HOME | DD
Nolo84 — Talon Marksman Assault Rifle
Published: 2008-05-13 19:45:10 +0000 UTC; Views: 1698; Favourites: 18; Downloads: 32
Redirect to original
Description
This is THE project.The Talon is by far the most ambitious undertaking I've attempted yet. I haven't uploaded anything recently because this is all I've been doing. I started the Talon by blueprinting the internals to scale (5px=1mm), which is something I've never done before. Then I developed an outline. Then I found out that outline wouldn't print, because the scale was too large. So I tripled the thickness of the lines, while keeping the scale the same. That's right, each of those lines is three pixels thick. Then I redesigned the blueprint, and redid the line drawing, culminating in the most detailed, most comprehensive product I've ever produced. The Talon is chambered in 6.5 Diamondback, and is intended as a light marksman rifle, capable of as good or better accuracy as the M110 SASS and equal or better range. The weapon is also capable of withstanding great environmental punishment, by using selective tolerances, tight in critical areas, but loose in others. Extensive sand grooves ensure that even in the cruddiest environments, this rifle will still work. The weapon uses a direct-impingement system, which I am confident will be quite reliable after doing studies on the French MAS 49 rifle, a DI weapon that earned laurels for reliability in jungle environments.
The weapon, as shown, has a 20-round box magazine, but also can use 30- or 40-round magazines. The controls are COMPLETELY ambidextrous, with charging handles in identical locations on either side, dual selectors and dual magazine releases. The weapon as shown has a forward sight M1913 rail and a rear sight M1913 rail, and is intended to be used mostly with optics and BUIS. The rails are also to exact scale, something I've also never done. The weapon field strips essentially like an M16, but requires the removal of the charging handles to remove the bolt carrier. The stocks shown are basic, I hope to get around to more detailed and advanced stocks, such as Quad Rail Interface Systems and a collapsible/foldable/adjustable buttstock.
Related content
Comments: 42
Why are people shouting FAL all over the place? The receiver design is actually a lot closer to the AR-15, though there are key differences (notably, the presence of a much better type of charging handle and a different looking ejection port.)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Right, I started from a slightly scaled down AR-10 and stylized a bit off the G3, mostly in receiver contour. I guess the silhouette just came out somewhat FAL-like.
Basically nothing in this rifle is taken from the FAL.
If you look a bit further into my gallery, you can see several much improved versions.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So, are you an enthusiast, or have you had some real experience with a gunsmith before?
Your knowledge is pretty extensive.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I am an enthusiast at the moment, but I will be going to gunsmithing school in about 6 months.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That's pretty heavy. I've never met a future gunsmith this prepared before.
I am studying the art of illustration (probably gonna go into technical illustration), but first, it's off to the Navy. I'm gonna be an aircraft mechanic, probably.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I intend to be a gun designer at some point. The industry is horribly stagnant.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, you've got FN cranking out some odd shit, though.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I wouldn't say that. The SCAR is the pinnacle of convention, the F2000 is only a bit racy, and the P90 is a plastic M1 Carbine in .221 Johnson.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I meant the Pistols (though the F2000 looks really radical at first glance, though).
Five seveN and Forty Nine are... well... the Five seveN is ugly as hell. And they use odd rounds.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The 40-9 is a .40 S&W and 9mm polymer frame, Browning-recoil, polymer framed handgun. Hardly revolutionary.
The Five-seveN, yes, it shoots a round very different from 9mm and .40 and .45, but consider that it's not so different from .30 Carbine or 7.62x25mm Tokarev, cartridges that are very old.
My point is, nobody's doing anything radical, and when people talk like something's radical, it usually isn't.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
They usually don't see the need to change an old formula to make way for improvement. At least, this was especially the case when trying to even get rifled cannons in national arsenals in the early nineteenth century.
Of course, we see that cannonry has changed in ways independent from small arms, but it's because some of the problems are more apparent.
Metal Storm's stuff is pretty neat, but I'm not sure how you'd reload a square 32-barrel machine gun without some sort of device and a lot of pre-assembled rounds.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Metal Storm seems fairly promising for grenade launchers. Their low-velocity, squat rounds would be quite compatible with the system, I should think.
But, in any case, the stagnation of the firearms industry seems rather unacceptable.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, the best thing I can see happening for small arms in the next few years is improvement in reliability, but not radical new operation.
Of course, there is one thing that catches my interest... a two-man portable autocannon that was in development a while ago.
