PDA

View Full Version : The Open Source Gun Project


okimreloaded
10-10-2011, 7:21 PM
123

scarville
10-10-2011, 7:32 PM
You can start here:
http://www.thehomegunsmith.com/

wash
10-10-2011, 7:54 PM
Look at AK flat bending, 80% AR lower CNC machining, 1911 machining, 1919A4 building, tube guns like the Sten, etc.

Which reminds me, I need to get a tube gun kit...

Ubermcoupe
10-10-2011, 7:56 PM
But my home builds are still subject to CA AW law... Drat!

When is the next build party? :D

jaymz
10-10-2011, 7:58 PM
While I agree with you to a certain extent, if homebuilds don't stay under the radar, they will also be outlawed. The inyourface UOC guys obviously didn't understand that.

wash
10-10-2011, 8:06 PM
It's pretty much impossible to ban home builds.

They can regulate the final legal configuration of the gun but they can't really regulate the sale of firearm parts. Even if they required registration of the finished gun, they still couldn't stop you from building.

It is wise to keep certain types of build parties low profile but an AK build party can be 100% out in the open because it's all hand work, it's not illegal in the slightest unless the owner is not doing all of the work.

SwissFluCase
10-10-2011, 9:01 PM
As the tools become more automated (and cheaper) the skill required to build guns will drop. There is no way gun control will work in the long run. Gun control will become technically infeasable.

Regards,


SwissFluCase

Midian
10-10-2011, 9:19 PM
We're getting close to the point where we need to just stop cooperating with the Mommystate

wash
10-10-2011, 9:24 PM
We should continue to cooperate, we'll just be two or three or three hundred steps ahead of them.

Apocalypsenerd
10-10-2011, 10:10 PM
part of this project should include a website for downloadable files that can be used in 3D printers like the makerbot.

unusedusername
10-10-2011, 10:23 PM
Right now, 3d printers are limited to using soft plastics.

You may be able to make a "plumb-crazy" like lower from it, maybe, and have it last a little while, but realistically we are a little ways away form this tech being ready for firearms. We need to be able to print from more durable polymer blends (or maybe metal?)...

moulton
10-10-2011, 11:22 PM
Right now, 3d printers are limited to using soft plastics.

You may be able to make a "plumb-crazy" like lower from it, maybe, and have it last a little while, but realistically we are a little ways away form this tech being ready for firearms. We need to be able to print from more durable polymer blends (or maybe metal?)...

Not true, there are 3D printers that can make hybrid Stainless Steel / Bronze metal objects. Stainless steel powder is fused together with a resin and then hardened forming a vitreous object, Bronze is then soaked up into the object giving it strength.

gatesbox
10-10-2011, 11:29 PM
Uh, isn't it just called a five axis cnc mill........

wash
10-10-2011, 11:47 PM
3D printers might be useful for making mold cores for lost wax or sand casting techniques.

DIY casting foundries are not that hard to make or expensive.

OleCuss
10-11-2011, 7:50 AM
This sounds like an excellent project! Well worthwhile.

I'm a little concerned about bad guys getting into the plans and techniques - but then, they've been stealing firearms and making zip guns for forever already.

Chris J
10-11-2011, 7:58 AM
I like it. How about getting some content up on gunhacker.com?

okimreloaded
10-11-2011, 8:53 AM
123

Apocalypsenerd
10-11-2011, 9:03 AM
I may be wrong, but disseminating the files for as many types of weapons will be important as well. I expect that at some point the authorities will try to limit those files through one avenue or another.

wash
10-11-2011, 9:14 AM
Forget about rapid prototyping in metal, the laser sintering machines that do that cost around $1,000,000.00.

