Am I th only one who would like a good reasonably priced AR type Bolt gun?

BreechFace said:
1. Affordable AR patterned barrels
Click to expand...

None of which work for a bolt action rifle because of the gas port. And in application, none of which really work for a well designed bolt action (2-3 lug 60-90degree throw vs. straight pull with no extraction camming advantage).

BreechFace said:
5. Lower with a 1913 rail on the back (where the buffer tube threads are) would allow for lots of stock options. Folding, fixed, collapsing, and different materials.
Click to expand...

None of which work for the fact the bolt must pass through the lower into the buffer tube, in the same way does a conventional AR-15 bolt. Pass through folding stock adapters can be used.

BreechFace said:
9. Ease of mounting scopes with pic rail on top.
10. Ease of mounting thermal lights, lasers, etc for nighttime predator control.
Click to expand...

Neither of these are unique to the AR-15.
 
I am too old and set in my ways to accept the concept. The only rifles I like that can readily change calibers are the TC Contender and Encore. I keep each barrel for either set up with it's own scope so it's a quick 2 or 3 minute change and is sighted in and ready to go.. Contender frames are back although it's a long wait for one and they aren't coming in numbers promised. Encore is a used only proposition and expensive unless you get lucky. A bolt action is just too much trouble.
 
Varminterror said:
None of which work for a bolt action rifle because of the gas port. And in application, none of which really work for a well designed bolt action (2-3 lug 60-90degree throw vs. straight pull with no extraction camming advantage).
Click to expand...
Gas ports can be blocked with a $25 gas block turned around. And if such a platform took off it wouldn't take long for AR15 barrel manufacturers to sell AR barrels sans gas ports. They already did that for blowback PCC barrels and 22LRs.


Varminterror said:
None of which work for the fact the bolt must pass through the lower into the buffer tube, in the same way does a conventional AR-15 bolt. Pass through folding stock adapters can be used.
Click to expand...
Never intended it to be a "conventional AR15 bolt," only simply utilizing the AR15 bolt head (to thus utilize AR15 barrel extensions) which can be designed to have camming surfaces rearward of the bolt face providing compounding leverage.

A non-conventional bolt has the possibility of being designed with a camming surface that would allow for enough throw to clearn intermediate length cartridges, if the bolt were to operate within the distance from ejection port through the forward assist area. I've not looked in-depth but it seems like it would be a possibility. Obviously, this would be a specialized upper receiver and bolt, but would have benefits of taking advantage of economies of scale of all other parts that are AR patterned that could be used.

The bolt would need to be designed to work with standard AR15 firing controls, namely the hammer.


Varminterror said:
Neither of these are unique to the AR-15.
Click to expand...

Didn't say they were, just simply stated it is very easy to install optics, lasers, thermals for night time hunting. Not to the same extent with traditional bolt actions such as Savage Axis, Ruger Predators, etc that have been suggested in this thread as a reason why it doesn't make sense.
 
One other concern to think through would be the trigger design. A standard ar trigger is designed to be cocked by a reciprocating bolt, and enters full battery very quickly, whereas a bolt action version is much slower, giving time to inadvertently pull the trigger during bolt close, bypassing any conceivable safety.

The best safety you have for out of battery firing for this system is to have a narrow slot for the hammer to travel through in the bolt body, and if the trigger gets bumped while the bolt is closing, you are going to discharge the rifle as soon as the bolt closes enough for the hammer to get to the firing pin. Aka vintage rem 700...

Only solution to this I can think of is a big ridge in the bottom of the new bolt carrier to catch on the side of the mis fired hammer and not let the bolt close. It might work and it might not. Not a perfect solution depending on what hammer is in the lower.. At this point we are into more machining than it takes to build a Ruger American, and costs are climbing.

Realistically, the safety issue is probably the real reason we aren't seeing a lot of these out there on the market. Liability is sometimes more expensive than production costs...

Not to say it's an impossible idea, but a home gunsmith can accept liability for their one off creation a lot easier than a company can for a product line. I personally want to try to make it work safely, but I don't expect a company to market them affordably...
 
