PDA

View Full Version : self-ejecting non-semiautomatic rifle


alpine18
12-02-2006, 5:50 PM
OK, so I had another idea I thought I would run past you all.

The idea is a self-reloading non-semiautomatic rifle. The definition of semiautomatic means a firearm that reloads itself after each pull of the trigger.
Well, what if the firearm fired, ejected and cocked itself, but did not chamber another round? Not a semi-automatic, right?. And then, you must do something else like press a button or release the trigger for the bolt to be released and the next round chambered.

The firing sequence would go like this:

1. Trigger is pulled.
2. Firing pin drops, firing the round.
3. Recoil/gas from round ejects the round and pushes the bolt rear.
4. Bolt is caught, held back by something, similar to the bolt-catch on the AR when the mag is empty.
5. Trigger is released, button pushed, etc. to release the bolt and chamber the next round.
6. Cycle repeats...


Looking at an AR type action this could probably be accomplished with a modified hammer, modified bolt catch... the hammer would "push up" the bolt catch with an extension arm when the disconnector is holding the hammer (actually the energy for pushing up the catch would come from the bolt moving rearwards, cocking the hammer, and thus pushing up the catch)

Here is a primitive diagram:

http://www.quickfilepost.com/download.do?get=4099aa34cb233d73f63a70b4904c0b24

When the trigger is released, the hammer moves slightly, and is then held in a notch at the nose of the trigger, but the hammer extension moves the catch down, allowing the bolt to move forward and chamber a round.

Another primitive diagram of the trigger and bolt being released:

http://www.quickfilepost.com/download.do?get=23e9b0db8757f720d534726a5db72828

* pull trigger - round fired, case ejected, bolt goes rear and stops
* release trigger - bolt goes forward, chambers round
* repeat...

Thoughts?

hoffmang
12-02-2006, 6:24 PM
That's kind of an interesting idea. I haven't given the definition enough thought yet though to have an opinion on legality...

-Gene

WokMaster1
12-02-2006, 7:26 PM
Manumatic action system. You can name it after Allison M. Call it the allison trigger.

But this made me think about the pump action paintball marker. You hold the trigger down & just keep pumping & the marker will continue to shoot. HMMmmm!

m1371
12-02-2006, 8:05 PM
OK, so I had another idea I thought I would run past you all.

The idea is a self-reloading non-semiautomatic rifle. The definition of semiautomatic means a firearm that reloads itself after each pull of the trigger.
Well, what if the firearm fired, ejected and cocked itself, but did not chamber another round? Not a semi-automatic, right?. And then, you must do something else like press a button or release the trigger for the bolt to be released and the next round chambered.

The firing sequence would go like this:

1. Trigger is pulled.
2. Firing pin drops, firing the round.
3. Recoil/gas from round ejects the round and pushes the bolt rear.
4. Bolt is caught, held back by something, similar to the bolt-catch on the AR when the mag is empty.
5. Trigger is released, button pushed, etc. to release the bolt and chamber the next round.
6. Cycle repeats...


Looking at an AR type action this could probably be accomplished with a modified hammer, modified bolt catch... the hammer would "push up" the bolt catch with an extension arm when the disconnector is holding the hammer (actually the energy for pushing up the catch would come from the bolt moving rearwards, cocking the hammer, and thus pushing up the catch)

Here is a primitive diagram:

http://www.quickfilepost.com/download.do?get=4099aa34cb233d73f63a70b4904c0b24

When the trigger is released, the hammer moves slightly, and is then held in a notch at the nose of the trigger, but the hammer extension moves the catch down, allowing the bolt to move forward and chamber a round.

Another primitive diagram of the trigger and bolt being released:

http://www.quickfilepost.com/download.do?get=23e9b0db8757f720d534726a5db72828

* pull trigger - round fired, case ejected, bolt goes rear and stops
* release trigger - bolt goes forward, chambers round
* repeat...

Thoughts?

What you're describing is still a semi-auto but firing from the open bolt position. The design has been used in machine guns for a long while, nothing new.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

eckerph
12-02-2006, 8:07 PM
Sounds intresting but it would be hard to explain to youre average cop without actually showing him via live fire.

blkA4alb
12-02-2006, 8:13 PM
What you're describing is still a semi-auto but firing from the open bolt position. The design has been used in machine guns for a long while, nothing new.

