Remington 9 mm recall

The Russians are realists. A 3-4 MOA weapon will get the job done and is isn't going to limit the effective accuracy of the average soldier.

Reply to
rbowman
Loading thread data ...

SGN had an article on one of the Turkish arms manufacturers. New plant, new machinery, new production techniques. In some ways the less developed countries get a leg up by not being burdened by manufacturing plants full of antiques.

Reply to
rbowman

SGN had an article on one of the Turkish arms manufacturers. New plant, new machinery, new production techniques. In some ways the less developed countries get a leg up by not being burdened by manufacturing plants full of antiques.

==========================================================

That's true. When Japan was emerging as a world-class car builder, they had the same situation.

Reply to
Ed Huntress

Not having been in the military, I don't know how well the average person can shoot that would be in the army. Especially now there are many growing up in cities and never have been exposed to guns. I bet the other nations are even worse as many of them have difficulty even owning guns if they want to, such as England.

If that is the case, a 3 inch rifle is good enough for them if it goes 'bang' every time. I am thinking now it is over a couple of million rounds fired per hit on the battle field anyway.

From some I have seen at the gun club and other places, there seem to be many of the deer hunters that should not even be out in the woods. I was over at a friends house and a man in his 50's brought over a new Remmington

30'06 autoloader. He could not keep all the rounds in one of the man size targets at 25 yards. Said it was the rifle, but three others of us shot and even firing rapid just as the sights got close to the center of the target, the largest group out of all of us was could be covered by your hand.
Reply to
Ralph Mowery

And the farmer said it would do no harm. I bet Nellie didn't enjoy it.

Reply to
Stormin Mormon

Our gift should be to export OSHA and Obamacare to them.

Reply to
Stormin Mormon

Let the Record show that "Michael A. Terrell" on or about Thu, 31 Jul 2014 01:36:08

-0400 did write, type or otherwise cause to appear >> "Michael A. Terrell" wrote:

"There is no educational value to being kicked my an Army mule the second time." Sayings of the Old Army Quartermasters.

-- pyotr filipivich The fears of one class of men are not the measure of the rights of another.

-- George Bancroft

Reply to
pyotr filipivich

Part of that is the change from "one pull, one shot" to "Hose that are down at 3,000 rounds per minute." "There's a bullet in here with your name on it, and I'll find it if I have to go through the entire belt!"

The poor workman blames his tools.

-- pyotr filipivich The fears of one class of men are not the measure of the rights of another.

-- George Bancroft

Reply to
pyotr filipivich

Same happened in Europe & Japan in the late 40's and early 50's. B-)

-- pyotr filipivich The fears of one class of men are not the measure of the rights of another.

-- George Bancroft

Reply to
pyotr filipivich

As I'm wont to say, particularly about new software packages "If this is the improved version, I'd hate to see the hell hole that was the old setup." Now, consider how "bad" things were, that selective assembly was such an improvement. 'Remember' back when High Speed Steel was the new wonder technology?

-- pyotr filipivich The fears of one class of men are not the measure of the rights of another.

-- George Bancroft

Reply to
pyotr filipivich

I think it wasn't the so much the common definition of the inch, (I know the US Government early on defined the inch as precisely 25.4 millimeters) but "what is a 'standard' size thread form?" As gets mentioned on and off - there are Whiteworth threads, there are Unified National thread, metric "equivalents", and ISO Metric threads. And some work well with each other, and others ...not so well.

-- pyotr filipivich The fears of one class of men are not the measure of the rights of another.

-- George Bancroft

Reply to
pyotr filipivich

Our gift should be to export OSHA and Obamacare to them. ============================================================= [Ed}

The Japanese have very extensive equivalents of both.

Reply to
Ed Huntress

I've seen a 1917 Enfield (A WWI infantry rifle, for those who don't know) with no gunsmithing consistently shoot 3/4 to 1 1/2 inch groups at

100 yards with factory ammo. That's basically sub-MOA accuracy. I guess whoever made the barrel and assembled the parts must have had a good day at the factory.
Reply to
Just Wondering

I have said we need to have all inports made in factories that meet our OSHA and EPA and other standards like we have in the US. That would raise the price some and level the playing field somewhat.

