98Z5V

He's doing some pretty cool stuff to get those Berdan primers out of the case - I'd mess with him about it, and ask him how he's doing it - how's he depriming and resizing? This is the coolest video I've seen on it: The ticket will be converting them from Berdan primed to Boxer primed - don't know if you can do that with steel:

I personally don't think we will see a ban, of any sort, in reference to this. They did NOT expect the pushback they got from the American People. That fucked them up. They poked the bear, and they now know that.

Tuesday looks like the day! I'll get my review up, compared to whatever triggers that are closest to it, in my inventory.

^^^ That is based off the presumption that this works out. You can nail a .308 AR barrel for cheaper than $250, from numerous places online. Not trying to be a downer to you, but there's going to be significant work involved in doing this. It doesn't seem that you realize that, as wells as your gunsmith realizing that. It won't be an easy affair, and you're the one paying for it.

You guys all need to go read the comments at the bottom of this page - and support Josh. <thumbsup>

Rene, you are not going to get a rifle gas system on a 14.5" .308 barrel, brother. I hate to break that to you - I've been watching the posts, and I understand your hardon. It's not gonna happen, brother. I hate to be a dick, but it is what it is. <lmao> I'm turning a mid-gas Rainer .308 barrel into a 13.7" barrel, so I can pin it to 16" minimum legal requirement. I will document this and give you pics. God DAYUM, you are stubborn... <laughs>

So, you're saying you don't have an extractor spring in your rifle? You do. From that vid you posted, it looks like the SR556 already had the p-ring on the extractor spring - your SR762 might already have it from the factory. If it does, and you can rule out a weak extractor spring, a functional o-ring - then you can jump to the conclusion that it's gas pressure that caused it. Rule out what you can before you jump to conclusions.

One of these will fix that trigger you took out - let me know if you can find one cheap somewhere, with cheap shipping. My usualy "quick searches" failed me, so my trigger sits in the parts box.

Those are for the smaller brothers - not .308ARs. Check your spring in yours first, and see if it's larger. It probably is, since everything in the 308ARs is about 30% larger...

Check the extractor spring - disassemble the bolt and look at it. If it doesn't already have an o-ring around it, put one on, and try it from there. Wouldn't be a bad idea to just replace it, and add the o-ring, too.

J-Spring. That's the J-Spring failing. I've currently got a stock-type trigger with a broken J-Spring. I'll fix it if I can find the damn spring somewhere.

Good vid from Military Arms Channel. Very good vid. Rob, here's some 7.62x25 Tokarev ammo that's very close to the 90gr at 2100fps you wanted to see. All these shots are against level IIIA. https://www.full30.com/video/bb4bb9aff53dc8d0be5718c7982bf55b

6" craftsman vise, swiveling/locking base.

The whole point is - they cannot do that. They cannot "modify the definition of armor-piercing ammunition to conform to..." anything. They cannot modify that. They can't go back in time and change the LEOPA, 1986. Spread that word, everyone.

Big fucking fail on the "AND" as well as the "OR..." .223 Rem ammunition, as well as 5.56 NATO ammunition does not fit those very specific requirements, which are law. Those requirements are law. Not "rulings" or "guidelines" or "opinions" or "adjudications..." Law.

To reiterate... The term ‘armor piercing ammunition’ means— (i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium; or (ii) a full jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile. © The term ‘armor piercing ammunition’ does not include shotgun shot required by Federal or State environmental or game regulations for hunting purposes, a frangible projectile designed for target shooting, a projectile which the Attorney General finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes, or any other projectile or projectile core which the Attorney General finds is intended to be used for industrial purposes, including a charge used in an oil and gas well perforating device.

