I am an unfortunate owner of 2 Fab-10's. I realized guns were fun right around the 3rd week of December 2001 (just before the ban) and all my local shops were out of stock of any kind of AR, even lowers. It was a case of bad timing. I got into the hobby too late and when I realized I really wanted a few AR's it was too late for me.
That being said, the Fab-10's do work and work reliably. They aren't that much of a pain to load (well, as long as you haven't been spoiled by how a REAL AR loads, LOL.) They have been very reliable. Very tight upper to lower fit, no problems with the magazines, no buffer issues, no stock/grip fit issues, etc. My only gripe with mine is they are early ones produced by CMS Engine Service and the baked-on finish just vanishes if a bore solvent hits them. Just don't use solvent on them!
Prices have gone up substantially since they were first released. I bought mine very early on (serial numbers are just barely in the 3 digit range) and I paid $160/each which I felt was reasonable. I believe they are now going for about $325/each. That's pretty steep IMO.
In my situation, having 2 fixed mag AR's is better than having no AR's at all. And when I finally move out of CA all I need to do is buy some lowers and transfer all my parts. My 16" carbine has a pre-ban upper, which will be perfect given what will happen in a few days.
That's another thing with the fixed-mag lowers, you can put whatever you want on the thing-- bayonet lug, flash hider, etc. Since it doesn't have a detachable mag, it doesn't fall under the SB-23 "Characteristics" and you can put whatever the heck you want on it as far as "evil features" go.
There is another option which is definately on the verge of being a bad thing. If you read the law carefully, it defines a detachable magazine as a ammunition feeding device which can be released by hand. If you need a tool to release it (and a bullet counts) then it is NOT considered a detachable mag as instead considered a fixed magazine. Therefore if you bought an 80% AR lower and finished it with a mag release button that could NOT be actuated by hand but instead required a tool (say a recessed button that needs a bullet to depress it), it *may* be legal. I have a friend with an inquiry into the CA DOJ about this. The thing here is that even a "fixed" magazine centerfire semi-auto is considered an SB-23 assault weapon if it has a >10 round magazine, so if you slapped a 20 rounder into your "tool released" lower receiver you have just created an "unregistered assault weapon." This is the grey area; your tool released lower has "the ability to accept a magazine with a capacity of greater than 10 rounds" which may make the whole idea a no-go. I'm awaiting the reponse letter. It's been several months now, still no reply. Should this prove legal it would be the way to go IMO for CA legal lowers and I feel there's a good chance to make money with it. However my hunch is that it isn't legal-- if it was legal to use a tool-removeable magazine, why didn't DSA make their CA legal FAL's have a tool-detachable magazine rather than locking it in place, and why were the FAB-10's made with a filled in magazine floor on the receiver rather than use a tool-dropped magazine? Maybe they were just playing it safe, I don't know.
Personally I don't like playing any games or pushing my luck when it comes to firearm legality, the potential consequences just aren't worth the risk! The only way I would even consider building a 80% lower that required a tool for mag release is if I had a letter in my hand from the CA DOJ saying it was legal, and I would keep that paperwork in the buttstock compartment at all times!
Actually, I keep the CA DOJ legality letter that came with my Fab-10 in the buttstock at all times... just in case I'm ever approached.
Troy
