Self propelled Gas Piston System

[kwelz]

1. Using more dense metal. What are you going to use? Depleted Uranium. the BCG is already made out of steel.

2. Redistribution the weight to a new feature of a BCG that would not interfere the normal operation of the BCG. How are you going to do this? There isn't a lot of room to work with here already. Bolts are pretty solid with the only open areas in a place for the hammer and back in the area you want to cut off.


3. Complete redesign of BCG Wow really? So you are going to redesign the Bolt on a proven 50 year old design making it incompatible with most other parts out there to achieve what exactly?

I give up. I know people talk about JMB and others who didn't have a background designing guns. But at least they had some idea ofwhat they were talking about. At this point you are just making stuff up.

I am all for people trying to improve what is out there. You are just trying to come up with a reason to post. Go to school. Learn about design and how these things function and then come back and try again.

 

[zollen]

I give up. I know people talk about JMB and others who didn't have a background designing guns. But at least they had some idea ofwhat they were talking about. At this point you are just making stuff up.

I am all for people trying to improve what is out there. You are just trying to come up with a reason to post. Go to school. Learn about design and how these things function and then come back and try again.

They are all in my original diagram. I did not mention using heavier metal but I did mention this kit could offer a custom shorter BCG. Your answers already suggested you aren't interested in this discussion at all.

You must understand that I would not take you seriously at this point in time because you are one of those who discriminated me out of an extremely silly reason. I am surprise you are still here.

 

[browneu]

You must understand that I would not take you seriously at this point in time because you are one of those who discriminated me out of an extremely silly reason. I am surprise you are still here.

I must be reading a different thread because Kwelz asked some very good questions and was trying to help your design.

Please explain where he descriminated against you. You should take his advice seriously.

 

[kingpin008]

I did not mention using heavier metal

Uh, check your last post on the 1st page. You specifically mentioned using a more dense metal as a possible solution to the weight issue.

Zollen, I have to agree with some of the folks here. It's awesome that you're trying to use your head and innovate, but it seems like you're just starting to re-hash the same stuff without getting anywhere. Perhaps it's time to take a step back and get seek out some info on the designs you're trying to change, and why they became the standard.

 

[Dreamcast270mhz]

Schooling has nothing to do with innovation.

@kwelz

yeah, he is proposing a change to a nearly 50 year old system, but I'm sure Soviet generals said the same about the AK, it messing up the proven bolt action. The M16 and M4 don't have exactly the greatest track record of reliability, when considering the marginal advantages of the stoner system over a short stroke like used in the AUG or the delayed blowback of the FAMAS, it really is not worth it. The SA80 and the M16 share one key problem, less reliable than the rifles they replaced.

 

[kingpin008]

Schooling has nothing to do with innovation.

Not necessarily, but it will help. I'm a big fan of Zollen's efforts, but it is kinda getting to the point where a little knowledge of engineering (even basic principles) is going to be a huge help in moving things forward with his ideas.

 

[zollen]

Thanks for the supports guys. I really means a lot to me after days of beatings.

 

[Shear_stress]

Schooling has nothing to do with innovation.

Yes it does. Not necessarily formal education, but schooling in the sense that:

1.) The inventor actually has a complete understanding of the current technology.
2.) The inventor has the mechanical wherewithal to come up with something that is not only new but has significant advantages rather than significant disadvantages.

Also, let's talk a little about what passes for "innovation". There are already a million and six piston kits and piston-driven, AR-derived guns already out there--including many that eliminate the buffer. What does this thing bring to the table? Instead of trying to come with yet another piston-driven AR, it would be nice if folks set their sights a little higher.

 

[zollen]

Yes it does. Not necessarily formal education, but schooling in the sense that:

1.) The inventor actually has a complete understanding of the current technology.
2.) The inventor has the mechanical wherewithal to come up with something that is not only new but has significant advantages rather than significant disadvantages.

Also, let's talk a little about what passes for "innovation". There are already a million and six piston kits and piston-driven, AR-derived guns already out there--including many that eliminate the buffer. What does this thing bring to the table? Instead of trying to come with yet another piston-driven AR, it would be nice if folks set their sights a little higher.

You mean there are already piston upgrade kit for standard DI AR that could also eliminate the rear buffer tube? Please send us the link.

 

[Shear_stress]

You mean there are already piston upgrade kit for standard DI AR that could also eliminate the rear buffer tube? Please send us the link.

Not that I know of. Including yours, which so far seems to exist largely in your imagination.

And, since I apparently need to help you interpret simple sentances now, there are many piston-driven, AR-derived rifles which don't have a buffer (the Daewoo K1 and K2 for example).

Please do yourself a favor and divert the energy you expend lashing out at constructive criticism toward something more productive.

