Converting A Vector FS FULL AUTO to a Mini

johnnywitt

UZI Talk Life Member
Feedback: 21 / 0 / 0
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
1,545
Vector did it, so why not? Talk me out of it.
Especially since I've always liked the FA Mini more than a FS.
The gun in question runs perfect, but back when the gun was being transferred from Vector (I lived in the N. SLC area then) I had them change the sights to B Sights so it's not "correct" anyway and the folding stock works perfect and locks up tight, but when I put on a fixed stock (my preference), I have to put some black duct tape on the stock between the stock plate and the receiver, or it wobbles a tiny bit. Same stocks lock up like a bank vault on my friend's IMI SBR Receiver, Btw.


Maybe there are NFA concerns to this,as well, that I'm unaware of.


I appreciate any and all advice, or insight into the advisability on this.
 

slimshady

Well-known member
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
1,243
I know it's been done, so apparently there is a workaround. But to convert it you essentially have to cut 2 sections out of the receiver to shorten it. How do you legally destroy an MG receiver? By cutting it up. For import purposes it requires a torch cut in 3 specific places displacing at least 1/4" of metal. Maybe that's how a saw cut receiver maintains it's status as a "live" MG? Done one section at a time you now only have 2 saw cuts at any one time. At best it's a grey area as I have never seen an actual law that states exactly what has to be done to destroy a receiver, which means ATF can change their minds at any time and change the rules.
 

rhouston8

UZI Talk Life Member
Feedback: 9 / 0 / 0
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
1,095
i looked into doing this with one of my full size rr Uzis...ultimately was talked out of it and just bought a mini outright. consider doing that. seriously. there's talk of grey area legally and all that jazz and how it will be papered and whatnot. Im no expert but I heard enough negatives about it that I changed my mind over it and never looked back. Risks too high for me.
 

johnnywitt

UZI Talk Life Member
Feedback: 21 / 0 / 0
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
1,545
Well, it's a moot point because I can't get R.H. @BWE to return my call. I guess that I could call Andrewski.

My Vector has the same problem that all Vector Arms Uzis has in that that receivers are slightly to very warped. On my gun you can't notice unless you attach a fixed stock, which again, is my preference & hence my desire to straighten the receiver out. I don't exactly know what's involved in straightening them out, but I bet that they have to have at least have the rear plate removed & maybe the trunnion, so why not go all the way at that point and change variants.

Vector Arms back in the day would just fish out a random Full Size Transferable receiver and convert it to a bastardized Mini. I know because I used to go over there and hang out with Ralph (Peabody) & Ralph Merrill on occasion. Peabody's Office was right in the front of the building and he would generally have his door open.

The only way to get a Mini FA Transferable is a Vector bastardized version, so that's why I thought about this. Other than have a super good Smith do the work and the cost, I believe it would only involve notifying the ATF of the change in barrel length and add Mini on the Paperwork. After all, that's what Vector did. You wouldn't be setting any new precedent here.

Anyway, I appreciate all the responses & advice. May be some Folks on here that don't want to have it brought out that their MG Receiver is warped, but it's all the Vectors, so it is what it is and what IS is well known anyway and most of the guns run very well because an open bolt Uzi is one of the most reliable guns of all time IMHO.
 

johnnywitt

UZI Talk Life Member
Feedback: 21 / 0 / 0
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
1,545
Ok, so I talked to John Andrewski & he said that the reason that Vector was allowed to do this was that they were the manufacturer and that the guns had not yet transferred off the property yet. Maybe this can help somebody else that is contemplating this variant change.

Secondly, I was wrong & forgot about the Vectors being the only transferable Mini's. There were a few IMI guns that managed to get on the registry, like Amphibians Mini, although they're as scarce as hens teeth.


Just know that a good NFA Gunsmith can straighten out your Vector if you want to because maybe you don't like your fixed stock to rattle & you hate the folding stock for shooting, or maybe (less common) the gun won't run with NATO Spec 9mm.
 

RoverDave

Administrator
Staff member
Feedback: 115 / 0 / 0
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
16,090
Location
ND
Ok, so I talked to John Andrewski & he said that the reason that Vector was allowed to do this was that they were the manufacturer and that the guns had not yet transferred off the property yet.

Vector wasn't the manufacturer of the registered, transferrable machine gun. If they were, the guns would all be dealer samples. Group Industries was the manufacturer and that is what's listed on the form for any of these guns.
 

johnnywitt

UZI Talk Life Member
Feedback: 21 / 0 / 0
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
1,545
Vector wasn't the manufacturer of the registered, transferrable machine gun. If they were, the guns would all be dealer samples. Group Industries was the manufacturer and that is what's listed on the form for any of these guns.

Ok Dave, you would know. I will consider myself "schooled". I'm just going to forget about cutting my gun & buy a Vector Mini later on down the line. Hell, if prices drop any further they will have to pay me to take it off their hands LOL.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.

Please Visit our Sister Sites Below

Sister Board - Sturmgewehr Sister Board - MachinegunBoards


Please consider becoming an UZI Talk Supporter
Top