No, but there are certianly opinions on the latest culinary tid bits to be pondered.
What did gemtech do to irk these guys?
My account still hasn't been approved over there, so I can't really search around and find what they're talking about.
http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22864
Does anyone have the real skinny on this?
http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22864
Does anyone have the real skinny on this?
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Gemtech has always had a reputation for excellent customer service.
That forum tends to attract quite a bit of drama.
That forum tends to attract quite a bit of drama.
From what I understand...
Some companies were taking suppressors and "rebuilding" them with the same serial number but effectively a different suppressor altogether. Like taking a hi-point and "rebuilding" it into a colt. Seems Gemtech asked for clarification form the ATF, and the ATF said no-way. Now people are mad at them for clarifying that this can't be done.
Some companies were taking suppressors and "rebuilding" them with the same serial number but effectively a different suppressor altogether. Like taking a hi-point and "rebuilding" it into a colt. Seems Gemtech asked for clarification form the ATF, and the ATF said no-way. Now people are mad at them for clarifying that this can't be done.
Yup this is pretty much what happened.. The consensus is that Gemtech was really "loud" and pointed in their request for clarification. This then supposedly led to the ATF rendering a decision that you cannot "rebuild" a can in a different caliber and or configuration.. KAC has been doing this exact thing for years, along with a smattering of other suppressor companies. I believe that there are companies out there that have "letters" in their possession that state that "re-manufacturing" the cans was an acceptable practice. Now with this latest "interpretation" or "decision" it is not... :neutral:BillSXT2002 said:From what I understand...
Some companies were taking suppressors and "rebuilding" them with the same serial number but effectively a different suppressor altogether. Like taking a hi-point and "rebuilding" it into a colt. Seems Gemtech asked for clarification form the ATF, and the ATF said no-way. Now people are mad at them for clarifying that this can't be done.
Basically it seems to me that the ATF is more interested in collecting the TAXES (gleaned from new caliber can purchases) and NOT interested in keeping their database updated with these few caliber changes that happen a couple few times a year...
--->APB
Wow! I knew about the bad blood but I didn't know Gemtech had done this.
To be honest, that does kinda tick me off at Gemtech too...
Apparently, it is not just with caliber changes, but also suppressor repair... such as replacing major parts like the end cap. They SUPPOSEDLY did it because other companies were working on/rebuilding Gemtech's suppressors and they were losing $$$.
Apparently, it is not just with caliber changes, but also suppressor repair... such as replacing major parts like the end cap. They SUPPOSEDLY did it because other companies were working on/rebuilding Gemtech's suppressors and they were losing $$$.
So suppressors can't be repaired anymore?
m0ondoggy said:So suppressors can't be repaired anymore?
SUPPOSEDLY... again, this is how they make it out to be... not for certain and not to be taken as fact without more info...
SUPPOSEDLY, repairing it requires a $200 stamp, because it is "building a new suppressor".
I was all set to get an outback, but maybe I'll get a yankee hill instead.
Thats the thing that concerns me. Building a whole new .50 BMG suppressor with the serial number of a .22 is one thing, but replacing parts after the inevitable baffle strike is another.Q-gunner2 said:Apparently, it is not just with caliber changes, but also suppressor repair... such as replacing major parts like the end cap. They SUPPOSEDLY did it because other companies were working on/rebuilding Gemtech's suppressors and they were losing $$$.
If all this is true, there goes the market value on 'out-of-business" suppressor manufacturers.
(This is how it has been understood)
The 'recognized' registered part of the suppressor is & has always been the "tube". Repacking an existing tube (in the same caliber) is not manufacturing a 'new' suppressor. Making a new tube is manufacturing a new suppressor. Changing calibers is making a new suppressor, just like changing calibers in a firearm. There are, & have been multi-caliber capable suppressors on the market already.
I quess this means that the TI empty suppressor tubes can't be built into suppressors by anyone, since TI didn't do it originally?
