NFOA MEMBERS FORUM
Handguns, Rifles & Shotguns => Handguns => Topic started by: shooter on January 20, 2015, 08:46:38 PM
-
a friend found this, I have no idea who would fire a gun this small , and it is made in .308. I expect some fool to buy onem give it to his girlfriend to fire, and post the video to u tube.
http://www.facebook.com/438428992978984/photos/a.438433249645225.1073741826.438428992978984/438433189645231/?type=1&theater (http://www.facebook.com/438428992978984/photos/a.438433249645225.1073741826.438428992978984/438433189645231/?type=1&theater)
-
Hmmm... first they say it's chambered in 5.56, then they say it's .308, and the gun is stamped .223.
Either way, it might have just a bit of muzzle flash... :o
-
Hmmm... first they say it's chambered in 5.56, then they say it's .308, and the gun is stamped .223.
I figured they make 2 different pistols
-
Actually, if you think about it, with virtually no barrel, there will be very little pressure, minimal recoil.....
Still nothing more than a gimmick
-
Hmmm... first they say it's chambered in 5.56, then they say it's .308, and the gun is stamped .223.
Either way, it might have just a bit of muzzle flash... :o
I had to reread it a few times myself because of missing commas and poor structure. I cleared it up below.
"Heizer Defense is releasing alongside their Pocket AR, a single shot pistol that is chambered in 5.56, a single shot pistol chambered in .308.[/u]"
That's some bad sentence structuring done going there... :)
As for firing it, I'll pass.
-
Here's a video showing a .410 shotshell being shot in this Little Pocket Wonder:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQaI-pB_Sy0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQaI-pB_Sy0)
All the viewer comments seem to be pretty consistent: ??What??
sfg
-
That's putting a LOT of hope on your first, and more than likely only, shot!
It better be a contact shot...
-
We've already established that I'm the idiot who will shoot anything once. :D
So someone should buy one and I'll write up a range report. I won't even send you my hospital bill. Promise.
-
Although I am sure there is a specific use case for single shot defense weapons, I would think they need to be smaller and more concealable, and this this just strikes me as very gimmicky.
GSD, have fun. let me know when you go and I will be there to record the whole thing for posterity. :)
-
GSD, i will film it.
-
And at a low price of only 499.00, cough..
-
I would shoot it. Wouldn't buy it, but I'd shoot it.
Anyone else get the feeling that we're reaching the pinnacle of firearms development, and manufacturers are running out of ideas? That would explain stuff like this. And pretty much anything designed by Taurus.
-
And pretty much anything designed by Taurus.
Aha!
Then you must have already seen the new Taurus Curve.............
http://www.taurususa.com/whats-new-the-curve.cfm (http://www.taurususa.com/whats-new-the-curve.cfm)
sfg
-
Anyone else get the feeling that we're reaching the pinnacle of firearms development, and manufacturers are running out of ideas? That would explain stuff like this. And pretty much anything designed by Taurus.
Some of the new marketing idiots who sell based on gimmicks and other nonsense are finally getting hired by firearms manufacturers.
-
Anyone else get the feeling that we're reaching the pinnacle of firearms development, and manufacturers are running out of ideas? That would explain stuff like this. And pretty much anything designed by Taurus.
There has not been a significant development in firearms for well over a hundred years.
Knowing that, wrap your head around this: The Flintlock was state of the art for nearly two HUNDRED years.
At 45 years of age, I likely will not be around for the next evolutionary step in the firearms world......sobering
-
Hand held lasers anyone?
Care to guess on when they would be available and how soon afterwards the gov will disallow public ownership?
-
There has not been a significant development in firearms for well over a hundred years.
Hm. Polymers? Lasers? Red Dots? (Though I'd agree that lasers and red dot optics aren't technically "firearms" developments. The use of polymer really is, though.)
At 45 years of age, I likely will not be around for the next evolutionary step in the firearms world......sobering
It seems unlikely to me that I would NOT be around for the next step, considering how technology is advancing, and the current fact that we haven't seen any significant advance in some time.
-
Hand held lasers anyone?
Care to guess on when they would be available and how soon afterwards the gov will disallow public ownership?
We may already be there. The laws on the importation of certain classes of lasers changed recently. There are several companies that have them for sale on line, and are no longer available to ship to the US. I dont know if the laws on the possession of these types of lasers has changed or not. Unfortunately I lost all of my lasers in a freak boating accident.
http://www.laserglow.com/GSS (http://www.laserglow.com/GSS)
http://www.wickedlasers.com/arctic (http://www.wickedlasers.com/arctic)
- Shawn
-
Hm. Polymers? Lasers? Red Dots? (Though I'd agree that lasers and red dot optics aren't technically "firearms" developments. The use of polymer really is, though.)
It seems unlikely to me that I would NOT be around for the next step, considering how technology is advancing, and the current fact that we haven't seen any significant advance in some time.
