Mattnall

gazzarM1, I tend to agree with you. I think there are no sensible gun laws that aren't covered by other legislation somewhere.

I would quite like to see a M91/30 in .22LR. Just to add to a WWII themed collection. Edit: Just seen the Poles made the wz. 48, a .22 trainer in the guise of a M38. Where can I get one of those?

The HO do not approve civilian ranges, neither the MoD nor the NRA approve civilian ranges. From what I understand the range operator approves the ranges after taking advice and guidance from any source he deems fit (JSP403, NRA, NSRA, etc). The condition you state seems to be more and more prevalent these days on FACs I see replacing the one that mentions Approved Ranges (not HO approved), probably reflecting the lack of MoD Approval for civilian ranges now that they don't do it.

Many FACs I've seen recently have the approved range condition changed to something like "on ranges suitable for the safe use of that class of firearm and with adequate financial arrangements in place to meet any injury or damage claim" since no one approves civilian ranges any more. But if anything goes wrong and it isn't built to a suitable standard don't expect to get let off with a warning.

One from the collection: Barrel is a bit shorter than the L1A1 and it currently has a machined top cover.

How about a hot glue gun to fill a primer pocket on a sized case?

Yes, but only for the M261 kit or the Bremmer rifles. They were the only mil spec 22 kits readily available in the UK, and these were 10 round inserts but would fit 20 or 30 round mags.

I've had 223 barrels last me 14K rounds and still be competitive at PR and others need changing at 3000 rounds. I know a few top shooters in the States who will not go to the Nationals at Camp Perry with a barrel that's shot over 1000. I find as soon as I think I can shoot better than the barrel it's time to change. Usually this is between 3000 and 6000 for .223. My last barrel had just done about 5500 and I hadn't realised how bad it was - I had taken 2½ years off competitive shooting for health reasons and started this season of CSR thinking that although the scores were passable the errors were just me being out or practice. But I changed the barrel over the winter break and was surprised at the difference. I'm not as rusty as I first thought! However the virus shut-down has halted the practice I was hoping to get before the Imperial that would prove it.

Just because you could doesn't mean you should. Down to the fiery pit it is. 👿 Nice work though.

I have a couple available. What spec are you after? At the moment one is a CMMG bolt/barrel with a CMT flat top upper, fully floated 16" barrel threaded ½UNEF built on a Schmiesser lower and stock (with hide-away 10rnd back-up mag for the .223 - or the stock can be changed if you prefer), RRA single stage trigger. PM me if you're interested.

.

I've got some of these 60gn SSS (Sniper Sub Sonic) ammo and you're correct they are crap in a standard 22 barrel. But put them through an AR with a 22conversion kit (in a 1:8" barrel) they are extremely good, I was surprised. Not tried them at great distances but up to 50 they are very good, I wonder how the sub-sonic mv will affect longer range performance. If they could make them faster then the longer distances would be interesting to see, but perhaps then you might as well get a WMR.

Just found this old thread: Old Thread.

The zero range is 71'7"

The zero range is good to 'get you on target' but not much else. The only way to get a proper zero on the range is to actually shoot that range. A small error in sight picture or zero might not show up at 70-odd feet but at 1000yards it could be a huge error, but you know that I'm sure.

If it's replacement of broken or worn out parts Dillon will send them for free.

Which are?... I was told that Gardner owns the danger area land and needs to agree to any potential round incursion but so far there is no agreement. Not saying anyone is in the wrong but it appeared to me that it wasn't a straight forward done-deal - yet. I was hoping this was sorted.

Unfortunately it is UK Law now, it would involve someone actually thinking it was worthy of parliamentary time to repeal this and all the comments mentioning 'public safety' would go against us as the firearms community. It will be ignored right up until the moment the powers-that-be deem someone (an RFD) unworthy and want a stick to beat them with.

Has there been a problem with the danger area? I hope it's all been resolved if there was.

Yep, that's the letter I got and it upset Cambs/Beds/Herts when they found out. 😆

That's what it looks like to me, Dave, but then that's the end of the story. We don't have to write the extra numbers on the FAC when we transfer the firearm, and then the trail runs dry. NFLMS, I hear, doesn't have the facility to record the extra 2 or 3 numbers with the year and country designations (which could all be different) anyway. I spoke to one importer and they were not happy but they were thinking it might be dropped as unworkable. The only way to do it successfully would be to get the manufacturers to do this at time of production. But as some mass produced parts are not destined for a particular country (or even a particular rifle) at this time would the manufacturers make this financial commitment for a small convenience in a small market? ETA: I still haven't had an answer to a problem that has arisen with a current build after discussing it with the FEO - who is deemed to be the manufacturer? Scenario: If I buy an unbranded receiver from abroad and engrave my name, number etc on it what goes on the FAC as maker? All I would have done is scratch or laser the surface. The conversation then went on... If I buy a barrel blank from (say) Lothar Walther and turn it, thread it and chamber it etc, does it become a 'Matt' barrel or is it still a Walther? I would have done more work to it than was involved in branding the receiver. It's a poorly thought out law with no benefit to safety that I can see. What is surprising is that I expected more from those who think up firearms laws. I've said it many times before - There are no sensible firearms laws.

There is no paperwork to complete over and above the filling in of the register. It should already be on your FAC and your club RFD will only need to book it in to his register and out and check it is already written on your FAC correctly. He is not transferring it to you, only handing it over.

Well, you know of at least two, myself and another of the old CSR shooting crowd and I have had a letter from the neighbouring county firearms department about this (it did upset my own FEO when they found out). I find it hard with all the social media/shooting fora exposure this has had that anyone using such platforms doesn't know about this. As an EU law we had to take it into UK law because we didn't leave the EU before the law came in to force (mid December). This was automatic and the problem now comes in finding the parliamentary time, and even the will, to repeal this. Most of Europe, according to a couple of my sources, are refusing to do this saying it's unworkable and it will not help in reducing crime, however it IS law in the UK and if 'they' want to cause trouble for shooters (RFD/manufacturers) then this is a good place to start. I have spoken to a couple of large firearm importers and they are looking into whether this will be complied with here. I have also heard that some firearms departments aren't going to enforce it (until they want to get rid of the RFDs perhaps, etc) and it only applies to RFDs and not FAC holders. The (various) numbers on a firearm only get reported as far as the RFD register and not on the FAC or to the firearms departments upon transfer as this is not provided for in the law. I believe that one proof house is offering to engrave the components to the required standard for a small fee per item. No surprise there.

I might have to dry fire a bit more...🤔