My look at this is the sheer volume of AR lowers in American's possession. I think some manufacturing and design costs are worth a look at when it comes to a bolt action AR patterned upper receiver. I would buy one if designed and implemented well, utilizing AR15 standard lower receivers, barrels, handguards, etc.

I'm not a firearms designer, but I am an entrepreneur, and the idea of selling a direct to customer's door a bolt action upper for their desired AR15 caliber to their door, pinning it on their already owned AR15 lower receiver seems like a good idea to make some money.

I have no desire to screw on and off Savage, Remage, or other type of barrel nut systems on and off, worrying about headspace, and the lack of being able to change bolt face without additional costs. This would take care of that as bolts would be married to barrels, and headspace never gets messed with after installation.

I never stated they would be for everyone, but there is enough AR15 owners out there that there would be enough for some pretty good marketshare, and it wouldn't take specialized licensing for a manufacturer to engage in selling said items as the controlled parts are either already in the possession of millions of Americans or can be purchased through other vendors.
 
I am positive that you could get your preferred barrel manufacturer to skip the gas port drilling and not charge too much premium to ship them to you if you ordered a large enough quantity. I think developing the concept on the ar-10 platform for r&d might be a bit better, and easier to justify the higher initial MSRP, but it would be cool to have, in effect, modular chassis rifles available with only a single lower purchase. Just got to get past the trigger safety issue...
 
Thinking about your hammer follow safety issue you present, which is a legitimate concern. Maybe even a keyed insert that is dovetailed into the bottom of the new designed bolt carrier that can be removed when the upper receiver is unpinned and pivoted out of the lower receiver, thus allowing the bolt carrier to slide out the back just like a traditional AR BCG. The keyed insert could be the channel designed to allow the MILSPEC patterned hammer to ride through preventing hammer follow and unintended discharges.
 
I've actually thought about this for several years and what I was envisioning was something that used the standard bolt with a modified bolt carrier to still provide the camming action with a K31ish bolt handle that pivoted fore and aft with a tail section that moved to block the firing pin to prevent it from having the hammer fall causing an out of battery fire and a front section that clipped into the upper when the bolt was closed.
 
zdc1775 said:
I've actually thought about this for several years and what I was envisioning was something that used the standard bolt with a modified bolt carrier to still provide the camming action with a K31ish bolt handle that pivoted fore and aft with a tail section that moved to block the firing pin to prevent it from having the hammer fall causing an out of battery fire and a front section that clipped into the upper when the bolt was closed.
Click to expand...
Or a small cam lobe on the bolt carrier in front of the hammer slot that would reengage the sear by pushing down slightly on the hammer shoe as the bolt slid to final closure. Not perfect but a last minute safety check as the bolt closes... I'm sure it's solvable, just haven't proven it myself yet...
 
BreechFace said:
Gas ports can be blocked with a $25 gas block turned around. And if such a platform took off it wouldn't take long for AR15 barrel manufacturers to sell AR barrels sans gas ports. They already did that for blowback PCC barrels and 22LRs.



Never intended it to be a "conventional AR15 bolt," only simply utilizing the AR15 bolt head (to thus utilize AR15 barrel extensions) which can be designed to have camming surfaces rearward of the bolt face providing compounding leverage.

A non-conventional bolt has the possibility of being designed with a camming surface that would allow for enough throw to clearn intermediate length cartridges, if the bolt were to operate within the distance from ejection port through the forward assist area. I've not looked in-depth but it seems like it would be a possibility. Obviously, this would be a specialized upper receiver and bolt, but would have benefits of taking advantage of economies of scale of all other parts that are AR patterned that could be used.

The bolt would need to be designed to work with standard AR15 firing controls, namely the hammer.




