Is New Technology Like Forced Reset Triggers Or Super Safety Going To Reduce The Viability Of Multiple Thousand Dollar Accessories

[mwarnick1]

the Hoffman Tactical Super Safety is the most creative & innovative mechanical addition to AR15 fire control since the RDIAS and Lightning Link. Period.

I’m 100% with you on this. I had thought up the FRT idea years ago but didn’t have the guts to make one. Rare Breed had the guts and strategy to do it right. Huge kudos to them

The SS is on an entirely different level of creative thought. It’s an impressive leap over the RB FRT for simplicity, cost, ease of use/tuning, etc

These triggers are difficult to appreciate until you try one.

ETA: It’s not just an AR device. These are about to explode into a bunch of designs including pistols

 

[ericthered]

I would classify the super safety in a different category then a rarebreed. I have shot both styles. The rare breed style has a lot more trigger vibration. You can feel what is happening. It is a lot more temperamental to get to run as well. And it flat out wont run with many calibers. The super safety is a very efficient design in terms of mechanical advantage. It has low to no trigger feel and it works with pcc and 22lr (is complicated for 22lr from what I have seen). I have shot a transferable, and I feel that the ss gives a very similar experience.
I think they will lower the price of the "cheap" machineguns. But if were honest, the people buying a transferable are usually either collectors or enthusiasts for that particular gun (ie mix of both).
The MAC upper market will actually probably improve as there will be more demand for them. The MAC is already a popular 3d print project that I think may have already gotten the frt treatment.
It would be really cool to frt shooters into mg matches. That would be quite interesting to run them side by side competitively. That would give you the best idea of if the usefulness of a frt or ss is equal to a transferable.

 

[strobro32]

The 5th district court struck down ATFs ban on all FRTs .

Federal Judge Strikes Down ATF Rule Banning Forced Reset Trigger Devices

A federal district court judge in Texas has struck down the efforts of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) to ban a rapid-fire

americanmilitarynews.com

Is the Super Safety considered a FRT?

 

[hkg3k]

It has low to no trigger feel and it works with pcc and 22lr (is complicated for 22lr from what I have seen).

No more complicated than using a .22 kit with a RR or RDIAS. You have a separate trip surface piece (of a different design and unique to the SS) just like a RR / RDIAS has and at that point it's about tuning the anti-bounce weight for function / reliability...just like with a RR / RDIAS.

Is the Super Safety considered a FRT?

Though of a different design from the drop-in modular FRT units...the Super Safety is a FRT. It's also 3-position, left to right push safety / selector.

 

[LawBob]

You mean before getting too hot?

Correct.

Of course then you take of the max15 and put the max11a1-9 back on and shoot 20 min to let 15 cool off.

 

[SecondAmend]

No more complicated than using a .22 kit with a RR or RDIAS. You have a separate trip surface piece (of a different design and unique to the SS) just like a RR / RDIAS has and at that point it's about tuning the anti-bounce weight for function / reliability...just like with a RR / RDIAS.

Note also, with a RR or RDIAS, for bolt bounce cancellation, an alternative or addition to an anti-bounce weight is the so-called "ball - detent modification". Probably also the case with the various trigger assemblies discussed.

As far as the title question goes, call girls and inflatable female dolls co-exist. That said, as Marvin Gaye and Tammi Terrell once musically noted, "Ain't Nothin' Like the Real Thing".

 

[hkg3k]

Note also, with a RR or RDIAS, for bolt bounce cancellation, an alternative or addition to an anti-bounce weight is the so-called "ball - detent modification". Probably also the case with the various trigger assemblies discussed.

Sure. The ball detent idea came from the Norrell 10/22 design / configuration which uses both (detent & anti-bounce weight). The ball detent modification gained some traction a few years ago for the AR15/M16 .22 kits and IIRC, one of the .22 kit manufacturers offered it as an option with their .22 kit (CMMG?).

That modification and offering from the manufacturer has somewhat withered in recent times, from what I can tell, with the selection of the adjustable (anti-bounce) weight systems that are out there now...see borebuddy.com as an example.

