Shoulder stock for handgun, maybe?

[nekshot]

Starting to think towards jobs for post hunting days this fall - winter. If you were to attache a handgun to a stock, how would you do it? Also how would you design the stock? I like the Rem 58 in a stock for black powder but I get tunnel vision when I think of doing this for myself. I think I will keep it to wheel guns. I have no desire to use anything tactical in looks. I guess I am a wee bit conservative in this application. Any good ideas? I must be able to make the stuff to do it or it won't get done(tite wad me)!

[JimB..]

I will not claim to be an expert on the legal issues, or on the engineering issues for that matter, but do be sure that you understand how to be sure that you either don’t make, or properly license, a short-barreled rifle.

[Johnch]

I had a "Kit" for a 1911 years back that I "THINK" was a legal way to do it

It was a 16 1/4" 45 ACP barrel
With a shoulder Stock that attached to the pistol by removing the grips and on both sides a thin metal piece went under the grips to the shoulder stock

It worked OK with some 45 ACP loads , others kept stove piping

Big reason I sold it was the only sights I had were those on the slide
Not the best past 50 yards

Sold the kit and used the $$ to partly pay for a Browning High Power

John

[sureYnot]

Under 16", with a stock, is an SBR and requires that you bribe the crown. A pistol brace though... That's different.

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk

[Texas by God]

A shoulder stock percussion pistol isn't that much fun to shoot- especially a revolver. Too much going on by your face. I speak from experience. Cartridge handguns with shoulder STOCKS are verboten without govt. say so.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[JimB..]

Under 16", with a stock, is an SBR and requires that you bribe the crown. A pistol brace though... That's different.


I read misread this as “...you bribe the clown...” and I chuckled.

[Drm50]

I know a guy that put a 16" barrel on a Ruger Std Auto. In fact it was a 10/22 barrel he cut and
fitted to gun. He silver soldered a cleat on back strap of frame. He scoped it and it shot good. I
found it awkward because of angle of stock was to high. The take down lever on the Ruger cause
the problem because it limited where cleat could be located.

I saw a old 38sp S&W that had a neat home made stock attachment but no stock. I've shot some
of the repros with 16" barrels. I still don't want my hand in front of cylinder, it will get stung with
the best of them.

[sureYnot]

I read misread this as “...you bribe the clown...” and I chuckled.Lol. Same thing, essentially.

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk

[Gewehr-Guy]

I remember seeing an interesting article, perhaps in The Backwoodsman magazine, where a man used a walking stick to steady his handgun,had a different way of holding for all shooting positions, looked like a very practical way to steady a pistol for accurate shooting , and legal.

[Mr_Sheesh]

They used to sell shoulder stocks for 1911s which had a thin (metal I think?) strap that you would hold on to the back of the mainspring housing and grip safety with your hand, they were NOT attached to the pistol, but your hand unified them. Thus they're not an attached stock and the BATFE (until they change their mind) called them legal w/o an SBR stamp. Your state may have different laws - Who knows. It's a little difficult to follow all the laws and regulations when they add 1000 a year and the complete set in book forms fills a wall at the local library. (A large wall.) I've wanted to try that though, haven't yet.

[nekshot]

Ok, I need guys like you all to keep me right. First I do not want to get cross ways with the "clowns." I appreciate your input and not going to pursue this venture, but the cane might be something I would enjoy! I still need a project for winter??? Maybe time to do a left hand flint lock?

[KCSO]

I have shot both an 1860 army and a Mauser 96 with a shouder stock and was not enamoured with either. The precussion gun occasionally spit back a little and the Mauser had an clumsy feel to it and I didn't like the bolt coming back in front of my eye.

[Drm50]

When I was a kid I always wanted a Finala .22 pistol with shoulder stock. They looked like Hi-Std
autos. These were made before 1st gun control act. 22s were the only thing that interested me in
this type of gun. I have shot several military pistols with attached stocks. They shot better than
without but not near as well as the same guns made as a carbine. I got to shoot a Luger that
had a 16" barrel, not original and not one of those carbine kits. The Luger was slotted for stock
and guy had bought repro hardware and made his own stock. He had ramp front and back sight
both on barrel. It was a good shooter, like shooting a 22 rifle at plinking distances. This was in
the 60s, he came up with the junk Luger for a donar but my smith is the guy who built it. The
owner had considerable money invested in that project. It looked brand new and was cute, but
what was it good for other than plinking?

