Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Sturgeon

Administrator
  • Content Count

    15,790
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    151

Everything posted by Sturgeon

  1. This is why you're a genius, and I'm not. I'm a very dedicated idiot.
  2. I don't know that I agree about the Benelli R1, but my experience is with the MR1 and it might be somewhat mechanically different. It was a nightmare to disassemble and reassemble it. But you're right about the rest of "sporting rifles", they all suck tremendously.
  3. This squares with what my little birds had been telling me. The 95 round drum was a disaster and led to the demise of the entire RPK-16, basically.
  4. Sean Connery has died https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-54761824 "Some age, others mature."
  5. Only if the feeding was ludicrously improper. That can happen with some jams with brass cased ammo for example.
  6. Moving the barrel higher typically makes recoil management much more difficult. Plus, if the gas system is below the barrel, you have to route around the magazine somehow. That introduces manufacturing complexity and structural weakness in a part that sees significant forces (the operating rod).
  7. How could you not have heard of the GLORIOUS OPEN BOLT TRACERS ONLY LAND NAVAL BOARDING IMPLEMENT?
  8. Oh, that's a really broad criteria, but yeah it might be. 1893 is extremely early for a fixed piston design.
  9. Depends whether there's interest. I still can't drum up enough people to reboot the truck comp.
  10. Note that the F-5's receiver is actually really small, it's smaller than a combined AR-15 upper/lower (and does not need an extension).
  11. Top to bottom: F-4 Phantom, F-5 CODPIECE/Tiger, F-12 Archangel, F-6 Hellcat, F-5G Tigershark, F-7 Shinden The F-8 Bearcat is not shown, but it's basically a slightly shortened Archangel for a different max COAL.
  12. I thought it was a guide rod but I might be mistaken as I haven't checked out a DE in a long time. I did base the APED on the F-4 on the AUG's design though, just a different approach. If you're talking about my design, that's the F-5 and F-6. The F-7 is a bullpup with an extruded upper.
  13. The APE device on the F-4 (which also appears on the F-5, F-6, F-12, and F-8) is mechanically distinct from the Desert Eagle/Tavor approach. Both use guide rods to achieve anti-rotation, but the consequence is that they do not achieve APE. The bolt being forced against the guide rod causes significant friction during feeding, which my approach eliminates. Fundamentally, the APE device on the F-4 is a simplification of the "claw" on the Steyr AUG. So in order to achieve a frictionless cycle, the APE device needs to be separate. If you don't know what APE is, this video I made explains it:
×
×
  • Create New...