Why is the Upper the Firearm...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sistema1927

Sistema1927

Member
Joined
May 21, 2004
Messages
7,699
Location
"Land of (dis)Enchantment"
...on my new Ruger Mk IV 22/45 Lite?

Just purchased the new Ruger yesterday, and noticed that the serial number only appears on the upper. No serial number anywhere to be found on the polymer lower (at least not where I can find it). If this is the case, they why is this so different from other firearms?

For example, compare this new pistol with an AR15. The lower on both contains the fire control components and the upper contains the barrel and bolt. Only real difference is the fact that the AR lower contains the buffer and recoil spring while the recoil spring is integral with the bolt on the 22/45. Could this be what makes the difference?
 
The reason is because the lathe turned tube that is the upper is cheap and easy to make. So if theres major revisions to the machinery, and there has been a few, the actual 'receiver' stays the same. The tube is very easy to make, and very small, and simple. In a time where receivers where not an important legal component, it was common to make the part that fit the barrel the 'firearm'. Nowadays, im sure the gripframe would be it. I think Ruger thought about revisions and aftermarket grip frames in the beginning. Also, theres a lot of space on that part. my best guess. It does have the benefit of deterring aftermarket parts, though I doubt that was a thought at the time.
 
mjsdwash said:
The reason is because the lathe turned tube that is the upper is cheap and easy to make. So if theres major revisions to the machinery, and there has been a few, the actual 'receiver' stays the same. The tube is very easy to make, and very small, and simple. In a time where receivers where not an important legal component, it was common to make the part that fit the barrel the 'firearm'. Nowadays, im sure the gripframe would be it. I think Ruger thought about revisions and aftermarket grip frames in the beginning. Also, theres a lot of space on that part. my best guess. It does have the benefit of deterring aftermarket parts, though I doubt that was a thought at the time.
Click to expand...

Not sure that line of reasoning is correct. It can't come down to "the easiest piece to manufacture is the firearm". If so, then Glock would stamp the SN on the slide instead of attaching a separate plate to the grip frame. I am guessing that we will all go crazy before we figure out the vagaries of this situation.
 
The ATF has a regulation that has a list of functions of a receiver (not in a position to search right now) and the part in a particular design that performs the most of those functions ends up being the legal receiver for that particular firearm.

Mike
 
"...Because that's what the BATFE decided..." Exactly. Unelected civil servants making law by regulation. Call your elected representatives and ask why that's allowed.
Your Browning Hi-Power doesn't have an upper and a lower. And there's no logic involved with any of it. My Inglis BHP has 2 barrels in different chamberings. No S/N on the other barrel. It's a .41 AE, but don't even think about it. There's no ammo or brass anywhere. No barrels either anymore.
"...The firearm is the serial number..." Nope. Just where the S/N is on parts that rarely get changed.
 
Sistema1927 said:
Not sure that line of reasoning is correct. It can't come down to "the easiest piece to manufacture is the firearm". If so, then Glock would stamp the SN on the slide instead of attaching a separate plate to the grip frame. I am guessing that we will all go crazy before we figure out the vagaries of this situation.
Click to expand...
you may be right about no correct answer, but I dont think the atf will accept the slide as a frame. The Ruger Standard predates the ATF, and the GCA, and most all laws except the NFA.
 
Well, my Browning Hi-Power has the serial number on the frame, the slide, and the barrel. I don't think that is the answer.
Click to expand...
Exactly as Robert said.

Look at an AR-15, and look at a Ruger Standard, MkI, II, III, etc. Go on and explain how the tube at the back of a Ruger's barrel is different from an AR-15 upper receiver. They do exactly the same jobs. But one's a "firearm" and one isn't.
 
Just because a Browning HP has all parts serialized (matching is a good thing but not mandatory) that still doesn't escape the fact that one of those parts is considered the firearm. I bet there are HP's out there without matching numbers or maybe even just one number.

Usually the firearm is what the manufacturer calls the receiver/frame or grip frame.

