/k/ - Weapons

Also, how viable do you think bullpup SMG would be? It seems like bullpups go well with longer barrels, while is a compact package of an SMG they'd only add weight and make them bulkier, while collapsible/folding stock could work just as well.

Does SITES Spectre double action trigger offer anything to the design? What's its use and why don't any rifles have this?

polite sage for doublepost

I would like 10mm auto for a subgun with a foldable stock and a total overall length without stock of 12 inches, with a direct impingement or short piston system and reinforced bolt so that you can load the cartridge to it's proper norma magnum level now and forever, and an adjustable gas system for anything less. Barrel should be ballard cut, featuring a stair-step front sight with an adjustable rear mounted as far back on the upper as it can go (sighted at 75m), and the barrel should be ported 90 degrees from the sight. Ashwood fore-end should be hard-mounted to the upper, and the barrel allowed to float. Grip and trigger should be mounted in the first 3 inches of lower, or mounted in the last six inches if bullpup config, set at 3.5lbs, and the gun should be able to use glock mags. Finally, it should be easily field stripped. The idea for this gun is as a woodsman's gun. It's mostly out of the way, can do a lot of fighting, and put meat in the pot.

>>628554

Wouldn't you be getting a higher percentage of barrel length increase, though?

>>628555

Are glockmags the best idea for a select-fire gun? I would imaging a magazine that's double feed as well as double stack would be more reliable.

SMGs are kinda going out of style nowadays. I think the only thing that could reinvigorate them would be if some sort of more powerful calibre was taken up for use like the aussie said, but that is unlikely cause everyone will just keep using 9mm for the foreseeable future.

>>628561

Given that glocks tend to reliably function with the giggleswitch says otherwise.

>>628556

You could get a bit of barrel length from that but you'd probably gain more bulkiness and weight from that. There feels like diminishing returns from using bullpup the shorter barrel you go. The closest thing you can do is locate mag in the grip(think UZI) instead of the back of the receiver like an MP5, though all it does is move the grip forward so you have less space for your left hand without extending receiver/handguard, still requiring a stock but having receiver closer to your face and limit your grip/mag choice to fit both(not a problem with 9mm but once we go to 10mm or even double feed things change).

So basically go with magazine in the grip for super compact options that take place of a pistol/sidearm(that uses pistol length barrel) and use a proper grip behind the magazine for longer barrel, proper double(or quad) stack double feed magazine and serve as the main gun.

>>628555

>10mm auto

Good, though something more suitable for a paired handgun like 357sig(or improvement of it like 9dillon or similar) would be better in most cases.

>foldable stock

Sure, why not

>total overall length without stock of 12 inches

Will you cut the barrel to reach that?

>direct impingement or short piston system

Why? You could have virtually any system and you choose a gas one. Various blowbacks shine in SMGs, there's so much that can be done and you pick a gas operates system. Really?

>you can load the cartridge to it's proper norma magnum level now and forever

It's an SMG, man. A small rifle that shoots pistol rounds. How weak should you make a rifle to make it not able to withstand pressures that a handgun can?

>ballard cut

Why not polygonal?

>stair-step front sight

Front? Not rear? maybe i'm misunderstanding but how does this thing look? DDG shows me stairs.

>as far back on the upper as it can go

No reason not to.

>barrel should be ported 90 degrees from the sight

Is that really necessary? Why not get an appropriate muzzle device instead?

>Ashwood fore-end

That's kinda imo.

>hard-mounted to the upper

Ok

>barrel allowed to float

It won't with a gas system but most SMGs do have these, sure.

>Grip and trigger should be mounted in the first 3 inches of lower

Yeah, why wouldn't you do that?

>or mounted in the last six inches if bullpup config

Ok, though maybe you should leave a bit more space for a forward grip.

>set at 3.5lbs

Make the mechanism simple and modifiable enough to either make it adjustable or have options.

>the gun should be able to use glock mags

Hell no. Double stack single feed mags are cancer. Either use single stacks or use double feed, it's possible and the only reason it's not used is stupidity and laziness. If we care about actual characteristics instead of brand names and fanboyism then double feed mags are: easier to reload, cheaper to manufacture, more reliable, simpler, have more parts compatibility and easier to interchange. Do not support the magazine jew that inflates magazine prices.

>it should be easily field stripped

Ar-style push pins would be good enough. No need to turn it into fancy puzzle box with bells and whistles.

I appreciate the levels of autism in this post but some things are just out of place.

>>628575

You have an autistic definition of submachine gun, anon.

>>628575

Go shoot yourself with your fully semiautomatic assault sporter rifle/15" barrel pistol with an arm brace, mr. ATF agent.

>>628575

First of all, >>628323 mostly covers this thread. SMGs are only good for police duty where you do want to limit your firepower. And at that point a machine pistol with a brace and a RoF limiter would be perfectly fine.

>>628575

Submachine gun was invented by general Thompson to market his automatic weapon. Machine pistol would make a lot more sense, after all most languages use that term for this category of weapons. It's similar to how German and English uses Sturmgewehr (and its translation), which was a propaganda term. Maschinenkarabiner (machine carbine) would be a much better name.

Is there any small caliber suited for SMGs that can penetrate armor? My biggest issue with SMGs is that against an armored opponent they're trash, and even 60IQ tyrone can order a level 4 plate online.

>>628578

>On an SMG? Are you high?

Not that anon, but he's right.

Compare the weight of the gas-operated Type 79 submachine gun (1.75kg)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_79_submachine_gun

to the Soviet PPS-43 submachine gun (3.04kg)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PPS_submachine_gun

or to the Yugoslav M56 submachine gun (3kg)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M56_submachine_gun

…and think also that a gas-operated SNG can be designed to fire from a closed bolt in semi and open bolt in full-auto, which would give a significant accuracy advantage.

>>628580

What is your definition of a submachine gun, machine pistol, pistol, rifle, etc?

>>628581

The point of a submachine gun is that it fires pistol ammunition. The point of a pistol is that you can use it effectively with one hand if you have to, and that greatly limits the cartridge. With all of that your only option would be 6.5mm CKJ, a Swedish cartridge based on 9mm Parabellum. But that has to use a tungsten core, which makes it way too expensive for a mere pistol cartridge.

>>628582

MP5K - 2kg

Sig MPX(gas operated) - 2.7kg

Beretta Cx4 Storm(16" barrel) - 2.5kg

Agram 2000 - 1.8kg

Jatmatic - 1.65kg

And these are not "machine pistols" that can easily weigh even less.

Type 79 also seems to use plastic receiver, compared to full metal ones in your examples. Its light weight might also cause durability problems(knowing chinks, especially) and paired with its EXTREME rate of fire at 1000rpm would be almost uncontrollable, limiting its use. Remember, most firearms are overbuilt and reducing fire rate is often done by increasing bolt weight.

> designed to fire from a closed bolt in semi and open bolt in full-auto

That's some high-level autism. If you can fire it from closed bolt in semiauto, go with it in full auto as well, it'll improve your accuracy and remove the need for this autism while the only disadvantage compared to open bolt would be a bit more heat but it's not a MG so who cares.

>>628583

>Sure, there's still BC to consider but this still shows something.

Pistol cartridges are useless even at 200m, so they shouldn't be the main weapon of an infantry squad even if you adhere to the 300m doctrine that dominates current thinking. And if they aren't the main weapon, then you are just adding an other weapon to the mix for no good reason.

>and reveal how close to SMGs our modern rifles are in terms of power

That's a problem with the modern idea of the assault rifle, it's just a glorified submachine gun.

>at least take .357 magnum rimless and use a revolver with a moon clip to call it "pistol"

Or just take any weapon chambered for 9x25mm Mauser Export.

>>628588

Yeah, i've found on Belgian Wikipedia info on vbr-b and it's 1.5kg blowback.

>>628584

> 6.5mm CKJ

Can't find any information on this. Sauce?

>>628591

He meant 6.5mm CBJ, it's a typo.

>>628588

>to please those in need of PDW

That's why I pointed at the PDW thread, we will end up discussing the same things. See: >>628402

>9x25ME would have a hard time fitting in the grip of a modern handgun when even 10mm does

It's literally as long as 7.62 Tokarev, and that cartridge is longer than 10mm Auto. It obviously won't fit into a weapon designed for 9mm Parabellum, but you could redesign nearly any of them for it without changing the external dimensions. Like that relatively new chink pistol for 7.62 Tokarev that is otherwise a straight copy of an older Sig Sauer pistol.

>posted it one one of the previous threads but nobody r8ed

The problem is that you'd have to make this cartridge, load it into a pistol, and do some tests to figure out what it can really do. You could actually do it if you had 10mm Auto brass and reloading tools for .357 SIG. Making the barrel would be a bit trickier, but you'd just have to push the .357 SIG's tool down a bit deeper to cut the chamber.

>>628591

I messed up the name.

http://www.gotavapen.se/gota/cbj/cbj_crtg.htm

http://www.cbjtech.com/ammunition/6-5x25-cbj/6-5x25-cbj-ball/

>>628588

I've also digged in Russian SMGs and there are a few interesting ones. Most of them are lightweight too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PP-91_KEDR - 1.54-1.57kg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PP-2000 - 1.4kg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bizon_SMG - 2.1kg, has 60% parts commonality with AKS-74

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR-2_Veresk - 1.65kg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PP-90M1 - 2.06kg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OTs-02_Kiparis - 1.6kg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PP-93 - 1.47kg

And also

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Br%C3%BCgger_%26_Thomet_MP9 - 1.3-1.4kg

It seems most modern SMGs have given up on controllability and just reduce weight with increase of ROF. Kind of feels like the symbol of the decay of the weapon class.

>>628595

Yeah, that thread was the thing that pushed me to make this one, i wanted a bit more attention towards SMGs specifically but there's an overlap in the roles of the weapons, obviously.

>It's literally as long as 7.62 Tokarev

5.7 is even longer but it can pull this out because it's so thin. That's why there have been complaints about the size of 10mm double stack even though it's shorter. it's not as much about the design but about comfort and size - 10mm as a "full power" pistol cartridge in double stacks is fine(with proper design) but really stretching it, especially with double feed.

>The problem is that you'd have to make this cartridge, load it into a pistol, and do some tests to figure out what it can really do

Yeah, but i assumed that it'd be something inbetween 9x25 dillon and 357sig as it's almost perfectly in the middle in dimensions.

>You could actually do it if you had 10mm Auto brass and reloading tools for .357 SIG

Well, because of my flag you can see that i cannot, but there'd be issues with that - there's 9x25mm dillon that does exactly that - necks 10mm with a 357 sig die, while my cartridge requires to go beyond that as you lower the shoulder and prolong the neck and i'm unsure if you can even do this with 357 sig die. Can you push the die beyond that point?

>>628633

I was thinking .30 Carbine.

The P90 had the right idea with a small but high velocity round, capable of penetrating armor with a large magazine to boot. It feels like innovation in SMGs ended with the P90, because there's nothing else notable other than maybe the MP7 and Vector.

>>628579

I'm inclined to agree with you, at least partially, although there are other things to consider such as many Slavic languages who have no original term for submachine guns and simply have a generic category for 'automatic weapons that aren't machine guns' (avtomat, samopal, etc.) which includes both subguns and carbines - in some rare cases even full length rifles. American society in general lends itself more towards a familiarity with guns, which is why we have several terms other nations and languages don't use; 'battle rifle' is a common example. Other peoples simply call it a rifle or use their 'assault rifle' analogue despite a full-power rifle cartridge overpowered and cumbersome for assault tactics.

This subject is always interesting to me because no language is as analytical about it as English, but ultimately there are so many things that blur definable lines (such as the ZK-383 which is either an SMG or an LMG, or the Villar-Perosa which is a pistol caliber aircraft machine gun) that it becomes a bit subjective and comes down to discussions of linguistics at times. It's a fun thing to autism about.

For example, the M1 Carbine is a rifle, but .30 Carbine is shaped like a pistol cartridge and performs similar to .357 Magnum… but its pressure curve was designed for the 18" barrel specifically, making it a definite rifle round.

>>628584

>pistol - a gun designed for use with one hand and no need for a stock, can have the magazine located in the grip or externally (or have a cylinder, etc)

>rifle - a gun designed for two-handed use from the shoulder, magazine is not integral to the grip

>carbine - functionally the same as a rifle, but shorter

>subcarbine - ditto, but with an even shorter barrel (think AKS-74U)

>submachine gun - a small caliber automatic weapon, compact but two-handed, typically open bolt, external magazine

>machine/auto pistol - a pistol, but automatic (G18, CZ 75 Auto, Skorpion)

I call the MP5 a PCC since it's a cut down G3.

>>628638

That faggot's shitposting, don't go for the bait.

>I was thinking .30 Carbine

.357 magnum can shoot 158gr bullet at the same velocities as 110gr 30 carbine does, resulting in more energy. 144gr 30carbine does have 2" less drop at 200yds than 158gr 357, though 170+gr magnum can probably match that, i dunno. .357 magnum is really a great cartridge, my favorite as well, even if only in theory.

>It feels like innovation in SMGs ended with the P90

In Russia they make AP pistol rounds with a steel penetrator that is separated from the jacket by polyethylene layer so that it stays in one piece when entering soft tissue and probably even expanding and when it hits a hard barrier the core separates from the jacket and punches through. They are very velocity dependent and not very aerodynamic, though, but it's a lot better than creating a whole new cartridge and weapons for that purpose.

>>628641

It feels like overly complicating things. Call anything that fires pistol cartridges and is longer than a handgun and/or capable of automatic fire an SMG and have subclasses like machine pistol for a pistol-sized or maybe with magazine inside the grip SMG and call a PCC any semiautomatic SMG. Other than that, just compare actual models and their traits to fit a special purpose. That'd simplify things a lot. I don't know where and how to push the term PDW in here, though.

>>628646

If we're looking at the purpose of the weapons then take a look at APS stechkin and this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OTs-33_Pernach as they too have been viewed kinda for this role.

>>628645

>That faggot's shitposting, don't go for the bait.

