3d printed guns - how effective are they

[SharpDog]

I was reading the discussion about 3d printing here:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018...-3d-printers-is-blow-against-gun-control.html

what struck me was this photo:



Now, I'm an engineer and I know about the problems in creating tools. It just seems to me that 3d printed firearms will never be remotely the same quality (accuracy, durability and especially safety) of quality engineered guns from major manufacturers.

LEAVING ASIDE THE GUN RIGHTS and FIRST AMENDMENT ISSUES (which I fully support but have been addressed in other threads), I just don't get the attraction at this point.

Now, the tech will undoubtedly improve and I do see some opportunity for creativity here.

Thoughts ?

 

[Deus Machina]

Oh, it's going to be a long time before they're acceptable for a 'working gun'.
That said, some people are already printing things like AR lowers that are working out. Particularly the ones I've heard of with metal inserts at the stress and wear points.
Barrels? That's going to be decades before even passable ones, much longer for machines that can manage anything like that from home. Maybe not in my lifetime.
Certain parts, no problem. Even receivers, to an extent--getting along the lines of the potmetal ones. But you can't really say 'never' because people said the same thing about casting, and I could swear my SR9c looks like a machined casting.

I'm betting that, eventually, they're going to make some solid designs that can be printed. Soon? Nope. And there's more opportunity for voids and weak points. But eventually there will be some passable stuff. But they're not going to outdo demand for nicely machined stuff for decades or centuries, if just for the 'craftsmanship' aspect.

 

[Sovblocgunfan]

The printers that can do this are out of reach for the likes of us, but a 3-d printed 1911 was made some years ago that went 5,000 rounds as of last report.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_Concepts_1911_DMLS

The technology does indeed exist, but it’s not exactly common-place.

 

[JeffG]

I wonder, along with the equipment costs, what is the per-unit expense? Aside from driving gun grabbers and social disarmers nuts, what's the purpose? What I see when I see this stuff, is a technology current Liberator. Not particularly useful.

 

[Sovblocgunfan]

The purpose of it is expression of our second amendment rights.

 

[Demi-human]

Ah, yes. The AR grip handle. The most scary of all tool handles. If it looked like a plastic J - frame it wouldn't raise as many eyebrows...

The allure is that "Big Brother" doesn’t know who has a very inexpensive, marginally safe, horribly disfigured and alledged untraceable pistola.

I think we could just look for the humans with missing trigger fingers after trying their new creation.

I also think that if a wand can find a zipper, it can fine a primer cup, much less a brass case...

 

[627PCFan]

Think past plastic. New machines from the big OEM's can print metal and carbon fiber. There are some jumps to be made but they are coming.

 

[H&R Glock]

Are springs printable?
Are firing pins printable?
Is ammunition printable?
Aren't these some things, apart from the barrel/liner that would show up on xray?

 

[RedlegRick]

I don't know what kind of metals they can handle, but I do see a use for making obsolete calibers, like .25,.30,and .32 rimfire. Maybe even, tagging on another thread, caseless ammo?

 

[Deus Machina]

Are springs printable?
Are firing pins printable?
Is ammunition printable?
Aren't these some things, apart from the barrel/liner that would show up on xray?

Yes, yes, yes, and yes. To some degree, and more in the future.
Not that they're as good for now, but I've personally designed things to be printed in metal, which would work for firing pins however briefly, and seen plenty of printed spring designs.
Not great ones, but new engineering and printing methods and materials are coming in every year.
Metal-sintering printers are currently out of the average hobbyist's hands, but then again so were basic 3D printers less than ten years ago.

 

[Telekinesis]

OP, the gun you have pictured in your post was just a proof of concept project to see what it would take to 3D print a 100% polymer gun (including barrel).

Luckily our legal environment only classifies receivers as regulated parts - which I believe is where the company's main focus is. They have files for AR lowers which depending on what generation/design of file you're looking at, can perform pretty well, especially if you use metal reinforcement.

There are also a number of pistols that have a receiver that is majority polymer. Take the Glock for instance - the slide rails are separate parts which are held in place with pins and are not regulated. If you wanted to, you could print the entire regulated piece yourself and then order the other parts and have a complete functioning pistol with no regulatory interference. This is basically the concept of the polymer 80 without the at home printing.

Think about printing a gun designed to use Glock parts, but with a grip based off of a mold of your hands. That would require some coding knowledge on the part of the guy printing the gun, but that's not too much of a leap with current technology.

There are also machines that do 3D printing with metal. While they are not affordable yet for hobbyists or home use, that could change in a few years.

This decision isn't about that one pistol, it's about the free exchange of plans to make ANY firearm receiver. It's a significant win, even if there aren't a lot of pre-made files out there yet.

