another way to get legal full auto in a ruger 10/22

gunslinger555 · September 4, 2006, 12:05 PM

check this out guys this is awsome
http://www.firefaster.com/index.html

shaggy · September 4, 2006, 01:55 PM

I got to try one of these last summer at Bulletfest before they went into production and I have to say they work quite well. I just dumped a few mags through it, and didn't test for accuracy, but because the action is a little loose in the stock I'd expect significantly less accuracy than a true fixed action 10-22 (either semi or full auto). However, they're still lots of fun and I've been planing on getting one.

Esquire M Busterbury · September 4, 2006, 02:03 PM

Holy crap, a thousand dollars for a stock?

shaggy · September 4, 2006, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Holy crap, a thousand dollars for a stock?

Considering the fact that when I got to try an early model, I was told the introductory price was going to be around $1500, I'm not terribly shocked. Still, even at $1000 for a stock, it does work, almost as well as a $10,000. registered 10-22.

gunslinger555 · September 4, 2006, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Holy crap, a thousand dollars for a stock?

which would you much rather have
a 10,000 dollor, registered 10/22 or 1,000 dollor stock that will make your 10/22 simulate full-auto.

Trapp · September 4, 2006, 06:12 PM

Maybe it's just me, but I think I see this technology taking off BIG TIME. It seems it would be relatively easy to make yourself.

I started thinking of ways to do it. I think the best would be a roller (ball type) bearing around the bbl. The side of the bearing facing the receiver would need springs (or even a spring that fits around the bbl) and a stopping block integrated as part of the stock.

The bolt on the bottom could be done like a mini drawer slide.

Oh if I had good enough hands to make this work!!!!

Trapp · September 4, 2006, 06:35 PM

Ok, Even better.....

A linear bearing slide system! The only thing stopping me now is.......

Actually having them!!!

I think I might be on to something.

P.S. If anyone figures this out and patents this before I do, I want 10%!!!!

gunslinger555 · September 4, 2006, 06:41 PM

Ohh then I whant %10 of your %10 for letting you know about it.

JK

tBlake08 · September 5, 2006, 10:44 AM

Seems that optics would be useless on this design. If you could make a more optics friendly design, say, where the optics were mounted stationary onto the stock around the reciever, you could make $$$.

Jeepmark2005 · September 5, 2006, 11:14 AM

That's pretty cool but a Grand does seem a little high for what it is. A plastic stock with a spring. Wait a while. The price will come down. Wonder if this will prompt the BATF to change some definitions? Ug.

silicon wolverine · September 5, 2006, 12:33 PM

The price is all related to the linear bearings they use. The stock is a stock. The bearings are what make it uber expensive. I think you could refine this design on a heavier recoiling weapon without them.

SW

tBlake08 · September 5, 2006, 12:47 PM

Quote:

The price is all related to the linear bearings they use. The stock is a stock. The bearings are what make it uber expensive. I think you could refine this design on a heavier recoiling weapon without them.

SW

So this idea would be ideal on, say, a pistol caliber carbine such as a .45 or .40?

kozak6 · September 5, 2006, 11:03 PM

Well, just keep in mind that they sell the (reportedly flimsy and fragile) stock alone, WITHOUT the Accelerator unit, for $500-$600.

Doubletaptap · September 12, 2006, 06:28 PM

Looks to me like the barrel and trigger assembly move back and forth like the slide on a .45 when it's fired.
So when all the mass comes forward, the trigger hits your finger,firing the rifle again.
So what's the difference between that and a semi that you have to pull the trigger each time to fire?
It's not full auto and 650 rounds a min. isn't that fast.
In my opinion it's a gimmick to make the producers rich.
Actually it's easier to pull the trigger on a normal semi-auto, than to have the whole barrel and all sliding back and forth.Just think of all the parts to wear and need expensive replacing.
And it's just a .22.
I think it's a total rip off and I'd like to hear from anyone that's fired one.

shaggy · September 12, 2006, 06:53 PM

Doubletaptap -

I've shot one - it works quite well and the cyclic rate is good. It is far easier to dump rounds downrange than a standard 10-22, or even one with a very light trigger. Its not a true full auto, nor will it dump rounds at the 1800+ rpm of an AM180/MGV-176, but it seemed to me to run a good bit faster than an Uzi (which average about 600rpm).

The whole barreled receiver and trigger assembly do recoil back and forth in the stock. The stock and trigger guard are essentially a chassis for the gun. As you pull back on the trigger and fire it, the whole trigger and receiver assembly recoils back. If your trigger finger remains in the same position, it will automaticallly fire again as the trigger assembly moves back to its original position. Its very similar to bumpfiring, except much easier as the stock can be held firmly while the receiver recoils within the stock itself.

deadin · September 12, 2006, 07:42 PM

Quote:

If your trigger finger remains in the same position

Does the trigger recoil out of the trigger guard (or into a recess of some sort)? In other words, when the triggergroup is in full recoil, is it "out of reach" of the trigger finger? Then, when everything comes back into battery, the trigger runs up against the finger and is tripped again?
If not, I would think it would be distracting if not difficult to hold your finger "just so" in order to get the whole lash-up to work.

