Rifle Concept

http://cz-usa.com/product/cz-550-fs-6-5-x-55-adj-5-rd-fixed-mag/

>also available in .30-06

What does your design do that this doesn't?

Make it mount an M1917 bayonet and we'll talk.

>>32156014
On first inspection and without going into the CZ thoroughly? Rear sight graduations, layout of the stock, stripper clip feeding, made in USA (that matters to some, IDGAF) and mine would be about half that price.

>>32156017
Gimme an hour and I'll see what I can do. I like where you're going with it though.

I just want a wood stocked rifle that is military-esque in design yet doesn't cost an arm and a leg, that I'd be comfortable treating the same way my grandfather treated his Springfield. Which I know he loved but it wasn't "babied".

>autism

>>32156077
>faggotry

File: Mossberg Patriot Minuteman w bayo.jpg (78KB, 1006x238px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 1006x238px

>>32156017
?

Bumping, I just want to keep this around til night /k/ can opin on it.

I don't mind your idea but I'd like something a bit different since stripper clips make you lose a modern optic setup.

Basically I'd want a Ruger gunsite scout in a different caliber and walnut stock... compact magazine fed fun times.

>>32156629
I had one, its what inspired me to do this little mock up. Its a nice rifle with a poor receiver IMO, and the magazine cost? No thank you. I'd prefer a scout scope and stripper clips if I had to have an optic.

>>32156731
How so is the receiver poor? Just curious.

>>32156629
You wouldn't necessarily lose the option to mount a traditional scope. It would be like most WW1 or 2 "snipers." All you would lose is the ability to use the stripper clip guide (something you where looking to remove anyway).

>>32156004
Interesting idea OP.

Maybe have it chambered in a variety of cartridges. 8mm Mauser, .308 win, .30-06, 7.7 Jap, 7.65 Argi, 7mm Mauser all can use the same bolt head. All that changes is barrel/chamber.

Maybe look into an intermediate cartridge version.
A 15 round .223/5.56 capacity and can use existing 5.56 stripper clips.
A 10 round 7.62x39 capacity could use SKS stripper clips

>>32157364
why not just ten or twenty round for 5.56 so either one or two clips are used?

>>32156004
>detachable box magazine
>stripper clip guide
Literally why?

>>32157390
>I screwed up 5.56 clip size..
Make it 10 or 20 then

>>32156629
>>32156731

You can have a stripper clip guide and a modern receiver-based scope mount ala the M40A1 rifle, though I really love the rear sights of rifles like the 1903A3 and M1 Carbine

>>32156844
It's very open, meaning it will flex.

The allowances for the bolt rails and body mean it has a very very sloppy bolt. Coupled with the sharp edges of the bolt flutes leads to being able to jam the bolt sideways as the flutes will actually gouge into the rear edge of the receiver.

Reports of the receiver cracking under normal use with factory ammo because they fucked up the heat treat and it's brittle.

>>32157410
Stripper clips take up less space and weigh less than mags

>>32157410
There are M14s with stripper clip guides.

>>32157453
And they're slow and a pain to use in a combat (or otherwise stressful) environment and preclude the use of traditionally mounted or any high-magnification optic, are easier to lose, and more likely to introduce dirt and debris into the action.

If you want to use stripper clips, use them to charge mags with a spoon when they're outside the rifle.

>>32157410
Options and
>>32157453

Plus if they are physically part of the receiver it doesn't cost more per unit (might be a slightly higher development cost but over a large number of guns that becomes de minimus)

>>32157477
>literally the dumbest service rifle of all time
>stripper clip guides
Gee, really?

>>32157503
Yet the guides would be unusable with an optic mounted in a traditional position.

And LER optics suck.

>>32157503
So basically you want the option to be a retard with your rifle?

...okay. Whatever. It's still a retarded idea.

>>32157520
>>32157547
You do realize some people want iron sights only and to be able to use existing supplies of stripper clips.

I dont intend to turn this into a durr rifle or sniper rifle. It would suck for a SHTF gun because functional and reliable semiautos exist.
This gun would be a range toy and baby's first gun at best.

