Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 98

Thread: What could be done to simplify the AR-15?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    District 11
    Posts
    6,339
    Feedback Score
    24 (100%)
    "So to get a 7075 monolith, you have to machine the living shit out of a monster forging."

    I am still laughing at this.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    District 11
    Posts
    6,339
    Feedback Score
    24 (100%)
    I like the simple sights integrated into the rails on the SIG 550 series/steyr scout rifle. Just a flush flip up simple peep with a battle zero.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Hamburg PA
    Posts
    3,506
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Greg Bell View Post
    Additional Bad idea

    Alright , what about welding the receiver extension in place? Would allow you to ditch a few parts and weak points in the design. I don't know how you would replace the buffer detent pin if it ever weakened.

    I guess you could also use a plastic lower with an integrated grip--but I suspect that would require metal sleeves for pins, etc which would be a step back.
    I don't like the idea of welding the RE. but, if you want to try to away with the castle nut you could possibly try to do something that has the end plate with an extension, which inserts into the lower and is then pinned to the lower, however, I am not sure I'd want to pin something like that to my lower, and in all honesty you'd end with a zero sum gain regarding parts supposing you are still threading the RE to the lower. I could also see trying to intergrate a QD mount to the lower, to do away with the endplate but I don't like that since if you manage to wear out or damage the QD mount you SOL. In short though, I just am not seeing the need for it myself.
    "I don't collect guns anymore, I stockpile weapons for ****ing war." Chuck P.

    "Some days you eat the bacon, and other days the bacon eats you." SeriousStudent

    "Don't complain when after killing scores of women and children in a mall, a group of well armed men who train to shoot people like you in the face show up to say hello." WillBrink

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    536
    Feedback Score
    0
    Integrate ambidextrous controls into the basic design of the lower. The idea of a removable fsb is great. Integrate qd into the standard rail, reciever end plate, and stock. I'm for a trigger guard that is swappable. Integrated sights could be handy if they're done well, otherwise you're slaved to crappy buis. Enlarge the bolt hold open / release.

    Essentially, these are quality of life changes that integrate into the base design a lot of what aftermarket does.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    167
    Feedback Score
    0
    Instead of permanently integrating the RE with the lower, I prefer a way to secure it in place without having to stake the castle nut. I know of the PWS's ratchet lock system but I wonder how well it holds up with hard use.

    More robust bolt with fewer lugs (like 3 lugs)

    Straight gas tube

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,755
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Greg Bell View Post
    Additional Bad idea

    Alright , what about welding the receiver extension in place? Would allow you to ditch a few parts and weak points in the design. I don't know how you would replace the buffer detent pin if it ever weakened.

    I guess you could also use a plastic lower with an integrated grip--but I suspect that would require metal sleeves for pins, etc which would be a step back.
    You can't welt 7075 . . .

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    N.E. OH
    Posts
    7,595
    Feedback Score
    0
    Simple is a loaded word. Simple to manufacture? Simple to use, or simple to assemble? Simple to fix?

    Everything I've seen mentioned helps in one area, but takes away in another.

    I think the current system is the best balance of simplicity in all areas while remaining modular.

    I'd love to see a standardized supressor mount, but that's probably outside the scope of this thread.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,762
    Feedback Score
    11 (100%)
    Monolithic uppers are clown shoes. Bend the rail? Well screw you. I know one swat officer who destroyed an lmt upper his first time using it in a shoot house. So much for that idea.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    32,833
    Feedback Score
    14 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Greg Bell View Post
    "So to get a 7075 monolith, you have to machine the living shit out of a monster forging."

    I am still laughing at this.
    I think it's been done or tried. It's just a machine time/forge yield nightmare. It's the way to do it. But cost prohibitive as a mofo.
    "What would a $2,000 Geissele Super Duty do that a $500 PSA door buster on Black Friday couldn't do?" - Stopsign32v

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,781
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    I vote for the FA to stay as well, and use an evolved FA so it won't snag on the user's fingernail or knuckle when he uses an ambi charging handle's right latch, as we did with the LDFA.

    FA isn't used much anymore, so it can afford to be smaller, and evolve with other components, as they have evolved from the original design.

    I don't want to use this thread to promote our product so I won't post links or pictures, y'all can look it up
    Roger Wang
    Forward Controls Design
    Simplicity is the sign of truth

Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •