Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Forum at

Why should YOU join our forums?

  • Connect with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Read up on the latest product reviews
  • Make new friends to go shooting with!
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

Glock Talk is the #1 site to discuss the world’s most popular pistol, chat about firearms, accessories and more.

Legality of MechTech CCU...

Discussion in 'GATE NFA/Class III' started by Gauss Rifle, Sep 22, 2012.

  1. Gauss Rifle

    Gauss Rifle

    Jul 1, 2012
    Good evening everyone.

    The purpose of this thread is to determine the legality of the MechTech Carbine Conversion Unit (CCU) with regard to NFA regulations.

    I became interested in this accessory after my search for a Keltec Sub2000 came up empty. The CCU looks solid but it is not without its share of caveats.

    So far, my research has led me to several forums with members arguing opposing points of view. The consensus is that using this device to convert a glock to a rifle/carbine is perfectly legal but taking it off and putting your glock slide and barrel back on constitutes 'creating' a new firearm out of what is now a rifle.

    Anyone who understands how this device works can see that there is absolutely no way to use it to create an SBR or AOW out of your glock without modifying the glock, the CCU or both.

    Misinterpretation of the law can often mean the difference between fun at the range and a knock on your door from the BATFE; something I'd rather avoid.

    The BATFE has made a recent revision to their NFA rule book.

    I think I understand what they are trying to say but for those of us who did not go to law school, we are often left to interpret these laws at our own risk.

    My interpretation of this ruling is; Once a rifle, always a rifle/Once a pistol, always a pistol. And as long as the kit/device/accessory does not result in the creation of (or the ability to create) an NFA weapon, you are in the clear.

    So by taking the CCU off your glock, you are NOT making a new weapon out of a rifle and you are NOT making an NFA regulated weapon.

    Is this a correct interpretation?
  2. Zak Smith

    Zak Smith 3Gunner Millennium Member

    Aug 25, 1999
    Fort Collins, CO, USA
    That would be my interpretation of the recent clarification by BATFE, but this is not legal advice...

  3. Gauss Rifle

    Gauss Rifle

    Jul 1, 2012
    Thanks for the response. This an idea I was toying with after I failed to find that sub 2K. It sucks that their aren't more glock mag compatible carbines out there. The dealers around here want way too much for a JR carbine.

    Does anyone else have any experience with the Mech Tech from an BATFE stand point?
  4. Gauss Rifle

    Gauss Rifle

    Jul 1, 2012
    Further review of the ruling...

    New location, as their site has been updated. Make sure you have adobe reader installed...

    Te following seems to be the main point that is in favor of the MechTEch...

    Held, a firearm, as defined by the National Firearms Act (NFA), 26 U.S.C. 5845(a)(3), is made when unassembled parts are placed in close proximity in such a way that they:
    (a) Serve no useful purpose other than to make a rifle having a barrel or barrels of less than 16 inches in length (e.g., a receiver, an attachable shoulder stock, and barrel of less than 16 inches in length); or
    (b) Convert a complete weapon into such an NFA firearm, including –
    (1) A pistol and attachable shoulder stock; and
    (2) A rifle with a barrel of 16 inches or more in length, and an attachable barrel of less than 16 inches in length.
    Such weapons must be registered and are subject to all requirements of the NFA.

    The words 'other than' imply that having a pistol, a separate 16" barrel and a stock could serve a purpose 'other than' to create an NFA weapon. It can be argued that while you are capable of making an NFA weapon, you are also able to and intent on building a legal 16" carbine/rifle with these parts. Only the court will tell you if I've interpreted the law correctly. The argument certainly holds water but I won't be testing it like this [ame=""]Glock carbine kit[/ame].

    I am not an attorney but from every interpretation I can come up with, the CCU is in full compliance with this ruling. Installing it does not constitute creation of a new weapon and it cannot be used to make an NFA regulated weapon without modification.

    I am currently on the waiting/callback list for MechTech to take my order. I think I'm gonna go for it if my finances cooperate...
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2013