What's the word on solvent traps, /k/? From what I've

$200 and 4-12 months of waiting per item just like any other NFA item

If you're going to go to that time/expense why not get a purpose designed suppressor?

Or just wait for the Hearing Protection Act to pass

>>32627246
Fuck off ATF

File: IMG_3252.jpg (57KB, 526x568px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 526x568px

Nice try, ATF.

File: ATF.jpg (57KB, 499x314px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 499x314px

>>32627246
Tell me more. Where did you get yours and how did you convert it?

File: 1473313824954.png (933KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

933KB, 640x640px

>>32627246
I smell ATF

No doggos here sir

>>32627322
this

However, "solvent traps" are cheap. Buy a proper threaded adapter, serialized, and thats the part considered nfa. Once the trap is no good, toss it, buy a new one with no legal issues since the adapter is the registered part.

For a handgun you need a device that I can't remember the name of. Neilson, nelson? Anyway, it's not as simple.

I am wondering how things like these and oil filters work compared to a proper suppressor, Is there an effect on accuracy and are they noticably louder?

If they are really good maybe it is better to license one of the adapters

File: tmp_31953-1457702138002-1949476194.jpg (46KB, 916x563px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 916x563px

>>32627592
>paniniposting on /k/

File: 1483840709120.jpg (50KB, 514x433px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 514x433px

>>32627809
What a cuck

>>32627805
go for a hydraulic filter. They generally have a more traditional suppressor shape.

just look up vids on jootube. Plenty of videos showing use.

>>32627865
Can't tell sound on YouTube at all and no one shows accuracy shifts or any thing like that

>>32627860
Leave poor harpsichord alone!

>>32627733
Wrong. The law specifically forbids this. Something like a wipe? Sure, toss it. But anything more is no-go. Look up "ATF chore boy" if you are a nigger.

>>32627913
How would the ATF even find out if you discard a non serialized part?

>>32627874
yeah i dont think ive seen an vids in regards to accuracy.
Suppression also involves the ammo. On a good sound setup, with and without vids give a good idea of sound supression. However, I dont think Ive ever seen any that actually measure dB reduction with an spl meter.

>>32627913
Taking your silencer apart for cleaning, or replacing the wipes is also technically illegal.

>>32627934
They can't

It's totally unenforceable

>>32627934
Why do you think OP made this thread?

>>32627945
I'm sure it can reduce 9mm subsonic to hearing safe levels. But still I'd be curious on the accuracy especially for people who shoot through oil filters.

.22 would be very easy to suppress

>>32627913
i stand corrected, thanks. I was under the impression that the adapter was the legally registered part.

However, if the filter was changed with the exact same filter, and serialized as such, one could get away with it. Not that I condone illegal activities.

Also....
>3) The adapter and the tube would share the same serial number.

Therefore, it would generally not be cost effective to plan on using a ‘solvent trap’ adapter as the basis of a Form 1 build since you would be stuck using a single oil filter for its entire service life.

However, if you really like the idea of using an oil filter as a suppressor then there is another alternative.

Cadiz Gun Works of Ohio, which is a licensed manufacturer, sells a completed version of this design known as the EconoCan. And because they are a licensed manufacturer they can replace the oil filters as they become worn for a modest fee … $25 at the present time.
https://johnpierceesq.com/suppressors-solvent-traps-and-legal-traps/

>>32627934
see above.

>>32627952
No. It's not. But feel free to post a source to your fucking off the wall retarded claim.

>>32627952
whoa....just cleaning would be considered modification and require a new stamp? Please provide referrance?

>>32627980
from what Ive seen, 9, 45 and .22 are all very easy to supress in this manner. Hell, a potato would work for a single .22 shot. Not that Ive ever tried....

Ive never looked into real long gun usage. .300aac/blackout would probably work well, as well as .458socom, using subsonic. Dunno about 5.56, 7.62x51, or x39 though. I should look those up.

