CZ’s Scorpion Evo S1 Pistol is proving to be a hot item. At an MSRP of an affordable $849 and with tons of potential, it’s easy to see why. I say “potential,” because the shootability of a large “pistol” like this — like an AR pistol, like a SIG MPX pistol, etc. — is less than ideal. They tend to be clunky and awkward but, of course, this is because they were designed to have a shoulder stock. Regardless of barrel length, they were made to be used like rifles and are only sold in pistol form to avoid NFA “short barreled rifle” regulation and/or to avoid 922(r) compliance requirements as discussed in detail earlier today. On the factory folding stock and 922(r) front, though, CZ-USA has just released the following bit of great news at the NRA Annual Meetings in Nashville. . .
Scorpion Factory Stock to be Made Available This Summer
Since the release of the CZ Scorpion EVO 3 S1 Pistol in October of 2014, CZ-USA has received many inquiries about the availability of the factory folding stock. It has always been CZ-USA’s intention to make the stock available to the public as soon as practicable.
Obviously, an approved Form 1 is required to convert the CZ Scorpion EVO 3Â S1 Pistol into an SBR. The ATF has informed us that 922r does apply, and their official parts count for the Scorpion Pistol is 16 parts. CZ-USA is currently in the process of manufacturing a number of US-made parts which we intend to sell both individually and as part of a kit to ensure that individuals manufacturing SBRs have the means to comply with 922r.
We’re also working closely with a number of US manufacturers to ensure a variety of US-made parts are available from sources other than CZ-USA. That being said, until more qualifying 922r compliance parts are available from aftermarket sources, the factory stock will only be available as part of the kit including the required compliance parts.
We expect to begin selling the stocks as part of a 922r compliance kit in late summer (earlier if at all possible).
Retail cost of the compliance kit will be very reasonable, ensuring that a CZ Scorpion EVO 3 S1 SBR will remain one of the most reasonably priced pistol-caliber carbines available to the public.
Although I’m very happy with the ACE M4 SOCOM stock on my Scorpion, I’ll probably switch to the factory folding unit and move the SOCOM to an AR. At any rate, the rest of the compliance kit can’t come soon enough, as my SBR is currently a trigger group-less paperweight until it can become 922(r) compliant!
Hopefully we’ll see a factory SBR offered from them as well.
That’d be cool. I’d say the main advantage to taking a pistol and filing a Form 1 to turn it into an SBR is that you have the pistol to use during the entire time you’re waiting on the Form 1 approval. If you buy a factory SBR, you have to pay for the firearm and it stays in your FFL’s possession until the Form 4 is approved (right now running about 90 days, which is super fast compared to the average over the last few years). That’s assuming the FFL had it in stock and you didn’t have to purchase it from another dealer and then wait a few weeks for the dealer-to-dealer transfer to happen first, then file the Form 4.
On the plus side, you don’t have to add any engraving to it if you buy it in factory configuration (since the manufacturer already engraved their info). If you do a Form 1 to build it, like I did with my Scorpion, you have to put your info on it. In the case of doing it under a trust, the name of the trust, city in which the trust is located, and state (2-letter state abbreviation is okay [this is an instance where spelling “okay” “OK” would have been very confusing haha]) have to be engraved on it.
Also, the e-file form 1 is still running over a month faster than a paper form 4, although it is slowing.
My AR form 1 in December took 34 days. My Scorpion form 4 from mid-February is at 57 days and still pending, but the average is 60 right now.
Did you ask ATF about 922(r)? An SBR is not a Rifle. A Rifle is a title 1 weapon. Also when you submit a form 1 you become the manufacture of a new weapon(an SBR). Therefore the weapon was not made by CZ.
I also am not a lawyer. But, it looks pretty clear that this act does not apply to NFA weapons.
Honestly, I’d be happier seeing a rifle model, with a 16″ barrel, preferably with the hand guard extending the majority of said barrel.
I think it’ll happen. The Scorpion is certainly popular enough. It will still be subject to 922(r), though, but hopefully by that point CZ-USA is simply importing them with certain parts missing and finishing the assembly in the U.S. with domestic parts so the numbers work out.
wh0cd601175 buy viagra soft
LOL, what did they read your last post?
I’m not saying it was aliens… but… it was aliens.
…and some rather timely aliens at that. phew
If like a folding “brace” please..
Any news on the Bren 805 and/or its variants?