File: FB_IMG_1480099557794.jpg (151KB, 720x1100px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 720x1100px

>>32157496
If you practice with them, they're no slower than magazines on the reload.
As far as introducing debris into the action, that all depends on how you personally store ammo on your person. Exposed magazine lips in a sandstorm can fuck your shit right up quick. Keep stripper clips in your closed pouches and you shouldn't have a problem.
Also I think that in the case of this thread, trying to emulate or replicate military bolt rifles of old is of higher importance than actual modern combat effectiveness.
People are allowed to like things that you don't.

>>32156004
I don't understand how you can fool yourself into nostalgie with such a rifle. or why you would want to. Zastava makes cheap ass rifles though:

http://www.zastava-arms.rs/en/civilianproduct/sporting-rifle-m70-standard

>>32157607
>if you practice with them, they're no slower than magazines on the reload
Only true if a detachable magazine only holds the same number of rounds as your stripper clip. If it takes more than 1 stripper clip to fill the magazine, it will take twice as long to reload the rifle with clips than it would with a new mag.
>that all depends on how you personally store ammo on your person
Not really. Anywhere you can store more than 1 stripper clip you can store a magazine. The magazine however only has 1 spot that can get dirt or debris in/on it that will enter the rifle, a stripper clip has a shitload.
>Also I think that in the case of this thread, trying to emulate or replicate military bolt rifles of old is of higher importance than actual modern combat effectiveness.
So buy a modern reproduction of a military bolt rifle of old (or an actual, surplus military bolt rifle of old) instead of trying to bastardize a hunting rifle into a military rifle. It'll be cheaper and you'll get exactly what you want.
>people are allowed to like things that you don't
Yes, but you fucks don't even know what you want.

>>32157593
>and to be able to use existing supplies of stripper clips
What existing supplies of stripper clips? Pretty much the only ammo that can be *routinely* found on stripper clips is 5.56, and those come with mag spoons 100% of the time. Also, clipped ammo is enough more expensive than non-clipped ammo that by the time you buy 500 rounds of it you've doubled the cost of 3 mags. And while clips can be reused a few times they wear out a HELL of a lot faster than mags do.

If you want it because you want it, fine. But there are enough people ITT saying it's a valid alternative to a detachable mag for actual practical usage to make me think you're all fucking retarded.

>>32157607
I want to kill these three fags with an MP40

>>32157687
Please go back to the /arg/

>>32157835
Why? Did all those truths hurt your precious feefees?

>>32157687
Valid point on the stripper clips. I guess I am stuck in my Milsurp collector mindset.

Although you can find stripper clips easily online (for both 5.56 and older milsurp).

Although I just had an idea of a niche this could go for: New Gun Owners. Here's some features that differ from OP:
>Chambered in 5.56 (.223 wylde is a possibility too)
>Retain stripper clip guides (no real extra cost and I want them damn it)
>Detachable STANAG capability (make default 10rounds)
Chambering it in an intermediate cartridge means smaller bolt and receiver (which means cheaper to produce).
5.56 barrels are also smaller and cheaper to produce. Maybe see if there is a way to use AR-15 barrel blanks, this would cut costs too.
STANAG is public domain so no development costs there.

Well its pretty. Whats the metal but called on the end of mauser style rifle stocks?

>>32157687
>So buy a modern reproduction of a military bolt rifle of old

That's basically what OP is trying to do. Regardless, there aren't many of those rolling around...like, none come to mind.

>>32157872
So basically a .223 GSR with STANAGs?

...shit I'd buy it

>>32156844
Pretty much what >>32157440 said.

It is accurate enough but when working the bolt, wew lad. She's sloppy, loose, and something about the cock on open in that rifle.....I dunno it just shouldn't be that difficult to operate the bolt.

>>32157364
I like it but I think a more feasible way to get this produced would to start with calibers currently in production. ie .308 & 30-06. I think this gun is chambered in 5.56 as well.

>>32157410
It works for handguns but by god I'm so sick and tired of having to buy overpriced special snowflake magazines. Damnit, just give me some stripper clips for my retro rifle. That's not to say I'm against magazines, as my AR will confirm, sometimes you just want something old school.

>>32157520
>>32157547
>>32157496
I get it. You can keep going but I get it.

>>32157674
How I can fool myself? I'm not tracking.

