3-D printers and homemade large cap magazines
An interesting concept. As it points out, a magazine is simply a spring-loaded box of specific dimensions. That the pattern has been downloaded over 2,000 times is interesting as well.
Somehow doubtful that these things are reliable. Just because you can roughly replicate a shape with liquid plastic doesn't mean it has the right tensile strength, fatigue resistance, shear strength, deflection resistance, etc.
Posted by: Kman at January 15, 2013 05:34 AM
KMAN you are correct. But this is very early in 3-D printing. Today it works for a while. Not great but it can only get better.
Posted by: Dan Hamilton at January 15, 2013 09:54 AM
Someone also made an AR-15 using 3-D. It fired six times before it broke. The gennie is out of the bottle now and can not be put back in. Where will 3-D be in five years?
Posted by: harp1034 at January 15, 2013 10:06 AM
Actually in the article they say they had problems but then it worked after that. Yest it is new and will take a bit to work out but I do not think long.
I would love to see a hi-cap mag for the Browning BLR in a variety of calibers. Lever-action so by passes the black arms view, probably just as fast and simpler to maintain
Posted by: Rich at January 15, 2013 10:09 AM
Someone made an AR-15 from his wife's cutting board (the lower receiver) too.
Bright liberty blue, I like it:
Posted by: Shootin' Buddy at January 15, 2013 10:39 AM
An AR-15 was not created using 3D printing...
A 'lower receiver' was made using 3D printing. A lower receiver and/or a magazine could be made. However, the pressure in a barrel and upper require much more strength than the plastic can handle...
If Congress passes a limited-capacity magazine law, I'd guess (assume really) they would not allow manufacture of a non-complying magazine (for military and law enforcement) without a permit of some sort issued through the ATF...
If they don't include that, well...
Of course, many people know machinists and blacksmiths... It isn't rocket science (and this is just more math...).
Posted by: Counsel at January 15, 2013 10:46 AM
The frustrating thing is that not a single proposal from the Democrats would do anything to address either violent crime in general or mass shootings by madmen.
Lets say they limit magazines to 7 rounds. What is the response time of the police? 30 minutes? Even if it was a superhuman 5 minutes, a not particularly skilled shooter can change mags and get off an aimed shot in 3-4 seconds. Lets say he's firing aimed shots at a rate of one every 3 seconds.
So our insane teenager who was taking drugs to keep his psychosis under control can fire 92 aimed shots using 17 round magazines but only 84 shots using 7 round magazines....
Clearly limiting mag capacity has nothing to do with stopping mass murders by insane people, so what is the point? Is it simply politicians dancing in the blood of children for personal political gain?
Posted by: Brian at January 15, 2013 11:51 AM
"The frustrating thing is that not a single proposal from the Democrats would do anything to address either violent crime in general or mass shootings by madmen."
But they don't want to do anything that might reduce violent crime or mass shootings. If that were to happen, they'd have nothing to run on.
Posted by: Ken M at January 15, 2013 06:27 PM
Dave, please don't help propagate the "large capacity magazine" propaganda. 30 rounds is standard capacity for an AR-pattern rifle.
Posted by: John Hardin at January 16, 2013 07:24 AM
I have to wonder about NY's new law limiting "clips" to 7 rounds. Yes, I know the difference between a detachable magazine and a "clip", but the ancient and collectible M1 Garand takes an 8 round stripper clip.
Are these relics now illegal in NY? I don't plan to ever set foot in that State, armed or not, but I have to wonder how much thought these idiots put into their legislation in the rush to make names for themselves.
Posted by: CDR D at January 16, 2013 05:02 PM