[–] 2 points 4 months ago (1 child)

hahaha,you are right.I am in china so only diy design is useful for me.But it is not mean that printable frame and recivers are useless,I believe there is no such thing as a useless innovation; every design in the 3D-printed firearms community offers some form of inspiration. Builders in the US, where gun regulations are lax, prioritize safety and reliability, which is why many hybrid designs incorporate quite a few factory firearm parts. Of course, since we are in a strictly regulated region, we can reference those designs that require standard gun parts and modify them to fit our constraints—just like how Derwood's AP9 design inspired JStark's FGC-9.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (2 children)

    the kinetic energy of pip9 nearly a 22lr and 9mm deep's kinetic energy not higher than a 380acp i think it can change to adapt the design,I heard there is an ammo 9.2x19mm --To save on costs, some American reloaders create "wildcat" cartridges by seating Makarov bullets into 9x19mm casings; however, this necessitates a modification to the firearm's chamber design.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] [S] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    Do they typically use standard, purpose-built airgun valve components?Because i am in China buy airgun value will face risks, it's very difficult for me to source specific airgun parts where I am. I was wondering if it's feasible to substitute them with standard, unregulated pneumatic valves (like generic off-the-shelf commercial valves)?

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] [S] 1 point 6 months ago (3 children)

    Hi there, your 3D-printed airgun design is really impressive! I saw that it can handle pressures up to 1000 psi, and I'm very curious about the engineering behind it.

    Could you share some details on the following?

    1. How exactly is the mechanism implemented? > 2. Which specific parts of the airgun are 3D printed?
    2. How does the design withstand 1000 psi? Are there specific filaments, print orientations, or reinforcements you used to prevent failure under such high pressure?
  • source
  • parent
  • context
  •  

    We've all seen the massive explosion in 3D-printed firearm development recently. Designs like the FGC-9 and Urutau are incredible feats of engineering. But this got me thinking: why don't we see the same level of innovation and high-quality projects for 3D-printed airguns?

    Logically, it seems like airguns would be a much easier and more accessible path. Components like constant pressure valves, regulators, CO2 cartridges, and HPA (High-Pressure Air) tanks face far less regulation globally compared to live ammunition, primers, and barrels.

    Given the current capabilities of 3D printing, shouldn't designing and building reliable CO2 or PCP platforms be easier? Is the core issue engineering-related (e.g., containing sustained high pressure in printed plastics vs. the momentary peak pressure of a 9mm cartridge)?

     

    Does anyone know the current state of 3D printed ammunition research? Specifically looking for info on the BLC tests and 3dprinted .380 ACP projects(case also 3dprinted). Since a lot of the usual Discord/FOSSCAD channels are down, I’m trying to find where the community is currently documenting these developments.

    view more: next ›