Sorry to burst your bubble.
No, it is not firing from the open bolt position. You would close the bolt on a new round and then fire it. This idea has been hashed out on the board before.

alpine18
12-02-2006, 8:17 PM
This is not open-bolt. The bolt would close on the release of the trigger, but NOT fire. One would have to pull the trigger again on the closed-bolt to fire the gun - no different than the standard AR action.
Think of it as a semi-semiauto :)

alpine18
12-02-2006, 8:23 PM
Manumatic action system. You can name it after Allison M. Call it the allison trigger.

But this made me think about the pump action paintball marker. You hold the trigger down & just keep pumping & the marker will continue to shoot. HMMmmm!


Where can I find more info about the manumatic action? No sense in reinventing the wheel.

Skammy
12-02-2006, 8:34 PM
You'd have to modify the receiver so that it couldn't accept standard trigger parts. Otherwise a few minutes with a punch and hammer would revert it to semi-auto.

One possibility is a CMC or Timney style drop in module with retaining pin or screw holes somewhere else besides the trigger and hammer pivot points. The receiver would have corresponding holes drilled and the standard pin holes would be sealed.

I don't see why you would have to use non-standard parts.. what's the possiblilty that it could be modified in a way that isn't legal have to do with it's legality ?

m1371
12-02-2006, 9:36 PM
This is not open-bolt. The bolt would close on the release of the trigger, but NOT fire. One would have to pull the trigger again on the closed-bolt to fire the gun - no different than the standard AR action.
Think of it as a semi-semiauto :)

So now you're saying that after each shot fired, the shooter would have to hold the trigger down and that releasing the trigger would release the bolt to go forward.

This still sounds like a semi-automatic in function, because you are automating a portion of the firing cycle.

hoffmang
12-02-2006, 9:41 PM
I think what he was proposing is that after each round, one would have to hit the bolt release and then pull the trigger.

The fact that something could be retrofitted to be semi auto again, does not effect the status of the weapon when it is not semi automatic.

The best example of that is the AK-47's that have the gas system stopped requiring actuating the bolt. Clearly, one could replace the gas system easily, but the gun, as configured, isn't a semi auto.

-Gene

m1371
12-02-2006, 9:55 PM
I think what he was proposing is that after each round, one would have to hit the bolt release and then pull the trigger.

That's what I am trying to clarify. In his initial post he said:

you must do something else like press a button or release the trigger for the bolt to be released and the next round chambered.

As I've said, the fact that some portion of the firing cycle is automated strikes me as still being in the "semi-automatic" category.

The best example of that is the AK-47's that have the gas system stopped requiring actuating the bolt. Clearly, one could replace the gas system easily, but the gun, as configured, isn't a semi auto.

I think that's the best example given. Firing the round doesn't have any effect on the operating system.

If after firing the round in the chamber, it caused any portion of the firing cycle to occur then I do not see how you could say it isn't a "semi-automatic" system.

In a lever-action, a bolt-action, a pump-action and even a single-shot: you pull the trigger, gun goes "bang" and then nothing happens until the shooter manually initiates the remainder of the firing cycle.

WokMaster1
12-02-2006, 10:20 PM
Where can I find more info about the manumatic action? No sense in reinventing the wheel.

Sorry, ancient Chinese secret! j/k!:D

That word just came across my mind when i read your post. It came from the self paddled automatic transmission for some cars.

What you are describing is a semi automatic action but there is a retarder (for lack of a better term) that prevents the bolt from moving back into battery with the next round after the first shot is fired. This in theory would not be a true semi auto as you would have to manually do something to release the bolt (by pushing a button). However, unless your retarder is a major piece of component in the whole "action" that any attempt to modify it would render it (upper & lower receivers) useless as a firearm, DOJ would not give you an approval.

For the AR model, the lower receiver is the actual firearm. It can be made/modify to accept detachable mags, etc. This is going to be the sticky point here. If you can come up with a proprietary upper & lower receiver, it is not going to hold water in California.
But nonetheless, it is a good idea that needs more study.

