Discussion in 'Firearms' started by OldDude49, Mar 10, 2018.
New Multi-Caliber Weapon System called KONEV Modular Rifle - The Firearm Blog
Very interesting design. He is using a lot of proven ideas from well established weapons, namely the legendary FAL gas system, combined with a rotating bolt from a Benelli/Browning R-1 and the AR series for trigger and controls. Where he does differ is the recoil system, employing a sort of Hy-Brid IWI, FAL para system, again well proven designs that should work very well! I'm going to be keeping my eyes on this one, especially with it's modularity and interchangeability, especially if offerd in a long action capable of feeding non magnum as well as magnum lengths! To me, this would be a superstar if offerd in .338 L.M with all the features available on the standards.
I' hoping he can get this up and running here in the State's, if it runs as good as it seems, I'm thinkingnits going to be serious competition to guns like Barrett and Noriean and Cobb! Should be priced below Noriean and it would really sell!
Good article about an interesting rifle. Like Stoner, he has taken a lot of excellent features and combined them into a very nice concept weapon. The proof is always in the production and debugging by thousands of users. I would like to see the concept of the mag well insert converted to the AR platform, although at least 1 of the 9 mm adaptations use a similar concept.
Civilian side it would take off a bit I imagine, but the .MIL would not buy into that system.
Pretty cool, nonetheless.
Quite interesting design. If it's produced I'd like to see if 8mm Mauser would be available! It can be done in 30/06 308 so why not 8mm?
Well, ...... after watching that rifle fire over and over again I'm going to agree with, both, Eugene Stoner's original DGI system design, and Ryan E. LeBlanc's (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute) scientific analysis of Stoner's direct gas impingement system.
I do think that the Konev rifle (It's a carbine in only the first two of its basic configurations.) would have been better off with a DGI system. Stoner could have gone with a short-stroke piston, too; but he didn't like the amount of rotational torque that a short-stroke piston would have introduced into an AR receiver; and LeBlanc, apparently, agrees with him.
To my eye the Konev rifle appears to be strongly and somewhat erratically over-gassed. I, also, noticed that the rifle failed to fire, at least, one round that had to be hand-ejected by the shooter. (I'm not quite ready to give up my DGI AR-15 just yet.)
Neither am I all that thrilled about using a folding stock on a rifle. Why? Because, over the years, I've never seen anybody's folding stock remain perfectly tight; and, if there's one thing I've learned to really dislike on a long-range firearm it's even the slightest amount of looseness in the stock.
The following research paper is very difficult to locate on the worldwide web. So, if you want a copy, I'd suggest that you download it now: https://pdfsecret.com/download/an-evaluation-of-gas-systems-for-the-ar15-m16-platform_5a323912d64ab21233919325_pdf
Thank you for the PDF file Sir...
Interesting concept. In the diagram I noticed that while the mag wells are modular the ejection ports are not. I'm curious about how they are going to be able to do both without compromising the receiver integrity since at a minimum 1/3 of the receiver diameter needs to accommodate both... unless they have figured out a way to eject 300WM brass through a 5.6x45 sized port.
Got the pdf, thanx. If I can figure out how to do it, will add as a resource on site.
Nice paper that provides a very good description and comparison of how DGI and several piston systems operate. On;y two issues:
In figure 2 the upper receiver is labeled "lower receiver". Minor, but this is a rather nice paper to have this type of error, especially as it was used as a Master's Thesis. It makes me wonder how closely the examining board read this paper and casts doubt on other content.
The conclusions were Milquetoast at best. He mathematically describes the forces, but does no analysis and then concludes based on anecdotal evidence that DGI isn't inadequate (for example what percentage of rifles malfunctioned under what conditions), but then makes no recommendation of which external piston system resolves the "reliability issue" or failing that what changes to existing external systems are required - for example how to best minimize bolt carrier tilt.
Criticisms aside I recommend this paper.
My own experience is that I don't see a ton of reliability issues with either DGI or the Adams piston system - I have no experience with other pistons. My Adams builds, short of a defective buffer tube in one, have no FTF,s jams, or other malfunction. My primary rifle of the two has over 2,000 rounds and yet to be cleaned. My DGI Ruger AR556 that I traded another rifle for has over a thousand rounds also with no issues whatsoever with minimal cleaning though I do run it wet.
Stoner was a circling genius! His system is so simple and reliable, how any one would have reason to complain is beyond me! About the only thing I don' care for is the gasing of the breach area, but it's not that bad compared to other designs that no one bitches about, G-3 any body!?!? Seriously, the AR design is almost perfect, it self regulates in a simple manor, dosnt require much maintenane forward of the breach, and the buffer is reliable once tuned, albeit a little noisey! All and all, a pretty simple design that's easy to care or and maintain, and that' what you want in a fighting rifle design! My Much beloved FAL isn't that simple, close enough, but still not as simple a design!
This new design looks to my eyes a pretty good compromise, especially in the gas system, using the Benelli designed system, gas regulation is simple where over pressures are vented at the gas block FAL style, and the bolt lock up is a faster design with less inertia and more extraction torque, really should yank those pesky stuck shells outa there!
3M, I think the ejection port size is immaterial, it looks like the .300 mag size is universal across the board, makes sence, you want the largest port to fling spend brass and it looks like the brass dosnt make contact with the receiver, so you don' have tbose issues. It also makes manufacturing a lot simpler to have one size for all. Unless they do a 5.56 size separately, ( and I see no practical reason to) it' likely able to handle that small size ammo just fine. Bolt travel would keep the port opening limited to that size ammo. Strength dosnt look to be an issue, it looks over built, and would need to be for .300 W.M!
Separate names with a comma.