Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 8/11/2005 7:29:32 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/11/2005 7:30:16 PM EDT by General_Tso]
Hi, folks.

I read something today that made me curious:


Quoted from Modern Firearms: FN SCAR
Improved action has Kalashnikov AK-type bolt with two large locking lugs and fixed ejector. This system apparently is less sensitive to fine sand, dust and any other fouling inside the receiver, than any system with M16-type multi-lug bolt and plunger-type ejector.



I also saw someone else on this board voice a concern that a fixed ejector would be an improvement upon the AR15 system. What is the rationale for a plunger-type ejector? Is a fixed that much better? Likewise, what is the rational for a multi-lug bolt and are they better? Inquiring minds want to know!
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 8:22:58 PM EDT
Just a WAG:

Multi-lug bolt -- fewer degrees rotation needed to open and close.

Plunger Ejector -- fixed blade requires cutout in bolt. Plunger allows complete encirclement of the casehead.
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 8:34:54 PM EDT
Interesting. That's, jmart. Any more thoughts would be appreciated.
Link Posted: 8/16/2005 9:32:42 AM EDT
Anyone care to expound on the downsides of multilugs and a plunger ejector?
Link Posted: 8/16/2005 10:10:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By General_Tso:
Anyone care to expound on the downsides of multilugs and a plunger ejector?



It may not be perfect but when properly maintained it's been damn good for 40+ years.
Link Posted: 8/16/2005 10:28:13 AM EDT
I certainly wouldn't dispute that. What got me thinking was a poster here commented that a fixed ejector would make the AR15 the ultimate weapon, so I was curious what its weaknesses were such that changing it would make it "ultimate." In my Googling, I saw that the multilug bolt was listed as a weakness, too, so I added that to the question. Just something I never thought about, so I wanted to ask the Arf Braintrust.
Link Posted: 8/16/2005 10:45:15 AM EDT

Originally Posted By General_Tso:
Anyone care to expound on the downsides of multilugs and a plunger ejector?


1) Smaller lugs are more likely to have a shorter life expectency, and require more maching time (meaning higher cost).

2) Plunger ejector: requires one more moving part (the plunger) and as such it can get 'gunked up' with carbon or fine sand thus not eject the round.

Link Posted: 8/16/2005 11:13:14 AM EDT

Originally Posted By General_Tso:
Hi, folks.

I read something today that made me curious:


Quoted from Modern Firearms: FN SCAR
Improved action has Kalashnikov AK-type bolt with two large locking lugs and fixed ejector. This system apparently is less sensitive to fine sand, dust and any other fouling inside the receiver, than any system with M16-type multi-lug bolt and plunger-type ejector.



I also saw someone else on this board voice a concern that a fixed ejector would be an improvement upon the AR15 system. What is the rationale for a plunger-type ejector? Is a fixed that much better? Likewise, what is the rational for a multi-lug bolt and are they better? Inquiring minds want to know!



Sounds like the author (along with a cetain incompotent gun rag author) mistaknely assumes that the SCAR is just an FNC with a new shell.

According to Small Arms Review, the SCAR does not share the same two lug Kalashnikov bolt as the FNC. Rather, it uses an enhanced multi-lug design.

I don't have the article on hand, but I'll look for it when I get home.
Link Posted: 8/16/2005 11:45:23 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/16/2005 11:47:21 AM EDT by ROMAD-556]
Is it just me or does every new 'improvement' to the AR keep taking the platform one step closer to a Galil 5.56 AR?


According to Small Arms Review, the SCAR does not share the same two lug Kalashnikov bolt as the FNC. Rather, it uses an enhanced multi-lug design.


Ahh - if that is true then my above statement isnt so valid anymore. Sure will be interesting to see what refinements end up sticking after the dust settles.
Link Posted: 8/16/2005 7:13:25 PM EDT
Interesting, Forrest and CitySlicker. Would someone go into the advantages of the AR bolt for me a little more? I'm googling it and not having much luck. I feel dumb asking, but I'm curious to know.
Link Posted: 8/17/2005 6:51:20 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/17/2005 6:51:55 AM EDT by LeitnerWise]
Link Posted: 8/17/2005 7:52:24 AM EDT
Interesting. Is their any truth to the multiple lugs being suseptible to dust and sand?

Since you guys have designed a bolt that hopes to improve upon the standard bolt group, could you give your take on the plunger ejector?

Thanks for the insightful comments, folks.
Link Posted: 8/17/2005 8:58:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By General_Tso:

<snip>

I also saw someone else on this board voice a concern that a fixed ejector would be an improvement upon the AR15 system.




Is this the quote you were referring to:


Originally Posted By 48thHighlander:
If Paul could incorporate a fixed ejector into the MRS like on the FAL, or AK, the result would be the most modular, accurate, reliable weapon to date.



www.jobrelatedstuff.com/forums/manageReply.html?a=quote&b=2&f=171&t=147976&r=1119614&page=1
Link Posted: 8/17/2005 10:40:00 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/17/2005 10:43:20 AM EDT by General_Tso]

Originally Posted By CitySlicker:
Is this the quote you were referring to:


Originally Posted By 48thHighlander:
If Paul could incorporate a fixed ejector into the MRS like on the FAL, or AK, the result would be the most modular, accurate, reliable weapon to date.



www.jobrelatedstuff.com/forums/manageReply.html?a=quote&b=2&f=171&t=147976&r=1119614&page=1



Yes, that is exactly it. I was trying to not name names. No worries, though.
Link Posted: 8/17/2005 10:50:53 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/17/2005 10:51:27 AM EDT by CitySlicker]

Originally Posted By General_Tso:

Originally Posted By CitySlicker:
Is this the quote you were referring to:


Originally Posted By 48thHighlander:
If Paul could incorporate a fixed ejector into the MRS like on the FAL, or AK, the result would be the most modular, accurate, reliable weapon to date.



www.jobrelatedstuff.com/forums/manageReply.html?a=quote&b=2&f=171&t=147976&r=1119614&page=1



Yes, that is exactly it. I was trying to not name names. No worries, though.




I don't think that should be a concern considering Darren (48thHighlander) and Paul Leitner-Wise are very good friends.
Link Posted: 8/17/2005 10:55:51 AM EDT
I know, I'm not talking about that.
Link Posted: 8/17/2005 5:23:05 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/17/2005 6:15:22 PM EDT

Originally Posted By LeitnerWise:

Originally Posted By General_Tso:
I know, I'm not talking about that.



LOL!




For the record, I didn't want to make this about L-W v. whoever bitchiness in other threads. End of hijack.
Link Posted: 8/17/2005 6:25:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/17/2005 6:25:23 PM EDT by DevL]
Fixed ejector would be part of the reciever. It would be aluminum. It would fail horribly. Its the worst idea ever. Oh wait lets turn the lightweight AR into a heavy ass billet steel AK!



Oh wait that is a horrible and stupid idea...

What other stupid ideas can we come up with for the AR? Press fit barrels? Larger tolerances for grime? Wood stocks? Oh wait lets make the rifle have 2 massive lugs so we cant get more even force distribution and create accuracy degradation!

Keep the SCAR and AK, I will keep the AR.
Link Posted: 8/17/2005 6:59:01 PM EDT
Good points.
Top Top