Jump to content
vladtepes

Pistol Brace

Recommended Posts

I’ve shot the KAK blade. I liked it better than the Sig type braces (like the SB).

The Tailhook Mod two was the best of the few I shot down in a Florida a few weeks ago.

https://www.gearheadworks.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=1&products_id=25&zenid=dg68bf4gbr4f0ij9n9dtq8pvn4

The Tailhook worked best as a brace and if you needed to shoulder it. The KAK Blade was next, then the Sig type.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, High Exposure said:

I’ve shot the KAK blade. I liked it better than the Sig type braces (like the SB).

The Tailhook Mod two was the best of the few I shot down in a Florida a few weeks ago.

https://www.gearheadworks.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=1&products_id=25&zenid=dg68bf4gbr4f0ij9n9dtq8pvn4

The Tailhook worked best as a brace and if you needed to shoulder it. The KAK Blade was next, then the Sig type.

Since being deemed legal to shoulder...has anyone actually used these as an arm brace?  Serious question.  I just don't really see the benefit of using it as a brace over shouldering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Since being deemed legal to shoulder...has anyone actually used these as an arm brace?  Serious question.  I just don't really see the benefit of using it as a brace over shouldering.


Definitely something to tread lightly on...

While shouldering does not redesign the brace as a stock (what was stated), if you buy a brace to strictly use as a stock (to shoulder), you are technically “building” a SBR (or whatever else you put it on... SBS). If I remember correctly, that was mentioned in the latest ATF letter on shouldering braces (too tired to look it up). Posting stuff on the internet might be harmless... but what if you get jammed up with that, and somehow ATF sees your post(s)? It kind of gets your reasoning for buying a brace sidelined. Hard to argue you bought it as a brace in that situation. Not calling anyone out, but just saying to be smart with the internet. Is it a joke of a situation when you really think about it? Pretty much, but it IS the law.

I have a brace, and was purchased/installed to use as a brace. Putting it to my shoulder isn’t the same as if it were a traditional stock, as you need to push your cheek far down on it to see your sights (think SUB-2000). The backend of a brace is also A LOT different than a recoil pad/buttplate. It is definitely different to have a firearm strapped to your arm... sort of like putting your weak hand through a forend loop (not really natural, in regards to shooting). The brace definitely does work, and puts recoil elsewhere than directly into your hand. The shouldering aspect... nice, but definitely wasn’t my main reason for getting one (being serious there). Main reason was increased overall length to allow for a traditional pistol grip... and that grip allows for the brace to be utilized.

I suggest to keep copies of associated ATF letters with the firearm. Mine are on a flash drive, which I keep in the grip. Just a little extra piece of mind, especially considering I could not get the printed pages to fit in the same grip.

Not that it means anything, but I predict another rule change with ATF on this. I’d actually like it to prove that the NFA is the stupidest piece of legislation out there... since you get taxed for a SBR (plus have restraints with travel), but if you add a brace to a pistol (can take anywhere that is legal... still, it is more/less is identical), you are fine. But there are too many people marketing braces, and discussing their uses as a makeshift SBR/SBS. Take Suarez International... Gabe Suarez posts YouTube videos that compare his braces mainly as stocks (giving LOP, which I don’t think matters in any setup other than shouldering). He doesn’t beat around the bush with it, and even though some of his viewpoints are far from mainstream (don’t want to make Suarez the topic of the post, strictly an example), that is a little questionable to be just tossing out there so blatantly. His instructor staff clearly compare braced TAC-14s as SBS on their forum. I am starting to see Springfield Armory putting Saint pistol ads out there... and they do look like a bad ass not-SBR (still an “Assault Weapon” here). Agree/disagree... doesn’t matter as they are in the wide open. That going out there does paint a target on braces just like Las Vegas and bump stocks. I don’t want to see rule changes on these, but just see stuff like this being the spark that lights it all up, like all the inquiries about shouldering braces that resulted in the first ATF reversal.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Screwball said:

 


Definitely something to tread lightly on...

