'Sup /k/. I'm working on a single shot firearm design

a moded orion flaregun flare gun

>>33505578
Okay I see how it works.

Cool I like it. One thing I would do is make the barrel interchangeable so you could switch it out with 9mm or whatever.

Got to thinking about selling extension to really make the money.

>>33505578
Pretty cool design desu. You should try to patent that.

>>33505578
Make a few and don't be afraid of changing the design. At some point you will figure how to make it the easiest possible way.

I'm not familiar with other gun designs that are that small.

The frame/recover doesn't look to bad. You could make it in two halves. One would be basically flat the other half recessed where all the part fit in. Many cuts will be small but do able.

I'm sure there's been various designs featured on Forgotten Weapons over the years, maybe there's something there.

>>33506199
>>33506227
>>33506257
>>33506257
>>33506330
Pic isn't my design. It's just an example of a different design. I guess I should have included that in the OP.

http://www.doubletapdefense.com/

>>33506445
Yeah, I try to watch as many of his videos as possible, though most of them use the same design I was talking about.

>>33506685

I think you could replace some of those really tiny trigger springs with some leaf springs.

File: fullcock.jpg (22KB, 300x227px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 300x227px

>>33506712
I'd rather deal with coilsprings than leafsprings, desu. See the half-cock and full-cock notches? Imagine how tiny in diameter a mill would have to be to cut that. The smaller the mill, the slower it cuts and the more fragile it is. That's the problem I have with most single-shot triggers.

Have you seen the 22-GB?

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/10/13/simplest-homemade-pistol-mark-serbu-gives-world-gb-22-gun-buyback-special/

>>33506876
I have. The firearm I'm working on will be using substantially stronger rounds, though.

I just saw Ian's video on the Mauser 77 and I think I might have a good idea of where to take it, now... Need to digest it a bit.

>>33506735
>Imagine how tiny in diameter a mill would have to be to cut that
1. Shaped cutter. You're thinking about it the wrong way - axis of the cutter is at right angles to the material thickness
2. Broach
3. It isn't a half-cock - that's an intercepting sear to prevent discharge if a loaded weapon is dropped.

If gunsmiths of a century ago without access to CNC tools could make both sidelocks and boxlocks, it shouldn't be a problem for modern machinery.

Yes I know they were hand fitted, but that was mainly due to the inherent inaccuracy of the machinery that they had, not the ability of the machinery to make the parts.

>>33507373
The idea is to make it faster, easier and less expensive to manufacture those components. The money can then be put to good use elsewhere so that the gun remains high quality without people shitting their pants at the price. There's ALWAYS a way to improve the product, to optimize it for a given manufacturing method. The fewer different tools you need to manufacture the entire thing, the better. If I can get away with nothing but a mill and a lathe, then you better believe I'm going to do it.

And yes, that is the half-cock. That's the position you put the dog in while you load in the powder charge and ram the bullet. It was literally the only "safety" those guns had.

>>33507407
>If I can get away with nothing but a mill and a lathe
Did you not read point 1? Shaped cutter. In an end mill.

Or you could go for sintering.

>>33507427
Custom made cutters are costly AF.

File: 1490240911718-k.png (4MB, 1632x1224px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1632x1224px

>>33506685
>double tap written on design
>retards think it's OPs design
Summer is fucking over

>>33507589
The fact that it's a double barreled firearm when it was mentioned that the design is a single shot... and that the firing mechanism is still mostly up in the air while the pic is of a fully completed assembly...

Summer is only beginning.

>>33507407
>>33507527
>thinking machining is lowest cost
>not willing to invest in custom tools to get paid back in cycle time

Your current thought process is rooted in prototyping, not mass production.

>>33508134
Machining is lowest barrier of entry. If I can't get to market at all then there's no point.

>>33508170
Your cost-per-gun in the prototyping phase is going to be at least double of that in mass production.

I understand your goal is "decent quality for a decent price", but that decent price is going to come from the transition to mass production methods.

It's obvious that you have limited means/funds for prototyping. Good for you for trying to improve manufacturability and optimize existing capabilities, but don't get stuck on them.

Good luck, and have fun with exploring new designs.