jeffh
.375 Atomic
Posts: 1,749
|
Post by jeffh on Mar 10, 2024 15:10:42 GMT -5
Not really sure what to think about this one.
On the PLUS side:
The Turks can make very good firearms The price is lower than even a Rossi Looks to be based on the Winchester 92 Does not look like a hybrid, tactical-mutant experiment gone terribly, terribly wrong, although I THINK it's an option
Regular butt pad ...
On the I-just-don't-know-about-this side:
An ALUMINUM FRAME??
I know, I know, all sorts of things are made of aluminum, to include many auto-pistols, on which the steel slide runs back and forth on an aluminum frame over and over and over again...
The 92 bolt slides too, so no problem, but the locking lugs, which lock the bolt in battery against the ways in the frame... I just don't know about hammering steel locking lugs against any kind of aluminum.
Without some serious convincing by a seriously believable expert on the subject of metallurgy in firearms, I'd be waiting ten years to see how one held up after someone spent that time shooting the snot out of it. Even then, I'm not so sure...
|
|
|
|
Post by hunter01 on Mar 10, 2024 19:29:22 GMT -5
Im sure there are steel or titanium inserts where needed just like every other aluminum or polymer framed gun that im aware of.
|
|
jeffh
.375 Atomic
Posts: 1,749
|
Post by jeffh on Mar 10, 2024 19:32:25 GMT -5
Maybe...
But this action design is more than just sliding on aluminum, the aluminum would take a pounding.
I aim to find out though. Whatever I do learn, I'll post here. It's a nice-looking gun and the price is WAY more affordable than what Ruger or Smith is offering.
|
|
|
|
Post by hunter01 on Mar 10, 2024 20:19:20 GMT -5
Maybe...
But this action design is more than just sliding on aluminum, the aluminum would take a pounding.
I aim to find out though. Whatever I do learn, I'll post here. It's a nice-looking gun and the price is WAY more affordable than what Ruger or Smith is offering.
I dont believe through whatever vetting process there may be that the US would allow importation of a firearm with locking lugs bearing against nothing more than aluminum if it caused a dangerous situation. I could see Head space increasing to a dangerous level in jut a few shots and rendering the gun useless and worthless. I don't believe ANY manufacturer would take the liability of marketing such a product either. I would never choose an aluminum framed gun for any high volume work, but those im aware of were never designed for that from the get anyway. Aluminum is used to save weight or to save tooling. High quality aluminum is NOT used to save money! |
|
jeffh
.375 Atomic
Posts: 1,749
|
Post by jeffh on Mar 10, 2024 20:42:39 GMT -5
Maybe...
But this action design is more than just sliding on aluminum, the aluminum would take a pounding.
I aim to find out though. Whatever I do learn, I'll post here. It's a nice-looking gun and the price is WAY more affordable than what Ruger or Smith is offering.
I dont believe through whatever vetting process there may be that the US would allow importation of a firearm with locking lugs bearing against nothing more than aluminum if it caused a dangerous situation. I could see Head space increasing to a dangerous level in jut a few shots and rendering the gun useless and worthless. I don't believe ANY manufacturer would take the liability of marketing such a product either. I would never choose an aluminum framed gun for any high volume work, but those im aware of were never designed for that from the get anyway. Aluminum is used to save weight or to save tooling. High quality aluminum is NOT used to save money!
I seriously doubt the "US" does any form of valid or viable scrutinizing of any such thing. Any of the firearms import restrictions I know of are based on baseless "feelgood" laws made by people who have zero clue about firearms.
I never implied that aluminum was used to save money. Your comments assume a lot and relate very little of what I've said.
|
|
|
|
Post by hunter01 on Mar 10, 2024 20:48:07 GMT -5
You said, "the aluminum would take a pounding". By that statement i am led to believe you are under the impression the aluminum will be taking the brunt of the force during firing. What should i have concluded from your statement? What exactly about your knowledge of the design leads you to make such a statement? Maybe you assume much and present little?
|
|
|
|
Post by Encore64 on Mar 10, 2024 20:54:13 GMT -5
Well this all sounds familiar...
Jeff, look forward to your thoughts and review. I sure like that 5.5 lbs weight. How easily would that carry?
The first gun I bought after turning legal in 1982 was an Ithaca 37 20ga. Built with an aircraft aluminum receiver. To this day, I've never found a shotgun I like better.
I spent my entire career putting aluminum thru more than anyone can imagine...
|
|
jeffh
.375 Atomic
Posts: 1,749
|
Post by jeffh on Mar 10, 2024 21:27:49 GMT -5
Certainly, aluminum, in its many alloyed forms has been a boon to firearms and many other things. I have a few myself which benefit from the weight savings - and sometimes (not exclusively) cost savings and they are fine. The action of the 92 Winchester does not seem compatible without some kind of accommodation, either by variation from the original design or some other means, thus my curiosity - I am intrigued. That many two-cycle engine blocks and cylinders are made of aluminum is testament to its usefulness and wide-ranging applications, but I have yet to see an aluminum anvil, so I am curious to see how they handled the locking lug/way interface.
