/k/ - Weapons

>embed shitting itself now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1ELw8utoOg&t=4s

Another video from the project. I remember reading about the superiority of free floated hand guards a number of years ago, but I only recently began noticing widespread use of them the past two years. Many 'entry level' AR's don't use free floating, I presume because it's cheaper.

>>518952

Why wood? Polymer as I understand is much more weather resistant and doesn't require as much care. As for bayonets, would they be worth adding onto the rifle? Any particular style that would be more effective?

>>518953

Because nostalgia faggot.

>>518957

Why would offsetting the axis of the barrel be beneficial? Maybe in recoil reduction, but the 5.56 is a light enough round that with a proper muzzle device wouldn't benefit much, if any from a modification that complicates the sighting slightly.

>>518957

PSA manages to mass produce free-float uppers just fine.

La france m16k Gas System.

>>518949

Why a sub 20 inch barrel? The increased velocity helps with defeating armor and the weight gain isn't that bad.

>>518962

And it would have a cambering l like the sr-25

https://youtu.be/DVWf_TcW7nw?t=373

>>518949

>Thus, I propose a collaborative board effort to joint-design an AR-15 that will hopefully be the standard issue AR pattern rifle for /k/ommandos everywhere.

Better idea: standard issue 20 mm anti-tank rifles.

>>518949

Lets see.

>18" 1/8 twist

>mid length

>free float hand guard with rails

>rail gas block

>adjustable stock

>endplate mount

I don't know what to do about the muzzle break besides on putting one that doesn't interfere with the direction the gas spins the bullet.

>>518985

>>518949

>18" 1/8

>mid length

>free float m-lock, top terminates in 1913

>multiple detent adjustable gas block

>your optic(?)

>maglite d-cell threaded to muzzle

A design for the lower receiver that would be very simple to make with a drill, a hacksaw, and a rasp.

Vid shows aluminum casting process, but it's a standard design.

>>518949

>polymer lower

Looks unbalanced as fuck have fun firing that at a distance…

Not trying to derail, but what's wrong with an M&P II? I had the chance to fingerfuck one the other day, and it felt cheap as I'd expect, but I hear they perform just fine.

>>519010

theyre good as far as I know, only black rifle whoops as far as S&W was their AR styled 22 was shearing sears and going whoopsie auto.

>>518949

Also, what's with their weird hate boner for the forward assist?

>>519008

you could save more weight overall by using aluminum cased ammo than making your rifle one-drop broken.

>>519017

>Also, what's with their weird hate boner for the forward assist?

why would you want to force a round into battery if it would not go into battery by the weapon's own springs? - their reasoning

>>519005

>polymer lower

for an ar15 at least, not a smart idea. put any amount of weight on it, then shatters. someone here sat on their polymer ar15 lower and broke it.

>>519032

>why would you want to force a round into battery if it would not go into battery by the weapon's own springs? - their reasoning

For when you pull the bolt back to make sure a round went into battery?

>>519051

If you pull the bolt back far enough, you won't need to push it in. The force of the spring will do it for you.

If you need to do it silently, then you have confidence problems to correct.

The indentation on the bolt carrier is also a good place to push. If your bolt doesn't go into battery, then you likely have ammunition that would be better off not being used.

There's also the issue of the forward assist being so exposed and off to the side, which is explained in the video - if you place the FA against a hard enough surface and unknowingly depress it, it will cause a catastrophic failure that will render the gun unusable.

>>519057

>if you place the FA against a hard enough surface and unknowingly depress it, it will cause a catastrophic failure that will render the gun unusable

if you fire it with the FA depressed*

>>518949

Really their most expensive parts are the polymer lower and the carbon fiber handguards. I think otherwise their findings seem to make sense.

Though I think no backup iron sights with a Holosun isn't very smart. If your gonna take of the iron sights I think you need to have an Aimpoint on there.