Aware, I just wanted to talk about how .30 Carbine had the right idea.

>.357 magnum can shoot 158gr bullet at the same velocities as 110gr 30 carbine does, resulting in more energy.

I know that .30 Carbine isn't a particularly well designed cartridge but it and the gun it accompanied did introduce some interesting and fresh ideas into firearms design. Interesting nonetheless, has anybody ever put a .357 in a SMG? It's been put in autoloading pistols before with the Deagle brand Deagle and that Coonan pistol.

5.7 essentially feels like a more modern take on the same ideas and it essentially perfected balancing recoil, velocity, energy and AP potential for something roughly .30 Carbine sized, and at the same time it can also function as a pistol round.

>In Russia they make AP pistol rounds with a steel penetrator that is separated from the jacket by polyethylene layer so that it stays in one piece… They are very velocity dependent and not very aerodynamic, though

I've heard of them, sounds like a good solution to the problem. The velocity dependence doesn't sound like a big issue in the sub-100m distances you expect SMGs and pistols to be used, it sounds like it does the job 'good enough' to get it done. The primary issue I could see from being velocity dependent is that it would limit its potential when you'd want to go subsonic & suppressed with it, as it wouldn't carry too much energy and hence wouldn't do too much damage.

>>628662

>has anybody ever put a .357 in a SMG

There was some Venezuelan abomination called "Tor" but that's it. Many attempts to copy it in rimless package have been made, with .357 sig being the most successful. There's also 357 magnum rimless and 357 maximum rimless that are made from 5.56 brass before it's formed and they fit into an AR and even sometimes called that way(.357 AR). Pistol caliber carbine manufacturers also slowly adopting 357 sig and i've heard that even some country wanted to issue it as their main cartridge, iirc.

>5.7 essentially feels like a more modern take on the same ideas and it essentially perfected balancing recoil, velocity, energy and AP potential

It's thinner and takes a lot less space in handguns that 30 carbine, has lower energy than 9mm, significant muzzle blast and either insufficient or overpenetration. It's main pros is weight, capacity and armor piercing ability, that's it, though i'd add the use of double stack and lever delayed as a personal preference because i really dig these engineering principles, despite their application. Paul Harrell has a great video on it and explains it a lot better and in more detail than me so if you're interested go watch it.

>it can also function as a pistol round

There's been pistols chambered in 30 carbine.

>The velocity dependence doesn't sound like a big issue in the sub-100m distances

Think of 30-50m instead, sub 100m are usually effective distances for 9mm and this one is basically an overpressured 9mm in one of the variants. There're also 9x21mm rounds that are more powerful and they boast penetration of 4mm of steel at 100m but there's not much data, lots of propaganda and even less info on how it'd translate into effectiveness so go figure, especially from an smg that turned out to be shitty. Overall, it's specialized ammo, not general purpose one and i'm still unsure if it's even capable of anything other than punching holes of at least its caliber and not icepick. It's a way to defeat body armor but i wouldn't put much faith into it beyond that point.

>>628668

Ah, i found the info the very best 9x21mm AP bullet penetrates IIIA body armor at 50m. Barrel length - 4.9". If you're using smg add 25m, i guess. If you're using 9x19 then it's less than that. Again, this is AP ammo, first and foremost, it'll do some damage where other would do none but it will perform slightly better than flat nosed FMJ at best if i understand anything.

>>628671

Also, the bullets are really light and seem to be pretty big and are seated deep in the casing because even the fancy 9x21mm has similar muzzle energy to your average 9mm load(no +p levels anywhere besides pressure).

>>628682

>not MP7/10

>not Bruger & Thomet TP10

wrong again libtard

>>628689

MP10, fuck. Disregard me, I inhale dongs.

>>628682

Can this run full load 10 or do you need to load down on the powder?

Captcha:gnspue

>>628689

>not Bruger & Thomet TP10

What is it? I can't seem to find this one, only TP9.

>>628842

A fictional TP9 in 10mm. I second that idea.

>>628853

I like that AR lad, very gucci, although the tape paint job is a little rough. Is that an IR laser? What are you running for night vision if so? Can you see through that elcan with your goggles on? Also, what are those BUIS?

>A2 grip

Does it not bother your hand? The grip and and finger groove always made it a pain to hold.

>good AR SBRs

Lets say you had unlimited money for ammo, would you use some of that 77gr stuff in your SBR?

>>628917

>Can you see through that elcan with your goggles on?

I'm not him, but I can answer your question. The reason for the PEQ-15 is specifically because he can't use his sights or optics with nods on. I agree though, I like that camo job. Not as good as mine, but pretty cool.

>>628567

Interesting thoughts, my borscht eating friend.

> something more suitable for a paired handgun like 357sig(or improvement of it like 9dillon or similar) would be better in most cases.

You missed the part where I had this in mind as a woods-gun. You do NOT go up against a big boi with a 9x19. Alaskans already use the mighty ten against polar bear.

>foldable stock

>Will you cut the barrel to reach that (length)?

Including chamber you can have a barrel length of 6-8 inches given that 10mm only requires 1.3 inches in order to reliably clear the action. Using a short, high compression strength spring with a telescoping bolt or underslinging the spring means that the action can be very small indeed, especially since….

>Why? You could have virtually any system and you choose a gas one. Various blowbacks shine in SMGs, there's so much that can be done and you pick a gas operates system. Really?

>It's an SMG, man. A small rifle that shoots pistol rounds. How weak should you make a rifle to make it not able to withstand pressures that a handgun can?

….it is much easier to make a smaller and lighter and stronger action by using a gas system. In order to deal with the amount of bolt-force from a properly loaded 10mm all day erryday, you would require a lot of tool-steel behind the chamber to not blow the gun the fuck apart, which also contributes to recoil and drastically slows fire rate and contributes to overall wear and tear on the gun. A gas system mounted an inch in front of the chamber can be adjusted to your ammo to give the correct amount of bolt travel instead of ramming it into your palm all the time.

>Why not polygonal?

Because cast bullets don't like polygonal.

>Front? Not rear? maybe i'm misunderstanding but how does this thing look? DDG shows me stairs.

Revolvers like the ruger bisley use a windage adjustable sight and a front sight that looks exactly like stairs from the front to give you absolute control over where your shot lands. I have no idea what the actual name for them is.

>Is that really necessary? Why not get an appropriate muzzle device instead?

With a gun this short, you need all the sight radius you can get. Adding a muzzle-brake means you're adding more length to a gun designed to be small, and slip on suppressors exist for being vewy qwiet.

>It won't with a gas system but most SMGs do have these, sure.

It will if you mount it only a very short distance after the chamber.

>Ok, though maybe you should leave a bit more space for a forward grip.

Combine trigger-grip with forward grip for this.

>Mags

It is easier to sell a gun that uses existing parts than to add your proprietary magazines into place.

>>629078

>I had this in mind as a woods-gun

Not really a good idea to limit yourself by that. A more versatile weapon would fit this but other roles as well nicely.

>Alaskans already use the mighty ten against polar bear

They also use the mighty 357magnum, especially since heavier bullets would offer better penetration and longer barrel more energy than any 10mm handgun.

>Using a short, high compression strength spring

It'd work but it's easier to increase the size of the weapon a bit and use a normal spring that's cheaper and would work just fine but whatever you want, it's not like we can't have different designs in the same class.

>a telescoping bolt

I don't like this, it'd shift center of gravity too much reducing handling characteristics of the gun and making the blot more complex both to machine, maintain and repair.

>it is much easier to make a smaller and lighter and stronger action by using a gas system

It's not, read the thread.

>In order to deal with the amount of bolt-force from a properly loaded 10mm all day erryday, you would require a lot of tool-steel behind the chamber to not blow the gun the fuck apart

And a gas system on a short barrel would fuck everything good that was left in the gun.

>Because cast bullets don't like polygonal.

Ok, your choice.

> a windage adjustable sight and a front sight

Could you post a picture, please? i found the thing but i still don't get how it helps or even whether i found the right thing. I'd also prefer easily swappable(like they do on handguns, why the fuck that's not standard) fixed front sights and adjustable rear peer sights.

>With a gun this short, you need all the sight radius you can get

You'll still probably not mount the sights on the muzzle. You could probably mount it on the handguard, even.

>Adding a muzzle-brake means you're adding more length to a gun designed to be small, and slip on suppressors exist for being vewy qwiet.

You could just cut your barrel down and have the same OAL if you need to, or go even shorter and have it integrally suppressed under the handguard.

>It will if you mount it only a very short distance after the chamber.

It won't, it'll also ruin the barrel harmonics in lengths this short. That's all if you somehow even manage this ugly abomination cycle.

>Combine trigger-grip with forward grip for this.

You still need to get your support hand somewhere - it's a bad idea to use your main hand for that. Unless you want to hold it to the rear with your left hand or are left-handed you want 3 common points to hold the gun with - shoulder, cheek and support hand. If you need to get space that much just get a forward grip like P90.

>It is easier to sell a gun that uses existing parts than to add your proprietary magazines into place.

And it'll be a lot easier when they jam, need to be reload in stressful conditions and spend less money. Don't support cancer because it's convenient, if you do the industry will forever be stuck with stupid shit that's only good for making the jews money.

>>629164

Oh, fuck off you faggot. You're already shitting another thread with your m855a1 shilling and now you sperg about something "civilians can't comprehend" and "too dangerous".

>5.7 was designed to work in straight blowback guns

Any rimless pistol round is, you dipshit, and FiveseveN is not straight blowback.

>>629169

>Go ahead prove me wrong

>Supporting gun control

>Projecting your own degenerate retardation on gun owners

Prove yourself right, you jewish shilling piece of shit.

>Any rimless pistol round couldn't fullfill other PDW requirements of recoil and penetration

Except the requirements are rigged to only include your jewish shit. 9mm SMG penetrates all the body armor 5.7 does and recoil is just as nonexistent but they'll never mention it.

>Also there are pure straight blowback 5.7 guns.

>Pistol rounds have blowback firearms for them

Wow, what a fucking discovery

>>629177

Agains shill ate its shit. Fuck off to cuckchan, cunt.

>>630000

>go for an SMG go for something from WW2 because they're cool and that's about when they reached peak relevance.

That's an interesting point, since they also started being obsolete by 1945, thanks to the StG and VG.

>>630033

DA NYAAAAA

>>630057

>So simple in fact that you can make one out of stamped steel in your garage

Yeah, nah, the barrels are the most difficult part to make, and those are the parts that are regulated in pretty much all countries outside of the USA.

>>630000

>SMGs are kinda obsolete for most purposes these days

Only because of the usage of soyboy pistol rounds that don't do shit, but you're right, unfortunately. They are still very good options for home defense even on semi auto.

>The AR-15 is The One Rifle to Rule Them All

That's only true if you don't call it an SMG:^)

>9mm Parabellum and nothing else

That's your problem, anon. You could have so much more and you use a cartridge they would only come close to 357magnum from a whole lot longer barrel. Read the thread and you'll see the truth at last.

>I have an irrational preference

>is objectively better

That's now what objective means, anon.

>>630024

This guy gets it. Unless Attacker has body armor(that'd only limit the effectiveness but would still fail unless its hard so it wouldn't matter) it limits overpenetration and longer barrel offers quite a step up in lethality and stock, greater sights radius and all these benefits of a long weapon grant a huge step up in firepower, precision, controllability and ease of usage, especially in stressful situations. You can also throw a red dot/holo sights in there as a great addition.

>>630002

>Keep slapping my shit

I'd be right happy to

>A properly loaded 10mm subgun easily matches .357 mag in energy

Somewhat true. Based on the data i have 10mm is more limited from longer barrels than 357. 10mm reaches its max at 13" barrel at nearly 1kft-lbs(buffalo bore 180gr, the most powerful one i have data on), while 357 magnum reaches the same energy from 9" for 125gr and same 13" for heavier loads(140-158gr) while continuing to grow at least 100ft-lbs from longer barrels for heavy loads and 250ft-lbs more for lighter ones.

>advantages of three point mounting

What is this?

>higher ammo capacity for a similar form factor as a hunter's 8 inch barreled .357

Yeah, though i was thinking more along the lines of "357 in a semi auto form factor", otherwise it's out of competition despite all its goodiness. I've already mentioned this itt, be it 357magnum rimless, improved 357sig or something else. In both examples we have either a bit larger or similar capacity.

>any larger and you'd legitimately need it on a sling all the time, which makes it in the way if you need to do anything with two hands-such as if you were fishing and suddenly a hungry animal(s) likes the salmon you just hooked

Well, i like versatility more - you surely can cut down the gun for your required size but is this the only gun or its use you'll ever need? I'd sacrifice the bit of effectiveness for being able to use it in more ways and situations and it'd probably be at least good enough. In any case, we might just have different uses for the gun and so have different requirements, nothing wrong with it, just go with what you want and be objective about it. Nothing wrong with specialization as well it it is what you want.

>if you wanted to bullpup the gun

Yeah, that's true but i don't see much use for bullpup guns with barrel length of less than 16"(and even then it's about the point where they start being equally good options). Just compare P90 that has 10" barrel and MP5 that has 9" and then look at P90 but with 16" barrel and pretend MP5 with it and you'll understand what i mean.

>The simplest answer is that high pressure cartridges DO NOT use blowback because it would send the bolt clean through the chassis

And pistol caliber cartridges are not high pressure, unlike rifle ones that both operate at higher pressures(357sig is prob the highest at 40kpsi and 5.56 goes 55-62k) but extend the high pressure over time with slow burning powders. Just look up 10mm Hipont carbine if you want to see yourself.

>AR/AK pistols don't seem to have issues here

They have their gas port pretty far down the barrel, are overgassed, probably gas drainage impact performance, short action can cause problems(especially in ARs) and works less smoothly and most of all - they are FUCKING HUGE. Really, AK pistols are heavy AF as are AKs, while AR ones do have this stupid gas tube sticking out of the back. Interestingly, many AR platform pistol caliber conversions do put blowback action in there.

>>630093 (cont)

>Can do, though I admit it's a kinda shitty pic for purpose. Basically pic related.

Ok, i guess it's one of the things that are better to see once than told about 10 times. I'd prefer peep sights on the rear with that, though. Or just some red dot/holo/low powered scope with lots of drop adjustment for shooting at longer ranges. With that, 200m range would be pretty doable without such extreme measures.

>You want less radius so that you can pick off targets from a distance with the given sight setup

Putting on a heat shroud on a full fun gun would be a good idea anyway due to heat obstructing sights picture, especially on open sights. Also, easily replaceable sights are a thing i'd like to see on any gun and i don't like that only pistols and tacticool ARs usually have it. It just adds so much options" fiber optics, tritium, peep, open, backup, foldable, whatever you want sights all without any custom gunsmithing.

>survivalist's short gun

Hearing safe and comfortable to shoot as well as not alerting everyone at good 700m around you of your presence is never a bad thing, especially in survival situation.

>Provided you can mount the section of barrel that has the gas system to the chassis the rest of the barrel is not affected

Again, your gas system would either bulky, heavy, unwieldy, throw off the balance and mount on the barrel(adding all the messing required like drilling it, needing special tools for gas block, gas tube, all fouling and heat in the receiver) or all of these at once it's not a good option. They would probably be a lot more ammo sensitive than blowback as well, and more expensive and less versatile too. It'd be a lot easier to get a new barrel for a blowback SMG when SHTF then if you're using gas system. you could also just make it open bolt if something breaks as well.

>These two I am willing to simply fold on because furniture design can be played with

I'll go with it, as i'm not really interested in bullpup SMGs that much.

>>630057

Also this. It's really something worth looking at. Make it out of better parts, give it a nice finish and mag release and you have a great and reliable weapon that's still cheaper than most equally nice options while still capable of getting shit done without much trouble and annoyance.

357 SIG vs 10MM submachine gun? How about 45 auto?

>>630095

10mm Auto wins with a proper Norma spec or higher load, .357 Sig can win with expanding ammo if against an FBI Lite load. .45 ACP loses against both, but if you load it to .45 Super spec then it will easily beat both .357 SIG and Limpwrist rounds, while providing a tradeoff against full house 10mm.

>>630095

>>630095

357SIG does not go that great out of longer barrels but i'd still give out 850ft-lbs out of 14" barrel, while 10mm maxes out at 13" and nearly 1000ft-lbs. 10mm does have substantially more recoil and power(from shorter barrel as well) but both are pretty good options so i'd go with the one you have handgun in - if you can handle 10mm go for it, if you CC or want a specific pistol then SIG would be a better option. 45 is only interesting for going subsonic, otherwise it's just an outdated alternative to 9mm.

>>630109

And i keep telling you that it's not a good option, just like 357 mag rimless is not, only an example of solution that matches ballistic performance of my desired cartridge. It's also easier to remember, understand and describe 357MR than it is 9x25 that you have to search load data for.

>>630109

>no bottlenecking to aid in feeding

The best option would be 10mm-length .357 sig

>>630113

It's called 9x25mm Dillon, anon. It's good, powerful but it's REALLY LOUD from handguns. Competition shooters wanted to use it with compensators but it was too effective and threw the guns down.

>>630115

>REALLY LOUD

Good

>>630112

Why would it be a bad option? I can't recall any actual arguments against the design of the cartridge itself.

>>630113

Non-bottlenecked pistol cartridges were good enough for two world wars.

>>630118

As i already have said, it's too long to fit into a semi-auto pistol grip. Its performance was also a bit lower than 357 magnum from longer barrels based on one of the posts from your link.

>>630135

>I wonder, would the trigger pull be consistent and comfortable in semi-auto?

Yeah, i too mentioned that nicer finish, better mag release and parts would make it an amazing budget option that would rival ones costing several times as much.

>Would small sections of picatinny rail work for that on pistols?

They could but there's not much reason to. They are big, heavy, catch on things and any sights you'll be able to put on them would look autistic and have the same problems. Pistols already have that dovetail notch thing where the sights go. Revolvers should get this one too and it's a shame it's not standard yet.

>it's as long as a 7.62 Tokarev cartridge

And TT is by no means a small handgun and it uses single stack. There was double stack TT developed but i don't remember it seeing any use so eh. Double stack tokarev may be possible, but only because the cartridge is so thin.

There's actually Five seveN pistol that has even longer cartridges and even though it has quite a big grip it's fine for most for the same reason - it's thin so dimensions remain bearable. You probably could have double stack in your cartridge but i doubt that'd go well as 10mm double stack has had complaints about its size and i'd consider it the upper limit. You could improve the grip construction and bottlenecked cartridges might allow mags that are thinner in the front so you'd end up with a handgun that even though is not concealable would be comfortable to use and serve well. With an even longer cartridge - not so much. Unlike revolvers, we don't have much space for longer cartridges but can easily increase their capacity at the cost of slightly reducing magazine size which is not big of a problem because of easier reloads than a revolver and having advantages of bottlenecked cartridges.

>And that decreases the number of cartridges in the magazine, which is not a positive according to current trends.

Current trends use any excuse to stay with 9mm so i don't see how that'd help.

>You can make a superior one if you aren't held back by the inherent limitations of pistol cartridges.

If i wanted to have a separate cartridge i'd go with an intermediate rifle one in 6-6.5mm caliber. The whole point of "full power pistol cartridge" is versatility that it brings, along with actual handgun performance. Especially when we already have the perfection to strive for in handguns.

>>630090

>Pushing a rifling button through a tube with a carjack

>difficult

You can source precision moly steel tubes anywhere on the planet. Lap the inner bore on a fixed rig (linear lapping should be ok), push the button, thread the barrel and call it a day.

>>630138

>You probably could have double stack in your cartridge but i doubt that'd go well as 10mm double stack has had complaints about its size and i'd consider it the upper limit

That complain is absolutely stupid. It is only an issue for women and manlets, not a very relevant part of the market. The main issue was handling the round on a pistol with slightly-bigger-than-usual grips, the root cause of the problem was poor grip of the firearm. If you ever get the chance, compare Glock 17 grips to bigger grip glocks (the .45 or 10mm), the difference is not significant.

The chinks made double stack 7.62x25 clones of a SIG 226. Perfectly doable.

>>630157

>It is only an issue for women and manlets

So basically the whole US military?:^)

>the root cause of the problem was poor grip of the firearm

Well, i'll believe your work on it and hope it's true. Still, i'd limit the length of the cartridge to 10mm as a standard "full size pistol cartridge", 9mm and lik as "medium length pistol cartridge" and stuff like .380 and smaller CC ones as "short length pistol cartridges". That'd aid universality of designs and conversions.

>>630138

I've also just found out that Hues designed this Uru SMG with a single stack magazine. I'm slightly mad about this. So to add to the list of complaints: finish, quality of the parts, mag release, mag construction, maybe fire rate and weight. All probably fixable without serious alterations in the basic design to get sweet sweet makarov of SMGs in return. Hopefully.

>>630188

Yeah, but that's not the kind of "bullpup smg" we were talking about.

>>630251

>I want to make the 10mm a 50kpsi cartridge

Would be pretty interesting, do you have any data on some specific loads? Not many pistols to be able to withstand that pressures though. You could carry different loads for the pistol though.

>I meant just your average rifleman's stance of cheek shoulder and foregrip

Ok, thanks. I didn't get your comparison of a subgun vs revolver and don't know many "official" names of things in the firearm world.

>a leg-wearable weapon

I don't think we can get anything smaller than M3 without getting into autopistol category, with mags in grips, forward grips, short barrels and short thin foldable stocks. It's not a good place for hot 10mm, tbh, with its recoil in full auto removing their only advantage over handguns - fire rate and controllability.

>Traditionally, this has been held by the handgun and powerful large revolver

Wasn't it a revolver and a hefty matching carbine?

>True, but you can adjust for that with a gas screw.

Adjustable gas block are great but it'd add even more moving parts that would increase costs and need for maintenance. They are also almost a requirement as such sort gas system would be a lot more ammo-sensitive than blowback mechanism.

>SAAMI regulations

I'm not much into 10mm world that much so excuse my lack of knowledge on the topic.

>Managed to get a better pic for you.

I see, thanks for the effort. Pretty cool and useful but it'd be hard to use in low light. Is it possible to use tritium paint or something on every other "step" of the sights for better visibility? Something could also be done to match it with a peep sight better, like making it thinner and surrounding it with shielding aka MP5 sights, for example.

>None of this is really a problem with a muzzle mounted sight

Yeah, though you'd want to raise the sights a bit and i'd be more difficult to do with a barrel mount, while handguard pic rail would allow all the options the latest AR has, especially since we're probably adding such rail for optics anyway.

>None of this is a problem in a CNC lathe for manufacturing

I was talking more about handling characteristics - a gas tube/rod thick enough to withstand the pressures would add more weight to already not so light barrel and no full stock to couterbalance that. Gas system also makes the gun thicker and bigger, even if just a bit, possibly limiting options for handguards/requiring one where it wouldn't be needed. Also, complicated bolt with locking lugs would be more expensive to make and harder to replace, as well as complicating the whole design.

>I think we're slowly closing on a formal design recommendation, I'd say interchangeable barrels might be in order

Why not pick MP5 shape as a basic setup? It's got options for multiple barrels, has space for action, plenty of stock options, etc. Just the general shape, not necessary any other features.

We've got to decide operation system of the weapon and i still recommend blowback. I do have an an extreme case of hatred towards "average" solutions like gas systems in rifles, moving barrels in pistols, 9mm and 5.56 in cartridges so i'm against gas system even if it can be made to work. I don't think straight blowback is a good option for anything but a prototype as it's just not that effective and light. I don't think gas delayed blowback is a good option as despite its benefits it'd add parts that require more maintenance and is too hot for full auto. I'm unsure about roller-delayed blowback due to it's engineering complexity as despite it being great option it's the hardest to pull through. So we're left with lever delayed blowback that is easy to manufacture(prototypes as well), can handle the hottest 10mm and can reduce the weight of the gun without increasing fire rate or recoil significantly.

One thing to consider would also be the fire rate - how much is enough? I think around 500-600rpm would be good, though if we're going 10mm i'd lower it a bit more, maybe to 250-350, if possible without too much weight.

I still think that 10mm isn't "optimal" for being a universal general-purpose "large pistol cartridge" and something more manageable like 9x25dillon(or my aforementioned 357 auto) would be of better use but they are still the same length so it doesn't matter that much, i suppose.

>/k/ube woodsman (long

10-16" barrel PCC lookalike

>/k/ube kebab remover (short)

either 6-8" barrel grease gun/mp5 type or a complete new design as a machine pistol that wouldn't make that much sense though.

>>630289

>The problem here is that you want a cartridge that seems to be too big and strong for a pistol to handle

Nah, i don't really think 10mm is a good choice for the reason of recoil and power and it certainly is a pistol caliber.

>A way out of this problem is to go with a carbine and a revolver

Kind of a way backwards. It was done but it can and should be done in semi-auto platform.

> pic related: it's basically a rimless supermagnum

I know about that but i talked about rimless magnum, not supermagnum. It's still too long to fit in a handgun but if we mate it with 357SIG that already copies the original in at least one load we're good to go. 9x25mm Dillon is already more powerful than 357mag, we just need to trickle it down so it won't blow up your eardrums when shooting from a handgun.

>>630270

I also thought a bit about the design/specifications/requirements of the gun and i think that looking at MP5/10 and observing its cons would be a better way to go, as we already have a good working platform that way.

So, here it goes:

MP5/10

>non-replaceable sights

>max barrel - 9"

>no pic rail by default

>something was mentioned about mags

>fire rate - 800rpm for 10mm, which is a bit too much.

>not great ergonomics

>only collapsible stock that's not great from what i've heard

>bolt hold open device?

>costs moneys

>owned by HK

Last 2 are not a problem while we're talking theory but still.

I think we should make a list of most important features or something that'd help not only design something if we want to but maybe find good options already existing.

>>630312

Alot of this seems unneeded attempt to create an impossible all fit platform.

Not quite, this is meant as a short range fighting weapon. It's able to be drawn from a (leg) holster and fought as a pistol very effectively within spitting distance, whilst also folding out a stock and able to hunt all manner of non african game including kebab with a powerful pistol cartridge that reaches the top end of .357 magnum in power, and with more capacity than .45 super. The subgun holds advantages over a bullpupped rifle cartridge with similar overall dimensions, say, a 14 inch overall weapon.

>Muzzle blast

Given that a bullpup in 5.56 is going to consume at least 4.5 inches of the overall length just to cycle the action plus another 2.2 inches for the chamber, you are now left with a 7.3 inch barrel. Factory ammo may as well be a flamethrower at this barrel length, because most of the powder is just going to explode outside of the barrel, and would need to be loaded with magnum pistol powders in order to be worth a damn.

>Handloading

10mm and others at it's level can be used out of the box without adjustment for this size. 10mm is much better for handloading with at this level, since it can use any of the fast burning powders without fuss. Rifle cartridges require fillers like tissue paper or kapok to do the same, and it'll likely still have issues. Cost per round for a handloaded 10mm is lower overall since it uses much less powder than a 5.56.

>Weight and portability

You can design a subgun to be as strong as you need for the same or less weight than a rifle chambered bullpup.

>>630289

The central point of my design here is that it's meant to be carried as a large pistol, not as a rifle. You don't carry two loads of ammo unless you need to be sneeki-breeki.

Now, for russbro.

>>630270

>Would be pretty interesting, do you have any data on some specific loads? Not many pistols to be able to withstand that pressures though. You could carry different loads for the pistol though.

As said above to magyar-bro, this is meant as a large pistol able to fight at longer ranges in seconds. I'll need to reinstall quickload to bring up some loads that aren't in my head.

>I don't think we can get anything smaller than M3 without getting into autopistol category

The average adult male's femur is 18 inches in length. A design of 12 inches overall leaves a lot of room for error even for manlets and still stops it from influencing knee movement at an outside estimate of 14.

>Wasn't it a revolver and a hefty matching carbine?

I'm talking about the weapons on your side, not what combinations of weapons would be carried. Sorry for not clearing that up.

> tritium paint or something on every other "step" of the sights for better visibility?

You'd need to subdue the paint, or create a similar effect with tritium slits. Even so, you'd have to take steps to reduce the light bleeding into each other, like less steps on the sight- less precision. If night fighting is an order, a low profile red dot sight would be a better fit. A peep sight would have to be made to instantly level with the steps. The target sight I posted already acts like a ruler across each line.

>Yeah, though you'd want to raise the sights a bit

Certainly, many guns already include a dovetail fitted sight riser between the barrel and sight proper where a rail would affect how you see it.

>lever delayed blowback

See, now this is why I appreciate back and forth in a design conversation and having my shit slapped. I didn't think of lever delayed blowback at all- it consumes bugger-all space, strong as hell and just requires thinking out the geometry to accommodate standard and super hot ammo, with a bias towards the hotter end.

>Fire rate

360 rounds a second, or a split second with a three round burst. Weight with an action that uses leverage is not as much an issue as per straight blowback.

>doesn't matter that much, i suppose.

Correct, you could easily stick a different reamer down the same barrel and have a different bullet spitter.

>>630978

>this is meant as a large pistol able to fight at longer ranges in seconds

Ok, i'll address it later.

>A design of 12 inches overall leaves a lot of room for error

That's roughly the length of MP5K, and they have pistol length barrels(4.5"). As i have talked about it all - if going compact autopistol is the way to go if that's your intention. As i've said, i'd consider M3 bare minimum for MP5 form factor and even that is a bit stretching it due to compact size of grease gun.

>I'm talking about the weapons on your side

Ok, still, such a revolver is, even though good for hunting as a "main sidearm", doesn't fit our criteria very well due to inability to suppress it, rimmed cartridges and other flaws of revolvers, despite its great OAL that allows it such an application while retaining a longer barrel.

>You'd need to subdue the paint, or create a similar effect with tritium slits

Stair-step fiber optic sights? This seems like a pretty deep rabbit hole so i'm unsure about the use of any of these things, especially since our weapon would probably feature some kind of reflex sights and so irons would be backup anyway, so it makes sense to make them durable, unobtrusive and good enough to use. So this stair step design is pretty good, we only might increase the size of each "step", paint every 3rd or so white, combine with a peep sight below and we're good to go, though i'm unsure about adjusting rear sight for drop and windage beyond what front is capable of helping as i've had little experience with these.

>A peep sight would have to be made to instantly level with the steps

Probably white dots on each side of the ring would suffice.

>many guns already include a dovetail fitted sight riser between the barrel and sight proper where a rail would affect how you see it

Sure why not then. It'd still be additional parts compared to just handguard but that's not that important.

>I didn't think of lever delayed blowback at all

Happy to help bro.

>thinking out the geometry to accommodate standard and super hot ammo

I've had an idea of having an adjustable blowback mechanism. Basically, you have a screw that connects to the floorplate that compresses recoil spring and so turning it would either make it stronger or weaker, allowing the action to accommodate larger variety of ammo. That'd be more important for rifles but it wouldn't hurt this one too, as these actions seem to be pretty violent and so can manhandle the casings if you use brass. I've also just got an idea of push-buttons on the receiver that push weights in the bolt to achieve the same result, though i'd be difficult to fix them in place, i'll go try to paint it.

>360 rounds a second

Could be okay, though lower fire rate always means more weight and might limit CQB potential, potentially. M3 has 450 and it's got a pretty bad stock so 10mm at 400 would probably be fine. I'm okay with setting 300 as the lower limit if it's adjustable, as it'd be very helpful with a suppressor.

>>631022

IIRC .400 corbon is pretty close in power to most lighter 10mm loads and was designed to mimic them. 45 super operates at higher pressures(than both 45 and corbon that is ~+P) and offers additional 100ft-lbs of power, getting close to full power 10mm. Both corbon and super have an advantage of fitting in a smaller form factor - the one most modern handguns use, though you get reduced capacity and most of the designs are unable to withstand the increased pressures. You could get to and maybe even beyond full 10mm levels if you combined 45 super and .400 corbon into .400Corbon-Super but it might have the same long barrel problems as 357SIG and you'd have to design new guns for it, as it'd require thicker chamber walls than even better material .45 ones, which in turn would require slide redesign and it might require pistol redesign in turn. If you do all that or find a model that won't blow up after some use and my doubts about long barrel effectiveness aren't true then good job, you've found a 10mm replacement that allows you to trade capacity for shorter grip.

>>630191

Re-fucking-gardless the 93R is one of the best concealable weapons in existence, the ultimate evolution of the flawed SMG concept. Only thing that comes even vaguely close and only on "huh thats interesting" points is the PP2000.

>>631093

>93R is one of the best concealable weapons in existence

Only after AK pistol:^)

>flawed SMG concept

ur flawed

>comes even vaguely close points is the PP2000.

>literally just another of the countless plastic UZIs that fires +P ammo, except this one is oversized and has more sharp angles

>>631096

No, the beretta 93R is the best concealable weapon, period. PP2000 has a bull barrel, and the ammo at least is interesting, that's why it's up there.

>>631124

>93R

>better than CZ 75 Auto

>says the alien

Ayyniggers go back to space NOW

>>631126

You can't make me go to space, do you know why? Because I have a Beretta 93R and you won't see it coming until brrrrrrt.

>>631130

93R can fire in semi-auto mode as well, how is your pic in any way superior?

>as its basically 9mm+P+ with a weird bullet that can penetrate IIIA armor

>in a bull barrel design that spits them out with more accuracy than an assault rifle

Nah not interesting at all.

>>631134

>93R can fire in semi-auto mode as well, how is your pic in any way superior?

I understand that mental retardation is a serious illness and is not your fault so i'll just tell you - look, pictures are sure interesting but sometimes you have to struggle and read the text that comes with them, try that more often and you'll have a lot less problems with your life.

>as its basically 9mm+P+ with a weird bullet that can penetrate IIIA armor

Yes, just unusual ammo, nothing spectacular, there's an ammo brand that does this without all the fuss about being "armor piercing".

>a bull barrel design that spits them out with more accuracy

Nah, it only works with longer barrels and on longer ranges. Your bullet will drop before you could ever notice any difference.

>assault rifle

Go back to where you came from

>>631130

>loo at the picture in this post

>>631137

>pictures are sure interesting but sometimes you have to struggle and read the text that comes with them

Look I'm plain NOT GOOD at guessing what the fuck you're thinking, or what you meant to say. So how about you explain it? Put it in terms that you might say to another person, for the purpose of communication.

If you say every third word of a sentence you're thinking about, the other person can't guess the other two words, they're stuck with a mishmash of useless information. Stop thinking between the lines and say what you mean.

>just unusual ammo

And you don't find unusual things interesting?!!?!

>Go back to where you came from

What the fuck is that supposed to mean? What is your problem with someone saying "assault rifle"?

>>631183

"Assault rifle" is a gun control term.

>>631195

>>631188

>>631137

No, assault weapon is the idiotic journalist nomenclature.

In late 18th century the entire concept of battle was broken into "phases". Approach phase, scout phase, supply phase, transport phase, but the final phase was called the assault phase. In WWI, the generals at the time ran into a problem, where it was basically impossible to "dig" an entrenched enemy out and kill him, which meant that fortification basically destroyed the assault phase of military doctrine. This was known as the assault phase problem and was popular in military circles in the interwar period. As a tangent, there existed the German (1932), the French (1910) and about the Russian (1915) school of how to go around that - in order the solution was to ignore the entrenched enemies, to pound him flat with explosives and force a crossing, and to poke holes in his lines and go through them to cut his logistics. America and UK later took the French doctrine and applied it to bombers, and America even invented the ultimate explosive, which painted in broad strokes the next 70 years.

But the POINT is that during and after WWI there were designed a fucktonne of weapons purely for this phase of combat. Assault guns were cannons mounted to armored vehicles that could come close enough (under fire) to be pinpoint accurate and hit the weakest part of fortifications. The Lewis assault phase rifle, the federov avtomat and other such rifles were designed to provide covering fire and make the enemy duck while the troops approached. 20 or 30 guys all firing assault rifles produced an unending stream of bullets, since only half of them would be reloading at any given time.

The assault rifle of today is an evolution of these early concepts.

Assault WEAPON is a retarded term, because it means nothing. A spoon, used in the assault phase of combat, was an "assault weapon". In typical journo fashion, it is a complete misunderstanding of history. And it's actually technically wrong, because the weapons they apply it to are semi automatic which actually completely excludes them from assault phase combat! It's like calling a SUV with a glass window on the roof a "combat vehicle" because some humvees have holes in their roof for .50 cal mounts, not only is it technically wrong because the glass prevents this mounting, but its also figuratively wrong.

tl;dr

<Assault weapon bad

>Assault rifle good

PLEASE COPY THIS POST, NEXT TIME IM JUST POSTING FACEPALMS UNTIL YOU GO AWAY

This is one of the places to point out that in WA, the term fully semi automatic assault rifle has been validated by the state laws, supposedly backed by sixty percent of the people.

Your marlin 60? assault rifle.

>>630091

>Only because of the usage of soyboy pistol rounds that don't do shit

Couldn't agree with you more there, 9mm a shit and people need to get on the .357 SIG/10mm/9mm Dillon train. But are you sure those keep SMGs from being obsolete? I feel like .300 memeout and similar have largely replaced SMGs, except in those niche cases you're planning to dump your whole mag on a target at once and need the recoil control. You can get SBRs pretty compact these days; just with commercial parts you can get an AR with a 7.5" barrel down to ~19 inches OAL, I'm sure if you designed a memeout gun from the ground up to be compact, you could go even smaller.

>>630270

>We've got to decide operation system of the weapon

What about lever-delayed blowback, like the FAMAS?

>>631272

Nevermind, I see you mentioned lever-delayed in your post, I suck cocks.

>>631183

>Look I'm plain NOT GOOD at guessing what the fuck you're thinking, or what you meant to say. So how about you explain it?

Ok, admitting this is at least honest, so i'll explain. Beretta 93R is not a concealable weapon in any meaningful way and certainly doesn't fit its purpose - it's heavy, bulky, catches on things with its sharp corners and is just plain too big. The entire class of the weapons' purpose is to be easily wearable as a sidearm/PDW, not a concealable weapon in any way and probably never will be and arguing for such use of one is astonishingly stupid.

>And you don't find unusual things interesting?!!?!

As i've said. this ammo has little to do with the gun itself. It seems your memory is just as lacking as your reading comprehension. Seek help or find a gun and kill yourself.

>>631272

>But are you sure those keep SMGs from being obsolete?

Partially. It's not just pistol calibers that have been reduced to over glorified pea shooters, but rifle calibers as well, as their efficiency is very close to those of full power pistol cartridges. 10mm, for example, has as much energy from 13" barrel as 5.56 has from 16" and its most advantage is better BC. If rifles are going to use these cartridges then SMGs will probably never return as these rifles are just a minor step up from them by removing handgun compatibility, while if we change to some ACTUAL general purpose intermediate cartridge(for example 6.5mmGrendel that almost copies the trajectory of the .308, not perfect but a good example) then SMGs could find their role as a PDW/CQB weapon once again. If you're interested in reading about 6-6.5mm GPC check this out http://abesguncave.com/category/general-purpose-combat-rifle/ or google "6mm optimum". As for .300 memeout, it's less powerful than 7.62x39 that nearly matches 30-30. Some .357 magnum loads can match the performance of the weaker 30-30 loads, aside from fatter bullets being slightly less aerodynamic. Given that 300blk is even weaker, you're better off using either .357 magnum rimless(that you could probably even get a revolver with moon clips) or even .357 maximum rimless that'll easily leave 300blk behind at ANY barrel length and also fits in an AR nicely. I've just looked at it, and in up to 12" barrels i think 10mm beats 300blk, though i'm unsure about that due to lack of info on blk and using only one 10mm load that might not be optimal for longer barrels.

>just with commercial parts you can get an AR with a 7.5" barrel down to ~19 inches OAL

It's still an AR, with its own problems. It has longer action, it has buffer spring and it doesn't fold, not even the stock. Now take a look at Kel-tec sub-2000 carbine and you'll see what can be done if you specialize a bit instead of stretching your rifle design all over for any purposes.

Famas isn't a very good example as it's french design that they fucked up, quite frankly. It has extreme fire rate, can't use brass cases due to problems with extraction and is really a letdown, but at least it's working. I much prefer citing TKB-517 as an example of the system, as it was lighter, more accurate, cheaper to manufacture, better ergonomics and milder recoil than AK. If only Soviets didn't fuck it up due to political games, PR and "established industry".

>>631272

I've repeated in this thread before that most commercial cartridges will not work in short barrels without lighting everything in front of you on fire unless loaded with a magnum pistol powder like H110 or W296. If you can do that, you've got a better performing weapon size for size.

That's the kicker though- you can make a much BETTER smaller weapon with an SMG because the cartridge OAL is smaller- a little over half the size of 5.56 in 10mm's case, and less for 9x19. For any given length dimension required for a 5.56 part, you can cut it in half to make a smaller gun with a competitive power to 5.56 or.300BO that isn't gimped by powder choice at the same length.

>>631012

>That's roughly the length of MP5K, and they have pistol length barrels(4.5")

I'm sure we can get it smaller so that we can squeeze a bit more barrel length out of it.

As for your idea:

>>631015

Bretty gud. The interesting thing about the base-plate and screw assembly is that if the screw strips they always do your gun defaults to the lowest spring pressure. My solution to having a problem with screws would be to require disassembly to adjust fire rate instead of on the fly- change the spring. If you need it done on the fly, you could also change the amount of resistance in the lever delay mechanism itself by applying a small friction wheel somewhere in the mechanism, which also means that you can change the gun to adopt mouse fart loads.

