Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 23 of 23
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Where the deer and antelope roam
    Posts
    1,321
    Quote Originally Posted by jesmith View Post
    It's not really that hard to shorten the buffer tube IF you strictly stick with a pistol cartridge. The AR was designed around a rifle length cartridge and has a lot of bulk that is simply not needed. Look at any short slide 9mm pistol (Glock 26 for example). How much reciprocating length do you really need?
    My uneducated guess is that while it looks somewhat like an AR platform. (the modular design concept is a good one) It shares no common internal parts.
    You are correct, however, with the design of the AR in Pistol caliber the tip of a HP bullet in the mag is about 1/2" from the chamber. Its early, but I think the PCC bolt needs about 1/2 the travel of the rifle caliber bolt. I use the Taccom 3G buffer/spring system. Another nice thing with the 9mm lowers is that they are always at the correct angle and height.
    A bedtime story:

    I was down at the Mosque going through a few magazines.
    I was having a good time.
    Then, my rifle jammed.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Where the deer and antelope roam
    Posts
    1,321
    Quote Originally Posted by LawDog View Post
    Itís all about the buffer tube (receiver extension). That design feature prevents the AR from being useable while the stock is folded. Shortening that part is both significant and difficult.
    It is also the part that allows for braces on AR pistols.

    I would like to go shorter and the Angstad pistol brace version might be the way forward.
    IMG_20190225_205436318.jpg
    A bedtime story:

    I was down at the Mosque going through a few magazines.
    I was having a good time.
    Then, my rifle jammed.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    UNited States
    Posts
    134
    Would the "Deadfoot Arms Folder" be a viable solution, and a solution for all AR15/PDW patterns?
    Would the folder place Angstadt Arms SCW-9 equally with Shield Arms SA-9?
    Are there other differentiating factors?


    Quote Originally Posted by RobertGuy View Post
    For us non-full auto civilians, why is the Angstadt Arms SCW-9 more interesting than their UDP-9?
    And there's also their UDP-9iP integrally suppressed pistol that's quite interesting too.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dorkface View Post
    Its more the stock, or rather the brace they are developing, that is interesting.
    Quote Originally Posted by LawDog View Post
    Itís all about the buffer tube (receiver extension). That design feature prevents the AR from being useable while the stock is folded. Shortening that part is both significant and difficult.

    Iíve got a CMMG dedicated 22LR upper that incorporates the entire bolt movement within the upper receiver. It makes me wonder if that system could be adapted to 9mm. When all bolt movement is in the upper, you could do away with the buffer tube and just attach a stock/brace. It would also generate the need for a new folding stock (sans buffer tube) for the AR (which could be used immediately on the CMMG .22 rifles).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •