renegade
10-18-2007, 05:24 AM
ALL - I changed this topic, thought it sounded too obscure.
After proceeding forward, I starting to tackle a couple of CETMEs, as well as 4 G3s. When it comes to the parts count thing, I have come to realize, that though they can be had, there are companies that would rather provide little or no information, they have their place (e.g. inquired through FAC Supply a.k.a. Century, about a U.S. made trigger, only to get some female yahoo defending Century's proprietary information, hell, I only wanted to buy a US made trigger).
It occurs to me that from all I read here, that the most things people want to change is the furniture. so it make most sense to maximize the internal parts counts or things that don't effect the furniture as far as 922 compliance. The main things that I have come to regard as high priority and have little/no effect on furniture or magazinze are the following:
1) Flash Hider
2) Charging handle
3) Receiver
4) Sear
5) Hammer
6) FCG cage
7) Trigger
8) Trunions
Building either of these rifles all of these are common. The receiver is basically a 'given', flash hiders are easily obtainable, charging handles, though somewhat highly thought of, are available. Though, with the exception of the trigger, all of these parts are readily available, they are expensive, simply because people like myself, will buy them.
Here is where I am going with this....
Some of this has prompted me start evaluating how to make these things, which has me considering buying the appropriate mill/drill/lathe machinery just to fabricate my own and also to see what is involved.
The end result, would be the potential to fabricate/build a U.S. made parts set that consists of the above, with the exception of the receiver, I would prefer to stay out of that realm.
I know certain blue prints are available, I guess the main thing is possible patent infringment (though, I don't think this is an issue).
I am not talking about using G3 bottoms because they will work and the parts are available, I am talking about to-spec parts replacements for both CETME and HK (though most of the HK are readily available).
Does anyone have or is willing to share/collaborate on a project such as this (in particular the CETME). Some of these parts do not look that labor/machine intensive to produce, if one were to tool for them (?CNC?). Maybe I don't know what the hell I am talking about. I am not talking one off projects, but a possible production run. this is not to infringe on people like PTR91, but to me, there is a void in the market for this parts setup. For instance, I do not believe a trunion is a real labor intensive part, a trigger is a little more complex, but it could be 'process' isolated, same with sear and hammer (these may be able to cast, I don't know).
Part of the fun in this, is learning how, but there are people who want to own one of these but they don't want to get involved in some of the more meticulous details.
Feedback anyone?
P.S. - I don't think magazine modifications should be included as a parts count, though they are an easy fix, I wouldn't want to have to jack with fabricating my own legal magazines when there are so many available, the trunion is an after thought, because it is not always needed unless barrel replacement is necessary
After proceeding forward, I starting to tackle a couple of CETMEs, as well as 4 G3s. When it comes to the parts count thing, I have come to realize, that though they can be had, there are companies that would rather provide little or no information, they have their place (e.g. inquired through FAC Supply a.k.a. Century, about a U.S. made trigger, only to get some female yahoo defending Century's proprietary information, hell, I only wanted to buy a US made trigger).
It occurs to me that from all I read here, that the most things people want to change is the furniture. so it make most sense to maximize the internal parts counts or things that don't effect the furniture as far as 922 compliance. The main things that I have come to regard as high priority and have little/no effect on furniture or magazinze are the following:
1) Flash Hider
2) Charging handle
3) Receiver
4) Sear
5) Hammer
6) FCG cage
7) Trigger
8) Trunions
Building either of these rifles all of these are common. The receiver is basically a 'given', flash hiders are easily obtainable, charging handles, though somewhat highly thought of, are available. Though, with the exception of the trigger, all of these parts are readily available, they are expensive, simply because people like myself, will buy them.
Here is where I am going with this....
Some of this has prompted me start evaluating how to make these things, which has me considering buying the appropriate mill/drill/lathe machinery just to fabricate my own and also to see what is involved.
The end result, would be the potential to fabricate/build a U.S. made parts set that consists of the above, with the exception of the receiver, I would prefer to stay out of that realm.
I know certain blue prints are available, I guess the main thing is possible patent infringment (though, I don't think this is an issue).
I am not talking about using G3 bottoms because they will work and the parts are available, I am talking about to-spec parts replacements for both CETME and HK (though most of the HK are readily available).
Does anyone have or is willing to share/collaborate on a project such as this (in particular the CETME). Some of these parts do not look that labor/machine intensive to produce, if one were to tool for them (?CNC?). Maybe I don't know what the hell I am talking about. I am not talking one off projects, but a possible production run. this is not to infringe on people like PTR91, but to me, there is a void in the market for this parts setup. For instance, I do not believe a trunion is a real labor intensive part, a trigger is a little more complex, but it could be 'process' isolated, same with sear and hammer (these may be able to cast, I don't know).
Part of the fun in this, is learning how, but there are people who want to own one of these but they don't want to get involved in some of the more meticulous details.
Feedback anyone?
P.S. - I don't think magazine modifications should be included as a parts count, though they are an easy fix, I wouldn't want to have to jack with fabricating my own legal magazines when there are so many available, the trunion is an after thought, because it is not always needed unless barrel replacement is necessary