It uses grenades and air-burst rounds.
Too bad it was cancelled in 2007.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
See, I can imagine a few improvements in small arms design. I am, in fact, working on a couple of different variations of 6th gen assault rifle at the moment. I believe that combat load weight can be decreased, rounds per man increased, effective range increased, controllability increased, weapon weight decreased, magazine capacity increased, reliability increased, and electronic and optics integration increased, and I have the rifles in mind to accomplish this.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
And the very mind to accomplish it with.
Hopefully your work will be fruitful. I will be reading the magazines. I'll be checking small-arms newsletters, too.
Most importantly, I'll be painstakingly browsing your gallery to pick up a little on this.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You've got an awful lot of faith in me for someone who just started talking to me a couple days ago.
I keep a lot of the promising stuff off dA, for obvious reasons. Here's an outdated picture of the rifle I am currently working on:
[link]
The layout of the rifle has changed somewhat, and oddly resembles an illustration by another deviant, Bonez18B:
[link]
While I changed the mag location to be essentially similar to Bonez's rifle, the development has been entirely independent. There's only 360 degrees to put the magazine, of course, and I ended up choosing something similar to him for sight height reasons.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, you obviously know what you're doing and how you're going to do it, so why not? That's what I always say.
Your design's slight cosmetic similarity to Bonez's seems purely coincidental, considering how every thing besides the general shape id different.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Like I said, the top mounted mag has been changed to a position similar to Bonez's rifle since that drawing was done.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I can imagine that the topography of the rifle is still pretty different, even if it's similar when you drastically simplify it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Since Bonez hasn't released any sort of innards on the beast, it's impossible to tell.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Aesthetically, it's extremely similar to the FN FAL...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Which is funny considering I started from the AR-15/10
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I see something that's promising^^ But why the direct impingement? According to the dust tests the US military conducted with the M4, 416, SCAR L and M8 the M4 jams 5x as much as the other 3 rifles (all piston driven).
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
A). The M16/M4 all have much tighter tolerances than those weapons.
B.) We in the gun community all strongly suggest those tests were staged, one way or another.
C.) They could have been using old carbines.
D.) The MAS-49 uses DI and is one of the most reliable rifles in the world, matching or exceeding the M1 Garand.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You know, from what I've read sofar (also about the MAS-49) is that a direct impingement weapon is fine as long as it's not as complex as the AR15 or something. The MAS-49 has only 6 moving parts, and therefore works just fine with direct impingement. A piston system on there would in fact only make it less reliable, since there are more moving parts to get dirty. Though on complex modern day rifles with a lot of moving parts, keeping yout that bit of carbon fouling and dirt getting in though the gas tube makes a big difference.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Which is one of the reasons this weapon is as simple as possible. I think it probably has only about 5-7 moving parts as well.
Trigger
Sear
Hammer
Bolt
Rotating Bolt Head
Firing Pin
Yeah... I think that's it. The AR-15 is unreliable because it was made with tolerances much more appropriate for a match weapon, not a battle rifle. That and its magazines suck. My weapon has very tight tolerances in critical locations and loose tolerances everywhere else. The bolt is shaped to increase the amount on surface area that is in contact with the receiver, and to have some areas with very tight tolerances, and others with loose tolerances. This gives sand, dirt, grit, shit a place to go.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hmm, I see. Well, good luck with further designing^^
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fal? is that you, looks sweet but wheres the charging handle?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Nope, not an FAL.
It's got some of it in it, though.
You can see the vertical rectangles by the ejection port and the cocking slot. Those are the charging handles.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
is it a modern day weopon lol did u make it for this time frame
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, I make all of my weapons for this time frame, at least for the most part. I pretty much never design out of 50 years either way, anyway, and almost never more than about 20 years into the future.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
cool it reminds me of a fal
lol if i drew it (which would be ugly lol) i would add plastic rather than wood and add a buttload of piccitany lol
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
It is plastic. OD plastic. And people put more Pics on things than they need.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
ooooooo k thought it was wood ( broken laptop screen with red tint :/ ) lol but having a gun loaded wiht attachments is pretty kick ass u gotta admit
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well, not really. The only things you need are a laser, sights and flashlight, and that can all be done with two rails: upper and lower.
The side shit is all superfluous.
But a quad railed version is coming, if you read the post.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
i read most of it lol (adhd and posts dont mix)
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
how you do these kinds of things I will never know
👍: 0 ⏩: 1