 

[Sovblocgunfan]

But we already have the free exchange of plans to make firearm receivers. You can go on the internet and find an AK drill and cut template online and print it on an 8.5x11 sheet of paper, glue it to some scrap sheet (I know someone who used the wall of a washing machine for his) and cut/drill an AK receiver shell. I know as I’ve done it myself. It doesn’t matter what anyone thinks about safety or quality either-that’s not what the discussion is about, and my right to build a gas pipe 12ga should not be hindered bc another thinks it won’t last 500 rounds or something.

The issue here is restrictions on 2A rights. People have unreasonable fears about unregulated guns (LOL) and want to control access and ability. This results in stupid restrictions on freedoms a la blue laws about alcohol access and consumption. The justice department was wise to settle. They’d lose this one in SCOTUS.

 

[AlexanderA]

You have to look at the intersection of 3-D printing technology with the current regulatory scheme. In the U.S., the controlled part -- the "gun" -- is the serialized receiver. In certain designs, such as the AR-15, the serialized lower receiver is subject to relatively low stresses, and could plausibly be made in a 3-D printing process. Not so with high-stress parts such as barrels and bolts. Therefore, this whole subject of discussion is dependent on the continued unregulated availability of barrels, bolts, etc. I can see the regulators (legislators) following the European example and making barrels regulated parts, in addition to receivers. In that case 3-D printing would become moot for the foreseeable future.

 

[Telekinesis]

But we already have the free exchange of plans to make firearm receivers.

Yes, except for the plans from this one company which the government has been suppressing for years.

I think what scared people wasn't just about unregulated guns, but the ease of manufacture. Normal from-scratch home build guns (i.e. starting from less than an 80% receiver) require a decent amount of knowledge and tools assuming you want something more than a zip gun. While building an AK from a flat isn't what I'd call an incredibly difficult project (though it is very cool, I've always wanted to do one) your average guy off the street can't do it due to lack of knowledge or access to tools.

What the combination of 3D printing and this company's files does is take home gun manufacturing from the realm of individuals with specific knowledge about firearms and opens it up to literally everybody with a computer and a 3D printer. That amounts to a massive increase in the number of people with the ability to make weapons.

 

[Hokie_PhD]

I wonder, along with the equipment costs, what is the per-unit expense? Aside from driving gun grabbers and social disarmers nuts, what's the purpose? What I see when I see this stuff, is a technology current Liberator. Not particularly useful.
View attachment 797129

Yes cost is the main factor. Second would be access.
By making it so that just about anyone can make a gun you’ve changed a social construct.

The reality is that this change will have all sorts of impacts that we haven’t thought about yet as the price issue drops

Think about how lawmakers have no understanding of technology nor of sociology nor of the relationship.

California has that silly micro stamping law but they don’t take into account re/hand loading. How would microstamps be read on casings used multiple times.

Likewise, I can see an issue with 3D printed guns being the next “ghost gun” for criminals. No serial numbers and no history. So they’re basically one time use. And they don’t/won’t comply with microstamping and other smart technologies.

The bottom line is technology will always move faster than law makers can regulate it. Combine that with criminals will always find a way around laws and come up with a way to commit crimes and we really should be looking at how to reduce the number of criminals not how to regulate the law abiding.

 

[Sovblocgunfan]

Yes, except for the plans from this one company which the government has been suppressing for years.

I think what scared people wasn't just about unregulated guns, but the ease of manufacture. Normal from-scratch home build guns (i.e. starting from less than an 80% receiver) require a decent amount of knowledge and tools assuming you want something more than a zip gun. While building an AK from a flat isn't what I'd call an incredibly difficult project (though it is very cool, I've always wanted to do one) your average guy off the street can't do it due to lack of knowledge or access to tools.

What the combination of 3D printing and this company's files does is take home gun manufacturing from the realm of individuals with specific knowledge about firearms and opens it up to literally everybody with a computer and a 3D printer. That amounts to a massive increase in the number of people with the ability to make weapons.

We agree here, in general. And while it doesn’t spell the end of gun control (repeal GCA68 and NFA34 to get my attn on that one) it does mean a significant leap forward in expanding our ability to KEEP ARMS.

 

[Sovblocgunfan]

Funny-this issue easily crosses over to first amendment territory. It’s both amendments wrapped up in one problem, like that chinese finger handcuff puzzle. Or maybe “symbiotic” is the word now.

At any rate, tis true-the first amendment is required to protect the second, but the second backs up the first.

