one for you gunsmiths and inventors out there
- Thread starter icebones
- Start date
- Status
Vern Humphrey
Member
If I were designing this gun, I'd use optical sights, with irons only as a backup.
The Dardick is a revolver, as I said, so no reciprocating parts are really needed -- you merely need to index the cylinder and cock the striker from shot to shot -- which should make for a much shorter receiver.
The Dardick is a revolver, as I said, so no reciprocating parts are really needed -- you merely need to index the cylinder and cock the striker from shot to shot -- which should make for a much shorter receiver.
Wow. Well, I think the desire is commendable. Good luck. Do you have mechanical engineering background? Is this to be totally from scratch, or use modular components from existing designs? Will you have the resources to make many prototypes and do the exhaustive testing needed to have a reliable design?
It's an awesome challenge.
K
It's an awesome challenge.
K
boatbod
Member
What makes you think carbon fiber is resistant to heat? The actual carbon fibers might be, but not the epoxy that binds it together. Try putting a piece in front of a torch and see how long it survives before delaminating.
PercyShelley
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2007
- Messages
- 1,075
Applied to an aircraft cannon, the rotating chambers of the Dardick would potentially have some use.
Also, it utterly failed to make any constructive use of the 65% increase in effective magazine volume that trounds fill and circular rounds don't!
...
Anyway, as for the concept, it sounds good so far, but I have to pick on the gas system. I think something similar to the AK's gas system in operation, but not appearance, would be more conducive to your goal of light weight.
Granted, AKs proper have huge bolt carriers that resemble something that's a felony to sell in certain parts of the South, but imagine a bolt carrier that works like an AK's but looks a little like an AR's. Since it's a bullpup, and action length behind the magazine is not desirable as it leads to excessive length of pull, the bolt carrier is a short, minimalistic affair with the rude, radial lugs of the bolt sticking out the front like some sort of demonic dremel attachment, the camming surfaces carefully machined into the carrier body, a piston rigidly attached up top, and not a whole lot else.
The piston resembles the gas key on an AR-15 bolt, except that instead of being a female attachment, it's a solid piston.
Gas is tapped either from a port in the barrel, or from a gas trap at the end of the muzzle and sent breech wards down an AR-style tube of minimal weight and bulk. This tube expands into a strong, rigid piston housing that the piston rides in. The gas forces the piston back. The piston is welded to the bolt carrier. There's a recoil spring somewhere. This is the same system that's been running AK's for 61 years now, and it works just as well now as it did then.
Err... there are some holes in the AK gas system that I can't really explain, but I think my explanation is more or less correct, and that even if it's not, such a system as I describe would work.
The advantage of putting distance between the piston face and the site of the gas tapping, especially if you use a gas-trap is that it will slow down the cyclic rate of fire, and allow the propellant gas to cool adiabatically, which should keep fouling and parts wear down.
the drawback to the AK's massive lugged bolt system is that it is...well, massive.
putting something like that in a restrictive space allowed by a pup layout would be hard. Plus, the violent/sloppy recoil action caused by the massive bolt and such would need more space to work properly
putting something like that in a restrictive space allowed by a pup layout would be hard. Plus, the violent/sloppy recoil action caused by the massive bolt and such would need more space to work properly
Vern Humphrey
Member
Actually, Dardick's design didn't fail -- it's still in wide use today, primarily in the oil industry, where Dardick guns are lowered down oil wells and used to fracture the oil-bearing strata.
It is the Dardick's short length and lack of requirement for reciprocating parts that makes it especially suitable for such a role.
Funderb
Member
Carbon fiber is resistant to heat, yes,
the resin that holds it together is not.
It has this problem with lighting on fire
at the temperatures that a barrel would operate
on a endurance full auto setting.
A good thing would be a thin-ish steel sleeve wrapped
in carbon fiber, layered in opposite directions. You'd have to find a resin that endured though.
And for life's sake, if you incorporate a recoil reducing action, please please don't wast the intelligent design of the mechanism on the fairly weak-recoiled and poorly stopping 5.56 round.
the resin that holds it together is not.
It has this problem with lighting on fire
at the temperatures that a barrel would operate
on a endurance full auto setting.
A good thing would be a thin-ish steel sleeve wrapped
in carbon fiber, layered in opposite directions. You'd have to find a resin that endured though.
