Breaking News: ATF Approves SB Tactical Collapsing Brace

ATF has approved SB Tactical’s new brace design.

“We are very excited with the ATF’s approval of our new adjustable Pistol Stabilizing Brace design, and understand the overwhelmingly positive implications of the decision,” said Jeff Creamer, Vice President of Business Development, SB Tactical. “SB Tactical’s commitment to emerging technologies and innovation has been the facilitator for the growing PDW pistol category. This Opinion ushers in an exciting time for us and the PDW community; we are proud to introduce the MPX PSB and SBPDW models.”

It is a collapsing brace. It will be made for the SIG MPX and they have teamed up with Maxim to make a PDW version.


13255988_1185011511517124_7939078788515563534_n 13260012_1185011531517122_4152140806723952796_n

I am eager to see if they make one for the MP5 clones out there. Here is a photo from their Facebook page. There are some cool looking braces coming out. Aside from the MPX brace I find the MP5 brace to be very intriguing. I have been told it is for B&T.


Nicholas C

Co-Founder of KRISSTALK forums, an owner’s support group and all things KRISS Vector related. Nick found his passion through competitive shooting while living in NY. He participates in USPSA and 3Gun. He loves all things that shoots and flashlights. Really really bright flashlights.

Any questions please email him at


  • ColonelColt

    This seems like another bait and switch setup.

  • borekfk

    Hot damn.

  • noob

    is that guy resting the brace against his shoulder, or is he just resting it near his shoulder?

    • John Yossarian

      Collarbone, it seems. Probably within bounds of ATF interpretation if the language on “rifle” includes “fired from the shoulder”, which I believe it does.

      • David Sharpe

        Looks more like a cheek hold.

  • datimes

    This is silly dancing around the NFA short barrel rifle law. Its old, out of date, and inane. Just make SBR’s legal.

    • m-cameron

      you can legally own a pistol……and you can legally own a rifle……..but god help you if you own something in between!

      • nova3930

        No lie. Hey buddy, that pistol with a 12″ barrel is totally safe and OK….OH JFC YOU PUT A BUTT STOCK ON IT NOW IT”S INSANELY DANGEROUS AND MUST BE REGULATED!!!!!

        • SirOliverHumperdink

          Sort of an assisted knife vs a switchblade. The switchblade sounds so scary and can put you in jail.

          • zakwilson

            Agree, though as a technical point, automatic knives (“switchblades”) are legal in a majority of states now.

          • Kivaari

            I sold one yesterday for $175. A finely made knife that simply defies the image conjured up when called a “switch blade”.

    • Audie Bakerson

      Have you contacted your candidates for office?

    • gunsandrockets

      And what about forward pistol grips on pistols? Another silly NFA anachronism.

      Pistols have incorporated features to help two handed use since at least the 1970’s , with the squared off trigger guard for gripping with the off hand index-finger.

      • Markius Fox

        Nature of the beast and following the letter of the law. The same strict following gives us the awesome options like the Mossberg 500 #50440 or #50273. Neither handgun, shotgun, AOW, or SBS under the letter of the law. They are legally “Firearms”.

        • Evan

          “Firearms” should really be the only legal category though. Differentiating between what’s a rifle, pistol, AOW, SBS, SBR, shotgun, or whatever the fvck else is absurd. If it goes bang, it’s a firearm, and that ought to be as far as it goes.

          I know, I know, attempting to apply common sense to byzantine government regulations written by people who have no understanding of what it is they’re regulating…

          • Markius Fox

            For one, the legislators knew exactly what they were doing when they authored the NFA, and the original text didn’t pass judicial muster back then (keep this is mind) because it was considered a gross overreach and against the constitution to ban the ownership of any handguns. That text was deleted from the bill and was passed.

            The given intention was to combat organized crime by requiring the firearms to be registered, in reality they placed a restrictive income barrier to buying any of the named and defined items, which happened to be fortunate for business owners. The business owners were worried about worker strikes and unionization, and worried most about if workers had access to firearms that could hurt or kill the hired thugs that were used to crush the strikes. The NFA guaranteed that anyone that went through the official channels would be scrutinized about their activist history and likely denied, not to mention the long delay in processing the registrations back then compared to today. If they made it “illegally” and were caught with it during a strike, that person was guaranteed to never take part in a strike for a while.

