HKPRO Forums banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
851 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Bored watching college football and I was wondering. Has anyone ever attempted for schlitzs and giggles to convert a USP to full auto? Is it even remotely possible?
 

·
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒ&
Joined
·
1,922 Posts
That is MORE than slightly illegal. I can't begin to imagine being so bored as to want to spend that kind of time in prison.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
851 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I guess it was more a question based on Hollywood fantasy. I see full auto Glocks all the time in the movies and I was just curious if it has been done to USPs is all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
116 Posts
That is MORE than slightly illegal. I can't begin to imagine being so bored as to want to spend that kind of time in prison.
A class 2 with a type 07 S.O.T can try to make one perfectly legal for research and design purposes. But that is the only way. I am sure it can be done, but I dont condone trying to do it or how it would be done. Oh yea, all NFA rules apply.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,023 Posts
The Glock 18 was designed fully auto. It has the different setup internally with the selector switch and sear etc....

You would have to make your own fire controll group, and modify pins etc... It could be done, but you would have to have a very good understanding of engineering to do it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,632 Posts
Oh sure, it's easy. All you have to do is file down the firing pin. It works on all guns, everybody knows that.

But serisouly, like F22 said, of course it COULD be done, but it's not like the Glock 18 that came that way. You'd have to make or modify any parts you need. But anything is possible. It might be pretty easy, or they may have designed it specifically to make it difficult to convert.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
avaitor... file down the firing pin...... that wont work ... till make the weapon useless ...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,788 Posts
I believe AD was making fun of all the Hollywood BS about how easy it is to make guns FA. Some CSI type of geek always comes on and says something like, "That AK-47 had its firing pin filed down to make it full auto" or some other technically incorrect BS.
They have no idea what they are talking about and could not care less. Just watch CSI Miami or CSI Las Vegas, if they have it in Ireland and if they don't count yourself lucky, and you will see all kinds of CSI wizardry BS that couldn't be done on the Pentagon's budget.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,393 Posts
I've always wondered if there was such a thing as a full auto USP.

I wouldn't want one, nor would would I make one. I just think it be cool to see videos of it online or something like that. Just to see how it compares to a Glock 18. I also want to see a Full Auto P226!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
851 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
I've always wondered if there was such a thing as a full auto USP.

I wouldn't want one, nor would would I make one. I just think it be cool to see videos of it online or something like that. Just to see how it compares to a Glock 18. I also want to see a Full Auto P226!!!
This was the very reason for the start of the thread. I would not want one and there's no way in hell I could or would make one (not an engineer and jail time is not fun). I was just curious if one existed.
 

·
Merchant of Death (Admin)
Joined
·
11,568 Posts
Once again, even a licensed manufacturer of NFA weapons cannot make a new machinegun just for R&D purposes. There must be the intent for bona fide demonstration or delivery to a qualified agency or for export. This is confirmed in the latest ATF publication (the NFA Handbook), section 7.6.2. That said, if an agency wanted HK or another mfr to propose and demo one, somebody would figure out a way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
I think HK went through a period where they were toying with the idea of making a full auto USP in 9mm... that's why you can find 30 round 9mm mags from time to time. Don't know if they were ever produced and sold to any departments or units... But there may be a box of them at HK.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
ohh thank god.... slept off that hangover of bulmers and irish whiskey...


unbeakable..... was just about to mention the 30 round mags.. there definatly needed as the rof would be so high, it would eat through 10,15,18 rnd mags....Mp5ks are high rof because of there short recoil... but a usp would be insane ... i think the full auto glock is over 1000rpm.... i have been wrong before... (once) :p:p:p

recoil would make the weapon crap to fire... ur be better off throwin a fist full of rounds at "a bad guy" :p:p

a complete design of the trigger group is needed...depending if you want it to have a "Safe" and "Full".. that would be the easier of the 2 options..."Safe" "Semi" and "Full" would be harder .. and quiet possible there might not be enough room in the frame for a redesigned trigger mechanism.

as bomb proof as Usps are ....id question how reliable it would become with that sort of abuse

IMHO.. there is no need for a fully auto pistol... smgs cover that field... it would be like putting a mustang engine into a nissan micra ( i donno what americans use as a really small old womans car that is normally seen driving at 45 mph everywhere) and trying to use it as an everyday car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
An idiot could probably file down the sear and make a USP a run away... but controlable full auto would require some fire control mods.

There was a guy that brought a Kimber BP Ten II into my friends gun store because he said it was having problems and wanted it fixed. Well I got to playing with the gun and noticed that when you would rack the slide the hammer would fall behind it. It wouldn't cock unless you let the slide forward really slowly. And when it cocked.... it had like a 0.5lbs trigger LMAO. It would also fire if you slammed a mag in it. And if you cocked it an engaged the safety... dropping the safety casued it to fire. We never test fired it becuase it was so obviously illegal. But We figure the idiot ground his sear down and the gun was now a run away.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,632 Posts
avaitor... file down the firing pin...... that wont work ... till make the weapon useless ...
Yes, I was being facetious. See definition 2.

Main Entry: fa·ce·tious
Pronunciation: f&-'sE-sh&s
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle French facetieux, from facetie jest, from Latin facetia
1 : joking or jesting often inappropriately : WAGGISH <just being facetious>
2 : meant to be humorous or funny : not serious <a facetious remark>
synonym see WITTY
- fa·ce·tious·ly adverb
- fa·ce·tious·ness noun
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
851 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Yes, I was being facetious. See definition 2.

Main Entry: fa·ce·tious
Pronunciation: f&-'sE-sh&s
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle French facetieux, from facetie jest, from Latin facetia
1 : joking or jesting often inappropriately : WAGGISH <just being facetious>
2 : meant to be humorous or funny : not serious <a facetious remark>
synonym see WITTY
- fa·ce·tious·ly adverb
- fa·ce·tious·ness noun
LOL :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
aviator.. i see said the blindman


my bad... :p:p:p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,023 Posts
There is a part you could file down to make it slam fire.... It would not keep the hammer back after each shot, BUT, weather it would actually fire from the slam fires each time is depatable. (as in seriously doubtful)

For abvious reasons, i wont say which part you would chop up, but its fairly easy to figure out.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,632 Posts
Once again, even a licensed manufacturer of NFA weapons cannot make a new machinegun just for R&D purposes. There must be the intent for bona fide demonstration or delivery to a qualified agency or for export. This is confirmed in the latest ATF publication (the NFA Handbook), section 7.6.2. That said, if an agency wanted HK or another mfr to propose and demo one, somebody would figure out a way.
And if you read the handbook linked above, it references 27 CFR 479.105, which states:

(e) The making of machine guns on or
after May 19, 1986.
Subject to compliance with the provisions of this part, applications to make and register machine guns on or after May 19, 1986, for the benefit of a Federal, State or local governmental entity (e.g., an invention for possible future use of a governmental entity or the making of a weapon in connection with research and development on behalf of such an entity) will be approved if it is established by specific information that the machine gun is particularly suitable for use by Federal, State or local governmental entities and that the making of the weapon is at the request and on behalf of such an entity.

What I get from that is that the procedure would be 1)A mfg is contacted by a gov't agency to design and build the weapon. 2) the MFG submits the application to make the weapon. 3)the application is either approved or denied and 4) if approved, it can be made.

What I wonder is if the application would be in effect for the entire design process, or if a new application would be required for each prototype. I know it can be done, I think those KRISS subguns run in full auto, and they don't yet have a sellable product, it's still in development.​

 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top