Shockwave Technologies Releases AR Pistol Stabilizer

DSC09917

I have always been a fan of pushing the envelope, skirting legality and riding the thin line.  We received this release this afternoon from Shockwave Technologies and their very own pistol brace for the AR pistol.

Unless you have been living under a rock for the last few months, we are all pretty well up to speed on the pistol brace discussion, including the recent ATF letter deeming shouldering of the brace to be within the scope of the product, and letting it remain a pistol, and not venturing into the NFA territory.

With the recent decision there have been rumblings of several other companies that are working on making their own brace, but this is the first one that I have seen that has a working prototype that has been released to the public.

While I will fully admit, I am very skeptical this one will pass the ATF’s sniff test in the current configuration, I am hopeful that I am wrong for the sake of driving innovation towards better products.  The information on the Shockwave Technologies site states that they are pending ATF classification.  While I totally get that their cross section is far less in the rear, we also know that the decisions that the ATF makes are not always logical.

For more information, check out their info page here: http://shockwavetechnologies.com/site/?p=1724

brace1 brace2 brace3




Advertisement

  • bigbear

    This will never get atf Approval

    • Martin Ewer

      We have already received preliminary “approval” by phone. You need to remember that the Blade AR is neither designed nor intended to be fired from the shoulder. That is the crux of the law.

      • Motor-T

        Good luck! (not sarcasm)
        It’s a shame you have to go through an approval process to make a simple product.

        • It is also a shame that you need to make the product with an end user intent to it as well.

          • Kivaari

            It’s a shame that NFA ’34, GCA ’68 and the May ’86 rules apply in defiance of common sense.

          • Don La Rue

            Right,…as 26″ in OAL firearms can be purchased without the Tax Stamp. An AR15 with a 10″ barrel is easily 26″ in OAL….It’s ridiculous.

        • Michel_T

          Yup, pretty sad state of affair when you need to ask permission from some bureaucrate for something as simple as this.

      • Zachary marrs

        So what does this do then?

        And because the atf never changes their mind. Noooo sir-ee

      • Kivaari

        It may be so in your mind. ATF has a way of making life miserable for most people. I hope your design is on a non-functioning AR pistol, unless you have an SOT for “research”.

      • MIstwalker

        I think the laws are pretty arbitrary when it comes to this kind of thing, as I see nothing in particular that’s dangerous or bad about a pistol with a stock or short-barreled rifle.

        That being said… this doesn’t look like a “wrist brace”. It looks like a thin shoulder stock.

        Good luck, regardless.

  • mechamaster

    Too stocky.

    • Martin Ewer

      Thank you for your feedback.

  • sianmink

    I’m gonna guess no.

  • TFB Reader

    My first thought was “How does it attach to your arm?” It doesn’t. The thing hanging down is supposed to be “a flexible stabilizing ‘fin,’ which the user rests against the inside of their forearm when in the firing position.” If it’s really flexible, it seems like it would be useless as a stock.

    My understanding is that an angled grip under the rail is okay for a pistol. If I had an impediment in my primary hand or arm, I be shooting two-handed rather than use something like this. At least, I think that I would.

    • Martin Ewer

      Thank you for your input. Yes, exactly, the Blade AR is a stabilzer, which the user rests against the inside of their forearm when in the firing position. Thank you again, Marty

  • Josh Carter

    This MIGHT pass a sniff test if it had some provision to ACTUALLY STABILIZE ANYTHING. The sig brace secures the firearm to your wrist. This “brace” stabilizes the firearm in one direction (towards the firing arm) but not in any other axis. If he had straps on the side of the “stabilizing fin” to attach the firearm to your wrist it might pass, but might run into patent issues with SIG. If this reverses the SIG brace decision I will find this guy and write him a strongly worded note ;).

    • Martin Ewer

      The Blade AR stabilizes the pistol in the horizontal plane with the “fin.” Additionally, the friction of your forearm against the fin stabilizes the pistol in the vertical plane.

  • Josh Carter

    Also, I hope that’s on an SBR lower or that guy is gonna have issues.

    • Mark N.

      What is the difference between an SBR lower and any other lower (aside from the piece that attaches to the buffer tube, of course)?

