Who uses/has a pistol compensator?

[fennecfrank]

^^^ looks very very nice! great work!

just one suggestion: the compensator has too much empty space below the barrel. might as well as incorporating a flash light and laser.

 

[TITAN308]

That space you a referring to is solid steel.

 

[9mmepiphany]

It occured to me in a discussion at our weekend match that there is something you might look into before investing too much time in this idea. Frame flex.

As the USP has a polymer frame, it's action timing must have taken into account the flex of the frame during recoil. This has been a problem in other polymer frames when the design parameters of the flex are changed through attaching a stiffener (the frame attachment) and adding weight which would affect it's resistance to flexing (inertia)

Most experiments that I have seen over time have attached muzzle and frame dampeners to the metal frame or barrel, where frame flex is more limited

 

[TITAN308]

We discovered some other interesting things regarding the CZ Duty when we looked at it more closely; in regards to the barrel tilt when locking back to cycling.

This may not apply to all pistols with the same action, but in the case of the CZ Duty when it cycles (or locks) it actually pulls the barrel back about 1/8 of an inch and then tilts up.

This is great news because the hood gap we designed in is completely unnecessary and we can actually back the compensator up further since this is no longer a concern. There is still a minimal gap to prevent slamming damage of the slide against the compensator, but its much more tighter of a seal (but still not as tight as a threaded compensator).

We also re-designed with V 2.0 more of a "minimalist" factor. Still in the brain storming stages, but we hope to produce a working prototype in the next month or two.

There is also a short You Tube video on our website (Area 51) for viewing as well. (I'm at work and You Tube does not work here).

 

[9mmepiphany]

This may not apply to all pistols with the same action, but in the case of the CZ Duty when it cycles (or locks) it actually pulls the barrel back about 1/8 of an inch and then tilts up.

Perhaps you should become more familiar with the operation of the Browning Tilting Barrel action before you start designing parts for pistols based on it

 

[TITAN308]

I knew the barrel tilted, but I never had a reason to pay more attention to it. (in regards to drawing back and then tilting)

Maybe you should understand the process and purpose of prototyping/modeling before commenting on it.

 

[Frank Ettin]

Perhaps you should become more familiar with the operation of the Browning Tilting Barrel action before you start designing parts for pistols based on it.

+1

This applies to all pistols using the Browning Titling Barrel, locked breech action, which would include the 1911, Browning High Power, CZ75, Glock, SIG P210 and a bunch of others.

The barrel is locked to the slide (by either lugs in the barrel in front of the chamber mating with lugs in the slide in front of the ejection port, like the 1911, or the barrel locking into the ejection port, like the Glock). As the slide moves back under recoil, the barrel moves a short distance with it. The the barrel is tilted down by cam action (or the swinging link of the 1911) to unlock it from the slide. The slide continues its rearward travel to eject the expended case.

This is illustrated in this animation of a Glock firing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1VD1D1hLsQ&feature=related

or these animations of a 1911 firing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMC_gfza6Mk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKRMcTlbWTs

...I knew the barrel tilted, but I never had a reason to pay more attention to it. (in regards to drawing back and then tilting)...

Yet for some reason, you weren't able to explain it too well.

Maybe you should understand the process and purpose of prototyping/modeling before commenting on it.

It's not a question of prototyping/modeling. It's simply a question of understanding how a particular type of handgun design works.

 

[TITAN308]

Until we started prototyping/designing I had no reason to pay attention to this minor detail.

Thus while designing, measuring, tinkering, prototyping, etc etc I discovered this little tidbit that was previously over looked.

I mean honestly, out of all the things to nitpick over - this is one weak argument. If you don't like the idea then don't read or waste your time with it, but finding a reason to discredit it by any means is lame.

Especially when its nothing more than pixels on a screen.

In general I'm pretty tolerant and open to feedback, but these last few posts just smell of disdain for no other reason than just because.

 

[9mmepiphany]

In general I'm pretty tolerant and open to feedback, but these last few posts just smell of disdain for no other reason than just because.

Not disdain at all, just pointing out things that I would have thought obvious before you went too far down the wrong path.

I've been part of designing and prototyping parts for guns and cars and the first thing we always started out with was a clear understanding of the original function, the projected goal and how that goal would be accomplished.

It isn't like you are breaking new ground here, it is interesting to see the process you are going through, however when you make certain assumptions without an apparent clear understanding of the original function, I would think you'd expect them to be pointed out.

It is like someone who thinks it would be a good idea to cut the barrel of a 1911 flush with the bushing, not knowing that a 1911 barrel isn't locked up parallel with the slide or someone designing a sighting system for a handgun without knowing that the barrel rises before the bullet leaves the barrel

 

[TITAN308]

Edit: After further thought - not worth the headache to try and reason with someone of this nature.

Would have expected better tact from a staff member, color me unimpressed.

I'll keep chuggin' along with my caveman ideas. Something is only as valuable as someone is willing to pay for it.

God Bless the USA.

 

[TITAN308]

This is just my 2 cents to anyone who is doing something you want to do and people dropping negiaive bombs on you.

Remember, in the end there is usually only people that matter who you should be concerned with and the rest can pound sand:

(In a comical turn of irony this showed up in my email box at work a few minutes ago)

Hi Damien,
CZ-USA commented on your photo.
CZ-USA wrote: "Very cool. Good luck with the project. When we were developing our tactical block, we tossed this idea around, but never actually built one. Keep us updated."

 

[LJ-MosinFreak-Buck]

Only thing I have to question is your blocky designs, like we see in your .308 project. In my opinion, it's too much, and just looks ugly. But if it woks, awesome. Get the product out there and keep up the good work.


Sent from my MP3/Hands-Free/Web-Browsing Device

 

[TITAN308]

No offense taken, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I will say if you look at current production free floats all of them are basically octagon in shape (same as ours), its just less apparent because of the rails and cut outs.

 

[LJ-MosinFreak-Buck]

Well, it just throws me off because it's too "large" in my opinion. I don't like blocky. Like the Beretta compensators seen on this post, or even like the 1911's with them shown on this post, that's what I find pleasant to look at. I just couldn't stand looking at a brick on the end of my pistol.

 

[TITAN308]

Just an idea - its a prototype that has not even been reproduced in physical form yet. There seems to be a (very) common misconception that people seem to equate "prototype" to "retail".


Please don't tell me you think it would really come with wallpaper swirly paint and aerodynamic trash bags....

 

[LJ-MosinFreak-Buck]

LOL Well I'm just expressing an opinion. Like I said, you have my support, go with it! lol

 

[TITAN308]

I know, but it seemed like you opinion was based on something that has not even been made yet.

Not that your not welcome to your opinion, but just pointing that out is all.

 

[LJ-MosinFreak-Buck]

Lol what I meant to say, and should have said in lieu of what I did actually say, was that your initial design is too large and ill-formed to my tastes.

But like I said, I support you fully, despite the way I am currently unattracted to the design. I have gotten some flack for some of my designs, too, for mil-surp rifles (you can see some of them and my ideas in my sig line).

But I'm all for innovation, and the small business ideas, and the next big ideas. From a fellow tinkerer and hobbyist, I hope you don't think I come off as someone high and mighty, because I sure as hell ain't any of them.

 

[TITAN308]

No not at all, like I said no offense taken! Just was pointing out an observation!