UZI Talk Forums

View Poll Results: Would Replacing The Factory M10 Sear With A Tenko Specific Sear Be A Deal Breaker?

Voters
74. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    14 18.92%
  • No

    45 60.81%
  • Depending Upon How Difficult It Is To Change The Sear

    17 22.97%
Multiple Choice Poll.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 4 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 73

Thread: Tenko 10-16 Fuction Questionnaire

  1. #21
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Posts
    58
    Keep up the good fight!!

  2. #22
    UZI Talk Supporter
    Gaujo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    3,498
    For me, it would have to be a dual function sear to consider it at 3k. At a lower price my expectations might be different. Best of luck and excited to see the fight continues!
    Last edited by Gaujo; 05-19-2021 at 10:36 PM.

  3. #23
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    581
    Quote Originally Posted by Gaujo View Post
    For me, it would have to be a dual function sear to consider it at 3k. At a lower price my expectations might be different. Best of luck and excited to see the fight continues!
    +1

    I think the price is too high regardless. I'm not complaining, I understand how this stuff is expensive. I'm just providing a data point on demand.

    For $1000 id buy one with or without a dual function sear.

    For $3000, I probably won't buy one either way.
    Last edited by Fishman; 05-31-2021 at 08:40 AM.

  4. #24
    UZI Talk Life Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    DFW
    Posts
    1,022
    OK, I admit that it took me a while to accept the idea of paying $1k for an upper that fits on a gun that was $200 brand new. Of course that $200 M11 now sells for $7k+. The price of a Max 11/15 or a Tenko adapter may seem high, but wait a few years. Neither will be in production for ever and once production stops, the price will be crazy. Have you noticed that when Lage announces that he is going to cease production of a particular model or accessory that there is a mad rush to get on the list for the final run? F/A is not a poor man's game. As far as having change the sear, not a problem. That is literally a 2 minute swap on the bench. It is much easier than converting the M16 to open bolt to use the AR180 upper. I don't normally swap uppers at the range. I am fortunate to have a couple of SMGs so I configure them the way I want to shoot them that day before I go to the range. Too easy to drop a bolt or small part when swapping uppers at the range so I don't do it. I know many people do, but it is not for me. My time at the range is limited due to other commitments so I want to spend that time shooting not tinkering. So I take a couple of guns with me. When one gets hot I switch to another while it cools down.

    When the BATF finally approves them, I will probably buy a Tenko, an Ultimac and Max whatever. I'm sure my grandkids will talk about the "good old days" when we could just buy this stuff on the internet for reasonable prices.

  5. #25
    Registered User Doobis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    118
    Considering its been delayed, re-engineered and resubmitted in multiple formats is the 3K per unit even still profitable? With the ATF's magic wand of reinterpretation im starting to wonder if it is approved if they wont change their mind in a few years and im out 3k. Im not trying to get into what-ifs but it is a consideration at the present time.

  6. #26
    UZI Talk Supporter
    woodenword's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    All over the place!
    Posts
    884
    Well, I’ve had my Max-11/15 for two or three years now, and if it went away tomorrow, while I would be unhappy, I would think I got my money’s worth. But to each his own.
    Just to add, I didn’t vote, as I don’t have a MAC 10, I don’t know how far out an M-11/9 version would be, so I would will wait till it’s offered before deciding.
    Last edited by woodenword; 05-21-2021 at 08:44 PM.

  7. #27
    UZI Talk Supporter
    Mackjack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,785
    https://www.regulations.gov/document/ATF-2021-0001-0001

    I’m guessing this proposed rule change is going to be really bad for these type of things

    Hence the hold up on all the determination letters…. Basically it makes what’s being proposed here Count as a “firearm “

  8. #28
    UZI Talk Life Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Southern New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,314
    Quote Originally Posted by Mackjack View Post
    https://www.regulations.gov/document/ATF-2021-0001-0001

    I’m guessing this proposed rule change is going to be really bad for these type of things

    Hence the hold up on all the determination letters…. Basically it makes what’s being proposed here Count as a “firearm “
    This is the actual article https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regula...ceiver/summary from the ATF website. Actually our adapter would not qualify as a firearm. But an AR upper receiver would. But what is not clear is are the ATF expecting for this change to effect new production or be retroactive? An AR upper has a bolt and carrier in the upper receiver. Does that mean that the AR upper and lower receivers are now firearm frames or receivers under this new redefinition? If so, how does that effect machineguns? Like the XMG upper, if there is more than two firearms firing automatically, to make one complete machinegun, one of the firearms becomes a Post Sample machinegun.

    Scott

    ETA The ATF redefining firearm frame or receiver discussion should probably continue in a thread dedicated to that topic instead of derailing this thread.
    Last edited by A&S Conversions; 05-22-2021 at 01:39 AM.

  9. #29
    UZI Talk Supporter
    Mackjack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,785
    Quote Originally Posted by A&S Conversions View Post

    ETA The ATF redefining firearm frame or receiver discussion should probably continue in a thread dedicated to that topic instead of derailing this thread.

