autogun

Military Guns and Ammunition

Hosted by autogun

This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons, particularly in larger calibres (12.7+mm).

  • 3177
    MEMBERS
  • 180511
    MESSAGES
  • 2
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Exploring The Design Space   Ammunition <20mm

Started 25/7/15 by NathanielF; 101071 views.
QuintusO

From: QuintusO

13-Sep

tidusyuki said:

In extruded receiver designs, does the bolt carrier rides directly on the receiver wall or does it need some sort of additional steel railing in the interior for the bolt carrier to rides on?

It depends. The ACR does have fastened on steel guide rails, but the HK433, CZ Bren 2, and BT APC series do not (I'm not super familiar with the APC series but it looks like what's bolted on the left inside of the receiver is an ejector, not a guide rail. You can see that on the APC9 here:)



I assume that design is a bit different on the APC556/223, but you can see the extruded guide rail right above it.

The SCAR uses the same design, you can see that in the raw extrusions here:

Archangel and Bearcat also use this arrangement.

  • Edited 13 September 2020 13:34  by  QuintusO
QuintusO

From: QuintusO

13-Sep

tidusyuki said:

Also how did the barrel mated in the 433? is there any sort of barrel block/trunnion molded directly inside the upper just like the old G36? Looking at the receiver i don't see any sort of screws outside where the barrel extension is supposed to be like APC, SCAR and BREN It is supposed to be a quick change barrel so i'm assuming the design is quite similar to the MCX. In the MCX to detach the barrel you just need to loosen a pair of screws that tighten the barrel in place.

HK433 patents:

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=US&NR=2018259275A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20180913&DB=&locale=en_EP#

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=US&NR=2018259276A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20180913&DB=&locale=en_EP#

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=US&NR=2018259278A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20180913&DB=&locale=en_EP

roguetechie

From: roguetechie

13-Sep

Yes, a 4moa gun that can never be better than that is the closest thing to the best we have...

autogun

From: autogun

13-Sep

tidusyuki said:

I really have no why they decided to go with 416.

Emeric can answer that... see: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/6744/1

  • Edited 13 September 2020 14:38  by  autogun
Red7272

From: Red7272

13-Sep

roguetechie said:

Yes, a 4moa gun that can never be better than that is the closest thing to the best we have...

Given what most assault rifles are used for that isn't too bad. I'm not really a fan of the bullpup either because of the LOP, but as the basis of a good rifle it's an excellent place to start.

QuintusO

From: QuintusO

13-Sep

It has some interesting detail features (the cam system I ripped off for all of my rotary bolt rifles, very good idea), but overall I disagree. It's not a space efficient design.

roguetechie

From: roguetechie

13-Sep

Honestly, my favorite pick for bullpups is still the AUG.

An honest to God super AUG 2.0 could definitely be worth doing but we all know it's never gonna happen.

As far as tavor goes, settling for four moa is a distinctly suboptimal decision no matter how you want to try to spin it in an era when bargain basement AR's that are only partially in spec are genuinely difficult to make shoot that bad...

Like it's just not actually justifiable, so unjustifiable in fact that the country the gun was ostensibly made for doesn't run it in any unit where they're allowed to use anything else.

autogun

From: autogun

14-Sep

roguetechie said:

Honestly, my favorite pick for bullpups is still the AUG.

I am fond of that gun, as well. A couple of years ago or so I visited Steyr and had some discussions with them, as well as a detailed presentation on the AUG. What struck me is that this 40-year-old gun is still highly advanced today. I do think that Steyr missed an opportunity, though: instead of developing yet another 5.56 mm AR-15 descendant, they really should have put the money into a 7.62 x 51 AUG. That way, they could have offered armies the opportunity to adopt both 5.56 mm and 7.62 mm rifles/ARs with matched handling - and had something that could easily be converted to 6.5 mm Creedmoor or whatever. Hindsight is a wonderful thing!

tidusyuki

From: tidusyuki

14-Sep

Thanks for the links. After looking at those patent images for quite sometime unfortunately i still don't really understand the barrel mating procedure nor how the barrel is supposed to be placed tightly inside the upper. The detailed description has so many engineering terms that are quite hard to grasp either. Mind explaining it to me?

Also I'm just really curious about it. How is the barrel block/trunnion manufactured and attached in the extruded upper?
here in the MCX barrel block there's no visible screws nor pin unlike on those SCAR type rifles.





 

Msg 6327.1146 deleted
TOP