New İnvented Handgun

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pushing on the muzzle to disassemble is a bigger turn-off for me than pulling the trigger. That just gave me some serious heeby jeebies. But it is an interesting design in spite of my experience-based (but not scientifically informed) aversion to blowback actions.

Great work! I don't mean to be too negative, either. That's an amazing accomplishment.
 
Erhan said:
Ok,now.The slide mass,wich is necessary to keep a 9*19 cartridge in the chamber,with 4 inç barrel, during firing is about 300-350 gram.. My slider weight is 150 gram.That means i need 200 gram mass..My hammer weight is about 17 gram.. But it act like a crank,because of the connection point to the slider,with a 1/3 ratio...
Click to expand...
Interesting. I'm not sure I understand how it works, then. A lever (or "crank") needs 3 points of contact in order to create the 1:3 ratio. In your video one point is at the bottom, where hammer rests on the frame, other point is where the slide pushes the hammer, but the 3rd point is not obvious. Well, there's a black thing that you removed in the beginning of the disassembly, but I do not see just how it can be in contact with the hammer and yet let the hammer fall -- unless it flies forward when the trigger is pulled. But if that's the case, the black part is what needs to have your 150 grams and the mass of the slider is not multiplied by the lever. Is there something I'm missing here?

P.S. Here's an annotated screencap with a lever-delayed bolt:

famas.jpg
The breech face is on the right, where Ian's index finger is, and it acts on the bottom half of the bolt group.

The receiver acts upon point A. The blowback acts upon point B. The accelerated mass is connected in the point C. The gun in question, FAMAS, uses the same 1:3 retardation ratio. The distance between the projection of A and C onto the direction of travel is 3 times the distance between the projection of A and B.
 
Last edited:
zaitcev said:
Interesting. I'm not sure I understand how it works, then. A lever (or "crank") needs 3 points of contact in order to create the 1:3 ratio. In your video one point is at the bottom, where hammer rests on the frame, other point is where the slide pushes the hammer, but the 3rd point is not obvious. Well, there's a black thing that you removed in the beginning of the disassembly, but I do not see just how it can be in contact with the hammer and yet let the hammer fall -- unless it flies forward when the trigger is pulled. But if that's the case, the black part is what needs to have your 150 grams and the mass of the slider is not multiplied by the lever. Is there something I'm missing here?
Click to expand...
The Hammer rotates on a 4,5 mm diameter bolt..Wich connect the hammer to the slide..When you push the Hammer from the top 3 mm,the slide move 1 mm...in the same direction...
 
mgmorden said:
Looks neat. Though the "standard" Browning tilting design is tried and true I always like seeing something a little bit different. If this was cleaned up into a finished product and sold at a reasonable price I'd likely buy one.

I will say though that the grooved chamber that puts a groove on the brass is a pretty big turn off. I reload/handload for all of my guns (as do a large volume of shooting out of their own funds) so damaging the brass would make it a more costly gun to shoot.
Click to expand...
Thank you ...My Goal was to create a lightweight and thin gun!SpeciallyFor people who needs to carry a gun all day secretly...And of course Shooting comfort and staying on the target ,was also aimed...Light guns tends to blowback very hefty....İ have the same model without grooves and the blowback is much higher...Now,wich is more important?...A light and 0,8 inç gun with less nozzle flip or a 1,2 inç gun with normal nozzle flip but wich dont destroy your casing?
 
Erhan said:
The Hammer rotates on a 4,5 mm diameter bolt..Wich connect the hammer to the slide..When you push the Hammer from the top 3 mm,the slide move 1 mm...in the same direction...
Click to expand...

The problem is that yes, hammer is accelerated, but the acceleration only applies to the hammer's 17 grams. The slider is only retarded by the counterforce of the hammer, in addition to its own mass, so you're not getting anywhere close to the 250 gram equivalent with this. In FAMAS, the effective mass of the upper part of the bolt is multiplied, but in your design this element is missing.

All practical delayed blowback systems have a bolt split. There's a strong and light breech face element, which transfers the force from the bottom of the case to a lever (Kirali), rollers (HK), or cam (CMMG). The leverage mechanism multiplies that force and applies it to the most of the mass of the slider or bolt.

The only exception is Thompson Autorifle, where bolt is one piece. Result is a poor reliability and exceptionally high bolt travel speeds.
 
The receiver acts upon point A. The blowback acts upon point B. The accelerated mass is connected in the point C. The gun in question, FAMAS, uses the same 1:3 retardation ratio. The distance between the projection of A and C onto the direction of travel is 3 times the distance between the projection of A and B.[/QUOTE]

Thank you,really...Yes,i watch the video and saw it the first time and its a interesting mechanic ...There is a big difference....This lever is static!..My Hammer(lever) creates a extra force due its inertia(Mass and speed)....İ dont delay the action.İ Reduce the weight of the slide for less felt recoil..Wich is better? stopping 350 gram or 150 gram wich acts like 350 gram,so the same speed?
 
1KPerDay said:
Looked like 9mm to me. Some other pistols have used the "grooved chamber" to help retard opening and allow fixed barreled 9mms... to the OP, how does your design mitigate the problems they encountered?
Click to expand...
The biggest problem is,that the casing sometime stuck in the chamber...Thats why i use 2 extractors...and it works...
 
Erhan said:
Thank you ...My Goal was to create a lightweight and thin gun!SpeciallyFor people who needs to carry a gun all day secretly...And of course Shooting comfort and staying on the target ,was also aimed...Light guns tends to blowback very hefty....İ have the same model without grooves and the blowback is much higher...Now,wich is more important?...A light and 0,8 inç gun with less nozzle flip or a 1,2 inç gun with normal nozzle flip but wich dont destroy your casing?
Click to expand...
I would go with the latter choice -- a heavier gun that doesn't harm the brass. I carry a Colt M1911 concealed and a Colt New Service revolver in the woods.
 
Erhan, Interesting, and I applaud your ingenuity and perseverance. But even if your design is robust, safe, and could be successfully produced, would your pistol be significantly superior to compact 9MM locked breech pistols currently in production? I once had the opportunity to shoot a small 9MM pistol that might be compared to what you propose, the Detonics Pocket 9. The recoil was pronounced and unpleasant, to say the least. I don't know if the Pocket 9 was a robust pistol or not, and would not want to shoot it enough to find out. I am not an engineer, but would have a concern about the lightweight slide with your retarded blowback type action. Even the little blow back .380 type pistols exhibit significant recoil, even though energy and momentum created by the .380 cartridge is much less than 9MM. I wish you well in your efforts.
 
Rock185 said:
Erhan, Interesting, and I applaud your ingenuity and perseverance. But even if your design is robust, safe, and could be successfully produced, would your pistol be significantly superior to compact 9MM locked breech pistols currently in production? I once had the opportunity to shoot a small 9MM pistol that might be compared to what you propose, the Detonics Pocket 9. The recoil was pronounced and unpleasant, to say the least. I don't know if the Pocket 9 was a robust pistol or not, and would not want to shoot it enough to find out. I am not an engineer, but would have a concern about the lightweight slide with your retarded blowback type action. Even the little blow back .380 type pistols exhibit significant recoil, even though energy and momentum created by the .380 cartridge is much less than 9MM. I wish you well in your efforts.
Click to expand...
The biggest problem is,you couldnt test the gun!..İn this stage the only thing i can offer you,is show you the mechanic and my words..and i see that is not enough..İ tested some 9mm guns like the canik TP 9 ..My gun has less Felt recoil and Nozzle flip...A shooting video is necessary....İf possible with high speed camera...Must find a way for that...Thank you
 
Different manufactures brass varies widely in thickness so the chamber ring delayed blowback will likely not be reliable with all types of ammo. Thick brass may stick in the chamber and not be able to be removed by the user when only partially extracted, and thin brass may not retard slide movement enough to be safe and may damage the slide and frame. I'm sorry but I believe a blowback 9mm pistol is a 100 year step backwards in technology when you can make a tilt barrel 9mm so light and compact and unfailingly reliable with a wide range of ammunition. The limitation on size of a pistol is almost entirely barrel length and magazine size so I don't see what this rather large heavy mechanism gains.
 
I don't see what this rather large heavy mechanism gains.[/QUOTE
A glock 17 weights 710 gram......Glock use double stack magazine and the width is 30 mm...My design with double stack magazine is 27mm width and weights 600 gram... Heavy mechanism?
 