Today, it's really easy (for the non-machinist) to tune a kit with an just adjustable anti-bounce weight system than to do the ball detent modification.

That's not the say the ball detent modification is not effective, because it certainly is...my Norrells wouldn't run without them being installed and properly adjusted. With today's other options however, that juice may not be worth the squeeze. YMMV.

 

[A&S Conversions]

Are these high cyclic rate alternatives fun? Certainly many think so. Somehow I just can’t imagine a buyer who would be “on the fence” between buying a $10,000 RR with $3,000 to $5,000 in accessories and a semi AR with around a $400 accessory to speed up cyclic rate with a couple of caliber conversion uppers. To me these two firearms and accessory packages are not only not in the same “ballpark”, they are not even the same sport.

Could a Mac style RR owner buy one, or even multiple devices increase cyclic rate of a semi? Certainly, but I would think it would be much less likely that an owner of one of these cyclic increasing devices will go out and buy a transferable machine gun? It is possible, but not very likely. Since I am fortunate enough to own five transferable machine guns, I can’t say as I have much interest in messing with these increased cyclic rate devices. But, to each his own.

Scott

 

[David Hineline]

Did fake diamonds and fake gold decrease the value of the real thing?

 

[Slowmo]

Are these high cyclic rate alternatives fun? Certainly many think so. Somehow I just can’t imagine a buyer who would be “on the fence” between buying a $10,000 RR with $3,000 to $5,000 in accessories and a semi AR with around a $400 accessory to speed up cyclic rate with a couple of caliber conversion uppers. To me these two firearms and accessory packages are not only not in the same “ballpark”, they are not even the same sport.

Could a Mac style RR owner buy one, or even multiple devices increase cyclic rate of a semi? Certainly, but I would think it would be much less likely that an owner of one of these cyclic increasing devices will go out and buy a transferable machine gun? It is possible, but not very likely. Since I am fortunate enough to own five transferable machine guns, I can’t say as I have much interest in messing with these increased cyclic rate devices. But, to each his own.

Scott

You never know what the future holds. They might turn out to be a good investment if they get banned in the future. Not exactly apples-to-apples, but I’m sure some turned up their noses at a DIAS in the past when compared to a Colt. Now you’d be financially better off to own the DIAS. Alternatively, if the MG ban gets struck down and the registry gets opened up, you wouldn’t lose much, if any, money on the AR+FRT route.

Even for those with the money, it’s not just a matter of which is better. It’s also what can you do with that other money. Compare a $1500 AR+FRT + $28,500 in ammo to a $30K M16.

 

[SecondAmend]

Sure. The ball detent idea came from the Norrell 10/22 design / configuration which uses both (detent & anti-bounce weight). The ball detent modification gained some traction a few years ago for the AR15/M16 .22 kits and IIRC, one of the .22 kit manufacturers offered it as an option with their .22 kit (CMMG?).

That modification and offering from the manufacturer has somewhat withered in recent times, from what I can tell, with the selection of the adjustable (anti-bounce) weight systems that are out there now...see borebuddy.com as an example.

Today, it's really easy (for the non-machinist) to tune a kit with an just adjustable anti-bounce weight system than to do the ball detent modification.

That's not the say the ball detent modification is not effective, because it certainly is...my Norrells wouldn't run without them being installed and properly adjusted. With today's other options however, that juice may not be worth the squeeze. YMMV.

The concept of a spring loaded ball for firearm bolt/buffer movement control goes back over 100 years. See, for example, U.S. patent no. 1,356,191.
Spikes Tactical had their .22 conversion bolt drilled and frame notched for the ball/detent but discontinued offering the ball and spring before finally dropping their conversion altogether. From what I've read, Rick Kuehl also installed the ball/detent modification on some of the .22 AR uppers that he assembled.
In the standard "Atchisson MkII/III" .22 conversion, there's no need to "tune" the anti-bounce weight (ABW). The ~1 oz. ABW that Atchisson came up with works well across a broad range of barrel lengths and ammo types (and has done so for over 40 years), and can be readily made from a 3/4x1x2 spacer or 3/4 in. black pipe at a very low cost.
MHO, YMMV, etc.
ETA: I should have mentioned above, the Spikes Tactical .22 conversion kit "Full Auto Version" always included a ~0.8 oz. ABW (as well as a sear trip).

