jacknast76 2 Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Me too, who knows if the ATF will change their minds. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
nalioth 405 Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Didn't mean to make a new thread. I saw this thread the other day, before it included the 'mystery piston'. My response: http://forum.saiga-12.com/index.php?showtopic=35576&hl= Quote Link to post Share on other sites
CavVet 0 Posted February 16, 2009 Report Share Posted February 16, 2009 MAA has corrected and they have a picture posted! I am going to keep mine just to have the part...it was cheap! Corrected what? Still shows as a 922r compliance part Quote Link to post Share on other sites
CavVet 0 Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 I placed an order 2 days before reading this thread, then I learned it wasnt a compliance part. After sending an email inquiring on fcg parts they had incoming and getting a response, I sent them an email addressing the "compliance part" issue. They ignored it and shipped the order. I hope the $14 part they dumped was worth losing a customer over. I want way more mags, but wouldnt order a glass of water from them after that. I fully believe the way it played out they damn well knew it is not a compliance part. They dont change their website and ignore the issue when notified. Im sure someone else will gladly take my money. Im sure others will remember treatment like this when times get tougher. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
CavVet 0 Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 (edited) I placed an order 2 days before reading this thread, then I learned it wasnt a compliance part. After sending an email inquiring on fcg parts they had incoming and getting a response, I sent them an email addressing the "compliance part" issue. They ignored it and shipped the order. I hope the $14 part they dumped was worth losing a customer over. I want way more mags, but wouldnt order a glass of water from them after that. I fully believe the way it played out they damn well knew it is not a compliance part. They dont change their website and ignore the issue when notified. Im sure someone else will gladly take my money. Im sure others will remember treatment like this when times get tougher. Well it showed shipped but didnt. Because of the FCG emails they held the order. No response emails ever came. I called a week later when it didnt show up, they still had it. He gladly removed the piston from the order, added the FCG, and shipped it right out. They didnt quite get back with me in response to my emails, but they didnt ship anyway, and was easy to deal with when we did talk. Good job by MAA in the end. ETA And they did clean up their website to reflect an accurate assessment of the Puck-piston controversy. Edited March 13, 2009 by CavVet Quote Link to post Share on other sites
7.62x39 0 Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 MAA's revised listing. On AK's and on Saiga rifles, the steel shaft extending off of the bolt carrier is the gas piston. In the Russian American Armory factory manual, the puck-shaped disc located in the gas block is defined as the gas piston. ATF has not issued any special ruling on this. There has been no known disseminated ATF statements to indicate that the "puck" is not the piston.The TAPCO piston is made in the United States and if the traditional steel shaft extending off the bolt is determined to be the piston, the part will counts as 1 US part for 922r compliance. So if there has never been a official determination as to whether the puck or the rod is the 922r countable part, how are we supposed to know whether we are legal or not? A lot of folks are counting on the puck being 922r countable in order to be compliant. Somebody should have done their homework before listing a part as being countable, when in reality they have no idea whether or not it actually is. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jswledhed 57 Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 (edited) So if there has never been a official determination as to whether the puck or the rod is the 922r countable part, how are we supposed to know whether we are legal or not? BATF says gas piston can be changed. Looking at it in combustion engine terms, in Saiga rifles, the connecting rod and piston are all one piece. The little cupped area on the end of the rod is the piston in the rifles. But since the two are all in one piece, one has to replace both. In the 12, the piston, the little puck thing, and the connecting rod are seperate pieces. So, they say piston, replace only the piston and unless they specify something about the rod thingy, don't worry about it. Edited March 13, 2009 by jswledhed Quote Link to post Share on other sites
7.62x39 0 Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 BATF says gas piston can be changed. Looking at it in combustion engine terms, in Saiga rifles, the connecting rod and piston are all one piece. The little cupped area on the end of the rod is the piston in the rifles. But since the two are all in one piece, one has to replace both. In the 12, the piston, the little puck thing, and the connecting rod are seperate pieces. So, they say piston, replace only the piston and unless they specify something about the rod thingy, don't worry about it. The smiley you chose seems quite appropriate. After reading your reply, it is obvious that you are smoking something. We are talking specifically about saiga shotguns. There has never been a official determination as to which part is considered the piston. Several vendors are/were selling the pucks as a 922r countable part. (although it appears that some are now backing away from that claim. Tromix/MAA no longer even list the pucks for sale.) Then Tapco releases, what I would refer to as the op rod in a Saiga shotty, but what is considered the piston on a regular AK (rightly so) and they stated that it was the countable part. The ATF has not included an op rod in the Saiga countable parts list, so if in fact it was the countable part, it has to be counted as the piston. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jswledhed 57 Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 So you insult me then throw back exactly what I said in my post. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ChileRelleno 7,071 Posted March 28, 2009 Report Share Posted March 28, 2009 There is only one correct answer here... The BATF can decide at any time to count one or the other, or even both, regardless of what IZMASH defines as the piston. I call it prudent, to simply have both the rod/piston and the puck/piston installed. Any good gunsmith should be able to easily change out the rod/piston, why not cover your ass? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.