one for you gunsmiths and inventors out there

Status
Not open for further replies.

icebones

Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2008
Messages
585
Location
You ain't from around here, KY
all right, first off, i am a gunsmith, and a machinist.

i can run a mill, lathe, CNC, weld all that good stuff.

i posted this idea on another thread, an no body seemed to notice.

how hard would it be to make a military rifle that is completely superior to everything else out there.

---think about this---

---bullpup layout, because i am right handed ambi-layout really dosent matter to me. a bullpup is much shorter than conventional rifles, this is extremely important in urban combat where a short, light and fast wepon can save you life and the lives of your fellow soliders.

---a standard barrel length of at least 20'' or 24'' to obtain high velocity and accuracy, this also results in greater stopping power. (free floating of corse)

---chambered in 5.56x45mm, even better if the barrel could be made with carbon fiber=less weight, stronger than steel and resistant to overheating

---an overall length of less than 30'' with the 24'' bbl attached, this does sound drastic, but it is possible with the right bolt design

---a gas-operated action with an gas-op rod and tappet system for greater reliability and less fouling.

---accepts standard STNAG m16 mags and drums

---weights no more than 6 lbs empty, w/o magazine, this is where the use of carbon fiber, alloys and synthetics would come into play.

---a picatinny rail for mounting optics, also a quad rail system for mounting foregrips, laser, lights ect.

---an ideal service life of at least 20,000 rounds with ss109 military spec ammunition

---a design which allows the weapon to be field stripped and parts changed out with no tools, except a cartridge for punching out pins, also a modular design so barrels and other parts could be swapped for flexibility, so a carbine, rifle, squad machinegun, designated marksmans rifle could be made.

---ergonomic controlls that are easy to manupulate under extreme stress and adverse conditions, but at the same time, sleek, unobtrusive and snag proof

---speaking of bolt design, i am thinking of either a telescopic bolt (UZI stlye) or a hinged bolt like that found on the new KRISS super V smg, this bolt desing would also reduce recoil. if you have not heard of the new KRISS i strongly suggest checking it out, an intersiting weapon indeed, a .45caliber smg with a 900 rmp fire rate, and almost ZERO RECOIL.

---above all this new rifle will be 100% reliable in any condition, easy to use under stress, rugged, light weight, low maintenece, provide the troops with greater stopping power, simple in design and maintenence, and compact in size. also fast and easy to produce to reduce production costs and unit price. this rifle should cost less than $350-$450 to produce in materials and labor

---a dust cover can be incorperated into the bolt, keeping this weapon reliable in dusty, sandy, dirty enviorments, which seems to be everywhere the military goes...


---all steel parts made from either stainless steel or hard chrome plated.

---all controlls, fire selector, trigger, bolt release, mag release, forward assist, can be operated with one hand.

---a small compartment in the grip for cleaning kit, spare parts ect.

---if this weapon really needs to be ambi- it should be easily converted, by changing the extractor, ejector, removing the ejection port cover on the appropriate side, simmilar to how a FAMAS is converted to left or right handed use.

---it also seems like the main flaw on bullpup weapons, is their poor trigger pull. the use a long connector rod, resulting in a heavy trigger that feels "squishy" i was thinking about using a trigger system simmilar to the one used in the new desert tactical arms SRS rifle.

apart from this... any ideas, suggestions...?
 
much luck to you.

a little advice:

contact the atf, fbi, and nics (national instant criminal background check orginization) and inform them of your intentions

i had a bud that was making .50 cal rifles just for himself and friends and they shut him down, took his stuff, and fined him an incredible amount (5 figures)
 
im not making anything yet...just drawing plans.

but after i am out of the air force i plan on getting my FFL. and opening up a gunshop. im also palnning on offering custom work on firearms, like rebarreling, and building custom rifles to from scratch and parts. something that nobody around here does...


the steyr AUG is a good weapon, but it has some small flaws, a little heavier than the AR-15 series, and too much plastic used in stressed parts, (the origional aug has PLASTIC hammers!) but these flaws were mostley corrected by the microtech made variant. i recomend checking it out...

im hoping that with the right ammount of work, and a insane ammount of luck, this weapon will make a change in the firearms market, just like GLOCK did.
 
