Display Mp40

[Lt Shaffer]

Hello all, I am looking for info on the CORRECT way to make a display MP40 from a Philly 80% tube. I looked on the ATF website and couldn't find anything on display guns. I was wondering if anyone has a letter or directions to the info before I contacted the ATF on this matter. I don't want any "intent to construct" possibilities. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/unsure.gif Thanks.

[mp40]

Hi. LT Shaffer, I personally think that it is truly not a good idea to construct a replica mp40 or other type of an machine gun using real parts, what with the "intent to construct possibilities" that the ATFE can hit you with!that's why i prefer to have the Japanese made replicas sure, they might not have the originallity factor that the replica made from real parts has, but they are safer to have!

[geodkyt]

Why don't you write a letter to Tech Branch and ask them what they consider a "no-no", and what they awould like to see?

 

Or, check with one of the parts people who sells display tubes, and ask them, "Hey, why, specifically, is your tube legal, and how do I know?"

[TSMGguy]

The 80% tubes and receivers are made in such a way that they comply with all BATF guidelines. There are none that will accept a bolt without modification. That's precisely why they are made: for the legal constructon of display guns. None of the parts mounted to the 80% receivers are in themselves regulated under the NFA. However, I wouldn't think it a good idea to possess both an 80% receiver and a video, template, or blueprint for finishing the receiver. This might be construed as "intent to manufacture". Take care!

[Lt Shaffer]

Thanks for all the replies. I will contact the ATF to find out what the law says about display guns. I would think they would have something cut & dry on the subject. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/laugh.gif They would never overlook or leave something like this up to us to figure out http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/blink.gif

[geodkyt]

QUOTE (Lt Shaffer @ Jul 23 2003, 07:03 PM)

Thanks for all the replies. I will contact the ATF to find out what the law says about display guns. I would think they would have something cut & dry on the subject. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/laugh.gif They would never overlook or leave something like this up to us to figure out http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/blink.gif

Unfortunately, as far as the law is concerned, they did. Technically, a legal "dummy" gun has no legal existance -- it's just a paperweight. The problem is what BATF considers a "readily convertable" or "readily restored" MG receiver. They won't list a standard -- only answer "yes" or "no" for specific cases.

 

The "80% receivers" are another grey area. Legally, there is no such thing as an "80% receiver" -- there are only gun receiveres, and lumps of metal that aren't yet gun receivers. What is referred to as an "80% receiver" is simply a reciever shaped piece of metal that the manufacturer has machined as far as he thinks he can legally get away with, and the BATF has said, "OK. It's not a gun. . . yet." What one guy calls "80%" may be what another guy calls "50%". As an example, I can order three different "80% receivers" for an AR15 or M1911 right now, and all three will be at different stages of manufacture. An "80% receiver" for an M1911 frame may be anything from just requiring the slide rails to be milled out, to requiring that in addition to drilling most of the holes!

 

But, "80% receiver" is accepted as an industry standard term for a receiver not quite finished enough to qualify as "readily restored". However, "80% receivers" are used to manufacture real guns. This makes it problematic, as the goal of an "80% receiver" is to finish it to the point that even one more machining operation pushes it over the line from "paperweight" to "receiver". (That's what "80%" is supposed to mean.) Likewise, you don't want to have a receiver blank (no machining operations, sometimes called a "0% receiver") that has a template on it when you have full-auto parts. . . that might be "constructive possesstion", i.e., you were obviously planning to complete an illegal machinegun!

 

What you should do (even though it may be possible to make a legal display gun from an "80% receiver", depending on the exact circumstances and the mood of the BATF guy who looks at it if it comes up) is use a BATF approved dummy receiver -- generally a solid aluminum casting that looks like a receiver, but has no internal space for the bolt, barrel, etc. These are commercially available, and should come with a copy of the BATF approval letter, stating that they are non-guns, and can be used to make a display gun. http://www.machinegunbooks.com/forums/invboard1_1_2/upload/html/emoticons/cool.gif

[Cincylance]

Geodkyt is right on the money with his information. 80% receivers are commonly built into post sample weapons. That is the real purpose of manufacturing them in the first place. If you build an 80% receiver into a dummy gun, be sure it cannot accept a bolt or chamber live ammunition. Remember, the receiver is the registered part on a MG, so make sure it cannot be construed as a live MG.

 

Your safe bet is to do as Geodkyt says and get an alum. dummy receiver.

 

Good luck,

Cincylance

 

http://home.fuse.net/cincylance/mp40LL.JPG

 

[billie32]

Might I suggest buying an MGC model as it would be a lot cheaper and definately a lot safer then attempting to build a dummy out of real parts on an 80% tube. You then have a 100% accurate reproduction, that you can fold the stock, move the bolt, pull the trigger, take apart, and play with without worrying about the whole "intent" angle. They can generally be had for about half the price of a parts kit, or even less depending on where you find it (e-vil bay seems to command rather rediculous prices, so I would suggest staying away from there). I own one myself and can't say enough good things about it, looks great on my 1943 Dodge Command Car (some of the Vets can't believe it's not real!). Good luck!

[Ron Mills]

I have seen what looks to be (in print, anyway), the MGC MP40 perhaps revamped. It's in the Guns-n-Stuff catalog, which you can also pull up on gunsnstuff.net. It even bears the old Collector's Armoury model number, 01-600 (the Thompson was 01-700). The ad copy is from the original description too. I haven't seen one up close, so I don't know how much metal is on it. It's $399 in the catalog. I think I paid $59.95 for my 1st one in 1971! I know that when the dollar vs. yen situation was getting bad, Tracy Nelson was looking to a vendor in Spain to make replicas, and use less metal and more plastic.

I hope this helps some. It would be interesting to view one and see how close it is to the old MGC. Mine even "browned" with age!