Lawrence precision moderators- caveat et emptor

[big ears]

So I decided to splash out and buy a titanium mod for my 308. With all the noise on this site and youtube I was convinced it was for me, and good for my dogs and my own ears!
Simon at Lawrence precision was very helpful and I have to say the service very good with a turn around time of less than a week. the moderator looks fabulous and weighs very little.
So far so good. Living in Cornwall I had to post the rifle up to Simon for the Mod to be fitted, this cost with insurance £79. When it arrived the RFD quite rightly would not let me have it as it was not proofed. So the mod now has to be sent to the proofing office at an additional cost.

When you pay £795 for a moderator you expect the best, and also a legally registerable device. The firearms proofing laws of 2006 clearly state that any barrel or attachment to a barrel through which the projectile or products of combustion pass needs to be proofed. so all Mods need proofing before they should be sold.

If you are thinking of purchasing one of these mods, which do look fabulous (and I hope they perform as well) then do be aware that the price tag is more than is quoted. So is the time frame. Once the proofing office returns my new mod I will let you know how it performs.

Caveat et emptor - let the buyer beware!!!

 

[Hunting Solutions]

Wow! Nearly £800 for a moderator, it better be the best thing since sliced bread mate!!

 

[Wsm]

The firearms proofing laws of 2006 clearly state that any barrel or attachment to a barrel through which the projectile or products of combustion pass needs to be proofed. so all Mods need proofing before they should be sold.

The proofing of mods is very much open to interpretation of the law (unsurprisingly championed by the proof houses) and has not been proven

Check out Jackson Rifles website here

​Reflex Suppressors UK website and look under the "Proof Testing" on the left of the page

 

[lister]

how do you prove a mod is it tested on a 26inch barrel or a 1inch barrel the design should be able cope with the gasses but the pressure will change with length
cheers lister

 

[Mr. Gain]

Caveat et emptor - let the buyer beware!

Et?

Anyway, I hope the moderator lives up to expectations.

 

[I. Farticus]

Glad I'm happy with my cheap Hardy Gen IV, or I'd be getting Mod Envy!!!

 

[EMcC]

My Omega watch tells the same time as my Rolex but costs about 30% of the cost of the Rolex -- but my Rolex does tell others a bit about me !!!!

 

[timbrayford]

So what would it cost to get a couple of rimfire mods proofed, would it be more than their original cost ?

 

[JAYB]

Your proofing difficulties aside, you should find the moderator to be an excellent piece of kit, I am very pleased with mine.

John

 

[2130martin]

Very pleased with my Aurora although its no where near as quiet as my PES ,still very happy as its far lighter and quiet enough....

 

[big ears]

Thanks for comments, to proof the mod I am told will be in the region of £20 plus postage. As to interpretation the RFD I deal with was one of the authors of the 2006 legislation and therefore I would take this as written and more likely the producers choosing not to go the expense and time of proofing their mods.
it still seems staggering that a £250 pound mod will be sold only when prooofed but one three times that price will be sold unproved and contrary to the 2006 ruling.

well spotted to the Latin expert. No ET!

BE

 

[j0e_bl0ggs]

link to the 2006 legislation please.

 

[Jagdmatch]

Thanks for comments, to proof the mod I am told will be in the region of £20 plus postage. As to interpretation the RFD I deal with was one of the authors of the 2006 legislation and therefore I would take this as written and more likely the producers choosing not to go the expense and time of proofing their mods.
it still seems staggering that a £250 pound mod will be sold only when prooofed but one three times that price will be sold unproved and contrary to the 2006 ruling.

well spotted to the Latin expert. No ET!

BE

Would this be Mike Squire who was one of the originators of the Amax debacle?

 

[Dalua]

it still seems staggering that a £250 pound mod will be sold only when prooofed but one three times that price will be sold unproved and contrary to the 2006 ruling

I'm not sure I understand this bit: but I also would like to know what the '2006 ruling' is - I have unproofed mods (the £250 type) for .308 and .270, both bought since 2006 via a reputable importer from reputable RFDs.

 

[timbrayford]

So the SAK and PH mods that I have on my rimfires should have been proofed? At £20 plus postage this would have nearly have doubled their cost. atb Tim

 

[gmart122]

link to the 2006 legislation please.

There were no gun barrel proof or firearms acts in 2006 as far as I am aware. The VCR act was 2006, but was concerned with knives, airguns and restriction of sale of primers and primed metalic catridges.

 

[gmart122]

So the SAK and PH mods that I have on my rimfires should have been proofed? At £20 plus postage this would have nearly have doubled their cost. atb Tim

I know we are all sceptical about the margins RFD make, but I am reliably told that the SAK mods are costing ~£25 and are being sold for low thirties, not a lot of mark-up. A .22LR rimfire costs between £10-15 to proof, I know the actual cost but not divulging. Costs about £6 more for priority proofing. But that in all cases covers gun only, mod only or gun with mod. £20 the RFD is charging is fair.

 

[Brithunter]

Proof has become a joke in the UK. From leading the world on gun safety to just turning in the coin and the more I read on the proof house and their antics the most sceptical I become of their motives.

Which reminds me I must chase up a proof certificate as the dumbos etched the proof marks so lightly on an in the white barrel there is nowt left after blacking plus the place the proof marks so far away from the breech that the rear sight band covers what is left of the marks.

They tell us who hand load not to use maximum loads all the time and never to exceed published data then the proof house wants to charge us to do exactly that every few years. Just one of their money making schemes that was propsoed a coupe of years back that all firearms would have to be proofed every few years.

Oh BTW my sound moderators bear no proof marks either nor do most of the rifles with threaded muzzles the exception being the recently proofed 280 AI and that only due to the fact the RFD who submitted it fr proof asked them to do so whilst they proved the barrel.

 

[Dalua]

£20 the RFD is charging is fair.

Exactly what margin folk consider 'fair' or otherwise must always be a bit contentious.

However, some might maintain that making any money at all on having something proofed can only be 'fair' if the purchaser is aware that there's no need either in law or in practice to have it proofed and can therefore excercise choice in that regard: or, if the vendor insists that he will not sell an unproofed item, that the cost of proof is included in the quoted cost of the item.

 

[danpd]

Not quite sure why you even made this post?

its got nothing to do with anything Simon Lawrence has done wrong. And everything to do with an over zealous RFD at your end.