Reply to
Ralph Mowery

This is on a larger scale than a Remington 9 mm, but it's fascinating nevertheless. Perhaps it will find its way into small arms manufacturing.

formatting link

Weapons of mass production: US Army making warheads with 3D printing Published time: July 31, 2014 15:05

The US Army is building deadlier, more efficient, and less costly warheads using 3D-printing technology, according to new reports.

While 3D printers have made more headlines for their ability to make homemade firearms, and for more benevolent uses like the development of prosthetic arms or facial reconstruction surgery, the Army is planning to use them to print sophisticated warhead components on the cheap, according to Army Technology magazine.

?3D printing of warheads will allow us to have better design control and utilize geometries and patterns that previously could not be produced or manufactured,? James Zunino, a researcher at the Armament Research, Engineering and Design Center, told Motherboard.

Traditional manufacturing methods are no match for what 3D printers can offer such weapons of mass destruction. 3D-processed components could allow for superior design such as the ability to ?pack in additional payloads, sensors, and safety mechanisms,? Motherboard wrote.

Weaponry made by 3D printers will also allow the military to engineer more precise specifications on warheads, such as blast radiuses.

?Warheads could be designed to meet specific mission requirements whether it is to improve safety to meet an Insensitive Munitions requirement, or it could have tailorable effects, better control, and be scalable to achieve desired lethality,? Zunino said.

And while the US Army is attracted to 3D printing?s ability to offer more efficient mechanisms for killing, the cost-effectiveness at a time of budgetary cutbacks is enticing as well.

?3D printing also allows for integrating components together to add capabilities at reduced total life cycle costs,? Zunino said. ?It is expected that 3D printing will reduce life-cycle costs of certain items and make munitions more affordable in the long run through implementation of design for manufacturability, and capitalizing on the add capabilities that 3D printing and additive manufacturing can bring to munitions and warheads.?

Zunino added that the Army is not likely to stop at mere component manufacturing.

?Maybe someday an entire warhead or rocket could be produced as the technology further matures,? Zunino said.

Printing weaponry in 3D doesn?t stop with the Pentagon. Defense giant BAE Systems announced in January that the British Royal Air Force?s Tornado fighter jets have performed their first flights with some onboard metal parts manufactured using 3D-printing technology.

BAE has also claimed in recent months that by 2040, aircraft will be able to use 3D printers to self-heal or produce mini-drones during missions using what they called 'Transformer' technology.

Reply to
Steve from Colorado

I've read the tale of the testing that went before the acceptance of the 1911. Perhaps it's true, perhaps aphophrical. Maybe some of both.

Supposedly candidate firearms were literally thown in a mud puddle, driven over by some numbers of tires, take up, wiped off externally, and fired. The precision makers looked on in horror. The 1911 went bang.

Believe it? Your call.

Reply to
Winston_Smith

I've read the tale of the testing that went before the acceptance of the 1911. Perhaps it's true, perhaps aphophrical. Maybe some of both.

Supposedly candidate firearms were literally thown in a mud puddle, driven over by some numbers of tires, take up, wiped off externally, and fired. The precision makers looked on in horror. The 1911 went bang.

Believe it? Your call.

==========================================================

[Ed]

Well, I don't know if it's true -- I did read some years ago about the testing that the Army put the pistols through when the 1911 was introduced -- but it is pretty hard to kill one of them. I don't know how many rounds have been shot through mine but I know that my uncle shot it in a bullseye club, almost every Saturday, for around 30 years. He bought it gov't surplus, through the NRA, around 1948. It was still packed in cosmoline, never fired. (That's how I got my South Bend lathe, too -- Navy surplus, never used.)

It's still going great but I mostly shoot .22s in it now, with a Cub conversion slide.

Reply to
Ed Huntress

And our exports should comply with all their regulations, such as veils for women.

Reply to
Jim Wilkins

I have no problem if all the women we export as commodities are equipped with veils.

Reply to
Winston_Smith

Germany and Japan are unlikely to agree to that large of worker protection cutbacks...

Reply to
F. George McDuffee

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.