>>519032

>for an ar15 at least, not a smart idea. put any amount of weight on it, then shatters. someone here sat on their polymer ar15 lower and broke it.

They did destructive testing on that model of polymer lower. Seems pretty reliable.

https://www.full30.com/video/31a73f8fade48648de9f917af92fdd53

>>519008

To have good control over any firearm the center of gravity of the gun needs to be as close as possible from your dominant hand.

That's why Browning designs won over Mauser, why so many bullpup sucks (back heavy), why for so long designers insisted on having bipods even if no-one ever used them, etc…

It's precision gun design 101, if you're almost holding the center of gravity, you have near complete control over the recoil, meaning the weapon won't bounce around. What's the point of firing 5.56 out of a super AR if it's gonna kick like at SCAR-H…

I went and listened to some of their last videos while writing this post and surprise:

while they're done making the carbine, they can't seem to be able to make a precision version, (I laughed, daily reminder that in any self-respecting army you're supposed to regularly hit man size targets at 300m with ironsights only without starting in position. Hell in the USMC you're supposed to do it while moving…)

Also

> complains about sport/range shooting being not close from the reality

>so you need to run around in dust firing at 50-75m against dozens of targets.

I'd take any old fat fudd capable of hitting 9/10 at 300m fixed target on iron sight with his fucking M14 over those two.

They're… dude bros with firearms.

"Man do you even run 3-guns course".

Nope you faggot if I ever have to carry the weight of a fucking semi-auto shotgun on top of my rifle I'd just carry more ammo you retard.

Hell if you have any non-manual rifle why the fuck do you want a shotgun for? Being fucking heavy and out of rounds after a few shots??? Hell you're better off with a fucking lever action!

>because some guys in the military/swat have them.

Yeah and they fire breaching rounds with them… not shot when any punk with $1000 can buy a fucking bullet proof hoodie…

>>519089

I just watched two dudebros explaining how they're gonna make a terrible expensive competition gun because they got youtube money for an hour.

I might be a tad bit angry…

>>519091

>>519088

You must be fucking retarded or deaf, or know nothing about this project. They specifically HATE 3-gun minded shooting and are attempting to see if Stoner's original idea, a lightweight combat rifle, is still applicable.

They are trying everything they can not to be the SOPMOD ARs that weigh damn near 11-12 pounds.

They are also bitching that they can't fine tune the OPTIC on the precision rifle, not that it won't work.

>I laughed, daily reminder that in any self-respecting army you're supposed to regularly hit man size targets at 300m with ironsights

On a square range for qualification, they are running this stuff in matches that are not 3-gun like.

>>519091

Karl regularly runs trooper and has repeatedly expressed that including the shotgun in 3 gun is arbitrary and pointless.

>>519095

The shotgun is what makes 3 Gun what it is. Remove it and the sport becomes 2 Gun even if the organizers try to make certain stages difficult enough that one could justify carrying a rifle in addition to their carbine. A good shooter with a carbine can still hang with mediocre shooters using rifles at long range.

The problem with shotguns in 3 Gun is that most stages are glorified shoot houses that do nothing to promote the development and use of shotgun skills. A good stage includes clays and other small, fast moving targets that represent the kind of work a shotgun is expected to do in the real world.

The point of 3 Gun was that those 3 shooting disciplines are unique enough that the pursuit of mastery in all 3 would make for a fun and engaging sport. Unfortunately, organizers tended to be more of the "tactical" variety of gun hobbyist and put little effort into creating stages that require skills derived from other shotgun sports. Now you have people like yourself advocating for the removal of the shotgun because it is poorly implemented.

>>518965

Its a room clearing thing. the trade off to a <16in barrel is it is more suited to HD and urban warfare while still being reliable to put holes in man-sized targets at 300m for shooters of all skill levels even with irons.

>>519100

So then the question becomes "What skillsets are unique to the shotgun?" and "How would you use the above to create a Shotgun/Pistol 'Action Challenge' match?"

