View Full Version : Controllability systems: creating the ideal?
December 12, 2002, 06:21 PM
I've been interested by the MP-40 and the STG-44 designs, as they were supposed to have a balanced bolt/timing mechanism that made them very controllable. I've also heard of the Finnish jati design that had the barrel inclined at 13 degrees (I think) which was also supposed to make them ultra-controllable.
Which of these would be more controllable, is that subjective, and would it be possible to combine the two mechanisms?
December 12, 2002, 08:41 PM
There is no special mechanism in the MP40. It is controllable because the rate of fire is slow enough for the gun to come back on target before the next round is fired. THe MP44 was a locked breach design. It was the light kicking intermediate round and the weight of the gun that made it controllable. The mp40 is 9mm which is not a big caliber in the first place. My S&W 76 is similar to an mp40 but without the beauty of the mp40. Mine is also a little faster yet at most pistol ranges I can shoot a pattern no bigger than most people shoot their Glock at the same range.
December 13, 2002, 08:39 PM
Oh as for the Jati, It feels a little awkward without a stock. The front grip/cocking grip did not impress me either. It was a design that never really went anywhere.
December 15, 2002, 02:06 AM
Forgive my ignorance, but how would installing the barrel at an incline help with control?
December 15, 2002, 03:41 AM
The theory being that the bolt moving upwards as it goes to the rear helps to counteract muzzle climb. You can tell this works by how easily Russian paratrooper colonels can hit Patrick Swayze while firing one-handed. ;) :p
December 16, 2002, 12:10 PM
No fair, Tamara.
You know that was just an example of Hollywood playing into our fantasies. I mean, who wouldn't want to see Patrick Swayze get shot up by some Commie general sporting a cool Finnish subgun?:)
December 17, 2002, 02:30 AM
Do a search for the Ultimax 100 (I think). It's an LMG form Singapore that has a ballanced recoil system. If I understand the concept, the bolt never comes to a stop on rearward travel is merely slowed to a stop before the spring fully compresses and accelerates forward again. The main advantage to this system is that you don't get the sharp slap of the bolt which tends to jolt the muzzle up. In fact, the bolt slamming home acts to nudge the muzzle down just prior to firing compensating nearly completely for the muzzle rise.
The whole idea is that you can get into a rhythm with the gun. The cycle of the action in guns like the AK-47 with massive moving parts slapping against metal multiple times is like trying to run an engine 10 degrees off on the timing. Yeah, it works but it jumps all over the place. The Ultimax and the other guns mentioned are like playing a finely tuned violin.
December 17, 2002, 05:05 PM
If you can, y'alls might want to take a look at the Gun digest book of Assault Weapons, 4th edition. They have a secion on the Stg-44 and that's where this is all comming from.
The author claims that Hugo Schmeisser stumbled upon a formula involving the timing and weight of the bolt that made it so controllable. He also claims that Ultimax inventor Jim Sullivan rediscovered Schmeisser's work when building his gun. I cannot judge as to the truth of this theory, but I do know that the Ultimax and Stg-44 are both heavy guns, so how controllable would a 15lb M16 be?
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.