It's pinned, the pin is covered with a spot of weld and filed down so the pin can't be seen. I could have just welded it in place, but I think doing it this way makes a neater job.
Printable View
Now it is clear. Thank you Mick and tiriaq.:super:
I have done a fair bit of testing with the auto disconnect trip lever, and it works very well when firing live ammo. I have cut a slot cut in the sear bendt of a bolt so that it will not contact the trip lever, and this has not so far allowed the gun to fire in anything but semi auto.
The thing that concernes me is that it is possible when dry firing to pull the trigger back just far enough to release the bolt without the disconnect disconnecting. I think that when live firing the recoil, light as it is, gives enough of a jolt to free the disconnect, but I'm not 100% happy with it. I want it to be working properly all the time when dry firing before I submit a gun with this mod.
In the mean time despite the FRT groups stonewalling I will be sending in a sten with the extended bolt etc. I have to say that I find the manners and professionalism of the FRT group to be seriously lacking.
Here is a copy of my latest attempt at communicating with Mr Smith...
Dear Mr Smith
Due to the absence of the digital photographs I asked for, I have tried to replicate what I think you have explained you did to a sten bolt in order to turn my semi auto MkII sten into a machine gun. To be sure there is no misunderstanding I would be gratefull if you would take a look at the picture below to verify that this is what you did. I need this verification to ascertain which modifications will best prevent my semi auto stens being converted again.
Is this what you did ? http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w...d/IMG_1122.jpg
In the near future I will again be submitting a semi auto MkII sten for inspection,with more firearms to follow after that.
I think it is in the interest of everyone concerned that we cooperate with each other.
Please reply to this email, and to the previous email that I sent to you twice.
Thank you
Mick Boon
Would it make any difference to the second disconnect if the cam were at a steeper angle, so that the downward movement of the tripping lever were more abrupt, and perhaps more positive?
Would this be a fair list of the modifications to date for semi-auto only functionning? Bolt altered with full width bent for sear engagement; tube slotted to prevent lateral movement of the tripping lever; slotted block added to the trigger box to prevent lateral movement of the tripping lever; change lever fixed to prevent lateral movement; bolt made inconvenient to remove to increase difficulty of substituting one with a slotted bent; bolt spigot lengthened to block access to tip of tripping lever; trigger mechanism cover fixed to prevent ready access to the mechanism.
The classification as prohibited used the phrase "was found to be easily converted to fire full-automatic in a relatively short period of time, with relative ease". How long would it take to defeat aspects of your redesign in order to allow full-automatic fire, and what tools would be needed? What is a reasonable definition of "a relatively short period of time"? Ten minutes? One hour? Two Hours? Half a day? "With relative ease"? By an average tinkerer with conventional home shop tools? Being a devil's advocate here - if you do go to court, the answers to these questions will be relevant.
I don't think it would make a difference if the slope was at a steeper angle, apart from making it release the sear sooner. If the angle were to steep it would disconnect from the sear before it had released the bolt. I think I have it at the optimum angle as it is now.
That would be a fair list of modifications.
The extra modifications would approximately double the time it took to convert it. It could be done with simple hand tools. The gun was built with hand tools.
I have no idea what the standards are, they seem to make them up as they go along. Most semi autos they grantrestricted or non restricted FRT numbers for can be converted to full auto easier than the stens I have sent for inspection.
The only way to get the answers is to go to court, I have a date set for the 13th of next month.
Im not after preferential treatment, just a level playing field.Iwill ask how it is that other semi autos have been granted non prohibited FRT numbers when they can be converted to full auto in a couple of minutes.
For what I could find here and there, the only new SEMIAUTOMATIC Stens that are reviewed by the RCMP are those from Sasksten. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm right. Anyone had confirmation on this one? My SAS3 based Semi Sten Mk2 build is still on ice 'til I know more.
The FRT number for a SAS type gun is not active, and cannot be used to register a gun. Don't even try. The FRT numbers for the SaskSten guns are active, but cannot be used either. There may be some developments in the not too distant future.
tiriaq thanks a lot for the update. As you said, waiting is the word for the moment. :thup:
You can safely bet on that. : )
In the meantime the stens have been returned, and I have submitted another one. I expect to be sending in more guns for approval soon, which no doubt will pi$$ them off even more.:madsmile:
The FRT group do not seem to have any standards for testing guns, ( least non that they have made me aware of despite requests ) the whole business really is a farce.
The hearing date is set for July 6th at Melville provincial court. I am pleased to say that Mr Murray will be called to give evidence. I will at last have ample oportunity to question him directly:bash:.
As part of my case I will be showing the court seven fast and easy methods of converting semi automatic firearms into fully automatic firearms.
Starts 6th July 10am, all are welcome. It should be great fun :D