Is it billet or an extrusion that's milled?

Also, on the hinge design, does the hinge articulate past it's catch point and then spring forward to interlock in a two piece fashion like you'd see on the LaRue design:




Note that the above design latch is similar to may cabinet type latches on the market.

The above design would lend itself to allowing the end user to adjust tension to ensure complete lockup. My biggest concern would be if you built the rifle in a room temp of 70 degrees but then I venture out into 0 degree or lower early morning temperatures for a hunt, the thermal expansion properties of everything involved would start to be enough to create some slack in the system.  Since your hinge design rotates to along the horizontal axis, I'd expect any significant slack to follow that path, resulting in the barrel/front half having side to side movement.  While we may only be looking at .020 of an inch at the breach, the angular play out at the muzzle will increase as the barrel length and bullet travel are continued out into the field of fire.

Essentially, how does you design compensate for that beyond "run to a range before I go out for a hunt and make sure my zero is still good".  I'm willing to believe that you've got the solution built in, I'd just like to hear what it is.

Cool concept by the way and good for you for pushing past the drawing board to make your concept become real.

Thanks.

The stories that could be told...

Billet is from a solid block.

Not sure exactly the question, but its an "over-the center" latching mechanism. It sounds like you are referring to "hinge" in regards to the latching mechanism, whereas I usually refer to the "hinge" as the pivot point between the upper assy and the forearm assy... which is an entirely unique application not seen in the LaRue takedown systems.
The above-referenced LaRue takedown design is rendered obsolete when compared to the folding upper. His is just a unique way to remove the forearm from the upper. It does nothing special that several other "quick-detach" forearms don't do. You still need to muscle that barrel nut off in order to take the rifle down.

Going from 70degF to 0degF will tighten everything up. Parts shrink when cooled.
The expansion/shrink rate of aluminum is .000013" in/in-DegF... which is entirely negligible for this area of the rifle.
The over-the-center lever doesn't need adjustment, it will apply nearly the same clamping force cold or hot.
I analyzed the need (or lack thereof) for an adjustment on the latch for several weeks and once I got the prototypes made, realized that even being off by many thousandths of an inch on the hook to grab-pin interface, there was no ascertainable difference in clamping force... which is tremendous in all variations. A huge temperature shift could only effect this by about a thousandth of an inch and effect clamping force only by fractions of a percentage. The tapers (barrel extension-male and upper receiver-female) lock in securely and stably in all temperature scenarios.

Sorry fighting a bad cold, yes, I meant the latch, not hinge.

I wasn't trying to say LaRue's design was similar to yours, only asking if the latch of your design articulates in a similar manner.

Thanks

Yeah, it looks like theirs is an over-the-center latch on both sides.
I can also tell that mine applies a lot more force since there is more leverage on the longer lever.

See the prototype folding AR's at the NRA show in Atlanta, GA on April 26-28.
They will be at a few different booths.
There will also be a shooting session at some point.
Please refer back to this thread for updates on when and where.
Thanks!

This sums up my thoughts. It's hella cool, looks to be well thought out and made of quality parts, I have zero interest in ever owning one. If I wanted to spend that sort of cash on an AR, I would buy a KAC or Noveske, and pop the upper off the lower and deal with the extra few inches over this system.

Good luck OP, I hope you sell enough to buy your own island

I want one so bad.  Quite an increase in firepower over a SUB-2000.  And swap btwn pistol & rifle by popping off the stock depending on stupid Baptist signage.  Break a leg, OP.

Reminder of anticipated pricing:
Basic:        $1600 - folding AR15 rifle, uses above average quality parts.
Mid:          $2000 - same as above but with match barrel and upgraded parts such as trigger, charging handle, gas block, etc.
Enhanced: $2600 - billet version of above with premium match barrel, adjustable gasblock, magpul stock and grip.

Conversion kit: $750-$900 includes all parts necessary to convert existing upper to folding upper (upper receiver, forearm, barrel and extension, gasblock, gas tubes, locking lever).

The basic rifle package would be in line with or cheaper than many other mid-ranged AR15 manufacturers prices.
I think the proposed pricing is very reasonable.

https://www.fddefense.com/rifles/xar/

This looks familiar.

This pricing structure is just If you are going to have a tier pricing system like that you need to be specific about what they buyer is getting for their money. What specifically do you mean when you say "average quality parts"? Average to what? DPMS? BCM? Model 1? What is my $1600 buying me? How do you justify the $400 added cost for the "mid" tier? What does my extra $1000 buy me for the "enhanced" version?. Saying stuff like match parts and average parts leaves a lot of room for interpretation since we all have different opinions on what average means. Not trying to be a dick but when you list out pricing like that with zero specifics it looks like you just pulled some random prices out of your ass to be blunt. You are entering a very saturated market that is facing a down turn. While you have an intresting product and personally I am intrigued, you face a lot of challenges moving forward. I wouldn't paint myself into a corner by throwing pricing out there without really knowing what it will cost you to produce and deliver your product on a large scale first. One major misstep a lot of companies with a new product in this industry make is over promise and under deliver. This action will kill a product quick. Also, some free sales advice. Never use the word "cheap" or "cheaper", to discibe your product when you are talking about value. Cheap is a negative word that people associate with quality. Use inexspensive or less exspensive. It sounds better and keeps the word "cheap" from being used to discribe your product in any context. You also need to seriously think about hiring a sales person. In my experience creators, designers, makers, whatever make shitty sales people. They are too emotionally invested in the product to see criticism for what it is. Just some thoughts.

While this is interesting, I don't see the price. Like the Law III folder, have 2 but still question the worth.

I agree as well, the whole "parts" description has to be more specific and it's relative as to what some consider average, above, etc. For instance a Bushamster verses BCM, not the same to most but to some they are.

Don't see a real advantage. you can already unpin an upper from a lower and packed you can use the diagonal to store the longer upper which does not increase the packed length that much.

You gonna shoot your rifle in the MOA challenge? I'd like to see your groups.

Only nitpick I have is I hate when gas blocks stick out half way from under the handguard, should be either all the way covered or all the way exposed.  

Otherwise it looks like a pretty cool setup, keep up the good work.

I just wanted to say congratulations to enov8ive for his hard work and skill paying off.  I can't tell you how many friends were emailing me during the NRA show coverage asking, "hey, is this the upper you showed me all those months ago?!"

Hopefully, not too far in the distant future, I can afford one of these uppers!  I really want to do an 8.5" 300 BLK barrel with perm attached suppressor for a one stamp gun that folds up in my backpack or goes under the cargo area of my truck.

I'm really happy for you and that you're finally getting the kudos you deserve!  I especially like it when people push a stagnant industry forward, making the usual suspects uncomfortable!  Great work!

Thanks!
Here are some articles from NRA show below, the most common questions were regarding return to zero.
I think the inquisitive minds will soon be impressed with what testing is showing. To be continued...
Task & Purpose
The Firearm Blog
Soldier Systems
Recoil
Prepared Gun Owners
This past weekend I began shooting with a specific focus on trying to determine any measurable point-of-impact shifting between multiple fold/unfold cycles.
No luck yet in finding any measurable shifting.

Extremely innovative!

Pricing is reasonable for what it's capable of.

Actually, two shoots of the Challenge would be helpful:

1}  The Challenge with each shot fired without folding/disassembling.

2}  The Challenge with each shot fired after folding/disassembling/reassembling.

That is exactly how I test my QD scope mounts and it makes sense to apply the same method to your design.

My shooting criteria is much more detailed.
But yes, it goes along those lines.

No doubt.  But we are not talking about your shooting criteria. We are saying you should shoot the thing in the 1 MOA All Day Challenge and post the results of same right here on ARFCOM so the membership can see what it does.  You will find LaRue Tactical etc on there as they have done just that.  Many of us have shot the Challenge, too and posted the results. Heck, I didn't even use a proper rest!  I shot it off my rucksack!

Since you are using an ARFCOM technical forum to market your product {I have no problems with that} I agree with the previous member that you should use ARFCOM to present its capabilities, using a method we ARFCOM members can relate to and compare to our own shooting.  Then post up the results in the tech forum here.  Should bolster your claims.

We didn't link it tho so maybe you are unfamiliar with it.

Here it is:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_16_17/51_--ARFCOM-1-MOA-ALL-DAY-LONG--Challenge-.html

Have at it!  

We're waiting!!    

Best.

You shouldn't discount hunters from your target market. A foldable AR with the ability to quick swap barrels would be pretty handy to a lot of hunters I know, myself included.

A) That "challenge" is actually beyond mediocre in regards to anything objectively verifiable. It fails to rectify numerous subjectivity variables.

B) I'm not marketing my product. I do not sell the product, and I am not an employee or an owner of the company that will be selling it.
I'm not pushing sales for the other company. I am simply posting commentary about my own personal work.

C) If I am going to spend my time and money performing some test, its going to have significance and meaning that goes well beyond the ARFCOM community and its "standards".

