User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 8:48:19 AM EDT
[#1]
Google "Shrike" MEGADUPE
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 8:48:37 AM EDT
[#2]
Side fed, you mean like belt fed? It has been done before.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 8:48:58 AM EDT
[#3]
It's called a SAW.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 8:50:30 AM EDT
[#4]
Quoted:
Side fed, you mean like belt fed? It has been done before. Nope, mag fed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 8:50:59 AM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
It's called a SAW. Ok, where do I buy one? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 8:52:16 AM EDT
[#6]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 8:52:33 AM EDT
[#7]
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's called a SAW. Ok, where do I buy one? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 8:52:50 AM EDT
[#8]
For the same reason no one has made a top-fed. No one would buy it. What advantage does it confer?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 8:53:17 AM EDT
[#9]
Quoted:
I'm bein' serious here dude,.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 8:53:39 AM EDT
[#10]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's called a SAW. Ok, where do I buy one?
Ok, that time I wasn't so serious.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 8:55:00 AM EDT
[#11]
Quoted:
For the same reason no one has made a top-fed. No one would buy it. What advantage does it confer? Top fed doesn't work for everyone (lefty's like me), and you'd have to move the gas system to the right side of the reciever... Lot more work to do this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 8:55:29 AM EDT
[#12]
Id like to see a side fed 12 gauge upper that uses Siaga 12 mags.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 8:55:55 AM EDT
[#13]
Shrike.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 8:57:13 AM EDT
[#14]
While agree in theory with a range gun for catching the brass. It would suck as a carry weapon with a big ol 30 rounder sticking out the side.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 8:58:25 AM EDT
[#15]
SAW with m16 mag.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 8:59:51 AM EDT
[#16]
Cant it 90 degrees to the right and you will have a "Gangstalicous side-fed-bottom-ejecting gat".
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 9:00:03 AM EDT
[#17]
Cobb has done this.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 9:00:18 AM EDT
[#18]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 9:05:22 AM EDT
[#19]
Quoted:
While agree in theory with a range gun for catching the brass. It would suck as a carry weapon with a big ol 30 rounder sticking out the side. There have to be advantages to it, or they wouldn't have designed paratrooper subguns that way in WWII. This isn't about having something "mo' betta", it's about something different. Frankly, I'm staring down another AR build with a pretty ho-hum attitude about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 9:06:50 AM EDT
[#20]
Quoted:
While agree in theory with a range gun for catching the brass. It would suck as a carry weapon with a big ol 30 rounder sticking out the side. Wouldn't stick out as far as that Shrike conversion in the post above you, and nothing says you can't use 20 rounders if it's a problem... Look at the Cobb rifle that was posted and tell me that isn't Pure Sex.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 9:07:21 AM EDT
[#21]
Quoted:
Quoted:
While agree in theory with a range gun for catching the brass. It would suck as a carry weapon with a big ol 30 rounder sticking out the side. There have to be advantages to it, or they wouldn't have designed paratrooper subguns that way in WWII. This isn't about having something "mo' betta", it's about something different. Frankly, I'm staring down another AR build with a pretty ho-hum attitude about it. You'll notice no one uses that sub-gun design anymore. 
If the AR is starting to bore you, do an FAL build. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 9:33:51 AM EDT
[#22]
Dave..Dave......Dave.......
just stick to your XCR and leave the ARs to us regular folk. Besides, you shoot with the wrong hand anyway, ya shouldnt be allowed to have a gun! Love P.Smith |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 9:45:23 AM EDT
[#23]
Somebody makes a 5.7 AR upper that takes PS90 magazines. It is top fed and ejects out the AR magwell. It is pretty new and I can't for the life of me remember where I saw it, but it does exist.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 9:45:54 AM EDT
[#24]
Quoted:
Dave..Dave......Dave....... just stick to your XCR and leave the ARs to us regular folk. Besides, you shoot with the wrong hand anyway, ya shouldnt be allowed to have a gun! Love P.Smith STOP JUDGING ME!!!! 