Thinking out loud:

>firearm manipulation / single loading / ammo changeover

>calling your shots, knowing your pattern with your gun and ammo, then choosing accordingly between bird/buck/slug/???

>sighting and targeting small, fast moving targets, basically sporting clays

>???

>>519032

no, you can't, aluminum cased rifle ammo isn't a thing. it is for pistols, because low pressure, and tanks, because weight is more important than expensive metallurgy.

>for an ar15 at least, not a smart idea. put any amount of weight on it, then shatters. someone here sat on their polymer ar15 lower and broke it.

there are 1001 things that can be called "polymer." I'm assuming you know someone dumb enough to buy an american tactical, new frontier armory, or one of the dozen other plastic trash lowers. the GWACs (cav arms) is glass reinforced nylon, similar to what is used in pistol frames.

>>519088

the "one hand balance" is early 20th century bullpup logic. it'd make sense if you 'fire the gun with one hand, but you don't. it's over straining your dominant arm. a well balanced rifle weighs evenly to both arms. balancing about the magazine like that is perfect, most of the weight is at the cg so it moves effortlessly.

>>519017

us mil required jam enhancer, design team didn't want it. quickest way to turn a case failure in to an unserviceable rifle.

I've been looking at parts for the /k/AR-15 and currently have these:

>Barrel

http://palmettostatearmory.com/psa-ar-15-18-rifle-length-223-wylde-1-7-4150v-nidride-barrel-77932743.html

>Upper

https://www.brownells.com/rifle-parts/receiver-parts/receivers/upper-receivers/ar-15-stripped-upper-w-marking-no-forward-assist-prod81821.aspx?avs%7cCartridge_1=AJO_223%2bWylde

>Lower

http://www.primaryarms.com/aero-precision-stripped-ar-15-lower-receiver-gen-2-apar501101

I still need a BGC, trigger, gas system (rifle length), furniture, and sights/optics. Any ideas or improvements? Places I should look?

>>519610

>.223 Wylde barrel

But why? It's kinda crap for both 5.56 and .223 while being advertised as safe for both, but there aren't any loads for .223 that aren't available for 5.56 or warrant even humoring .223 Wylde chambering.

>>519627

The ability to interchange between the two calibers seemed appealing. Do you know of any better alternatives?

>>519652

Buy two uppers, one for each.

>>519676

The rifle I'm designing is to simplify logistics for those who cannot afford two uppers. I've read elsewhere that .223 Wylde is more than adequate with either caliber.

>>519679

It's "safe" with both - the rifling starts a bit early for 5.56 and the .223 projectile has to jump a small unrifled segment. It's got weird issues with pressure, mainly, since it's an intermediate between intermediates.

It's more suitable for plinking rather than serious use, or for when you have a mixed bag of both calibers you can't avoid using.

>>519685

So you'd recommend a dedicated 5.56 barrel?

>>519689

5.56 is very common and .223 vanishes alongside 5.56 during ammunition droughts, so yes.

>>519627

So wait, are there actually practical concerns with running .223 through a barrel chambered for 5.56? I've always thought that 5.56 may cause issues in older .223 rifles due to the higher standardized pressure but running .223 through a 5.56 rifle had no downsides.

What are the actual compatibility issues between the 2?

>>519804

Slight fireforming due to the geometry of the brass in the slightly different chamber and inaccuracy due to the distance between the bullet and the rifling.

It's safe but don't expect it to perform well.

>>518949

>inrangetv

>disables comments on some videos

why are they this gay now?

>>519819

>>519804

Preformance of .223 was an afterthought, the rifle is being designed with heavy grain 5.56 loads in mind. Thanks for the clarification, i'll look for a suitible barrel after work.

Bump.

>>520571

They probably regularly have faggots shitting up the comment section (as in making it ridiculously shit even for youtube standards) because of Vegas and would rather avoid dealing with that for teh time being.

Or maybe they're just faggots, who knows.