[MFGordon]

About 35 years ago the American Rifleman magazine had an article and plans to convert a High Standard Sportking .22 auto pistol into a rifle. High Standards have a barrel that is easily removed by pushing a button. This conversion fitted a 16 inch barrel to the pistol and then attached a wire stock to the side of the barrel. The author then put a small scope on the barrel. This conversion was legal because the stock could only be used by the rifle barrel.

[500Linebaughbuck]

https://i.imgur.com/fqulU7o.jpg

this is sorta what you want. but i would brace it on the elbow, not the shoulder. on the shoulder you have a SBR. on the elbow, its still a pistol/revolver, I THINK. you would better off if you contact someone who knows the laws. BATF is a good place to start.

[500Linebaughbuck]

this one better...
https://i.imgur.com/r3SElRA.jpg

[Texas by God]

About 35 years ago the American Rifleman magazine had an article and plans to convert a High Standard Sportking .22 auto pistol into a rifle. High Standards have a barrel that is easily removed by pushing a button. This conversion fitted a 16 inch barrel to the pistol and then attached a wire stock to the side of the barrel. The author then put a small scope on the barrel. This conversion was legal because the stock could only be used by the rifle barrel.I remember that article. The same author had a Remington rolling block converted to a .250 Savage backpack rifle.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Texas by God]

I have a swivel stud on the bottom of the grip of my .54 plains pistol. I have a short loop sling that I attach to it and loop over my right shoulder or around my neck. I can be quite steady with it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Thin Man]

I suspect a pair of crossed sticks, held together by a few wraps of leather bootlace, would provide all the steadying help a handgun may require. A pair of sticks would be light and easily portable, quick to change elevation (bring the legs closer together or wider apart), and would not attach to the firearm. Think of this as the modern buffalo hunter's rig. I used to carry a pair of these on muzzle loading hunts but can envision the concept working well for a handgun. Short sticks for a sitting position, longer for kneeling or standing.

[oldred]

https://i.imgur.com/fqulU7o.jpg

this is sorta what you want. but i would brace it on the elbow, not the shoulder. on the shoulder you have a SBR. on the elbow, its still a pistol/revolver, I THINK. you would better off if you contact someone who knows the laws. BATF is a good place to start.

I seriously doubt the BATF would care where you say you brace it and if it CAN be braced on the shoulder even if you are not shooting it just having it in your possession would get you an all expenses paid trip to a Government owned Grey Bar resort! A stock is a stock and it matters not how you claim you shoot it, you need not even be shooting it at all!

[Drm50]

I'm not a great one hand pistol shot. I always shoot two handed.

[turtlezx]

check into it being black powder it may not fall under batf rules

[Texas by God]

Shoulder stocked Blackpowder handguns are not considered "firearms" by the BATFE.
State laws may differ.
They are not in demand because they aren't fun to shoot IME/O.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[oldred]

Shoulder stocked Blackpowder handguns are not considered "firearms"

Well almost, the feds don't care what kind of powder it shoots if it is a cartridge gun, a cap&ball would fall under the same rules (or no rules as the case may be) that muzzle loaders fall into. Pistols such as that Remington pictured are not cap&ball and are cartridge revolvers so likely the law would indeed apply -I certainly wouldn't want to argue the point with them. Now if that is an original made before 1898 (is 1898 right????) then MAYBE but then there is the obsolete cartridge wording in the rules too so even that may not do it.

Considering the penalty and the fact that the feds don't play around or cut anyone any slack it's a good idea to ask them beforehand and take any internet advice, as the old saying goes, "with a grain of salt". I very seriously doubt that "but they told me on the internet it would be legal" would be a very effective defense! :roll:

[bigted]

As to reasoning for the desire for a shoulder stocked handgun ... wouldnt a 16 inch barreled carbine such as a trapper model lever or a singleshot such ad a 16 inch Encore be about as handy ... AND PERFECTLY LEGAL?

