Semi-production = production class legal?

[benenglish]

There are any number of "boutique" builders turning out semi-production pistols, essentially starting with a base from an established brand and adding all their own parts to complete the pistol. Everybody knows that lots of AR makers do this. So do lots of 1911 pistol makers.

So is this

(found at http://www.oregonprecisionarms.com/?page_id=162) legal for production?

As I read the rules, the barrel section could be mated to a MkII and would probably be legal without too much room for discussion. After all, it's just a replacement barrel for a firearm that's out of production and for which new parts are not readily available from the factory.

However, when a third party buys current-production frames, stuffs them with their own parts, and then sells the result as a new, complete firearms, I get confused. I see this as an OGA pistol that just happens to use a Ruger frame as a base, just like so many 1911 shops make their pistols using frames from a small number of suppliers. However, I don't know how this particular pistol would be treated by IHMSA.

Any ideas? I'm considering buying one to use for Conventional Pistol competition and if it turns out to also be legal for IHMSA production class competition, that would be a big added bonus.

[kg4tyr]

I'm no expert, but I would say no.

[260 Striker]

Very gray area and open to many interpretations. If the frame is stamped Ruger then I would definitely say no since it is a modified Ruger. If the frame is identified as originating from this company, then I would say a strong maybe. There are currently companies making semi-auto 22 pistols based upon Ruger 10-22 designed frames but they are licensed to make the frames so are not modified Ruger Charger frames. Those would also fall into this category. Lets face it, even the so called production legal handguns probably have some outside made parts in them and they are condered production legal by IHMSA. Apparently this company has outsourced there frames to Ruger or has a license agreement with Ruger to use their frame design. I could go either way on this issue but I do see an opportunity to get more guns to use for IHMSA. Imagine this gun with a 14" barrel. That is what Browning did years ago but they were cost prohibitive for Browning. I'm sure more thought needs to go into this decision. I would also like to restate that I think all our IHMSA committes state what they are evaluating in the IHMSA News or on the IHMSa website. It would be good to see what the Evaluation committee has to say, pro and con, about this pistol.

[19 Turkeys]

Contact Dell Taylor. Call him as I understand he does not check email often. Dell is the Evaluation Committee.

Steve W.

[benenglish]

Thanks to all for the input.

On a side note, the picture of the pistol is no longer appearing on this page for me. It worked for a while; now it doesn't.

For anyone who brings up this thread after I post this - Do you see the photo of the OPA pistol above? Or is there just a blank line after the "So is this" text?

If something has gone screwy with either the way I've set up the IMG tags or my PhotoBucket account then I've got a bit of troubleshooting to do.

Again, thanks.

Ben

[ole95]

i can see it on the 1st post

[Justin Cider]

that is one crazy looking gun!