User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/11/2005 7:29:32 PM EDT
Hi, folks.
I read something today that made me curious:
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! 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2005 8:22:58 PM EDT
[#1]
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2005 8:34:54 PM EDT
[#2]
Interesting. That's, jmart. Any more thoughts would be appreciated.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 9:32:42 AM EDT
[#3]
Anyone care to expound on the downsides of multilugs and a plunger ejector?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 10:10:19 AM EDT
[#4]
It may not be perfect but when properly maintained it's been damn good for 40+ years. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 10:28:13 AM EDT
[#5]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 10:45:15 AM EDT
[#6]
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. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 11:13:14 AM EDT
[#7]
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. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 11:45:23 AM EDT
[#8]
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?
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. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/16/2005 7:13:25 PM EDT
[#9]
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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 6:51:20 AM EDT
[#10]
A multi lugged bolt has greater surface area for engagement, this means the load on each individual lug is reduced plus there is less rotational mass. It makes for a more elegant and durable solution. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 7:52:24 AM EDT
[#11]
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 8:58:35 AM EDT
[#12]
Is this the quote you were referring to:
www.jobrelatedstuff.com/forums/manageReply.html?a=quote&b=2&f=171&t=147976&r=1119614&page=1 |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 10:40:00 AM EDT
[#13]
Yes, that is exactly it. I was trying to not name names. No worries, though. 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 10:50:53 AM EDT
[#14]
I don't think that should be a concern considering Darren (48thHighlander) and Paul Leitner-Wise are very good friends. 
|
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 10:55:51 AM EDT
[#15]
I know, I'm not talking about that.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 5:23:05 PM EDT
[#16]
LOL! 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 6:15:22 PM EDT
[#17]
For the record, I didn't want to make this about L-W v. whoever bitchiness in other threads. End of hijack. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 6:25:10 PM EDT
[#18]
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2005 6:59:01 PM EDT
[#19]
Good points.
|
|
|
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.