>>631309

>I'm sure we can get it smaller so that we can squeeze a bit more barrel length out of it.

I still think that we should either go with a full sized main gun or a compact wearable autopistol, not a mix of these 2 as each one would hinder others purpose. I'd also not go with an autopistol for the reason of complexity of engineering and different materials, as well as doubts about 10mm fitting this role well.

>The interesting thing about the base-plate and screw assembly is that if the screw strips

You could add pins that go through the rod and stop the plate. It doesn't have to be operated from assembled state, as you mentioned.

>My solution to having a problem with screws would be to require disassembly to adjust fire rate instead of on the fly- change the spring

You'd have to have a set of different springs unless you repurpose them somewhere for the time being - that's bad. I want the gun to be able to be as self-contained as possible. Ideally, disassembly and cleaning should be possible using either bare hands or parts included in the gun(think M3 stock functionality) and only thing for the gun to be functional to be the ammo.

>your gun defaults to the lowest spring pressure

I'm unsure if this could be dangerous in lever-delayed blowback gun - could the case be extracted too early and explode due to lack of resistance of the sporing? I've a bit hard time understanding variables in such a complex operating mechanism with my lack of engineering knowledge.

>mouse fart loads

Just remove the lever, man. That could probably be done and also used for (possible) conversions in lesser calibers.

>>631315

You could also probably make the socket conical inside so that you adjust the delaying by moving the friction wheel along the rod. The positions could probably be set with ball detents so it sits in place.

>>631281

>93r

>same size class as 1911

>comes with holsters

>NOT CONCEALABLE

>ak pistol

>100% concealable

This is why I ask you to clarify your arguments. Whenever you make your opinions clear, they become self evidently shit.

>>631345

>size class as 1911

Its not

>>ak pistol

>100% concealable

There's a ward sarcasm anon, try to learn what it means.

>>631345

Actually, i'll clarify

>size class

Nice mental gymnastics, there's no such thing as "size class" so you just made this shit up to shill for your stupid gun, you ugly faggot.

>comes with holsters

As if it mattered at all, you lying faggot. Rifles come with holsters, yet no mentally ill piece of shit that found imageboard spergs about their concealability.

>clarify your arguments

>resorts to strawmanning

>you make your opinions clear

You fucking dense retard, you are so stupidly arrogant it should not be even possible, you can't read, you can't hold a thought in your empty head, yet you are so proud to demonstrate how much of a distilled piece of liquid shit all of you are.

You motherfucking inbred retard, kill yourself, your mother and all your family so that no possibility of such disgusting degenerate scum to walk this earth ever arise.

>>631281

>I've just looked at it, and in up to 12" barrels i think 10mm beats 300blk, though i'm unsure about that due to lack of info on blk and using only one 10mm load that might not be optimal for longer barrels.

Fair enough, but I get the impression that you're comparing really hot pistol loads to regular intermediate loads. If you took .300 memeout/7.62x39 and tricked it out to the same degree you're tricking out these high-caliber pistol cartridges, wouldn't you get superior performance? Granted I'm not basing that assumption on anything scientific–but I'd assume the cartridge with better case capacity and more aerodynamic bullets would have higher potential performance than a pistol cartridge if done correctly.

>It's still an AR, with its own problems

Granted, slavfriend, I think I implied as much in my original post. My point was that, even with off-the-shelf parts for a gun that was very much not designed to be a compact weapon, you can get it pretty damn short; if you designed a gun from the ground up to be a foldable SBR in some intermediate caliber you could get it even smaller. And sure, an SMG would have the potential to be even smaller than that due to the shorter magwell and action, but if the SBR is already small enough to meet all your requirements (granted, you guys have gone pretty extreme in this thread so a compact SBR might be too fat for you), wouldn't it make sense to stick with the higher-power caliber?

>If only Soviets didn't fuck it up due to political games, PR and "established industry".

Commies truly ruin everything.

>>631371

>I get the impression that you're comparing really hot pistol loads to regular intermediate loads

I'm using buffalo bore 180gr data from BBTI as an example of full power 10mm load, there's a more powerful one on wikipedia but there's only 1 data point and it may be false. I'm also using data from wikipedia on 300blk and it has ~1200ft-lbs from 16,5" barrel - quite a bit lower than 7.62x39. The 10mm load maxes out at 13"(which isn't great and could be improved in specialized loads from looking at 357mag that can get to 1240ft-lbs at 16") at ~1050ft-lbs so i assumed the performance of more long barrel-oriented cartridge would be in more steep decline from shorter barrel. I suppose my approximations can be wrong or you can find hotter 300blk loads but still, their capabilities are pretty similar. I could use 357mag instead as they match better at 1.2kftlbs from 16" instead but i chose 10mm because it has more potential to be powerful.

>I'd assume the cartridge with better case capacity and more aerodynamic bullets would have higher potential performance than a pistol cartridge if done correctly

Of course, when you're not hindered by fitting your cartridge in a pistol you can get something substantailly more powerful - like 458SOCOM. The problem is - do you want yet another cartridge to do what can be efficiently done by the one you already have? You end up getting slightly more specialized effective SMG still - not a proper rifle as can be seen with modern intermediate cartridges, where 5.56 needs 20" barrel to reach 300m effectiveness.

>if the SBR is already small enough to meet all your requirements (granted, you guys have gone pretty extreme in this thread so a compact SBR might be too fat for you), wouldn't it make sense to stick with the higher-power caliber?

It would, but only because our current militarizes use 2 cartridges when there could be only 1 that'd outperform both(i could explain how it can be done but you'd better check out the link in my previous post as it explains it much better than i could). For now, i'll just say that such general purpose cartridge would have 1 major hindrance - it'd require a full-length 20" barrel to be effective for multiple roles and optimized for that as well, so SBRing it would mean great power loss, ineffective powder burn, inaccuracy and overall things similar to SBR 5.56 AR. That's where SMGs come into play, offering effective (re)use of already-used(they should) in the military full power pistol cartridges that offer lower recoil, less flash, more energy and less size than using a dedicated 20" barrel cartridge for that could - all while you have 1 LESS cartridge to issue and supply to the troops than you do now. Ain't that beautiful?

>>631379

Wait, want to correct myself - 300blk is around 1350ft-lbs for hotter loads(while 7.62x30 is at least 1500) so it is more powerful than 357mag and probably even long-barrel specialized(though i've not found one but 10mm is not that common to begin with) 10mm loads. It still would lose more from shorter barrel than a pistol cartridge, so my claims are still mostly correct.

>>631400

Thanks, i'll look into it shortly.

>The problem with autopistols that I have is they are difficult to control

Indeed, though it's more of an issue when you have a moving slide instead of a bolt no stock and just a folding grip, so something like vbr-b or beretta with a stock would probably be fine. The stocks are usually pretty flimsy but i like the one on the vbr.

>Again, though, my biggest issue about reducing an SMG to an autopistol is controlability, that's why I shill for the SMG/PDW style weapons

There's a line where a gun can be carried as a sidearm on your hip or starts to require a sling and gets in the way. After that it doesn't make much difference how long your gun is - less weight is good but unless you go to extreme examples like 20" barrel it's not really that different. Kind of like issuing M4 vs MP5A4 - weight is the same and AR only gets in the way a bit more.

I've also got another idea of adjusting the delaying - why not have multiple positions for the lever so it can have different closed positions that adjust amount of leverage on the 2nd part of the bolt? It'd probably require a bit bigger bolt to be able to accommodate lever in multiple positions but it needs to be able to be disassembled anyway so why not have a few more holes for the pin?

Why would you even need an SMG? They are outdated

>>631423

>what you're aiming for

I'm not so sure myself, it was Australia's idea first, i just kinda supported it.

>adjustable fire rate

Nah, adjustability is only required to accommodate wider variety of ammo in the ammo-sensitive action. If it can run it good without all this stuff, there's not much to gain from if the base FR is sensible.

>light

Ok, but not necessary. Manageable fire rate is more important.

>ease of manufacture [Stamped?]

I'd say it's more important in prototyping, unless we can get such a magnificent weapon that it beats commercialor smuggled options available to a strelok. Otherwise, at least you US guys could probably manufacture a good design.

>barrel shroud

No reason not to, really.

>concealable or nah?

Nah, definitely. Wearable, on the other hand is a lot better question, but unless you're a serious arms manufacturer with plenty of spare resources and are/have a good engineer i'd pick an easier option.

>Could be a slightly scaled down/altered pdfrelated, too.

I don't think bullpups in a gun with a barrel under 16" add anything to its value that'd compensate for all disadvantages it brings. This model is indeed interesting but i think it'd better fit a service rifle project.

>>631426

>Otherwise, at least you US guys could probably manufacture a good design not hindered by the tools and materials required.*

>>631426

Barrel shroud only because in such a short weapon you want to protect the hands of the shooter but there are other ways of doing that.

>nah, but wearable

Agreed.

As for manufacture, if somebody in the thread has a mill, lathe, and press (not too much to ask) then prototyping the general idea might happen, would be cool. Not that you'd actually be able to mass produce them or anything this is just speculative.

But I like the idea of the bullpup SMG just because the added barrel does effect ballistics. Disadvantages of course include brass2face effect, shit triggers, and sometimes awkward loading.

>>631254

Thanks for reminding me that I still need to kill Inslee and burn Seattle to the ground.

>>631433

>Barrel shroud only because in such a short weapon you want to protect the hands of the shooter but there are other ways of doing that.

I feel like it's the most useful solution. You could use wood handguard for aesthetics but it'd add more weight and won't help with barrel heat, as well as burn your hand with a wrong grip. They are better for a slow-shooting long gun, really.

>As for manufacture, if somebody in the thread has a mill, lathe, and press (not too much to ask) then prototyping the general idea might happen, would be cool

Yeah, though if end result is not the main goal then designing and projecting these unusual engineering solutions might be more viable. Longer gun would still be simpler to work with and we've had a few interesting ideas that can be tested but in this case you could think of something within autopistol type too, if you want to.

>But I like the idea of the bullpup SMG just because the added barrel does effect ballistics

I've already discussed the utility of bullpup SMGs ITT. I can just point out to my post >>630093 , specifically the part about bullpup barrel length.

>>631379

I have an older version of QuickLoad. It recommends Alliant POWER PISTOL, but technically there are slightly better choices if you use powders you've never heard of.

Here's a reasonable estimate: (remember, this is a piece of software, not a range test)

165gr Speer TMJ bullet, seated normal OAL, on top of 9.7 grains of PwrPst out of an 11" barrel, will burn 97+% of the powder (no setting your cover on fire), have a muzzle velocity of 1550fps for 883 ft-lbs, and have a lock time of 0.85ms (for accuracy's sake, from the time you smack the primer until the bullet isn't touching anything anymore, is less that 1/10000th of one second)

Or, out of a 16" carbine barrel, and allowing a guestimated 33,000PSI max pressure, you can consider Rottweil's P806, 13.8gr charge, same bullet, to just-kiss 1700fps, less that 1.1ms lock time and muzzle energy of 1075 ft-lbs.

Or Accurate #7, 12.65 grains to just kiss the SAAMI pressure specs, same bullet/OAL, 16" barrel for 1650fps/995 ft-lbs, 92.7% powder burned (not much flash after 16" of barrel) and still under 1.1ms lock time.

That last load, from a 10.5" barrel, has burned 86% of the charge, reach 1540fps/875ft-lbs and .8ms locktime.

For %-burned comparison, seems to burn 99.7+% of its powder. For example, IMR 4198, 20.7gr charge, pushing a 70gr SSP also from Speer, reaches 2460fps/944 ft-lbs in .624ms

Does any of this conjecture facilitate more accurate considerations here?

>>631698

>seems to burn

proofread to make sure youdon't any words out.

That's 556-NATO estimates, for the 70gr bullet. Also, I seem to have typed 'that' when I meant 'than' – blame the cat, who is helping me type.

>>631698

This is all pretty interesting but the options you presented seem rather underpowered. Could it be that these loads are optimized for all powder burn within the barrel and not most of to keep the pressures high throughout the entire thing? The only load that is remotely powerful is 1075ft-lbs one, though its from 16" barrel and buffalo bore 180gr does 1k out of 13". Also wikipedia has 135 gr (9 g) Controlled Expansion Doubletap Ammunition that has 768ft-lbs from 4.6" barrel, that's close to what buffalo bore has at the same length. Either they're using more powerful powders to get plain better results or the loads aren't optimized for their purpose.

>>631744

Those loads are the result of asking for a list of suggested powders.

Input is: the caliber, of course, the bullet, the barrel, and some variables like "fastest powder you'd consider" and likewise the slowest. Not sure what the consequence of that is – mostly if you consider all the powders, it takes longer because it has to systematically say "nope that exceeds pressure limits" or it puts BMG-50 at the bottom of the list because it would limp out the bullet at 415fps.

You also can specify any of a few radio boxes for critical limits, I've always used "limit by pressure and capacity" with a maximum of 103% of available (very slightly compressed) and I usually don't know about the PSI limit, but figure SAAMI are probably pretty conservative. For the 10mm, it's listed at 32,400PSI I think? For 5.56 NATO I'm sure 63,000PSI is within expectation of the components of the gun.

I doubt you could pressure the 10mm brass up to 55,000, but out of an AR-platform it would be less unreasonable. Out of a glock, no that will break something.

It IS possible there are some powders my software doesn't know about, but honestly I don't expect that to be the limiting factor. It's always possible the ammo vendors are overstating their claims, of course. But at the very least, you should be able to compare loads from the same software against each other, since the limitations would be spread & repeated evenly.

>>628552

Glocks with an extra 3inches of barrel would service perfectly fine for pistol caliber automatic fire. Anything bigger might as well include a 10 inch barrel. Those top two are neat, and I always loved helicals.

