hi Jow Forums, my name is Chris, I have invented "gear delayed blowback" (patent pending). The advantage of using gears over a lever or rollers or any other type of delaying method is that the weight of the delaying mechanism can be "divided" and some weight sent forward to counteract the rearwards moving components and greatly reduce felt recoil.
I have submitted a provisional patent application to the United States Patent and Trademark Office and I have about 9 months to improve my drawings (very amateur) and specifications before submitting a non-provisional patent application. I will be posting my drawings and a large portion of my specification in this thread.
Let me know what you think. If you are interested in licensing you can email me at > connecticut constitution @ gmail . com
brief description of drawings: The drawings (figures 1-4) depict a configuration of this invention wherein 2 axles and 2 sets of gears are mounted ahead of the bolt and symmetrically along the axis of the barrel, and there is one counterweight. In this configuration the bolt, bolt carrier, and counterweight all have 2 racks in order to act upon both sets of gears. In this configuration the counterweight moves forward at the same speed and distance (1:1 ratio) as the bolt carrier moves backwards as their racks impinge on the same gear. In this configuration the bolt and bolt carrier have 2 symmetrical guide rods with a spring surrounding each and the counterweight has 2 symmetrical guide rods with a spring surrounding each. In this configuration there are 2 gears on each axle one small gear upon which the bolt acts and one large gear upon which the bolt carrier and counterweight acts, the small gears are located on the outside of the large gears on both sides so that they are not obscured by the large gear in the drawing. In this configuration the counterweight is located to have its mass “in-line” with the barrel axis on both sides of the barrel and it is connected at the top, the bolt and bolt carrier are also depicted to be “in-line” in the same fashion. The object(s) that guide rods are mounted to are not shown but they are attached to the gun, or a supporting structure in some manner. The end of the barrel is not shown. The pencil shaded areas (18) are not physical objects but they depict the areas in which cartridge feeding and/or ejection may take place in this particular configuration. The hammer (13), the hammer fulcrum (14) the triggering mechanism (15) and the firing pin housing which extends from the back of the bolt and through the bolt carrier while the bolt is closed (16) are included to add context, and are one possible means of firing a cartridge.
Figure 1: a side view of the invention depicting the bolt closed position of the system and the hammer (13) at the moment at which it strikes the firing pin located within the firing pin housing (16)
Figure 2: an overhead (top) view of the invention depicting the bolt closed position of the system and the hammer (13) at the moment at which it strikes the firing pin located within the firing pin housing (16)
Figure 3: a side view of the invention depicting the bolt open position of the system
Figure 4: an overhead (top) view of the invention depicting the bolt open position of the system
drawing guide:
1) bolt and attached racks 2) bolt carrier and attached racks 3) axle 4) small gear 5) large gear 6) chamber 7) counterweight and attached racks 8) barrel 9) counterweight guide rod 10) counterweight guide rod spring 11) bolt and bolt carrier guide rod 12) bolt and bolt carrier guide rod spring 13) hammer 14) hammer fulcrum 15) trigger mechanism 16) firing pin housing 17) impinging device and arrester 18) possible spaces for cartridge feeding or ejection (pencil shaded areas)
Detailed Description of the Invention: A gun action mechanism with an unlocked bolt. When a cartridge is fired the backwards movement of the cartridge pushes the bolt back. The bolt in its initial rearward travel impinges on a small gear(s) or gear ratio(s) with its attached rack(s) spinning the gear(s). This in turn spins a larger gear(s) on the same axle(s). The large gear(s) spins at the same rpm as the small gear(s) but at a greater speed at its diameter. This larger gear(s) moves a bolt carrier and its rack(s) backwards at a greater speed than the speed of the bolt. Either the small gear or the large gear or any additional gear(s) may act upon and move a counterweight(s) and its rack(s) forward at any desired speed/distance ratio in relation to the rearward moving components as the axle(s) turns. Once the initial bolt movement spins the gears and propels the bolt carrier backwards and the counterweight(s) forward (and optimally the bullet has left the barrel and chamber pressure has dropped), the bolt has moved backwards to the point where its rack(s) has completed its travel along the small gear which it has turned and the bolt rack(s) are no longer in contact with the small gear(s). At this point when the bolt is no longer acting on the small gear(s) and has initially been delayed, the faster moving bolt carrier, which is also moving rearwards in the same direction as the bolt impinges on the bolt and begins to draw it back at the same speed as the bolt carrier.
