HKPRO Forums banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
177 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Was thinking about getting a nice SR9 but after reading all the 922R related stuff too many questions came up .... lol. Any help is appreciated . 1). How early are SR9 rifles with bellow 200 serial number KA code ? 2). Is it common/probable for that early of a rifle ( not stamed TC)to ORIGINALLY be in SR9TC configuration ? 3). What US made parts are on those rifles as they were sold new? (If any). 4). Do SR9 owners have freedom (922r) to change parts on their guns at will? For example a SR9T owner want the thumbhole stock back on their rifle? Or wants a wide HK forearm ? Or replace the PSG1 grip with something else ? Etc. 5).is HK claw mount the best way to mount the scope, or are there better options? 6). Did HK ever made a thubmhole stock for a 91/93 ? Just want to have all that out of the way before I decide on the rifle. Thanks .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,330 Posts
Was thinking about getting a nice SR9 but after reading all the 922R related stuff too many questions came up .... lol. Any help is appreciated . 1). How early are SR9 rifles with bellow 200 serial number KA code ? 2). Is it common/probable for that early of a rifle ( not stamed TC)to ORIGINALLY be in SR9TC configuration ? 3). What US made parts are on those rifles as they were sold new? (If any). 4). Do SR9 owners have freedom (922r) to change parts on their guns at will? For example a SR9T owner want the thumbhole stock back on their rifle? Or wants a wide HK forearm ? Or replace the PSG1 grip with something else ? Etc. 5).is HK claw mount the best way to mount the scope, or are there better options? 6). Did HK ever made a thubmhole stock for a 91/93 ? Just want to have all that out of the way before I decide on the rifle. Thanks .
1. Not early enough.
2. I wouldn't bet on it.
3. Maybe the stocks.
4. Not sure what you mean, you must comply with 922r. Putting a thumbhole on a T should not be a problem, but placing a wide forearm could be another import issue because of the bipod mount.
5. Yes.
6. No.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
177 Posts
Discussion Starter #4 (Edited)
1. Not early enough.
2. I wouldn't bet on it.
3. Maybe the stocks.
4. Not sure what you mean, you must comply with 922r. Putting a thumbhole on a T should not be a problem, but placing a wide forearm could be another import issue because of the bipod mount.
5. Yes.
6. No.
Thank You .
(responding to Your answers to my questions)

1). Not early enough for what?
2). Is the gun too early (under 200 ser#) to be one of the unmarked ones?
3). Were the thumbhole stocks and forearms ONLY made by Bell and Carlson?
4).what GERMAN made forearm is OK to put on SR9?
5). HK Claw mount is most recommended and would work with most scopes?
6). Since HK never made thumbhole stocks for HK91/SR9 , what other thumbhole stock were made other than Bell and Carlson ?

According to HK the rifle in question was shipped in November 1990 . Is that about the beginning or SR9's?

Also , how do I figure out what kind of forearm is on the gun ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,330 Posts
Thank You .
(responding to Your answers to my questions)

1). Not early enough for what?
2). Is the gun too early (under 200 ser#) to be one of the unmarked ones?
3). Were the thumbhole stocks and forearms ONLY made by Bell and Carlson?
4).what GERMAN made forearm is OK to put on SR9?
5). HK Claw mount is most recommended and would work with most scopes?
6). Since HK never made thumbhole stocks for HK91/SR9 , what other thumbhole stock were made other than Bell and Carlson ?

Also , according to HK the rifle in question was shipped in November 1990 . Is that about the beginning or SR9's?
1. "Is it common/probable for that early of a rifle ( not stamed TC)to ORIGINALLY be in SR9TC configuration ? " No.
2. Yes, and there were not necessarily any unmarked TCs, that's speculation.
3. Don't know.
4. Any without a bipod attachment.
5. MSG90 for most scopes.
6. B&C came with HKs. Other clones, like Springfield Armory had thumbholes too.

also...yes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
177 Posts
Discussion Starter #6 (Edited)
1. "Is it common/probable for that early of a rifle ( not stamed TC)to ORIGINALLY be in SR9TC configuration ? " No.
2. Yes, and there were not necessarily any unmarked TCs, that's speculation.
3. Don't know.
4. Any without a bipod attachment.
5. MSG90 for most scopes.
6. B&C came with HKs. Other clones, like Springfield Armory had thumbholes too.

also...yes.
Thanks .

1). How do I tell if forearm has bipod attachment??? I don't know much about HK's. What does it look like?

2). If You ended up with that early of a rifle (NOV 1990) in wrong configuration ( TC) ,would You turn it back to a basic SR9? If that is the road You would decide to take. WHAT EXACTLY WOULD YOU NEED TO DO IT?

