The 231 firing port weapon was about 1100-1150 rounds per minute IIRC. Maybe as high as 1200 with ball ammo, which wasn't authorized for use in it except in an emergency.

The Backup Disconnector is blind pinned in place to prevent tampering.  If you were to tamper with or remove the BUD, you may be breaking the law.  ATF required that we redesign the BFS so that you could not get a hammer follow if you left your finger at the breaking point on a release phase.  If you remove the BUD, you will likely be making a machine gun.  (For the same reason, earlier comments about making your own BFS with burst components were inaccurate.)  

Yes, Franklin Armory staff (myself included) are adept at not overrunning the carrier speed, but we used standard components.  No funky tricks were employed.  However, if you want to run as fast as your finger can go, why not just adjust the port to your desired carrier speed?  Lightening the components performs the same goal anyhow.  ... and NO, we did not cut buffer springs.  It would not be helpful to do so.

Lastly, the statute for WA is Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 9.41.010 (15) "Machine gun" means any firearm known as a machine gun, mechanical rifle, submachine gun, or any other mechanism or instrument not requiring that the trigger be pressed for each shot and having a reservoir clip, disc, drum, belt, or other separable mechanical device for storing, carrying, or supplying ammunition which can be loaded into the firearm, mechanism, or instrument, and fired therefrom at the rate of five or more shots per second.  

...and the one for OR is:  166.210 (6)  Machine gun means a weapon of  any description by whatever name known, loaded or unloaded, which is designed or modified to allow two or more shots to be fired by a single pressure on the trigger device.

I thought the Whiskey Arms carrier was titanium?

ETA: Nope you're right; it's aluminum. I wouldn't trust an aluminum carrier in anything full auto, or even close to full auto such as the FA BFS. Too much wear on too many parts. I would, however, consider a titanium carrier. Which can get pretty light.

There's the answer to several questions...straight from the horses mouth so to speak.

No mention of "Magazine" which is what Eugene Stoner, Robert Fremont, and L. James Sullivan decided to use for the AR-10/AR-15 weapon system. I wouldn't consider an AR magazine a mechanical device.

But the ATF has all kinds of fucked up, and twisted definitions for simple $2 words that really have no meaning. So who knows?

Sometimes I think they purposely word it so to catch people off guard just to prosecute, or have an argument to prosecute. Using phrases that can be interpreted in 3 dozen different ways but only have one interpretation, and that interpretation is whatever ATF says it is depending on which way the wind is blowing that day....

What the hell ever happened to the fucking Constitution of the United States of America?

So we can get it strait from the horses mouth. What has to occur for the bud to engage. Is it maybe that they are not releasing the trigger all the way on the release stroke? Like there trying to feel the reset instead of just releaseing it and thats causing them to ride on the edge just enough for it to catch or is it a carrier speed issue

That is my thought too. I do not know how it would hold up over time.

Thanks for posting and giving us more insight on the backup disconnector. Do you think your lighter carbine buffer (2.8 ounces) will help with not over running the carrier? I have not used it so this would be a question to ask you guys.  I was going to try 2.5 ounces down to 2 ounces. The rifle being used is a 300 blackout SBR lower. I'm not sure what happened to my FA lower but the spring that was shipped with the lower was shorter and cut. Its not a big deal because I was planning to remove the BFS trigger from the lower when I got it from my FFL.

Are there any plans for making NiB coated selector levelers and different styles mods

Any word yet on an ATF approval letter?

Thanks for chiming in. I was pretty sure that was why you added the BUD.

 

What are your thoughts on higher spring rates?

Thank God the state of Alabama has NO definition or restrictions on machine guns... they really having nothing in the law at all.

FA says they haven't cut any recoil springs. Yet two of the lowers that came from FA have cut recoil springs in them.

It seems like they wanted to get the trigger on the market before thoroughly testing it after ATF demanded an addition. The addition being the BUD which is an obvious problem. Because they offer no assistance, or advice.

FA also boasts themselves as being "adept at not overrunning the carrier speed" yet the staff, and FIRST TIME users they had testing it in the below video had zero problems. Also commenting they "used standard components, and no funky tricks were employed."

In 41 pages in this thread which started in January, new years day to be exact, FA has posted in here a total of two(2) times. The last one being more of a shoulder shrug as in a "you bought it; now it's your problem", and not a lot of information other than "you'll most likely be breaking the law if you tamper with the BUD".

