Jump to content
308AR.com Community
  • Visit Brownells
  • Visit AR15 Builder
  • Visit
  • Visit Site
  • Visit Beachin Tactical
  • Visit
  • Visit Ballistic Advantage
  • Visit Aero Precision
  • Visit Cabelas
  • Visit Faxon
survivalshop

Bolt Action AR uppers

Recommended Posts

 I was kind of pissed off myself at first when I read I was kind of pissed off myself at first when I read this also. Upon further consideration, I do believe they are correct. Any other bolt action rifle is serialized by the receiver with in which the bolt of the rifle resides and operates. Just because this tubular receiver bolts on to another receiver such as an 308 AR type of receiver, doesn't make it a "non receiver".... at least that's how I would tend to understand this also.

 

 the big the big problem is now how to easily and cleanly deal with everything that's already out there of this type of accessory / newly reclassified firearm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, using their logic - if I buy one of these upper assemblies (since they say it's a "firearm"), how do I fire it?...

If it's a "firearm" then I should be able to fire it (send a round) as soon as I pick it up (literally, in my hands), right? 

Nope, have to add an AR lower receiver and trigger group to the mix, in order to shoot it. Since the AR lower is serialized...   what's the serial number of my rifle?  Do I have to use BOTH serial numbers?

This is fucking stupid, on their part.  Purely ignorant. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so does the upper bolt action have a barrel? will it fire with said barrel on ...NO because it has no trigger is this correct? the lower has the trigger? i thought the trigger was the firearm ie....sig P320?i need to see this thing.....

just took a look ...i call BS on this one you can,t have it both ways

Edited by Magwa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they are tying to Import this assembly , read the first Sentence in the second paragraph of the BATF letter . Import restrictions are different , thanks to Bill Clinton & BO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are just trying to serialize everything to be able to keep tabs on things and make things harder to get maybe. idk, but the ATF's reputation has gone to crap and seems to be politically motivated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A stripped receiver ( pick any bolt action maker if you want) the tube of the mechanism where the bolt rides in and the barrel attaches is serialized as the receiver. If you get a custom maker, order a stripped Remington bolt action (or a blue printed one from another gunsmith) receiver from Brownells, however one wants to get it.....it is still the serialized part. Even with no trigger assembly, stock, what have you. ...it is still the receiver by longstanding definition.

 

Whether we like it or not,  I do think this has been slipping under the radar for years. My first thoughts about these years ago, when the first 50BMG styles were being put out, was curiosity of how this wasn't considered a firearm back then.

And I do agree that this is just one more way to register everything, hands down. No argument there.

Edited by bubbas4570
clarifying my thoughts and example

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FAL is made no differently than a bolt action, it feeds into the action and the barrel is attached to this serialized part, nodifference.

Our AR'S are the exception in which parts are serialzied. Normally the barrel attachment part is the serialzied receiver. For whatever reason the brain trust at the federal level went with the ammunition feeding part instead of the "normal" way it had been done previously and since to every other style of firearm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Not sure why the Bolt gun would be different than any other AR type Upper Receiver assembly , but I'm not familiar with hat action or its inner workings . Does the normal AR Fire Control Group Hammer, engage the Firing Pin ? If it does , there is no difference in components to differentiate it from a normal AR Upper .

It may be as said , because its a Bolt action & not a semi auto .

I see one comment made reference to it being a .50 cal. , not sure what difference that would make . If they us the same logic on that Upper assembly , why not all the AR types , I still say it must be something with importing , but I've been wrong before . 

The BATF/E has always had issues , political motivated depending on who's in office .

This is a strange ruling , well we also have to consider the source & they have changed their rulings before , it doesn't happen too often , but its possible . 

Edited by survivalshop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This from the M14 Forum, I don't know enough about this type of Upper assembly to have a conclusion .

" Here's the thing: These uppers incorporate the barrel and locking lugs, as well as the magazine assembly, of the important things a receiver does, it does two out of three.

Generally, two out of three gets you classed as a "receiver".