      • Kivaari

        Being registered as an NFA gun. Without the $200 tax being paid, it becomes a sawed off rifle (short barreled rifle). If the lower is a fake then it’s OK. If the maker has a SOT (special occupation tax, license) t build such guns it would be illegal. A private citizen can use an ATF Form 1 to make and register such guns (if allowed by local laws). It takes about a year to process. It shouldn’t require any more than doing a 4473 to buy a single shot .410.

  • USMC03Vet

    What is the rationale behind trying to limit the availability of short barrels to begin with since it technically makes the firearm less effective by lowering muzzle velocity and accuracy?

    • Nicks87

      Easier to conceal. Back in the day gangsters liked to saw the barrel off of rifles in order to fit them under coats and car seats and what not.
      Lowering the velocity doesnt necessarily affect the accuracy of a rifle.

      http://rifleshooter.com/2013/12/300-winchester-magnum-how-does-barrel-length-change-velocity-a-16-300-win-mag/

      • Shillary Clinton

        That test means nothing. Too inconsistent because you cant cut the barrel the same every time and the crown is important to the accuracy.

        • José Pulido

          Barrel length still has essentially nothing to do with group size. A stable bullet is stable

          • lars22222

            The crown of the barrel matters a lot regarding where the bullet goes when it exits the barrel. An even crown means the gas from the bullet will exit evenly and not push the bullet off course. An uneven crown will push the bullet as it comes out of the barrel.

      • José Pulido

        Bruh are you seriously gonna conceal a freaking 26″ gun? I don’t know if you noticed, but 95% of the country doesn’t walk around in big trench coats anymore, and folding stock 16″ AKs and other rifles are just as concealable as 10″ barreled non-folding AR-15s.

        • BPCoop19

          Have you ever seen Heat? During the famous shootout scene, two of the bank robbers showed how easily an SBR can be concealed with a generic suit coat…NFA is still bullshit though.

        • Jhn

          Much of the [fundamental] gun laws we have were due to the gangsters of the 1930s. The SBR laws were due to people such as Clyde Barrow and his Whippet gun. Before then, one could by a Full auto Thompson 1921 straight off the shelf of a dept store

          • Kivaari

            Most of the laws were directed at the common man. The Bonnie and Clyde types were not effected by such laws, as they stole guns and sawed off the barrels. Chopping a BAR stolen from the local National Guard armory was the crime.

      • Michel_T

        Funny (or should I say pathetic) how the government spent time and $$ on a law that couldn’t possibly have any effect on criminal activities.

        if someone is willing to kill someone else, I don’t think that someone will be bothered much with breaking this or that NFA rule…

    • Miles

      In the original NFA ’34, handguns were included. Yep, we’d be paying $200 transfer tax a whack and waiting somewhere around a year to take possession of a pistol, just like SBR/SBS/MGs today.
      The NFA regulated SBR/SBS because people could circumvent the proposed pistol regs by chopping rifles and shotguns down to size.
      See, in that day, the bolshevik/communist/anarchist threat was perceived as real and TPTB were afraid of easily concealable weapons being used by assassins.
      The NRA got handguns out of the mix, but apparently spent too much political capital and kicked the SBR/SBS problem down the road.
      Back then, the notion of Ruger Chargers, TC Contenders, Freedom Arms M2008s and AR/AK pistols had not been conceived.

      • hydepark

        This is actually really interesting. Given that handguns make up a HUGE proportion of firearms sold nowadays, I wonder if we wouldn’t ultimately be better off with them on the registry. The BATFE would have to have a factor of ten (or something) more examiners to cope with that volume, and possibly tax stamps could be processed in days or hours because of that. But I would rather they just FOAD personally.

        • Matthew Whited

          Then they can just stop issuing new registration like the 1986 law

        • Cymond

          The NFA killed the suppressor industry for decades. It has only really started recovering in the last 20 years or so. If pistols had been included with a $200 tax, we wouldn’t have the level of development and variety that we do today.

          • noob

            wouldn’t glock still exist as an exotic mil/leo only product under that regime?

