Where can I see the ATF letter?  I cannot seem to find one on this chat site.  I do not think that you would want to reduce the diameter of the rollers.  The width of the rollers or their mounting studs can not be reduced by much.  I do not know how the rollers at attached to the bolt.  I think they are held in like a rivet.  If you grind them much they would fall off.   I inquired about this from TNW but they clamed up and did not reply.  There is a good chance that they are not reducing the width of the roller assemebly.

Here's some pictures.

The first pic is a close up of the receiver area I'm suggesting needs to be welded up to convert the receiver to semi only.

The seccond one shows two torch cut receivers and a stub.  The lower receiver was from IMA, middle from FAC and the top stub is a part that came with my kit.

 

 

Edited by gregnel

I got my copy from EZFEED (thanks buddy).  I know there used to be a copy here, but no longer.  I'm out of town for a couple day but when I get back I'll see if it can be reposted.

I haven't been able to leave work and go home yet but as soon as I do I will send you the complete letter!

To answer the question about reducing the size of the braoaching and therefore having tho do the rollers and wings: you don't have to.

When I did mine I started to do this but after comparing the conversion to BRP's 42 I did'nt. Only thing that sucked though is that I had tacked the spacers in it already. The spacers I used required me to shave down the ends, not the sides of the wings and rollers. To reduce the sides would mess with the cams and barrel lockup. Same would happen if yopu trimmed the length down too much.

After comparison with the BRP 42 I realized how little they required to convert the action to semi. Conversion of the 34 can be done thae same and successfully. My "new" receiver only has the channel where the sear once was welded up solid. I also welded a plate to the rear lug for the trigger housing. I shaved the lug on the trigger housing intself to fit the new configuration. Otherwise the receiver is the same as the original plus I have the added benefit of having original markings.

The bolt is modified similarily to the TNW bolt by removing the built in trigger an welding it up to where it no longer can accept the little trigger lever. There is a simillar setup now at the rear of the bolt that, like the original, uses a little lever to catch the internal carrier but this one trips it by pushing it open.

My trigger pack is redesinged to where I have carried the sear from the back to the front and sliced into the front lug on the trigger housing, next to the dustcover catch, and added a lever that operates in a similar fashion as the old sear but in reverse by pushing upward to hit the new little trigger.

I built this for myself and while it's not exact to the TNW letter, it would fly if reviewed. I don't usually let others copy my guns but I'm thinking about posting some pics of it as soon as I get off work. Maybe some photographs will help you guys come up with your own conversions and give you some ideas for coming up with semi conversions. 

 

EZ FEED you have been a wealth of knowlege.  Any further info you could provide would be great..  How hard is your trigger pull? Pvt Ryan has a TNW and says it pulls hard.  I am worried that it is a design flaw.  Pushing up on the trip lever in the bolt would take a lot of pressure.  This could only be overcome by leverage i.e. the length of the sear. 

This is page one of the approval letter.  Sorry about the quality but you can make it out.

 

Then page two.

 

Any updates on this?

build pics would be great

Anyone?  Where is FAC?  I'd like to maybe pic up some cheap parts to try and get some better overlap on my 2 IMA receivers....

FAC went under around a year ago. Century bought up a big load of their stuff. They just opened up their web site. www.FACsupply.com Not very organized yet but they ship quick. Already bought a few items from them. Wish I would have bought more about a year and a half ago.

That is right.  Thanks smoggle.  I didn't bookmark their page because it was previously pretty worthless and didn't think twice. 
Don't see any receiver pieces, though.  Will place a phone call Monday to see if any exist...

They have cheap ak kits.  Advertised as incomplete but mine was very nice, and complete.

smoggle wrote: FAC went under around a year ago. Century bought up a big load of their stuff. They just opened up their web site. www.FACsupply.com Not very organized yet but they ship quick. Already bought a few items from them. Wish I would have bought more about a year and a half ago.

 

 

Edited by panaceabeachbum

I did get a MG-34 bipod from FAC supply and it appears to be from a ZB-26 or 30.  Has anyone heard of MG34 tripods looking like this.  They have the adjustable wingnuts on the legs with extendable legs just like the zbs.  Thanks.

Schaubel

schaubel777 wrote: I did get a MG-34 bipod from FAC supply and it appears to be from a ZB-26 or 30.  Has anyone heard of MG34 tripods looking like this.  They have the adjustable wingnuts on the legs with extendable legs just like the zbs.  Thanks. Schaubel

better send that sucker to me for identification. LOL

FAC has them for 20 or 30$ if they havn't sold out.  Great deal for those tanker kits that didn't come with the ground kit (mine).

schaubel777 wrote: They have cheap ak kits.  Advertised as incomplete but mine was very nice, and complete.

  Looks like everthing went up a t FAC---- "Century" had the romy kits for $69 missing parts and the few I got were missing upper hand gaurd wood only. I was told they were missing the trigger packs but mine had those.

 does anybody have the mg34 built and running?

HUMMM, now there is a good question.

 

benthell wrote:  does anybody have the mg34 built and running?