Dean

shaggy · September 13, 2006, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Does the trigger recoil out of the trigger guard (or into a recess of some sort)? In other words, when the triggergroup is in full recoil, is it "out of reach" of the trigger finger? Then, when everything comes back into battery, the trigger runs up against the finger and is tripped again?

Thats how it works; the whole trigger asembly just recoils backwards a short distance so its just slightly out of reach. As it then moves forward, the trigger hits up against your trigger finger and consequently fires another round. Its not really distracting or difficult. In the few mags that I tried, I had one or maybe two stoppages - and I can't definitively say it was due to operator error (It could have easily been a bad mag, round, or just needed some cleaning. I just didn't have enough trigger time to figure out what went wrong, but I know it worked just about as well as any Norrell 10-22 I've shot for spraying lead downrange.)

deadin · September 13, 2006, 08:59 AM

If the trigger recoils "out of reach", I don't see how the stoppages could be attributed to "operater error". (If you can't touch it, how could you affect it?

) I would imagine magazine problems.

Dean

MisterPX · September 13, 2006, 12:47 PM

Having shot one, I can say it really is a neat way to simulate FA fire. It is just a bumpfire stock, nothing new there, just the first to patent and market one. Lot's of fun, but does seem a little pricey with that crappy stock they sell. If they sold it in the laminated wood beta type stock they were using, I'd feel better laying down the cash. It's not going to be for everyone, especially those that frown on bumpfiring. It's a nice toy, for less than 10% of a Norrel.

reils49 · September 14, 2006, 01:22 PM

$1000 is alot of money. Too bad there not legal out here on the left coast (a.k.a. California).

MisterPX · September 15, 2006, 02:22 PM

Aaah, that's right, CA and MN, the two states that forbid accelerated firing.

gunslinger555 · September 15, 2006, 08:24 PM

So is it illegal to bump fire a gun in Kali? Well it probably wouldn't be worth it with only 10 rounds.

September 4, 2006, 12:05 PM	#1
gunslinger555 Senior Member Join Date: March 5, 2006 Location: Lima, ohio Posts: 580	another way to get legal full auto in a ruger 10/22 check this out guys this is awsome http://www.firefaster.com/index.html __________________ (")_(") OMG!!! I think I shot bunny in the face!

September 4, 2006, 06:12 PM	#6
Trapp Senior Member Join Date: December 5, 2004 Location: KTN Posts: 1,221	Maybe it's just me, but I think I see this technology taking off BIG TIME. It seems it would be relatively easy to make yourself. I started thinking of ways to do it. I think the best would be a roller (ball type) bearing around the bbl. The side of the bearing facing the receiver would need springs (or even a spring that fits around the bbl) and a stopping block integrated as part of the stock. The bolt on the bottom could be done like a mini drawer slide. Oh if I had good enough hands to make this work!!!! __________________ HDR Ban!? It's a shame all of my guns sank with my boat last week... Time to catch up.....like mayonnaise

September 4, 2006, 06:35 PM	#7
Trapp Senior Member Join Date: December 5, 2004 Location: KTN Posts: 1,221	Ok, Even better..... A linear bearing slide system! The only thing stopping me now is....... Actually having them!!! I think I might be on to something. P.S. If anyone figures this out and patents this before I do, I want 10%!!!! __________________ HDR Ban!? It's a shame all of my guns sank with my boat last week... Time to catch up.....like mayonnaise

September 4, 2006, 06:41 PM	#8
gunslinger555 Senior Member Join Date: March 5, 2006 Location: Lima, ohio Posts: 580	Ohh then I whant %10 of your %10 for letting you know about it. JK __________________ (")_(") OMG!!! I think I shot bunny in the face!

September 5, 2006, 10:44 AM	#9
tBlake08 Senior Member Join Date: March 18, 2006 Location: West/Middle TN Posts: 178	Seems that optics would be useless on this design. If you could make a more optics friendly design, say, where the optics were mounted stationary onto the stock around the reciever, you could make $$$. __________________ I've got a firm policy on gun control. If there's a gun around, I want to be the one controlling it. -Clint Eastwood

September 4, 2006, 01:55 PM	#2
shaggy Senior Member Join Date: October 9, 2004 Posts: 1,519	I got to try one of these last summer at Bulletfest before they went into production and I have to say they work quite well. I just dumped a few mags through it, and didn't test for accuracy, but because the action is a little loose in the stock I'd expect significantly less accuracy than a true fixed action 10-22 (either semi or full auto). However, they're still lots of fun and I've been planing on getting one.