RANGER295
12-02-2006, 10:35 PM
As someone said on here before, we hashed this out on here a couple of months ago. We decided that there would be way too much wear on the bolt catch parts. Lets say you shoot 150 rounds on a trip. That is 5 mags worth assuming you have 30 rounders. If it was semi-auto, it would only lock back once per 30 rounds. So 150x30=4,500 which mean that you would put 4,500 rounds worth of wear on the bolt catch parts by with those 5 mags. You would also have to figure a way to make it so that you could not just hold the bolt catch button down and fire it semi-auto. I donít really think it is the best option.

blkA4alb
12-02-2006, 10:55 PM
Lets say you shoot 150 rounds on a trip. That is 5 mags worth assuming you have 30 rounders. If it was semi-auto, it would only lock back once per 30 rounds. So 150x30=4,500 which mean that you would put 4,500 rounds worth of wear on the bolt catch parts by with those 5 mags.
Umm..your math doesn't make any sense. You have 150 rounds, if it locks back every round, thats 150 times.

4,500 times would be if you had 150, 30 round magazines ;) .

xenophobe
12-02-2006, 11:49 PM
This is a good idea and could work. Definitely pushing the limit of the law, and there would probably have to be a court ruling before I'd be comfortable with it... It would need modification of the action so that you couldn't change it without disassembling the rifle, and it would have to be uninterruptable... meaning, if you can keep the 'bolt release' button held down and then pull the trigger enough times until the mag empties... Then you're probably still breaking the law.

I am going to attempt getting a FN FS2000 next year and make it a manual action with the gas port sealed off. That should be fun! ;)

anotherone
12-03-2006, 12:06 AM
Wasn't there some kind of fed ruling by the ATF or other agency that any semi-auto made to fire from an open bolt was a machine gun?

xenophobe
12-03-2006, 12:09 AM
Wasn't there some kind of fed ruling by the ATF or other agency that any semi-auto made to fire from an open bolt was a machine gun?

That it was too easy to convert to being a machine gun.

The device proposed here would not be a firearm the fired from an open bolt. An open bolt has a fixed firing pin, and the action of the bolt grabbing a round out of the magazine, chambering it, and firing it when the bolt closed on the chamber is what an open bolt does.

Closing the bolt on an open bolt gun fires the weapon. In this case, closing the bolt on this device would only chamber the round, readying it to fire. Big difference in mechanism.

SemiAutoSam
12-03-2006, 12:10 AM
That might have been the federal ruling that made the MAC10 series of weapons change to a closed bolt design.



Wasn't there some kind of fed ruling by the ATF or other agency that any semi-auto made to fire from an open bolt was a machine gun?

sierratangofoxtrotunion
12-03-2006, 12:17 AM
I like it. I say let's keep it with the same AR lower hole pattern, to make the point that SB23 sucks.

socalguns
12-03-2006, 5:01 AM
Push a button, then pull trigger to fire,
then push a button, and then pull trigger to fire again?
I think they'd call that double action :)

RANGER295
12-03-2006, 9:29 AM
Umm..your math doesn't make any sense. You have 150 rounds, if it locks back every round, thats 150 times.

4,500 times would be if you had 150, 30 round magazines ;) .
You are correct that it would only lock back 150 times (once per round) with this option. If you are firing it semi-auto it only locks back once per mag. To get it to lock back 150 times (assuming it was semi-auto), you would need to go through 150 mags worth of ammo. Assuming that you are using 30 round mags, 150 mags worth of ammo would be 4,500 rounds. It would only lock back 150 times, but that is the amount of normal wear that it would see with 4,500 rounds through it being that it would only lock back once every 30 rounds. I think the math does make sense.

saki302
12-03-2006, 12:58 PM
As far as the FS2000 goes, why not just ditch the flash hider and plug the thumbhole and then run it as a regular detach mag semi? Seems much easier to me than futzing with the gas system.

A few hours with a dremel and some wood and black paint, and you'd have a half decent plug. Line it with felt to keep from scratchign the stock, and bolt or glue two halves together. No one said it had to be permanent.