>>631744

He's using fast burning pistol powders in order to minimize muzzle flash, and getting similar results to high powered pistol rounds by handloading instead of using factory ammo. It's a pragmatic approach- if you don't want to develop a new platform and are willing to use a piston 10" AR-10 with a side-folding stock you would be able to achieve decent results for a subgun substitute *provided* the powder fill is high enough to consistently ignite. In fact, there's a good article here http://guns.connect.fi/gow/arcane1.html

Which deals explicitly in using fast burning powders with .30, 8 and 7mm cartridges to produce subsonic rounds in order to be quiet. It's a very good approach for mild rounds.

I'd be interested in seeing the burn rate for IMR4198 in the load he listed.

>>631751

You could certainly do a good job with a folding stocked G40 with a foregrip. At that size though, I think the lever delayed system would fare better for re-attaching 10mm's balls.

>>631749

>Out of a glock, no that will break something.

Precisely why we're talking about this- no blowback pistol has the ability to repeatedly wear 50kpsi without a delay.

Also, on thinking about it- in order to maintain a high barrel length for 12-14" size, the subgun discussed would pretty much have to be a bullpup fed through the trigger grip. Everything else would stay the same.

>>631744

>buffalo bore 180gr does 1k

Looking up Buffalo Bore, I see a mention in Shooting Illustrated, Not sure if its factory hyperbole or tested fact, but their +p+ 9mm reaches 1350fps. Going back to my software, I find Alliant Bullsye (isn't that a shotgun powder?) out of, again it remembered from before, a 10.5" barrel, would need 4gr, which for the 115gr Barnes X-Tac bullet I didn't spend too much time finding, will reach 1350fps muzzle velocity, passing 39220PSI to get there – about 10% above SAAMI spec of 35,000PSI limit for the round.

Using that 10% figure, and going back to the 10mm Auto round, again Power Pistol, a 10.62gr charge behind the same Speer 165gr bullet as before, now reaches 1650fps out of a half-inch shorter barrel, peak pressure of 39000PSI which can be dealt with if the parts are selected for it (probably) and yes, 995ft-lbs of energy.

>>631755

>in order to minimize muzzle flash,

No, it sorts by muzzle velocity, and pistol brass needs pistol powder. I've looked into it – you can't drastically change the burn rate just because "I'm using a longer barrel" – there's a range of powders that are good choices based on the ratio of volume of powder to bore of bullet. Rifles shoot faster because they have necked brass, thus huge (proportionately) volumes of powder; pistol powder will break something so you need slower "rifle'' powder.

>seeing the burn rate for IMR4198

I'll see if I can look that up / post it. My "fancy" keyboard may not have been programmed with a print-screen button (err, I built/programmed my keyboard myself).

>>631759

>Its 37500 SAAMI or 33k

32,750PSI suggests my software, and is probably right.

>>631759

> but you won't get best performance with fast-burning powders from a long barrel, only quieter one

not that anybody's against that particularly

>vidrelated

nice

>>631761

nothing wrong with grip magazine well.

>>631763

For some reason I thought yoy were talking about a .308 cartridge. Fool on me.

>>631761

Nuh un, you don't. Magazine inside a pistol grip only makes sense in a compact autopistol - if you go full size you're better off just having the grip on the back of the receiver, like MP5 does. You don't gain much by moving the grip because you still need space for bolt to move and end up with something like UZI that would only hinder the gun's handling characteristics and complicate engineering for the gain of a bit shorter overall profile. You still need a stock, place for support hand and a barrel shroud so it's really not a great decision, especially with how problematic can using double feed mag be in this configuration.

>>631763

>Buffalo Bore

Here http://www.ballisticsbytheinch.com/10mm.html

>No, it sorts by muzzle velocity, and pistol brass needs pistol powder

You have longer barrel so you can have slower burn rate. Whether it makes the powder "pistol" or not, this is the way to go to maximize performance.

>about 10% above SAAMI spec of 35,000PSI limit for the round

>32,750PSI suggests my software, and is probably right.

Wikipedia says its 37500 SAAMI and 33k CIP.

>>631764

>not that anybody's against that particularly

You have to sacrifice something else for that. I remember watching a video where a guy experimented with fast powders in 44mag rifle - they'd burn completely before the bullet left the barrel so he basically had subsonic ammo without a suppressor. Safe to say, performance of such ammo would be pretty low even for subsonic loads.

>>631768

12 inches is the dead-nuts limit of length as according to my upper leg 5'11", conventional bolting only gives even with compressed springs and having the magwell intergrated into the front of the trigger guard of 6 inches. You get eight with a bullpup.

>>631768

>You have longer barrel so you can have slower burn rate

Nope, sorry. False. Believe me I'd love for it to be true, but by and large it's not. This is a common question that gets repeatedly smacked down in serious forums by engineers and experienced handloaders. The viable burn rate is decided by the brass, before it's put into a chamber.

I'd love for it to otherwise, for the same kinds of reasons you're looking for "more performance" but if you want to take the most advantage from a longer barrel, you're going to need more, not slower or faster powder.

>>631773

How does it work then? Doesn't slow burning powder burn slower?

>>631781

>the range of burn rates suitable for a cartridge are decided by the brass, not the length of the barrel

I didn't intend to say that barrel "decides" how powder will burn, only what powder will be usable for a barrel. Fast-burning powder works great in short barrels because it burns through their length quickly enough, with burn rate itself independent from the medium in which it burns(not really but you get the idea). The same way loading slow burning powder in 5.56 and shooting it from short barrel leaves us with plenty of unburnt powder that leaves the barrel.

I'm not a handloader so it's a bit hard for me to grasp what all this data means, could you explain what happens if we load some standard .223 ball powder in 10mm? Or using blank powder in 5.56 cases?

>>631754

>>631754

Make that top one twice as thick, sith a compensator.

>>631754

>that top one in .22/.22LR/.223 bullet out of a LR cartridge

>with a 50 roujd capacity thick helical

>at 1100 rounds per minute.

>>631781

>Quickload

Nice. Might be worth shoveling out the shekels for it. I was going to ask about what program you were using. I just wish their website wasn't straight out of 1995.

>>631786

>blank powder

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I often am), but a powder has to have a slow enough burn to push the bullet down the barrel rather than just exploding in the chamber and blowing up the gun. There has to be a balance between what the barrel/chamber can take and what your goal is.

>>631794

> It's a bit too fast for a good .308 Winchester

Okay I feel the need to point out I was pretty wrong. For that 150gr bullet, in a run of the mill .308 shell, the best powder my copy knows about is … 1680.

But to be fair, Hogdon 4198 was right behind it, and that's what I bought all those years ago when I first started handloading (literally, with my hands and a hammer. Good ol' Lee one-caliber reloading kits.)

>>631793

>Correct me if I'm wrong (and I often am), but a powder has to have a slow enough burn to push the bullet down the barrel rather than just exploding in the chamber and blowing up the gun.

Indeed, blank powder(that's often used in nailguns too) is a very-very fast burning one so the pressure spike makes it unusable for propelling bullets in most cases.

>>631794

This is rather interesting but i'd prefer if you answered my question. 5.45 is pretty cool and it's mostly underpowered because its data usually comes with 16" barrel compared to 5.56 20" but eh.

>again, brass chooses what burn rates the powder should have

Then why not use any powder in there? Why is the powder not great for .308? I see that necked cartridge allows to concentrate pressure and increase burn rate of a given powder. Still, there're different powders that have different characteristics that do influence the burn rate and so i assume they can allow more prolonged application of pressure that'd make a more long barrel friendly load, despite cartridge's basic limitations.

You keep mentioning different powders but i know nothing about any of them and googling each one is pretty tedious and overall is just making your point more confusing to understand.

>>631799

I know I'm not explaining it well; I don't know the full technical explanation but I've read it more than once. The burn rate that is "ideal" is ideal because of the ratio of powder volume to barrel bore. So again, the powder is chosen before barrel length is considered.

Oh, there's a little leeway, mostly because of the absolute glut of powder choices on the market.

Here's a few pages that touch on the subject, since I can't find the reloading thread that finally set me straight.

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/reloading-education/tips-and-tricks/does-shooting-pistol-caliber-rifle-change-reload-data

https://dillonprecision.net/are-pistol-caliber-carbines-shooting-rifle-like-velocities/

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/03/31/frankly-pistol-caliber-carbines-dont-make-lot-sense-heres/

Good luck and as I said, good night.

>>631806

Ok, thanks for clarification.

As we've started talking about ballistics and cartridge designs, i've tried to look why does .357 magnum perform so well out of long barrels, i've found out that .357mag has quite a bit more case capacity than 10mm(1.70vs1.56cm3), while being weaker in pistols, which leads me to the conclusion that .357 magnum case might be more optimized for slower burning powders and less for shorter barrels with which it's usually used. I'm not very knowledgeable on the subject of case construction so i'll just leave this as it is.

>>631806

>So again, the powder is chosen before barrel length is considered.

Again, i'd like you to answer my question. I see that cartridges more often than not perform well with a specific powder while others severely change the burning rate like in your pic here >>631802 , but it doesn't mean that ALL powders that aren't the standard will have such a weird pressure curve. I believe there are powders that can allow more gradual powder burn without being in the same burn rate range that is acceptable for the cartridge. Therefore, i think that you =can= have a 5.56 load that uses a fast-burning powder while allowing proper burn and pressure distribution that would make the use of the cartridge with shorter barrels more bearble.

>>631806

Also in your articles nobody explains shit

First one says that loads don't change depending on the barrel lengths - unlike velocities, without any argument for it. I'd counter it in that you still have some powder selection that does work in the cartridge and can still pick the slowest burning one from them and it'll likely yield slightly better long barrel performance. It might be small but adding 1-2" of barrel that can accelerate the bullet instead of slowing it down are possible, pretty sure and it'd prove my point.

Second article only talks about weakness of 9mm that never goes away even from longer barrels, which is pretty obvious to anyone interested in this stuff anyway.

And third article is a little shitty cunt from TFB talking shit about PCCs by cherrypicking both cartridges(only shitty pistol ones of today), guns(ar platform) and applications, like excluding SMGs and discarding advantages of an option based entirely on his personal needs and preferences. If you're posting this scummy worthless degenerate after you're read through this here you're a piece of shit, anon, quite frankly.

Okay, i'm basically stuck with casing engineering. It seems very complicated, has many variables and little info on the topic. From what i got i suspect that a cartridge is basically designed around 1 type of powder and is limited to it, the only thing adjustable being the hotness of the load. That'd mostly make handloading look useless and handloaders as people whose time costs less than a few cents but putting that aside, it seems my understanding of versatility of reloading in general and .357 magnum in particular was but a fantasy. Then, we need a cartridge that allows similar long barrel performance as 357 without sacrificing size, recoil and overall versatility that'd allow its use in both handguns and rifles efficiently. So i've got a question - can you reduce the pressure of a cartridge to gain more prolonged powder burn rate? I'm (re)thinking something like 357SIG but longer and with less operating pressure, but if that's not true a complete redesign might be necessary, up to the point of increasing maximum dimensions to .45ACP size, though i have no idea what to do with all these bottlenecks, angles, pressures and powder burn rates all mixed together.

>>631822

though now that i think about it, it's not that bad. It seems like it comes more to case capacity then construction, at least in longer barrels. .45super has similar capacity to .357mag and performs slightly worse, comparable to difference in pressure. it doesn't explain how 10mm beats 357 though, might be larger caliber, 3kpsi more and hotter maximal loads observed. .357mag vs .357SIG could also be explained this way - less capacity is partially compensated by 5kpsi(or even 9, in case of CIP). Looks like more space results in better long barrel performance than hotter load, probably due to space setting the pressure distribution and hotness just increase it proportionally over the whole process. Still, these comparisons are kinda weird, as 9x25mm dillon, for example, is 1.48cm3 at 36kpsi is very close to 357mag that has more capacity(1.7) for the same pressure.

>>632334

Pretty cool but messing with air buffers doesn't seem very reliable or durable.

>>632367

idk, a machine tight fit on the bolt, without any gaskets, should be a good enough seal to work as an effective air piston. could do it on the back end of the bolt, with a few gas check rings.

>>633019

No offense but polish submachine guns look hideous

>>633566

It would limit available materials, require more precise machining and would lose effectiveness pretty quickly with parts wear. There's already been invented a more practical variant of this operation system - gas delayed blowback. It's not as pressure sensitive and can be contained more easily.

>>633019

Its literally an Uzi, the barrel swaps out with a twist of a nut.

>>633019

It's cool, but the grip is uncomfortable and for whatever reason the Poles decided that red=safe and white=fire. Also the wire stock is shit.

I've done some more search and found out a few things:

There's a cartridge called .40 Super, which is basically a .45 super necked to .40 cal or .400corbon on steroids. The same thing we talked about earlier. It's considerably more powerful than 10mm(and 9x25corbon still falls ~100ft-lbs short) and wikipedia writes about plenty of flexibility with both bullet weights and powder selection, though no actual data is present. it's case capacity is presumable somewhat equal .45 and .357mag so the only clearly visible downside of it for now is reduced sectional density that would further limit the effective range, though it can be overcome. It also has reported problems with feeding due to its bottleneck akin to what 357sig had before glock redesigned its followers, so be wary if you're getting it.

I've also revisited the 7.62x25 tokarev cartridge - it's hotter loads offer ~500 ft-lbs, which is not very much compared to other monsters here but is still more than functional. The only serious problem that has been detected with it by multiple reviews both by soviets that dropped it and Paul Harrell's review is it's insufficient expansion that limits its performance compared to less powerful options, though it does retain great penetration capability. I think that lack of expansion can be overcome if ammo actually used modern soft point technologies that were unreachable for soviets and aren't used by those remaining manufacturers that still offer it due to unprofitability of development of good performing bullets in this caliber. It's also notable for continuous use in SMGs and so probably performs well from then by design. It's not perfect and falls behind a bit with range but its low caliber and proven design do make it something to consider. It also has base diameter 0.1mm smaller than that of 9x19, offering similar capacity. I'll be looking into additional data on it in the future, as it might be more promising than i thought of it.