So judging by FA's activity in this thread on probably the most prominent AR-15 site on the entire interwebz. I wouldn't expect any new questions to be answered for at least another 50 pages!





Not to be a big ball of negativity. But FA could have spent a few more minutes here, and posted something a little more constructive instead of feeding us several lines of bullshit with a side of shit salad.

here is a thread about the durability of aluminum bolt carriers.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_118/686486_Durability_of_aluminium_carriers.html

 This is exactly why I don't chime in very often.  

So there are two recurring scenarios that many of you are encountering.  The first one is hammer follow as a function of carrier speed.  In order to ensure 100% effectiveness irrespective of trigger speed, you have several elements to work with:  spring tension, buffer weight, carrier weight, and gas port size.  The video taken of staff and first time users shows an unmodified rifle.  The first time users were not given a full magazine due to safety concerns. (Several users had never fired a rifle before.)  It was the generation 2 prototype that was installed in that gun.  If I had tried to go as fast as my finger would go, I would have induced hammer follow due to carrier speed.  However, there is a solution.  You can simply open up the gas port.  You can spend a lot of money on cool parts to make your carrier go faster, or you can simply open up the port about .001 at a time.  Whence you get your brass ejecting to about 1:30-2:00, you probably got it right where you want it.  Whether you open the port or you lighten the components or increase spring tension, you are still effecting the same result.

The second scenario is the annoyance of getting hung up on the BUD.  It is designed to engage your hammer if you should not release the trigger fully.  This means that reset shooters will likely need to practice with the trigger to get it to function without getting hung up on the BUD.  We posted in a earlier video the need to "release fully" when operating in binary mode.  Whence you do this, this problem should be resolved.  Of course if you do get hung up on the BUD, you should be able to simply pull again and the hammer will be released to the binary disconnector.

So I am trying to understand this correctly.  Is the product being sold the same product shown in the video????  Or does the addition of the BUD make it a jamm-o-matic piece of useless shit?  Because an unreliable firearm is a useless firearm IMHO.

Ahhh, I see the followup FA response....which answers my questions, thank you.

Never had an issue with FTF's including using a Beta Co. C-Mag drum. Keep in mind, that's what they were marketed for....use in registered M-16's (these were sold in the early eighties prior to the 05/19/86 ban)

first of all I don't understand what you are upset about. But was it in their post you didn't like? Also its called an action spring.

On my old Smith carrier, "chatter" from the hammer on the underside of the did cause some damage.

According to current published specs, the M231 Firing Port Weapon had a MINIMUM rate of fire of 1225 rpm.



No issues after almost 35 years of use other than the aforementioned "chatter". Here is a photo of the "chatter".

Same exact product.  There's no need for your firearm to be unreliable.  You simply may need to tune it for optimum results.

Here's a quick video of me at the range tonight, sorry I didn't video more.  Magazine only had 20rds, it was my last box of ammo after shooting 270 rounds.




Weapon




Troy Industries 16" upper




Spikes Tactical lower




PSA pistol buffer tube/spring/buffer w/sig brace




Magpul magazine

Thank you, it was the trigger reset & BUD engagement that I was not understanding, but you described what happens in that situation and why it happens very well.

I was under the impression that it didn't take to many mag dumps in a row to do serious damage to chamber throat of your barrel.
I am wrong or are you guys just planing replacing barrels on a regular basis?

Thanks for that.  I had a feeling that was happening to me, as I'm used to riding the reset on an S3G, but wasn't sure.

No kidding.  Thanks for posting that.

Barrels are consumables. That said, as long as your accuracy requirements aren't high you can use them for thousands and thousands of rounds.

 

I don't think any of us intend to do too many repeated mag dumps.  But we want the ability to.  For instance, if someone inventive were to develop a 12 gauge belt fed upper, tell me you wouldn't want to do some belt dumps

Thanks for your feedback.  I'm really enjoying your product.

He'll you've got me hooked and you haven't even designed it yet. Lol

Top men are working on it.  Top.  Men.

Same here.  Thanks FA!  Both for bringing this to market and for chiming in here.

I can't imagine a need for that...........
Shit I won't be able to sleep thinking about that thanks.

