Using the Sig brace as advertised
- Thread starter smovlov
- Start date
- Status
Panzerschwein
member
Well if you ask me, it doesn't take a genious to know what it was really meant for. 
kimberkid
Member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2010
- Messages
- 1,654
I've tried it; cumbersome is the first impression I had, but my shortest AR pistol has a 10" barrel, a 7" would be easier I'm sure ... My M85 PAP AK pistol has an 8" barrel but awkward describes it for me ...
... now if I only had one functional arm, I'm sure I would adapt.
... now if I only had one functional arm, I'm sure I would adapt.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Sure, someone has. SIG posted videos of folks using it strapped to their arm. I doubt those demonstrators were the very last people to use one that way.
Probably in the last 10 or so, but not the very last.
Probably in the last 10 or so, but not the very last.
bikemutt
Member
I tried it but could not get the scope eye relief figured out.
Arizona_Mike
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2013
- Messages
- 3,452
I tried it . Heavy, hard on the rotator cuff for a larger SBR but probably OK for a pistol. Strange arm position for getting eye lines up with optics that really makes you feel the recoil in the elbow.
The thing is that if I did not have use of my left arm it really would be preferable to shooting freehand (just as advertised). I'd probably want offset optics however to allow a more natural elbow extension.
Mike
The thing is that if I did not have use of my left arm it really would be preferable to shooting freehand (just as advertised). I'd probably want offset optics however to allow a more natural elbow extension.
Mike
Theohazard
Member
Yes, and it's absolutely terrible that way. It's extremely awkward and it's almost impossible to get a decent sight picture, even with a red-dot.smovlov said:
Maybe it might be useful for a one-armed person, but I can't see how they could strap it to their arm without having another hand to work the straps. And even if they could strap it on with only one arm, it's so terrible when fired that way that a lighter weapon that you can shoulder with one arm would still be a better idea.
There's a good reason why everyone just shoulders it like a normal rifle.
Aaron Baker
Member
If you've got one good arm, and you've strapped a Sig brace to it...
How do you work the rifle's charging handle?
How do you eject and insert a new magazine?
How do you hit the bolt release? (Assuming you don't have a BAD lever.)
How do you use iron sights or a scope? (I guess a red dot is perfect for this.)
If I had one good arm and wanted to shoot an AR15, I'd want a stock that hooked under my armpit to keep the weight of the front of the rifle from pivoting it up off my shoulder.
So, clearly, the SIG brace wasn't really designed for one-armed people/the disabled.
And hardly anyone shoots pistols with one hand and their arm fully extended in some sort of duelist's stance any more... so I'd shoot an AR15 pistol the same way as any other pistol--a two-handed grip.
Which really leaves only the obvious answer: it's an obvious workaround for making an SBR without having to pay a tax stamp.
The fact that the ATF approved it makes you wonder if they even care about NFA enforcement anymore, or if they're just doing it because it's the law and they have to. Or maybe they're just hoping the rate of Form 1 submissions will drop off.
Aaron
How do you work the rifle's charging handle?
How do you eject and insert a new magazine?
How do you hit the bolt release? (Assuming you don't have a BAD lever.)
How do you use iron sights or a scope? (I guess a red dot is perfect for this.)
If I had one good arm and wanted to shoot an AR15, I'd want a stock that hooked under my armpit to keep the weight of the front of the rifle from pivoting it up off my shoulder.
So, clearly, the SIG brace wasn't really designed for one-armed people/the disabled.
And hardly anyone shoots pistols with one hand and their arm fully extended in some sort of duelist's stance any more... so I'd shoot an AR15 pistol the same way as any other pistol--a two-handed grip.
Which really leaves only the obvious answer: it's an obvious workaround for making an SBR without having to pay a tax stamp.
The fact that the ATF approved it makes you wonder if they even care about NFA enforcement anymore, or if they're just doing it because it's the law and they have to. Or maybe they're just hoping the rate of Form 1 submissions will drop off.
Aaron
MasterSergeantA
Member
First it is designed for use with an AR PISTOL, not a rifle.
And it WAS designed by a veteran, in conjunction with an ortopaedic prosthetics specialist, for disabled veterans...specifically amputees. Sig saw that there was money in it and bought his patent.
