HOME | DD
SgtMuffin — Auto-Revolver Concept for L9OBL
Published: 2012-08-02 12:28:18 +0000 UTC; Views: 1622; Favourites: 18; Downloads: 73
Redirect to original
Description
This is an Auto-Revolver concept that I proposed to [link]Nothing spectacular art wise but it gets the point across.
It is a gas operated revolver, using gas to cycle the cylinder and also re-cock the hammer so that you do not have to pull back a full weight. Two version:
The top has a hammer like all conventional revolvers, but uses gas to cycle the cylinder and to reset the hammer to full cock.
The bottom has a bolt which would allow for removal of the Main Spring that is used to force the hammer down on the primer of a projectile. Makes the revolver look more like a Semi-Auto Self-Loading Pistol with a cylinder, which coincidentally is just like the 10mm pistol from Fallout 1: [link] (You have to look very closely).
These are designed for use in the FO:E universe, but feel free to use them (not that anyone probably will) elsewhere.
Related content
Comments: 31
i think it would be simpler for the gas tube to impinge directly into the hammer, or the piston to be one solid piece from the gas port to the point of contact on the hammer itself. maybe a gas tube impinging onto a hinged transfer rod which transfers energy to a cam at the base of the hammer?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I didn't really think much into this. It was just to prove a point, not to be a fully working design.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
But isn't the intellectual exercise part of the fun?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Not when I have more important things to work on.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
nothing is more important than that, which is the intellectual exercise of engineering :3
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
But I do agree, intellectual exercise is a very important thing that not enough people take part in these days.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Would just like to add that "automatic revolvers" are an actual thing
Mateba Model 6 Unica
Your idea, is actually not viable due to the combustion gas loss from the cylinder to barrel mating surface. Where as the purely recoil based operation of the Mateba is much more practical.
Just your friendly local Blacksmith/Whitesmith/Gunsmith pony here~
-Sunset
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah I know about the Mateba, and it would be possible.
the Mateba is very problematic with its recoil action. If you don't have a big enough load you will not get a cycle, which means you need to use loads over .357, you also have the problem of weak handed people not being able to cycle the gun a lot of the time. This is pretty much why the Mateba was never even looked at for service.
A gas operated revolver is possible, you would know of the Nagant 1895, when fired the cylinder moves forwards and creates a seal with the barrel, that would allow the gas to successfully pass into the piston and reset the action. Yes, I didn't draw it onto this picture, but I had it in mind while drawing (as this was just a simple idea to shoe L9OBL) and didn't add it because I did not expect Gun-nuts (like myself) to come on here and pick out the flaws I didn't include.
Thanks for the input anyway, shows that I will have to go into greater lengths of detail next time to avoid this.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Not really trying to nitpick, lol. I just deal in revolver a lot. Mainly mid 1850's through early 1900's.
Yes I'm aware of the Nagant, as I am also aware of the chamber seating issue making it worse than the Mateba in my opinion.
yes the .357 is a larger round, however until you fire a Mateba loaded as such and realize just how little kick it has, you won't understand that misconception. Yes it has its share of jamming issues, however consider that we're talking about a 'revolver' being 'semi automatic' and that the point is mostly futile.
Personally, the engineer in me thinks that the recoil based option seems like the better choice compared to trying to maintain a metal to metal seal on a revolving cylinder, under compression forces.
-Sunset
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You are nitpicking, but that is a good thing. It is good to get problems out into the open so they can be dealt with.
I have never heard of any problems with alignment in the Nagant. It has a fixed cylinder so this pretty much makes it impossible to have alignment issues.
It's not the problem of .357 being a big round, it's the problem of it being a round that is useless in a military or police role.
In a police role it has too much energy to be safely used in suburban areas, it does excessive tissue damage, it is bulky, it weights a lot, it does have a lot of recoil in other revolvers.
In a military standpoint it is even worse: It cannot be used in other pistols other than revolvers (and the Desert Eagle), it has no armour piercing capability, and it has a low magazine capacity when used in revolvers.
If you were going to have a gas action revolver it would have to be in .357Sig, 40S&W, .45ACP (yes these are all Auto-loading cartridges, but they have been successfully put in revolvers), 5.7x28 or maybe even something drastic like 5.56mm (That Gun).
Well we are trying to get an Auto-cocking revolver that doesn't jam here, that is the point.
I can see where the engineer side is coming from, but then you look at the applied side of it. Lots of weapons look great when drawn up on a white board or designed in a shop, and they work great on a range, but when you take them out into the field, and run through dirt, dust, sand, you find they become shit really quickly.
I do IPSC Pistol shooting, I use a Taurus PT99AS, the rest of my club use STI's that are all decked out with red dots, compensator, speed cocker, match grade barrel and slide, all that stuff that works on a range. I took a bunch of them up to the outback Australia, to a really dusty range and we did our shooting. Now with my PT99AS I usually come in around the middle, that weekend I cam first, because my gun never jammed, because it is a simple action, not complicated like everyone else's.
What I am trying to say it, the Mateba is not a war-zone gun, a 1911 will fire with a weak hand full of dust, a Mateba would jam because it uses a very fiddly system that requires perfect conditions to work.
Anyway, if I was choosing a gun for FO:E I would have never had gone for a revolver, but I guess Kkat when by the game (having the revolver as the most powerful pistol) and just chose it, which is fine, her right, and again, this is just a concept piece.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah but that's just it, the Mateba won't jam... it's a revolver. Just the trigger will have the double action weight rather than the single if the recoil cocking system works properly.
the nagant isn't about the torsional alignment, it's the rotational alignment.
Then again we're both talking about fiddly guns here. Warzone? S&W Sigma40. However that's just my opinion, again.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, jam was the wrong word, but the whole idea of this is to remove the 15-20lbs trigger pull that a pony would not be able to do with their tongue.
I still have not heard a thing bad about the alignment, and the one I have used at my club worked perfectly for 100+ rounds, the only problem we had was two or three of the self sealing cartridges didn't go off first hit, but they were 80+ years old, so that is a pretty good turn out I think.
"Warzone? S&W Sigma40." I'm not sure what you mean by this... is this the gun you would take into combat?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Eh, might have just been that one guys personal opinion then. I've never personally handled one.
And yes I would take a S&W Sigma40 into combat, no questions. That or a S&W Sigma 9KV depending on if I wanted a 9mm or .45. It's a nice gun, almost a carbon copy of the Glock17 with the differences of, well one being made by S&W. Two, they fixed the half supported breach issue. Three better grip [at least for my hands]. 4. lighter trigger pull. Yadda yadda basically it's a glock17 with a ton of little improvements whilst keeping the simplistic mechanics of a glock.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sig P229 is what I would have, extended barrel with threading, in .357Sig.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I am thoroughly okay with that choice.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I see where you're going on this, though you'd need to modify the grip to be pony friendly. Also I don't see how it would be double action. The gas cocks the hammer, allowing for the trigger to release the hammer and fire the gun. The initial Trigger pull with the hammer in rest would either have a heavy pull or would need to be single action and have the hammer cocked. Though I like it. While I don't think I'm going to change up my current design (though I will make an X ray version showing how the internals work (I have a couple ideas that can reduce trigger pull drastically) on my design) I think I will utilize this design later on.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I was think afterwards that if you made it a break action you could have some sort of reset device to make the first shot as light as the rest, but I couldn't be bothered changing it half way through.
The non-pony design is just to show off the concept.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
also, break action revolvers aren't strong enough to hold high energy rounds like a .357 and .44. They'd just blow apart after the first round or so so you're stuck with swing out, fixed, or front loading revolvers
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yeah, you would be stuck to smaller cartridges, but I can't see a way to have the swingout re-cock it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
maybe a cylinder pin that extends out to cock the hammer as the cylinder swings close? That or the ever viable "It's magic I ain't gotta explain shit" Which I'm claiming on little macintosh.... And pip's saddlebags because I refuse to draw her as the ball of guns she inevitably ends up as.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I don't know, doesn't seem very possible. While the "It's magic I ain't gotta explain shit" method works, I always like to see a realistic side to things, or at least an explanation to how the magic is doing its "shit"
Maybe her saddle bags are like The Doctors TARDIS, bigger on the inside.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
well same I hate the "its magic" opt out, it seems cheap to me (but if you look at little macintosh I don't see how it could work. And thats exactly my explanation to pips saddle bags. Doctor who got hired by stable tec to design saddlebags and gear packs for soldiers and civilians because he could make them bigger on the inside. Alternate dimensions inside a bag? not plausible from our current technological standpoint. Possibly feesable with future tech. Totally plausible with magic and time lord know-how.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
With Lil'Mac I see you are going for a very Colt Peacemaker styled approach over the .44 Mag from FO3, which seems very outdated for the Fallout Universe, but as the Apple family are very Mid-Western American orientated it might work.
But then you come up against the Colt being a Single Action... it is a tricky one. If you changed it to be like the .44 in FO3 then you could call it Double Action, then that fixes that, but not the spring problem.
IS there anyway you could keep the original handle and add the side thing on as well?
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
The whole 'firing with the revolver on its side with the scope mounted on the side' is out right?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I always thought a peacemaker suited little macintosh better then the SW .44 mag (which is why I went with the design) But you're right that makes it single action (which is why I'm claiming magic on little macintosh. cop out FTW lol) Also I have no idea what you mean by side thing...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So you have the are where the main spring can go, the rest of the handle in other words, then you have the mouth piece come out of the side of the handle (maybe it is screwed/bolted on?) and it somehow mechanically acts with the original trigger.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ooohhhh I guess but personally the aesthetics on that are pleuh in my opinion. I think imma just go with magic though. unless I see a design I like better and can base it off of
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
interesting design, it's a pretty cool concept.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hopefully it sheds some light on what I was trying to get across to L9OBL... I'm not the best at describing things.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0