Can anyone ID the Trijicon sight in the leading photo??? Never seen such a mount…
looks like a TA45 1.5x Mini ACOG
http://www.opticsplanet.com/trijicon-ta47-acog-15×24-compact-sight-tritium-reticle-bac.html
The optic yes – but look at the mount. The CZ image has a 4 bolt mount to the optic itself… nothing I’m able to find online. I wouldn’t put it past ANY company to use knock-off parts for advertisements, however.
Mystery solved – TA26 which was discontinued for 2015. I guess they’re dropping all the “Special Ring Mount” models.
My Scorpion form 1 should be back soon. I am of course going to remove parts to make sure it stays 922r compliant. 😉
I’m still hopeful that one of the aftermarket trigger experts, like Timney or Geissele will help us bring up the domestic parts count with a drop-in aftermarket trigger.
Yeah, considering the trigger group is 4 parts and the magazine is 3 parts, that would bring the total down to 9 and you’d be able to add the factory, Czech-made stock onto it. Muzzle device is kinda a freebie. Then I’m sure aftermarket pistol grips will be available fairly soon as well. …so flash hider & grip = 2 more…
Does the U.S.-made trigger group fire without the trigger being pulled back, as illustrated by the woman in the third photo? 😉
I bet there are quite a few things that will just go off with her merely touching it.
Doesn’t converting it to an NFA item automatically mean the entire gun is “US made?” This seems like a scam to get money from idiots who don’t understand gun laws.
No, it does not. Assembling it in the U.S. has nothing to do with how many imported parts are on it. If you build an AK from a bare receiver (or a sheet metal flat, for that matter), you’re still subject to 922(r) and can only have 10 imported parts from the list of 20 on the final product.
And there are other opinion letters from the ATF (do some Google Searching) that is a contradiction to this ruling. Are we surprised?
It isn’t really a contradiction. It’s per firearm. 922(r) only applies if the firearm is banned for importation because it doesn’t meet the “sporting purposes” exemption. So an imported firearm that met that requirement is fine to have whatever number of imported parts on it because it’s exempt from 922(r). A firearm that is “nonsporting” must comply. Whether it’s an NFA item or not has nothing to do with it at all. It’s a semi-auto rifle or it’s a shotgun whether NFA or not. The ATF will rule on each individual firearm model separately because it rightly is a case-by-case basis. Saying one gun isn’t 922(r) applicable and another is applicable is not a conflict and it isn’t contradicting past rulings, etc etc
Serious question about the terminal ballistics of pistol caliber carbines:
Which caliber would provide the best odds of immediately stopping a motivated attacker with one shot at ranges under 25 yards? I know, we are talking about “pistol” calibers which are “anemic”. We are also talking about barrels that could be 16.1+ inches which could greatly increase muzzle velocity and hence “stopping power”.
I am rapidly converging on the idea of .40 S&W shooting 135 grain hollowpoint bullets at something like 1600 fps or 10mm shooting 135 grain hollowpoint bullets at something like 1900 fps.
Thoughts?
Impossible to answer. But it should be stated that standard weight 9mm ammo and standard weight .45 ACP ammo actually don’t gain much velocity at all in a 16″ bbl vs your standard ~4.7″ pistol bbl. Pistol ammo is designed to burn all its powder and come up to full velocity within a full-sized pistol’s barrel. Some calibers do see significant gains, like 10mm and .40 S&W does as well or light-for-caliber projectiles tend to gain velocity in longer barrels in any caliber. Sure, you could also custom load with slower-burning powder to really get the most of it. http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/ has data for basically all calibers shot out of a huge range of barrel lengths.
People like to over think.
Go take a look at shootingthebull ammo reviews for 147gr HSt 9mm and see if that might tend to discourage someone from being motivated. In addition that 147gr will be subsonic.
Some times the best answer is easy.
That’s what will be in my Scorp when it’s running. 30 rounds of 147 grain standard pressure HST. BTW it’s right freakin’ on the cusp of subsonic and supersonic through the Scorp so, depending on the temperature, it will break the sound barrier sometimes.
I have a bunch of 9mm ammo here, including like 7 popular hollow point brands, so I’m likely going to do some chronograph testing to show what the velocities are through the Scorpion’s 7.72″ bbl.
doesky2 and Jeremy,
I considered high-quality 9mm 147 grain hollowpoints and with a muzzle velocity of just over 1000 fps out of a 16 inch barrel, I am not all that confident that one shot is going to immediately incapacitate a motivated (e.g. suicide) attacker.