3). Do the importation laws deal with possession or manufacturing or both?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,330 Posts
Thanks .

1). How do I tell if forearm has bipod attachment??? I don't know much about HK's. What does it look like?

2). If You ended up with that early of a rifle (NOV 1990) in wrong configuration ( TC) ,would You turn it back to a basic SR9? If that is the road You would decide to take. WHAT EXACTLY WOULD YOU NEED TO DO IT?
1. image.jpeg

2. No.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
It's a HK G41 handguard, and, there's a HK bipod that snaps into it. They fit 91's and SR9's too.

Have you looked at a US made M LOK or Key Mod hand guard?


The whole idea that you can't have a hand guard with a bipod mounting bracket is so damn stupid on the government's part. You can put a bipod on just about any long gun in a mater of minutes any number of ways; and, suddenly mass mayhem doesn't occur.

Plus, to think that a SR9TC is ok; but, a SR9 with the SR9TC accessories is suddenly not ok. I am so sick of government nonsense. Short barrel rifles are NFA; but, arm braced pistols aren't.

Don't even get me started on trying to be a trail maintenance volunteer with the National Forest Service & the BS paper work they want you to do. Impact studies before you can move a trail 5' to one side to solve an erosion problem THAT is causing silt to run into a trout stream. ****, there you go wasting my tax dollars. A Boy Scout could figure out the trail needs to be moved. WTF do you need an impact study for?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
177 Posts
Discussion Starter #9 (Edited)
It's a HK G41 handguard, and, there's a HK bipod that snaps into it. They fit 91's and SR9's too.

Have you looked at a US made M LOK or Key Mod hand guard?


The whole idea that you can't have a hand guard with a bipod mounting bracket is so damn stupid on the government's part. You can put a bipod on just about any long gun in a mater of minutes any number of ways; and, suddenly mass mayhem doesn't occur.

Plus, to think that a SR9TC is ok; but, a SR9 with the SR9TC accessories is suddenly not ok. I am so sick of government nonsense. Short barrel rifles are NFA; but, arm braced pistols aren't.

Don't even get me started on trying to be a trail maintenance volunteer with the National Forest Service & the BS paper work they want you to do. Impact studies before you can move a trail 5' to one side to solve an erosion problem THAT is causing silt to run into a trout stream. ****, there you go wasting my tax dollars. A Boy Scout could figure out the trail needs to be moved. WTF do you need an impact study for?
Is G41 basically the same as HK91 or SR9? ( I know HK's very well)

So far from what I been reading here, we will never know how the SR9 I was looking to get ended up the way it is today. Since all of them were imported just as SR9's. The only thing I got from HK is that it was shipped in November 1990 from Germany with 5 rd. magazine.

I guess we will never know how it ended up with a 4IJ (1989) PSG1 stock , with PSG1 trigger group and grip and with G41 forearm, since the original owner is long gone. HK has no such information .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
The G41 was a 5.56x45 that took M16 mags.

My SR9 had a G41 hand guard on it when I got it. The hand guard looked good on the rifle; but, felt flimsy IMHO. Sold it to help pay for the rifle. It did kind of looked like a PSG1 style hand guard. I can understand why it may have been a popular accessory; but, I don't think HK shipped SR9's with it. I'd rather have an M LOK hand guard than a G41 one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
177 Posts
Discussion Starter #11 (Edited)
The G41 was a 5.56x45 that took M16 mags.

My SR9 had a G41 hand guard on it when I got it. The hand guard looked good on the rifle; but, felt flimsy IMHO. Sold it to help pay for the rifle. It did kind of looked like a PSG1 style hand guard. I can understand why it may have been a popular accessory; but, I don't think HK shipped SR9's with it. I'd rather have an M LOK hand guard than a G41 one.
So G41 hand guard is German made? I never heard of G41. It seems to fit the gun very well. What other German hand guards are good for SR9? ( that either don't have bipod stuff or that it can be easily removed).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
244 Posts
If it were me, I would buy the rifle, do whatever i want with it and not worry about it. People freak out over small 922r stuff but I seriously doubt an ATF agent is going to care that some podunk nobody put a bipod on a 20 year old rifle.

ETA that the podunk nobody is me. in case anyone gets offended.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,194 Posts
Worrying about 922r is like agonizing over pulling that tag off your mattress and just as pointless. Heck most of the "US" compliance parts aren't even marked in anyway to tell they were made in the US.

As an end user (non-commercial manufacturer) unless you get popped for a BIGGER weapons charge, you are NOT going to ever have to deal with 922r.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
177 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Hurry up and by that rifle man. It is a great deal!
What's the current pricing on basic SR9's. in excellent condition? Reason I say basic is because the rifle is just SR9 according to markings on the receiver . I guess the options on the gun would have to be priced separately.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top