-Dave

Pulsar
12-03-2006, 1:47 PM
You are correct that it would only lock back 150 times (once per round) with this option. If you are firing it semi-auto it only locks back once per mag. To get it to lock back 150 times (assuming it was semi-auto), you would need to go through 150 mags worth of ammo. Assuming that you are using 30 round mags, 150 mags worth of ammo would be 4,500 rounds. It would only lock back 150 times, but that is the amount of normal wear that it would see with 4,500 rounds through it being that it would only lock back once every 30 rounds. I think the math does make sense.

But I think with this design he is using a whole new mag catch, not just the magazine activated one, it would be relatively simple to make a beefier catch for this job. Just make sure that catch is the same hardness as the bolt, otherwise your gonna be wearing out parts very quickly.

This would actually be a rather simple project, I might just have to get my hands on another lower and give it a shot... course I'm in dire need of a new computer first.

RANGER295
12-03-2006, 2:02 PM
But I think with this design he is using a whole new mag catch, not just the magazine activated one, it would be relatively simple to make a beefier catch for this job. Just make sure that catch is the same hardness as the bolt, otherwise your gonna be wearing out parts very quickly.

This would actually be a rather simple project, I might just have to get my hands on another lower and give it a shot... course I'm in dire need of a new computer first.
You are right that you would need to redesign the parts, largely so that you could not just hold the button down and it would fire semi-auto. I am not so worried about the parts wearing I guess as I am about the receiver. The parts can be replaced. I would think that you would end up with egg shaped pinholes. Something that you do have in your favor is that it is stopping the bolt at the back of its path before it has gained much forward momentum. I still think that gripless or a fixed mag is the way to go.

Pulsar
12-03-2006, 3:19 PM
You are right that you would need to redesign the parts, largely so that you could not just hold the button down and it would fire semi-auto. I am not so worried about the parts wearing I guess as I am about the receiver. The parts can be replaced. I would think that you would end up with egg shaped pinholes. Something that you do have in your favor is that it is stopping the bolt at the back of its path before it has gained much forward momentum. I still think that gripless or a fixed mag is the way to go.

Yeah, I understand what your saying about the holes getting worn into ovals. And you did mention the fix for it already, just stop it before it gets any momentum. Only bad part about this is what happens if you've got ammo that causes short cycles.

And honestly, I'd rather go gripless as well, but I'm all in favor for giving people as many options as they can get.

alpine18
12-03-2006, 4:20 PM
You are right that you would need to redesign the parts, largely so that you could not just hold the button down and it would fire semi-auto. I am not so worried about the parts wearing I guess as I am about the receiver. The parts can be replaced. I would think that you would end up with egg shaped pinholes. Something that you do have in your favor is that it is stopping the bolt at the back of its path before it has gained much forward momentum. I still think that gripless or a fixed mag is the way to go.

What would be needed is a mechanism that would not allow the gun to fire if the bolt release is held down at the time the trigger is pulled.
I think the original diagrams I posted would cause issues, possibly slam fires if the bolt catch were held down for each shot... as the extension connecting the base of the hammer to the catch would block the hammer from travelling far enough back to catch the disconnector.

Another idea I thought of today is a small mechanism that attaches between the buffer tube and receiver. This mechanism would allow the rear of the bolt to pass back into the tube (as it does normally), but then hold it as it tries to move forward.... The shooter would then have to hit a button with his thumb to release the bolt. This is sort of like the opposite concept of how an M16 auto sear works. Instead of the bolt actuating the firing, the bolt would be held by a sear-like mechanism until the shooter released it. The button would have a disconnector mechanism that would allow it to catch the bolt regardless of the state of the button.

Blacktail 8541
12-03-2006, 4:42 PM
I'm sorry if I'm raining on the parade, but it just seems to make a little more sence to just make it a straight pull action by closeing off the gas system and adapting the bolt to have a handle like the Alexandert Arm action, and pinning the upper in such a way that the front pivit pin would be hard to remove.
http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c314/JDSISCO6/image.jpg

sierratangofoxtrotunion
12-03-2006, 5:11 PM
Weak ammo could be dealt with by having the bolt catch have a series of teeth, as the bolt came back, whichever tooth it passed over last would be the one to catch it. Weaker ammo would catch it on a tooth farther foreward. Or better yet, have steps on the bolt that the bolt catch would step down as the bolt moved back. Then maybe the bolt catch lever could be moved sideways to release the bolt. It's definitely doable.