The Daewoo K1A1 uses a fixed ejector. For those unfamiliar with it, the BCG on the MCX looks very similar but the K1 is DI.
The Daewoo K1A1 uses a fixed ejector. For those unfamiliar with it, the BCG on the MCX looks very similar but the K1 is DI.
It's vital in every rifle; but in rifles with massive aftermarket support with a wide range of barrel and gas system length options, people occasionally get it wrong. Unsupported platforms with few choices rarely have home barrel swaps, or the conversations that go along with them.
Last edited by RetroRevolver77; 03-15-18 at 21:47.
The Iranian KH-2002 is a DI bullpup. It's basically a bullpup version of an Iranian unlicensed copy of a Red Chinese unlicensed copy of the M16.
Stoner, along with Armalite, sold his patents relating to the AR-10 and AR-15 to Colt. And Stoner went back to DI later in life, as IIRC, he assisted Knight with the initial development of the SR-25 and SR-15/SR-16.
" Nil desperandum - Never Despair. That is a motto for you and me. All are not dead; and where there is a spark of patriotic fire, we will rekindle it. "
- Samuel Adams -
It is spring loaded, though in form is hardly like the G3. It is a spring loaded blade that sits in a tube behind the magwell. The carrier keeps it compressed, but as the bolt moves rearward during extraction, the ejector moves up and protrudes through a slot in the bolt. The first time you see one of the bolts it’s common to think a lug sheared off. It’s a pretty neat design.
I was actually wondering before I fell asleep last night as to why Stoner went to all pistons after the AR-10 and AR-15. Forgot that he sold his patents but a part of me wonders if he found the piston system to be a better and went back to DI only because he was working at Knight's and the project required it of him.
It seems to me that most of the guns that he worked on after the AR-15 were not necessarily intended to compete with or replace the AR-15 (although ArmaLite did develop the AR-18 from the AR-16 after Stoner left them in part to compete with Colt and their AR-15/M16 FOW). In fact, I believe that Stoner spent the most time and energy post-AR-15 developing the M69W/62/63/63A and its follow-on projects, which saw their greatest success in the role of a light machine gun, rather than as a carbine or rifle (to the point where the only version of the 63 still in production is a dedicated LMG, rather than the super modular one-receiver-nine-weapons concept that Stoner initially devised).
Jim Sullivan also seems to have enjoyed his greatest success post-AR-15 with another lightweight LMG in the Ultimax 100.
" Nil desperandum - Never Despair. That is a motto for you and me. All are not dead; and where there is a spark of patriotic fire, we will rekindle it. "
- Samuel Adams -
Why do you have to have the buffer tube? I think it is the simplest way to do it and the least bulky,(ETA) for a rifle at least with a stock and gives you the higher sight over bore for a long zone of hits with a fast bullet(?). The gas coming back hits/enters the BCG and by the time it starts moving to be off the gas tubes 'nipple', it isn't getting any more energy from that gas- or not very much? You'd still need some kind of spring system, but why not one like the AK on top? Are the speeds and energies all of the wrong magnitudes and screwing with the timing?
Last edited by FromMyColdDeadHand; 03-21-18 at 16:17.
The Second Amendment ACKNOWLEDGES our right to own and bear arms that are in common use that can be used for lawful purposes. The arms can be restricted ONLY if subject to historical analogue from the founding era or is dangerous (unsafe) AND unusual.
It's that simple.
Bookmarks