And for life's sake, if you incorporate a recoil reducing action, please please don't wast the intelligent design of the mechanism on the fairly weak-recoiled and poorly stopping 5.56 round.
icebones
Member
ive never seen a dardick system, any links or websites with examples?
sounds interesting indeed...
sounds interesting indeed...
icebones
Member
the longer barrel is for not only accuracy, but higher velocity. contrary to what most people belive, the 5.56mm is a devastating round. but it relies on high velocity to do the damage.
you take a 5.56mm (lead core or maybe even steel) fired from a 20'' barrel, its gonna do some nasty stuff.
but fire it from a shorted 12'' barrel and you get performance on par woth a hot .22 magnum. (velocity wise of corse)
a longer barrel would solve this problem, also STNAG magazines yould be needed because i doubt the entire military wants to throw away millions of magazines, for a new rifle design.
you take a 5.56mm (lead core or maybe even steel) fired from a 20'' barrel, its gonna do some nasty stuff.
but fire it from a shorted 12'' barrel and you get performance on par woth a hot .22 magnum. (velocity wise of corse)
a longer barrel would solve this problem, also STNAG magazines yould be needed because i doubt the entire military wants to throw away millions of magazines, for a new rifle design.
icebones
Member
oh and dont worry, if this ever takes off. i aint gonna act like colt or HK and say: screw the civies im gonna sell to uncle sam...
i would bet that 90% of all the sales firearms compaines get are from private civilians, not military contracts.
military contracts is the exact same reason we never went back to the .45
not that i dont like the m92, its just i like any other .45 better. look at it like this, if for some reason you switch from your rifle or carbine, to a handgun, bad stuff is goin down... and when SHTF a wound maker dosent equate to a man-stopper...
i would bet that 90% of all the sales firearms compaines get are from private civilians, not military contracts.
military contracts is the exact same reason we never went back to the .45
not that i dont like the m92, its just i like any other .45 better. look at it like this, if for some reason you switch from your rifle or carbine, to a handgun, bad stuff is goin down... and when SHTF a wound maker dosent equate to a man-stopper...
Funderb
Member
at least do 6.8 man, cmon. pleeeeaaseee.
Vern Humphrey
Member
Try here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dardick_tround
The original Dardick patent is about 50 years old and could be used in the development of a new and improved system.
PercyShelley
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2007
- Messages
- 1,075
I disagree.
Take a look at an AR and an AK bolt (not the bolt carriers, the bolts themselves) side by side. The AK's bolt is a little bit bigger, but mostly because of the arrangement of the camming surfaces. The lugs are a little bit longer, but that's because it's only using two lugs as opposed to seven and a half.
The bolt carrier is bigger, true, but from a ground-up perspective, most of that metal is nonessential and can be shaved down to the austere design I described earlier. The stroke can be as short as the cartridge OAL plus tolerances, and AK inaccuracy is largely the result of manufacturing practices. A well-made, ground up bullpup based on the AK operating principle could be quite accurate and compact.
Or, rather, the SAR-21 and the TAR-21 both already are.
Re-arrange the recoil spring, charging handle, and receiver takedown and the AK action is entirely suitable for bullpups.
Well you can try the old-fashioned method of whittling parts out of wood just to see if concepts work and how the overall product would look and feel. No problem there with BATFE.
But I think the first thing to ask yourself is whether a government with billions invested in its current small arms inventory would find your product so superior and so irresistable that they would go for it. If you think the answer is yes, do the model, then get a manufacturers license and make one up in steel or plastic or whatever, wring it out and try to peddle it.
You might also consider the fate of the Stoner push-pull, swap around, multi-everything rifle/carbine/machinegun, that went nowhere. Just proves that ideas that sound great in the gunzines often just don't fly.
Good luck.
Jim
But I think the first thing to ask yourself is whether a government with billions invested in its current small arms inventory would find your product so superior and so irresistable that they would go for it. If you think the answer is yes, do the model, then get a manufacturers license and make one up in steel or plastic or whatever, wring it out and try to peddle it.
You might also consider the fate of the Stoner push-pull, swap around, multi-everything rifle/carbine/machinegun, that went nowhere. Just proves that ideas that sound great in the gunzines often just don't fly.
Good luck.
Jim
mgregg85
Member
this whole idea sounds very, very expensive.
Gtscotty
Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2007
- Messages
- 3,635
If you really want to sell to the government, I think a major point of focus should be price. I'm sure the government wants good rifles for our troops, but im also pretty sure they are not willing to shell out many times the price of an m-16 to get the best rifle they possibly can. To make this rifle competitive, I would first ditch the carbon fiber barrel. It might be lighter, and stronger (per pound), but for this application, steel really is good enough. Steel has very good fatigue characteristics which is what you would be looking at with a desired life of many thousands of rounds. Moreover, barrel design in steel has been done for a very long time; if you switch over to carbon fiber, you will likely be more on your own rocking all the math that goes into designing such a part for desired criteria. All this time spent designing and testing with a new material will cost, and much of it could probably be avoided by using steel. I think channeling your energies into working out a design that could be easily manufactured using (mostly) existing machines will do more for government acceptability than most pursuits. The lower the price the company that buys the design from you can manufacture the gun at, the more likely they are to win a gov contract....all this assuming a good and robust design. I'd say its a pretty monumental task, at the very least, after you had a design you would probably have to pair yourself with a large firm for testing and implementation. Also don't forget the fundamental engineering idea of "good enough".
~ just my .02
Edit: Sorry about the huge block-o-words.
