No. I didn't give them any specs on the upper. just the bolt. I didn't want one company to make everything. I knew better. Just needed the bolt

u think they knew it wasa topfeed bottom eject?

pretty much. Since I gave them the specs to build the bolt....

All you needed was for them to measure and model your existing prototype?
No reason for that to take more than a couple hours...

Exactly..... The plan was to cad the bolt, make one out of aluminum. Test it for fit and function. Then move on to making a steel bolt for actual test firing.... Well, this is how things go in America now I guess. Pay money and wait.... I always wondered how other people get things done. I just don't understand. You agree on a price, you pay your money. And a month later, nothing? How do others get things done so quickly?

Heck, send me what you got and i could get you a solid model on a rainy afternoon for free...
Do you need detail drawings?

Well.. A little mis-communication. But I have a cad bolt diagram. Looks beautiful. Went down there yesterday, I was a little un-happy, but now I am excited again.... Who knows. Someone will probably steal the design before I get a chance at selling a few....

Well.. A little mis-communication. But I have a cad bolt diagram. Looks beautiful. Went down there yesterday, I was a little un-happy, but now I am excited again.... Who knows. Someone will probably steal the design before I get a chance at selling a few....

And this is for DOWNWARD ejection...... Lets hope it works in testing...

http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=1znsfwn&s=8#.VgtsV2eFNxI
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=1znsfwn&s=8#.VgtsV2eFNxI

tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2m05cy&s=8#.ViHAN2eFMb0

[

Holy crap, dude, you DID put a periscope on it!  That's awesome!

Yes. I wouldn't buy one, as I'm not that into 9mm. But it sure makes me think about buying one. So I'm sure lots of 9mm shooters out there would be interested in getting one. Drums are a little pricey. But if you consider that it would take 3, 30 rounders plus 1/3rd, it looks a little more reasonable.

It's not for everyone. But they idea to pop 2 pins and run a completely different set up, I thought was kinda cool. Still working on the downward ejection. Gonna try and make a video of it, bump firing.

Yes it's a periscope.... You know, brings the reticle closer to barrel centerline....

Just FYI, unless you've got other measures to prevent an OOB, might want to rig a forend and not use the magwell hold.  When an AR has an OOB or a squib, all the gas dumps down the magwell.

Did some bump firing this weekend. And sure could have used a vfg. We used an empty 30 pmag and it helped. Gonna try and get a youtube video up soon...
But meanwhile.... almost have the prototype downward ejection bolt completed for testing....

Ok.... here is the latest installment....

www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcFJXVrlUIU

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcFJXVrlUIU[/youtube]

Ordered up metal today for the 2nd prototype, For dedicated downward ejection and improved sighting system.

I will be working on first test fire with downward ejection bolt next weekend.... I dont know if the second prototype upper reciever will be ready in time. If not I will test it with the 1st prototype....
Wish me luck....

That's awesome!

Well..... test fire postponed. Going to Oakland to see the raiders play....

Testing starting this weekend for downward ejection through magwell.......

http://oi68.tinypic.com/125m03t.jpg

Sir, you are a brave man!

I mean for going to a raiders game.

Uh oh - is the 1st one chipped on the front right edge?

Yes... remember these aluminum bolts are for fitment and function checking... ONLY! They are not meant to be fired. We are getting closer to finalizing the design. Kinda of a funneling affect going on. Getting closer little by little. Everyone of those bolts is different. Firing pin angle, ejector slot depth and location, recoil sping locations.... All different. To see what works and what doesent... I was hoping to test fire but it got pushed back obviously. Working on the second prototype, in conjunction with the bolt design, it will have ambi charging handles. One on each side. The first prototype (now called the A model), The b models will have more improvements and design features. Pretty it up so to speak. Function tests are fun and all, but having a sighting system to actually hit something with it would be nice, not just another bullet hose....

Reminds me of the glock 19 full auto with a 100 rnd drum. How controllable and accurate can it be?

IM pretty excited about the second prototype. Parts and accessories are right in front me. It's gonna be pretty bad ass..

It was fun... always is... even if they lose the best part was going with a couple of Vikings fans.... Nothing stands out like purple in a sea of black at a raiders home game....
To be honest this was the first time I went to a raider game and didn't see anyone leaving the stands in hand cuffs.... Oh.. except for the idiot that ran onto the field.....

Well..... calculating spring rates, and AR15 buffer weights....

Doesent look like IM going to make it to AZ for the next test fire. At least until after the first of the year....

Downward ejection bolt is ready. For 2 modes of operation. 1 not using the AR buffer system. 2 using the AR buffer system.

I have sent a letter to the BATFE-FTB for approval for use on m16/m4 registered lowers. We will see how long it takes for them to respond.
I submitted diagrams of operation both with and without buffer system. I would really love to have it approved without using the AR buffer system.

It's so beautiful.  

I do not understand. As long as it is not an open bolt semi how is it that you even need to seek approval of yourour design. If it fits on top of an AR 15 lower and it functions as it closed bolt weapon with the trigger and disconnect your working as usual why do you even need to talk to them about it?

and why in the f*** would it matter whether the system uses its own action spring contained in the upper receiver or if it uses the action spring in the lower receiver of an AR 15??I mean either way you prefer to design it it still a closed bolt semi auto blowback Utilizing a standard trigger of which millions exist right?