          • Cymond

            Glock would still exist, as would HK, FNH, CZ, and countless other foreign manufacturers. Arguably they would be somewhat smaller companies due to the loss of the US market. What percentage of Glock’s sales are to US citizens? I would expect it’s at least 10% or more. Also, competition can be driving force to innovate. Companies continually improve their own products in response to competition. The Daewoo K5 (DP-51) is heavily based on the S&W 59 series, which in turn was based on the Browning High Power and Walther P38. And S&W has had an undeniable effect on revolver designs all over the world. I have no doubt that American companies have effectively forced European companies to continue pushing hard for progress.
            .
            I would expect to see other side effects. If handgun ownership were as rare as suppressor ownership, I doubt there would be such a thing as legal concealed carry. Handgun owners would be viewed by society as complete nutjobs, similar to how people look at me when I tell them that I’m planning to buy a silencer. Also, if they were that rare, the current generation of polymer micro pistols in 380 & 9mm wouldn’t exist. As far as I can tell, the pocket pistol genre was revolutionized by American companies like Kel-Tec, Seacamp, and Kahr. This has rippled through to European companies, producing things such as the Sig P938.

          • It is interesting that inflation also helped the suppressor industry come back… $200 just isn’t as expensive as it used to be.

            The wait looks to be what is slowing it down now.

          • Cymond

            From what I’ve read, in 1934 you could buy a Colt 1911 for $7, a suppressor for $3, or a Thompson submachinegun for $50.
            That would be like if a suppressor today had a $20,000 tax stamp.

          • w0lfie

            Yeah especially when a silencer can cost close to a grand; another $200 is not a big deal.

          • Kivaari

            The wait is a big reason I haven’t moved on newer NFA devices. I had 7 NFA weapons in the past, sold them and regret it today. Now I am thinking of doing another Colt M4 “Commando” and a can. At my advanced age, I may be just throwing money away. I like this device and think an AR pistol is in my future. I’ll just wait until an ATF letter is created – saying OK!

      • José Pulido

        BULL. The NFA was made so the bureaucrats wouldn’t have to fire the now worthless prohibition agents.

      • Kivaari

        In the thirties it was a way to disarm poor people. The rich and connected would get approved quickly. The hard working middle class would be essentially disarmed since $200 was a huge amount of money. Gun control has always been people control. Poor whites, blacks, Jews, Italians and east Europeans were viewed as low class people, and therefore they needed to be disarmed. Gun control then and now remains the same – control people “they” don’t like.

    • Esh325

      If lower muzzle velocity and accuracy were legitimate issues then the length of rifle barrels wouldn’t have kept getting shorter and shorter like it did.

      • USMC03Vet

        Lower muzzle velocity and accuracy are legitimate issues. Barrel length is reducing because of environment not because smaller has superior ballistics.

        • Nicks87

          Ballistics and accuracy are two different things. The shorter barrel does affect ballistics but does NOT affect accuracy. It’s not a theory or an opinion but a fact and there are plenty of tests that have been done to confirm this.

          • Robert Kalani Foxworthy

            it does but not any thing noticeable to most end users. you are talking about 100th of a inch difference in the groupings. lower velocity also more rapid bullet drop .

        • Kivaari

          I’d agree, that environment makes the short barrels logical. In LE, the smaller weapons are simply easier to handle, especially getting in and out of patrol cars. No one makes Chevy or Ford as big and roomy as they were in 1992. We had gone to MP5s over shotguns for both performance and compactness. It does make a huge difference. “Sniper rifles” were long, but our normal use ranges were short, typically under 100 yards. Putting a 20 inch barrel on a .223 or .308 worked just fine. Except in a military setting chances of needing long range capability just didn’t exist. Eventually, we dumped even having a sniper rifle, replacing them with well equipped AR15s. OTHER nearby agencies with bigger budgets would supply trained and equipped tactical teams. If a case couldn’t be handled by our people, we had back up within 2 miles. For many departments there are not enough people to control foot or vehicle traffic let alone bring a team together.
          I did like the Remington M700 in .223 having a 20″ tube. An AR 20″ rifle can do as good at the ranges typical in an urban setting.
          That said, I like this device. It makes an otherwise silly AR pistol, more valuable.

    • Shillary Clinton

      Shorter barrels are more accurate than longer barrels of the same profile due to the superior harmonics. What you just said is the gun equivalent of bro science. It only lowers velocity.

      • USMC03Vet

        Read it on the internet. Must be legit.

        • Shillary Clinton

          Are you like over 50 years old or something?

      • John Basilone

        Thank you!!! http://www.tacticaloperations.com/SWATbarrel/ I say no more.