 

[mwarnick1]

not in the same “ballpark”, they are not even the same sport.

I shoot with a fairly large MG group. Everyone that I’ve seen shoot one had the exact opposite reaction.

It would be interesting to see what you think after shooting one. The usual reaction that I’ve seen by MG owners after trying a SS is “holy crap - send me the link to where I can order one”

 

[Gaujo]

You never know what the future holds. They might turn out to be a good investment if they get banned in the future. Not exactly apples-to-apples, but I’m sure some turned up their noses at a DIAS in the past when compared to a Colt. Now you’d be financially better off to own the DIAS. Alternatively, if the MG ban gets struck down and the registry gets opened up, you wouldn’t lose much, if any, money on the AR+FRT route.

Even for those with the money, it’s not just a matter of which is better. It’s also what can you do with that other money. Compare a $1500 AR+FRT + $28,500 in ammo to a $30K M16.

I think the chances of a grandfathered SS are zero tbh. This is like what they are dealing with bump stocks and the FRT. If they can't legislate them out by just calling them MGs, they'll be dead set on making the law change to do so.

 

[Slowmo]

I think the chances of a grandfathered SS are zero tbh. This is like what they are dealing with bump stocks and the FRT. If they can't legislate them out by just calling them MGs, they'll be dead set on making the law change to do so.

That is true, but SCOTUS just smacked them down for doing exactly that in the bump stock case. Alito’s concurrence flat out told them that if they wanted to regulate bump stocks, they’d need to pass a new law.

I think there is a good chance the FRT suits will end up the same way, though it seems to be more of a fact issue than a statutory interpretation dispute.

 

[hkg3k]

The concept of a spring loaded ball for firearm bolt/buffer movement control goes back over 100 years. See, for example, U.S. patent no. 1,356,191.

I kinda doubt Spikes (thanks for the correction, btw) dug through 100 years of patents to find that fix. No, I think someone more than likely looked at the success of the Norrell 10/22 closed bolt system and applied it to the M16 .22 kit. Don't you?

In the standard "Atchisson MkII/III" .22 conversion, there's no need to "tune" the anti-bounce weight (ABW). The ~1 oz. ABW that Atchisson came up with works well across a broad range of barrel lengths and ammo types (and has done so for over 40 years), and can be readily made from a 3/4x1x2 spacer or 3/4 in. black pipe at a very low cost.

Not my experience when I first tried a Ciener .22 kit in my RR M16 >30yrs ago and not my experience last week running 2 different Ciener kits side by side with different ammo in setups with both a RDIAS and SS. Maybe you weren't around back in the day on the old Bower's board when someone posted the topic of "how do I get my M16 .22 kit to work in F/A" almost weekly...with responses containing all types of voodoo for the fix. If these kits were reliable / needed no tuning to begin with...what exactly was the ball detent fixing?

Again, I'm not dissing the ball detent "fix," but they don't exist off the shelf and the adjustable anti-bounce weight systems out there are dead-nuts effective in alleviating bolt-bounce stoppages in my experience.

 

[TSPC]

I've had a Norrell for years and I'm just now learning that it has a ball detent!

 

[A&S Conversions]

…It would be interesting to see what you think after shooting one. The usual reaction that I’ve seen by MG owners after trying a SS is “holy crap - send me the link to where I can order one”

Maybe I missed something, but the inventor has made the files public. They don’t sell the Super Safety. You have to print your own. At the bottom of the home page:

“As of 8/21/2024, no warrants have been served to HOFFMAN TACTICAL LLC principals or employees. No searches or seizures have been performed on HOFFMAN TACTICAL LLC assets.”

That statement does not inspire confidence that messing with their design wouldn’t put my collection in jeopardy and possibly require me to sell that collection to afford a good NFA lawyer.