Besides, I'm 'tatical enuff to shoot with the wrong (right) hand anyway 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 9:46:29 AM EDT
[#25]
Quoted:
Somebody makes a 5.7 AR upper that takes PS90 magazines. It is top fed and ejects out the AR magwell. It is pretty new and I can't for the life of me remember where I saw it, but it does exist. yeah, but that one allows for the use of rails and optics. A top feed AR wouldn't |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 9:46:54 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted:
SAW SupahJammoMatic with m16 mag. http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1065/654005227_b95ed3a01d.jpg?v=0 Never had a very good time getting M16 mags to work in the SAW. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 9:49:05 AM EDT
[#27]
Quoted:
4) Shouldn't need an FFL as the recoil spring is in the lower Where the recoil spring is doesn't matter. On the FAL, the buffer tube is also on the lower, but the upper is what is considered the firearm. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 9:49:48 AM EDT
[#28]
Quoted:
Somebody makes a 5.7 AR upper that takes PS90 magazines. It is top fed and ejects out the AR magwell. It is pretty new and I can't for the life of me remember where I saw it, but it does exist. http://www.57center.com/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 10:14:36 AM EDT
[#29]
Quoted:
Quoted:
4) Shouldn't need an FFL as the recoil spring is in the lower Where the recoil spring is doesn't matter. On the FAL, the buffer tube is also on the lower, but the upper is what is considered the firearm. So what determines it then? The Shrike and 5.7 upper feed from the lower.... I based that statement on BATFE opinions about uppers used for M11/9's where one can get them to fire by pulling the recoil spring back. I know, we're talking open bolt guns, but the only way to get an AR upper to fire is to put something in the bolt carrier and hit it with a rock. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 10:25:39 AM EDT
[#30]
Quoted:
Guys, I have a friend who runs his dad's CNC shop. Things are slow in MI. I pitched the idea of a side fed/paratrooper upper to him yesterday and came up with a list of reasons WHY it would be a good idea: 1) nobody's doing it and it would be wayyyy cool 2) rounds would eject out the magwell and into a brass catcher for reloading 3) lower prone height 4) Shouldn't need an FFL as the recoil spring is in the lower 5) can be made to work with current gas piston conversions if people want them 6) nobody's doing it and it would be wayyyy cool So, he'd need to come up with a new upper, the parts for the mag release, and a new bolt carrier. I think it's do-able, just can't see why it hasn't been done before.. My guess is it's too much work for most shops who want this kind of product but don't have the ability to do that kind of work. It would look awesome with a PRI carbon tube and ACE stock..... Very WWII ish, but modern! WTH does that have to do with needing an FFL? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 11:33:19 AM EDT
[#31]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Guys, I have a friend who runs his dad's CNC shop. Things are slow in MI. I pitched the idea of a side fed/paratrooper upper to him yesterday and came up with a list of reasons WHY it would be a good idea: 1) nobody's doing it and it would be wayyyy cool 2) rounds would eject out the magwell and into a brass catcher for reloading 3) lower prone height 4) Shouldn't need an FFL as the recoil spring is in the lower 5) can be made to work with current gas piston conversions if people want them 6) nobody's doing it and it would be wayyyy cool So, he'd need to come up with a new upper, the parts for the mag release, and a new bolt carrier. I think it's do-able, just can't see why it hasn't been done before.. My guess is it's too much work for most shops who want this kind of product but don't have the ability to do that kind of work. It would look awesome with a PRI carbon tube and ACE stock..... Very WWII ish, but modern! WTH does that have to do with needing an FFL? because it would be too close to having a functional firearm? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 11:50:39 AM EDT
[#32]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: While agree in theory with a range gun for catching the brass. It would suck as a carry weapon with a big ol 30 rounder sticking out the side. There have to be advantages to it, or they wouldn't have designed paratrooper subguns that way in WWII. This isn't about having something "mo' betta", it's about something different. Frankly, I'm staring down another AR build with a pretty ho-hum attitude about it. You'll notice no one uses that sub-gun design anymore. If the AR is starting to bore you, do an FAL build. Since I presume Dave is talking about the British Sten SMG, here are a few facts about the Sten: - The British paras nicknamed it the "Stench" because they had such disdain for it. - There were very serious binding problems with the side feeding magazine (made worse by the bad habit, which was near universal, of using the mag as a grip while firing). - The whole design was just an emergency expedient that was adopted and rushed into production because the British had no suitable domestically made sub gun in 1940. Side feeding magazines were abandoned with very good reason, guys. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 11:53:59 AM EDT
[#33]
I would love to get my hands on an inferiorly balanced, awkward to load upper. Tell your friend he's sitting on a goldmine!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 11:55:20 AM EDT
[#34]
Quoted:
For the same reason no one has made a top-fed. No one would buy it. What advantage does it confer? Well, theres lefties like me who would enjoy not having brass hitting me in the face all the time. That and and it would look pretty cool. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 12:05:50 PM EDT
[#35]
Quoted: None of the engineering that goes into modern firearms design is based on how "cool" the finished product will look.Quoted: For the same reason no one has made a top-fed. No one would buy it. What advantage does it confer? Well, theres lefties like me who would enjoy not having brass hitting me in the face all the time. That and and it would look pretty cool. This is a good thing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 12:07:15 PM EDT
[#36]
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's called a SAW. Ok, where do I buy one? I know where you can get to use one, free of charge. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 12:15:39 PM EDT
[#37]
It would work, but we all know what force cases are flung out of the ejection port. The former magwell would have to be steel lined to keep the lower from getting worn away.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 12:21:33 PM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
Since I presume Dave is talking about the British Sten SMG, here are a few facts about the Sten: - The British paras nicknamed it the "Stench" because they had such disdain for it. - There were very serious binding problems with the side feeding magazine (made worse by the bad habit, which was near universal, of using the mag as a grip while firing). - The whole design was just an emergency expedient that was adopted and rushed into production because the British had no suitable domestically made sub gun in 1940. Side feeding magazines were abandoned with very good reason, guys. The Sten was disliked for a number of reasons, having poorly engineered magazine interface was one of them. You can't say the same about the Sterling (still in use today in many parts of the world BTW), the Lanchester, the MP28, the FG42 etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 12:22:47 PM EDT
[#39]
Quoted:
Side fed, you mean like belt fed? It has been done before. No, he means like an FG-42. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 12:22:55 PM EDT
[#40]
I always wanted one of those robinson arms M96 with top feed conversion. Dont know why....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 12:23:31 PM EDT
[#41]
Quoted:
Quoted:
None of the engineering that goes into modern firearms design is based on how "cool" the finished product will look.
