As far as the over 50 deal, older cartridges are grandfathered in, same reason we can have rifled shotguns.

Does that mean if I want to build a .577 Nitro 3" Ruger No. 1 I'll have no trouble? I am not allowed, however to develop wildcats with larger than .510 caliber projectiles.Is that right?

Also, with the 8 bore question, I guess I would have to base the cartridge on an exsisting design, as the "8 bore" was actually made in calibers ranging from .840-.890 inch.

Reign

[This message has been edited by Wildcatter (edited 07-12-2001).]

As far as wildcats over .510", I don't know exactly what the deal is, I know that with handguns, that is the limit, but I'm not sure exactly how the letter of the law reads regarding rifles, seems kinda grey. I believe that as long as the arm is for sporting use, the destructive device clause doesn't apply. It certainly didn't keep Ross Seyfried from making his 585 Nyati, which is a 577 NE turned into a rimless case with a minute shoulder, and trimmed to 2.85".

As far as the 8 bore, check out Searcy, and check out Dangerous Dave or Huntington's to see about brass.

All things with time and $, if you want a modern Howdah, you could do that as well, but it would have to be built by a Class III manufacturer, and you'd have to pay the $200 tax on it, same as a silencer or machine gun.

Sorry cant offer any advice on the >510 + ideas.

Djinn

quote:

---

Actually the 8 bore was never a shotgun. It was always a rifle.

---

Djinn,

Not sure where you got your information, but there certainly were 8 gauge shotguns. I just examined a very fine specimen from Hollands last month at Cabelas and have a friend who owns one as well (an 8 gauge, not an H&H.) Actually, I'd wager that 8 bore shotguns outnumbered 8 bore rifles several times over.

Interesting that there is an 8 guage shotgun. I seriously doubt that the two are compatible though. See you do learn something new everyday.

Djinn

No need to take anything up with Mr. Seyfried as he is well aware of the existence of 4 and 8 bore shotguns. His quote in Rifle was to make it clear that this particular article was talking about true rifles, not shotguns -- nothing more. Why do you think we have a Federal law banning the hunting of migratory waterfowl with any shotgun bigger than a 10 bore?

Wildcatter,

Sorry we got off track. Back to your original post -- I don't think the fact that you plan to use black powder makes any difference unless you're building a muzzle loader. If you're talking about a self-contained cartridge, it will be considered a firearm like any other. As to the rules on bores over .5" being classified a destructive device, those were set forth in the National Firearms Act, and repeated, almost verbatim in the Gun Control Act of 1968. In either case, the wording is vague enough to leave some question about a project like yours. You can find the full text of both at the BATF website, but it basically says anything with a bore over .5" is a destructive device UNLESS it is "a shotgun or a shotgun shell which the Secretary finds is generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purposes" OR "any other device which the Secretary of the Treasury finds is not likely to be used as a weapon, is an antique, or is a rifle which the owner intends to use solely for sporting, recreational or cultural purposes."

The way I read that last sentence, what you plan to do is perfectly acceptable, and there certainly are those who have built rifles over .50 without asking ATF's permission. BUT if there is ever any question about the legality of the rifle, the BATF's interpretation is what matters. As I recall, Teenut never did get his manufacturer's FFL precisely because he was planning on producing rifles over .50 caliber. It's also worth noting that on SSK's web page, JD Jones specifically says, in reference to his .577 Nitro and .600 JDJ Ruger #1 conversions, "yes, this does require ATF approval - we have it". Don't forget that if you're building the action yourself, that requires ATF permission as well.

Actually, that is not true, if you build your own action for personal use, it is legal to do so, well, provided it isn't fully automatic. There was a series in the Home Shop Machinist about building a falling block single shot, and it covered the legal aspects.

Now, if you manufacture actions, you need a manufacturers FFL.

quote:

---

Title 26 U.S.C., Ch. 53, Subchapter A, � 5822. Making

No person shall make a firearm unless he has (a) filed with the Secretary a written application, in duplicate, to make and register the firearm on the form prescribed by the Secretary; (b) paid any tax payable on the making and such payment is evidenced by the proper stamp affixed to the original application form; (c) identified the firearm to be made in the application form in such manner as the Secretary may by regulations prescribe; (d) identified himself in the application form in such manner as the Secretary may by regulations prescribe, except that, if such person is an individual, the identification must include his fingerprints and his photograph; and (e) obtained the approval of the Secretary to make and register the firearm and the application form shows such approval. Applications shall be denied if the making or possession of the firearm would place the person making the firearm in violation of law.

---

A little further digging at the BATF website revealed a Question and Answer document which includes the following which backs up your statement.

quote:

---

(A7) Does the GCA prohibit anyone from making a handgun, shotgun or rifle?

With certain exceptions a firearm may be made by a nonlicensee provided it is not for sale and the maker is not prohibited from possessing firearms. However, a person is prohibited from making a semiautomatic assault weapon or assembling a nonsporting semiautomatic rifle or nonsporting shotgun from imported parts. In addition, the making of an NFA firearm requires a tax payment and approval by ATF. An application to make a machinegun will not be approved unless documentation is submitted showing that the firearm is being made for a Federal or State agency.

[18 U.S.C. 922(o),(r), (v), and 923, 27 CFR 178.39, 178.40, 178.41 and 179.105]

---

[This message has been edited by Cannon (edited 07-23-2001).]

------------------
Larry

Hmmpf,
Sarge