Amputees figure out a lot of ways to do things that we (with two arms) don't have to.
Fabricating a "stock that hooked under your arm" would disallow the use of said stock on a pistol.
Amputees just might have a problem with a "two-handed grip".
And the "obvious answer" may may not be so obvious to someone that hadn't followed the development of the brace.
The ATF approved it because it doesn't change the fact that the brace doesn't change the pistol into a rifle. You can also shoot a Rossi Ranch Hand from the shoulder...but that doesn't make it a rifle.
You may be correct about the ATF. Or maybe they actually realized it isn't a stock.
And it WAS designed by a veteran, in conjunction with an ortopaedic prosthetics specialist, for disabled veterans...specifically amputees. Sig saw that there was money in it and bought his patent.
Amputees figure out a lot of ways to do things that we (with two arms) don't have to.
Fabricating a "stock that hooked under your arm" would disallow the use of said stock on a pistol.
Amputees just might have a problem with a "two-handed grip".
And the "obvious answer" may may not be so obvious to someone that hadn't followed the development of the brace.
The ATF approved it because it doesn't change the fact that the brace doesn't change the pistol into a rifle. You can also shoot a Rossi Ranch Hand from the shoulder...but that doesn't make it a rifle.
You may be correct about the ATF. Or maybe they actually realized it isn't a stock.
Aaron Baker
Member
Fair enough. I'm surprised that any significant number of veteran amputees want to shoot AR pistols, but I guess all is takes it one who wants it bad enough to design it.
I'm speculating, but I think it's safe to say that SIG didn't buy the patent because they thought there was a huge amputee-veteran-with-a-love-for-AR-pistols market.
I'm glad it's approved, but SIG's banner sales aren't because there's a huge amputee market. I just hope that its popularity as an SBR workaround doesn't result in a change in the ATF's determination, which they have been known to do.
Aaron
Last edited:
Shawnpatrick
Member
Here's a video of someone using two of them, one on each arm.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7G-sOC3-sQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7G-sOC3-sQ
ny32182
Member
Regardless of whether the original inventor had other intentions, two things are blatantly obvious:
1) Sig never would have brought it to market if they thought the only market was one handed amputees who want to shoot AR pistols. They can say what they want, put up pretty pictures of whatever they want, but their intended market is faux-SBRs.
2) No one who buys one does it for any other reason than to avoid SBR hoopla. They bought it as a stock, and use it as a stock.
Now I'm no fan of the NFA, as I'm sure few here are, and couldn't care less how anyone uses their "arm brace", but how this one slipped past Obama's ATF I'll never know, and have to believe the day is coming when they will "fix their mistake". Just like with past mistake fixes, the buyer of the now illegal item is out the cash. At least this is a relatively cheap item.
1) Sig never would have brought it to market if they thought the only market was one handed amputees who want to shoot AR pistols. They can say what they want, put up pretty pictures of whatever they want, but their intended market is faux-SBRs.
2) No one who buys one does it for any other reason than to avoid SBR hoopla. They bought it as a stock, and use it as a stock.
Now I'm no fan of the NFA, as I'm sure few here are, and couldn't care less how anyone uses their "arm brace", but how this one slipped past Obama's ATF I'll never know, and have to believe the day is coming when they will "fix their mistake". Just like with past mistake fixes, the buyer of the now illegal item is out the cash. At least this is a relatively cheap item.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
I think that's abundantly clear. "Jim's Homebrew Gun Accessories" company, or even someone like PSA or BravoCO. might, maybe, have seen enough of a market in the gun prosthesis for amputee veternans field to bring something like that to market. But for a MAJOR firm like SIG to do this, they had to expect millions of units sold. There just aren't millions of lower-arm amputee shooters to sell these to.
(Think about that market. Not just military veterans with amputations who like to shoot AR15s, but specifically guys with arm amputations. And, just the strong-side LOWER arm amputation of just the right degree to support the brace.)
SIG isn't going to go to that trouble for a few hundred or a few thousand sales. They knew exactly what they were doing when then jumped in. And kudos to them!
Shawnpatrick
Member
First the brace, then the mpx brake. Now if they would come out with an AR pistol with a slidefire arm brace and their mpx brake....
- Status