            It’s a dark history, but it’s true. Which is why I have a love/hate relationship with the ATF.

        • gunsandrockets

          That would apply to the various .410 ‘snake charmers’ too, wouldn’t it?

          • Markius Fox

            If they are smooth bore and are fired from the shoulder, no. They would be shotguns. If they are handguns chambered for the same, they need rifling to avoid being categorized as AOWs (and all offerings on the market have rifled barrels).

          • gunsandrockets

            The stocks are cut down, too short to fire from the shoulder and even if you tried the comb height is too high to align the barrel properly.

      • Mmmtacos

        Let’s just make a really long, very ergonomic hand-stop and submit that. Someone at the ATF apparently thinks NFA is silly, too.

    • Gregory

      Who ever said the government did anything making sense?

    • Lee Attiny

      The only problem with this is that SBRs already are legal and always have been. It’s actually irrelevant whether or not the ATFs classifications for different guns makes sense or not. I think a valid argument can be made that if it’s too difficult for you to fill out a one page form and write a check you probably didnt really want an SBR all that much to begin with. I guess what I’m really saying is, even though a lot of our gun laws are absolutely ludicrous, it requires absolutely no actual effort to get an SBR or a suppressor so maybe next time instead of posting the same tired ATF rant we’ve all heard a million times try filing a form and stfu!!!

      • nova3930

        I think his intent was that SBRs should be treated like any other rifle since there’s nothing inherently more dangerous about them….

        • Pistol, rifle, sbr, and she should all the the same, regulating them separately is pointless because there is so much Grey area between them all.

      • Robert Powell

        Datimes is absolutely correct. Just because it isn’t completely illegal doesn’t justify having to get the feds permission and also paying an extra $200 for something that shouldn’t be regulated any different then any other firearm. It isn’t irrelevant that freedom is reduced. And to argue that no effort is needed is false. It may not be difficult to fill out a form 1, form 4, etc. but it is very tedious. Waiting for an approval on a right, furthers the tedium. Then once you have the item in your possession, assuming permission is granted, parameters are set that regulate when you can use it. I’m fine if I stay in my state, but I have to notify the atf if I want to go 30 miles away into my neighboring state to shoot with a buddy or go hunting. The problem is the whittling away of rights. NFA regulated weapons are no longer a right and that is a problem that we should fight.

      • John

        It isn’t that easy in Illinois to own an SBR.

        • charlesrhamilton

          It’s more difficult than it should be. But, applying for an FFL3 is pretty painless and not too expensive. You shouldn’t have to jump through all those hoops, but it can be done.

      • PhotoDave

        And don’t forget to send in your money and wait for months.

    • SirOliverHumperdink

      Like that’s going to happen. Cali is on it’s way to banning all semi’s.

  • Charlie Taylor

    I love how the photo has that guy not quite shouldering the stock.

    • Patrick M.

      How else would you use it?

      • Gorilla Biscuit


      • Billy Jack

        Crotch Rocket mode with a cup on.

        • Iggy

          OH YEAH!!!:

          • jng1226

            LOL, WTF is that from? Almost as bad as He-Man cartoons.

          • Bob

            I never read it, but that is the “super villian” Codpiece I believe. He felt inadequate as per size, so he got his revenge on society with his substitute, up until a young woman with super powers melted it. Some kind of analogy there…

        • Bob

          If we’re talking 5.56, you don’t need the cup…

          • Billy Jack

            You can boil water in it after the apockalips.

    • John W Tobin

      And your point is, what exactly?
      Looks to me like he has it right where it works best for him and what he’s shooting.

    • David Sharpe

      Look again.

  • tazman66gt

    Just wait til the YouTube asshats show off. Then it will be disallowed. We are our own worst enemy sometimes.

    • imachinegunstuff

      How is it any different than the other brace? It just collapses.

    • JSmath

      It wasn’t (just) the Youtube asshats that got it disallowed, it was the idiots who kept mailing the ATF asking for clarification on the use.

      • Cymond

        Well maybe ATF shouldn’t keep tellung everyone “this letter only applies to you”.

  • Jack

    Great Merciful Crap!!

  • Justin Roney

    I see an AR PDW pistol in my future now.