        Hey USMC03VET, Teufen Hunden, check this out death dealer.

        http://www.deathfromafar.com/htm/08_iba_weaponsys_xm3.shtml

      • Vitor

        LOL @ this, that is why all high end sniper rifles have short barrels…or wait,they dont.

        • James Earl Jones

          they have them for higher velocity.

          • Robert Kalani Foxworthy

            for longer powder burn time thus allowing high pressure to build safely. barrel rigidity and riffling twist rate set for barrel length and bullet weight will be more accurate. the crown is not needed it is just some thing that fine tunes accuracy. as does fluting unless you are a ppc shooter such things dont matter relatively speaking you can still hit a man size target at a given distance…

      • Hank Seiter

        Bunk. A barrel can be cut any number of lengths to take advantage of its harmonic nodes which, btw, changes depending on what load and weight of bullet is being used. However, in 5.56 the ideal minimum length is somewhere around 14 inches and maximum ideal length is somewhere around 26 inches with a “sweet spot” between 16 and 20 inches. There’s a reason the vast majority of ARs have barrels 16 and 20 inches, all legalities aside.

        As to barrel accuracy, though shorter lengths do compromise ballistical efficiencies of a given cartridge, barrel length has very little to do with the inherent accuracy of a given barrel just so long the muzzle is cut square and properly crowned. Accuracy of a barrel is mostly determined by the concentricity of the bore, the homogenaeity (sp?) of the steel, the cut of the rifling, the kind of steel being used and its consistency of expansion coefficient, etc. For a given factory or military loading, some barrels will shoot better than others, however the barrels which don’t appear to be as accurate can often benefit from load tuning via handloading. But barring all that, I’d say 99.9% of all AR barrels far exceed the accuracy capability of the average shooter — that is, the inaccuracy of the shooter himself/herself will mask what ever accuracy deficits a particularly barrel may have. The average rifle (and pistol) are incredible pieces of machinery. I have an out-of-the-box Glock 17 that I use for club steel challenge shoots that I can get routine hits on a center-of-mass steel plate at 200 meters on the rifle range! Bullet drops are around two to three feet at that distance.

  • Jeff Smith

    That looks like it would be painful to shoot from the shoulder.

    • Kivaari

      Not enough recoil to matter. Some one would bring out a new rubber slip-on pad, and when they do, it will become a SBR. ATF is not going to approve of this, as it is obviously made to circumvent the law. A law that should not exist.

      • Martin Ewer

        Thank you. We’ve already received two verbal “approvals” on the Blade AR. Just waiting for the “official” letter.

        • Cymond

          Good luck to you! and I apologize for my earlier skepticism. I hope that you’ll get approved (despite my fears), and I hope you’ll start putting them on Mossberg Cruisers with 14″ barrels (as discussed above).

  • david

    Interesting, but unless they have a way to attach it to the arm, I don’t see it being defined as a pistol brace. Too bad they didn’t learn from the Sig model and increase the length of pull.

    • Martin Ewer

      Thank you for your input, David. The Blade AR is not a “brace.” It is a stabilizer. Thank you again, Marty

      • Alex

        Isn’t Sigs product called a Stabilizing Brace…therefore stabilizing and bracing?

  • Cymond

    I read their page, and I just cannot see how this is supposed to work as an arm brace. Resting it against the inside forearm? That won’t provide much stability, and it won’t help with the muzzle-heavy balance, either.
    .
    I think there would be more benefit to adding weights to the buffer tube to fx the balance. I can raise a 20 pound weight with 1 hand (at least for a bit), but I find it difficult to shoot an AR pistol 1-handed because the balance is so poor, regardless of recoil control.
    .
    I had an idea I wanted to submit to Shockwave Technologies, but this makes me reconsider. Their “other” shotgun is still an interesting concept, though.

    • It’s not going to pass. The Sig brace for instance tells the tale. If you remove the velcro strap you just created an SBR according to ATF.

      • Cymond

        I know it’s not going to pass, but it’s so obvious that I don’t even understand what kind of BS they’re trying to pass. I can’t see how they can justify that explanation, even to themselves.

        • Martin Ewer

          Thank you for your opinion, Cymond.

      • Martin Ewer

        Thank you for your input, Phil. Actually, I have only read that a couple of firearms attorneys were “concerned” about removing the velco strap. AFAIK, removing the velcro strap has not been considered by the ATF itself.