There seems to be a running theme in the responses in this thread. Why. Because I want it, because I can, just because. Because I'm tired of everything being black and plastic, I'm tired of the high speed, low drag, FLIR mounted, cryo barreled, Cryptec bolted, wizz bang cookie cutter bullshit. I'm tired of every fucking bolt action being a similar amalgamation of sporter stock, sporter barrel, gotta have a scope, here's your 4 round detachable mag that costs $90. I'm tired of watching surplus rifle prices go up and up and up some more, while the condition goes down and down and now you can't even get some CAI imported round receiver 91/30 for less than two bills. God help you if Tula made it. I just want an "everymans rifle", bolt action full power, stripper clip fed, pointable, aesthetically pleasing. Like the 1903A3 used to be.

>inb4 that's the AR-15
I've got one and that's just not what I'm talking about. If that answer is so ingrained in you as the only answer all I can say is this thread/ rifle just isn't for you.

>>32157440
Fucking Ruger.
>revolvers built like tanks
>rifles built like spun glass

>>32157921
I don't get nostalgia over a newly made rifle. you can have mausers, enfields or whatever else there is still. most of us, me included, don't have the money for guns not serving an immediate purpose. That usually boils down to rifle, pistol and maybe a shortgun - in that order.

>>32157968
>>revolvers built like tanks
they are massive but not strong. metal quality is jsut barely over pot metal.

>>32157862
What. The fuck. Is a "feefee".

>>32157882
A nose cap.

>>32157872
>>32157904
That rifle is currently made, its the Mossberg MVP, they have it in 308 as well.

>>32157884
That is exactly what I'm trying to do, but using a modern in current production receiver design to keep costs down. Because fuck doing a one off run of Mauser receivers or Springfields, you'd be looking at a $400 receiver by itself. Looking at existing pricing for the parent rifle ($375 retail), I'd say your looking at a $500 retail for my design.

>>32157970
It would never have the nostalgia of an original Mauser or Enfield. But would would give you a taste. Yes you can get them now, but not for long and at some point in our lifetime, it'll be madness to take them out and shoot them, because they'll be so old, so worn and tired. This could be a basic rifle with wood and irons that anyone could take out and flog.

File: MH1_3000.jpg (428KB, 3000x800px) Image search: [Google]

428KB, 3000x800px

>>32156004
I had the same thoughts OP. I just have terrible photoshop skills.

Things i think you're missing from having a SOLID item on your hands

1. Cleaning rod. Preferably under barrel, but a trapdoor buttplate would be good also

2. Bayonet lug. The Mauser lug would be idea, but its not like it will see serious use

3. Rear sight. Back of the receiver aperture you negroid

4. Side rail for scope mount. This would allow your rear sight, stripper clip, and scope alignment to all play nicely.

5. (Optional) A two piece stock would allow for greater damage resiliency and allow for optional item such as pistol grips, and thumb hole stocks to still exist without major modifications or bubbas. This would also save manufacturing costs on wood blanks/fitment while allowing the option to still go with a single piece stock. I would also extend the bottom of the magazine well to be inline with the bottom of the trigger guard to act as a ramp, preventing anything from catching on the guard while giving a stronger locking ability/protection for magazine conversions.

>>32157999
>That rifle is currently made, its the Mossberg MVP, they have it in 308 as well.
Really...
If they could get the price below $400 with irons I think this would make a damn good replacement for the nugget as a newfag gun.

>>32157921
OP.
May god speed you on your way.
I agree.
I want something that has a full length stock and a bayonet mount and stripper clip guides and for fucks sake a sight that takes me ought past 1000 yards.

It needs to make a comeback.
Yeah you can make it in 5.56 and even use the stripper clips.
Make another in 7.62x39.
They'll be the handiest fucking carbines ever.
Try to make a swivel bayonet too!
And don't EVER make varmint stocks from the factory (just to piss people off)

Would people get a straight pull version of this sort of thing, by any chance?
Thing a K-31 in 5.56?
Just for shits and giggles and gongs at a thousand yards for >$400?

File: cz-usa-cz-527-carbine.png (100KB, 784x522px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 784x522px

>>32158057
>Make another in 7.62x39.