  • Josh Saintz

    Shut up and take my money!

  • Porty1119

    You gotta be kidding me. Good on SB Tactical for further demonstrating the utter futility of the NFA.

  • Kovacs Jeno

    The SBR ban IS de facto DEAD. It should be de jure, too!

  • Cymond

    I wonder what the cost will be for the PDW style. Stocks like that are usually around 400.

    I’m planning to register my favorite lower as a SBR after we buy a house. If the brace is cheap enough, I might put it on an actual SBR. That oughtta cause some confusion.

    And yes, I’m sure that some people shoulder their braces in private, but not everyone has a private range.

  • Cal S.

    Good. Now, shut up and don’t ever write the ATF about this again. Got it?

    • TennTexan

      “Don’t ever write the ATF.”


    • Harry’s Holsters

      I’ve never understood why people would look a gift horse in the mouth. The ruling on shouldering was to stop people from writing the ATF.

      922R used to not be an issue for NFA items till to many letter were requested. If there is a current letter out don’t question it.

      • Brett Barnette

        Those letters are good only for the person/persons they’re addressed to. They also aren’t legally binding. The ATF/DOJ can still prosecute you if the ATF changes their mind about the legality of the item in question.

        • Cynic

          Which really infuriates me that they can write such twisting contradictory rules that a letter from me asking flat out is this legal depends on who I am and what company I work for more than it does the law.

          Len savage – everything he wants is illegal because the atf hate him for example.

  • Hamma Hamma

    Are we opening a betting pool yet about how long this thing will be otherwise legal and/or unmolested by ATF rulings reversing from idiots continually asking them if it’s REALLY legal until the ATF makes it illegal to make them happy?

    I’m going with a year if anyone’s a bookie.

    • Tim Pearce

      Well, it’s probably the same nonsense as before. “It’s a pistol until you shoulder the brace and then it goes through a magical girl transformation into an evil illegal SBR.”

      • Cynic

        Nah its all about intent if I buy a brace intending to shoulder it – felon

        If I buy the brace and shoulder it to try it after using it strapped to my arm -legal

        Thought crime ftw

  • Mystick

    ..give it 6 months… they’ll change their minds.

    • jng1226

      Yep, especially after that first marketing picture blatantly showing their intended use and flaunting of the previous BATFE ruling on the “use” braces in general. That was a poor move on their part that will speed up their demise.

      • USMC2090

        Demise??? The brace has been out for more than 3 years now and has never been banned. Cheek firing has been totally approved by the ATF….get a grip.

        • jng1226

          Well, you learn something new every day. It looked quite apparent that he was “shouldering” it but after seeing other comments that it’s not in his shoulder pocket and your comment that cheek weld holds are specifically approved by the BATFE, I stand corrected.

          • USMC2090

            I’m impressed by your answer…it’s very rare that someone actually says that they stand corrected in this cynical online world….religion is not dead. 😉

    • DwnRange

      Lest one forget with who you are dealing with here, check out this excerpt from the 1982 R E P O R T OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE
      FEBRUARY 1982

      “The Constitution Subcommittee also received evidence that the Bureau has formulated a requirement, of which dealers were not informed that requires a dealer to keep official records of sales even from his private collection. BATF has gone farther than merely failing to publish this requirement. At one point, even as it was prosecuting a dealer on this charge (admitting that he had no criminal intent), the Director of the Bureau wrote Senator S. I. Hayakawa to indicate that there was no such legal requirement and it was completely lawful for a dealer to sell from his collection without recording it. Since that date, the Director of the Bureau has stated that that is not the Bureau’s position and that such sales are completely illegal; after making that statement, however, he was quoted in an interview for a magazine read primarily by licensed firearms dealers as stating that such sales were in fact legal and permitted by the Bureau. In these and similar areas, the Bureau has violated not only the dictates of common sense, but of 5 U.S.C. Sec 552, which was intended to prevent “secret lawmaking” by administrative bodies.

      These practices, amply documented in hearings before this Subcommittee, leave little doubt that the Bureau has disregarded rights guaranteed by the constitution and laws of the United States.

      It has trampled upon the second amendment by chilling exercise of the right to keep and bear arms by law-abiding citizens.

