SIG Talk banner
1 - 20 of 46 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
761 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
194 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
My understanding is that, with this, you can build a complete p320 from parts and not have to have a registered pistol - in similar fashion to the 80% glock and ARs. Again, is just assume but the complete pistol. I can somewhat see the reason to building an 80% Glock as you can build the pistol from the ground up with all the parts you'd like and potentially spend less vs buying the complete gun and then adding the parts.....this somewhat could make sense due to the Glock's aftermarket.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,765 Posts
What's the point? There's no performance to be gained with it.
For most of us, there is no point.

However, it could appeal to some for one or more of these reasons:

1. "Ghost gun" = no 4473, so no record of its existence.
2. You have to DIY it to complete it--some guys like projects
3. If SIG's production capacity gets monopolized by government/military contracts, this may be one way to circumvent a shortage of available factory FCUs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gibbs and Mills

·
Registered
Joined
·
556 Posts
For those who are unfamiliar, here is a video that sheds some light on the concept of an 80% and what it takes to finish it. You can find plenty of these 80% parts online with shipping available.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
Its a good thing ,with this political climate, who knows what the libs will try next. I personally would not live somewhere the state had to have a list of my stuff. LIVE FREE OR DIE. We just got Constitutional carry.Till the next lib gov .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
For most of us, there is no point.

However, it could appeal to some for one or more of these reasons:

1. "Ghost gun" = no 4473, so no record of its existence.
2. You have to DIY it to complete it--some guys like projects
3. If SIG's production capacity gets monopolized by government/military contracts, this may be one way to circumvent a shortage of available factory FCUs.
4. The California market where you have to pay through the nose for a P320 if you want one.

Also if the 80% FCUs do become a reality watch the market dry up on xchange kits and other stand alone slides and grip modules available.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
499 Posts
4. The California market where you have to pay through the nose for a P320 if you want one.

Also if the 80% FCUs do become a reality watch the market dry up on xchange kits and other stand alone slides and grip modules available.
I think you mean the supply of exchange kits and grips would dry up. The demand for them would go up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
920 Posts
Of course, the website could be a 'false front' to the FBI, ATF, DOJ, etc collecting email addresses... but I have my well-worn tinfoil hat on, being from CA.

Darn, they already collected my IP address.... I need Tor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
204 Posts
While this is cool, I think we're missing one minor part which is the FCU parts. Sig could simply not sell them and require you to send you FCU in for replacement. So someone would have to make sure to keep the Springs and other things in stock or readily available.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
368 Posts
My understanding is that, with this, you can build a complete p320 from parts and not have to have a registered pistol - in similar fashion to the 80% glock and ARs. Again, is just assume but the complete pistol. I can somewhat see the reason to building an 80% Glock as you can build the pistol from the ground up with all the parts you'd like and potentially spend less vs buying the complete gun and then adding the parts.....this somewhat could make sense due to the Glock's aftermarket.
I've heard of the Polymer 80 for a while and just looked into it now, using Lone Wolf uppers, it'd be at least $500. Might as well buy new. If it could get me a Glock clone for $400 or less, I'd be all over it because I can't even find used Glocks for $400.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
261 Posts
Keep in mind, this is the part that has the factory serial number on it. Replacing the factory unit with this is similar to filing off the serial number on "normal" weapons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Keep in mind, this is the part that has the factory serial number on it. Replacing the factory unit with this is similar to filing off the serial number on "normal" weapons.
Uhhhh...

Not really. Manufacturing your own firearm is what you're doing, and then buying accessories. Defacing the serial number on a firearm is a crime, manufacturing one for your own use without a serial number is not.

"Additionally, although markings are not required on firearms manufactured for personal use (excluding NFA firearms), owners are recommended to conspicuously place or engrave a serial number and/ or other marks of identification to aid in investigation or recovery by State or local
law enforcement officials in the event of a theft or loss of the privately owned firearm. ” -The ATF
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
261 Posts
I'm not looking for an argument but interested in a discussion on this.

Not really. Manufacturing your own firearm is what you're doing, and then buying accessories. Defacing the serial number on a firearm is a crime, manufacturing one for your own use without a serial number is not.
Except that the parts you need to manufacture the FCU are not available without purchasing a complete weapon (or in this case FCU). I suppose you could make your own parts but its highly uncommon/unlikely. I believe the more nefarious purpose I stated in my original statement. People want a firearm without a serial number (for whatever reason) and replacing the stock FCU with this piece makes it look a lot better than just filing off the serial number.

"Additionally, although markings are not required on firearms manufactured for personal use (excluding NFA firearms), owners are recommended to conspicuously place or engrave a serial number and/ or other marks of identification to aid in investigation or recovery by State or local
law enforcement officials in the event of a theft or loss of the privately owned firearm. ” -The ATF
Correct, serial numbers aren't required on something you make however they are required for anything that is sold.

In 1968, the Gun Control Act (GCA) imposed numerous additional requirements in the arena of gun manufacture. As per the GCA, all firearms manufactured or imported into the United States are required to bear a serial number. This law ―which was effective October 22, 1968― extends the serial requirement beyond the specific group of NFA regulated firearms.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
556 Posts
I'm not looking for an argument but interested in a discussion on this.

Except that the parts you need to manufacture the FCU are not available without purchasing a complete weapon (or in this case FCU). I suppose you could make your own parts but its highly uncommon/unlikely.

[/I]
There is another, similar thread going on this same topic. I recall someone mentioning that a project is in the works to make a parts kit available without having to buy an FCU.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Except that the parts you need to manufacture the FCU are not available without purchasing a complete weapon (or in this case FCU).
They aren't?

but yes we agree: this definitely looks better than filing off the serial number and is, you know, way more legal.

And honestly right now, the dearth of small parts has to partially be the lack of market for them. Nobody's buying a "spare" sear assembly...why would you? And it's definitely also cheaper at the moment to buy a whole gun and part it out than to buy the small parts piecemeal but...I don't think it's impossible.
 
1 - 20 of 46 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top