Curernt legal status of Can-Cannon?

[Arizona_Mike]

The ATF changed their mind about the Can-Cannon in September last year (basically it is a short non-rifled barrel) that will make an SBR or DD depending on whether it is mounted to a rifle or handgun. This was due to the end plug being a screw which could be removed. The ATF is apparently worried about a 5.56 projectile getting some velocity from a very loose (~1/4") 1 1/8" of barrel before the first big vent!

I spoke to them at the SAR show and they claimed their new welded plug should take care of that. However, their web page seems to indicate that a change is coming and they are currently urging customers to threat them as a short non-rifled barrel.

I deduce that the ruling on the welded plug is still pending and they are being super cautious. Does anyone know the details?

For now it is just a fun toy but with the promised grappling hook and dog training accessories (not to mention a line launcher or antenna launcher) I might have more appeal.

Mike

 

[unknwn]

I bought one new last month and had to trade the barrel for a quality control/warranty issue.
The replacement came with a welded end plug, and a chamber neck/leade machining that could have been better done by a child with a dull drill bit.
After the several weeks turn-around to get the stub/barrel / pressure chamber exchanged I went to a gunsmith for help with the sticky empties.
From what I can gather, if you experience empties getting stuck in the chamber expect to be told that you must use "their" blanks rather than commonly available mil-spec PPU blanks to overcome the problem.
The PPU blanks are "hot-damn" versus LC surplus being "so-so" in comparison.
The PPU blanks toss a can of soda a good 120 yards or so, but will stick in the crappy chamber reaming. where-as the anemic Lake City blanks fall-off at 80 yards or less, but, they will extract from the poor chambering every time.
I think I paid too much for crap machine work. You hear -X Products?

 

[dogtown tom]

Arizona_Mike The ATF changed their mind about the Can-Cannon in September....

They didn't change their mind because the manufacturer never asked for a determination letter until early 2015.

I remember when the vendor (not an FFL) with the tables next to mine at the Dallas Market Hall gun show started selling them.....several other dealers pointed out the numerous problems with that device attached to an AR lower receiver.

The manufacturer should have done their due diligence before bringing that to market.
http://s3.amazonaws.com/siteninja/site-ninja1-com/1442932884/original/Can_Cannon_Determination_Letter.pdf

(basically it is a short non-rifled barrel) that will make an SBR or DD depending on whether it is mounted to a rifle or handgun.

Can't be an SBR because it doesn't have a rifled barrel.
The ATF determination letter says it would be a short barreled shotgun or AOW depending on how it is configured.

This was due to the end plug being a screw which could be removed. The ATF is apparently worried about a 5.56 projectile getting some velocity from a very loose (~1/4") 1 1/8" of barrel before the first big vent!

They aren't "worried" as much as they are following an eighty year old Federal law. What constitutes an SBS or AOW hasn't exactly been a secret since 1934.
The manufacturer SHOULD have known that.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

It looks like I was not given accurate information at the vendor's booth.

Mike

PS. I do not own one.