
Kahr Sa Thompson
#1
Posted 28 January 2004 - 12:18 PM
When we purchased the AutoOrdnance line in 1999, the guns were not being made with a detachable buttstock, we have continued to make the gun the same way. At the present time there are no plans to make a detachable buttstock for the 1927.
Sincerely,
Faye M.Newcomb
#2
Posted 28 January 2004 - 12:40 PM
I hope you didn't expect Kahr comprimise their inability to listen to customers.

Maybe you (and I) should write them another letter. We could tell them "When Kahr purchased AO of WH in 1999, the guns actually functioned. Why did they change that?"

Norm
#3
Posted 28 January 2004 - 12:51 PM
#4
Posted 28 January 2004 - 01:12 PM
It just occured to me that they may not want to make a detachable stock for the 27A1. Maybe it is because it could fit on a 27A5 pistol with no modifications. That might get them into some hot water down the road, seeing as how they are the manufacturer.
I hope their customer service has gotten better.
Norm
#5
Posted 28 January 2004 - 01:24 PM
Edited by LIONHART, 28 January 2004 - 01:24 PM.
#6
Posted 28 January 2004 - 01:57 PM
The liability of attaching a removable stock on the A5 would be about the same as a person swapping barrels from 16" to 10". I don't think it would fall back on Kahr. It is the intent of the owner.
I looked into making stocks for handguns, a big "NO" on the ATF side. But you can legally make a stock for a handgun so long as it is not attached directly to the gun. ( the pistol just sits on the stock )
#7
Posted 28 January 2004 - 02:08 PM
I think I read somewhere that Mauser broomhandles were now legal with buttstocks... Does this fall under some kind of collector/antique thing?
As for car, yes, they probably have no intention on doing anything different, as long as folks continue to purchase the items.
Best Zamm
#8
Posted 28 January 2004 - 02:10 PM
#9
Posted 28 January 2004 - 02:15 PM
#10
Posted 28 January 2004 - 03:34 PM
#11
Posted 28 January 2004 - 04:47 PM
I was seeking to make a stock for all makes of handguns that was attachable.
The ATF won't allow a handgun to be changed back and forth into a rifle/handgun... Throw in the barrel length, even my Dan Wesson with a 10" barrel would need to be classified as a SBR.
As to function AO - Kahr I've herd that both were plagued with feed problems. Those that purchased both new and had none are lucky.
From others on this board it's been stated that the Kahrs are finished a little better so far as aesthetics.
I have a Kahr and with minor tweaking it works fine. I picked up a 28 stock from Gun Parts, and swapped out the alloy slide with one made of steel from TommyGunner.com. I might add that the fit of the steel slide is far better. Plus the metal to wood fit was like he had my stock in hand. Great job Damon!
I've purchased several Colt pistols over the years that did not function
out of the box, so far as feeding reliably. Again minor tweaking and they worked great.
#12
Posted 29 January 2004 - 01:08 PM
Always wondered about that.
#13
Posted 29 January 2004 - 04:38 PM
Good point, well taken, I had forgotten the Contender.
It was the barrel length that was the stickler.
It was legal though to produce a stock where the gun simply rested on the wood and was held in place with the hand.
The catch there on production level is to make a stock that would fit all styles of frames, revolver & pistol.
Fencer,
The use of a collapsible or folding stock on the M1A1 would be a violation because of the pistol grip, and removable magazine. That would place the gun into the assault weapon category, unless you were to make the magazine un-removable and load through the ejection port. I would think that to do all of that would be treading very close to the line.
Using the removable 28 stock and slide is not listed. (at least yet!)
#14
Posted 29 January 2004 - 05:26 PM
By M1A1 you do mean a WWII C+R M1 Carbine, right? I was not talking about the Semi-auto
M14 produced by Springfield Armory.
Thanks.
#15
Posted 29 January 2004 - 05:34 PM
I was referring to the Thompson M1A1.

The cliassifcation for an assult rifle. 9/13/1994
According to the semiautomatic assult weapon definition as found in 18 U.S.C. 921 (a) (30) ( B )
A semiautomatic rifle that has the ability to accept detachable magazines and has at lease two (2) of the following features.
( i ) a folding or telescoping stock;
( ii ) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
( iii ) a bayonet mount;
( iv ) a flash suppressor or a threaded barrel designed to accomondate a flash suppressor; and
( v ) a grenade launcher
However there are no laws to date stating that a removable stock like the 28 cannot be used on the semi's like the Kahr and AO 27's...
Lionhart included this information when he un-veiled "Project X".
Then under another law the restriction of folding stocks.
For pre-ban rifles only. It is illegal to install a folding stock on a rifle manufactured after 9/13/1994.
Argh, there are far to many laws!

Edited by Grey Crow, 30 January 2004 - 02:30 PM.
#16
Posted 29 January 2004 - 05:49 PM

Bought one a couple years ago, and have been afraid to actually install it since I saw an article in
SGN about typical Gun Law violations.
Thanks again.
#17
Posted 29 January 2004 - 06:06 PM
For pre-ban rifles only. It is illegal to install a folding stock on a rifle manufactured after 9/13/1994.
Removable stocks are still legal on the semi Thompsons as well as FA's.
For now any way!
It's great that Kahr is finally responding to questions about their product
Now if they would only take a few of their guns out and shoot them, do a little home work, and fix the problems, they would have a product worth the asking price.
Yes, I own a Kahr 27A1, and it did not function without more work. But I do not regret the purchase.