D) Here is a rough breakdown of what I am in the middle of in regards to testing return to zero capabilities:

-Testing will be performed with FGMM 168gr, don't care if it shoots great or not. Neither cherry picking ammo nor working up handloads will be a factor. Not shooting for group size.
-Testing will be performed in a lead sled to virtually eliminate shooter variables.
-Testing will be performed with a recording device attached to scope and at the target, every shot will be recorded by both modes.

-Two identical but separate rifles will go through same testing sequence as follows.

Phase 1 (establishing the "fixed-barrel" baseline)
-Each rifle will be shot without the hinge components installed, but instead the barrel will be traditionally mounted (fixed) to the upper receiver.
-Three groups of 10 will be shot through each rifle at 100yds with predetermined shot intervals and group intervals (5-15 seconds) and group intervals (15-20 minutes).
-POA will be approximately 1" right of POI. POI will be .25" dot.
-Barrel temperature will be recorded immediately before and immediately after shooting each group.
-Groups will be recorded and photographed on one single target.
-Accuracy will be determined using the Mean Radius method, as is the military standard for properly accessing rifle and ammunition capabilities.

Phase 2 (determining POI & RTZ shifting)
-Each of the same rifles and barrels will be shot with the barrel being attached by the hinge and latch mechanisms, and not traditionally as Phase 1.
-Three groups of 10 will be shot through each rifle at 100yds with the same predetermined shot intervals (5-15 seconds) and group intervals (3 days).
-POA will be approximately 1" right of POI. POI will be .25" dot.
-Barrel temperature will be recorded immediately before and immediately after shooting each group.
-Between each group, each rifle will be unlatch and folded, then unfolded and latched 3 times before shooting the next group.
-Groups will be recorded and photographed on one single target.
-Accuracy will be determined using the Mean Radius method, as is the military standard for properly accessing rifle and ammunition capabilities.

With the general outline above followed, it will be easy to see any RTZ/POI shifting that might occur over the course of approximately a week of testing.

The results will show a few things:
-Any POI shift between a rifle barrel that is fixed to the upper receiver and the same rifle that is hinged.
-Any POI shift between a hinged rifle barrel between shot groups over the course of approximately a week, with multiple breakdowns between groups.
-Any POI shift as the barrel warms up through the 10 shot groups. Since the shots are being recorded, we will see if the "string walks".
-By using the Mean Radius method and 10 shots per group, we will find the average center of each group and be able to see if the average group center shifts between the groups, and then be able to properly measure any average POI shift.

This will not be done for the next few weeks as it is actually a pretty intensive test despite only requiring less than 200 rounds. And time must permit, so relax.
I can say so far that I have gone out to shoot a number of times now and have not had to adjust the scope any after its initial sight-in. And the rifle has been transported thousands of miles over the past 5 months and has been opened and closed at least a few hundred times. So I predict that the above testing will not show any amount of measurable shifting at all.

That's great, though I hope you put more than 200 rounds thru it in testing, and certainly I hope you test it for precision.  Granted, buyers will, but it would be neat to see those tested as well.

But you are totally missing the point.

First, of course you are advertising and marketing your invention.  It's obvious so no need to go into it further. As I said, I have no problem with that.

The member merely asked to have the thing shot and posted in the MOA Challenge.  No one said the MOA Challenge is a comprehesive test of accuracy or anything else.  But we are on ARFCOM and it is something unique to ARFCOM with rules and such and would allow you to show how the rifle performs accordingly and compare it to the other rifles and shooters out there.  Personally, I agree with the guy's suggestion and think it was a good one.  I bet a lot of other guys agree. I think it would do your marketing efforts good if the rifle shoots well, too.

Now I hope you don't mean that you hate shooting so much you only do it for work!  

C'mon, don't be a spoil sport.  Give it a whirl and let's see what you can do with your gun! Go give LaRue a run for it!  

I hope that's not what you took out of my previous post...
In no way would the above be an end-all to testing. In addition to what I do, the manufacturer has been doing its own extensive testing for months.
And really, the overall product (minus the hinge and latch portion) has been in the marketplace and continuous refinement for years.
Silly.

Me posting about the invention has no relation to selling any product.
In fact, I don't sell any product and I'm not an employee or owner of any business that sells product.

Again, I have no relation to any marketing efforts of any company.
I will do what testing it is that I see fit.
It wont be the "challenge"... but what I do will certainly give a lot more credibility to the results.

The MOA Challenge wouldn't really have any relevance to the OP's design project at all.