FAL - barrel and locking system, and magazine.
M14/M1 - barrel and locking system and half of the magazine locking system (and there is little else that could be classes as a receiver>)
M16/AR15 and all their copies as well as the AR18 and its variants - magazine and fire controls
Bolt actions - barrel and locking system and trigger mechanisms
Pistols - trigger mechanism and magazine.
Most older .22s have all three."
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that looking at this like any a other AR15/308AR upper, there isn't much difference than one type being manually activated and the others (semi or fully auto) being gas operated somehow. And I will leave the pump versions out of this discussion....

In my opinion, all the ATF is doing is trying to ID all the bolt uppers, and using the "it has a bolt action upper style receiver" argument to bolster their case. In their twisted logic, which I used in earlier posts, they probably think the pivot pin lugs constitute the place where the fire controls attach to.....

I do know the 50BMG types have everything on the upper needed to fire except trigger controls. They have the bolt, barrel, locking lugs, and the magazine sticking out the side (if mag fed) ; if single shot - there just is no magazine.

In many ways what is problematic to myself is that the 308 and 223 sized uppers are caught up in this crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, an AR open upper receiver with a barrel, and a BCG in it would fall into the same category as bolt action upper no?  Completes all of the same functions. Aside from bolt actions with horizontal magazines...that adds one more function to the mix. 

Seems like a dangerous path to making AR uppers a serialized part as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, DNP said:

Seems like a dangerous path to making AR uppers a serialized part as well. 

One step at a time. They just hate  the idea that we can have most of a rifle shipped to us with no trail. Add in the 80% deal and they get livid. They want that paper trail, wonder why they think they need that??!?!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/6/2018 at 5:36 PM, bubbas4570 said:

 

Our AR'S are the exception in which parts are serialized. Normally the barrel attachment part is the serialized receiver. For whatever reason the brain trust at the federal level went with the ammunition feeding part instead of the "normal" way it had been done previously and since to every other style of firearm.

I have wondered about THAT^^^^ right there for many years. When I first got into AR's back in the early 80's I thought it was odd that the lower receiver had the serial # instead of the upper!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that this organization is mixing regulations to suit them.  They're combining Bolt action regulations with AR regulations, until the outcome best suits what their goal or need is.

Bolt actions, even as a barreled receiver group, have the serial number.  The barreled receiver group could, in a controlled setup, fire a round.  The stock doesn't have a serial number, and there is no "lower" on a bolt action.

ARs have the lower serialized - so that's the controlled part.  It can't really fire a round, unless you have all the workings of the upper receiver group attached to it - but you couldn't fire a round from just an upper, either.  AR lowers are what will make a round go down range - but not by themselves.

A bolt action upper that's specifically designed to mate to an AR lower - by itself, cannot fire around.  You have to combine it to an AR lower receiver group, complete, in order to fire a round.

I think BATFE is coming up with whatever they want, to further classify something, into something that it is not. 

The ACTION of this specific upper receiver is bolt-operated.  On an AR platform.  That doesn't fit the true definition of a "Bolt-action rifle" because it cannot fire around in that upper-only configuration.  It just can't.  It's NOT a "barreled action" because it does not contain or house the trigger group, in the terms of bolt-action rifles.  You must mate it to an AR lower to fire a around.  Same as any other AR upper.  The ACTION of a standard AR upper is semi-auto operated, through direct gas impingement, or gas-piston operation.  The ACTION os an AR upper is NEVER full-auto - but the lower receiver could be...

That make sense?  BATFE is making up their own rules,based on the wrong info.  Just because a weapon is bolt-operated, does not make it a bolt-action rifle.  It's NOT a "rifle" until it gets mated to a lower receiver.  It's just another upper receiver.  It's not semi-auto, Full-auto, doesn't fire from the open-bolt position or the closed-bolt position, nothing...  Until you mate it to a lower receiver, that has a serial number (if it's not an 80% completion).  Right now, those are still legal, too, those pesky 80%s.

This would get wiped out in the first court trial, if the proper definitions were presented on the side of the defense.  There's no other way a judge could see it differently. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are right, and they make it up as they go. creating a bunch of bullpoopy cases designed to take away the rights and punish good people while the real criminals hide their illegal guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×