If they simply mill the ways into the aluminum, I'd be leery. If they go to the trouble of embedding inserts of some sort, it seems cost and complication might outweigh the minor weight savings, so in my original post, I left out the hypotheses and conjecture, because that could go anywhere and end up nowhere.
Suffice it to say that I am definitely intrigued with the idea of an aluminum 92 Winchester receiver and rather than do all the R&D engineering in my head, I will wait to see how they did this - as I felt I had communicated earlier.
Not aluminum bashing either.
|
|
aciera
.375 Atomic
Posts: 2,208
|
Post by aciera on Mar 10, 2024 21:47:27 GMT -5
My Merkel K1 has an aluminum frame. And they put 300 Win Mag in it.
Different type of action I know. But…….
|
|
jeffh
.375 Atomic
Posts: 1,749
|
Post by jeffh on Mar 10, 2024 22:31:39 GMT -5
My Merkel K1 has an aluminum frame. And they put 300 Win Mag in it. Different type of action I know. But……. I'm glad you came along just now!
"Different type of action I know. But……."
NO BUTS, BROTHER! That's exactly the point - it LOOKS like a Winchester (Browning) 92, hence my curiosity.
It's not a Merkel, not a Model 37, not an auto-pistol, Ruger Bearcat or M16. It LOOKS like a Winchester 92. Maybe it is. Maybe it isn't, but that's a very popular design for such chamberings and is currently being copied by Miroku, Rossi and some others.
Imagine your little CZ 527 with an aluminum receiver and the steel bolt lugs bearing against that. If someone showed you a new bolt-action, said the receiver was made of aluminum and it LOOKED like a clone of the 98 Mauser, you'd be curious I bet. You'd want to know just how they did that. The 92 is similar in that the bolt locking lugs bear against the receiver. My Mossberg 500 has an aluminum receiver - but the bolt locking lug does not bear against the aluminum, it bears against a steel "ear" hanging off the breech-end of the barrel.
Everything I've seen on it so far is marketing blather which tells you pretty much nothing. I want to know what's inside this action. Is it really a 92, or is it something else inside? No telling just yet, but I sort of like it and want to know what's inside.
|
|
aciera
.375 Atomic
Posts: 2,208
|
Post by aciera on Mar 10, 2024 22:53:23 GMT -5
My Merkel K1 has an aluminum frame. And they put 300 Win Mag in it. Different type of action I know. But……. I'm glad you came along just now!
"Different type of action I know. But……." NO BUTS, BROTHER! That's exactly the point - it LOOKS like a Winchester (Browning) 92, hence my curiosity.
It's not a Merkel, not a Model 37, not an auto-pistol, Ruger Bearcat or M16. It LOOKS like a Winchester 92. Maybe it is. Maybe it isn't, but that's a very popular design for such chamberings and is currently being copied by Miroku, Rossi and some others.
Imagine your little CZ 527 with an aluminum receiver and the steel bolt lugs bearing against that. If someone showed you a new bolt-action, said the receiver was made of aluminum and it LOOKED like a clone of the 98 Mauser, you'd be curious I bet. You'd want to know just how they did that. The 92 is similar in that the bolt locking lugs bear against the receiver. My Mossberg 500 has an aluminum receiver - but the bolt locking lug does not bear against the aluminum, it bears against a steel "ear" hanging off the breech-end of the barrel.
Everything I've seen on it so far is marketing blather which tells you pretty much nothing. I want to know what's inside this action. Is it really a 92, or is it something else inside? No telling just yet, but I sort of like it and want to know what's inside. My point. The type of action means everything!!!!! Until I see a lot more………… |
|
|
|
Post by squawberryman on Mar 11, 2024 5:37:48 GMT -5
Aren't the fuzzy pictures of a bearded "cowboy" enough?
|
|
|
|
Post by tullymars on Mar 11, 2024 9:09:38 GMT -5
It’s less ugly than a Henry.
|
|
jeffh
.375 Atomic
Posts: 1,749
|
Post by jeffh on Mar 11, 2024 9:20:58 GMT -5
Aren't the fuzzy pictures of a bearded "cowboy" enough?
 Yeah, that said zip about the gun but a whole lot regarding how savvy they think their customers are as consumers. |
|
|
|
Post by z1r on Mar 11, 2024 11:37:26 GMT -5
I would imagine that if it uses an aluminum receiver it probably employs a barrel extension and rotating bolt head or similar arrangement. That way the aluminum is just a carrier and all pressure related activity is handled by good old steel.
|
|
Yeah, that said zip about the gun but a whole lot regarding how savvy they think their customers are as consumers.