    • Martin Ewer

      Curious what your idea is and why our new product makes you reconsider. We are always open to ideas. Thank you, Marty

      • Cymond

        Disqus is giving me problems. I guess I’ll post it this way. I still think that your “other” firearm (12 gauge, 14″ barrel, 26″ overall, bird’s head grip) is brilliant. OTOH, I think this stabilizer is not a great idea and makes me lose some faith.
        ,
        Anyway, I’m not a big fan of PGO 12-gauge firearms. The solution is somewhat obvious – put a brace or stabilizer on a PGO firearm. With a 7″ brace sticking out the back, it should be even easier to keep it greater 26″ overall, and the barrel could be shortened further. (Be careful about adding a folding adapter so it doesn’t drop to below 26″ when folded).
        .
        In short, imagine this with a brace/stabilizer and almost any barrel length: http://shockwavetechnologies.com/site/?p=224
        .
        It should be easy to do, just add an AR-15 stock adapter, a pistol-buffer-tube, and a brace. to a Mossberg Cruiser. It may be difficult, depending on how the brace is positioned in relation to the pistol grip. (For example, I would not use a SB-15 brace on an ENDO Glock stock adapter because there is no way to use the brace as a brace, the original intent).
        .
        What we need is a company capable of getting this approved, much like how AR-15 pistols with arm braces are clearly legal (not a “gray zone”). Also, as far as I know, there are no PGO 12-gauge semiauto designs on the market. Every semi-auto 12 gauge I’ve seen has a stock, and they usually have a spring/buffer/recoil system in the stock that makes a PGO design impractical. I’d love to see a semiautomatic 12-gauge “other” firearm with a 14″ barrel and an arm brace.

        • Cymond

          The brace-on-ENDO-adapter is debatable. On one hand, I would be far more comfortable with it if the brace lined up better with the pistol’s grip (see pic). It looks like the brace couldn’t be used as a brace, only as an improvised stock. http://i752.photobucket.com/albums/xx166/jasonusvi/Mix4_zps019e246d.jpg
          .
          OTOH, this video shows that is IS useable as a brace. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVCpEopMGvE

          • Marty Ewer

            The Blade AR will shine in this configuration as well–without having to contort your arm or the brace. I should have a pic of the Blade AR attached to a Glock any day. We’re waiting for our ENDO stock adapter. Had to buy one second hand off eBay, as it seems ENDO never has them in stock.

          • Cymond

            But more importantly, how about a brace on “other” firearms? Seriously, imagine how awesome it would be to have a Mossberg Cruiser with a brace and a 14″ barrel.
            Someone just needs to promote the concept.

          • Kivaari

            Then it is a AOW with a $5 tax and a year wait. It becomes a smooth bore pistol. Just like taking the rifling out of a .45 revolver for shot shells. It costs $200 to make and register such a gun, unless you manufacture it as an AOW. The ATF is going to screw over people on the arm braces. This wont last for long.

          • Cymond

            Nope: http://shockwavetechnologies.com/site/?p=224
            .
            It’s the same basic concept as the Franklin Armory XO-26, which is also not an AOW.

          • Kivaari

            I was referring to shotgun having a 14″ barrel. Any shotgun barrel under 18″ becomes an NFA item. If a shotgun fitted with a pistol grip gets cut below 18″, it becomes a smooth bore pistol. Then it costs $5 to transfer it. If it was NOT made by a SOT holder it costs $200 FET for a Make and register Form one NFA gun. Making it into a short barreled shotgun having a shoulder stock requires the $200 Form 1, and then when transferred requires another $200 form 4 or 5 (LE tax exempt). Spending $200 for the smooth bore pistol creates a gun that only requires the $5 fee, but still a years wait.