Every single poly gun on the market uses a firing system developed in the late 1890's..................so other than the materials, what exactly is the technological advancement??
I don't consider different materials to do the same job as any real advancement, besides, poly was first used in, the what 30"s?? ( I believe Bakalite is a type of polymer, I could be wrong about that however... )
-
We may already be there. The laws on the importation of certain classes of lasers changed recently. There are several companies that have them for sale on line, and are no longer available to ship to the US. I dont know if the laws on the possession of these types of lasers has changed or not. Unfortunately I lost all of my lasers in a freak boating accident.
http://www.laserglow.com/GSS (http://www.laserglow.com/GSS)
http://www.wickedlasers.com/arctic (http://www.wickedlasers.com/arctic)
- Shawn
Indeed!
Industrial lasers are already available. 600W Nd:YAG pulsed lasers powered by a 12V battery could be very effective.
-
I would shoot it. Wouldn't buy it, but I'd shoot it.
Anyone else get the feeling that we're reaching the pinnacle of firearms development, and manufacturers are running out of ideas? That would explain stuff like this. And pretty much anything designed by Taurus.
Certainly appears that way to me. Much the same could be said of cars, really. Internal combustion engine with 4 wheels. All the other stuff is just incremental refinement.
Sad/disgusting thing about the state of firearms is the NFA & GCA regs hand-cuff so much development and availability for the general public.
-
Every single poly gun on the market uses a firing system developed in the late 1890's..................so other than the materials, what exactly is the technological advancement??
I don't consider different materials to do the same job as any real advancement, besides, poly was first used in, the what 30"s?? ( I believe Bakalite is a type of polymer, I could be wrong about that however... )
So, if you are saying that you see no difference between polymers created in the 1930s and the vast range of polymers available now (with widely varying properties), and that you see no difference in the firearms made then out of certain materials, compared to the firearms made now (with vastly different capabilities, weights, accuracy levels, tolerance levels, and reliability) then yeah, we don't really have anything to discuss.
I'll note: I personally rather think that there is a technological difference between a mechanical calculator as first created and a present-day calculator. Your viewpoint seems to see no difference as they both use the same mathematical process to achieve the same end.
I disagree.
If, on the other hand, you mean "completely different way of creating a weapon that fires projectiles over a distance" then okay, yeah, we haven't seen that in----oh, ever. After all, we've been using gas pressure to drive projectiles pretty much from the beginning of "firearms" and it wouldn't really be a firearm unless we are using combustion gases to drive projectiles.
If you don't mean that, but instead mean the action parts, then yes, there have been changes in those unless, of course, you are saying that Glocks and 1911s have similar actions? ---and if you are saying they do, then again, there really isn't anything to discuss.
I'm curious as to what you would consider a "significant difference" in firearms technology? How much difference does there have to be? You say that materials don't make the difference, action parts don't make the difference...so what exactly would?
Short of actually getting caseless ammo--(is that different enough? The gun's materials aren't different and the actions wouldn't have to be different...) ....seriously, I'm not sure what you would consider a sufficient "technological advancement."
-
Well, could be the reason for no innovative breakthroughs in firearms development is that firearms purchasers are so commitedly conservative, they just won't buy the New Stuff.
How would you like to be inventor David Dardick and go to all the trouble to develop this Little Gem of a pistol and then have it sit rusting on the shelves of Cabelas and Guns Unlimited?
http://www.guns.com/2012/09/12/most-unusual-handguns/ (http://www.guns.com/2012/09/12/most-unusual-handguns/)
It didn't shoot cartridges..... It shot trounds. Zounds!!!
We need USPSA and IDPA classifications for this Little Beauty. Who's gonna invent something that you bring to a match, RO looks at it, calls over the Range Master, both look at it again, look at each other, look at you, shake their heads, and then stick you in OPEN classification with no appeal?
Just Sayin'..............
sfg
[BTW: Anybody got a Chiappa Rhino??]
-
Glocks and 1911's both use the same short recoil system patented in the 1890's.
There will not be a significant advancement until there is something to replace smokeless gunpowder, which was invented in the 1870's(??), which was the driving force behind the LAST great leap forward in firearms technology.
There certainly have been advancements in manufacturing technology, with new materials, such as polymer, and the use of Scandium, and Titanium, along with computer aided developments, again to manufacturing technology.
When you boil it all down to its very basic core, a "modern" firearm is no more than a pressure vessel open on one end, using a firing pin to strike a primer which explodes causing smokeless powder to burn quickly enough to create enough pressure to push a bullet out the end of the barrel. And its has been that was since the invention of smokeless powder.
There have been advancements in directed energy weapons, there has been testing of using electricity to drive the projectile, and there is always the ongoing work with lasers. As much work as has been done in those fields, in my opinion, they are still a long ways away from anything that will replace the firearm as we know it.