    100% agree. Don’t mean to hijack thread over people squabbling, just figured it was pertinent information to consider regarding this device.

  10. #30
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    277
    Pics or Video Please, IF possible? Might be the only one here who can better understand with a visual? IF it's a patent/legal type issue not to post, can understand that as well, no worries Sir! Thanks again very much either way and God Bless!

  11. #31
    Registered User Deerhurst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    407
    There is some stuff on the youtube:

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCn6...EalfNWbpPwKuYg

  12. #32
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    277
    WoW holy shit that's Pure Awesome... looks good to me as well, with The Man Himself no less! Thanks for sharing DH!

  13. #33
    UZI Talk Life Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Southern New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,314
    For those members who are not familiar with the Tenko 10-16 adapter, it is just that, an adapter not an upper receiver. The Tenko adapter allows the M10 lower receiver to function using magazines and upper receivers from the AR-15/M16 family of firearms. So basically it has similar functionality of a M16 registered receiver. Because of patent issues I can not discuss internal function, but we have spent a great deal of engineering time and development on being able to make that switch from factory style open bolt upper to adapter/AR-15/M16 upper without any tools.

    Yes, $3,000.00 is a lot of money. I am not an engineer. Nor am I a machinist or a CNC programmer. We pay professionals who are. That certainly effects our overhead. We are also looking to get a return on our investment. To be honest, if I had known that we would be where we are right now four years ago when I was looking for an engineer to develop the proof of concept, I would not have done it. The toll this project has taken on me, my family, and our finances, has taken such a toll. This has gone from an interesting project to the most stressful and difficult time of my life. Of course we are in far too deep now to give up. Much as I want to, I don't feel we can afford to. So we keep hoping and continue to try.

    If we can get the closed bolt version to pass, we should be able to hold our current price structure. If only the open bolt version passes, then we would probably have an increased cost of production as we would have very limited off the shelf parts access. Those open bolt parts would be at 10 times the cost of the corresponding closed bolt parts cost, plus there is the issue of carrier/bolt modification for the open bolt mechanism. So if the only option is open bolt mechanism, expect a 15% to 20% increase. If both the open bolt and closed bolt mechanisms get a positive determination then the closed bolt will be the standard with an opinional open bolt conversion kit available. We very much appreciate the emotional support.

    Scott
    Manager A&S Conversions L.L.C.

  14. #34
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    277
    That's absolutely clear and really appreciated Scott. All the stupid needless BS the miserable ATF putting you and other American innovators through is far beyond disgusting and doom on all these haters forever. When your product comes to market you all deserve and earned to make a mint. If others don't understand or appreciate it, they can go pound sand. This is a fight you shall win.

  15. #35
    UZI Talk Supporter

    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    85
    I don't mind changing out parts. That's why I chose the Ingram/MAC/SWD family of weapons to begin with. I'm no gunsmith but I find these to be very user-friendly and enjoyable to work on. I like to engage with machinery and for me changing out parts is no detriment. Lay everything out on a mat, pour a cold adult beverage, turn on my record player, and have a nice evening.

  16. #36
    UZI Talk Supporter
    root's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    3,311
    No swapping the sear is a deal breaker for me.

    Main reason? I already have a few uppers I can just swap on and off,
    no mods or hinky parts to worry about having extra or losing.

  17. #37
    UZI Talk Life Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Southern New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,314
    We are in fact working on a dual use sear. So the Tenko would come with the dual use sear, Eliminator sear pin, and another fire control retaining spring. There is a part that uses the space where the factory semi auto trip is. So for those who want semi auto function of the open bolt system, they will need to switch the fire control parts.

    Scott
    Manager A&S Conversions L.L.C.

  18. #38
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    277
    Pure Awesome Sir Scott!

    You can't make everyone happy, some never are, but most will be very happy with your market pending fantastic MAC innovations!

  19. #39
    UZI Talk Life Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Southern New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,314
    Quote Originally Posted by Galil#1 View Post
    Pure Awesome Sir Scott!

    You can't make everyone happy, some never are, but most will be very happy with your market pending fantastic MAC innovations!
    Thank you for the very kind words. Right now we are stuck in machining purgatory. We have a design to modify standard M10 sears for use with both the Tenko and standard style uppers. We initially thought to have the sears modified via CNC, but everyone is so busy and the sears being so hard, the sear would need a fixture. We are looking into doing the modifications using wire EDM. I also bought some M10 sears from Numrich that have the sear shaft holes that are too small. I am ordering more sears. The sear modifications are the last peice of the puzzle. Once we can get a couple done we can start testing.

    Scott
    Manager A&S Conversions L.L.C.

  20. #40
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    491
    I plan for a dedicated lower to pair with it, so a sear swap doesn’t seem like a big matter. When I fully stripped my MAC one time, the only hard thing was the safety selector and that wouldn’t need to come off for a sear swap. I think it’s the same as replacing a selector delete / FA only selector.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


Please consider becoming an UZI Talk Supporter.