          • Cymond

            Read that link, and the letters from the ATF on that site. A firearm is not a “shotgun” just because it fires shotshells. A Mossberg Cruiser is not equipped with a shoulder stock and is not intended to be fired from the shoulder. A Cruiser is not a shotgun, and even the ATF agrees with this. You must be 18 to buy a shotgun, but 21 to buy a Cruiser. A shotgun must have a barrel over 18″ but an unclassified “firearm” doesn’t have that restriction. It only becomes an AOW if it is under 26″ overall OR if it is concealed and meets all the other requirements of being an AOW (which mirrors what they wrote about the XO-26).
            .
            This is the most significant letter: http://www.nfaoa.org/documents/testttt20001.pdf
            “The submitted firearm […] was originally manufactured with a pistol grip in place of a shoulder stock. The original Mossberg barrel was replaced with a barrel with a length of approximately 17 inches, and the firearm has an overall length of approximately 26 1/4 inches. After examination, we have determined that, although it is a fiream subject to the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), it is not a “firearm” as defined by the NFA. Note further that this classification pertains to this type of firearm and its classification under Federal law. We recommend you check with the state in which you intend to make and seel this weapon and verify if it complies with state law and regulations.”
            .
            “If fitted with a rifled bore it exceeds the .50 caliber rule.”
            Then all shotguns with rifled bores are DDs. Somebody better tell that to Mossberg and Remington, they’ve been selling them for decades!

          • Kivaari

            I have never seen in person a cruiser with such a short barrel. I have never seen one offered for sale as an over-the-counter weapon. I do know that it would violate many state laws. ATF has exempted rifled shotguns. I know I never sold one with a barrel less than 18″ without having an ATF form 4.

          • Cymond

            So your argument is basically “I’ve never seen it done before”. Does that make them illegal? And I have no idea why no one manufactures one as an over-the-counter firearm when the ATF has clearly stated that it is legal. There is only ONE company making an over-the-counter “other firearm” with a short barrel and a vertical foregrip, and no one had seen one before they released the XO-26 in 2011. Everyone used to say that it was illegal to add a vertical foregrip to a pistol, but now the 26 inch “other firearm” classification is well publicized on firearm forums, and we have Franklin Armory to thank for bringing the concept into public knowledge.
            .
            I think this is an area where the possibility of a shorter barrel hasn’t really been explored. I think the big difference between the “Shockwave” 12 gauge and the XO-26 is that Franklin Armory has enough influence online to spread the word, while most people are not aware of a similar classification for 12-gauge firearms.
            .
            What I’m trying to do is convince a manufacturer to become the new “Franklin Armory” and popularize this concept. I emailed FA about it back in April. Their response called it “a very interesting idea” and promised to forward it to their president, but it doesn’t look like they did anything with it.
            .
            You’re right that it would be illegal in some states, but so is a basic AR-15. That doesn’t stop gun companies from selling them in the rest of the country. Ironically, AOWs are the only NFA items that CA residents can own, and an AOW with an arm brace should be legal in California. CA residents can’t have SBRs either, but they can have pistols with arm braces.

          • Kivaari

            Thanks. I spent much of my life in Washington, which outlaws such a firearm. I now know, thanks to you, that such a weapon would be legal some places. Five of my NFA guns were made in Washington. The last two in Idaho. I know I don’t need a Mossberg Cruiser with a 17″ barrel.

          • Kivaari

            The XO-26 is a pistol with rifling. The Mossberg isn’t rifled, as it is a shotgun. If fitted with a rifled bore it exceeds the .50 caliber rule.
            With rifling it doesn’t perform well with buck shot, just slugs.

          • Kivaari

            I had two Remington M870s with 14 inch barrels. Each required a form 1 and $200 FET. Following neck surgeries I could no longer use them and sold them to a local PD. I’d like to have one anyway. They are simply very neat guns.

  • Michael R. Zupcak

    Samir Naga…naga…nagonna pass the ATF, anyway…

    • BPCoop19

      Nice, I just watched that last night.

    • effthenfa

      Office space! I hereby nominate you as chancellor of the interwebs for the day. When movie nerd-dom crosses paths with gun nerd-dom, it is a great day.

  • valorius

    That sig brace has ne seriously wanting an ar “pistol”

    • Martin Ewer

      This is a Shockwave Technologies product, not Sig. Thank you.

      • valorius

        I know, im commenting on the sig brace that other posters were discussing.

  • steveday72

    This design is right up there with the chin brace.

    • Martin Ewer

      Thank you for your feedback.

  • Blake

    All legal issues aside, this looks like it would be really uncomfortable to shoulder, & doesn’t seem to “stabilize” much of anything.

    Hopefully these guys haven’t just screwed the pooch for everybody making real arm braces.

    • Martin Ewer

      Please see my earlier reply about how the Blade AR works to stabilize an AR-15 pistol. Thank you, Marty

      • w0lfie

        Aka. The bullshit I just made up. By your logic I could sell a rubber sleeve that attaches to a pistol buffer tube – by increasing friction I am making a stabilizer, yay!