 

[cc-hangfire]

I had a brief discussion yesterday with a close friend who is gun-friendly but not a gun owner about this very article. I spent most of the conversation explaining what AlexanderA said above :
“In the U.S., the controlled part -- the ‘gun’ -- is the serialized receiver.“
Or - more specifically - the serialized part. (IE: the SIG P320 & many others have a serialized internal frame)

For an AR-15 or a Glock style handgun, the ‘firearm’ is the lower receiver or grip-frame respectively. Either works OK as a high quality polymer. The current market of 80% lowers shows the interest in this aspect of building your own firearm. I’d expect this to be the initial primary use of 3D firearm printing by individuals, because as long as I can order all the other parts, all i need to build is the lower or grip-frame.

Metal 3D printing won’t be affordable for most individuals until that technology is standardized. But it will come as discussed in posts above.

And creating an all-polymer, nonmetallic firearm is a whole other discussion. It’s difficult for me to imagine a lawful need for such in a Rule-of-Law world. And in a World-without-Rule-of-Law situation, I’d rather have a reliable firearm with metal components.

 

[AlexanderA]

One aspect of this that we haven't discussed is that if the 3-D printing technology progresses to the point where all the parts of guns can be made easily at home, it would mean the death of the firearms industry. Or, if it survives, it would be 100% dependent on government contracts. This doesn't sound like a particularly good development.

 

[Sovblocgunfan]

Oh, I don’t think I’d go that far. I think you’d find gunmakers adapting and printing their own stuff. Or maybe re-inventing themselves by just selling the programming for the printers. Free market principles and such...

 

[RedlegRick]

Oh, I don’t think I’d go that far. I think you’d find gunmakers adapting and printing their own stuff. Or maybe re-inventing themselves by just selling the programming for the printers. Free market principles and such...

I can see a maker selling one time use only files for a design. It's already done with other media, shouldn't be a problem there.

 

[Deus Machina]

I don't think gun makers will fade out in my lifetime.
However much I enjoy designing and machining, I trust established manufacturers--and their customer service--more than I want to rely on something I made in my own shop.
Besides, most people just won't be able to, or want to, run a 3D printer instead. Perhaps in addition to, but not instead of.
Once the technology picks up that it even makes a dent in the market, manufacturers will be selling the plans. Either single-use or licensed, as industrial or consumer software is now.
I figure the easiest way for that would be to generate the file to include a serial number that will be printed in as part of the process, and setting it read-only.
Of course they will soon be cracked and pirated, but unless the read-only tag is removed and editing is done, the illegal user would be reprinting someone else's number--or forced to remove it and change it manually--which may run afoul of other federal laws.

 

[RedlegRick]

How about this, the designer/license holder only produces and sells the actual 'firearm' part, the serialized receiver, and the buyer is then able to 3D print the rest, except perhaps the barrel.
Whoops, posted too soon. I was thinking about that Sig-Sauer design that permitted an owner to place the receiver in different grip and slide configurations. I'll be honest in not knowing what model it was.

 

[Flechette]

The printers that can do this are out of reach for the likes of us, but a 3-d printed 1911 was made some years ago that went 5,000 rounds as of last report.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_Concepts_1911_DMLS

The technology does indeed exist, but it’s not exactly common-place.

That printed barrel, along with the rifling, looks pretty darned good.

 

[CapnMac]

One aspect of this that we haven't discussed is that if the 3-D printing technology progresses to the point where all the parts of guns can be made easily at home, it would mean the death of the firearms industry. Or, if it survives, it would be 100% dependent on government contracts. This doesn't sound like a particularly good development.

That presumption has more dimensions than that.

If the printers and feedstock are available, why buy a toaster if you can print one? Or a tv, or a car stereo? Or even a cell phone. Some would-be Aldus Huxley's have predicted a "third industrial revolution" from that case, with similar changes to society. The would-be Orwellians winge on centralized control of feedstock "Zo, Meester Yones, yust vhat are tu doink wit all dat 1055 [arching eyebrows sinisterly]?" (Now, there is an interesting discussion on whether petty property crime would exist, but that's not germane here.)

I find both of those off the mark for the simp0le reason that parts do not equal final assembly.

You can (could) 3d print many of the parts of a car. Printing them in an assembled state is rather a different beastie. None of us are going to be able to "3d print" a refrigerator. Houses, vehicles, really anything with a man-machine interface needs assembly to integrate the human-contact parts into the machine function bits.

Ok, this get tenuous with firearms, but remains very real. That AR grip shown above is the result of around five decades' worth of trial and error. Gaston Glock's frame has, what, three decades' worth of refinement in it? Reading the EM-1 story is illuminating here, as many of the bad features of what became the L85 were born there, and of engineering that had no expereince in the how & why of firearms (not merely things like "What do you mean, the magazine release ought not be where it hits LBE?" but "ER, what do you mean, 'Where is the extractor cut?").