September 4, 2006, 02:03 PM	#3
Esquire M Busterbury Junior member Join Date: July 29, 2006 Posts: 445	Holy crap, a thousand dollars for a stock?

September 5, 2006, 11:14 AM	#10
Jeepmark2005 Senior Member Join Date: May 29, 2006 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 171	That's pretty cool but a Grand does seem a little high for what it is. A plastic stock with a spring. Wait a while. The price will come down. Wonder if this will prompt the BATF to change some definitions? Ug. __________________ Ed Brown Special Forces .45 - Glock 22 .40 - Bushmaster Modular AR15 5.56 - Benelli M1 Super90 - Ruger 10/22 - Ruger 22/45

September 5, 2006, 12:33 PM	#11
silicon wolverine Senior Member Join Date: April 28, 2006 Location: South dakota Posts: 674	The price is all related to the linear bearings they use. The stock is a stock. The bearings are what make it uber expensive. I think you could refine this design on a heavier recoiling weapon without them. SW

September 5, 2006, 11:03 PM	#13
kozak6 Senior Member Join Date: June 16, 2005 Location: AZ Posts: 3,113	Well, just keep in mind that they sell the (reportedly flimsy and fragile) stock alone, WITHOUT the Accelerator unit, for $500-$600. Last edited by kozak6; September 5, 2006 at 11:03 PM. Reason: fixed tags

September 12, 2006, 06:28 PM	#14
Doubletaptap Senior Member Join Date: July 9, 2006 Location: Around north Houston Posts: 287	Whattttt??? Looks to me like the barrel and trigger assembly move back and forth like the slide on a .45 when it's fired. So when all the mass comes forward, the trigger hits your finger,firing the rifle again. So what's the difference between that and a semi that you have to pull the trigger each time to fire? It's not full auto and 650 rounds a min. isn't that fast. In my opinion it's a gimmick to make the producers rich. Actually it's easier to pull the trigger on a normal semi-auto, than to have the whole barrel and all sliding back and forth.Just think of all the parts to wear and need expensive replacing. And it's just a .22. I think it's a total rip off and I'd like to hear from anyone that's fired one. __________________ Don't believe the hype!!!

September 12, 2006, 06:53 PM	#15
shaggy Senior Member Join Date: October 9, 2004 Posts: 1,519	Doubletaptap - I've shot one - it works quite well and the cyclic rate is good. It is far easier to dump rounds downrange than a standard 10-22, or even one with a very light trigger. Its not a true full auto, nor will it dump rounds at the 1800+ rpm of an AM180/MGV-176, but it seemed to me to run a good bit faster than an Uzi (which average about 600rpm). The whole barreled receiver and trigger assembly do recoil back and forth in the stock. The stock and trigger guard are essentially a chassis for the gun. As you pull back on the trigger and fire it, the whole trigger and receiver assembly recoils back. If your trigger finger remains in the same position, it will automaticallly fire again as the trigger assembly moves back to its original position. Its very similar to bumpfiring, except much easier as the stock can be held firmly while the receiver recoils within the stock itself.

September 13, 2006, 08:59 AM	#18
deadin Junior member Join Date: September 6, 2005 Location: Ocean Shores, WA Posts: 1,052	If the trigger recoils "out of reach", I don't see how the stoppages could be attributed to "operater error". (If you can't touch it, how could you affect it? ) I would imagine magazine problems. Dean

September 13, 2006, 12:47 PM	#19
MisterPX Senior Member Join Date: April 25, 2006 Location: Amerika's Doyleland Posts: 809	Having shot one, I can say it really is a neat way to simulate FA fire. It is just a bumpfire stock, nothing new there, just the first to patent and market one. Lot's of fun, but does seem a little pricey with that crappy stock they sell. If they sold it in the laminated wood beta type stock they were using, I'd feel better laying down the cash. It's not going to be for everyone, especially those that frown on bumpfiring. It's a nice toy, for less than 10% of a Norrel.

September 14, 2006, 01:22 PM	#20
reils49 Member Join Date: September 13, 2006 Posts: 89	$1000 is alot of money. Too bad there not legal out here on the left coast (a.k.a. California).

September 15, 2006, 02:22 PM	#21
MisterPX Senior Member Join Date: April 25, 2006 Location: Amerika's Doyleland Posts: 809	Aaah, that's right, CA and MN, the two states that forbid accelerated firing.

September 15, 2006, 08:24 PM	#22
gunslinger555 Senior Member Join Date: March 5, 2006 Location: Lima, ohio Posts: 580	So is it illegal to bump fire a gun in Kali? Well it probably wouldn't be worth it with only 10 rounds. __________________ (")_(") OMG!!! I think I shot bunny in the face!