Super Safety – Hoffman Tactical

hoffmantactical.com

According to the page above, the plastic version will last a couple hundred rounds. The least expensive 3D metal printer a quick search told me was $80,000. I don’t have the machinists skills or equipment to build one myself from metal. Just because someone is able to build one for themselves, doesn’t remove the possible jeopardy of having one. So for me personally, there is way too much risk, especially since I already have transferable machine guns. Is this a cool concept? I think so. Just because no one has yet gotten “Imperial Entanglements “ doesn’t mean that everything would be fine if you had one in your possession. YMMV.

Scott

 

[Slowmo]

Maybe I missed something, but the inventor has made the files public. They don’t sell the Super Safety. You have to print your own. At the bottom of the home page:

“As of 8/21/2024, no warrants have been served to HOFFMAN TACTICAL LLC principals or employees. No searches or seizures have been performed on HOFFMAN TACTICAL LLC assets.”

That statement does not inspire confidence that messing with their design wouldn’t put my collection in jeopardy and possibly require me to sell that collection to afford a good NFA lawyer.

Super Safety – Hoffman Tactical

hoffmantactical.com

According to the page above, the plastic version will last a couple hundred rounds. The least expensive 3D metal printer a quick search told me was $80,000. I don’t have the machinists skills or equipment to build one myself from metal. Just because someone is able to build one for themselves, doesn’t remove the possible jeopardy of having one. So for me personally, there is way too much risk, especially since I already have transferable machine guns. Is this a cool concept? I think so. Just because no one has yet gotten “Imperial Entanglements “ doesn’t mean that everything would be fine if you had one in your possession. YMMV.

Scott

A place called Twin Bros was machining them from metal and selling them, but they got raided.

 

[hkg3k]

Maybe I missed something, but the inventor has made the files public. They don’t sell the Super Safety. You have to print your own. At the bottom of the home page:

“As of 8/21/2024, no warrants have been served to HOFFMAN TACTICAL LLC principals or employees. No searches or seizures have been performed on HOFFMAN TACTICAL LLC assets.”

That statement does not inspire confidence that messing with their design wouldn’t put my collection in jeopardy and possibly require me to sell that collection to afford a good NFA lawyer.

Super Safety – Hoffman Tactical

hoffmantactical.com

According to the page above, the plastic version will last a couple hundred rounds. The least expensive 3D metal printer a quick search told me was $80,000. I don’t have the machinists skills or equipment to build one myself from metal. Just because someone is able to build one for themselves, doesn’t remove the possible jeopardy of having one. So for me personally, there is way too much risk, especially since I already have transferable machine guns. Is this a cool concept? I think so. Just because no one has yet gotten “Imperial Entanglements “ doesn’t mean that everything would be fine if you had one in your possession. YMMV.

Scott

Couple things. The Federal District Court ruling struct down the BATF's ruling (7-23-2024) on FRTs and ordered the return of those FRTs confiscated, back to their owners. So they're protected by a court ruling...at least for now.

There's at least 3 companies that I'm aware of (not including TwinBros3D) that are selling the Super Safety kits, (made in steel)...their cost is anywhere between $70 - $110, depending.

Anyone interested in the mechanics of how AR15/M16 fire control works and how the SS applies would be impressed IMO...notwithstanding their action in firing.

 

[BlackBelt]

I think this is a slippery slope with the super safety.
I look at the CRS Firearms federal case where the guy was selling a novelty metal card with an out of spec drop-in-auto-sear literally drawn in ink on the face.
The government could not make it into a working auto-sear.
Yet in front of a federal jury of regular people it looked like he was trying to sell drop-in-auto sears, and they found him guilty.

That makes me wonder if a jury would find the safety sear to be a mg conversion device, even though technically it is not? There is no predicting which way an un-informed jury would decide. But we DO know how they have found that recent previous case with CRS.

Kinda makes me want to steer clear of any device that steps up and puts its toe on the line of "legal or not".

It is not about what we know to be true. It's about what a federal jury can be convinced is true.
I am not willing to play those odds