From your post above - second linked article: "Rep. Steve Israel of New York Friday said in a release that he will push the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to "reevaluate" it's decision to back off a ban of the 5.56 M855 ammo." The only problem is this - they're too stupid to even know the law. They don't even know the "framework" of the 1986 LEOPA. Too fucking dumb, and too fucking dumb to research it. Here's the bottom line on it: http://thefederalist.com/2015/03/09/the-obama-administrations-m855-ammo-ban-is-blatantly-lawless/ The Obama Administration’s M855 Ammo Ban Is Blatantly Lawless The ATF has no statutory authority to ban the manufacture of M855 rifle ammunition. Earlier this year, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) unexpectedly announced that it planned to characterize all M855/SS109 ammunition (5.56x45mm) as armor-piercing and ban its manufacture. The ATF claims that its authority comes from a 1986 federal statute that defines armor-piercing ammunition and gives ATF the authority to ban it. Unfortunately, the ATF’s claim is nonsense. It has no such authority to ban a rifle round that is economical, popular (especially among those who own AR-15s), and far less lethal than many other types of common rifle ammunition on the market. The ATF does not have that authority now and did not have it back in 1986 when the law was first passed. At its core, this is a naked and lawless power grab meant to effectuate gun control that the administration is unable to obtain via the ballot box or the legislature. Here is the precise statutory definition of “armor-piercing ammunition,” which can be found in 18 U.S.C §921(a)(17): (17) (A) The term ‘ammunition’ means ammunition or cartridge cases, primers, bullets, or propellent powder designed for use in any firearm. (B) The term ‘armor piercing ammunition’ means— (i) a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium; or (ii) a full jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile. © The term ‘armor piercing ammunition’ does not include shotgun shot required by Federal or State environmental or game regulations for hunting purposes, a frangible projectile designed for target shooting, a projectile which the Attorney General finds is primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes, or any other projectile or projectile core which the Attorney General finds is intended to be used for industrial purposes, including a charge used in an oil and gas well perforating device. This definition is really, really important when comes to the issue of whether M855 ammunition is “armor-piercing” or not. Interestingly enough, the definition does not require that so-called armor-piercing ammunition actually be capable of piercing armor. The definition includes two main parts, at least one of which must be satisfied before ammunition can be classified as being “armor-piercing” and therefore subject to prohibition. Furthermore, each of the two parts contains multiple conditions, all of which must be satisfied. You cannot mix and match requirements from the two distinct definitions (the supreme importance of this point will become clear later). We’ll look at each of the two major definitions separately. The first definition, from (B)(i) above, requires all of the following: a projectile (or bullet) must be 1) usable in a handgun, and 2) constructed entirely from “one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium.” Is M855 ammunition usable in a handgun? Yes. Although it’s primarily a rifle round, some handgun manufacturers built handgun platforms around it. Is the M855 projectile constructed entirely from one or a combination of those materials listed in the statute? No. It’s made from a combination of steel and lead, and lead is not one of the materials listed in the statutory definition of “armor-piercing ammunition.” What does this mean? It means that the first statutory definition for “armor-piercing ammunition” fails to apply to M855 ammunition, since both conditions were not satisfied.

Have you even shot this thing yet?

We, as a collective group, need to readdress the assault on the M855 round by politicians, the BATFE, and the President - we truly know who is behind this anyway. This will not be "forgotten" by them, or "shelved" in a temporary manner. With what they led with, they faced a losing battle. And, they lost that battle, at least for now. You can rest assured that they will not stop, and this is not over. It's far from over. FAR. The main contention they were pushing for was that M855/SS109 is an armor piercing cartridge - it is not. It does not meet the definition of an armor piercing cartridge/load/round as defined by the LEOPA. Just reading that information contained in that specific law proves that point. These politicians are grabbing at straws, and their target is the AR Pistol configuration. The AR Pistol configuration is not new, and it's been around for many, many years. The GenPop (America, at large) doesn't have any idea of this, but the politicians are parrotting this as a "new thing" and a "threat to Law Enforcement." They are bending the LEOPA to fit their "new term" or "new toy" to try to bullschit the GenPop that this was never here before, and now it's a HUGE threat to LEOs. Historically, it's never been a threat to LEOs. FBI Statistics show that - or has the FBI been lying to the GenPop all this time? I think not. For your own shock, research the FBI statistics for Sandy Hook... How many deaths and shootings were there for Sandy Hook, again?... At any rate, my whole point for this longass post is simple. Very simple. Level II, Level IIA, and Level IIIA armor is NOT rated for rifle ammunition, nor was it ever intended to protect against rifle ammunition. Never. IS THERE A NATIONAL MANDATE THAT LEOs CAN ONLY WEAR THOSE LEVELS OF ARMOR?!!? Fuk no, there isn't. They can wear Level III and Level IV, if they want. Those armors are rifle-rated. And, if they're in a really fucked up city/county/state/situation, they already wear it. And, they bought their own schit, because they value their own lives - and know their own situation. When was the last time you heard about the Federal Government providing body armor to local/city/state LEOs? Free?! That's what they do?! No, that's NOT what they do. As a LEO, when was the last time YOU were provided free body armor?... When was the last time you were provided free body armor that you knew, without a doubt, would protect you against EVERYTHING? If you're a LEO, and you answer this question in the positive, then you're EOD. Bottom line - and GenPop is clueless in this latest political assault on our freedom - pistol-rated armor was never designed to defeat rifle rounds. Never was designed for it.If you need to defeat rifle rounds - buy rifle-rated armor, LEO. You have to buy your own, anyway. Off my soapbox on this bullschit.

As soon as you said that, I was thinking .311... Weird that they were .308.

Love those damn gloves. <thumbsup>

Here's a link to the good hardcopy, brother - time to order and get one in hand, to carry with: http://www.gunlawguide.com/ Here's a website to research and print what you need: http://www.handgunlaw.us/ I typically work on Saturdays, but I'll see if I can get that one off. I'll post back in with the results. They're not too keen on giving me days off, most of the time, but that's not a day that ends a pay period. I might get it.

YEEEEEAAAAAHH!!! :hethan:

Damn, I didn't check the mail today... Yep, it's in the box - I'll grab it in the morning.

Damn, I've smashed so damn many fingers so far in life. I can tell right away whether that nail is a goner, or if it'll make it. <lmao>