When the bolt carrier begins to move the bolt rearward, an arrester(s) is engaged which then holds the bolt and bolt carrier at a specified distance apart from each other for the remainder of rearward travel. The bolt and bolt carrier then travel backwards and the counterweight(s) travel forward. The bolt and bolt carrier travel backwards far enough to allow for extraction of the spent cartridge and to cock the hammer or striker or whatever mechanism is used for igniting the primer. At the completion of their travels, the bolt carrier and/or counterweight are then propelled back towards their original (bolt closed) positions by the force of springs that were compressed during their travel to open position or the rebound force of a buffer or any other methods. On the return journey the bolt strips another cartridge if one is available and continues moving towards the chamber. As they approach rest (bolt closed), the bolt rack(s) reengage the small gear(s) and the arresters which held the bolt carrier and bolt at the same speed and distance disengage allowing the bolt and bolt carriers to travel at different speeds and different distances as they are now impinging on different sized gears on the same axle(s). The bolt chambers the new cartridge at the speed which the small gear(s) allows and the bolt carrier comes in behind it to its original position at the speed at which the larger gear(s) allow. The counterweight(s) also returns to rest depending on the speed of which gear(s) it is impinging.
Ian Morgan
Thus a cartridge has been fired, ejected, another one loaded, and the trigger mechanism has been cocked, the gun is now again ready to fire. The weight of the counterweight(s) can be adjusted in order to mitigate felt recoil as needed. Weights may also be held at certain positions on the bolt carrier or counterweight guide rods in order to increase the effective mass of either at any point in travel and then separate from the main moving parts of the apparatus when not needed.
Carter Gonzalez
I love attempts at innovation, congrats on coming up with an idea.
My first thought is how the gun will be completely disabled by a gear tooth shearing off. Would there not be extreme force at both ends of the recoil action?
Xavier Myers
I mean, if a lug sheers off a more standard setup you'll have a bad day. The gear in OP's design would need to be incredibly strong and therefore expensive (think properly hardened tool steel or even tungsten), but it's not untenable.
Adam Hall
thanks and yes but the ak107 does something similar so I figured it may be feasible
ALSO: ideally the gears and axles would be mounted on the interior of the receiver independent of the barrel/chamber I only drew it that way (pictured) because it was easy
Luis Jones
Right, but I feel traditional lugs are stronger simply due to geometry. The teeth being thin will create a challenge that modern metallurgy may overcome easily.
Anthony Jones
(tactical blender/food processor attachment not pictured)
Sebastian Murphy
The Russian take on the idea doesn't seem as robust as what op is describing, but by all accounts it works just fine
they wanted me to mail them the info via paper mail and I was like nah, but now that I havent gotten many responses I may have to resort to such outdated methods
Robert Gomez
>just like lever-delayed, only stupid!
Wyatt Nelson
a gear is a circular level learn abt simple machines pleb
Nathaniel Butler
But why would you use this over roller delayed? the gears are not only difficult to machine, and also dissasemble for the end user, but also will be a place of weakness in the system.
Ethan Martinez
The AK107's geared area is not acting like a locking lug though; the mechanical stresses on it will be negligible. In this design though, your gear teeth will have to be large and very strong to withstand the rearward forces during firing. I know your drawing is not to scale, but itty bitty teeth the size of airsoft gears will not cut it. I'd recommend you try to calculate exactly how much force will be exerted on the first teeth. Something like this (caveat: I just googled for 2 seconds) for example: engineersedge.com/gears/gear-tooth-strength.htm
Dylan Sullivan
>recoil counterbalance >2 things hitting opposite ends of the receiver at same time = sorter travel time + higher cyclic rate
why couldn't you break apart the top half and bottom half like AR disassembly?
but yeah it may be a weak point
great point, I think the small edge of a FAMAS lever is pretty small tho
>why couldn't you break apart the top half and bottom half like AR disassembly? you could, but again i can just imagine the hell of trying to line up the gears correctly.
everytime someone has tried to make a recoil counterbalance it has failed, not that it doesnt work to a slight degree, however the amount of pay off you get compared to the machine time and complexity of the system is not worth it. Modern rifles arent chambered in a particularly stout cartridge either.
yeah you would have to lock bolt carrier back and the counterweight forward to disassemble which is an additional layer of complexity.
> every time I have only heard of the ak107 are there other systems? and yeah true it isnt a big improvement for intermediate cartridges maybe for DMRs tho?
Colton White
hudson H9 being another example.
Caleb Gomez
how so?
Easton Nguyen
If this gets implemented into any AK/AR format will you be giving Jow Forums discounts.
Nathaniel Roberts
It's a novel idea, which is cool. Sadly it probably won't work reliably because gear teeth are very weak under any kind of impact or shock loading.
It has other disadvantages too: -highly suspectible to dirt/grit/fouling getting into the mechanism -gears are expensive to produce, especially with any degree of precision.
Using gears is obvious to any engineer, as is their downsides.