On the Ruger auto MK series stuff the bbl is threaded to the receiver. The old grip frames were 2 stamped pcs welded together.........that might be why the serial number went on the receiver.
 
Arizona_Mike said:
The ATF has a regulation that has a list of functions of a receiver (not in a position to search right now) and the part in a particular design that performs the most of those functions ends up being the legal receiver for that particular firearm.

Mike
Click to expand...


This is my understanding and explains why all the other guns mentioned aren't marked the samw way as the gun in the OP.
 
Just purchased the new Ruger yesterday, and noticed that the serial number only appears on the upper. No serial number anywhere to be found on the polymer lower (at least not where I can find it). If this is the case, they why is this so different from other firearms?
Click to expand...

The upper is the firearm on my FAL as well
Click to expand...

Cannibul said:
Because it's where the serial number is. It's that simple. The firearm is the serial number.
Click to expand...
This.

In both cited cases, the OEM chose to put the S/N on the upper receiver rather than the lower receiver. The BATF doesn't care which part it's on - they only care that it exists in a form that meets regulation:

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firear...rms-ammunition-firearms-verification-overview

Using the Ruger as the example - the upper receiver/barrel *is* the firearm and the lower receiver/fire control group is not, simply because that's the way that Ruger started doing it in 1949 - many decades before the GCA '68 started mandating the notion of serial numbers on firearms made/sold in the US.

That's also true of the FAL - when it was designed in 1953, the GCA '68 requirement for serial number tracking of a firearm was fifteen years away from existence. FN put it where they did for reasons known only to the mists of time. Come 1968, the ATF didn't care how FN did it so long as a major subassembly of the gun had a tracking number that met regulation and could therefore be called 'the gun'.

It's not about some bureaucrat deciding this - it's the way that the manufacturer originally marked them.
 
Last edited:
The manufacturer does have a say in where the serial number goes. I imagine that this is an example of such. Normally the SN would go on the frame/receiver, and I imagine that's where it would have gone if the ATF had decided on their own, as it's pretty cut and dry. I bet Ruger requested the serial number be placed on the upper for some unknown reason (maybe they had planned for interchangeable frames?), or maybe someone at the ATF was just high that day (those clowns are definitely smoking something). In general, the ATF will put the SN on whatever major part houses the FCG. The FAL is kind of a strange setup. I think they probably viewed the upper as like the receiver of an M14, and the lower as more of a self contained trigger pack than a proper receiver. As far as I know, all the CETME/HK based firearms are the same way, with the serial number on the "upper."

I'll tell you what's really slick are the newer polymer frames with the SN on the removable chassis, that way you can replace pretty much the entire gun without having to bother with FFLs. Had I been in Ruger's marketing department I would have pushed for that on the 22/45. In any case I would much rather be able to change barrels than frames, and would imagine that most people probably feel the same way. Now if we could just get the ATF to agree to put serial numbers on an AR trigger chassis. That would be an 80% lower I could get on board with!

ETA: It just dawned on me, are 22/45 components compatible with earlier MkI-IV pistols? If so, that would probably explain why. Since the Mk series has the SN on the upper, it would be possible to buy a Mk lower, which is not serialized, then buy a 22/45 barrel. So you could essentially assemble a complete firearm without doing paperwork. I thought I had heard they weren't compatible with any of the Mk series, but maybe they're close enough that the ATF was worried about them being easily modified to fit together.
 
Last edited:
Sistema1927 said:
...on my new Ruger Mk IV 22/45 Lite?

Just purchased the new Ruger yesterday, and noticed that the serial number only appears on the upper. No serial number anywhere to be found on the polymer lower (at least not where I can find it). If this is the case, they why is this so different from other firearms?

For example, compare this new pistol with an AR15. The lower on both contains the fire control components and the upper contains the barrel and bolt. Only real difference is the fact that the AR lower contains the buffer and recoil spring while the recoil spring is integral with the bolt on the 22/45. Could this be what makes the difference?
Click to expand...