AUG
overall: 31"
barrel: 20"
weight: 7.9 pounds

Type 95/QBZ-95
Overall: 30"
barrel: 20.5"
weight: 7.8 pounds

SAR-21
overall: 31", 27", 25"
weight: 8.4 pounds, 7.7 pounds, 6.6 pounds

there's a starting point. If you can shorten the bolt system or gas block without unbalancing and killing the gun's reliability and tolerances, then you can see bullpups in the 30" range with a 24" barrel at best. Considering how the barrel length is that of an M16 on modern pups, it may be best to keep a 20" barrel and try to just further shorten the rifle to carbine lengths while still retaining a rifle-length barrel.

also, I used to be pursuing an architectural science degree, so I have a bit of backing in architectural design and engineering. With that comes proficiency in autoCAD. i'll see if I can whip up some neat-o ideas in bullpup form (already have a few traditional sketches made up:))
 
i have never used autoCAD, but i have used solidworks and mastercam programs to run CNC machines and draw up 3D blue prints.

from what i understand solidworks is extremely simmilar to autoCAD programs.

and for comparison the new HK416 has a service life exceeding 26,000 rounds.

im thinking of a design simmilar to butler creek carbon fiber barrels for 10/22 rifles.

also carbon fiber is actually much stronger and more rigid than steel. the G-36 series recievers and the carbon-15 rifles from bushmaster are all made from carbon-fiber composite.
 
Icebones, I came up with a very similar list of requirements for the zombie gun I'm designing, although without the STANAG magazine (we want reliability under all conditions, right?), and AL-7 type recoil balancing instead of the Kriss bolt. I'm designing mine right now in Cinema 4D (not the best for CAD, but it's what I have).

tjdUSCG, I agree, the Morita is awesome. Especially as in the movie the Mini-14 mags seem to hold 100 rounds or so, and he's able to get out 10 or so rounds out of that Ithaca 37...

Speaking of which, what if you had an underslung shotgun (maybe automatic like the AA-12, a bullpup design would allow for the long bolt overtravel in a shotgun under the barrel but in front of the trigger) primarily loaded with Frag-12s to defeat enemies using cover? Kinda like the OICW but with the HE component secondary to the KE.

Bah, it would probably weigh a ton. Still, the zombies would never know what hit them.
 
I usually hate it when people do this but I after reading your post I couldn't help myself.

doesn't
weapon
soldiers
of course
controls
marksman's
manipulate
style
design
interesting
maintenance
incorporated
environments
similar


Ok, now that I have that out of my system lets get OT.

Your question was how hard would it be to build your end-all-be-all rifle.

The part that seems most unrealistic to me is the sub 6 lb part. Thats a light rifle.
 
from what i understand solidworks is extremely simmilar to autoCAD programs.

Solidworks is essentially a lightweight version of Dassault Systemmes CATIA V5, one of the big three CAD packages used almost exclusively in industry. Its made for small businesses that can't drop tens of thousands of dollars on a license for one of the full-featured packages. That being said, its still capable design software.

If you're going to be working up models of this thing, don't stay away from AutoCAD. There hasn't been a version of the software that matched the capability of its competitors since it was command-line based - more than ten years ago. The third dimension, which you really need for effective modeling and virtual testing, is an afterthought, and is even poorly done on the company's weak attempt at solid modeling, Inventor. AutoCAD no longer has a place in mechanical design, all its useful for anymore is architectural stuff.

If you have Solidworks, and you know Solidworks, stay with it. It will serve you much better for a project like this.
 
I know of a couple of well-known gun parts manufacturers who do everything in SolidWorks. I've only played with it, but it matches the way I think. Any machinist should find it much easier to deal with.

As far as barrels, ABS makes carbon wrapped AR barrels that are very light and durable. Just be prepared to pay a lot for one.

http://home.alltel.net/mdegerness/prod01.htm

Most of what you've described has been tried. Givent he reliance on polymer parts or stamping, it's going to be hard for the average Joe to compete against well funded companies.

I designed and built a prototype bullpup, bottom eject. Looking at the cost of full development, tooling, etc (not to mention regulation) convinced me that is not a road to venture down lightly.

If you can make add-ons or conversions of existing weapons, where you aren't dealing with the registered part (receiver) is a much better way to get started. Magpul started with a very simple product.

Good luck.
 
anything you can do in solidworks, you can do in autoCAD. Actually, no...there is one thing AutoCAD can do that solidworks can't: bankrupt you :p I also think autoCAD comes with more subsidary and specific project packages and networking, and 3D modeling is actually pretty good (but rendering color and shading isn't). However, alot of it is highly unnecessary, considering how much you pay for it. 3D design wasnt even important to either, since 3D modeling was becoming its own department from concept design two years ago when I changed majors. That probably could have changed by now.

I still kind of wish I took the time to at least try SW out all the way for a whole semester, though. I kind of liked it. It probably will out-do AutoCAD soon completely considering the price gap.
 
how hard would it be to make a military rifle that is completely superior to everything else out there.
Must be pretty hard.
Colt, FNH, SIG, Steyr, many other huge companies worldwide, all the major military powers in the world, and even little Kel-Tec have been trying to do it since WWII.
http://www.kel-tec-cnc.com/images/downloads/RFB_Flyer_SHOT_2007_web.pdf

So far, no one can agree on what is "completely superior", and most Armies wouldn't change to it anyway even if it was.