File: zastava m85 223 Rem 762x39.png (132KB, 1024x354px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1024x354px

>>32158068

>>32158068
>full length stock
>bayonet lugs
>stripper clip guides
>iron sights that go to 1000 yards or more (preferably ladder sights)

I've actually considered modifying one to fit the bill but I haven't had the time or money.

>>32157968
Dafuq? That's Mossberg with the shitty rifle. The M77's are built like tanks too.

>>32158037
1. Yeah I thought about it, but decided against it after staring at some M1917 Enfield pics.
2. I'm on board with that, I was trying to keep costs down.
3. I prefer a more forwarded mounted rear as I find it better when snap shooting vs the receiver mounted sight.
4. Could be workable, maybe a proprietary mount?
5. You lost me, let me re-read a few times.

>>32158042
I think the MVP would make an excellent starter rifle, I think it is on the Poorfags Gun Guide.

>>32158057
I think the most likely calibers to start would be 30-06, and 308. I don't think they make the base rifle in 5.56 but it should be a simple bolt head & barrel change.

See >>32158068 for a 7.62x39 solution. I think my idea is a niche rifle to an extent, meaning I don't think it would be popular in 7.62x39, but it could be.

>>32158134
I've had 2 M77 actions from Ruger. A GSR which was loose and sloppy and a Hawkeye tactical. The GSR got sold, but the Hawkeye is staying for a while. Maybe the receivers and a case by case as the Hawkeye is pretty tight.

>>32158148
You know they sell them by the action.

You could buy a bunch and start the 7.62x39 version with very little actual startup (comparatively speaking)

You'd need to figure out how to mount the bayonet lugs and stripper clip guides but really, it's pretty much ready for you.

Well. That and the iron sights that go out far enough.

>>32158148
>I think my idea is a niche rifle to an extent, meaning I don't think it would be popular in 7.62x39, but it could be.
As long as it eats steelcase it can compete with a .30-30 while being a lot lighter, smaller, and cheaper to feed.


...fuck it, I'm probably getting a CZ 527 in 7.62x39.

>>32158165
The sloppy GSR is...bad news. I've owned several Hawkeyes over the years and have never had a complaint about the action (triggers on the mk2's sucked tho).

The M77 is literally an American-built mauser. I've never heard of one being anything but perfect before now, and I'd still literally bet my life on it not KB'ing when pretty much any other action would.

>>32158208
>CZ 527
>7.62x39
>MSRP $680.00
Ouch. Be sure to shop around, I'll stick with my rifle pipe dream.

>>32158208
>CZ 527 in 7.62x39.
one of the better choices for a poorfag hunting rifle. I's still get a HOWA with a plastic stock instead but whatever.

>>32158238
I saw them for like $550 at a local store, but was still in my "get an AR first" mode.

>>32158239
>$600 rifle
>"poorfag"
I do not think you understand something here.

A poorfag hunting rifle would be something like a Savage Axis ($300 or less including 3-9x40 scope), Mossberg patriot ($350 or less including 3-9x40 scope), or Ruger American ($350 with bases plus a $40 Simmons 8 Point 3-9x40), chambered in something like .243 or .308 so you can shoot 50cpr Powerpoints or Core-Lokts.

File: enflield stock.jpg (37KB, 800x531px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 800x531px

>>32158148
>You lost me, let me re-read a few times.

I think he means a Lee Enfield type stock where the actual buttstock and handguard are two different pieces of wood, allowing for swap-outs both in front of and behind the trigger instead of changing the entire stock

>>32158282
Oooooh, I gotcha now. Thanks.

>>32158274
If you do much shooting at all and can save up just a little bit more the CZ 527 becomes a better buy in a hurry when steelcase 7.62x39 is half the price of .308.

>>32158418
If the premise had been "plinking rifle" absolutely.

But the premise was "hunting rifle". here let me quote it: >>32158239
>one of the better choices for a poorfag hunting rifle
Softpoint 7.62x39 costs as much as or more than softpoint .243, provided you get softpoints that actually expand (IE, not Tula/Barnaul with their thick bimetal jackets).

>>32156004
How's this for a concept?
>Browning Maral
>6.5 Creedmoor
>Aramid skeleton stock with bipod
>5 and 20 round box magazines
>PSO scope

>>32158578
Expensive fudd rifle in snowflake round? nah