Not really DIY.

goober
10-11-2011, 9:15 AM
Am I missing something?
I don't disagree in the slightest w/ the OP, but what is it that is being proposed that isn't being done/doesn't already exist?
Folks build their own firearms all the time. There are 10's or probably hundreds of websites and forums dedicated to the pursuit, both in general and specializing in one format or another.
Are you proposing a particular design for this project, or just consolidating info (while also distributing it widely)? Because there is already a wealth of information out there, and I'm not sure how this idea will significantly add to, complement, or otherwise make home building information more available.
Not discouraging the idea in any way, just trying to understand it better.

Arisaka
10-11-2011, 11:15 AM
I have only bought one gun, lol. The rest are built. I really hope it stays under the radar, though. I think people (anti's) would be shocked that this is legal.

Alan Block
10-11-2011, 11:29 AM
I would suggest organizing cooperatives to share tools. Mills, lathes, rifling machines and foundries are things not everyone needs to own.

ENTHUSIAST
10-11-2011, 11:36 AM
Justin makes nice jigs and leaves a link to the FREE code downloads here:

http://www.cncguns.com/downloads.html

From his website:

My files are free to download, and if you share these files they must remain free!

okimreloaded
10-11-2011, 2:03 PM
I like the idea of having a cooperative set up where we can share resources. The jigs are necessary but also the flats.

We need to know where to cut and punch, how thick of a piece of sheet metal is required and what strength is required.

I'll get the wiki up this week and we can start reaching out to people.

Does anyone have a CNC mill or sand casting experience?

ENTHUSIAST
10-11-2011, 2:23 PM
If you try posting in the gunsmith section you will probably get better results.

The sheet metal is 1mm on standard AKM stamped builds.

Curtis sells them for 19.95 each (I wouldnt try to make your own since these are so CHEAP and work perfectly.)
http://ak-builder.com/index.php?dispatch=categories.view&category_id=171

okimreloaded
10-11-2011, 4:58 PM
I agree- it is impractical to make our own but for the project I would still like the schematic in the event one needed to make his own.

Peter.Steele
10-11-2011, 5:57 PM
Forget about rapid prototyping in metal, the laser sintering machines that do that cost around $1,000,000.00.

Not really DIY.



You feel like a nice project, I'd be willing to bet you could build one for under $5,000. Probably significantly cheaper than that, even.

okimreloaded
10-11-2011, 6:39 PM
We don't need laser sintering machines. It would be cool to design an entirely open source gun from the ground up but again it's not necessary. All we need to do is compile the existing info in one place and ensure that people who want a legal and unregistered long gun can have one. We need to make sure parts like barrels and stocks are easy to come by.

We could even create video tutorials that detail the assembly process and safety precautions.

Joewy
10-11-2011, 6:46 PM
We don't need laser sintering machines. It would be cool to design an entirely open source gun from the ground up but again it's not necessary. All we need to do is compile the existing info in one place and ensure that people who want a legal and unregistered long gun can have one. We need to make sure parts like barrels and stocks are easy to come by.

We could even create video tutorials that detail the assembly process and safety precautions.

Has to be a copy of a already manufactured gun or it will be classified as a zip gun and ... Well, who needs that headache.

Kharn
10-11-2011, 6:52 PM
Just buy the AK blank already bent into shape to avoid buying the hydraulic press and jig, riveting the trunions and trigger guard and welding the lower rails into place require modified bolt cutters, trigger guard riveting jig and a low-end MIG welder. Other than that you'll need a drill press and a dremel. The MIG is the most expensive tool, but they have many other uses so finding one you can borrow is not very hard. The barrel is drawn into the trunion using all-thread, nuts and washers.

Finishing an AR from a 0% forging is just an exercise in using a >16" milling machine and reading the prints, DROs really help due to how everything is based on the location of the front take down pin.

okimreloaded
10-11-2011, 7:34 PM
Has to be a copy of a already manufactured gun or it will be classified as a zip gun and ... Well, who needs that headache.