>>32628090
5.56 sucks dick for suppression anyway. I would still do it if I had one but I'd be more interested in 9 and 22.

I want a suppressed .22 to shoot off of my deck so bad

>>32628087
The term “make” is defined in the NFA to include manufacturing, putting together, altering, any combination of these, or otherwise producing a firearm. 26 U.S.C. 5845(I).

If you take your silencer apart, its legal. If you clean it, its legal, but if you reassemble it, you are putting together (read: making) a silencer.

>>32628168
K E K
L
O
L

>>32628112
i wish i still had my 10/22....would love to have suppressed it.

Im thinking about custom loading .40. Ive got a cheap ass HiPoint carbine Id like to suppress for critters. But that extra barrel length kicks sub .40 into supersonic territory. I cant justify the expense of threading the barrel and buying reloading equipment for a $300 rifle. Would be a fun toy though. I knew I shouldve bought the 9 or 45 version dammit.

>>32628168
You're full of shit

>>32628182
Fuck .40

File: Screenshot_2017-01-12-22-48-27.png (997KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

997KB, 1080x1920px

>>32628168
wt actual f
>pic related...captcha "slow children at play"

>>32628187
Its right there in the law, go read it.

>>32628211
If you were right then cleaning your SBR would be illegal too.

>>32628195
dont hate on .40. Its cheaper than 9 and .45 around here. Plus, when theres a shortage, you cant find 9 or 45 here, only .40. Thats why I bought it. Practicality, not muh stoppin powa

>>32628211
No, you are just interpetting it like a fucking idiot nigger.

File: 1447822476188.jpg (91KB, 800x598px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 800x598px

>>32628227
^this

>>32628227
Well, since the receiver is what counts as the SBR, the same does apply, but you'd have to cut the receiver in half and then weld it back if you want to "take it apart." With silencers, parts other than the serialized part are treated as the silencer.

>>32628268
>interpreting like the ATF

File: what399.jpg (817KB, 1600x1600px) Image search: [Google]

817KB, 1600x1600px

>>32628210
Kek'd

>>32628287
hide your doggos.....atf confirmed!

>>32628168
That's bullshit but I believe it

>>32627775
>Nielsen device
>necessary
Confirmed for having no idea how guns operate

File: 1449383350817.jpg (36KB, 460x288px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 460x288px

>>32628287
your logic is flawed....the tube is registered, like an sbr receiver, acorrding to your logic. Internals that arent serialized can be taken apart, like in sbr receiver scenario you speak of, are free from these legalities.

How much pot did you smoke tonight? You do know that its a federal offense to do so whilst owning firearms, right? Either that or your just plain retarded, or a britbong (same difference).

File: SilencerCo-Octane-45-mounts-1-2-450x300.jpg (25KB, 450x300px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 450x300px

>>32628368
handguns with moving barrels do need a nielson device to use a silencer, dummy.

>>32628376
The baffle stack is also considered a silencer even if not serialized. This is apparent from the ATF chore boy letter

>>32628381
>handguns with tilting barrels do need a nielson device to use a silencer, dummy.
Fixed my nig.

>>32628405
Px4 also needs one and thats a rotating barrel.

>>32628397
huh.....learn something new everyday. Im gonna go look that up since youve told me to twice now. Thanks

What's the ATF going to do with all their extra time if the hearing protection act passes?

>>32628414
SilencerCo had a video before they shut down the SWR division showing that the rotating barrel basically unscrewed the suppressor.

>>32628460
I'd hope they would speed up the sbs and sbr processes, but I know hope is folly.

>>32628482
It does. You have to rocksett and torque the silencer for it to stay.