For a one-man-show to attempt it is probably neither possible, or economically feasible.

rcmodel
 
you could design it, but it would need to be appealing enough and close to application of engineering to score a patent and a sell to an arms department. Problem is, with so many government-backed programs out there, you'd just waste your $50 patenting fee

anyways, I had a little fun for about a half-hour and came up with a rough-sketch of something with as close to a 24" barrel as I could reasonably make it:

whatifcz8.png


name: the 'what-if?'
spec: 32" long; 24.5" from tip of barrel to approximate beginning of chamber
action: rotating bolt, gas block operation, etc. etc.
caliber: whatever you want
sights: iron peep; front double post folds down to allow better view from additional optics

there ya go. Gotta love simplicity (yea, it looks like a Bloc block, lol). As you can see, nothing on it is anything new. When I look at how small the back area is, I doubt a gun like this would work (not enough work for a good enough bolt and gas system). Hope no one sues me >.>
 
it wouldnt really be hard to make this rifle weight under 6 lbs.

the g-36k weighs about 7lbs, and thats with a conventional all-steel barrel

the su-16 rifles kel-tec builds weight about 5 lbs or less. also with conventional steel barrels.
 
I have been running several carbon wrapped barrels for a while. It's not like a racecar. Several have been banged around without any ill effects. The shed heat fast, and are much lighter than a comparable steel barrel with great stiffness. Cost seems to be the major downside. I also don't know how they'd take full auto.

Expect a composite centerfire barrel to be in the $700-$1000 range. That's a huge premium to pay for some weight reduction. For some, the money is worth it.
 
its also true that carbon-fiber doenst hold up to impact, but once again the g-36 series have stamped steel inserts on stressed areas. also the SCAR rifel developed by FN has a polymer lower, im not dead-set on carbon fiber, maybe something like polymer the glocks and xd handguns are made from.

ok maybe 6 lbs was streaching it, but im a soldier, and the less weight i have to lug around, the better.

a stock m4 weights about 5lbs. with no optics and accessories. so the weigth can be a little flexible, i just wouldnt go over 7 lbs max.

remember the xm-29 OICW program?

it was scrapped not only because people though it was a good idea to put computers into firearms, and it just was too heavy.

thats great, lugging around a 15lb hunk of steel that is completely useless, because it just rained...
 
cost is irrevelant, too many companies today comprimise quality because of cost. if its the best there is, people will buy it, no matter how much it costs, why do you think lamborghini and rolls-royce and all the other high dollar compainies are still thriving. but this isnt a luxury car, its a fighting rifle for soldiers. and the government just "hates" spending "our" tax dollars.

anyone know how much the government pays for a brand new m4 or m16a2?
 
I agree with rcmodel: If you go ahead, make a good rifle, dont try to go for an episode of Future Weapons or something. do the achievable, then improve. Become an innovator at the testing grounds not at the design board. It also costs alot to start a shop like that. Most folks when thinking of their own business, dont really take into account the one or even two years of no business that can occur. You cant really go waltzing into a bank for a loan to make firearms. They want (usually) an immedient return on their investment.

Hell, rip off the current chinese rifle. It looks like a decent idea. Use maybe a gas piston design (but dont engineer it to batter the frame and cause inaccuracy). Decent barrel, I do like the bullpup idea, but people always have something bad to say about the blessed bullpup. Caliber? 556 is great, 762x39 would be fun too if you could engineer it (STANAG is fun, but to market, you gotta think what rounds/weapons are currently available by most folks. A variant that takes AK mags too? Neato stuff :) ). .308 is nice, but would add to weapon weight and change weapon usage (if .308, then maybe a designted marksman rifle? I would love a short .308 but with a good long barrel for accuracy!). Trigger pull? Design the trigger sassemly as close to the action as possible. Also keep it sealed somehow to prevent dirt from jamming up any connector bars. The biggest thing (and I mean BIGGEST thing) Ive noticed is make it accessible to private shooters. No limited editions, no military/LEO only contracts (small companies can never seem to operate well within these situations). Allow average shooters to use it and use them to test it too. Dont just release it, thinking, well I like it, lets see how it does on the market.

BTW RP88, I do like the looks of that rifle! It reminds me of a cross between a Sig 550, a Daewoo K200 and the SA80.
 
Have you considered a Dardick design? The Dardick is form of revolver with a "chamber" formed by a "cylinder" with a V-shaped cut in it, forming two sides, and the third side is the topstrap. The cylinder can be rotated automatically to kick out the empty (since when it makes a turn there is no third side.) Most designs have 3 chambers and feed from dual side-by side magazines. It makes a very short weapon.

The ammunition is made by inserting conventional cartridges in holes drilled in aluminum or nylon prisms.

Since it was invented in the '50s, the patent has long expired.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top