While shouldering does not redesign the brace as a stock (what was stated), if you buy a brace to strictly use as a stock (to shoulder), you are technically “building” a SBR (or whatever else you put it on... SBS). If I remember correctly, that was mentioned in the latest ATF letter on shouldering braces (too tired to look it up). Posting stuff on the internet might be harmless... but what if you get jammed up with that, and somehow ATF sees your post(s)? It kind of gets your reasoning for buying a brace sidelined. Hard to argue you bought it as a brace in that situation. Not calling anyone out, but just saying to be smart with the internet. Is it a joke of a situation when you really think about it? Pretty much, but it IS the law.

I have a brace, and was purchased/installed to use as a brace. Putting it to my shoulder isn’t the same as if it were a traditional stock, as you need to push your cheek far down on it to see your sights (think SUB-2000). The backend of a brace is also A LOT different than a recoil pad/buttplate. It is definitely different to have a firearm strapped to your arm... sort of like putting your weak hand through a forend loop (not really natural, in regards to shooting). The brace definitely does work, and puts recoil elsewhere than directly into your hand. The shouldering aspect... nice, but definitely wasn’t my main reason for getting one (being serious there). Main reason was increased overall length to allow for a traditional pistol grip... and that grip allows for the brace to be utilized.

I suggest to keep copies of associated ATF letters with the firearm. Mine are on a flash drive, which I keep in the grip. Just a little extra piece of mind, especially considering I could not get the printed pages to fit in the same grip.

Not that it means anything, but I predict another rule change with ATF on this. I’d actually like it to prove that the NFA is the stupidest piece of legislation out there... since you get taxed for a SBR (plus have restraints with travel), but if you add a brace to a pistol (can take anywhere that is legal... still, it is more/less is identical), you are fine. But there are too many people marketing braces, and discussing their uses as a makeshift SBR/SBS. Take Suarez International... Gabe Suarez posts YouTube videos that compare his braces mainly as stocks (giving LOP, which I don’t think matters in any setup other than shouldering). He doesn’t beat around the bush with it, and even though some of his viewpoints are far from mainstream (don’t want to make Suarez the topic of the post, strictly an example), that is a little questionable to be just tossing out there so blatantly. His instructor staff clearly compare braced TAC-14s as SBS on their forum. I am starting to see Springfield Armory putting Saint pistol ads out there... and they do look like a bad ass not-SBR (still an “Assault Weapon” here). Agree/disagree... doesn’t matter as they are in the wide open. That going out there does paint a target on braces just like Las Vegas and bump stocks. I don’t want to see rule changes on these, but just see stuff like this being the spark that lights it all up, like all the inquiries about shouldering braces that resulted in the first ATF reversal.

 

Nice, thanks for answering my question and then some.  I haven't lived inside the CONUS since these became a thing, although I have not been blind to their popularity.  With their growing popularity, and typical use, I wouldn't be surprised if they reversed their decision.  It's a shame, because like you said, it's pretty dumb to begin with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Screwball said:

 


Definitely something to tread lightly on...

While shouldering does not redesign the brace as a stock (what was stated), if you buy a brace to strictly use as a stock (to shoulder), you are technically “building” a SBR (or whatever else you put it on... SBS). If I remember correctly, that was mentioned in the latest ATF letter on shouldering braces (too tired to look it up). Posting stuff on the internet might be harmless... but what if you get jammed up with that, and somehow ATF sees your post(s)? It kind of gets your reasoning for buying a brace sidelined. Hard to argue you bought it as a brace in that situation. Not calling anyone out, but just saying to be smart with the internet. Is it a joke of a situation when you really think about it? Pretty much, but it IS the law.

I have a brace, and was purchased/installed to use as a brace. Putting it to my shoulder isn’t the same as if it were a traditional stock, as you need to push your cheek far down on it to see your sights (think SUB-2000). The backend of a brace is also A LOT different than a recoil pad/buttplate. It is definitely different to have a firearm strapped to your arm... sort of like putting your weak hand through a forend loop (not really natural, in regards to shooting). The brace definitely does work, and puts recoil elsewhere than directly into your hand. The shouldering aspect... nice, but definitely wasn’t my main reason for getting one (being serious there). Main reason was increased overall length to allow for a traditional pistol grip... and that grip allows for the brace to be utilized.

