Update John's Gun's 22 integral??

[msc_8791]

I have an older Integral 10/22 from John's Guns that uses the older Style dimpled washers and spacers design and I was thinking of having someone update it with a newer set of Baffles or a mono-core baffle stack? If so...

1) Any idea on someone who does this (Preferably in Texas, but not absolutely necessary, I tried to contact JG but was unsucessful)

2) Im pretty sure I don't need any forms correct?

3) Would there be a noticeable improvement in suppression?

Thanks

[Baboon]

If it aint broke why fix it?

[Bendersquint]

I have an older Integral 10/22 from John's Guns that uses the older Style dimpled washers and spacers design and I was thinking of having someone update it with a newer set of Baffles or a mono-core baffle stack? If so...

1) Any idea on someone who does this (Preferably in Texas, but not absolutely necessary, I tried to contact JG but was unsucessful)

2) Im pretty sure I don't need any forms correct?

3) Would there be a noticeable improvement in suppression?

Thanks

1 - We can recore your suppressor, no problem.

2 - You don't need any forms just a letter/work order explaining what needs to be done(or fill out our work order form), and a copy of the approved Form4.

3 - Yes, the difference would be noticeable.

[itruns]

is an intergral suppressor tham much quiter than a good modern can?

[renegade]

I have an older Integral 10/22 from John's Guns that uses the older Style dimpled washers and spacers design and I was thinking of having someone update it with a newer set of Baffles or a mono-core baffle stack? If so...

1) Any idea on someone who does this (Preferably in Texas, but not absolutely necessary, I tried to contact JG but was unsucessful)

It is a custom job. John used a 1 inch BBL and for the past decade or more, most use a .920 BBL so whoever does the work will have to make custom baffles.

2) Im pretty sure I don't need any forms correct?

Correct.

3) Would there be a noticeable improvement in suppression?

Not likely. This was one of the quietest firearms ever made. I have one myself, and nothing else even comes close.

Thanks

BLUE

[Bendersquint]

Any documentation on it being one of the quietest gun ever made?

Maybe the Integral I heard was a lemon?

[renegade]

Any documentation on it being one of the quietest gun ever made?

Maybe the Integral I heard was a lemon?

They held trials at KC a few years back, it won.

I have metered it myself.

Keep in mind one of the reason it is so quiet it is is heavily ported, I think when I chrono'd it mini-mags were around 700 fps.

The gun I own was made in the 80s. There have been a variety of designs, baffles etc., since then, perhaps the one you heard is not the quietest version, or the most heavily ported etc. So there might be large variance within the different models over the years.

[Bendersquint]

Any documentation on it being one of the quietest gun ever made?

Maybe the Integral I heard was a lemon?

They held trials at KC a few years back, it won.

I have metered it myself.

Keep in mind one of the reason it is so quiet it is is heavily ported, I think when I chrono'd it mini-mags were around 700 fps.

The gun I own was made in the 80s. There have been a variety of designs, baffles etc., since then, perhaps the one you heard is not the quietest version, or the most heavily ported etc. So there might be large variance within the different models over the years.

I figured as much.

The one I heard sounded louder than a TAC65 on a Beretta21! I was not impressed at all.

It dropped the fps by 300fps? Holy crap thats some massive porting. Like shooting a 25% more energy powderless 22lr!

No wonder it was quiet. A 45 230gr pill travelling at 500fps is stupid quiet as well!

[renegade]

Any documentation on it being one of the quietest gun ever made?

Maybe the Integral I heard was a lemon?

They held trials at KC a few years back, it won.

I have metered it myself.

Keep in mind one of the reason it is so quiet it is is heavily ported, I think when I chrono'd it mini-mags were around 700 fps.

The gun I own was made in the 80s. There have been a variety of designs, baffles etc., since then, perhaps the one you heard is not the quietest version, or the most heavily ported etc. So there might be large variance within the different models over the years.

I figured as much.

The one I heard sounded louder than a TAC65 on a Beretta21! I was not impressed at all.

It dropped the fps by 300fps? Holy crap thats some massive porting. Like shooting a 25% more energy powderless 22lr!

No wonder it was quiet. A 45 230gr pill travelling at 500fps is stupid quiet as well!

Yes, they never did another trial at KC as they though folks would just bring trick guns to get the number down but be useless in real life. 700 is slow on a pistol but on a rifle it is silly.

