[maxim.semyonov]

this is a long shot...

if i can buy a receiver for $15.00 why should i spend more on a barrel and be stuck with available calibers only, or pay even more for custom barrels? all that ak receiver stamping/folding got me thinking and here is what i got:

instead of using lets say a 40mm long blank and boring it, and reaming it, and rifling it - suppose we just take 1mm thick disks (40 of 'em) and stamp a hole through them complete with lands and groves!

we then go on and put them into a simple tube with a snug fit and cap it off tightly on both sides. as for RIFLING TWIST let's say that each disk is offset in the tube so as to produce the effect of proper rifling.

i could go on, but seeing some feedback first would be really nice :thankyou:

 

[Triangle 66]

High pressure gas leakage !

 

[maxim.semyonov]

High pressure gas leakage !

even if torqued?

OK, how about an insert, it would definetly work then?

 

[Triangle 66]

Are you thinking along the lines of a quick change barrel ??

Compressing the disks doesn't keep them leak proof , the gases will still want to escape in the gaps between them , however small the gap.

 

[maxim.semyonov]

what about qd barrels?

i did some brain storming and you're right about the gas, but what if a filler (liquid metal, jb weld) or silver sodder is used to seal the gaps?
and if that still fails to contain HP gas it should have no problem with LP systems like blackpowder. with all the new in-line gadgets it's high time for a breech loading caseless BP repeater!!

WHEW... appreciate your input, i just think that a gun assembled under $50.00 would be a boon to the industry, especially for the homebuilder. thanks T66, keep 'em coming!

 

[shortround]

Why would you want a 1 1/2" barrel (40mm)? Secondly, how are you going to stop all those rifled washers from turning as well as line them up? You do realize that when you pull the trigger, there is 40,000 PSI or so less than a foot from your face? Even 10-12,000 PSI with black powder would be bad news. 40 or more high speed pieces of shrapnel would definitely not endear you to those shooting on either side of you.

 

[maxim.semyonov]

u got me, make it 40cm, or 20". the point is that instead of using single expensive tubes we use multitudes of cheep disks, stacked in a tube. as long as gas is not blowing through the gaps and the disk OA dia is big enough then the system would be safe.

 

[droog]

If it was cheap and could be done the commies would have did it and they didnt.

 

[maxim.semyonov]

true, but doesn't that kind of logic lead to the absense of invention? keep in mind that the USSR was not concerned with simple pursuits and simply let the idea roll around. i assure you that once i get a chance to apply myself to this the outcome may surprise the skeptics (famous last words). didn't saddam have a sectioned gun barrel?

 

[Sangrun Hunter]

What about rifgling and accuracy? Doesn't sound like it would be any good.

Back in the black powder days that used to make shotgun barrels from rings that were hammer welded to together over a form. They didn't hold up when smokeless powder came along.

Another concern wopuld be gass esacping between the discs even if it was in a tube. It would play hell with escaping gases gettting all over the place. It's possibly, but not likey and barrels aren't that hard to make anymore.

 

[Golovko]

Disregarding pressure considerations, that's an awful lot of rough edges to deal with. I think there would be a lot of metal fouling (think 'leading', but with copper jackets too). How would one smooth the interior, short of rifling and lapping in the first place? A lead lap isn't going to want to move with all the staggered edges in there.

By the way, since you said 40mm when you meant 40cm, did you say 1mm when you meant 1 cm?

 

[pirate56]

when you twist the disks to twist the rifiling there will be a sharp edge to shred the bullet. the disks would not stay together and it would cost more to mfg than a barrel.

 

[bsn]

Wher would your burst strength come from? If you use a liner for that you could have made a barrel cheaper.

 

[aviator]

Too many variables for it to work well. First the gas issue, you will be losing gas presure everytime the bullet traves through one disk, no presure, the bullet will die upon exiting the barrel. Then there is the edge issue, creating a lot of friction inside, heating the washers to the point of warping, deforming the trajectory completely and causing a hazard. I don't think so, The present system has been in use for a very long time and has been proven effective. If it ain't broken don't fix it.

 

[DrugRunR]

It would be classified as a NFA weapon.
Basically you will be making a silencer based on your your first posts

Lets say you took a 1 1/4 round stock (steel)
You then bore it to so the ID is .75
You then cut a goove in the bottom of the inside 1/4 wide and 1/8 deep
You then make up you barrel washers (WITHOUT RIFLING)
Make the bullet hole smaller but make the outside EXACT
You then stack all the washers up in your "barrel tube"
Then get a button cutter and cut your rifling in.

Now, here is the fun part.
This has been discussed at length elsewhere.
No matter how good you make it, there will be gas leakage around the washers.
This leakage will cause a reduction in the noise when compared to a regular barrel.
Because of this reduction, the ATF will rule it a Silencer.

Silencers are rarely "SILENT". Most do reduce it to a level where you do not need hearing protection, and some will reduce it enough to where you can hear the action cycle and the bullet it the backstop. ANYTHING that gives you ANY reduction in noise could be classified as a silencer

 

[Steelcore1964]

beside the above post I think the Feds would call it a suppressor.

 

[maxim.semyonov]

damn so much negativity, but you are all correct. well, what about that olde hammer welded ring barrell, can it be improved upon with today's manufacturing tech? is so
it would address the gap / edge / suppress / pressure issues above. keep in mind: kitchen table assembly!

 

[pirate56]

There is no "kitchen table" solution to barrel making. you are dealing with a precision part that is meant to withstant preassures of 50,000 cup's and temperatures of 5,000 f.

 

[DrugRunR]

pirate is correct.

You would have to basically design a completely new weapon.
If you want to be able to change calibers like you change shoes, then get yourself a AR since you can use the same lower for 5.56, 7.62x39, and all pistol calibers

But if you do want to travel down this road then we can.....

Basically you would need a complete barrel for each caliber.

You want the locking lugs for your bolt to be a part of the barrel.
This way you could have a 5.56 barrel and a 5.56 bolt and it will always headspace the same. In fact you could build 2 "receivers" and interchange between them if your original design tolerences were tight.
This also takes care of pressure issues since all the pressure will be in the barrel/chamber assemble, not in the reciever.
In a AK it would mean that you make the trunion/barrel one complete assembly.
It is really easy to do with all of these "screwed" builds (pun intended)
Just unscrew the 6 screws, swap front ends. Screw it back together

son wants to play so no more computer time till later....

 

[jpglee1]

YEP...thats my idea for my next build...USE a 74 as a base rifle. Procure a 2nd trunnion/sight block and an UZI BBL pressed into a 74 trunnion minus the locking lugs. For the magazine well, make an adaptorusing a 74 mag body w/a Mac-11 magwell/magrelease welded to it. You would basically have a magwell that would lock in place like an AK magazine I.E. you would clip the 9mm magwell on when you inserted the 9mm trunnion/BBL assembly. *VOILA* instant caliber conversion. Im 99% sure the adaptor plate would hold tight enough considering the original magazine holds tight thru all sortsa torture......

MAXIM, dont stop imagining man. MANY of the most succesful inventions started as flukes/accidents and stupid ideas... Imagination = innovation.