C&R modifications question

[il_10]

I've been working on a Series 70 1911 "age of flight" gun, to tune to my desired specifications, as seen in this thread: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?p=7317810#post7317810

These guns, stock, are on the C&R list, but as I explained in the thread the gun is worth about the same as any other standard series 70, so I'm approaching it as a shooter. My question is: since I've modified it from its original configuration, if I ever did decide to sell it (which is doubtful) would I still be able to sell it as a C&R gun? I have all the original parts and can easily return it to its original configuration, aside from the stock sear which would make it a dangerous gun.

Thanks!

 

[hermannr]

IMHO (only an opinion, and you know opinions are like behinds, everyone has one, and they all smell)

If you did not modify the function and character of the firearm, it is C&R by the serial number (manufacturing date). Everything else is maintenance.

There is no way to show that the "maintenance" was not done over 50 years ago, or not...

Think about an antique Automobile...it does not become a "new" auto even if it has had extensive modification like a new motor that was never available when it was originally manufactured..

 

[M-Cameron]

well federally, the action/receiver is the firearm.......everything else is just parts.......so as long as the action/receiver is original.....the firearm should still be a C&R gun.......

 

[Shadow 7D]

NO read the ATF letter
certain 'cosmetic' things like sights are OK, NON period sporterizing results in no longer being a C&R

 

[AlexanderA]

The are two ways a gun can become a "Curio or Relic" -- one is by age (50 years) and the other is by unique characteristics that make it especially collectible, and for which a formal request to be put on "the list" is required. It seems to me that your gun is on the C&R list because it's the rare "age of flight" variation. As long as it maintains its character as that variation, in spite of customizing changes, it should be OK.

 

[Cosmoline]

The definition for curio or relic (“C & R”) firearms found in 27 CFR § 478.11 does not specifically state that a firearm must be in its original condition to be classified as a C&R firearm. However, ATF Ruling 85-10, which discusses the importation of military C&R firearms, notes that they must be in original configuration and adds that a receiver is not a C&R item. Combining this ruling and the definition of C&R firearms, the Firearms Technology Branch (FTB) has concluded that a firearm must be in its original condition to be considered a C&R weapon.

It is also the opinion of FTB, however, that a minor change such as the addition of scope mounts, non-original sights, or sling swivels would not remove a firearm from its original condition. Moreover, we have determined that replacing particular firearms parts with new parts that are made to the original design would also be acceptable-for example, replacing a cracked M1 Grand stock with a new wooden stock of the same design, but replacing the original firearm stock with a plastic stock would change its classification as a C&R item.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/curios-relics.html#modifications

A profoundly idiotic and contradictory position which is not in accord with any law. But that never stopped these guys before. Can you ship a Garand or Mauser as C&R if it was once put in a sporter stock but put back in an original? Who knows. These guys are worthless and the C&R license is also essentially worthless. If they want to find a way to burn you for some violation of it, they can and will. Treat everything that isn't an antique as non-C&R and you'll be safe. Or safer.

In this case you've got one classed as C&R because it fits this category: "Derive a substantial part of their monetary value from the fact that they are novel, rare, bizarre, or from the fact of their association with some historical figure, period, or event."

You may have destroyed too much of the collector value that made it a C&R, even if it's even more unique and a better pistol now.

 

[Shadow 7D]

Technically there is ONLY ONE WAY A MODIFIED C&R maintains it status
you write the technology branch and describe the changes you would like to make, and they determine that it would still be a C&R.

 

[mgmorden]

The basic consensus from most license holders is that if the "spirit" of the firearm is unchanged, it's still C&R. IE, if the grips are worn and you replace them with new grips but still styled the same as the old one (ie , a reproduction replacement part) then you're good. If you replace some non-visible interior parts that are worn with identically functioning parts, then you're OK.

For handguns though, if you throw on some skull and crossbone grips, adjustable sights, beavertail grip safety, etc, then it's not C&R anymore.

For rifles, if you change out the stock for a military-style reproduction then you're good - put on a sporter stock and you're not.

It's an odd system. "The receiver is the gun" only partially applies when it comes to C&R. The receiver is the only piece needed to qualify - the item shipped must be a functioning gun though, and it must be functionally and cosmetically in it's original configuration.

My guess is the same is likely true of finishes. If the gun was originally blued then a reblue wouldn't remove C&R. Duracoating it would. Similarly, if it was originally parkerized then you could have it reparkerized, but if you had it stripped down and blued then it wouldn't be C&R anymore.

AIM for example has 1903-A3 rifles right now as C&R's that are original styled - the receivers are original but most of the rest of the rifle is all period correct reproduction parts. That's C&R. If they'd taken them and built up custom sporters on the same receivers then they would count as new guns as far as C&R's go (TECHNICALLY they'd become C&R again 50 years after the sporterization was completed, though that would be very hard to prove and not something I'd even mess with).

 

[Shadow 7D]

"spirit"
Doesn't MATTER
guess DOESN'T mean squat

We are talking a PRECISE legal definition (at least when they get around to defining it, and in a very nebulous way...)
that you can get into a LARGE amount of LEGAL trouble over.

IF you do the mods, don't sell it as C&R, it may not be you, but all it takes, is them backtracking to you, and everybody along the way being in trouble, I have done a 4473 on C&R's just because they maynot be covered due to modifications (period cut down, and quite poorly done)

Write the Technology branch and get the letter that says, YES or NO.

 

[mgmorden]

Condescending tone aside, the ATF has already stated several times that you can replace worn out parts. That's part of simple maintenance. As long as it's in original configuration you're good. You're free to disagree if you wish. I don't share your viewpoint. Have fun and do as you wish.

 

[Shadow 7D]

since I've modified it from its original configuration

That is your legal hang up...
I'm pointing out, that NO MATTER WHAT OUR OPINIONS MAYBE
They don't count, only a letter from the ATF does.

 

[madmike]

These guys are worthless and the C&R license is also essentially worthless.

Really? Because I get 20% off my parts and supplies, receive guns all the time without paying for transfer, and get them shipped direct.

I think the mistake you're making here is thinking of the C&R as a transfer license. The C&R is a COLLECTOR license.

However, do you have a list of the thousands of C&R holders jailed for receiving something with a replacement part or two? That would certainly prove me wrong.

 

[Frank Ettin]

Shadow 7D has it nailed. Re-read his posts, and Cosmoline's post, and understand what they are essentially saying.

[1] The law is unclear.

[2] If one continues to treat a gun he's worked on as classified as a C&R, and if ATF disagrees, things can get very unpleasant. Even if one wins in court, it will have cost him a bunch of money, anxiety and hassle.

[3] The only way to know for sure whether or not you're in the clear would be to get a formal determination letter from ATF.

The other thing that the OP should realize is that the opinions of everyone here telling him that he's okay don't really count. If those folks are wrong, it'll still be the OP's problem, not theirs.

 

[Shadow 7D]

Damn Lawyers (not you fiddle I like you, and cosmo too, shoot maybe I should just go back to school and join the shark pack)

Always killing the fun by pointing out the little things that may (will) deprive you of money, time and liberty....

 

[il_10]

Fair enough. A bit of a shame that I can't do what I want with it so long as it can be returned to the original configuration. Still, I've got it tuned about how I want it, and being my first 1911 build I doubt I'll turn loose of it any time soon anyway. Thanks for the help!

 

[Frank Ettin]

Damn Lawyers (.... maybe I should just go back to school and join the shark pack)...

Why not? Since I retired, there's an opening for you.

...Always killing the fun by pointing out the little things that may (will) deprive you of money, time and liberty....

I like to think that by understanding, "... the little things that may (will) deprive you of money, time and liberty..." one has a better chance to avoid doing them, and thus a better chance to preserve his "...money, time and liberty...."