It seems to me like a high-quality .40 caliber 135 grain hollowpoint bullet at 1600 or 1900 fps (from .40 S&W and 10mm respectively) would have to be much more likely to stop someone right away. That 135 grain bullet at 1600 fps has 767 foot-pounds of energy and at 1900 fps has 1082 foot-pounds of energy … versus 359 foot-pounds of energy from the 9mm 147 grain bullet.
In other words I picture the 9mm bullet creating a hole and the 10mm bullet creating an explosion in the attacker’s torso. It also seems like the 10mm is much more likely to cause hydrostatic shock for instantaneous “lights out”.
I don’t really understand. Why limit yourself to pistol caliber then? Everything is a compromise. I choose 9mm because I want the capacity and I want subsonic for suppressed use. What’s the point in going with the most powerful pistol-caliber carbine you possibly can if the limitation of pistol caliber is an ‘artificial’ choice you’re making in the first place? Shoot a .308 carbine.
At any rate, you could do a pistol caliber carbine in .460 Rowland or in other calibers more powerful than 10mm anyway. So why choose 10mm? Every choice is a compromise over another caliber that’s bigger and stronger. It plays out all the time… .380 sucks, carry 9mm; 9mm sucks, carry .45; .45 sucks, carry 10mm; 10mm sucks, carry .44 magnum; .44 mag sucks, carry 5.56; 5.56 sucks, carry .308… ad nauseam.
If you want these kinds of effects in an SBR, just get one in .300 BLK.
Not as good as an SBR in .308, .458 SOCOM, .50 Beowulf, etc etc etc…
Jeremy,
I was initially thinking along three lines:
(1) Keep ammunition cost down.
(2) Keep the report (blast) relatively low without a suppressor.
(3) Keep recoil low.
While 5.56 x 45mm NATO and 7.62 x 39mm ammunition satisfy the low cost objective and to a decent extent the low recoil objective, they will be much louder than .40 S&W in a 16 inch barrel without a suppressor. I have shot .40 S&W out of a 16 inch barrel without any suppressor and it is amazingly “quiet” compared to the blast out of a 4 inch barrel. (It is still loud of course and you would want to wear hearing protection when practicing.) I have also heard someone shoot .45 ACP out of a Baretta CX4 Storm without any suppressor and it seemed even quieter than the .40 S&W.
I am trying to stay away from suppressors because they are expensive, require ATF blessing to purchase and transport, decrease the maneuverability of a firearm, and represent a unnecessary component that can fail and degrade firearm function.
.45 ACP is pretty low pressure compared to the majority of other modern pistol rounds (9mm, .40, 10mm, .357 sig, etc), and the heavy, slow bullets give the powder plenty of time to completely burn. In a 16″ bbl without suppressor, it’s quite likely to be the quietest by a decent margin.
No permission is needed to transport a suppressor. If it’s legal where you’re headed, it’s legal to move it around. Most NFA items that actually shoot projectiles do need permission (form 5320.20) to bring across state lines, though.
Hmm choices….
I just got my brace tube last week because I liked the idea of less regulations related to traveling with a pistol versus an SBR.
Tell you what…you certainly can’t criticize CZ in how they are trying to respond to their customers.
Retail cost of the compliance kit will be very reasonable, …
That’s a pretty ballsy statement.
Good, I have a Scorpion on order and was planning to convert it to a SBR.
With a pinned flash-hider bringing the barrel length to 16″ this would be perfect. Of course it would have to be made here. Does CZ plan on building an American manufacturing plant?
No idea. I think the BREN and Scorpion would be popular enough to justify it, though. CZ-USA does own Dan Wesson, which has manufacturing capabilities. They’d have to expand it, but I’d think that would be the “easy” route (move DW to a larger location and expand its machinery, staff, and capabilities so it can produce parts/firearms for CZ-USA).
Hey Jeremy. Can you explain to me why your EVO doesn’t have a trigger group at the moment? I’m confused. Multiple people have claimed to have their Form 1 approved for a EVO 3.
Apparently the ATF is more than willing to take your $200 and say, “Ok you can now make it a rifle” but then turn around and say, “Oh by the way making it a rifle is illegal”.
