Remington's new pistol. Not seeing the point.

[User 1234]

Anyone know if the Browning Buckmark Carbine stock could physically fit a Buckmark pistol? After the Form 1 of course. I could call Browning but it is Saturday.

 

[The Heretic]

I understand the target market, I would buy one if it were better implemented and priced.

1) Heavy for what it is - almost 8 pounds if I read a review correctly. It would be appealing if it were half the wight.

2) Not modular enough - i.e., can't change calibers.

3) Price - compared to a rifle, I could get something more useful for the street price. Spend more and I start getting into the realm of a titanium action rifle with a carbon-fiber barrel.

 

[Member 34319]

I think if anything these guns are a great way to showcase the stupidity of NFA restrictions.

I would say these wouldn't be taboo or weird to folks if we had rifles with any sort of barrel length available. Imagine if NFA barrel length laws never happened? All the crazy lengths and such that would exist...

 

[Stomper]

 

[The Heretic]

Speaking of ugly homemade experiments, here's a bolt action I got bored with and wanted to put in my pack so I made a folding stock. Actually a person could set the folding adapter into the stock so that it would be pretty well flush but not worth the time for me. Again just playing around with "toy" gun, not a hunting rifle. View attachment 694660
View attachment 694664

I picked up a folding buttstock - I think it is for a shotgun. My intention was (is?) to adapt it to an Ishapore Enfield in .308 that has the barrel shortened and the barrel rear sight milled down to accept a rail mounted scout scope.

 

[The Heretic]

Anyone know if the Browning Buckmark Carbine stock could physically fit a Buckmark pistol? After the Form 1 of course. I could call Browning but it is Saturday.

No - my understanding is that they purposely made it so it wouldn't fit on the pistol.

 

[CountryGent]

Speaking of ugly homemade experiments, here's a bolt action I got bored with and wanted to put in my pack so I made a folding stock. Actually a person could set the folding adapter into the stock so that it would be pretty well flush but not worth the time for me. Again just playing around with "toy" gun, not a hunting rifle. View attachment 694660
View attachment 694664

Very neat.

I think if anything these guns are a great way to showcase the stupidity of NFA restrictions.

I would say these wouldn't be taboo or weird to folks if we had rifles with any sort of barrel length available. Imagine if NFA barrel length laws never happened? All the crazy lengths and such that would exist...

Agreed. I'm not a fan of the braces for a variety of reasons, but they do nicely illustrate how spectacularly moronic the NFA categorizations based upon barrel and overall length are.

And, to your point, there would almost certainly be a greater variety of firearms available sans NFA34 nonsense. I've often wondered if the stocked pistol concept would have lingered on longer in this country if it wasn't for that old law.

But, I digress.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

I think if anything these guns are a great way to showcase the stupidity of NFA restrictions.

I would say these wouldn't be taboo or weird to folks if we had rifles with any sort of barrel length available. Imagine if NFA barrel length laws never happened? All the crazy lengths and such that would exist...

Subject to the assumptions listed below, can't most all of these crazy lengths etc. guns u are talking about be created right now without a stamp as long as the weapon is manufactured as a pistol? F.e. I have a revolver (pistol/handgun) originally manufactured with a 16" barrel. Someone correct me if I am wrong but couldn't I also create a pistol with a brace that has a long barrel, say 30" barrel (again refer to assumption #2 below), or any short or long length really. I suppose if it had a 30 foot barrel on it then it would be hard to say it's designed to be used with one hand though ha ha.

Assumptions:
(1) Not a shotgun
(2) Items that turn it into a two handed weapon such as stocks (which are designed to be shot from the shoulder) and vertical grips are not used
(3) In terms of maximum flexibility for the type of firearm that can be made, pistol braces are allowed unchanged from current ATF guidance now and in the near future
(4) Length of pull less than 13.5" so that ATF doesn't consider the brace a stock (i.e. designed to be used from the shoulder)

From the ATF:

"Although not defined in the NFA, the term "pistol" is defined by the Act's implementing regulations, 27 CFR 479.11, as "a weapon originally designed, made, and intended to fire a projectile (bullet) from one or more barrels when held in one hand, and having (a) a chamber(s) as an integral part(s) of, or permanently aligned with, the bore(s); and (b) a short stock designed to be gripped by one hand and at an angle to and extending below the line of the bore(s)" (emphasis added). "

 

[DirectDrive]

Remington is going to get the ATF re-visiting the pistol brace bringing crap like that to market.
Thanks Cerberus Capital Management

 

[orygun]

Nope! I'm not interested. I find it rather strange.

 

[wired]

They originally offered it in 300 BLK but discontinued it. Odd.

Its Remington. Theyve lost their way.

 

[micdude]

I've been looking for a .223 bolt action rifle to buy that take standardized mags and debating on what one to get. I would say I'm in the minority when saying I want one. I'll wait till it flops and goes on sale for some ridiculously cheap price, then I'll buy two just like the Remington 870 dm.

 

[The Heretic]

Remington is going to get the ATF re-visiting the pistol brace bringing crap like that to market.
Thanks Cerberus Capital Management

It is no different than an AR or AK pistol and much more likely to only be used for hunting, and not defensive or offensive purposes. There are plenty of other pistol brace examples that politicians and gun control activists would attack long before a bolt action pistol.

 

[DirectDrive]

It is no different than an AR or AK pistol and much more likely to only be used for hunting, and not defensive or offensive purposes. There are plenty of other pistol brace examples that politicians and gun control activists would attack long before a bolt action pistol.

I tend to disagree with that.
But that's OK.

 

[clearconscience]

Three words

Because they can. They are not innovative. Companies are just releasing the same firearms through slightly different platforms in hopes of boosting sales.
They could spend their money a lot better.
Like helping fight stupid guns laws

 

[DB is Here]

Help me out guys but I'm not seeing the point in this thing.

That's because their isn't. Or I'm just not tacti-nerd enough.

 

[The Heretic]

Three words

Because they can. They are not innovative. Companies are just releasing the same firearms through slightly different platforms in hopes of boosting sales.
They could spend their money a lot better.
Like helping fight stupid guns laws

Run it up the flag pole to see who salutes it.

I would see such a firearm as useful - properly implemented. How many who are poo-pooing this would and do accept the idea of an AR pistol? How many like the idea of a Shockwave/Tac-14? How many like butt-stocks or braces for conventional pistols? How many like the idea of an SBR in general?

I like it because it is small and compact. I like carbines. I like take-downs. I like pistols that have the power and reach of a rifle.

I don't like this particular example because it was done poorly - they should have made it with a smaller extremely lightweight action and stock. This is really just a full sized bolt-action with a brace and a short barrel. Good idea, poorly implemented; over priced (twice the price of the rifle it is based on), overweight, poorly thought out.

 

[DB is Here]

How many who are poo-pooing this would and do accept the idea of an AR pistol? How many like the idea of a Shockwave/Tac-14? How many like butt-stocks or braces for conventional pistols? How many like the idea of an SBR in general?

None of the above are bolt action...see the problem?

 

[cigars]

It's the right gun for somebody.

 

[DB is Here]

It's the right gun for somebody.

Agreed, just failing to see why a manufacturer would set up an production line for it. Oh well.