Then there's .38 casull - it's a mysterious one, being something like .45 necked to 38 cal, all while performing really well, on levels similar to .40 super or so(~950ft-lbs, at least for that one load some guy posted being 977 and .40 being 971 on wikipedia). It was also noted to be loud, which could mean better performance from longer barrels, as well as being very accurate and heavy-recoiling(but not terrible). Was working fine with guns that used it too. There's also .38/.45 Clerke or .38/.45 Auto Pistol that is weaker, probably due to lower pressures and it certainly uses .45ACP cases, but at least their concepts are identical and its 445ft-lbs are not much but aren't complete failure.

There also were .38 super/9x23mm winchester/9x25mauser that are good performers with decent energy that does fall behind. .357mag but not by much. There's no info on their performance from longer barrels, only few requests, as well as info that Thompson SMG was chambered in it but again, no info on performance. If we accept that it's performance falls behind .357mag to a similar margin as it does from pistol(even though the case capacity is very different) then we've got a pretty good option that is still common enough today, as well as the one with a small case base diameter, aiding in both capacity and width of the grip, which are both good and latter even more important, especially for a double stack double feed magazine concealability which we'd need if we're ever going to get stuff done instead of wasting moneys on locally-made copies of the same shit over and over, they also are straight-walled so that might be a plus for reloading. Is it possible to CC a .45 double stack? Not the best choice of course, but we're picking the most extreme example in case we'll have to go to .45acp case base diameter. Overall these rounds might be an alright choice and certainly aren't terrible for this purpose.

Lastly, there is a weird one that's not really practical - .224BOZ which is 10mm necked down to .224 that takes 5.56 bullets. It's pretty interesting in that it fires 50gr bullet at 2500fps from 5" barrel, resulting in 650+ft-lbs, so it might be not a bad performer, even though it was designed to defeat body armor. It has 5.56 sectional density and from longer barrels can actually outperform its bigger brother, unless we go 15"+, i suppose. If anything, you can use it to troll 5.56 fanboys.

There's been 9×25mm Super Auto G but there's absolutely no info on it aside from dimensions on wikipedia, saying that 9x25dillon is the closest we have today but it might actually the thing we're looking for.

>>635911 (pt2)

There's a problem with 9x25 dillon and it's its loudness - it's hard to bear even with hearing protection. It was designed for slower powders and light bullets to generate lots of gasses and it does this quite well and these gasses might give a considerable boost in performance from long barrels. The problem is - it's mainly a pistol cartridge, still, so it should be optimized for faster burning powders, but not as fast ones as in 10mm - it does fall behind at longer barrels and stops gaining anything at 13". I don't know if .357mag powders are different or it's just its case capacity but if they are then it's pretty much the optimal thing. How can you change the effective burn rate of a cartridge? What things affect it's long barrel performance beyond case capacity? Are steep sharp shoulders more desirable to a narrow taper? Dillon does seem to have pretty steep shoulder angle and round edges so that might have something to do with its performance.

There doesn't seem to be any info on anyone using 9x25 dillon from longer barrels, which is frustrating, as it really seems like an obvious thing with all its gasses and loudness and compensators and power, but there are only few mentions of some problems and some people that were going to try it either in AR, along with some pics, but absolutely no data, which is really unfortunate.

Does anyone know how does a shoulder angle affect the burn rate? Or data on performance of any of aforementioned cartridges from longer barrels?

>>636046

Finally. i've found the final info on tokarev performance. It gains ~300fps from +6" barrel if using weaker Russian ammo and around 200fps when using hotter Czech stuff from about the same length. The latter is probably a specific load and so we can expect around additional 300fps from using a 10" barrel. Also the soviets might have chosen a weaker load to prevent Mauser pistols that were commonly used from blowing up immediately.

There's also been some guy that tested loads using a TT and a modified rifle with 20" barrel, gaining around 450fps with better loads, so the potential of the cartridge might not stop at 10".

And the cartridge's pressures are around 36kpsi with some loads reaching 39k so there's even more room for improvements.

I don't know shit about smg design autism but I'm tempted to learn for the sole purpose of being able to participate in one of the few non-shit threads on the grind page. Godspeed streloks.

>>630010

>VG

Would make for a very poor contender. You should've stopped at the StG(if you wanted two you could've included the Mkb which was what the StG was based on).

>>630024

>SMGs are great for home defense

Theoretically? Yes, not better than a semi-auto intermediate rifle, but very good.

In practice? Most people are pretty shit at controlling full-auto weapons, even people that have handled full auto weapons are pretty shit at it unless they've put in lots of practice(and I mean shit loads). So what's more likely to happen than you dealing with a home invasion efficiently is you making your house look like the Reichstag circa May 2, 1945. Woe betide your pets, furniture and any low flying aircraft in the area.

I'd also advise against select-fire rifles for the purpose of home defense for the same reason, too easy to accidentally switch to full-auto(or be stupid enough to let the stress get to you and do it on purpose) and send bullets flying into your neighbor's house through the living room wall.

>>630040

The Kiraly was pretty good actually. The Swiss abomination on the other hand…well…I'll put it to you this way, it can be considered unnecessarily complicated by toggle lock standards. Also it's a toggle lock SMG…a sideways toggle-lock SMG…which I just realized is using a reused Mosin stock.

>>636083

>You gain nothing for that extra recoil that isn't made redundant by the existence of intermediate rifle cartridges(especially 5.56 NATO and 5.45 Soviet).

Out of longer barrels this is true enough, but when we're talking SBR lengths, it seems to me that some of the more powerful pistol cartridges have 5.56 beat in terms of muzzle energy and sectional density, with the added advantage of not breathing fire.

>>636076

Thanks strelok, there's plenty of information in this thread so if you wanted to help up you might want to read some of it. You can also ask questions if you need as they are pretty on-topic of SMG discussion. Or just post some good pictures or design elements. Whatever you feel like.

>>636083

>That's the definition of an SMG

No, i was talking specifically about soyboy class of pistol rounds.

>we lack words for half the things that go into guns

Yeah, there are plenty of overly long, complicated terms that are often conflated and work poorly. We have a word with the literal translation of a "trigger" used as a hammer or striker, while calling the actual trigger a "triggering hook" or something, which is why they are often conflated.

>You gain nothing for that extra recoil that isn't made redundant by the existence of intermediate rifle cartridges

Only because soyboy rifle cartridges are used as a substitute of proper pistol ones. Actual intermediate rifle cartridges in 6-7mm caliber would be a lot more useful and even fix some of the logistical mess they've created.

>The reason 9mm Parabelum is the only cartridge worth considering in an SMG(or service sidearm) is because you get great ballistics in a very controllable cartridge and you don't need anything else.

Wew lad

>great ballistics

Even 9mm +p is barely tolerable in terms of muzzle energy and doesn't fly well past 100m, usually limited to 50-75 at best. And that's with all the power of modern technologies trying their best to keep a severely outdated cartridge afloat because some guys can't afford to spend much in one go.

>very controllable cartridge

Compared to what? 9x18makarov is even more controllable, it can actually be implemented in autopistols. It doesn't make it a first pick or even a good choice.

The only argument for muh 9mm is its price but the only thing responsible for it is that it was widespread and it seemed cheaper for someone to keep it around than improve stuff. Especially since keeping things around and slowly turning them into a money sink is what bureaucrats live off.

>>636090

>Theoretically? Yes, not better than a semi-auto intermediate rifle, but very good

Intermediate cartridges suffer a lot from overpenetration, even the wimpiest ones. It's also notable that PCC are THE easiest type of weapons to shoot, which might be important for someone who doesn't spend much time training and having other stuff to do. There's also length, which can be a problem if you're using a proper 556 20" AR - it could be problematic to move around the house and especially around the corners, risking being disarmed too. On the other hand, if you shorten the rifle you've got yourself an extremely loud gun that will harm your ears, blind you and will be hard to control(AK74U is notable for being harder to control than a full sized variant, with its purpose being a PDW for personnel that'd spend less time training to shoot itfacepalm) as other anon has pointed out.

>Most people are pretty shit at controlling full-auto weapons

Yeah, that's a pretty valid concern but it doesn't have much to do with our options, as both of them do have it.

>>636090

The swiss gun looks like its using a chopped down 1889 stock.

>>630024

>I always thought that SMGs were the perfect weapon for home defense, actually.

In a team? Yeah. On your own? Doubtful. Same is true for assault rifles, the mags are small because it's assumed your buddy can cover you when you're reloading.

Home invasions take place over a period of minutes and you need to be fighting on a single mag the entire time, which means either a regular semi auto pistol or if it's full auto it needs to have a large magazine and a lot of bullets. Or ridiculous discipline.

That's one reason why the machine gun ban is ridiculous, it can't even be used effectively by people.

More information on 7.62x25. It's pressures are rated at 36kpsi CIP and no manufacturers make +p ammo, it seems. There's plenty of underloaded or weaker ammo compared to modern commercial loads and hotter surplus like the Czech ones, but it might mean that it's others that do use weaker than maximal loads. I'm positively sure that S&B has made ammo with 1600fps and it does show that in specs even now, clearly stating that it follows CIP standards and the ammo is not +p. This means that our best "normal" loads alone are capable of achieving 500ft-lbs of muzzle energy. All with pressure that's greater than normal 9mm by only 1kpsi. There have been mentions of loads that could achieve velocities over 1700fps, presumably reaching 38kpsi pressure that some mentions also suggest, which is an average 9mm+p pressure. There were also some mentions of the C.U.P. tests that determined the round's pressure limits at 42kpsi, which is substantially more but i'm unsure if they should be used or trusted.

So tokarev does indeed show great potential, especially with modern metallurgy and some modernized brass that would raise the pressure limits. Another thing that can be improved about it is the bullet selection - not only subsonic or low drag bullets can be interesting but most importantly hollow points, as they are at this point the determining factor of its efficiency and the issue with them has already killed it once. There are a few hollow point bullet choices on the market but their performance varies from limited to far from perfect, as they often have solid base and brass petals with little lead left on them, losing it in tissue. This round would probably be the one that'd benefit most from these new "bonded jacket" hollow points technology. It's still a viable choice with existing ones, as they do offer enough expansion to stop slightly beyond penetration requirement threshold so they do work and dump the energy pretty well but they could be much better.

I also wonder if it was used in any competitions - it shoots flat, produces low recoil and enough gasses to power a compensator and offers the same capacity as your 9mm and more energy than the 38 super they use. Is it ignorance or they aren't using energy as measure of power?

I've written down and compared the rounds we looked at before and i could find enough data on, so here's my conclusions:

7.62x25 tokarev - amazing for pistols, great gains in rifles but it still doesn't quite get to 556 energy levels, unlike others, whether it matters or not.

9x25dillon - problematic, loudness is compared to 7.5" AR. It does match 357mag power levels from 6" barrel almost perfectly with lighter bullets, being only few dozens fps faster. Little info on loads and no info on performance from longer barrels, mostly just usual forum trash. If fixed, could be the best option both as a powerful pistol and an SMG round.

10mm - while popular, powerful and almost adored, its performance increase from longer barrels matches only usual weaker pistol cartridges, resulting in similar % increase as 9mm or 40sw. BBTI blogs have provided some very valuable information on the topic of performance from longer barrels. Basically, there are pistol cartridges and there are magnum cartridges, with magnum ones being capable of gaining over 50% energy increase with barrel length. There are only a few such cartridges and they talk about almost none that fit in autoloaders. 10mm, while is a good choice and deserves more is not very suited for the role. Especially since it is a bit weaker than its bottlenecked counterpart.

.40 Super - amazing energy, most of the ones i've got data on and fit in common pistols(unlike 500AE). No data otherwise. Probably too powerful for being universal but it has a niche and deserves more fame along the 10mm.

45 Super - one of the rounds tested by BBTI that do perform well from long barrels. It actually gains quite a bit of energy, beaten by 357mag but still coming pretty close, offering more energy at the start. Its speed to SD ratio is not very impressive and would result in a pretty steep pressure curve and its recoil would too be limiting but it's another option, as well as something we can go to if we're unable to fix issues with dillon in 10mm case, as we can go to the greater capacity of 45acp's one.

Also, for streloks with access to guns and money out there - if you're interested in getting yourself a handgun paired with a PCC or just a powerful PCC you've actually got plenty of good options out there, that are if you choose to go with 45 Super cartridge. Not only does it offer a bit more power than 10mm, it also fits in many 45acp handguns that can withstand it and is one of the few cartridges that actually perform well out of long barrels so you won't be wasting your effort by using it. BBTI guy did shoot Beretta Px4 storm in this cartridge and it functioned well without need for any readjustments and signs of increased wear.

>>636162

>home defense

>rifle

>full-auto

Nigger you canuck are retarded.

Have you ever defended your home with a full fun rifle? Shit's going to destroy your house AND your family's ears.

Guise, pls help, i can't quite figure out the barrel length of the rifle in the vid. Is it 10" or 16"?

>>636466

Appears to be around M4 length, maybe a tad shorter. The M4 has a 14.5 inch barrel, for reference.

Definitely not above 15in, definitely not under 11in. My best guess is probably 13in.

>>638089

The mention seems like an overly generous estimate with no real data to back it up. Based on the information i have, cartridge dimensions of 9x25 and 38super are very similar, with mauser case being longer but OAL being the same and differing only in 1kpsi of max pressure. You won't get to magnum levels with this and 9x23mm winchester beats it hands down, while still lacking case capacity and power of the magnum.

>So, how many Joules does .45 Super deliver?

The vertical axis of the graph shows energy in ft-lbs, horizontal is barrel length. You can use that as a reference along other calibers for your desired barrel length. It's around 820ft-lbs from 6" barrel, slightly beating 10mm at this point.

Is the bolt face only there to centre the cartridge during feeding, or is it also supporting the rim of the cartridge so that it doesn't deform? I suspect it would be a bad idea to use the same bolt face for 9mm Parabellum and 10mm Auto, but I want to be sure.

>>639974

Not totally sure, but extraction is a part of the bolt face. So, center, hold tight into the chamber, and yank it back out with precisely linear force.