It appears that the definition of a zip gun in CA may be intentionally nebulous. http://www.savvysurvivor.com/law_research_on_home_built_firea.htm I'd be surprised if there were any cases tied to someone building a new gun privately in ca but I wouldn't want to be the first.

Also building an AK or Saiga is not what the project is about, what the project is about is making the process streamlined and available to anyone who wants to do it. Most people would choose an 80% receiver and while the project should address that- the point is what if 80% receivers are not available.

The point is to make it impossible to disarm us.

Peter.Steele
10-11-2011, 7:47 PM
Has to be a copy of a already manufactured gun or it will be classified as a zip gun and ... Well, who needs that headache.


FUD, pure and simple.


In order for a gun to be a zip gun, as defined by PC 12020, it must meet ALL of the following criteria, which we will discuss point by point.

(a) It was not imported as a firearm by an importer licensed pursuant to blahblahblah.

Okay, your home built design obviously meets this criteria. It was manufactured domestically, and therefore it was obviously not imported. Of course, my S&W M&P 15-22 also meets this criteria, since it was manufactured domestically. We are, however, well on the way to having manufactured a zip gun!

(b) It was not originally designed to be a firearm by a manufacturer licensed pursuant to blahblahblahblah.

Well! We meet this criteria as well! You are not a manufacturer licensed pursuant to blahblahblahblah.

(d) It is made or altered to expel a projectile by the force of an explosion or some other form of combustion.

Well ****. We meet this criteria as well. Looks like it's the big house for us ... but wait, I think we missed a section ... we skipped from (b) to (d)!


(c) No tax was paid on the weapon or device ...

Oh damn! We didn't pay any taxes on the gun we just made ...

... nor was an exemption from paying tax on that weapon or device granted under Section 4181 and Subchapters F (commencing with Section 4216) and G (commencing with Section 4221) of Chapter 32 of Title 26 of the United States Code as amended blahblahblah.

Now wait just a minute here!

Section 4181 of the Internal Revenue Code says "There is hereby imposed upon the sale by the manufacturer, producer or importer of the following articles a tax ... : Pistols. Revolvers. Firearms (other than pistols and revolvers). Shells, and cartridges."

Section 4182 contains exemptions to the taxes imposed by 4181. 4182(c), entitled Small Manufacturers, etc., states in pertinent part, "The tax imposed by section 4181 shall not apply to any pistol, revolver, or firearm described in such section if manufactured, produced, or imported by a person who manufactures, produces, and imports less than an aggregate of 50 such articles during the calendar year."

So ... I've manufactured, produced and / or imported less than "an aggregate of 50 such articles" this year ... so that means I'm exempt from the taxes imposed by section 4181 ...

Hey, waitaminute! This means that my firearm fails to meet this criteria! And that means that it's not a zip gun!

okimreloaded
10-11-2011, 8:29 PM
It seems like it is open to further legal discussion and I'd be open to the idea of seeing what could be done to design a gun that can be assembled with as few machines as possible but doubt that it would be up to modern standards we've all come to expect.

I'm going to ask around in other sub forums- it would be awesome to get some momentum with this thing.

okimreloaded
10-11-2011, 8:30 PM
I should say ask around about the scope of the project in general, not specifically creating a new firearm.

Peter.Steele
10-11-2011, 8:49 PM
It seems like it is open to further legal discussion


No, actually it's not.

If it's (a) not specifically prohibited under another law and (b) you make less than 50 per year, it is not a zip gun according to California law. This is black letter law. It is just about as open for debate as whether the sun is rising in the east or west tomorrow morning. Or, to make the analogy more firearms related, you might as well argue about whether or not a bullet is considered a tool under California law.

ETD1010
10-11-2011, 9:21 PM
I have access to a CNC machine. I would LOVE to be able to make an AR lower from a billet!

okimreloaded
10-12-2011, 7:49 AM
No, actually it's not.

