MG FEED ASSEMBLY PARTS COUNT???

Post by **SHARPSSHOOTER5090** » Mon Apr 30, 2007 12:35 pm

I am sure this has been addresed before but I can't find it, but how does a Mg belt feed assy fit into the no more than 10 imported parts count??

Thanks

Post by **URAR1004** » Mon Apr 30, 2007 5:47 pm

No need for a parts count an MG42 is considered a Firearm not a Rifle, so no need to count. This is Based on BRP's and WLA's Letters, I have not seen the WLA letter yet.

Post by **SHARPSSHOOTER5090** » Mon Apr 30, 2007 5:51 pm

Does that mean that I can use import FAL fcg and not have to use US parts?

Post by **88comm** » Mon Apr 30, 2007 7:16 pm

If the above holds true, that is correct.

Chris

Post by **striker754** » Mon Apr 30, 2007 7:32 pm

feeding mechanisms arent even part of the parts count. the mg42 isnt a rifle per BRP and WLA letters so its moot.

Post by **hcpookie** » Mon May 07, 2007 3:38 pm

Do we have a copy of the WLA letter somewhere? I haven't seen that yet...

Post by **Pirate** » Mon May 07, 2007 4:17 pm

URAR1004 wrote:No need for a parts count an MG42 is considered a Firearm not a Rifle, so no need to count. This is Based on BRP's and WLA's Letters, I have not seen the WLA letter yet.

I don't think you are correct, 762x51 asked the batf for clarification and they at first classed it as a firearm then reversed thier decision and made it a rifle. as far as I know it has never been reversed.

Post by **striker754** » Mon May 07, 2007 7:31 pm

Pirate wrote:
URAR1004 wrote:No need for a parts count an MG42 is considered a Firearm not a Rifle, so no need to count. This is Based on BRP's and WLA's Letters, I have not seen the WLA letter yet.
I don't think you are correct, 762x51 asked the batf for clarification and they at first classed it as a firearm then reversed thier decision and made it a rifle. as far as I know it has never been reversed.

The law applies to everyone not select individuals. The firing mechanism (your design,beachbums, wiselite, etc) does NOT change the designation of firearm or rifle. An mg42 is an mg42. Latest letter, which I believe is from WLA, would be the current ATF opinion.

Post by **Pirate** » Mon May 07, 2007 7:53 pm

striker754 wrote:
Pirate wrote:
URAR1004 wrote:No need for a parts count an MG42 is considered a Firearm not a Rifle, so no need to count. This is Based on BRP's and WLA's Letters, I have not seen the WLA letter yet.
I don't think you are correct, 762x51 asked the batf for clarification and they at first classed it as a firearm then reversed thier decision and made it a rifle. as far as I know it has never been reversed.
The law applies to everyone not select individuals. The firing mechanism (your design,beachbums, wiselite, etc) does NOT change the designation of firearm or rifle. An mg42 is an mg42. Latest letter, which I believe is from WLA, would be the current ATF opinion.

No mention has been made of the firing mechanism. it is the complete gun I am talking about. have you read the letters from brp and wiselite? If I am not mistaken in my last conversation with Tony from wiselite it is classified as a rifle. If you search the threads you will see the reclassification letter that was submitted by 762 x 51.

Post by **Pirate** » Mon May 07, 2007 7:59 pm

here is the link to the atf reversal on it being a fire arm, the letter has been deleted.

http://www.panzer46.net/mg42board/viewtopic.php?t=2018

Post by **SHARPSSHOOTER5090** » Mon May 07, 2007 9:15 pm

Please see the attached photos of the finished semi- auto only firearm. It's not a MG42 or 53. The barrel, trunion, bolt and bolt carrier are Romy ak, the top cover is MG3. the feed tray, receiver, operating handle, barrel extension, gripstick, buttstock, grips & forearm are scratch built. The rear sight is K98, the belt pouch is SAW 249, the FCG is US made FAL, the barrel attachment is L1A1 pined in place. Oh yea, the return spring is a shortened M60. The bi-pod is anybodies guess. (Shoots 7.62x39. The rounds are dummies)

Post by **tony** » Mon May 07, 2007 10:20 pm

O.k. so if the MG42 series isn't a "firearm" or "crew fed weapon", and it falls in to needing a certain amount of U.S. parts to be compliant. Where can we see a BATFE parts breakdown of this weapon to determine which parts need or can be made or bought to bring it into compliance. And why doesn't it fall into the same rules as the other belt-fed weapons on the market?

This needs to be further researched so people don't get burned.

And what of the MG's that are already built? Now these aren't compliant?

a-kmanator · Post by **a-kmanator** » Tue May 08, 2007 12:12 am

sharpshooter,your project looks friggen awesome,nice work!!!!what's the range report on this bad boy.....kman

Post by **SHARPSSHOOTER5090** » Tue May 08, 2007 9:50 am

I will get you a range report with pictures as soon as I can get back to the range.

Post by **striker754** » Tue May 08, 2007 11:03 am

Pirate wrote:
striker754 wrote:
Pirate wrote: I don't think you are correct, 762x51 asked the batf for clarification and they at first classed it as a firearm then reversed thier decision and made it a rifle. as far as I know it has never been reversed.
The law applies to everyone not select individuals. The firing mechanism (your design,beachbums, wiselite, etc) does NOT change the designation of firearm or rifle. An mg42 is an mg42. Latest letter, which I believe is from WLA, would be the current ATF opinion.
No mention has been made of the firing mechanism. it is the complete gun I am talking about. have you read the letters from brp and wiselite? If I am not mistaken in my last conversation with Tony from wiselite it is classified as a rifle. If you search the threads you will see the reclassification letter that was submitted by 762 x 51.

depends on what WLAs letter says then, although if (Try a different word.) ever went down, you could easily argue this thing is NOT a rifle.

Post by **hcpookie** » Wed May 09, 2007 9:13 am

tony wrote:O.k. so if the MG42 series isn't a "firearm" or "crew fed weapon", and it falls in to needing a certain amount of U.S. parts to be compliant. Where can we see a BATFE parts breakdown of this weapon to determine which parts need or can be made or bought to bring it into compliance. And why doesn't it fall into the same rules as the other belt-fed weapons on the market?

This needs to be further researched so people don't get burned.

And what of the MG's that are already built? Now these aren't compliant?

To the best of my knowledge, there has been no "OFFICIAL" parts count display from the ATF.

However, there has been some threads here that indicate "13" as the obvious count. That is debatable and moot because until ATF says an SA42 has XX or YY parts count, everything is a guess. There is debate on whether the booster can actually be classified as a "piston" or "operating rod". There is debate on whether the recuperator can be classified as an "operating rod".

Going on the "13" count, if you have an SA42 receiver and the AR trigger set (=4 us parts), then you have already fulfilled the "less than 10" quota. FAL and G3 trigger groups mean you must find the parts elsewhere, or use US-built trigger groups. This is a big assumption since we all know how the ATF changes its mind. I am fairly certain that the BRP design is based solely on an AR trigger group, therefore the parts count still "works" with the BRP design that was reviewed by the ATF.

One could argue conversely that the ATF can not enforce a parts count "quota" without an official parts count, but who wants to argue with the JBTs?

It will be most interesting to see the Wiselite ATF letter!

www.MG42.us