        The SIG one can actually be strapped to the forearm. Yours cannot.

        • Marty Ewer

          Actually, using a standard AR sling, you can easily “strap” your forearm to the Blade AR. Thanks for your input.

          • Hank Seiter

            Using you logic, ANY stock can be turned into a “brace” by merely using the sling as a strap. The whole thing is a stupid argument since the Sig brace/stabilizer does what it says it does without any pretense of using the sling though two are provided to complete the attachment. BTW, I have that Sig and frankly it makes no tactical sense to use a buffer-tubed AR platform as a “pistol”. Way too heavy and unbalanced. I wish knock-offs would just knock it off and let Sig benefit from its own pioneering efforts. These knockoffs are only going to lead to an eventual crackdown by the fascists in the BATFE. Thanks guys.

          • Martin Ewer

            A main feature of a buttstock is the “butt.” i.e. the buttplate. The Blade AR has no buttplate or provisions for adding a buttplate. ergo, it’s not a buttstock. Not sure if I can simplify that any further.

  • sammy_ j_bird

    I think that this product does have potential, just not as a “stabilizing brace”. Perhaps marketing it and submitting the design as a pistol buffer tube cover/cheekpiece accessories. You know, like the ones you could just slap onto your pistol buffer tube for pistols? And just say that the “stock” looking portion is for cosmetics, and maybe ATF would look at it as such because it seems to flimsy to be a true shoulder stock? I could be wrong, but I think that might be the way to go.

    • Martin Ewer

      Thanks for your input, Sammy. It actually does work well as a stabilizer. We are sending out 10 beta units to testers.

      • sammy_ j_bird

        You’re welcome! And I’m sure it does, good luck!

  • José Pulido

    This only LOOKS good from the side! While the SB-15 looks like shit, it at least feels somewhat like a stock instead of trying to shoulder a piece of tile stuck to a rod!

    • Martin Ewer

      Thanks for your feedback.

  • Sorcerer Zartan

    You guys need to attach a sweet leather gauntlet to it! Then the atf will totally approve it!! And you could also take it off the pistol and attach a short ax to it so you could chop wood or bad guys. Woh that’s like two uses for the same thing.

  • wetcorps

    If all else fails, hijack the concept of the Soviet TP-82…
    http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2007/10/13/tp-82-russian-space-pistol-shotgun-carbine-flare-gun-no-longer-being-carried-into-space/
    This is no stock! This is a tactical chopping tool!

  • j

    can we just attack the NFA already? We don’t have to go full repeal, just get rid of the stupid barrel length stuff

    • echelon

      Because the NRA is too busy trying to get nationwide concealed carry reciprocity. The NFA puts money in the fed coffers…can’t go repealing something and let the sheeple have more of their own hard earned money to spend on things that are by nature legal.

  • Mike King

    Nope, that’s just a non-adjustable stock. It’s no different than a collapsed stock on a rifle. It’s solid plastic like a stock, not pliable like the Sig brace. It will never be approved.

    • Martin Ewer

      We’ve already received two verbal “approvals.” Thank you.

      • Mike King

        Good luck with the product, but remember the Ares Armor debacle over the EP Armory lowers.

  • yourmomsplaytoy

    As we all know, most of the stupid laws out there on firearms and their classifications are made by idiots who know absolutely nothing about firearms and spew phony statistics. When was the last time you heard about a murder with a legally owned suppressor on the news or even a sawed off shotgun lol. These laws do nothing to stop criminals from getting firearms and only punish law abiding citizens. I am glad that I live in Texas where you can hunt with one. All these laws need to be dropped from the books. I really hope that Americans finally start standing up for their rights in this country. Vote all of them out who do not comply with the movement to drop the tax stamp BS!!!!

    • dan

      So as long as they agree the tax stamp is b.s. thats who we vote for? So they can also be for slavery, increased term limits, higher taxes, and generally violate every other part of the constitution but as long as they agree that tax stamps are b.s they are good to go? Got it.

    • yourmomsplaytoy

      Hahahahahahahaha you’re a douche. Did I even imply that there shouldn’t be term limits. Yeah you’re reaching for it badly you retard. Do I need to go on and cover every single thing when this is about the article. Do you want someone to throw in school taxes and gay marriage because the way you whine it seems like you would be all for that.