Refer to the book Practical Gear Design by Dudley
Brayden Carter
as for the reliability I think having a higher cyclic rate than any other delayed blowback system will lend itself well to "cutting through" fouling
you got me on the gear precision tho I did not know about that
Jayden Torres
yes
Dylan Bennett
Do you have a working prototype?
Gavin Morris
I'd thought of a much more conventional gear delayed blowback, but besides the obvious tooth shearing issue, I just don't think it's a novel idea because it's really just lever-delayed blowback with a gear instead of a lever, and a gear is really just a special case of lever.
The novelty here is that the system uses the same axis to split the bcg in half for synchronous operation. Probably it's new and patentable, can't say I've ever heard of something similar. The Russian one, by design, doesn't need to be nearly as robust because the forces on it are balanced. The counterweight is propelled forward by it's own gas piston and returned by it's own spring. The gears are just for timing.
Cameron Rogers
>The large gear(s) spins at the same rpm as the small gear(s) but at a greater speed at its diameter Rpm is speed, gear reduction is in ratios, 2:1 3:1 etc, the bigger gear is turning at a slower rpm but gaining torque. Is the small gear turning the big gear or are they both being spun at the same rpm indepentendly in which case the big gear would cover more distance
Wyatt Barnes
>as for the reliability I think having a higher cyclic rate than any other delayed blowback system will lend itself well to "cutting through" fouling
You're dumber than I thought, user. Higher cyclic rate has two problems: -increased wear on an already weak mechanism -increased shock loading on a mechanism that's already very ill suited to that.
Patents haven't required prototypes for decades.
Brandon Carter
The gears don't interact with each other. They're on a common shaft rotating together, and interact with racks on the bolt, bolt carrier, and counterweight.
Isaac Powell
This looks very complicated and my pea brain cannot fathom it but it looks promising yes. Good luck op
with drawings that shitty do you really think I would have a working prototype lmao?
hopefully 2 thicc sets of gears on each side will be able to handle it, as I said higher in the thread the short end of the FAMAS lever handles similar force and it doesnt look impractically beefy but idk a lot of the feedback in this thread says itll be tough to make it strong
in the initial rearward travel of the bolt the speed of the delaying mechanism wont be any faster than a traditional delaying mechanism, the high cyclic rate comes front he ability of it to bounce hard against the receiver which is discouraged in contemporary designs and being able to travel back to close faster than if it was just closed by spring pressure alone. yes the bounce will be tougher on the receiver but if the 2 sides bounce simultaneously it shouldnt be too hard on the gears and it definitely wont be any more of a shock than the system experiences after it is fired.
Jacob Harris
yeah perhaps
Colton Scott
That's what I thought. See above. It's a good quality indicator.
Jackson Fisher
thats a good idea the bolt is not delayed tho
Aiden Turner
>A single tooth breaks >Gun not only opens too soon and vents gas pressure brass fragments in your face, but is jammed and rendered permanently inoperable Don't quit your day job retard.
Hudson Ross
add a weighted flywheel to the gear to increase the cycle time via inertia
Adrian Diaz
guns are weapons of war, the worse my design is the better it is for the world, no civilian needs a working gun
Hunter Torres
Does he really think that subjecting a gear tooth to 50k psi I'd a good idea? I mean any machine that comes even half the operating speed of a firearm uses belts instead of gears
Jace Smith
if the gear is assisted in turning it may not delay bolt opening enough + a turning disc acts like a gyroscope and may hinder "handle-ability"
Jackson Morris
...
James Gutierrez
Understand that the bolt thrust of intermediate cartridges like 5.56x45 and 7.62x39 is about 7000 pounds. (Double that for full-power rifle cartridges.) Assuming the bolt mass is small compared to the bolt carrier and counterweight, the interface between the bolt's rack and the small gear is going to see basically 100% of that force. That's a tall order in the space you're indicating, and I can't see any good reason to do it that way.
A better choice for handling such heavy loads over short distance is a lever, like in the Kiraly system. Keep the large gear for counterbalancing, if you like, but use a lever to drive any one of the bolt carrier, gear, or counterweight from the bolt. (This approach has the enormous disadvantage of not being patentable, because it's an obvious application of two existing inventions to the same gun. But it does have the slight benefit that it will actually work.)
Isaac Murphy
a lever is a circular gear why would the short end of a delaying lever be more robust than a small delaying gear with a tooth that is the same shape?
Lucas Bailey
a gear is a circular lever** imagine if you will the small delaying gear has one tooth the size of the small end of a FAMAS lever
false, no leverage between multiple sized gears delaying blowback
Adam Jenkins
Where are the grease fittings?
Sebastian Martin
yes 2800-3000 RPM supposedly.