      It has offended the fourth amendment by unreasonably searching and seizing private property.(pg.23)

      It has ignored the Fifth Amendment by taking private property without just compensation and by entrapping honest citizens without regard for their right to due process of law.

      The rebuttal presented to the Subcommittee by the Bureau was utterly unconvincing. Richard Davis, speaking on behalf of the Treasury Department, asserted vaguely that the Bureau’s priorities were aimed at prosecuting willful violators, particularly felons illegally in possession, and at confiscating only guns actually likely to be used in crime. He also asserted that the Bureau has recently made great strides toward achieving these priorities. No documentation was offered for either of these assertions. In hearings before BATF’s Appropriations Subcommittee, however, expert evidence was submitted establishing that approximately 75 percent of BATF gun prosecutions were aimed at ordinary citizens who had neither criminal intent nor knowledge, but were enticed by agents into unknowing technical violations. (In one case, in fact, the individual was being prosecuted for an act which the Bureau’s acting director had stated was perfectly lawful.) In those hearings, moreover, BATF conceded that in fact (1) only 9.8 percent of their firearm arrests were brought on felons in illicit possession charges; (2) the average value of guns seized was $116, whereas BATF had claimed that “crime guns” were priced at less than half that figure; (3) in the months following the announcement of their new “priorities”, the ercentage of gun prosecutions aimed at felons had in fact fallen by a third, and the value of confiscated guns had risen. All this indicates that the Bureau’s vague claims, both of focus upon gun-using criminals and of recent reforms, are empty words.”

  • guest

    “brace” for “pistols”, or how to entrap yourself better than any ATF/FBI honeypot. Wait… never mind.

  • Pete M

    Love that family picture at the end. So much win.

  • Harry’s Holsters

    I’ve never really liked the braces before, Especially for the MPX. I could see if on an AR pistol but not other guns that would get a stamp anyway.

    This looks really cool and isn’t just 75% correct like most braces. I wouldn’t know it’s a brace if I hadn’t seen the picture from the rear. I think when I buy an MPX it’ll have this.

  • Avery

    *Looks at the picture of the butt of the brace*

    Haha, yeah right.

  • Bill Fitzsimmons

    Despite not being able to shoulder it, it appears that the design evolution is moving away from being able to comfortably put your arm through it. The small opening and flat end looks like it’s designed to be shouldered.

  • Cymond
  • nova3930

    Now that’s a “brace” I might actually buy. especially if they make an EVO version. lol

  • John W Tobin

    How sweet and kind of a “federal government agency” to “give” We The People “permission” to own arms with a certain type of stock.
    Remember, it is more important to have a government privilege than a Human Right.

  • Hojo

    Let’s see if Trump will make SBRs legal when he becomes President. Hopefully he will know enough about this and care enough to do anything.

    • Emperius

      So pass a law that supplants a law, only increasing paperwork and confusion. How about ABOLISH 1934, 1968, and 1986 gun laws that are anti-Constitutional.

  • supergun

    Several youths break into local eating place. Does a little over a thousand dollars worth of damage to the doors while breaking in. Insurance deductible is a thousand dollars. Poor owner barely making it is stuck with the bill. Youths will probably be given probation for the 5th time and not made to pay for the damages. You slap a stock on a AR pistol, you can be fined $250,000 and ten years. Have we gone wacko?

  • scaatylobo

    WHERE the hell is ANY form of logic in ,telling me that making a PISTOL longer is a bad thing ???.
    I am not talking about making a long gun smaller,but about making a short gun LONGER !.
    I cannot understand why this is a problem at all.

  • DwnRange

    The NFA was the governments answer to what to do with a the revenue agents after Prohibition ended.

  • UVB76

    HK and KAC should look at releasing some of their more popular current systems via the pistol route onto the US market. I could see the shelved KAC PDW and popular HK MP7 being hot sellers (I’m sure very expensive) and would open up the cartridges 6×35mm and 4.6×30mm for more exploration. I”m hoping to see the trend continue with HK since they are looking at the MP5K coming to market as a pistol.

  • Paul X

    Keep in mind the true purpose of these regulations: not to make sense, but to provide employment for bureaucrats.

  • john Ziegler

    with so much hype and acceptance of the Sig P-320 can you compare to the sig 250 which in appearance looks identical and has some great history of its own but is over $100 less expensive