Quoted:
For the same reason no one has made a top-fed. No one would buy it. What advantage does it confer? Well, theres lefties like me who would enjoy not having brass hitting me in the face all the time. That and and it would look pretty cool. This is a good thing. Tell that to the tacticool mall ninjas |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 12:33:26 PM EDT
[#42]
Quoted:
It's called a SAW. Thank you |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 12:37:46 PM EDT
[#43]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Guys, I have a friend who runs his dad's CNC shop. Things are slow in MI. I pitched the idea of a side fed/paratrooper upper to him yesterday and came up with a list of reasons WHY it would be a good idea: 1) nobody's doing it and it would be wayyyy cool 2) rounds would eject out the magwell and into a brass catcher for reloading 3) lower prone height 4) Shouldn't need an FFL as the recoil spring is in the lower 5) can be made to work with current gas piston conversions if people want them 6) nobody's doing it and it would be wayyyy cool So, he'd need to come up with a new upper, the parts for the mag release, and a new bolt carrier. I think it's do-able, just can't see why it hasn't been done before.. My guess is it's too much work for most shops who want this kind of product but don't have the ability to do that kind of work. It would look awesome with a PRI carbon tube and ACE stock..... Very WWII ish, but modern! WTH does that have to do with needing an FFL? because it would be too close to having a functional firearm? No offense but are you completely clueless as to what the ATF considers a firearm? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 12:40:23 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Guys, I have a friend who runs his dad's CNC shop. Things are slow in MI. I pitched the idea of a side fed/paratrooper upper to him yesterday and came up with a list of reasons WHY it would be a good idea: 1) nobody's doing it and it would be wayyyy cool 2) rounds would eject out the magwell and into a brass catcher for reloading 3) lower prone height 4) Shouldn't need an FFL as the recoil spring is in the lower 5) can be made to work with current gas piston conversions if people want them 6) nobody's doing it and it would be wayyyy cool So, he'd need to come up with a new upper, the parts for the mag release, and a new bolt carrier. I think it's do-able, just can't see why it hasn't been done before.. My guess is it's too much work for most shops who want this kind of product but don't have the ability to do that kind of work. It would look awesome with a PRI carbon tube and ACE stock..... Very WWII ish, but modern! WTH does that have to do with needing an FFL? because it would be too close to having a functional firearm? No offense but are you completely clueless as to what the ATF considers a firearm? Maybe I am clueless; if you didn't intend to offend me, you would have just asked if I knew what ATF considers a firearm. Given that other uppers that have their feed mechanisms for AR's and are kosher, I think we're good to go. But you have a nice day. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 12:40:46 PM EDT
[#45]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Side fed, you mean like belt fed? It has been done before. No, he means like an FG-42. yeapp. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 12:42:04 PM EDT
[#46]
Quoted:
I always wanted one of those robinson arms M96 with top feed conversion. Dont know why.... Most likely because it is different and looked cool.
The other reason may have been "Why not?" |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 12:44:16 PM EDT
[#47]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Side fed, you mean like belt fed? It has been done before. No, he means like an FG-42. +1 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 1:01:53 PM EDT
[#48]
Quoted:
Quoted:
While agree in theory with a range gun for catching the brass. It would suck as a carry weapon with a big ol 30 rounder sticking out the side. Wouldn't stick out as far as that Shrike conversion in the post above you, and nothing says you can't use 20 rounders if it's a problem... Look at the Cobb rifle that was posted and tell me that isn't Pure Sex.. It isn't pure sex. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 1:08:01 PM EDT
[#49]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
While agree in theory with a range gun for catching the brass. It would suck as a carry weapon with a big ol 30 rounder sticking out the side. Wouldn't stick out as far as that Shrike conversion in the post above you, and nothing says you can't use 20 rounders if it's a problem... Look at the Cobb rifle that was posted and tell me that isn't Pure Sex.. It isn't pure sex. LoL, Bro-you need to get your meter checked! You mighta caught Teh Gay... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2008 1:08:12 PM EDT
[#50]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I always wanted one of those robinson arms M96 with top feed conversion. Dont know why.... Most likely because it is different and looked cool.
The other reason may have been "Why not?" hey..don't pay attention to anyone else. If you think you can do it? Do it..you know how many people laughed at Edision & his light bulb? All great inventions started out with people laughing at the inventers. You know why people laugh?? It's easier than making it work! Anyone can laugh
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