You can fudge bolt faces a little, but not a lot … but given the pressures involved I bet pistols (& PCCs) are less sensitive than rifles with 3-5x the internal pressures.

>>636083

>Being honest the Russian nomenclature system is retarded since it puts an MP 18 in the same category as a G3

Since when? MP-18 is pistolet pulemiot and G3 is avtomat.

>>639974

>I suspect it would be a bad idea to use the same bolt face for 9mm Parabellum and 10mm Auto

This might be only somewhat relevant, but Glock Fawties with 9mm conversion barrels apparently work with the same slide and extractor for either, so it might work, depending on the design.

>>640082

And I've found this: https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/06/jeremy-s/40-in-a-10mm-glock/ Maybe it really is a problem solver if you want a multi-caliber firearm.

>all this autism about handloading the perfect cartridge for their PDW where one of the selling points is a handgun that uses the same round

I hope the Russkie knows that Buffalo Bore is on the very high end of power in cartridges, often well into +P+ for their most notable works.

>>640170

Yes, i specifically picked the most powerful load available to see the whole potential of a cartridge, such as double tap or buffalo bore, which is used for 10mm load, for example.

>>640217

Could you throw in the modern loads for .45 Colt too?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.45_Colt#Handloading

>>640217

.327 Mag's case capacity is 19gr, 13.8gr with a 100gr bullet.

>>628596

I've looked into the cartridge and it's a trimmed down 10mm magnum necked down to 7.5mm. It does deliver great amounts of energy similar to 9x25 dillon with better SD but they use their own caliber. They also make a gun with it but they are the only patent owners and manufacturers of both. They seemed to try to dampen recoil in the gun instead of picking a weaker cartridge and it'd all be pretty interesting and promising if the whole story didn't smell like concentrated shit. They lied about designing the cartridge from the ground, used vague wording to make it seem like they got a contract from military, use a long cartridge that specifically doesn't fit any other gun and bullet diameter that only they manufacture, proprietary everything so they keep it all and 7K$ for the gun. This one cartridge does pretty well at range and is more powerful than dillon, having 80ft-lbs more at the same SD, with more velocity. I wonder how would necking the latter to the same caliber would compare, probably the energy gap would grow a bit but not by much. There's also no data on longer barrels so i guess into the trash this blatant money grab goes.

>>640719

>Imagine picrelated that recoils and handles like original does but delivers (almost) 10mm power with each shot.*

Fugg, i'm going sllep, sorry about that.

>>640717

Fuck me, ruskie bro, you've been busy in my absense.

If you can make the bullet diameter .308, you can make the cartridge accept a great variety of 30 caliber bullets as it is, and make the standard an aerodynamic 115 grain bullet sitting on top of a quantity of w296 powder to give .357 power from it with *much* better ballistics. The addition of a bottleneck means the feeding is going to be more reliable too given the correct neck angle- 40 degrees is sufficient. Given a .308 die set that I am going to buy soon enough and a 10mm case from somewhere, this is probably doable as a demonstration of the cartridge.

>>640898

I think you may have found something- reading that forum post shows one user putting 12 grains of 2400 in it uncompressed. That's the same amount I put under my 38/44 keith cartridges.

>>640902

Well, that's great, even if i still don't get how it works. I'll keep searching but at least here we've got something feasible enough that someone can actually try to replicate instead of just plain theory. If anyone tries this, please tell us about your observations.

>>631807

Does anyone has the original picture of that?

i'd love to see a modern 7.62 tokarev catridge.

based on one of the long 9mm brass blanks (for matched capacity). near-straight wall for stacking, with a pinch of taper for extraction. rimless.

I love conversations like this because SMG's are very cool even if they're considered a bit outdated. One role I can see the SMG shining in in the modern era is their ability to dominate in a "pistol" fight. Within reason, a lot of SMG layouts are almost as concealable as pistols. I've only ever shot two SMG's and those were a stamped M-11 and a stamped Model A Uzi. The shitty wire stock and high ROF turned me off to the M-11. The Uzi was surprisingly controllable and the underfolder was a lot better than I expected. It's a fucking chunk though and you can kind of tell it was done in a hurry and meant for soldiers and not spoopy shit. Maybe a more modern, closed bolt design that incorporates a rate reducing pawl like the AK uses would be good? I don't know a ton about the various, uncommon loads but how about just some hot 9mm AP? Maybe if it had a similar design to Russian 7N1 with an air pocket near the front and a steel knocker? Again, I'm not sure how well that design would work in a pistol round since it's originally like 152gr and fired from a rifle. There's just something that turns me off about using uncommon rounds but I guess if the round was good enough, it wouldn't be uncommon for long.

The hipoint in 10mm.

>>641026

Damn, that's nice. How did it fit in? The cartridge seems to be almost as long as tokarev.

>>641104

>even if they're considered a bit outdated

SMGs aren't outdated, just misplaced, along with other weapons.

>Within reason, a lot of SMG layouts are almost as concealable as pistols

No, only very few SMGs are wearable and absolutely none are as concealable and compact as all but the largest of pistols. Concealable SMGs are a dead end. Wearable, on the other hand, have their place even if they'd not be as effective as full-sized ones or rifles. It really depends on whether you want to carry it on a sling or on a hip.

>Maybe a more modern, closed bolt design

It was done in a few years after spread of UZI and was called MP5. It became so popular it still is very common despite more interest in short barrel rifles.

>I don't know a ton about the various, uncommon loads but how about just some hot 9mm AP?

It can work but the effectiveness is questionable. Check out the thread, there's some comparisons and examples. I'd prefer lower caliber(.308-.312) high velocity monomaterial pointed spoon tip bullet to have at least some lethality instead of just hardly punching through a piece of armor.

>There's just something that turns me off about using uncommon rounds

Bad idea, almost all rounds that are currenlty in use are horribly outdated. Unfortunately, spread of these rounds makes development and production of new ones a lot less sustainable unless some government agency starts using them.

>>641204

actually a good question since the OAL is 3mm longer than 10mm, guess there was some space left in there? or i might have got a miss-labeled pic of a 9x25 Dillon conversion.

>>641428

The bolt system always intrigued me, wanted to shoot one the second I heard about it.

>>641394

On your picture it certianly is the cartridge, but i'm unsure if it'd fit in glock. All sources, even manufacturer, clearly state that it is incompatible with any pistols and magazines on the current market, which seems to be a feature they pursue.

>>641428

Seems like a huge joke, really.

>>641442

You can get it in 45 and shoot 45 super out of it. You'll get better than 10mm performance. even.

>>641448

>I'm really hoping the market picks that up and we see caliber conversions/mags and ammo become more and more available

It's proprietary, comes from one manufacturer that also makes the only pistol for it and it costs 7500$. So no, kill it with fire and take its developers with it.

>rowland

The rowland guy is a lying faggot that makes worthless shit with an overpriced tag. His 460 round is nothing but your basic 45 super with lengthened case so that you can only get ammo from this fag. Oh, and he lied about its performance too, it's nowhere near that numbers, just you basic 45super. 960 is probably no different.

>>641938

i'll cry if these didn't survive. want to see that VBR GP

>>628588

>pic

Care to quickly summarize what your changes were and why? Looks like you took .357 SIG and lengthened the neck a bit–I assume to make more room for powder and/or longer bullets, so that you can replicate .357 mag ballistics in heavier loadings than 125 gr? There's also some changes to casehead dimensions, but I'm too small brain to understand the implications right away. Is it to withstand the higher pressures? How long is the new cartridge compared to original .357 SIG? Will it still fit in "small" pistol frames that are designed for 9mm and .40?

>>644120

I basically moved the shoulder forward by the length of it, without changing other dimensions like the base or the rim. I also extended case length to match that of 10mm, so now it has longer neck. It's OAL is now that of 10mm as well, so it won't fit in 9mm frame. It was designed to give the case more capacity to actually match 357mag ballistics, at least from shorter barrels, as 357SIG uses hotter loads to match milder ones in its predecessor. The difference is not a lot but it's there.

Case head is unchanged, though it could be changed to accept other type of primers if that seems useful. The pressures are the same as that of 10mm, though it's possible to use tougher brass for higher pressures at the cost of some capacity. Given its generous amount, it could be an improvement. I didn't really look into 10mm magnum a lot, there's not much info.

>How long is the new cartridge compared to original .357 SIG?

It's larger and a bit more powerful due to greater capacity and ability to higher seat bullet. It could also possibly offer better than poor 357SIG's long barrel performance. I wanted it to be a middle ground between 357SUG and 9x25mm dillon, which is more powerful but generates too uncomfortable muzzle blast to use in a pistol(as if it was a rifle cartridge). Dillon does have similar dimensions but it's basically 357SIG lengthened in the body - its neck and bottleneck are the same length and dimensions.

>>640386

There's been a guy that formed 357SIG DIRECTLY out of 10mm, so it only had longer neck and his performance was already pretty good, but i designed this one before i found that, and i still think that mine would perform greater from longer barrels while being probably slightly more powerful that 357mag from short barrel. You can check my graphs here, they describe velocity gain from different barrels for different calibers.

>>644221

Wanted to correct myself: the cartridge would probably me close or better than 10mm, not on the level of 357SIG.

The purpose of the cartridge was to copy 357 magnum performance in an autoloader without it being too big and having at least some long-barrel performance. Now i've kinda changed the scope and picked another caliber but this one is also alright, along with other ones mentioned.

There's one more thing about 357SIG i've found out - it's either misunderstanding on my side or a fucking scam. 357mag is most popular in revolvers with 4" barrels, which is what most think of when they hear 357 revolver. The problem is, the actual barrel length, if measured as in pistols, is ~6" because of retarded regulations. What follows this is 357magnum is thought of in terms of its power from 6" barrel, not 4", and that's a significant difference that puts it in a whole another category because its gains from barrel lengths are greater than almost any other pistol cartridge. Basically, 357 magnum is equal to 10mm from 6" but 40SW from 4". 357SIG replicates magnum's performance from actual 4" barrel, which equals to a 2.75" snub nose revolver, and while it almost accomplishes what it claims, it highly relies on speculation from this misunderstanding.

I've already mentioned how 357SIG doesn't seem to be much of an improvement over 40SW in theory, even if it's generally loaded hotter, so that's another point towards it being a letdown.

>>644221

Perhaps I'm reading the picture wrong. Looking at the two topmost drawings, it seems you have slightly different dimensions for the casehead diameter and angle.

>>644252

>There's one more thing about 357SIG i've found out - it's either misunderstanding on my side or a fucking scam.

Wouldn't it be the other way around? Because the revolver has an extra ~2 inches of "barrel" from the chamber, if the SIG claim is that it can replicate the performance of a 4“ barrel revolver out of a 4" barrel autoloader, isn't it in effect replicating the performance of 6" of revolver out of a 4" barrel?

Also, still reading through the whole thread, but what's the cartridge of choice at the moment?

>>644288

The two drawings on the top are 10mm and 357SIG for reference, 2nd row is the same but without the numbers, down left comparison is them altogether and right one is a finished cartridge with a more aerodynamic bullet. The case heads might differ a bit but probably don't matter as they all are the same family and their parts are interchangeable iirc.

>the SIG claim is that it can replicate the performance of a 4“ barrel revolver out of a 4" barrel autoloader

They don't specify which way is their revolver barrel measured, so it could be that they were talking about 2.75" barrel revolver, using a correct measurement method.

>isn't it in effect replicating the performance of 6" of revolver out of a 4" barrel?

Absolutely not. It struggles to match 357mag from a 4"(measured to the breech face, like autoloaders do) barrel and, as i mentioned before, 357 magnum gains a lot more from longer barrels even when compared to other magnum cartridges. From 4" both SIG and magnum have around 600ft-lbs of energy, with the first having 20 more for the hottest loads available, while from 6" barrel SIG gains 70ft-lbs, while magnum gains 200, matching 10mm auto in terms of power. It's really got unusually high gains from longer barrel.

So, to sum up, 357SIG is a misunderstanding at best and a lie and speculation at worst. It still a pretty good defensive ammo that shoots flatter and with less recoil than 40SW, and has hotter loads in general and slightly more powerful(like 40ft-lbs) hot ones due to higher operating pressures.

>Also, still reading through the whole thread, but what's the cartridge of choice at the moment?

For now i've rejected 9mm caliber because despite the great commonality and bullet selection it would have too much recoil for desired velocities and sectional densities, albeit with more power. Something like aforementioned 357 auto could have 357-sih performance from 6" barrel and lose less from 4", while retaining more gain from longer ones than most pistol cartridges, allowing efficient use in SMGs as well but it'd have the recoil of 357 magnum which, while ok in rifles, is a bit problematic in pistols, especially autoloaders that lend themselves for more rapid shooting than revolvers. It probably could be changed by using lighter bullets but they'd lose SD and limit expanding ammo options so much that it's easier to pick a new one.

I've stopped at 327 magnum as a golden standard - it's performance is in the better half of the 530-600ft-lbs defensive ammo(read:40sw or mild 10mm, 45+p, 357SIG, 2.75" 357mag) while recoiling "slightly more than mp shield" in a revolver, which means that it'd recoil even less in an autoloader. But wait, there's more - it almost matches 30 carbine from similar barrel lengths and doing that with as little as 19gr case capacity, compared to 21.4gr for 10mm, for example. I didn't choose smaller caliber because i fear that'd require longer bullets that'd increase OAL more, though i'm uncertain on this matter due to lack of dedicated research of this topic. I've found someone actually designing a similar cartridge with dedicated software but i don't know how to use that and have no equipment so it stays still for now. >>640898

Right now i was further researching internal ballistics and cleaning up my notes, filling the empty space with averages and will soon post cleaned-up and more wholesome graphs.

>>644334

>it seems like fragmentation is the only way to "lose" energy, otherwise it'll be converted in either temporary or permanent cavity.

So the implication is that you always want your bullet to stay in one piece if possible, yes? I already knew soft points were objectively better on soft targets than fragmenting rounds, but does this suggest that it's better for an FMJ round to stay in one piece and tumble rather than fragment?