Understood but I start half most mornings climbing a hill while its still dark to watch the sun come up and look for predators and tend to empty a mag walking back to the house I just see my self control fading and my barrels feeling the heat with this thing.

Thank you! This clears up a lot!  Please consider different selector lever styles or even making it where BAD levers could be used

Thank you.  I ordered last week.  

Here's a video showing how "riding the reset" will induce engagement of the BUD as Franklin Armory mentioned earlier.

Great video man, clearly showing how the BUD works.

All I can say is that I can't wait until I get my hands on one of these triggers.

I will add that giving people options on their safety selector will prevent overly eager beavers like myself from having to go head to the machine shop to start fabricating. AKA, I want BAD levers on this trigger.

Ideally, I want BAD SHORT THROW type levers on this trigger - aka, 45 degrees to semi, full sweep to 90 for binary. This would also allow you to SAFELY (and without having the world's longest and most agile thumbs) re-engage single/semi mode if your left hand was available and you needed to NOT send that second round downrange.

It's gonna happen, either Franklin can introduce at least slotted safety bodies that match the fitting of the BAD-ASS or even dovetailed to accept BAD-CASS - or I'm going to have to fabricate it. I don't think I'll be alone, either.  How about FRANKLIN ARMORY gets proactive and contacts Battle Arms Dev about getting the nod on making compatible attachment points? This doesn't have to entail a endorsement or licensing by BAD either; just to avert any surprises or infringement hertfeelz...

The short throw will have to alter the geometry of the different camming surfaces, etc that make the different modes activate - which from the looks of it has little fingers that engage adjacent buttons or 'levers' to activate the two different modes - or block out both for SAFE.

+1 on the BAD levers and short throw

Personally I don't have any complaints with the 0-90-180 lever other than the detent pin pockets are a little deeper than I'd like.  That's easy to fix by touching up the point of the detent pin.  But it's really not a big deal to me personally.  If nothing else I already have a lower that's engraved 0-90-180.

Of course, short throw would be nice if you planned to use this for 3 Gun.

I'm thinking about getting a v seven ti carrier to reduce the weight. I have several v seven products and I really like them. I have no experience with their carriers. Anyone used a v seven bcg before? I'm sure they at top quality like their other products.

Could one of you folks do me a favor?  I am curious if anyone else's hammer comes in slight contact with the primary disconnector when you manually reset the hammer while in semi mode and the trigger is forward?

hopefully I explained that right.

I will check when I get home from work for you.

Some people can reach into a barrel full of pussy and pull out an asshole...

Ok-  I've got my trigger in semi.  Hammer is sprung like it just fired.  I keep my finger off the trigger so it stays forward.  I manually cock the hammer.  The sear catches the hammer.  If I continue to rotate the hammer past sear engagement, yes, mine slightly contacts the primary disconnector.  It does not catch, but you can feel it touch.

QFT

So I have to ask the inevitable question.  How long until somebody shortens the trigger pull & release travel?  Watching this video you can see rapid firing the trigger makes the weapon jumpy while his trigger control gets a bit sloppy.  

Now I am not advocating modifying the trigger in anyway shape or form and I have the technical abilities of a gnat....but I think it would make the weapon....uhhhh safer...yes safer is the word.....safer if the trigger finger did not have to travel so much distance.

And what is this barrel full of pussy and why does it have an asshole in it?

Could someone explain the pros/cons between the 3 methods of improving reliability with the BFS?  (not including opening up the gas port)  I haven't tinkered much with this stuff.

- Lighter carrier
- Lighter buffer
- Stronger spring

It seems using a stronger spring would be the easiest item to change.  What are the downsides to this, or why are people trying a lighter carrier first, which seems to be the more costly option?

And what about using one of those JP Silent Capture springs?  I see they sell a spring pack with heavier springs as well to fine tune the setup.

Let's not omit opening the gas port since that seemed to be FA's default method, and is certainly viable.

There are 2 objectives to making this trigger run the way we want it to.  One is to speed up cycling of the action, so that it is mechanically faster than you can pull the trigger.  The second is to eliminate bolt bounce, which is the bouncing of the carrier after it returns to battery, because while it may not bounce far enough to come out of battery, it may bounce far enough to prevent good hammer to firing pin contact.  There is a third point that matters but it's not mechanical.

