Home AR-15 SigTac SB15 Arm Stabilizer, AR15 pistol review and analysis

SigTac SB15 Arm Stabilizer, AR15 pistol review and analysis

912
28

Mark installs and analyzes the SigTac SB15 arm stabilizing brace on an AR15 and analyzes the practicality of this accessory and the weapon system as a whole.

Show everyone that you love Fire Mountain Outdoors by purchasing one of our FMO T-Shirts. Prices start at $15 and there lots of styles available.

-~-~~-~~~-~~-~-
Please watch: “AK Platform SAFETY ALERT!! WATCH!”

-~-~~-~~~-~~-~-

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, social media, internet forums. etc.

28 COMMENTS

  1. yeah they "ATF"have since started that the shouldering of the brace does change the classification of the ar pistol to be considered a rifle smh ohh well see no evil hear no evil SPEAK no evil not to them…. keep it up brother great video all the same

  2. It would be nice if one day someone recognized that a shorter barrel rifle isn't any more dangerous than a 16" barrel. There really shouldn't be any restriction on a barrel length. If and when I become president I will change that law.

  3. LOL! WATCH OUT MARK SASQUATCH IS SNORTIN THAT ANGELDUST ON YOUR AR PISTOL NFA FIASCO WAITING TO HAPPEN! lol for a second that's what I thought! xD Kirby was scared sir! <('.'<)

  4. i was at the range and asked the range master that kept looking over my shoulder checking my really short micro draco out ,and asked him if i could do it one handed and he said no , i was thinking to myself that's what this brace was designed for! lmao

  5. This is how you capitalize on a market which is more regulated than the consumers want it to be.

    It is simply a product that allows people who wish they had an normal ar15 to get closer to that "dream".

    Apart from all that shooting an AR-type "pistol" with that kind of equipment is just retarded.

  6. Green tip was never meant to defeat body armor specifically, and in that case most .223/5.56 will defeat body armor, even some high velocity soft points. That is the same logic you offered up on a plate to the current administration in your video. Is it dangerous? No, not really. Is it gonna effect anyone but gun owners? No, not really. BUT will it screw with gun owners? Oh hell yea it will.

  7. And no I don't feel I need permission, no I don't need over sight, BUT there is legal permission and oversight. Every time a gun owner screws up or runs afoul of the law it further weakens our standing in an every more liberal country. Again I don't fault you for spreading knowledge, I fault you for the " now for how originally intended to misuse it" then proceed to shoulder said brace and fire.

  8. While I can argue with the BATFE til til I'm blue in the face, they had approved this brace. But after videos like yours, the approval has has been diminished if not taken back. No, my ire does essentially lay with the gov't, but you were a proverbial tattletale in the process. We're two kids and you just told mom about our fun adventure; mom doesn't approve.

  9. I hope in the future your choice of words and actions befit your prowess as an outlet of things pertaining to my 2nd Am rights. "Intended misuse" is exactly what they use against us, I just want you to know that that video ( while informative and fun to watch) should be removed. It's videos like that causing the BATFE to pursue the SIG brace.

  10. I don't see how I'm misdirected. In a video post with an already controversial AR15 pistol, you decide it wise to not only shoulder the stabilizing brace but announce that you had, in fact, an intended misuse for it. You think BATFE doesn't have wifi? You think they don't watch YouTube? Are you single handedly the issue? No. But as a purveyor and sports enthusiast you should know better, had you just shouldered it without the absurd comment, fine. But to announce with no decorum that you were intentionally using it against it's design, WTF?

Leave a Reply