[oldred]

As to reasoning for the desire for a shoulder stocked handgun ... wouldnt a 16 inch barreled carbine such as a trapper model lever or a singleshot such ad a 16 inch Encore be about as handy ... AND PERFECTLY LEGAL?


:EDIT: Sorry, I misread your post.

[500Linebaughbuck]

I seriously doubt the BATF would care where you say you brace it and if it CAN be braced on the shoulder even if you are not shooting it just having it in your possession would get you an all expenses paid trip to a Government owned Grey Bar resort! A stock is a stock and it matters not how you claim you shoot it, you need not even be shooting it at all!

https://i.imgur.com/fqulU7o.jpg?1

i'm saying if you cut it off(note red line) , then you can bend the "stock" to fit your forearm. the shoulder is not required. it would be a brace not a stock.

the Grey Bar resort[smilie=l:[smilie=l:[smilie=l:, that one goes to memory bank!!!!

[W.R.Buchanan]

This already exists in a legal iteration. It is called the USA 1 Shot.

www.usa1shot.com and https://rsrstore.com

I have two. They just had a guy make a shot at 1200+ yards with a S&W 686.

Randy

[oldred]

https://i.imgur.com/fqulU7o.jpg?1

i'm saying if you cut it off(note red line) , then you can bend the "stock" to fit your forearm. the shoulder is not required. it would be a brace not a stock.

the Grey Bar resort[smilie=l:[smilie=l:[smilie=l:, that one goes to memory bank!!!!

Ok, somehow I completely missed that part before, don't see any reason why that wouldn't be legal.

[Skipper]

ATF info:

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/if-person-has-pistol-and-attachable-shoulder-stock-does-constitute-possession-nfa

[JWT]

Glad to see that Luger exception.

But if it's ok for a Luger why not a 1911?

[oldred]

Glad to see that Luger exception.

But if it's ok for a Luger why not a 1911?



I saw a discussion on another forum that was about that very question. The consensus was, and one of the participants seemed well versed in the law, that it must be a rare collectable as pointed out in the last part,

[such as original semiautomatic Mauser “Broomhandles” and Lugers, have been removed from the purview of the NFA as collectors’ items]

with "collectors items" being the key here. These very rare and very expensive collectors pieces would not be likely at all to be used for any sort of crime and in fact are of much more value as non-use collector pieces than as shooters so it was deemed that while they did indeed fall into the physical description as per the law they actually posed little or no danger of being used in crimes but still retained a high value as collector and historical items thus they were exempted. The law also, as stated by "However certain stocked handguns SUCH AS original Mauser" clearly leaves open the option to also exempt other such stocked handguns as long as they are original and can be shown to have a significant collector value, obviously very few such handguns exist.

So apparently the answer to the question of "But if it's ok for a Luger why not a 1911?" would be because it lacks significant collector value. I would think that if you could find a rare highly collectible ORIGINAL shoulder stocked 1911 (if such a beast could be found, and some were built) then you could apply for a collector exemption and possibly get one.

[El Bibliotecario]

I once fired a Inglis High Power with stock and a Smith & Wesson Model 27 8 3/8" revolver without stock side by side at 100 yards. It was probably an unfair comparison; the High Power was reimported from the far East, and had considerable wear. Standing in the back of a pickup and bracing on a sandbag on the roof, the S&W was more accurate.

[Texas by God]

I once fired a Inglis High Power with stock and a Smith & Wesson Model 27 8 3/8" revolver without stock side by side at 100 yards. It was probably an unfair comparison; the High Power was reimported from the far East, and had considerable wear. Standing in the back of a pickup and bracing on a sandbag on the roof, the S&W was more accurate.A brand new Hi- Power wouldn't keep up with the m27 S&W either, I think.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[W.R.Buchanan]

OK I put this up but everyone ignored it. The guy wants a Stock on his pistol. This is not legal. Period.

However the USA 1 Shot Pistol Brace doesn't attach to the pistol, the gun merely sits in it.