If it's (a) not specifically prohibited under another law and (b) you make less than 50 per year, it is not a zip gun according to California law. This is black letter law. It is just about as open for debate as whether the sun is rising in the east or west tomorrow morning. Or, to make the analogy more firearms related, you might as well argue about whether or not a bullet is considered a tool under California law.

Sounds good to me.

model63
10-12-2011, 8:00 AM
but they can't really regulate the sale of firearm parts. Even if they required registration of the finished gun, they still couldn't stop you from building.


What is to say that they can't regulate uppers or make the subject to some kind of tax or fee or disposition rules like mags? They ban other items (maybe as DD) like grenade launchers and the like... After this round of bills being passed and the constant clawing by legislators I can't help but think they won't stop at trying anything? I am truly bummed over my C&R being relegated to near nothingness so maybe I am speaking during a moment of weakness :(

Chris J
10-12-2011, 9:03 AM
What is to say that they can't regulate uppers or make the subject to some kind of tax or fee or disposition rules like mags? They ban other items (maybe as DD) like grenade launchers and the like... After this round of bills being passed and the constant clawing by legislators I can't help but think they won't stop at trying anything? I am truly bummed over my C&R being relegated to near nothingness so maybe I am speaking during a moment of weakness :(

To me, the most attractive part of the open source idea is that it has the potential for making firearms manufacture so ubiquitous that enforcement of any prohibition may become impractical. (Something kind of similar happened in encryption software awhile back, I believe; in a sense this makes the "open source" tag more relevant.)

I agree that uppers could present a problem in the long run if lawmakers decide it is worth regulating. Someone needs to come up with a DIY approach to barrel manufacture.

wash
10-12-2011, 10:52 AM
You feel like a nice project, I'd be willing to bet you could build one for under $5,000. Probably significantly cheaper than that, even.
Five grand probably doesn't even cover the power supply for the laser...

Selective laser sintering ain't the same thing as a plastic extruding maker-bot or whatever they call those DIY 3D printers.

wash
10-12-2011, 10:55 AM
If the government tried to regulate firearm parts more than they currently do, so many parts kits and barrels would hit the market before the law goes in to effect that Obama-mania would look like a slow business day.

Peter.Steele
10-12-2011, 7:03 PM
Five grand probably doesn't even cover the power supply for the laser...

Selective laser sintering ain't the same thing as a plastic extruding maker-bot or whatever they call those DIY 3D printers.



Yeah, I know it's not the same thing as a makerbot. :p


Re: power supplies ... you'd be amazed what you can come up with if you look hard enough, and you're not needing tremendous quantities of identical things.

wash
10-12-2011, 7:31 PM
For the same money I would rather get a used Bridgeport size CNC mill, a rifling machine, a lathe, a makerbot, a DIY foundry, a set of AK bending and riveting tools, a parkerizing setup, a bead blasting cabinet, a spray booth, a pain oven, a hot bluing setup, a sinker EDM, a TIG welder, a surface grinder, a shaper, a heat treat oven and a new Corvette.

Laser Sintering is pretty cool but I doubt it's as good at making gun parts as you think it is. It's a rapid prototyping method but it's far too slow for real production and it's no good for parts like bolts or barrels.

It's not a magic bullet.

Peter.Steele
10-12-2011, 7:46 PM
For the same money I would rather get a used Bridgeport size CNC mill, a rifling machine, a lathe, a makerbot, a DIY foundry, a set of AK bending and riveting tools, a parkerizing setup, a bead blasting cabinet, a spray booth, a pain oven, a hot bluing setup, a sinker EDM, a TIG welder, a surface grinder, a shaper, a heat treat oven and a new Corvette.

Laser Sintering is pretty cool but I doubt it's as good at making gun parts as you think it is. It's a rapid prototyping method but it's far too slow for real production and it's no good for parts like bolts or barrels.

It's not a magic bullet.



I know it's not a magic bullet. I'm just saying that it's feasible, and for a lot less money than you might think.