OBTW, changing calibers in firearms has been considered manufacturing a "new" weapon for some time now, w/ excise tax due. So, all you 01FFL's better quit swapping .556 uppers for 9mms, you're in violation......
If you don't have an FFL, none of this applies anyway.....
(This is how it has been understood)
The 'recognized' registered part of the suppressor is & has always been the "tube". Repacking an existing tube (in the same caliber) is not manufacturing a 'new' suppressor. Making a new tube is manufacturing a new suppressor. Changing calibers is making a new suppressor, just like changing calibers in a firearm. There are, & have been multi-caliber capable suppressors on the market already.
I quess this means that the TI empty suppressor tubes can't be built into suppressors by anyone, since TI didn't do it originally?
OBTW, changing calibers in firearms has been considered manufacturing a "new" weapon for some time now, w/ excise tax due. So, all you 01FFL's better quit swapping .556 uppers for 9mms, you're in violation......
If you don't have an FFL, none of this applies anyway.....
It is my understanding that as things sit now only the original manufacturer is allowed to "service" the suppressor... That and I believe that the ATF set a limit as to how much repairing can be done.. For instance if the main body of the tube (aka the serial #'d part) was "irreparably damaged or distorted" , and as a whole the tube body it self was not usable that serial #'d suppressor was to be destroyed and another $200 stamp was to be needed for it's replacement...
--->APB
--->APB
It seems like it could in two cases.wgallc said:If you don't have an FFL, none of this applies anyway.....
1) You build your own suppressor on a form 1. How much can you repair or change (without changing the tube) and still not have to file another form and $200?
2) If I need my baffles replaced due to strikes and I send it back to the manufacturer, how much can they do within the tube before I have to shell out another $200 because the have to send me a whole new suppressor?
I don't know the answers to these.
Well, ok, I wasn't specific enough.
(1)Not having an FFL exempts you from excise tax due on caliber conversions of (Title 1) firearms. You as manufacturer of a 'Form 1'ed suppressor can make repairs to the internals & end caps as long as you do not have in your possession, or make, additional identical internals or end caps. Making a new tube is manufacturing a new suppressor, along with making "spare internals" or identical end cap(s) is making a new suppressor(each piece). So far Gemtech's 3 Lug module is not considered a suppressor part, as it also fits the HK flash hider for MP5. SWR uses the same part.
If you registered a "multi-caliber" suppressor, all related caliber specific parts may be manufactured by you, the manufacturer. Just don't make duplicate parts/pieces! Destroy the old baffles before making new repair parts.
The preceeding paragraph applies to non-SOT individuals or FFL licensees. Non-SOT FFLs cannot service suppressors, as the repair parts cannot be possessed by them.
(2)New tube = new suppressor. Old tube = same old suppressor. As far as the original manufacturer supplying you with a new numbered tube, it's seems that another tax is due. If exchanged under warranty, they should pay any tax due by you, if they can't/won't use the original serial number.
I don't make suppressors, so I don't deal with these issues very often.
(1)Not having an FFL exempts you from excise tax due on caliber conversions of (Title 1) firearms. You as manufacturer of a 'Form 1'ed suppressor can make repairs to the internals & end caps as long as you do not have in your possession, or make, additional identical internals or end caps. Making a new tube is manufacturing a new suppressor, along with making "spare internals" or identical end cap(s) is making a new suppressor(each piece). So far Gemtech's 3 Lug module is not considered a suppressor part, as it also fits the HK flash hider for MP5. SWR uses the same part.
If you registered a "multi-caliber" suppressor, all related caliber specific parts may be manufactured by you, the manufacturer. Just don't make duplicate parts/pieces! Destroy the old baffles before making new repair parts.
The preceeding paragraph applies to non-SOT individuals or FFL licensees. Non-SOT FFLs cannot service suppressors, as the repair parts cannot be possessed by them.