[Bendersquint]

700 is slow on a pistol but on a rifle it is silly.

Very well understated there.

[ctbreitwieser]

700 is slow on a pistol but on a rifle it is silly.

Might as well shoot a slingshot at your target with those kind of speeds!

[Bendersquint]

700 is slow on a pistol but on a rifle it is silly.

Might as well shoot a slingshot at your target with those kind of speeds!

Very true. Thats ridiculously slow, no wonder it was quiet. The one I heard definitely wasn't ported the same at all it sounded nothing like that.

[msc_8791]

Bendersquint,

I think you've probably seen the design of this John's guns 10/22 integral on the boards. The other commentators to this post are correct on the tubing size used on this design. To be honest the main reason I started this conversation was to see if there was a way to refurbish it and shorten and get an OAL length of say 10 to 11". Id like to use this on my Ruger Charger and or my Norrell, not to mention I have an SBR stamp processing on a Elite 22 receiver. The current tube length is right at 22". I guess my hope was to shorten the internal barrel which is at 16" down to maybe 4 or 5" and then shorten the overall length of the tube. I was just trying to get around the 6 month or so wait by having the tube modified.
(Assuming its legal to do so)

Thanks to all who have replied to my post

[Bendersquint]

Bendersquint,

I think you've probably seen the design of this John's guns 10/22 integral on the boards. The other commentators to this post are correct on the tubing size used on this design. To be honest the main reason I started this conversation was to see if there was a way to refurbish it and shorten and get an OAL length of say 10 to 11". Id like to use this on my Ruger Charger and or my Norrell, not to mention I have an SBR stamp processing on a Elite 22 receiver. The current tube length is right at 22". I guess my hope was to shorten the internal barrel which is at 16" down to maybe 4 or 5" and then shorten the overall length of the tube. I was just trying to get around the 6 month or so wait by having the tube modified.
(Assuming its legal to do so)

Thanks to all who have replied to my post

It is legal to shorten a suppressor you can't lengthen it though. The barrel length will have to be cut shorter than the tube for the ridiculous porting that is in it. The problem is that the tube is welded onto the barrel so you would have to destroy the barrel in order to remove the tube then a new barrel......you get the idea.

It would cost alot more than what the transfer time savings is worth.

[renegade]

Bendersquint,

I think you've probably seen the design of this John's guns 10/22 integral on the boards. The other commentators to this post are correct on the tubing size used on this design. To be honest the main reason I started this conversation was to see if there was a way to refurbish it and shorten and get an OAL length of say 10 to 11". Id like to use this on my Ruger Charger and or my Norrell, not to mention I have an SBR stamp processing on a Elite 22 receiver. The current tube length is right at 22". I guess my hope was to shorten the internal barrel which is at 16" down to maybe 4 or 5" and then shorten the overall length of the tube. I was just trying to get around the 6 month or so wait by having the tube modified.
(Assuming its legal to do so)

Thanks to all who have replied to my post

Shortening it that much is a taxable event and would cost you $200. ATF Silencer FAQ says you can only shorten to effect a repair, and then only to re-thread. Shortening it more than that or for convenience, is not a repair but a MFG of a new silencer.

Q5: May a repair change the dimensions or caliber of a silencer?
A: If alterations to a silencer would increase the overall length or change the diameter or caliber of a silencer, this is the making of a new silencer, as opposed to a repair. The new silencer must be registered and transferred in accordance with the NFA and the GCA. Alterations to a registered silencer that result in a minimal reduction in the overall length for purposes of rethreading are permissible as repairs. However, the reduction in length may not result in the removal, obliteration, or alteration of the existing serial number, as this would violate 18 U.S.C. § 922(k). If such a repair is necessary, the damaged silencer should be destroyed or returned to the registrant. If it is destroyed, destruction should be reported to the NFA Branch. Any replacement silencer must be registered and transferred in accordance with the NFA and the GCA. See Q2 and Q3 for further information on repairs.

[Bendersquint]

You are right Renegade the wording in the frequent asked questions does say that.

I have seen 10" long cans shortened to 5 inches and the ATF had no problem with it.

I have seen tubes on take apart cans that were shortened dramatically because of a ding in the tubing.

When in doubt get in touch with the ATF Tech Branch. What they allow one SOT to perform doesn't mean they allow it for all.

[msc_8791]

Renegade and Bendersquint

Thanks again for your answers to my questions and keeping my ignorance from getting me into trouble.

Scott