TKTM

I see no price anywhere in the thread; is this an auction site now?

I just want to know what he is doing with all those stock-less M4's

I just pulled the pistons out of my m4 and plugged the ports with JB weld, now it works like any other inertia driven Benelli, and I am compliant

If the 1989 ban was any indication you do not want your inventory trapped in customs; If the report is true, I wager that is what is happening with Benelli.

there is no requirement for it to say US, that is just to make people feel good

Buy these and keep shooting them till you get really good; you should be able to get them around $0.57 a piece delivered.

I don't remember the exact source (I think it was from field reports), but I do remember talking about it with the Benelli rep at he 2006 NRA convention; he REALLY didn't want to talk about it. But since then, I have not heard anything negative so I figured what ever the issue was that it was resolved.

There were reports of the Benelli M4 getting usage in Iraq in 2006, and from what I remember the reports were not always good; something about cycling issues and sand if I remember correctly. I'm sure someone will post the info in a response shortly.

Here is the link to the British History of gun control, it basically gives a good time line of what is in store for us here in the US. http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2010/tle558-20100221-07.html

Our 1968 gun laws in the USA were near verbatim translation of the Nazi gunlaws- see http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/GCA_68.htm The C-stock lets my wife and kids shoot the M4, the goons don't like that.

you're blazing the trail for us; First the Magna Carta, and now- Nazi gun laws.

I have an excellent source for M4 C-stocks;)

buy him a Saiga 12 gauge, make him think he is getting the Benelli. After he opens the gift wrapped Saiga, give him a gift box of "accessories"-hide the Benelli in that box. Then, wait for the proposal.

so TAPCO is going to be making M4 parts?

The M4 has two things going against it in the study. (1) it can hold more than 5 rounds of Aguilia MiniShells, but there is probably not the political weight around to ban its import based on that. (2) it was initially designed for military or tactical applications. To overcome the second issue requires evidence that it is 'regularly used by sportsman and is generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes' (per the ATF study). That second condition could block the import of the M4. I would suspect that the M4 will be continued to be allowed to be imported (for various reasons) but I also suspect that there is a reasonable chance than any import shotgun that was a military/tactical design that was converted back into a military/tactical condition will be declared a destructive device.

I would expect demand to increase the closer we get towards of the end of the atf shotgun study comment period

This is an update to my previous review of the Freedom Fighter Tactical 922r forearm for the Benelli M4 found at this link http://www.benelliusa.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25750 The number one issue I would watch for with the FFT forearm is its overall length preventing proper seating of the barrel into the receiver. The number two issue is squeaking of the forearm haves related to a sloppy tongue and groove joint, which is supposed to lock the two forend haves together but doesn't. The number three issue is warping of the forend halves resulting in installation difficulties. Basically, all the issues I have noted are related to the dimensionality of the FFT forend. The first two issues can be overcome by trimming the forend's overall length, and either bedding the tongue in the groove or using a heat gun to modify the shape of the groove. The third issue varies, some forarms have it worse than others. Apparently, the ideal state is forearm with enough warpage between the halves to bind up the slop in the tongue and groove joint, but not so much as to make installation difficult. The forearms I received had a good amount of squeak and only a mild amount of warpage. Their overall length was slightly long, but useable. I was able to reduce the tongue and groove play by heating the inside of the forearm with a heat gun and reducing the width of the groove. The result is a quiet and sturdy fitting forearm with a just a small offset (perpendicular) between the forearm halves. Because of the offset, I believe that the best do-it-yourself solution to resolve the squeak is to bed the forearm haves together using epoxy. The true solution would be for FFT to increase the width of the tongue on the forearms to match the factory forearm. (I suspect this would cause them to have to scrap forearms that have significant warpage) To sum it up, the FFT forearms are NOT up to the fit quality of the factory Benelli forearms. However, with some do-it-yourself fitting they do feel sturdy on the gun. With a few improvements, FFT probably could either match or surpass the fit,feel, and functionality of the factory forend.

Thanks for the advice on the bonding. The M4 can hold more than 5 rounds AS-IS, you just have to put Aguila 12 ga mini shells in it.

Is the bond between the forearm and epoxy good enough that it won't just pop out after a few uses? I wager you could just wrap some wax paper around the magazine tube to keep the epoxy off during the initial setup. On the ATF, the can pretty much do what they wish with impunity on imports. If they do go the Destructive Device root, I expect that they will try to limit the number of registrations any way they can, inability to handle the throughput would fit right in with that. Both the M4 and the Saiga have features that are on the list. The M4 can hold more than 5 rounds; The Saiga has a side rail on the receiver. Both are "military" derivatives. But I will wager dimes to donuts that the MD-20 mag for the Saiga will be declared a destructive device in and of itself.

Bedding the strips together I think would probably work well, but every time you take it on an off you would risk having to re-bed it. Softening up the plastic (if possible) probably would be a permanent solution. And as you said, it is a $50 part on a $1500 shotgun so the experimentation might be worth it. On the ATF study, the scenario I described covers all the elements you list. Its not to difficult to tell a importable from non-importable M4. If you had one in a non-importable condition you could readily be asked to show your Destructive Device tax stamp; there would be no hassle to people who left their M4's in a importable condition. So anyone who had their M4 in a un-imporatble condition would have to register it as a DD. To keep people from swamping / registering their non-converted M4's as DD's the ATF would require it to be 922r compliant before issuing the amnesty tax stamp (free of charge). I think they would limit the DD device to "military" shotguns, as mentioned in the study. Under that scenario the ATF has a way to easily control the issues you raised, plus the Attorney General can do it all with the stroke of a pen.

Here is another thought to give some thought to, and it is a big "IF". If the Feds go the route I expect them to on imported shotguns, I suspect that any "military" shotgun in a non-importable condition will be declared to be a destructive device. Moreover, to be able to register your shotgun as a DD it will have to be 922r compliant. IF that played out, there would be quite the run on compliance parts.

I think that is the case, the more out of spec it is the more it keeps the halves from slipping past each other. I suspect the tongue was purposefully made small to allow the out of spec parts to mate. The stippling might work, but it probably would loosen back up. Using black RTV as "fixodent" probably would do the trick, as would using a small pin to join the halves. Hopefully most people have a fit up like yours. Two things I would check with your fitup are (1) make sure that barrel is properly seated in the receiver. (2) spray your handguard haves with some oil and see if they shift/squeak. That will at least give some confidence that they wont give away your position when you are out in the field and the handguards get sweaty or oily.

There certainly is something a foot, and it is the slack in the rope you are hanging around yourself. Now if you would kindly pull that rope taut by kindly telling us how having or not having returned the FFT forearm in any way affects the fit of the forearm to the gun? It doesn't, its is just a strawman put up by a shill.

I'm not sure if it is thermoset or a thermoform plastic; if its thermoset a heat gun would not work. If it is thermoform then it might be possible to alter the groove just enough so that the tongue won't wiggle around inside. That might have solved the shifting/screeching issue mine came with. But I agree with you if it has to be done on the gun it would not be worthwhile to try and fix it. Especially if its a fit problem as bad as the one L84Cabo reported - not even being able to get the halves close enough together to fit in the gun.

Well I'm glad that what appears to be shilling on your part is only as the result of being a satisfied customer.