As far as I know, the Ruger .22 semi auto pistol is the ONLY handgun that has the serial number on the UPPER FRAME .

Better known as the barrel and bolt.

Check all your other guns,you will find the serial number on the LOWER part of the actual FRAME.
 
acdodd said:
What about old firearms that don't have a serial number?
Click to expand...

What about them? Not required prior to GCA 1968.
Not to be confused with Grandpa's Gun which is his USGI service pistol from which he deleted the serial number and USP in 1946 to cleverly conceal from the MPs and the FBI that he had misappropriated government property. Not legal.
 
I thought many guns produced in Europe (pre-68) had the serial numbers on the uppers, like the Inglis. The location may have changed after 1968 when they exported guns to the USA and they wanted as few "red tape" issues as possible.
 
The reason for some European guns having S/Ns on the frame, slide and barrel are due to some variations of laws in some of the countries. In some the barrel and the frame need to be serialized, in others, the frame and slide, and in some all three. So, that's why Glocks, for example, have all three.

Similar on proof testing and subsequent markings in some of the countries.
 
I was kinda thinkin' the upper is considered the firearm because that's where the bolt, breech and chamber are located.

But whiskey tango foxtrot do I know.
 
200Apples said:
I was kinda thinkin' the upper is considered the firearm because that's where the bolt, breech and chamber are located.

But whiskey tango foxtrot do I know.
Click to expand...

Like someone else posted, the ATF considers the frame/receiver to be the firearm. In general, the receiver is going to be the part that houses the fire control group and magazine. Obviously those definitions get a little muddy with bolt actions and similarly laid out automatics, like the FAL, M14, M1, CETME, etc. where the receiver houses the action and not the FCG. But in an indirect way, they kinda do house the FCG, or at least it fixes to them, and they hold the magazine, or at least half of it.
 
What does the "receiver" do? By namesake, it "receives" the recoil. For a semiauto pistol, that effectively is designated as the part which provides the stopping resistance, first hand, of the action operation. The assembly pin in the upper of the Ruger Mark series pistols places that action force upon the UPPER. Contrarily, for a 1911, Glock, AR-15, etc, the recoil springs anchor to the grip frame, hence the grip frame for those models "receives" first and provides the gross resistance the force of the action's cycle.

Are there some models which are marked in a manner whic doesn't follow that rule? Sure. But overall, this is the most basic rule one can attribute to what qualifies as the receiver, and what does not. But overall, if you ignore the fire control group (it's a receiver, not a "firer" after all), and focus upon the location of the supporting structure against which the recoil spring is anchored, more often than not, you'll have the right answer.
 
Just to muddy the waters: my first rifle was a Nylon 66 (actually, I had the non-tubular magazine version, whatever model that was). The serial number was on the U shaped piece of metal that wrapped around the action - a dust cover really. It wasn't a functional part, other than perhaps keeping the ejector from falling out (it's been a few years, I don't have the rifle anymore, alas). So, if I remove the serialized dust cover and use a piece of duct tape to keep the ejector in, is the firearm the removed dust cover, or the rest or the rifle?

The answer, I think, is 'It depends' - specifically, it depends on what law we're talking about. If the law in question defines 'gun' along the lines of 'an object that uses chemical energy to propel a projectile...' then the dust cover isn't the gun. For another law, maybe the dust cover is the gun, and everything else is just parts. In other contexts, maybe both are guns - strange alchemy indeed!

You'll go insane trying to formulate a general rule; I don't think there is one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Ruger old & new ?
Replies
0
Views
363
scaatylobo
S
L
  • Locked
Why are FAL uppers serial numbered, but not the lower?
Replies
13
Views
3K
Texfire
T
M
  • Locked
AR10 Upper on AR15 Lower?
Replies
4
Views
666
Andrew Wyatt
A
S
  • Locked
Ruger Mk II 22 pistol question
Replies
6
Views
939
ArmedBear
A
Riomouse911
  • Locked
Ruger MK IV bolt headspace question
Replies
17
Views
1K
Project355
Project355
Back
Top