To speed up the cycling of the action, you need to do at least 1 of 3 things, possibly more depending on the variables your rifle presents.
1- Put more energy into the system.  This is opening the gas port.  This doesn't increase gas pressure, but it will increase gas flow, and will send the carrier rearward faster than a smaller gas port.  This is a permanent modification to your barrel that cannot be undone (without drilling it out, threading it, and inserting a set screw with the center drilled for whatever port size you want or using an adjustable gas block).  There is risk to doing this, in that you may over gas your rifle, and increase carrier speed too high, causing other malfunctions.  It's not a huge risk if you only open it a few thousandths per attempt, but none the less once you've gone too far, it's harder to put metal back than it is to take it away.  I'm more than willing to do this, but not until I've explored #2.

2-Reduce the total mass in the system.  This can be done by using a lightweight carrier or a lightweight buffer.  Neither are permanent modifications.  If a lightweight carrier is too fast, it's only going to be due to an oz or two of weight, which can be compensated for in the buffer if need be.  Lightweight carriers are not so costly anymore, with AIM offering one of the lighter steel ones on the market with NiB coating for only $120.  And personally, I needed another bolt carrier anyway.  Reducing mass in the buffer will speed the system up, but may negatively impact bolt bounce, as the weights inside the carrier work like a deadblow hammer and negate some of that recoiling energy, so the ideal set up will achieve necessary cyclic rate with the highest mass buffer possible.  A lower mass carrier should also bounce less than a higher mass one, given reduced inertia even at the same or slightly higher cyclic rate and the same buffer.

3- Increase spring rate.  Like increased mass, an increased rate spring increases the amount of energy required for the action to reciprocate.  It can decrease the amount of time the entire cycle takes, but most of that will be made up on the return stroke.  If the return stroke is significantly slower than the first stroke rearward, that is ok.  If it is not, you're essentially robbing peter to pay paul.  Lighter total mass requires less spring force to return at a faster rate than a higher mass system being driven by the same spring.

So mechanically, if the goal is balancing total mass against available energy from the gas port for the maximum cyclic rate with the minimum amount of bolt bounce, it really makes a lightweight carrier necessary given that there are 4-5 oz of weight difference (roughly) between a full mass carrier and a typical lightweight one, when there is not even 5 oz total in the buffer.  A 30% decrease in carrier weight is equivalent to a 125% decrease in buffer weight, and you cannot operate with no buffer, because your carrier will inevitably bounce (I didn't believe this until I saw the highspeed video and tested extremely light buffers myself).

I can't believe that simply opening the gas port and increasing energy input without decreasing the mass will be as effective as doing a mixture of both, and I believe that if you were to do that, you would need to do the last, non mechanical bit, which is "learn the technique" of using this trigger, which I refuse to attempt until I've exhausted all mechanical solutions.  By this I mean, timing your pull and release to what your system can handle, which is what I believe people in FA's videos are good at, and the first time shooters simply aren't going to pull and release any trigger as quickly someone who is used to doing double taps on IPSC targets. (This is outside of just learning that you cannot ride the reset, since the BUD requires your to pull the trigger fully to prevent inadvertent activation).

Finally, we're working off of Jaqufrosts work with his bumpsaw, which he put a lot of trial and error in to in order to get it to run reliably at relatively high cyclic rates.  Which is even more impressive in a bumpfire gun, because the very nature of the firearm moving rearward robs energy from the system, where the BFS does not require that to happen to achieve similar rates of fire.  

To summarize, for the highest reliability at the highest rate of fire: whether more gas, less mass, more spring or a combination of all 3, you need to tune your rifle to achieve 1000 rpm cyclic rate (which would be 500 RPM trigger rate and likely faster than you can pull and release) and you need to completely depress the trigger on the pull stroke prior to releasing to keep the BUD indexed away from the hammer.

Wow Kuraki, now THAT is an answer lol.  I'm going to have to read that several times to let it sink in when I'm not half asleep!  Thank you for the detailed explanation.  Oh, and I love the vids too.  I know you said you don't do vids, but believe me they're pretty darn good!

I second the thanks on the vids, they sold me on a BFS equipped lower......and an AIM lightweight carrier..........and a wolf XP spring........and a shockwave blade