I've already got a mill and a lathe, and (most of) a DIY foundry, and (most of) a 4-axis JGRO machine. Of course, I still don't have power set up to the mill and lathe ... but anyway. :p Once I have those finished, I'll have the rest before too long.


(Except for the pain oven. I don't think I want a pain oven. I'm not sure what it is, but I'm pretty sure I don't want one.)

Joewy
10-12-2011, 8:40 PM
I used to own a 3d systems SLS machine. Used it mostly for making short run foundry patterns and core boxes.
There are not many SLS machines that do direct metal fusion. It takes a lot of power just to use standard SLS composites. You are talking megawatt lasers to do the 100% fusion that would be necessary for most active firearm parts. Probably only within the price range and capabilities of NASA and high end aerospace firms. I dont think steel is a good material for this type of machine anyways. Even when casting steel, alloys need to be watched and modified at all times. The silicon and carbon would probably burn out quite easily and leave you with a very malable part. Not something you want in a firearm.

A good start for a project would be something like a modern BAR. Just beef it up a bit. I have a 338 win mag BAR that Ive put many thousands of rounds thru and it still works well. It has a woden stock and can be carved without too much trouble. The action is simple and easy to work with.

billybob_jcv
10-12-2011, 9:58 PM
Hmm, I thought I understood - but the last few posts confused me...

I *thought* the primary purpose of this exercise was to produce the *regulated* portion of the firearm - ie, the receiver. The rest of the parts (barrels, bolts, etc) are already easily purchased from multiple vendors - and can be (currently) purchased without Big Brother watching over us. If the scope of the project is focused on the receivers, then you avoid the issues of needing to mill and rifle a barrel and other difficult processes.

Of course, it would be great to be able to build your own complete firearm in your garage without buying anything but some steel - but I think that's not realistic or necessary. Instead, the focus can be on leveraging the entire firearm industry to supply the unregulated parts, and only worry about those parts *if* Big Brother decides to try to control them.

I also have another comment...

Does this first attempt at an opensource firearm really need to be a relatively high-profile semi auto rifle? What if the initial attempt is something much more under the radar - like a bolt action rimfire rifle or a plinking pistol? You would be able to perfect the manufacturing processes, information distribution, etc, etc without the "stigma" of creating an Evil Black Rifle in your garage. Once the processes are in place, retooling for an opensource AK-clone should be relatively easy. I suspect this kind of thinking will probably rub the activists the wrong way - they will want to charge ahead with their bayonets out - I'm just trying to offer a more subtle approach...

billybob_jcv
10-12-2011, 10:31 PM
One more thing...

What about 26 U.S.C. 5841 : US Code - Section 5841: Registration of firearms

(a) Central registry
The Secretary shall maintain a central registry of all firearms
in the United States which are not in the possession or under the
control of the United States. This registry shall be known as the
National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record. The registry
shall include -
(1) identification of the firearm;
(2) date of registration; and
(3) identification and address of person entitled to possession
of the firearm.
(b) By whom registered
Each manufacturer, importer, and maker shall register each
firearm he manufactures, imports, or makes. Each firearm
transferred shall be registered to the transferee by the
transferor.
(c) How registered
Each manufacturer shall notify the Secretary of the manufacture
of a firearm in such manner as may by regulations be prescribed and
such notification shall effect the registration of the firearm
required by this section. Each importer, maker, and transferor of a
firearm shall, prior to importing, making, or transferring a
firearm, obtain authorization in such manner as required by this
chapter or regulations issued thereunder to import, make, or
transfer the firearm, and such authorization shall effect the
registration of the firearm required by this section.
(d) Firearms registered on effective date of this Act
A person shown as possessing a firearm by the records maintained
by the Secretary pursuant to the National Firearms Act in force on
the day immediately prior to the effective date of the National
Firearms Act of 1968 (!1) shall be considered to have registered
under this section the firearms in his possession which are
disclosed by that record as being in his possession.
(e) Proof of registration
A person possessing a firearm registered as required by this
section shall retain proof of registration which shall be made
available to the Secretary upon request.

wash
10-12-2011, 10:54 PM
Guns made for personal use avoid pretty much all reporting and registration requirements.