I suggest to keep copies of associated ATF letters with the firearm. Mine are on a flash drive, which I keep in the grip. Just a little extra piece of mind, especially considering I could not get the printed pages to fit in the same grip.

Not that it means anything, but I predict another rule change with ATF on this. I’d actually like it to prove that the NFA is the stupidest piece of legislation out there... since you get taxed for a SBR (plus have restraints with travel), but if you add a brace to a pistol (can take anywhere that is legal... still, it is more/less is identical), you are fine. But there are too many people marketing braces, and discussing their uses as a makeshift SBR/SBS. Take Suarez International... Gabe Suarez posts YouTube videos that compare his braces mainly as stocks (giving LOP, which I don’t think matters in any setup other than shouldering). He doesn’t beat around the bush with it, and even though some of his viewpoints are far from mainstream (don’t want to make Suarez the topic of the post, strictly an example), that is a little questionable to be just tossing out there so blatantly. His instructor staff clearly compare braced TAC-14s as SBS on their forum. I am starting to see Springfield Armory putting Saint pistol ads out there... and they do look like a bad ass not-SBR (still an “Assault Weapon” here). Agree/disagree... doesn’t matter as they are in the wide open. That going out there does paint a target on braces just like Las Vegas and bump stocks. I don’t want to see rule changes on these, but just see stuff like this being the spark that lights it all up, like all the inquiries about shouldering braces that resulted in the first ATF reversal.

 

I am thinking about getting a brace so I can attach my pistol to my arm because that sounds amazing.. and if it accidentally touches my shoulder it will be by accident of course.. 

the biggest upside for me is having the brace as a point of reference when looking down sights.. 

I will eventually get a stamp for it.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get the extra rubber on the brace. The regular SB that came with my PSA kit isn't comfortable.

i have used the Velcro brace for a few shots just for laughs while I shot it one handed.

i have to say I like the AR pistol much more than I thought I would. It is really, really cool (most important factor obviously). It also doesn't shoot as poorly as many would lead you to believe. With the standard A2 can there sadly isn't the fireball effect. The lighter weight makes it fun to shoot off hand without putting it down for 4 straight hours [this morning]. Jump on this before the ATF changes their mind. Once liberals discover these scary, more concealable black guns the ATF will succumb to the pressure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gabe Suarez is a convicted felon and an ego maniac. Be careful taking any advice from him regarding firearms.


I’ve heard the story, and personally, couldn’t really care less about Suarez’ situation in CA (probably about the same amount as I actually care about Gabe Suarez). But I agree, someone that makes the claims/comments I’ve seen made is not someone I’m taking legal advice from. My main reason for bringing him up was the likelihood the ATF will be reevaluating braces due to how blatantly some people/companies make shouldering a brace as a normal thing. Either that or a major incident (like Las Vegas and bump stocks) are what are going to cause a reevaluation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Screwball said:

 


I’ve heard the story, and personally, couldn’t really care less about Suarez’ situation in CA (probably about the same amount as I actually care about Gabe Suarez). But I agree, someone that makes the claims/comments I’ve seen made is not someone I’m taking legal advice from. My main reason for bringing him up was the likelihood the ATF will be reevaluating braces due to how blatantly some people/companies make shouldering a brace as a normal thing. Either that or a major incident (like Las Vegas and bump stocks) are what are going to cause a reevaluation.

 

it could go that way.. but if you read the letter that says its OK, the logic for the ruling is very sound... so it would really take quite a bit to flip that around I think.. especially considering normally things like this get in the limelight because something horrific happens.. at the end of the day it just looks like any other "scary evil black rifle" so I don't know that it will ever catch the kind of attention the "bump stock untraceable machine-gun" did.. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...