If thats not robbery I dunno what is.
That could even be the base of a legal defense in the oddball chance someone received a 922r stand alone charge (which has never ever happened apparently). Almost all 922r charges you see via Google are add-on charges to more serious stuff, like having an unregistered SBR for example
That’s right. My Form 1 was approved. For all the ATF knows, I AM able to configure it as an SBR legally. Maybe I have a CNC machine and I manufactured my own trigger parts, magazine parts, pistol grip, etc. The approved Form 1 doesn’t mean turning it into an SBR meets 922(r) compliance without doing other things to the gun first. …and in this case, it wouldn’t be compliant without removing 6 of the 922(r)-regulated, imported parts…
You are the exception to the rule I imagine, having access to a CNC machine.
All that aside lets ask the questions everyone is thinking;
– how can the ATF possibly know the origin of unmarked/stamped parts?
– has anyone ever been charged with a 922r violation that was NOT a tack on charge?
I don’t have access to a CNC machine. But I *did* configure my Scorpion into a legal SBR anyway by removing the trigger pack and the magazines. So, again, the Form 1 approval is valid. The gun may not function, but it is a firearm and it is an SBR and it is 922(r) compliant. No reason to deny a Form 1, as I’ve just proven it can be assembled into an SBR and stay compliant.
In answer to your other questions:
— the entire gun is made in the Czech Republic. If you have the factory magazines and factory trigger components, they were clearly made there. Maybe you could create enough reasonable doubt during a trial by claiming something like “sure, the magazine and trigger parts look entirely identical to the factory ones and aren’t distinguishable from them in any way, but the ATF can’t prove they really are the factory ones” but even if you win you’re still bankrupt from going to trial against the federal government. Winning or losing is a big deal, yeah, but avoiding the prosecution in the first place is hugely important also. I have kids, etc etc, and don’t feel like being the test case in a trial for a federal felony.
— not that I know of. Not individuals. FFLs/dealers/importers, yes. Regular people? No. But I still wouldn’t suggest posting photographs or videos of non-compliant firearms on public forums. Again, it wouldn’t be pleasant to be the test case even if you beat the charges.
Fair enough. Was just curious…. /cough
I know what part of next years tax refund is going towards.
I don’t have an application for an SBR, but I noticed something: The factory barrel is 7.72 inches. If they were to make one with 8.28 more inches of barrel sticking out front they could put the stock on and call it a carbine. If they did I’d buy one in a heartbeat, but I guess it ain’t gonna happen.
It can happen after the compliance kit is ready. Right now, a carbine version is not importable due to 922(r).
922(r) has done nothing to protect Americans. However, job creation in the firearms parts/accessories manufacturing industry is one hell of an unintended consequence for the antis, to be sure! Ha! Take that, you bastards!
The people pushing for these import regulations actually used that to help get it passed 😉 . …Keep money in the U.S. by restricting foreign imports, which would be replaced by firearms and parts made domestically, etc etc
Allowing a Scorpion into the country as a pistol but making it illegal to assemble it into a rifle even though I’m bolting on a U.S.-made stock is a stupid consequence of it though haha. The dang thing is already here! I’m not adding, importing, or buying any further foreign parts. I am, however, adding U.S. parts. Restricting that is asinine.
But…. the ATF and the GCA of 1968 does not consider a TRUST a person. 922r says no “person” shall “assemble” a rifle with more than 10 imported parts. My TRUST is the manufacturer of the SBR and it did the assembling, therefore it is compliant with 922r during the assembly act. 922r makes the assembly act illegal not possession after the assembly has already happened. Plus I really want them to explain to a judge why one part is legal and the other part is not based on its origin. The case would be throw out in 2 seconds and that is why it will never be used in a criminal case.
We need a kit to make this into a rifle in CA.
YES! I will start looking for a CZ now that I know they will release the stock for an SBR build.
Well ware is the factory folding stock for crist sakes most of these posts are from 2015 it is now late Oct 2016 and parts supplier to include Brownells still tell me they are coming. I am 68 years old so between the ATFE bullshit and they will be there soon I would like to get the dam thing in this lifetime.please
i just ordered and received the stock and 922r kit from prepper gun shop onlinethink it was $249 . will keep it at my sons house until form 1comes back
Ok, now we are going into June of 2017, where are the stock parts, costs and how do I get one that keeps me from filing a Form 1?