AKs and ARs are already routinely made from an unregulated flat or 80% lower and parts that are also unregulated.

If someone in the government wanted to stop people making paperless guns, they would have to regulate parts such as barrels so the ability to rifle a barrel might be very useful at some point.

If I see the writing on the wall, I'll start buying up parts kits and barrels.

It would be nice to be able to do everything in house but that's pretty far beyond my means and few will ever get there.

billybob_jcv
10-12-2011, 11:03 PM
Guns made for personal use avoid pretty much all reporting and registration requirements.

AKs and ARs are already routinely made from an unregulated flat or 80% lower and parts that are also unregulated.

If someone in the government wanted to stop people making paperless guns, they would have to regulate parts such as barrels so the ability to rifle a barrel might be very useful at some point.

If I see the writing on the wall, I'll start buying up parts kits and barrels.

It would be nice to be able to do everything in house but that's pretty far beyond my means and few will ever get there.

So - those 80% lowers have no serial numbers? That's the part I was having difficulty understanding - I didn't see exclusions for "personal use" in the federal code. In Search 26 U.S.C. 5842 : US Code - Section 5842: Identification of firearms it says:

(a) Identification of firearms other than destructive devices
Each manufacturer and importer and anyone making a firearm shall
identify each firearm, other than a destructive device,
manufactured, imported, or made by a serial number which may not be
readily removed, obliterated, or altered, the name of the
manufacturer, importer, or maker, and such other identification as
the Secretary may by regulations prescribe.
(b) Firearms without serial number
Any person who possesses a firearm, other than a destructive
device, which does not bear the serial number and other information
required by subsection (a) of this section shall identify the
firearm with a serial number assigned by the Secretary and any
other information the Secretary may by regulations prescribe.
(c) Identification of destructive device
Any firearm classified as a destructive device shall be
identified in such manner as the Secretary may by regulations
prescribe.

okimreloaded
10-12-2011, 11:58 PM
Any non prohibited person can build a gun if he wants to without Dros or registration or serial numbers as long as he does not transfer it, although my limited understanding is that if one did wish to transfer it there are means for adding the proper information.

The reason I vote for the saiga type is because the receiver is not milled, it is bent- which makes it much easier.

However it would be interesting to see what other types could be built. Just as computers are hacked guns can be hacked too.

The point of hacking is to push the limits and to learn new things- for instance I remember reading about the FP liberator and later the deer gun, single shot insurgency pistols that were minimalistic in form and function. One group may want to go off on that tangent and just see how simple they could make a gun.

The goal of the project as I see it, is to create an organized system for producing firearms outside of the over regulated ways- as a model- in case buying a firearm the traditional way becomes too burdensome, all within the letter of the law.

I would love for the opposition to see that all it takes is a few affordable machines and dedicated people to make regulation pointless and expensive to enforce.

Of course not all of the required machines are affordable but creating a network of people who make the parts we need and have those machines is part of what this is about.

okimreloaded
10-13-2011, 12:03 AM
I'd also encourage all those unfamiliar with a saiga rifle to google it. It looks very similar to a regular rifle, and lacks all "evil features" that the state is so concerned about.

The Wingnut
10-13-2011, 12:09 AM
It seems like it is open to further legal discussion and I'd be open to the idea of seeing what could be done to design a gun that can be assembled with as few machines as possible but doubt that it would be up to modern standards we've all come to expect.


This is what initially sprung to mind for me: A very inexpensive, highly simplistic, but reliable and accurate firearm. Something that uses as few parts as possible and is not reliant upon close tolerances or complex machining, but will function and perform well.