards to the "Black Aces Tactical" that was trying to get the shotgun approved brace, they had a few things going against them.

1. A shotgun doesn't have a buffer tube that is needed for operation of the firearm to attach the brace. In other words you are having to create an attachment point to the firearm before the brace can be secured.
2. They sample picture and verbiage in the document to the ATF had an spoke of a vertical fore grip installed on said firearm they were trying to get approved. We already now with AR15 pistols that the vertical fore grip is a no go.

In support of the AR15 brace being able to be shouldered. A Colorado police officer wrote the ATF about specifically using the sig brace to shoulder the firearm and the ATF specifically said, "Generally speaking, we do not classify weapons based on how an individual uses a weapon."
LINK: Sergeant Joe Bradley

I for one would much rather utilize the Sig Arm brace then jump through the hoops of having an SBR. My pistol AR falls under my CCW rules for my state, and I can take it to and from my state to a pistol friendly state as I choose without having to get permission. In my opinion with the different lengths offered in the buffer tubes now a days, the sig brace is very useable. But I'm sure there are some NFA aficionados that want to promote their tax stamped items over the lessor Sig Brace which is fine but don't go saying that the Sig Brace is a 100x worse then a traditional stock as that is just not true.

 

[bikemutt]

I have both a SBR lower and a 9mm AR pistol with the Thordsen saddle on it's carbine buffer (ATF-approved). I tried the Sig brace on an M92 PAP and did not care for it, just felt awkward for me.

In any event, I see both sides of story, to me not every thing needs to be, or is worth making into a SBR.

I do get tremendous stamp-leverage out of the SBR AR15 lower though, so many uppers, so little time

 

[Surly]

I have both configurations as well. I travel out of state regularly for work and use the braced pistols for that, as filing a 5320.20 for one of the SBR's is not feasible due to the short time frame I have.

 

[dogtown tom]

Surly I have both configurations as well. I travel out of state regularly for work and use the braced pistols for that, as filing a 5320.20 for one of the SBR's is not feasible due to the short time frame I have.

You do know you can file a 5320.20 to cover you for the entire year don't you?
You don't need to file it for every individual trip.

 

[Surly]

You do know you can file a 5320.20 to cover you for the entire year don't you?
You don't need to file it for every individual trip.

With the nature of my work, I would have to file a few dozen or more for each of the four states I travel to to cover the job sites and areas that I would be. The brace, as cheesy as it is, saves me time which is money.

 

[Sam1911]

I don't think there will be any precedent set on AR15 pistols just because of the ruling on a shotgun. If they start telling us "how we can shoot our weapons" we are in serious trouble.

...

In support of the AR15 brace being able to be shouldered. A Colorado police officer wrote the ATF about specifically using the sig brace to shoulder the firearm and the ATF specifically said, "Generally speaking, we do not classify weapons based on how an individual uses a weapon."
LINK: Sergeant Joe Bradley

Well, this is right, but the actual letter to Black Aces says something counter to that which it may be worth paying close attention to:

The Black Aces firearm was a "shotgun like item" that we know of as a "PGO" shotgun. Because it is built with no stock, it can't be a "Shotgun" under federal law, and because it is GREATER than 26" overall, it isn't "concealable" so it doesn't fall within the NFA's Title II definitions for a regulated firearm.

What the ATF said that is VERY worth noting is that IF YOU DO carry it concealed, you've just disproved the "not concealable" presumption, and now they WILL consider it a Title II Firearm, and an unregistered one at that.

That's a really big deal. A clear instance in which you may build something that's perfectly legal, shoot it, carry it around, etc. and you're fine, but then (a perfectly legal) something you can DO with it can turn it 100% illegal instantly. Taking a legally owned item and doing a perfectly legal act with that item turns it into a seriously ILlegal item.

While they're saying this specific ruling doesn't apply to AR15 "pistols" (because they CAN be concealed anyway, as a handgun) it is important to understand that the old maxim that Sgt. Bradley repeated, "Generally speaking, we do not classify weapons based on how an individual uses a weapon," is now clearly dangerously flawed.

 

[Warp]

With the nature of my work, I would have to file a few dozen or more for each of the four states I travel to to cover the job sites and areas that I would be. The brace, as cheesy as it is, saves me time which is money.

Are you sure you would have to file one for every individual trip or address?

My understanding is that once you have a valid and current 5320.20 for a particular state, you are good to go in that state.

 

[Surly]

Are you sure you would have to file one for every individual trip or address?

My understanding is that once you have a valid and current 5320.20 for a particular state, you are good to go in that state.

I'm not certain and I don't want to be the test case and find out while I'm working. The brace is good enough.

 

[Warp]

I'm not certain and I don't want to be the test case and find out while I'm working. The brace is good enough.

I'm not a lawyer, but I am quite certain that one address is all you need and you are good for the entire state.

There are some advantages, which vary by state of course, to having a "handgun" vs an SBR, though (and vice versa).