Didn't say they were, just simply stated it is very easy to install optics, lasers, thermals for night time hunting. Not to the same extent with traditional bolt actions such as Savage Axis, Ruger Predators, etc that have been suggested in this thread as a reason why it doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

The problem with all of these modifications - while all possible - is that they're all moving away from the extremely high volume AR market, into specialty product markets, and moving away also from the pipeline of low-cost AR components into higher prices. When we're talking about proprietary bolts and carriers, proprietary uppers, and proprietary barrels with proprietary extensions and omitted gas blocks, we're doing the same stuff that has already been done, and we're NOT talking any longer about cheap AR components... I've done some "straight pull" AR-15 conversions, doing exactly what you're describing in some of these steps - turning the gas block sucks, we fill with fouling and end up building something awful into our bore (because that port is no longer self-cleaning/self-clearing). When we stop talking about $75 barrels and start talking about $500 barrels, stop talking about $100 BCG's and start talking about $350 BCG's... We stop talking about ~$500-650 rifles and start talking about $1500-3500 rifles (or worse)... It's cool, but it's just not the same market and not the same prices...

Some of us have been doing this for a long time - remember, we did a LOT of this game playing with the AR design already when the Federal AWB passed 30yrs ago, and ever since then to comply with specific State restrictions and requirements. This isn't "just an idea" for some of us - it's a road we've already walked as an industry, so we know the modifications and we know the prices of doing so.
 
Varminterror said:
The problem with all of these modifications - while all possible - is that they're all moving away from the extremely high volume AR market, into specialty product markets, and moving away also from the pipeline of low-cost AR components into higher prices. When we're talking about proprietary bolts and carriers, proprietary uppers, and proprietary barrels with proprietary extensions and omitted gas blocks, we're doing the same stuff that has already been done, and we're NOT talking any longer about cheap AR components... I've done some "straight pull" AR-15 conversions, doing exactly what you're describing in some of these steps - turning the gas block sucks, we fill with fouling and end up building something awful into our bore (because that port is no longer self-cleaning/self-clearing). When we stop talking about $75 barrels and start talking about $500 barrels, stop talking about $100 BCG's and start talking about $350 BCG's... We stop talking about ~$500-650 rifles and start talking about $1500-3500 rifles (or worse)... It's cool, but it's just not the same market and not the same prices...

Some of us have been doing this for a long time - remember, we did a LOT of this game playing with the AR design already when the Federal AWB passed 30yrs ago, and ever since then to comply with specific State restrictions and requirements. This isn't "just an idea" for some of us - it's a road we've already walked as an industry, so we know the modifications and we know the prices of doing so.
Click to expand...
All 100% true. We all find different aspects of the hobby of guns interesting though, and maybe, just maybe, one of these conversations will trigger a truly innovative idea for someone. That's why I personally appreciate your specific input. Been there done that, here's the issues saves a lot of time, and saves some people a lot of money. But it helps narrow the thought processes for those of us who are going to tinker...
 
What we CAN DO is a much, much bigger list than what we can do at low competitive prices against common, high volume, affordable firearms.

Personally, I've been tinkering with the bolt action AR for a long time, and I find the relatively abhorrent triggers and unstable/high torque rifle profile to be the biggest hurdles. Lots of folks want to customize everything, but won't put forth any money to actually do so - so we have cheap AR's and customized Howas/Savages/Rugers, or worse, custom Mosin Nagants and SKS's, and the results are what they are - but no matter what we spend to retrofit AR-15's, we still end up with an AR-15 trigger and an AR-15 profile, and when it comes down to the performance return on the investment, they lag a long, long way behind a more common bolt action design... I've never seen a product or even an idea for a product which solved either of these issues - if a guy developed a striker fired bolt carrier and a new trigger, we could solve the trigger issue, but I'm not terribly certain the tall, torque-sensitive profile can really be solved if we stay with an AR-15 receiver.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
  • Locked
Heretic time. I don't own an AR am I the only one?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
147
Views
6K
Ignition Override
I
Joshua M. Smith
  • Locked
  • Poll
Mosin Nagant - Am I the only one who DOES like these?
2 3
Replies
61
Views
4K
hang fire
H
guyfromohio
  • Locked
So who makes a good Bolt Action these days?
2 3
Replies
64
Views
7K
Paul7
Paul7
T
  • Locked
Cheapest AR (Oly) vs. mid-range AK? (Vector)
Replies
15
Views
1K
The_Shootist
The_Shootist
D
  • Locked
Another take on the AR vs AK debate
2 3 4
Replies
87
Views
4K
nathan
N
Back
Top