Ayden Sullivan
>in the initial rearward travel of the bolt the speed of the delaying mechanism wont be any faster than a traditional delaying mechanism No, but you still have the problem of very high forces being applied to very weak components (gear teeth).
>being able to travel back to close faster and that is where wear will occur.
How do you plan on keeping powder residue, dirt and debris out of these gear teeth?
How will you lubricate the gears without the lubricant attracting dirt and grit?
How will you manufacture this firearm at a reasonable price when precision gears are among the most costly machine parts by far. HK is not stupid. Rollers and levers are easy and cheap to make, even precisely. Gears are the exact opposite.
Juan Watson
>>thicc gears how are you going to make them thick without the inertia of the gears fucking up your cyclic rate?
Also, you do realize that the size of a gear's tooth (pitch) is far more important for strengh than the width is, right?
...there's a reason I referred you to a college textbook on gear design earlier. You don't even grasp the basics.
Bentley Jones
Without impingement the force on those teeth will be incredible. And though you are excited about a high cycle 'cutting through' fouling, that's not a great idea. Also the high cycle will make incredible heat. Since the gears are integral to the system the gun would not sustain high firing volume and barrel change would be useless (if not impossible due to design.) No need to go into the effects of heat on metal tempering.
Anthony Reyes
You could get away with some very strong springs by adding a mechanism to decouple the counterweight from its rack when force is applied to whatever charging device is used and doubling the total spring tension under operation with half the cocking resistance. You could use this to increase cartridge size, or decrease the necessary travel distance for the bolt.
Juan Gomez
a gear is a circular lever and a FAMAS lever isnt that beefy just imagine that in a circle. the small gear only needs one big ass tooth the same size as the small end of a FAMAS lever and the big gear needs teeth slightly less big as the big end of a FAMAS lever because since the bolt carrier weight is split in 2 the large gear teeth are only doing half the work that a FAMAS long gear would be doing. gear teeth can be designed in ways that push carbon out of the way and inrange mud tests proove that the best fight against dirt is to just keep it out of the gun in the first place. as for the barrel changes see and as for big ass gears more inertia = more delay = less reliance on leverage. I dont know precisely the angles of gears and shit, but if a FAMAS can do it with a little metal rectangle lever im sure its possible with something more robust by design (circle (gear) as opposed to line(lever)). as for gear precision im not sure good point as I said before
Luke Morgan
I like my short recoil ball bearing lock better.
Chase Barnes
gear teeth will run in from "whiplash" of changing directions. a pulley under tension would be a better design.
what state are you in? I have CAD experience and we can fuck together a prototype.
Grayson Fisher
sounds very cool
yeah judging from the feedback the teeth seem to be the weakest part, what do you mean by "run in" tho? Im in CT (sadly)
Nolan Murphy
>sounds very cool Literally imagine something that looks like a Ruger MkII but in 9mm, and the whole top part recoils about 4mm.
Nolan Cruz
Don't discount a company because of things like this. Hi-Point thrived on the AWB, so upper management could easily have a bias towards older ways of doing things.
Jeremiah Harris
>dont know precisely the angles of gears and shit
Good like with your patent application.
Isaiah Wilson
im going to need it lol
Jaxon Wright
interesting point, but yeah I definitely am not going to discount them, it was unwise to even move them down my list of people to contact in the first place (because of the paper mail)
Christian Cook
I guess he's more of a big picture guy. The nicest possible way of saying he's a complete moron.
Ayden Torres
I'm in TN. Backlash is unavoidable with gears, no matter house precisely machined.
I think counterbalance actions are the future of small arms. Taming subguns is a good start. Making a 9x25 dillon / 10mm sub gun that has less recoil than a 9mm would be a huge leap forward.
Cameron Brown
i asked the USPTO and you dont need precise measurements/ratios/shapes just a proof of concept for a patent, even if I wasnt a laymen and I could figure out the precise geometry on my own it would still be subject to change with R&D so no point in my (a laymen) even attempting to specify said things. im no genius, I stumbled onto an idea so simple and straightforward that I figured it just may be robust enough to function reliably, its also based on simple AF and proven principles (leverage) I never claimed to be the next stoner or anything
Jose Fisher
damn i will look into that. I had the same idea desu that would be very cool
Jack Sanders
>gear is a circular lever
You keep saying that. By the logic that anything with a radius imparts force then sure. >mud tests proove that the best fight against dirt is to just keep it out of the gun in the first place.
Yeah no shit.
>gear teeth can be designed in ways that push carbon out of the way
Le maintenance-free. That's what should be a patent.
Kayden Powell
The average patent takes $11,000 in lawyer and process free and takes seven years to complete.