  • GARVIN THE INCREDIBLE

    WORD DOG!

  • hydepark

    Why is everyone here giving the BATFE fuel? Why can’t we just all get along and say yes, this is a brace. Bring it to market because we want to buy it.

    • Kivaari

      I’d like one. I just want to see how the ATF and states view it.

  • Michael

    I was looking at an AR pistol the other day. It was the same length as a PS90 and a TAVOR rifles. Still want one with a Sig Brace, why? because I can.
    If 5.56 is useless in a 71/2 or 101/2 inch barrel as some people suggest why do CP teams use them.

    • I am actually building a AR pistol in .300blk. Reasoning being is that its going to be the same with a sig brace without the extra $200 and I can legally carry it loaded in the car if need be with my CPL.

      556 still works really well in 7-10″ barrels, you just tend to lose a little velocity and get a bigger fire ball/blast. a 7″ 556 wouldn’t be my go-to for somewhere that I meed to need it out to 600yds, but inside of 100yds it works really well. Inside a building/structure/home is where a 7-10″ barrel will really shine’s though.

      • CHOMP

        CPL CHL CCW (what ever) & “handgun designation” for the win!!!!
        .300 whisper is a perfect package for this. THANK YOU SIG ARM BRACE & ATF LETTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WO WOOOOOO!!!

  • gunslinger

    it’s like a suburban white girl… i can’t even…

  • Hank Seiter

    It will never be approved. There isn’t even a pretense of the stock being strapped to an arm or wrist. Utterly stupid and a waste of time and this runs the risk of having the BATFE re-evaluating the Sig “arm brace”. Thanks guys.

    • Martin Ewer

      We’ve already received two verbal “approvals.” Just waiting on the official letter. Thank you for your interest.

  • Rob Hill

    Makes as much sense as a hanging strap being legal on a pistol a la MAC-11, but not a forward grip. I always felt that if you can shoot it two handed that does not mean it wasn’t also designed to be fired from one hand, which is the qualifier. The AOW category is a early catch-all term for “assault weapon” IMO. I hope they don’t say it’s an SBR. Looks like it just slides on. Friction fit?

    • Martin Ewer

      There are two mounting screws to secure it on the pistol receiver extension.

      • Rob Hill

        I noticed the two screws but I assumed they don’t pass through the buffer tube at any point. IOW they adjust the friction by narrowing the sleeve’s I.D. so it is not necessary to “attach” the device as such.

  • Rick A

    Needs moar arm strap. ..

    • Martin Ewer

      With the Blade AR, you can use as much or as little arm strap as you like, using a standard AR sling.

  • kruzan

    I simply used a pistol tube (longer than carbine buffer tube) and put a bumper on the end to stabilize the pistol on my shoulder. Works like a charm, can still easily use the BUIS and red dot.

  • Kivaari

    If this passes ATF muster, I will buy one. I was getting ready to do an ATF Form 1 to create an SBR. I seriously think ATF will not allow this product to go to market. What makes more sense is to have the NFA ’34 repealed. I doubt that would happen either. An M4 with a 14.5 inch barrel should not require a years wait and $200.
    NFA ’34 was an unneeded law 80 years ago, and it still remains unneeded.

  • LetsTryLibertyAgain

    I wish Shockwave luck with this product. I’ve been jonesing for a 300 BLK AR, and this pistol stabilizer on a 12″ barrel 300 BLK AR pistol could be just the ticket.

    Unfortunately, the BATFE has ruled in favor of items like 80% complete polymer AR
    lowers, and various mechanically actuated trigger accelerators, and then
    arbitrarily changed their minds after the companies invested in tooling
    to manufacture these products, and in some cases even demanded a list
    of the customers who bought the legal-until-they-weren’t products.

    • Martin Ewer

      That always is a concern for companies–especially small companies.

  • JusticeM4

    I commend the effort to create another option for a AR pistol brace.
    What you need to do is to price this below $100 and it will sell. Good luck on your efforts.

    • Martin Ewer

      We are aiming for a street price of approximately $54.

  • him34

    AKA…We are trying to copy SIG…This industry is full of copy cats.

    • Martin Ewer

      No, we are improving on the pistol stabilizer breed. Thank you.