Erhan said:
I don't see what this rather large heavy mechanism gains.[/QUOTE
A glock 17 weights 710 gram......Glock use double stack magazine and the width is 30 mm...My design with double stack magazine is 27mm width and weights 600 gram... Heavy mechanism?
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing your design Erhan. I always appreciate seeing people's creativity.

As far as the latest, greatest in size and capacity, The Sig P365 seems to be the leader. How does your design compare to it?

sigp365_01.jpg
 
The brass thickness is critical.....The counterforce for pressing the projectile in the Barrel is not the mass of the slider!..İt takes more then 30 kg force to press a 9mm projectile in a riffled Barrel..So,how can a 350 gram slider resist this power?...The answer is ^^Cartridge Wall Adhesion^^ against the chamber!This is the force wich lock the casing in the chamber..That means if your brass is to thick,it wouldnt expand and stick to the chambers wall...Then This pressure will come directly to the shooters side...Your slider will destroyed...So thats why,i believe there must be some standarts in brass tchickness....
 
Last edited:
FAS1 said:
Thanks for sharing your design Erhan. I always appreciate seeing people's creativity.

As far as the latest, greatest in size and capacity, The Sig P365 seems to be the leader. How does your design compare to it?
Click to expand...

Sig Sauer P365 My Gun
Weight 500 g (18 oz) weight 580 gramm / 20,5 oz
Length 147 mm (5.8 in) length 178 mm/7 in
Barrel length 78 mm (3.1 in) barrel length 110mm/4.3in
Width 27 mm (1.1 in) width 20 mm /0.8 in
capacity 10 rounds capacity 9 rounds

Thank you very much..Compare with Sig Sauer...fantastic...
 
Erhan, congratulation in your creativity an efforts, don't give up.
If we compare weights Erhan is a full steel firearm prototype where Glock and Sig are polymer, If he is able to made in polymer, might be able to reduce at least 40%.
If he pursue a minimalist pocket firearm with few rounds at very light weight, Erhan can have a winner, like an economic Lorcin in polymer, allow me to suggest.
czhen.
 
The profile of the gun in your video suggests it is a single stack mag type, similar to a Kahr CT9 in size, but full steel construction, except for the unadvisable plastic 'slide cover' for lack of a better term.
You also left out a very important measurement for a Carry gun (which is what you compared yours to); height. (Bottom of mag to top of slide) Yours appears to compare in size to the Kahr I mentioned or maybe the cw9, which is a little smaller.
Basically your gun is the Frommer stop with the seecamp annular chamber ring, and a Kahr body, but heavier and blockier. You are looking back into time and dredging up old designs that didn't pan out, particularly for the 9mm round.
Look forward. See where the market is headed; you have a good head start, though I suggest more study of the history of semiauto pistol delevopement as a 'what not to do', and I believe you can come up with something the market will be there for. (Hint; right now, small .380's are popular. a polymer bodied version of a low bore axised pocket-sized .380 would be something there would be initerest in. A good gun to start with would be the Smith & Wesson Escort [or Model 422] sized up to .380 and the recoil and blowback tamed.)

.That means if your brass is to thick,it wouldnt expand and stick to the chambers wall...Then This pressure will come directly to the shooters side...Your slider will destroyed...So thats why,i believe there must be some standarts in brass tchickness....
Click to expand...

Unless you designed the cartridge (Georg Luger beat you to that in this case), you don't get to set the brass specifications, CIP and SAAMI do.
 
Last edited:
Erhan said:
The brass thickness is critical.....The counterforce for pressing the projectile in the Barrel is not the mass of the slider!..İt takes more then 30 kg force to press a 9mm projectile in a riffled Barrel..So,how can a 350 gram slider resist this power?...The answer is ^^Cartridge Wall Adhesion^^ against the chamber!This is the force wich lock the casing in the chamber..That means if your brass is to thick,it wouldnt expand and stick to the chambers wall...Then This pressure will come directly to the shooters side...Your slider will destroyed...So thats why,i believe there must be some standarts in brass tchickness....
Click to expand...

I can tell you as a hand loader who has loaded thousands and thousands of rounds of 9mm that there is no standard for brass thickness. They vary quite a lot from one manufacturer to another. Additionally steel and aluminum cases are also used in factory 9mm ammo, and many reloaders do not clean the resizing lubricant from there brass after reloading which will all change the chamber wall friction. Also there are a few brands of 9mm with an internal step to prevent bullet setback. This design with the slide coming off the back and relying on the chamber ring to delay blowback could be rather dangerous if one were to use this type of ammo in it.

