3d printed gun parts

A

azselectfire

Inactive
Hey everyone, I was looking at a website called printedfirearm this morning which has a bunch of 3d printed gun parts. Does anyone here have a 3d printer and tried printing any firearm related items? Curious how hard it would actually be to use...
P1013591_preview_featured-300x225.jpg
 
There are a lot of these files on the internet, but many of them have been reported to be inaccurate. Many of the CAD files floating around are reported to not fit the intended parts at all.

I think finding accurate files and having the tools and knowledge to judge the accuracy of the printed part is probably one of the more difficult considerations before you even begin talking about long term durability of parts.
 
3D printed parts are at the same stage the first mobil analog phones were. They were a far cry from the Star Trek communicators everybody fantasized. It took decades to make them available to the public, and a lot of underlying infrastructure has to exist.

Good code is just part of it. A good printer that can handle the right powder and having the post formed processing equipment is also necessary. That's the same as clearing a bandwidth for phones, installing the towers, and having the same packet protocol to make it work.

After that, you still have to retail the phones. Then it was limited to who had towers up - today it's who sells the powder to print, the machines to print it, and the code to drive the machines.

Most of that in my metro is internet order. Nothing is on the shelf. Nada. You can't buy anything retail here, and that goes for most of the country. Only a major metro can offer the goods - same as when the tower networks only covered the major metros ( and military bases. There was a lot of DOD money in the start up.)

Right now, the cost to print a handful of 3D parts is exorbitant for the number of rounds they will suffer. Most of the guns made can't possibly endure a service life of 50,000 rounds and 20 years of rough duty, which is a standard for LEO/MIL. And the result to achieve that is yet to be seen from 3D - and the cost would be stunning. The 1911 printed up as a demo by an aerospace parts maker was made on a million dollar machine with powder costing in the thousands per pound.

At best, the plastic guns if retailed would simply be collector items. Most have yet to demonstrate being able to handle 100 rounds of ammo. Mostly less.

You can bend sheet metal, drill billet, and file parts by hand to get a reasonable facsimile of a firearm than could handle thousands of rounds on a garage workbench for under $500, and a lot of people do it. It would only take having a drill and some angle iron to make a brake. The overhead would be less than the resulting gun would sell for. And - it's entirely legal right now.

In the near future with the proposed ITAR regulations even discussing how to do that with a printer may be illegal. The .Gov is coming down on it with a vengeance and the 1st Amendment supporters are now between a rock and a hard place. Supporting adult movies could be done on principle, supporting the 2A is a lot to choke down.

The clock is ticking on how long we can even discuss it. We now have an Administration which is not only against the 2A, it's starting to compromise the 1st.
 
Just needs to shoot one round to be dangerous in the wrong pair of hands. The Liberator pistol concept updated to 21st century.
 
The Liberator pistol has a lot of history, but as a firearm it's a pretty poor weapon. It's a good example of how something has more value as a collector item than actual utility for self defense.

They were distributed as an assassin's weapon and the related consequence was that the attacker had no more shots - where the defender may still be able to respond.

If the concept needs more substance look to the popularity of derringers or the Heiser Double Tap. Lots of talk, almost no actual "combat" reports.

Rather than spend $1,000 for a printer, $$ for powder, add in the code, a laptop to run it, etc, you can buy a working metal gun that can shoot one or two cartridges for $279. Plenty run less. And they won't self destruct in less than a box of ammo.

I'm still waiting for cars that start themselves by firing the cylinders in order, no cranking with a starter. Hasn't happened yet. But mention 3D printing and the airwaves are full of hype - the future filled with Big Macs waiting at the push of a button, just like the food processors on Star Trek!

Not so much.
 
Been going to school for a CAD degree for the past 4 years and have experience with 3D printers and this I can tell you the current lower end consumer 3d printers will not print close toleranced polymer firearms components. With the consumer printers <$7k you can expect about +/- .012" and I guess if you need to go the route of printing receivers (which is generally the guys that will be denied the background check resulting from priors,DWI's and domestics) you "might" have a reasonably safe functioning firearm. There is NO way I would trust basement printed components.
 
First thing I designed for my portabee printer was a magazine loader for my Makarov. On my long term to-do list is a front sight for my ar-7 designed for a fiber insert.

As far as actual structural parts? Not at the hobbyest level for another couple of generations yet. Realistically, my printer cost about $500, took over 8 hours to set up and tune to get decent parts and would take the better part of a day to print the Defense Distributed liberator and cost a decent amount for the spool. $15 and an hour could build a better zip gun out of any hardware store.
 
I had this debate about six months back; $3k for a 3D SLA printer, or $3k for a Chinese metal lathe? I rapidly determined I would be make far more useful objects, faster, using the lathe, and would be developing skills more fundamental than I would using a software/device that would be obsolete within a year.

3D printers themselves are presently in the '90's cell phone/home PC phase, where they are available, expensive but not prohibitively so, and more a curiosity for nerds than a practical tool in the vast majority of cases. They actually do work once set up properly.

3D printed parts are stuck somewhere even more primordial than that, however. Probably more like early alloy-steel or bakelite-era plastics. There are lots of possibilities on the horizon. The suitable applications for the materials available haven't been fully scoped out, yet, nor the full capabilities of the materials or unique additive-production techniques. The vast majority of items and parts are simply aping those designed for previous manufacture methods (injection molding, sheet metal, milling). It is still very common for designs/parts which are wholly incapable of fulfilling their task to be made by 3D printing users, simply due to quirks in the process/material rather than the design or promised specs.

I personally think the future is in 3D printing that utilizes long-chain cross-linking polymer matrix and oriented super-tensile fibers to 'weave' a fiber composite stronger and more optimized than any layup. Build up your internal form, then have the machine head crawl around it like a funnel-weaver spider, layering strategically-oriented strands of fiber composite until the part is built up. Boeing sort of has this with the enormous 'dream weaver' thing they use to build the Dreamliner fuselages from pre-preg CF tape, but a much smaller and more precise device laying a bead of material would be able to handle very diverse jobs.

Also, true closed-loop operation (self-sensing tooling) and AI-generated toolpaths will continue to reduce the difficulty and tedium of getting all these automated processes up and running. Eventually, you'll be able to use your solid model to directly initiate a part's construction with very little interference or tuning required, not unlike color inkjet printers in the last ten years, or so.

TCB
 
3d printed gun parts don't interest me at this time. Just like having a computer didn't interest me until the early '80's. Before Microsoft and PC's, it took way too much work to produce uber-crap with proto-PC's. Much easier to continue using IBM Selectric typewriters for word processing.....what barnbwt said is correct. (Yes, I was a kid in the '70s who desperately wanted to type to avoid being ridiculed about my "horrible hand writing" in school, so I knew of such things at a very young age!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top