File: 1450189237466.gif (874KB, 197x162px) Image search: [Google]

874KB, 197x162px

>>32628397
>>32628452
ill be damned. A "no marking" variance I had never heard of. That shits just autistic. Guy cant even have any in his kitchen to clean his pots and pans due to being considered a "stockpile"! W...T...F

>>32628460
remove doggies

>>32628552
I wasn't kidding. The ATF are cunts. Its simply that nobody has sent them a letter to clarify it yet. If they did, I bet it would make the front page of TTAG

OP here and I see the thread has devolved into a shitfight so I'll just try a reasonable question:

>>32627322

Can you elaborate a little? As far as I know, buying the solvent trap is fine. You can order it and have it shipped to your door just like any other item you buy online.

Then you get the licensing to manufacture, which does require a tax stamp. So why would you be paying $200 and have a 4 month wait before buying anything?

File: 1477417207520.jpg (119KB, 800x1000px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 800x1000px

>>32628397
>See what looks like make believe bullshit that only an asshole would come up with
>its real

Fucking wake me up.

>>32628612
not >>32627322

the solvent trap is a solvent trap....until its modified for suppressor use. It would require registering, along with the adapter. It will have a limited life and need replacing, at which point a new nfa item is put into the equation.

Im not quite sure whats involved with a manufacturing permit, as ive never looked into it (form 1, right?).

>>32628452
No I told you first and then he piggy backed on that as a way to spread his lie.
Taking apart your silencer and then putting it back together is not the construction of a new NFA item. Period. Even the ATFags don't believe this shit.

File: image.jpg (1MB, 2448x3264px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2448x3264px

Hey you dirty mother fuckers, it's time to join the ranks of fucking real men who make their own suppressors!

>>32628612
Yes you can buy online easily.

If you want to use as a suppressor you then need to submit a Form 1. $200 and several months later you get the okay to build/use as a suppressor.

File: image.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>32628612
Ok lil nig.
I'm gonna lay it down and you're gonna stop listening to these fucking morons.
You TECHNICALLY can't buy something with the INTENT to make a suppressor BEFORE you have an approved Form 1. There is no "license." For you to get an actual license would mean spending literally thousands of dollars every year to hold an FFL and 02/07 SOT. Plus you would have to prove to the ATF you are actually operating a business and not just doing it for yourself.
OK, now that we got that nonsense out of the way, you $200 tax stamp allows you to build ONE can of specific length and caliber. It is not a free pass to do whatever you want. If you get your approved Form 1 (the stamp is literally just a receipt for tax paid, the approved form is the actual permission slip), then you can buy a trap with the intent to turn it into a can without issue. No dog shooters are going to come calling if you do it backwards but that is, legally speaking, the correct order to do it.
You must also remember that you can't play around with your baffles and such. Your form is permission for ONE iteration of your can. If you destroy all the baffles and start over again that is illegal without another stamp. An SOT can replace internals for you without another stamp. Many offer this service.
You must engrave your can with your info as the maker and it must match what's on your form.
What else you need to know my lil nig?
Pic related is me making fucking real baffles, not nigger rigged freeze plugs like a fucking welfare recipient.

Just make it and don't pay the tax stamp?

Is everyone here honest and legit? Jesus, it's like you're a bunch of boyscouts all of a sudden

Also, you're seriously overpaying for the mag-lite conversion kit. You pay like $50 for two pieces of machined aluminum and some freeze plugs

>>32629343
What the fuck is the point if you have to hide it all the time. I'm sorry you work at McNiggers and $200 is a lot to you.

>>32629547
>Have to hide it all the time

>Not living inna woods with your own personal range

>>32628460
Double down on the dog murder

>>32628168
Show me a legal precedent, not some backasswards shit you came up with on your own.

No court precedent exists that conflates end-user reassembly with manufacturing.

My lil nigs, let's be done with this troll.
http://www.titleii.com/bardwell/atf_letter66.txt
Per the ATF you can replace wipes without a new form. Since you can't replace a wipe without reassembly, this means reassembly does not need a new form.
B T F O
T
F
O

>>32631947
Reked

What about trap solvent? What can I use to dissolve lady bois? I'm asking... For a friend.

>>32633728
Industrial lye