He could build a hinged rifle with a really stellar precision barrel, presumably it would shoot well.  He could build a hinged rifle with a really cheap barrel, it might have poor accuracy.  Neither would have any relevance to the efficiency of the hinge. (Conceding that an accurate barrel will make it easier for him to test for shifts in the POI).

Secondly, the OP might be a great marksman, or he might be a poor marksman.  The OP's skill would influence the results, not the hinge design.

The MOA Challenge wouldn't tell us much about the hinge design at all.

Exactly.
If we want to prove a point (determine POI shifting), we need to pointedly conduct a proper test.
I think I can do that in about 200 rounds.
Such a test would ONLY address POI shifting, nothing else.
But you might also get a good idea of grouping capabilities with my particular test rifles (one has a Brux barrel and one has a Bartlein barrel). Neither of which would be properly representative of a production rifle.

Who cares.

You guys are making a mountain out of a molehill.  If the gun shoots lousy, it's no good, obviously, but nobody expects that.  Nobody expects it to be a lemon.  But getting your gun on the board isn't going to hurt your efforts, either.

Honestly, I never understand people who make long arguments AGAINST shooting, but have lots of them on this board.

Have some fun and pit your invention against the others.

Are you claiming you have no vested interest in the results of your invention selling well or are you trying to delicately dance around the issue by disclaiming everything you can and ignoring the obvious?

If you have no vested interest in what happens with the platform in the market, pray tell, why are you testing it's accuracy?

No, I'm not claiming that.
I'm claiming that I am not pushing for sales and am not an employee or owner of any company that may be selling the product in the near future.
And the rifles I do own are not even for sale.

With your testing, you're going to fold it 3 times between groups? There's no way that'd produce any shifts. Try 100 folds, which might reflect a couple years of use.

Everyone has their opinion...
But to argue about a shifting POI over the course of a couple years is silly.
All rifles have to be sighted in occasionally. Mainly due to seasonal temperature changes.

Some of you guys are acting like you're gonna see a 2 inch POI shift.
I will be very surprised to see a half moa average POI shift between the 200 round evaluation.
Because I have not seen any POI shift yet. Even between December and May.

Clearly you're not running an EOTech.  

True. been there

I still want to see how tight the lock up is after 2000 rounds.

I want to pull out of this as we have received a sort-of warning, but you keep speaking of shifting POI.

That isn't the issue with designs of this type.

Opening groups is.

So finding an accurate load and then shooting that load over time {with numerous openings/closing, exposure to sand/grit/dust/dryness, etc} for group is the thing to do.  A hinge that wears and allows slop to creep in isn't simply going to shift impact, it is going to introduce random shots and groups that open up.

Look, I really find the presentation of this thing awesome.  I want it to succeed, because I think it is a unique and very interesting idea. There are things about it I think are great.  I'd LOVE to test it under my conditions.  But I just think that the design sort of defies known concepts and thereby might bite the maker in the keester over time and after a production line is set up for it.

I truly wish you the best and hope it does well.

Okay. At this point I should probably point out that .002" shims can be inserted behind the extention flange (between it and the corresponding forearm flange). If, for some reason, the fit becomes loose, a shim can be installed to tighten it back up. I imaging the manufacturer would provide shims upon request. This does not have anything to do with headspace, but rather only applies more resistance to the clamping action. I have not had to mess with this to date, so I anticipate it will be a very rare occasion for use. I can see the shims being more often used to compensate for manufacturing tolerances during initial assembly rather than compensating for looseness over time. A shim installation is a 5 minute ordeal with no special tools required.

Finally!

Thanks.

This specifically addresses the weakness inherent to the design of which I have been speaking.  If shims are a feature of this product, then my assessment is confirmed.

But they do address a potential fix for any increase in tolerance that may develop over time, so that's good.  Not sure why you waited this long to tell us, but glad you did.  Good on you.  

I hope it works out well.  Again, thanks.

Because I have yet to use any shims beyond tightening up the initial assembly (even then, I only used one shim and not certain it was even needed), and don't yet see any imminent need for them in the future.

How many rounds have you run through this set up so far?

It's like physics are different in your world.

Nah, not really. Just lay opinions vs. expert hands-on verification.

@Aimless

I'm still curious why you're allowing someone to promote a product, who has admitted he has a vested interest in its success, when they are not a paying site sponsor? The, "I'm just the designer, not the manufacturer or seller." work around sounds like complete BS.


If I was a paying site sponsor, I'd be pissed.