6BD30B45-C0D9-4BBB-9951-CD4B492891A9.jpeg
 
The only common ring-delay gun that I know is Seecamp, and the company publishes a list of acceptable ammunition for it (both versions). So, this sort of problem is not unprecedented.

The main issue is the value proposition. In case of Seecamp, you get the smallest .380 period. It is noticeably smaller than the likes of P238, LCP II, and CW380. I am struggling to see what the design we're discussing here brings to the table. The market of 9mm autos is very diverse and it's difficult to find an opening.
 
For what it’s worth I would wager less than 5% of gun owners in America handload. If it works with most commercial ammo that portion of your design should be ok. If variance in brass thickness could make it dangerous then that’s a different matter.

You are a tinkerer and inventor. I’d you ever travel through Missouri let’s have a range day!
 
Rock185 said:
Erhan, Interesting, and I applaud your ingenuity and perseverance. But even if your design is robust, safe, and could be successfully produced, would your pistol be significantly superior to compact 9MM locked breech pistols currently in production? I once had the opportunity to shoot a small 9MM pistol that might be compared to what you propose, the Detonics Pocket 9. The recoil was pronounced and unpleasant, to say the least. I don't know if the Pocket 9 was a robust pistol or not, and would not want to shoot it enough to find out. I am not an engineer, but would have a concern about the lightweight slide with your retarded blowback type action. Even the little blow back .380 type pistols exhibit significant recoil, even though energy and momentum created by the .380 cartridge is much less than 9MM. I wish you well in your efforts.[/QU
Click to expand...
What cause to Felt recoil and nozzle flip ?:
1-Bore axis
2-Slider weight (Totally moving weight during firing)
3-Recoil springs
4-A god grip position
Bore axis is 11mm..Thats very very low..The lowest i know is Striker one with 12mm
Slider weight is the half of common guns
İ have two recoil springs..When the soft one is totally compressed,the hard one moves in and stop the slider softly....
You can grip the gun by the front side to,because of no moving parts..
The grooved chamber was invented By Mr.Mann Year 1920 . HK get a second patent for a slightly different geometry in 1980s..Yes,its damaged the Case..but its really smoothened the recoil and when you use with supressor you will recognize,that is more silent,compared with a gun without grooves.Because very less noise and gas comes in the shooters direction..
This design is 0.8 in thin...This is the thinnest i know...And its light because of a larger polymer frame and less steel parts....The 580 gram weight is for polymer frame!!The prototype is steel and weight 790 gram.
Thank you
 
Erhan, I salute you for your skills and talent. I couldn't begin to do what you have done. Ingenuity at it's best which I love to see.
Respectfully I ask "what problems does your design resolve"?
 
Vern Humphrey said:
Americans reload ALL calibers. In fact "progressive" reloaders, machines which reload one cartridge with one pull of the handle are quite popular. Personally, I reload .38 Special, .357 Magnum, .45 ACP and .45 Colt in quantity (1000+ rounds at a session.)
Click to expand...

+1

Frankly, this gun will be a total flop in the USA. We are a nation of reloaders. This is why guns like the PTR-91s are not popular with true shooters, as true shooters reload.

Neat concept but it will be a total failure here. Fix the design to where the brass is undamaged and ready for the press, get the weight down below 10 oz, and keep the MSRP under $250 and you might have something.

Other vital qualities the gun MUST have is that it be flat black, be predominantly made of polymer, and have "Tactical" in its designation. A Picatinny rail, preferably several, must also be included.

Again, this is to ensure sales in America.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
Low bore axis measurement
Replies
5
Views
1K
The Lone Haranguer
T
V
  • Locked
What's the real deal on bore axis?
Replies
13
Views
1K
Handy
H
Z
  • Locked
Handgun with low-bore axis??
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
DHart
D
E
  • Locked
Auto safety Release (patent Pending)
2 3 4
Replies
79
Views
4K
Creaky_Old_Cop
Creaky_Old_Cop
ACIinventor
  • Locked
Can Browning's Masterpiece Be Surpassed?
2
Replies
44
Views
2K
9mmepiphany
9mmepiphany
Back
Top