~ just my .02
Edit: Sorry about the huge block-o-words.
about the idea of a minimally-lugged bolt system like the AK's...
couldnt you possibly do something like 'sleeve' the system around the barrel and chamber? I'm pretty sure that could reduce length and keep a standard-length barrel
but...yea, something like that could be ridiculously expensive.
Also, I'd go for a 'cheap parts now, upgrade later' kind of thing for a project like this. AR15s were cheap pieces of crap back in the day made out of the bare-bones minimum (which explains the problems they had considering the tolerances they forced it to have). After things became cheaper, then they gave it the upgrades over time until it became what it is today. With that in mind, it would be good to make something out of commonly used materials for current weapons before worrying about modern materials. No need to make something out of carbon fiber just to save a bit of weight and make it even more indestructible than an AK at the cost of 4x the amount of cash for an M16
Also, I don't see the reason for griping about weight to a rifle. I mean, for the love of God, does 1.5-2.5 pounds extra weight cause spine to misalignments or something? Do your wrists snap under the burden of all of that extra heavy weight?
Lightening gear is more important than a featherweight gun; two pounds won't make much a difference to a marine.
couldnt you possibly do something like 'sleeve' the system around the barrel and chamber? I'm pretty sure that could reduce length and keep a standard-length barrel
but...yea, something like that could be ridiculously expensive.
Also, I'd go for a 'cheap parts now, upgrade later' kind of thing for a project like this. AR15s were cheap pieces of crap back in the day made out of the bare-bones minimum (which explains the problems they had considering the tolerances they forced it to have). After things became cheaper, then they gave it the upgrades over time until it became what it is today. With that in mind, it would be good to make something out of commonly used materials for current weapons before worrying about modern materials. No need to make something out of carbon fiber just to save a bit of weight and make it even more indestructible than an AK at the cost of 4x the amount of cash for an M16
Also, I don't see the reason for griping about weight to a rifle. I mean, for the love of God, does 1.5-2.5 pounds extra weight cause spine to misalignments or something? Do your wrists snap under the burden of all of that extra heavy weight?
Lightening gear is more important than a featherweight gun; two pounds won't make much a difference to a marine.icebones
Member
how about a bi-metal barrel?
not as expensive, but still light weigth and cools down better than solid steel?
its simmilar in concept to carbon-fiber, but the barrel tube is sourrounded with a light alloy, like 6061 aluminum.
the whole point of this rifle is modularity. a few pins to push out, (captive pins of corse) and you can swap out trigger groups, barrels and such.
not as expensive, but still light weigth and cools down better than solid steel?
its simmilar in concept to carbon-fiber, but the barrel tube is sourrounded with a light alloy, like 6061 aluminum.
the whole point of this rifle is modularity. a few pins to push out, (captive pins of corse) and you can swap out trigger groups, barrels and such.
icebones
Member
also , are you talking about the stoner 63?
it never took of because of the politics in the 60's
the same politics that said "instead of aimed fire, lets get a bunch of guys with small caliber weapons and spray as much tax dollars as possible, hey, while were at it, lets switch powder, take away their cleaning kets and tell em it dont need to be cleaned.
and then when it does have problems, lets spend millions of dollars trying to figure out the problem, that we caused"
the same politics that made us loose the war.
a road i hope i never have to see. im glad i was born in 1990...
it never took of because of the politics in the 60's
the same politics that said "instead of aimed fire, lets get a bunch of guys with small caliber weapons and spray as much tax dollars as possible, hey, while were at it, lets switch powder, take away their cleaning kets and tell em it dont need to be cleaned.
and then when it does have problems, lets spend millions of dollars trying to figure out the problem, that we caused"
the same politics that made us loose the war.
a road i hope i never have to see. im glad i was born in 1990...
porsche
Member
from the date you make your public disclosure (today or the earlier thread you started) you have 1 year to apply for the patent. otherwise its gone on the basis of this disclosure. not a simple process, but go discuss with a patent lawyer in your community. see whether your idea is patentable. a patent lawyer can tell you. your goal, if you want to exploit this idea, is to obtain a patent and license the right to build and sell it to a company who has the wherewithall to build and sell it. think john browning. he got rich patenting new art in firearms.
icebones
Member
allright something else for yall to snowball.
if you look at it from a engeneering point, storing cylinder shaped rounds in a square container isnt really space-efficient. but its too soon to try to re introduce caseless rounds...
new magazine concepts.
-triple or quadruple stacked magazine
-double stack u bend magazine
any more ideas?
if you look at it from a engeneering point, storing cylinder shaped rounds in a square container isnt really space-efficient. but its too soon to try to re introduce caseless rounds...
new magazine concepts.
-triple or quadruple stacked magazine
-double stack u bend magazine
any more ideas?
Vern Humphrey
Member
The Dardick used twp magazines, side by side, which could be loaded with stripper clips.
As the cylinder rotated, the first magazine the empty chamber encountered fed a round. When that magazine was empty, the cylinder would rotate a fraction more and feed from the other magazine.
- Status
Similar threads