(2)New tube = new suppressor. Old tube = same old suppressor. As far as the original manufacturer supplying you with a new numbered tube, it's seems that another tax is due. If exchanged under warranty, they should pay any tax due by you, if they can't/won't use the original serial number.
I don't make suppressors, so I don't deal with these issues very often.
In my opinion, any anger should rightfully be directed at ATF, not Gemtech.
ATF has issued letters to certain manufacturers saying that they could perform certain procedures, and other letters to other manufacturers saying they could not perform the exact same procedures. The problem, whatever it may be, is with the ATF. I don't know exactly what happened, but if this were the case, I can certainly understand why a manufacturer would want to be able to perform the same procedures the competition was doing, without fear of legal reprocussion.
Gemtech has always taken the high road when it comes to dealing with the internet drama. They don't use the net as a forum to air their laundry, or trash the competition. They let their products speak for themselves. I think Gemtech does buisiness in an honorable, and professional manner. The same cannot be said for some of the competition.
ATF has issued letters to certain manufacturers saying that they could perform certain procedures, and other letters to other manufacturers saying they could not perform the exact same procedures. The problem, whatever it may be, is with the ATF. I don't know exactly what happened, but if this were the case, I can certainly understand why a manufacturer would want to be able to perform the same procedures the competition was doing, without fear of legal reprocussion.
Gemtech has always taken the high road when it comes to dealing with the internet drama. They don't use the net as a forum to air their laundry, or trash the competition. They let their products speak for themselves. I think Gemtech does buisiness in an honorable, and professional manner. The same cannot be said for some of the competition.
+1eodinert said:In my opinion, any anger should rightfully be directed at ATF, not Gemtech.
ATF has issued letters to certain manufacturers saying that they could perform certain procedures, and other letters to other manufacturers saying they could not perform the exact same procedures. The problem, whatever it may be, is with the ATF. I don't know exactly what happened, but if this were the case, I can certainly understand why a manufacturer would want to be able to perform the same procedures the competition was doing, without fear of legal reprocussion.
Gemtech has always taken the high road when it comes to dealing with the internet drama. They don't use the net as a forum to air their laundry, or trash the competition. They let their products speak for themselves. I think Gemtech does buisiness in an honorable, and professional manner. The same cannot be said for some of the competition.
Thanks to Gemtech, now we all get to Pay the Gemtax to ATF when we have a can damaged by baffle strikes...
Look at it this way-
Who makes fully welded cans that you can't push the baffles out of?
What happens to a fully welded can when damaged...you can't exactly just replace one baffle, the can is a solid unit...
Now, who makes cans that aren't fully welded and can be disassembled?
Hmmm...funny how this runing benifits a certain manufacturer that was whining about their cans being rebuilt :roll:
Gemtech screwed us all for their benifit.
Next time your fully welded (stronger) can gets a good baffle strike, thank Gemtech for the $200 dollar check you have to send ATF.
Look at it this way-
Who makes fully welded cans that you can't push the baffles out of?
What happens to a fully welded can when damaged...you can't exactly just replace one baffle, the can is a solid unit...
Now, who makes cans that aren't fully welded and can be disassembled?
Hmmm...funny how this runing benifits a certain manufacturer that was whining about their cans being rebuilt :roll:
Gemtech screwed us all for their benifit.
Next time your fully welded (stronger) can gets a good baffle strike, thank Gemtech for the $200 dollar check you have to send ATF.
For all of you posting in this thread, I'd like to ask you:
How many of you own a can?
How many of you own a Gemtech can?
How many of you have ever dealt with Gemtech customer service?
How many of you have had a baffle strike?
How many of you have had to send your can in for warranty repair?
How many of you own a can?
How many of you own a Gemtech can?
How many of you have ever dealt with Gemtech customer service?
How many of you have had a baffle strike?
How many of you have had to send your can in for warranty repair?
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
AK Rifles
A forum community dedicated to AK rifle and AK variant rifle owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, builds, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Recommended Communities
