3d printed 300 blackout lower test firing

3d printed 300 blackout lower test firing

www.bitchute.com...



This is a test firing video clip of a AR-pattern rifle chambered in 300 Blackout and was 3D printed and test-fired and everything looks pretty good. As most of you know I'm sure the lower receiver is considered by the BATFE as the firearm so this was strictly made at home on a 3D printer producing the part of the gun that is considered the firearm as far as the federal government is concerned. It is entirely legal to do this you can create your own firearms you cannot sell them unless you have an FFL but for yourself for your own personal use you're within the law to produce these weapon.

originally posted by: machineintelligence
It is entirely legal to do this you can create your own firearms you cannot sell them unless you have an FFL but for yourself for your own personal use you're within the law to produce these weapon

You could still potentially be prosecuted under the Undetectable Firearms Act unless you add a piece of metal to the printed part.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

The lower receiver on quite a few Firearms are now made out of composites so I don't understand your point. Without a barrel and without bullets in a magazine and many other metal Parts it will not fire this is strictly the part of the gun that is stamped with a number which says that it was manufactured by a Firearms manufacturer under us law

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

yOu cOuLd bE pOtEnTiAlLy pRosEcuTeD



buzz killington

a reply to: machineintelligence

The genie is definitely out of the bottle. I havent decided how I feel about 3d printed firearms...just bein "old" I guess.

But I love .300 blackout, and guns in general. Interesting story, its hard to believe how far this has come.

a reply to: BlueJacket

There is considerable pushback from gun control advocates on this. The reason for my linking to the Bitchute archive is because youtube and facebook are strangling this information on their platforms.

originally posted by: machineintelligence
a reply to: BlueJacket

There is considerable pushback from gun control advocates on this. The reason for my linking to the Bitchute archive is because youtube and facebook are strangling this information on their platforms.

That is the ugly other end of this.

The censorship is outrageous.

These new technical innovations are inevitable. People need to know what is going on, and evaluate it, to be able to talk about it.

I am not a gun enthusiast. I am, however cognizant of, and a staunch supporter of, the 2nd Amendment.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: machineintelligence
It is entirely legal to do this you can create your own firearms you cannot sell them unless you have an FFL but for yourself for your own personal use you're within the law to produce these weapon

You could still potentially be prosecuted under the Undetectable Firearms Act unless you add a piece of metal to the printed part.

To assemble an AR platform all of the lower internal are steel as well as the barrel. Many other parts are aluminum. The thing to remember is do not drill the third hole for the auto sear. That will get you in trouble.

300 is a fairly low power round so this is less impressive than a 223 or 6.5 as far as durability both if which would use the same receiver, then again he's using cheap plastic instead of aluminum or more durable metals that can also be printed. To the best of my knowledge you can make 1 rifle receiver at home but it's only a matter of time before all of the other parts could be made now that they are into titanium and inconel.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

It is the all plastic other than a rubber band zip guns that need the metal added.

The lower without the metal goodies in place is still technically a firearm, but it is in an inoperative state at that point. They will still hang you on that full auto sear as mentioned.

In Kansas you have to have a serial number. with out one it is considered an altered serial number. You want one anyway so that you can identify it if it gets stolen. A serial number can be anything you want. SN/myfungun1 .

a reply to: circuitsports

The 300 Blackout I think is close to the 7.62 x39 used in the AK pattern rifles. I suppose it has more stopping power than the 5.56mm and has a low velocity for sub-sonic suppressed purposes. The 6.5, of course, is on par with the 308 round as far as external ballistics. The nitch for the 300 Blackout is suppressed CQB use. It is also less material penetrating in an urban situation than 5.56mm.

a reply to: machineintelligence

You've actually got your comments almost completely backwards.

But before u get to that I'd like to very clearly state that there is no such thing as stopping power in the first place, but even if there were modern 5.56 ammo would still have more for a very wide variety of reasons.

Also, 7.62x39 and likely 300 blackout too actually have better base barrier penetration than 5.56 rather than the reverse. This is why 7.62/300 blk are actually preferred by some nation's for cqb and urban combat is specifically their more innate "barrier blind nature's". For those with the money and technology to develop/afford barrier blind 5.56 this is not much of an issue because their 5.56 is equal or better to the heavier slower rounds wrt barrier blind performance by quite a bit.

There's also some who go to subsonic 300 or x39 specifically for suppressed use that still allows you to equal or better standard ak performance to at or a bit beyond 300 meters simply by switching mags to ones loaded with supersonic ammo. This is however an implicitly acknowledged and pretty specialist in nature compromise though.

The reason for this being is that an akm in 7.62x39 with standard 16.25" barrel or the great majority of 300 blk guns with barrels usually substantially less than 16.25" in length give up a literal 66% in range to an m855a1 or mk318 mod 1 loaded 14.5" barrel m4 or m4a1 which can be used to hit man sized targets out to 500 meters quite easily compared to scoring hits with a 300 blk or 7.62x39 gun firing at man sized targets at 300 meters (their max effective range).

Depending on your training budgets, average skill level of your people, and multiple other things including terrain and opfor characteristics this may or may not actually be a massive issue.

Finally, which exact 6.5 round are you saying is equivalent to 7.62x51 exactly? There are a great many 6.5 rounds which range from vastly inferior to massive superiority over 7.62x51!

I'd hazard a guess that at least one or two of your 6.5 rounds you're thinking of as as good are in fact just severely ocerhyped by mainly severely undereducated enthusiasts.

Even the "superior" 6.5's will actually require development to fully exploit their ballistic superiority while still meeting requirements for specialist ammunition such as tracer and others that a military chambering will require.

What's even more frustrating is that in general militaries want or even need these specialist rounds to ballistically match the trajectories of their gp loadings which often forces suboptimal compromises in the GP projectiles design and performance. Many if not most of the 6.5 wonder rounds people tout will promptly become shockingly less impressive the instant the GP round and the tracer variant must be trajectory matched.

TL;DR making military ammo is at least an order of magnitude harder than marketing guys and bad historians will cop to it being.