SGN Article On Building JPFO/KT AR-15 Rec. From Scratch:

7005 Views 30 Replies 16 Participants Last post by B.A.R. gunner, Aug 4, 2006

2ndShooter

Discussion Starter · Jul 30, 2006

Don't know if any of you saw the July 20th issue of SGN, but on page 50 there is an article about building the "receiver kit" offered by JPFO built by KT Ordnance. Good article.

Anyways, I think there has been some talk about the BATFE raiding KT Ordnance, over this receiver I guess??? According to the article JPFO will not take any orders. I'm curious as to what kind of raid it was, since if these turds decided that 1919's were no longer legal, we could all face something similiar perhaps?

To pee in the alphabet gangs alphabet soup, here is a website that shows you how to build a similiar set-up from home (which is LEGAL still, just don't sell/market them

)

http://www.geocities.com/elmgrove1765/project6/project6.html

and here is the JPFO website:

www.jpfo.org

1 - 20 of 31 Posts

slowfire

· #2 · Jul 30, 2006

my understanding is that them selling 80 percent receiver wasn't the issue they got raided........it's that the guy buying it could go back in their shop and put that thing in a CNC machine, that was programmed by the owner who was selling the 80 percent reciver, or that the owner was deeply involved in making the receiver to 100 percent. what you are getting is just one side of the story, mainly from the owner, which in itself isn't the whole story on what was going on, he probably left out big chunks of the story.

frankly that AR receiver looks hookey......I would sooner buy one that was factory built, then putting a bubba trailer park receiver that is held together with screws.

2ndShooter

Discussion Starter · #3 · Jul 30, 2006

slowfire said:
the guy buying it could go back in their shop and put that thing in a CNC machine, that was programmed by the owner who was selling the 80 percent reciver

Whats the fun in that?

The SGN article didnt say one way or the other, and I cant immediately see anything on JPFO or KT's website about the incident. There is always more to a story, and staying out of trouble over guns is easy (so far and with exception) if you are careful and SEEK knowledge.

Anyways the link I posted is interesting for anyone considering doing that type of build, or for one of the AR 50 BMG type set-ups out there. With everyone on the planet selling AR receivers, its just one more option, maybe even an economical one for the mechanically inclined.

B.A.R. gunner

· #4 · Jul 30, 2006

the MAJOR problem from what ive been able to dig out of it was he did not send in his so called "80% receiver" for approval/classification that it was in fact 80%

you have to be RETARDED to sell an 80% receiver without a classification letter saying that it is NOT a firearm, and no special liscense is needed to sell it

only gathered this from another thread on another forum i read where kt ordnance was talking about there delima

slowfire

· #5 · Jul 30, 2006

see now there is another possible explenation.......honestly unless the specific reasons are published on what he did, or didn't do......I will hold off judgement on who is at fault here. I'm not jumping on his side, just because he happens to be in the firearm business.

GWR1

· #6 · Jul 30, 2006

Well, I was about to place an order, until I finished reading the article -- why publish the article in the FIRST place, until whoever has the 80% letter?! I believe the JFPO are in the forefront of protecting our rights, but SGN "F'"d up!!!

slowfire

· #7 · Jul 31, 2006

GWR1 said:
but SGN "F'"d up!!!

wouldn't be the first time.....these asshats gave a glowing revue and recommended the gooch as a premire AK builder, as his chciken coop of scams, and lies was falling down around him.

personally the SGN is a worthless rag, when it comes to articles......their writing staff consist of that assclown wannabe kokalis, who like to dress up for the camera, and touts himself as some kind of firearm guru in his writing....man is more like a legend in his own mind, then anything else

Mark Genovese

· #8 · Jul 31, 2006

For the record Mr. Kokalis has never used his own likeness in any of his published works. The gentleman in the photographs is a paid model.

Mark

jdmcomp

· #9 · Jul 31, 2006

No such thing as an 80% letter as I understand. Just a matter of judgment. I do wonder why anyone would pay 200$ plus for a bunch of parts that have to be worked on with great skill and then finished when a new forged, finished, receiver is less then 100$. I do understand the desire to build your own but why not use a 25$ forging.

Avoiding paperwork is not hard, lots of receivers floating around gun shows.

Something just not adding up here, I will wait for the rest of the story.

Commander47

· #10 · Jul 31, 2006

I don't want to start a flame war or anything, but some of us at home bubby trailer park type really know what we are doing. I have assembled a few screw built guns in my lifetime, and they are all flawless with thouhsands of rounds throught them.

In fact, a screw build can be much stronger than a rivet. The peaks and valleys of the screw allow for more metal to metal contact than with a rivet. Also, a screw can be gotten with a much stronger steel content and if spot welded in place, like I do, they will never....never get loose.

Now don't get me wrong, amateur workmanship in any build is amateur workmanship. We all have to learn sometime.

See less See more

striker754

· #11 · Jul 31, 2006

jdmcomp said:
No such thing as an 80% letter as I understand.

Not really. If you are going to sell 80% receivers, you better damn well send one to ATF to make sure it isnt considered a firearm. While the 80% term is made up by people, the final decision that matters is whether atf thinks it is a firearm or not. Don't want to be selling firearms without going through a licensee and paying taxes on them!!

7.62x39

· #12 · Jul 31, 2006

Commander47 said:
In fact, a screw build can be much stronger than a rivet. The peaks and valleys of the screw allow for more metal to metal contact than with a rivet. Also, a screw can be gotten with a much stronger steel content...

Sorry, I don't buy it.
I don't care what kind of super-duper, grade gazillion bolt you use, there is still only .100 of material in the trunnion available to tap.
Meaning, under the best possible scenario, the most you can possibly hope for is 3.2 threads (when using a 10-32 screw) and will probably end up closer to two.
That's the weak link.
Please don't try to tell me that a bolt held in by 2 threads is stronger than a properly set rivet

B.A.R. gunner

· #13 · Jul 31, 2006

you also only achieve about 75% thread contact at BEST - usually 50% or LESS
http://www.thedirtforum.com/drilltapsizes.htm

the drill and taps sold in the packages at the stores for drilling through steel give you a 50% thread and thats if you use a super dee duper accurate hole drilling machine of some sort (note - not a hand drill where the hole can be drilled slightly out of center)

rivets expand COMPLETELY inside the hole giving you 100% contact

Commander47

· #14 · Jul 31, 2006

Well, guys, I'm not going to debate it because you are wrong. Screws are much stronger. And in fact, on my AMD in the picture I used 1/4 inch cap screws for the rear two and they are pinned in from the inside. They are torqued properly to begin with, and have a much higher rated strength than any mushed soft steel rivet. Any rivet you can mush with a hammer is soft as butter in the engineering world. Ever try to mushroom a hardened steel cap screw with a hammer?

If you only get one thread in the upper four to grab, you are not tapping it right. You must use a bottoming tap against the barrel.

When you torque a screw to its proper strength, it will fill the slot completely, never come out, and never shear. Unlike rivets which shear easily.

The only reason rivets are used in the first place is because they are cheaper to make, cheaper material, and cheap to install with automation. Lowest bidder kinda stuff.

"The clamp load, also called preload, of a cap screw is created when a torque is applied, and is generally a percentage of the cap screw's proof strength. Cap screws are manufactured to various standards that define, among other things, their strength and clamp load. Torque charts are available that identify the required torque for cap screws based on their property class.

When a cap screw is tightened it is stretched, and the parts that are captured are compressed. The result is a spring-like assembly. External forces are designed to act on the parts that have been compressed, and not on the cap screw.

The result is a non-intuitive distribution of strain; in this engineering model, as long as the forces acting on the compressed parts do not exceed the clamp load, the cap screw doesn't see any increased load. This model is only valid when the members under compression are much stiffer than the capscrew"

See less See more

Poverty Ridge

· #15 · Jul 31, 2006

Not so

The treaded part of fastener is actually the weak part of the fastener. That is why in aircraft maintenance the rule of thumb is to have the grip (Unthreaded part of the fastener) be the same or greater than the material fastened together.

A properly set rivet will completely fill the hole and is designed for shear loads.

vtx-

· #16 · Aug 1, 2006

her is a post from other site with lot's of info on the KT raid, Rick the owner of kt ordnance is a member there and posts often on his situation

http://www.homegunsmith.com/cgi-bin/ib3/ikonboard.cgi?;act=ST;f=6;t=14781

hotchkissmtrifle

· #17 · Aug 1, 2006

Poverty Ridge said:
The treaded part of fastener is actually the weak part of the fastener. That is why in aircraft maintenance the rule of thumb is to have the grip (Unthreaded part of the fastener) be the same or greater than the material fastened together.

A properly set rivet will completely fill the hole and is designed for shear loads.

Damn! You beat me to this point I was poised to make. The thread is just like a scratch on glass. I agree, however, in the AK either done properly would be more that enough. I am not sure why anyone would bold an AR reciever togather, Completely clueless on this. Last I checked forgings were only about $25 and you don't have to be a rocket scientist to machine one of them out and have much better looking results. I assume you wuold be desperate to hide a paper trail or you would have shelled out the $100 and already been assembling the rifle though? Hotch

c322348

· #18 · Aug 1, 2006

A properly sized rivet will fail the receiver in shear. The rivet also fills the hole completely which is better in bearing. A rivet will have a preload on the parts just like the torque of a bolt provides. All this is esoteric however since the loads are not high enough to worry about.

And yes I do play an engineer on TV.

BigMac

· #19 · Aug 1, 2006

I have never seen a better example of a thread hijack..

slowfire

· #20 · Aug 1, 2006

vtx- said:
her is a post from other site with lot's of info on the KT raid, Rick the owner of kt ordnance is a member there and posts often on his situation

http://www.homegunsmith.com/cgi-bin/ib3/ikonboard.cgi?;act=ST;f=6;t=14781

you are joking, "lots of info"? I wish I can get back that tme I spent reading that 37 pages of dribble. the entire thread has maybe one or two tid bits of useful info.....the rest is just post after post of the usual ATF bashing, anti-gov't retoric and bashing, links to nutjob sites and nutjob airwaves, conspiracy post ie, bilderberg, UN, and a plea for money......... hardly what I would call "lots of information".......from gleening through all the garbage on that tread.....it would seem that this KT Sovereign, more then likely had not gotten his receiver approved as a non-firearm and was selling it not only here but into canada, without a 07 licence.....which if correct, is why they raided his place......hardly what I would call a "innocent victim", or deserving of a penny of my money for his "defense" on doing something that amounts to being a criminal. of course YMMV.

1 - 20 of 31 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.