 

[Vyacheslav]

yes, there is

http://www.quarterbore.com/ar15m16/oa93.htm

 

[Shear_stress]

yes, there is

Interesting. Found this one as well. Amazing what five minutes on Google can tell you:

http://world.guns.ru/assault/usa/zm-weapons-lr-300-e.html

It's currently being resold by Para-Ordnance as the TTR. Uppers are available directly from the manufacturer.

 

[jon_in_wv]

Dude, AR15s are the sacred cow. Suggesting it could be improved in any way is GOING to get you flamed. Whether your idea has merit or not is irrelevant.

 

[zollen]

Please do yourself a favor and divert the energy you expend lashing out at constructive criticism toward something more productive.

I just want to point out I am not trying to invent a completely different rifle, which is what you think I have been doing. If this concept has not yet exist in the market, then I would think this is an innovation. I would love to hear more of your wisdom.

 

[Shear_stress]

These are specialize designed assault rifles. Most of their internal components are not even compatible with standard AR.

You are mistaken. It uses a standard AR lower.

Suggesting it could be improved in any way is GOING to get you flamed.

I'll be happy to start the flaming as soon as I see the improvement.

Look, I don't really care one way or the other AR-15. I do have a problem with armchair engineers posting, to put it mildly, tentative designs, making bold claims about the advantages they offer, and then getting pissed when someone dares to challenge them.

Still, despite everything, I appreciate what Zollen is trying to do in principle. He just needs to learn a lot more about firearms before he's ready to start blazing trails.

 

[zollen]

Dude, AR15s are the sacred cow. Suggesting it could be improved in any way is GOING to get you flamed. Whether your idea has merit or not is irrelevant.

I know exactly what you mean.

 

[Shear_stress]

I just want to point out I am not trying to invent a completely different rifle, which is what you think I have been doing. If this concept has not yet exist in the market, then I would think this is an innovation.

I get that you're trying to modify an existing rifle. Still, please spend a little more time working out the kinks before presenting your design. There really are significant technical challenges to what you are trying to do, and you should be aware of them. All the while you should ask yourself if the design represents a real advance over the current field. Honestly, at this point I am not convinced it does.

Despite everything I've said, I do think that you have the potential to come up with something good. However, whether through books, classes, or basic experience you need to be on the ball when it comes to the state of the art. Also, you're going to need to be your own harshest critic to really ensure you've got something worthwhile.

 

[zollen]

I get that you're trying to modify an existing rifle. Still, please spend a little more time working out the kinks before presenting your design. There really are significant technical challenges to what you are trying to do, and you should be aware of them. All the while you should ask yourself if the design represents a real advance over the current field. Honestly, at this point I am not convinced it does.

Despite everything I've said, I do think that you have the potential to come up with something good. However, whether through books, classes, or basic experience you need to be on the ball when it comes to the state of the art. Also, you're going to need to be your own harshest critic to really ensure you've got something worthwhile.

I agree with you.

 

[kwelz]

You must understand that I would not take you seriously at this point in time because you are one of those who discriminated me out of an extremely silly reason. I am surprise you are still here.

So wait. Since I am not telling you how great your idea is I am "discriminating against you" Wow. What are you? 12?

 

[zollen]

So wait. Since I am not telling you how great your idea is I am "discriminating against you" Wow. What are you? 12?

This guy was called out on another board. Here is what we know about him.
He is Canadian, does not own and never has owned an AR, and he has no understanding of the workings of a firearm.

So far he has posted this on just about every major Firearms board. A few have banned him more than once for his BS.

Would you consider this is a discrimination? I think it is.

I am asking you nicely if you have nothing positive to contribute, please do not derail this thread anymore.

 

[Rubber_Duck]

No I don't consider it discrimination. I posted something similar in this thread but it seems to have been deleted by the mods, so I'm not going to pursue the issue. These people have been far more forgiving with you than those on the other boards, particularly the ones you were banned from. So try to appreciate it and learn something here.

 

[Sam Cade]

Would you consider this is a discrimination? I think it is.

That word does not mean what you think it means.

I am asking you nicely if you have nothing positive to contribute, please do not derail this thread anymore.

If you ask for constructive criticism you shouldn't complain when you get it.



But one thing is clear: before attempting to create something new, it is vital to have a good appreciation of everything that already exists in this field.--M. Kalashnikov

 

[kwelz]

Would you consider this is a discrimination?

No it isn't It is stating the truth. You don't have knowledge of what you are trying to speak about. That is an important (and obvious) fact.

The fact that some of the people who have told you that you don't know what you are talking about are well respected members of the firearms community should be a clue.

Once again if you want to do this that is great. But you need to learn a lot first.

 

[zollen]

I thought most of you were having problem seeing me posting my ideas/concepts. If this is not an issue, I shall continue my important works here.

 

[rbernie]

Enough bickering.

Zollen - your ideas are interesting but lack any engineering credibility. You've been allowed to run several threads now in which you present your notions, and in those threads you've been provided with feedback that indicates the immaturity of your efforts. You would do well to internalize those comments.

To those of you that provided thoughtful commentary - thanks.