Although I can make them leagally for a closed bolt operation on an m16/m4 regestered class 3 weapon. It can be considered a gun when mounted to a registered lower receiver, requiring yet another tax stamp. So for legallity for the end user, im seeking approval first. I hoping for a "NON GUN" approval, Either design can be considered a seperate gun and be illegal when assembled on a registered receiver. I am not the first to try something like this. Even making a mac11/9 reciever without a magwell or even drilling the holes, IS considered a reciever. THAT'S ATF for ya..... I am not taking chances. My design doesent have a fcg, and has a self contained recoil system and magazine feed. It could be considered a reciever. There is some question on the utilization of the buffer tube, from other patented designs I have researched. Like for instance the AR57.

Like I said, I have come to a crossroads for the design. I would like to make 1 standardized bolt for both semi and full auto operation. Will cut down on production costs if it's just one designed bolt instead of 2. You know there will be someone(police/military/class2) who will want to run one full auto. Like using an m16 bolt in an AR15. It doesent make an AR15 full auto but is ok to use in an AR15. So... I need a clear definition at this point before I proceed. Use the AR15/M16/M4 buffer and recoil spring...OR NOT? and still be considered a non gun per ATF.

If ATF-FTB rules it a non gun utilizing the lower reciever buffer sysytem so be it.
If ATF-FTB rules it a non gun NOT utilizing the lower receiver buffer system.. GREAT!!!!

If ATF-FTB Requires me utilize the buffer and recoil spring of the lower reciever... I will have to totally re-engineer the whole bolt. Factors such as spring recoil rate, bolt weight to match buffer weight and so on...

Trying to make something cool for the masses, isnt easy.
Either way... I will have my answer soon enough. Some steps HAVE to be taken these days..... I didnt want to.. Believe me...  And believe me when I say I have done my home work over the last year and a half...

Even the original calico design upper is considered a gun, without fcg. The fcg is not serialized, but the upper is. You must agree this is a totally different off the wall design. But like others I have talked to, all we can say is this.... ITS SO SIMPLE ITS COMPLICATED!!!! and I mean that.

Even this is considered a receiver. Requiring serial numbers. notice: no feed ramp or fcg.

This is my design. notice: HAS feed ramp, no fcg.

Notice the serial number is on the upper and not the lower. And it has an internal recoil system. What if I just mounted a calico receiver to an AR15 with an adaptor? It's technically 2 guns. 2 serial numbers.

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=531481129

This is AMERICA! Anyone can build anything they want. BUT! If you want to sell it to the masses. You must consider patent infringements, Government and local legalities. How hard can it be? right? well im finding out. Its not like im looking for a million dollar idea every week. I thought something up. people said thats cool, I want one. And here I am. I know im not going to get rich. Just wanna make something cool.

But I dont want to go to prison in the process either.....

aaah The AMERICAN dream......
As long as it is approved by the guberment....
I know why small business guys give up early.....
Even a guy like me who just wants to build something cool has lots of red tape. Not my rules, but I try to play by them..... And when I have questions..... I ASK!

i see, since the ammo doens't feed through the AR lower maybe they would call your upper a receiver.  

would you be making the full auto version for theoretical use on a RR an open or closed bolt design?

Thx

Closed bolt.

Its a nightmare I know.....

and how is it that the ATF could demand that you utilize the AR action spring?  Is the possible argument that for it not to be its own firearm it would have to not contain its own action spring??  Or, is this question relative to its use on AR pistols w/ receiver extensions but not using the action spring in the receiver extension??

The argument would be for it not to be its own firearm it would have to not contain its own action spring,

Well.... been awhile. Still waiting for return letter from ATF-FTB. Gonna head to AZ this weekend for another round of testing. Wish me luck.

Drive safe & break a leg.

BTW, remember to bump this thread every 30 days or so to keep it from oing into archive.

I keep an eye out and post something when it gets down there.... Wasn't able to do much over the holidays. But the last round of testing was a bag of mixed nuts. Out of 6 rounds tested only one ejected. And it wasn't in that great of shape. Trying to get the ejector rod length right. Also had bulged cases, which im sure complicated matters. Head space was waaay off. To the point the firing didn't touch the primer, or it hit the primer correctly or it pierced the primer. testing testing  testing. getting closer though. I will be headed to AZ again on the 5th. No videos of this round of testing. Just me scratching my head a lot...  lol...

Made a decision to dump the ejector rod for ejecting the shells. The rod just is not compatible with the top feed set up. Measure and tested. It's just not going to eject early enough to clear bolt and ejection sequence. The sooner it ejects the better. Going to install a more practical ejector. Maybe an AR15 type. But it is a little small....

AR ejectors work fine on larger cases up to 1400 rpm:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1641834_Official_Bump_SAW_thread__Jaqufrost_s_BumpSAW_reaches_1400_rounds_per_minute___1_16_2016_.html

Bolt was already drilled for 1/8 ejector rod. So I tried a AR15 ejector too small for hole drilled. So I ordered an Armalite AR10 ejector kit. It is larger. Will drill and install for testing purposes. But in the end it will probably an AR15 ejector. Trying to use off the shelf parts.....

Well dummy me. Went to AZ for next round of testing, this past weekend. I brought the bolt but I forgot to put the firing pin in. Durf. But I did get a chance to cycle live rounds through it by hand. Seemed to work. But as always trial by fire will show for sure.....

Using alpha model to test downward ejection bolt...