It is the same as bracing the pistol against a barrier except the barrier is movable. Once again, the gun is NOT attached to it in any way. Your strong hand pressure holds the gun and the brace together, and if you open your hand the brace falls away.

I have two of these and I can hit a Silhouette Chicken at 50 meters every single time with my Glock 35. Pigs at 100M 8/10, Rams at 200m 4/10 I sucked at turkeys. This is with G35 in .40 S&W with a Red Dot Sight. I shoot my G23 nearly as well with irons.

The same brace works with all medium frame Glocks, and I have one for my G21 SF as well. They are available for many guns and if you are looking to shoulder your hand gun, this is the way to do it.

They recently had a guy make a 1200+ yard shot with a S&W 686, it's on Youtube.

I just shot a plate rack last weekend 6 shots/hits in 7 seconds. I can't get near that without the brace.

The amount of accuracy this adds to your gun is astounding. It is the Broomhandle Mauser you always wanted except the gun travels in your holster just like normal. The brace just comes along as an accessory.

This is the only way I know of to legally attach a stock to a pistol. Because it's not attached!

http://www.usa1shot.com/

Randy

[Mr_Sheesh]

A stock on a pistol is legal, with the right NFA paperwork, in those states that allow SBRs -- Short Barreled Rifles.

Also legal if it's a contender with a long barrel put on first, then the stock put on.

There was a stock made for 1911s some years ago (40-50?) that you held on same as those braces. BATF legal back then as it was not permanently attached. Probably more examples out there.

[jmorris]

Yep, an SBR or machine gun can both be “pistols” with stocks.

You can also put a 16”+ barrel on a pistol and stock it as well. “Kits” have been made for a few different pistols over time as well as dedicated “uppers” to convert them.

Being a machinegun this one doesn’t matter what length barrel is on it.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=227265&d=1537140039

This one is legal with no barrel or the long one, the short barrel and the stock is a no, no without the right tax stamp.

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=227266&d=1537140210

[FergusonTO35]

Wait a sec. The USA1 products on their website use the "arm brace" devices that AR-15 pistols use. If they are not permanently attached to the gun and therefore don't create an SBR, why don't they have actual buttstocks?

[357Mag]

Neckshot -

Howdy !

You probably are already acquainted with it, but.....if you already haven’t; take a look @
The shoulder stock used on Lee Van Cleef’s Remington 1858 in the Western
“ For a few Dollars More “. He played” Col. Mortimer



With regards,
357Mag

[Mr_Sheesh]

FergusonTO35 - It seems odd to me too. Maybe people are more used to braces nowadays than stocks for pistols?

357Mag - Oddly IMFDB (http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/For_a_Few_Dollars_More) doesn't show an 1858 in "For a few Dollars More". Way too long since I watched these. One of "Angel Eyes"'s thugs did use a stocked '58 at one point in "The Good, The Bad, & The Ugly"

[Baltimoreed]

229005I built this out of a piece of ss tubing filled with lead shot and elmers glue. Works great to steady the gun. It’s not attached to the gun in any way. You hook the one end under your armpit and the brace wraps around your arm to steady it. And it is legal!

[W.R.Buchanan]

Wait a sec. The USA1 products on their website use the "arm brace" devices that AR-15 pistols use. If they are not permanently attached to the gun and therefore don't create an SBR, why don't they have actual buttstocks?

Sorry for the late reply. The shockwave AR Pistol Brace is legal unto itself, The other half is unimportant because the gun isn't attached to it. Part of the reason to use the shockwave brace is because it can be attached to your arm or used as a buttstock and the outfit wants to make this thing as bland as possible so states like CA won't outlaw it outright, which they would do if there were very many of them out there.

CA DOJ outlawed the Roni Pistol Chassis by name and demanded that all FFL's stop selling it. Even though they don't have the authority to do so without legislative action. They basically scared everyone by threatening removal of their FFL's.

They are currently working to outlaw Gun Shows at all the fair grounds in the state. They all come under the control of the Agriculture Dept. and the management of each one is being threatened by Gavie that he will remove them if they don't comply.

These people are super shippy and will resort to any underhanded method of getting their way that they can concoct.

If you live here you must vote Republican all the way down the ticket.

Randy