DeLane Development Group Rimfire Ventures

[RAVAGE88]

MB, I just wanted to mention that the L3i Stinger magazine has a round shaving problem in my Vudoo. It happens intermittently, and is present no matter how I adjust the height of the magazine. The way I discovered it was that I was getting random fliers I wasn’t getting with the poly mags. If you can design yours with this in mind as well, it would be greatly appreciated.

Yessir, I'm aware. When they, admittedly, copied my mag, there were some features left out that controls the departure angle on the way to the chamber. Also, many are under the impression there's a feed ramp in the front top of the magazine. There isn't, as the bullet would/will touch such a feature when it shouldn't touch anything enroute to the chamber.

MB

 

[RAVAGE88]

@RAVAGE88 great idea placing the mag blocker as far rear as possible.
I considered this but didn’t know if pressure on the DBM would have any influence on accuracy.

One other thing to consider, and likely this is accomplished by the 3 different lengths of mag blockers you’ll offer.
Lots folks are using 3d printed mag extensions which are wider all around and will interfere with mag blocker unless given enough space. I thought there was something mentioned a few posts back that your blocker will interface via ARCA. Assuming that’s the case, the 1.5” will allow for clearance of the aforementioned.

Good stuff. Love the concept!

View attachment 8726298View attachment 8726299

Yo, Dude, the Hoz & Shield +3 fits inside the Barricade Stop with room to spare.

MB

 

[Shootin25]

Yo, Dude, the Hoz & Shield +3 fits inside the Barricade Stop with room to spare.

MB
View attachment 8729059

Perfection Mike !

 

[RAVAGE88]

Perfection Mike !

MB

 

[Csafisher]

Any thoughts about having an adjustable follower?

 

[RAVAGE88]

Any thoughts about having an adjustable follower?

Adjustable in what way?

MB

 

[ma smith]

Any thoughts about having an adjustable follower?

Its a constant battle to fool proof a design (both in production + field use/operation) vs maintain flexibility in the same.

Personally, I'm a fan of less moving parts, but I also do like the geometry to be fundamentally correct.

 

[Shootin25]

For gits and shiggles…

Another trinket I get asked about often.. If you know, you know… if you don’t you will once you interface with it.
Understand not everyone shoots this way, but those who do have liked it.

It can make use of the slot in the trigger guard assuming the slot comes rear enough for adjustment. In hindsight, I should’ve keyed the stud to the slot.

Weird I know…

 

[carbonbased]

For gits and shiggles…

Another trinket I get asked about often.. If you know, you know… if you don’t you will once you interface with it.
Understand not everyone shoots this way, but those who do have liked it.

It can make use of the slot in the trigger guard assuming the slot comes rear enough for adjustment. In hindsight, I should’ve keyed the stud to the slot.

Weird I know…
View attachment 8729274View attachment 8729275

Hmmm interesting…

 

[RAVAGE88]

Its a constant battle to fool proof a design (both in production + field use/operation) vs maintain flexibility in the same.

Personally, I'm a fan of less moving parts, but I also do like the geometry to be fundamentally correct.

I’ll post overlays of numerous followers atop my original follower from 2010 that show the exact same departure angle. The aftermarket samples are marketed as “enhanced.”

All this follower hoopla started when someone at VGW pressed a follower to a belt sander by hand because someone said Eley didn’t feed and then declared it worked better.

All nonsense.

MB

 

[RAVAGE88]

Chicken dinner for the first to tell me how many followers are in this overlay; the basis of which is my original follower from 2010.

There's one that isn't in the overlay because the departure angle isn't the same and it's the one that I get reports on of shaving lead "when adjusted properly." I'm not in any way substantiating those claims, as I've not experienced it for myself, but the point is, the reports I hear of what has worked best are in the overlay above.

So why have there been feed/cycle issues? I covered this in a prior post about an extreme departure from foundational information. The belt-sander-scandal in St. George was a kneejerk reaction to a claim that wasn't properly vetted, and it's part of what blossomed into at least four rabbit holes leading to things that don't need to be adjustable.

MB

 

[JFricke]

Looks like 5. No chicken required

 

[texasmotor]

I’m continuing to execute on the creation and delivery of the Comprehensive Parts Kits for:

• Gen 1-Right and Left
• Gen 1.2-Right and Left
• Gen 2-Right and Left (includes Magnums)
• Gen 3-Right and Left (Three60 Repeater, V22S Single Shot)

Through the arduous process of standing this up as quickly as possible, I’ve been asked what’s in the kit, and to date, my quick answer has been, “anything that isn’t the receiver, bolt body and bolt nose.”

That answer at the time was designed to save me a little time, but it’s now time to post up exactly what’s in each kit. This will also give everyone some clear insight into what an enormously heavy lift this is, and it's happening in parallel to Receiver Wrenches, Range Test Fixtures, DBMs and associated accessories, Magazines and new Rimfire Bolt Action Development....and, it’s just me.

So, the parts kit contains:

1. Firing Pin
2. Cocking Piece
3(a) Cocking Piece Cross Pin (Gen 1)
3(b) CP Retainer Set Screw (x2) (Gen 1.2/2/3)
4. Firing Pin Spring Kit-All Gens (15-20, 22 lbf)
5. Extractor
6. Pusher
7. E/P Spring Kit
8. E/P Plunger Pin (x2)
9a) Bolt Shroud-Gen 1
9b) Bolt Shroud Gen 1.2
9c) Bolt Shroud Gen 2/3
10. Bolt Nose Retaining Pin (Gen 1/1.2) (x2)
11a) Ejector, Gen 1/1.2, RH
11b) Ejector, Gen 1/1.2, LH
11c) Ejector, Gen 2/3, RH
11d) Ejector, Gen 2/3, LH
12. Ejector Screw (all Gens)
13a) Side Bolt Release, Gen 1/1.2
13b) Side Bolt Release, Gen 2, RH
13c) Side Bolt Release, Gen 2, LH
13d) Side Bolt Release, Gen 3, Rev 0, RH
13e) Side Bolt Release, Gen 3, Rev 0, LH
13f) Side Bolt Release, Gen 3, Rev 1
14a) Side Bolt Release Spring, Gen 1/1.2
14b) Side Bolt Release Spring, Gen 2
14c) Side Bolt Release Spring, Gen 3
15a) Side Bolt Release Threaded Pin, Gen 1/1.2
15b) Side Bolt Release Threaded Pin, Gen 2
15c) Side Bolt Release Threaded Pin, Gen 3
16. Trigger Pins, all Gens
17. Action Bolts, all Gens
18a) Picatinny Rails (to be available at a later date)
18b) Picatinny Rail Dowel Pin (x2) (to be available at a later date)
18c) Picatinny Rail Screws, Front (to be available at a later date)
18d) Picatinny Rail Screws, Rear (to be available at a later date)

There are parts landing today that starts the building of physical inventory, and the pace is finally starting to quicken for what it means to pick, pack, and ship. Again, this is not a small undertaking, and I appreciate everyone’s patience.

Alongside what it has meant to dig through a ton of data, track revisions that occurred after I departed Vudoo, pay off past due invoices that Vudoo owed to a key vendor, source the materials to appropriately package the parts, banking, merchant services, and so forth, I’m pleased with how well and, in reality, how fast this is coming together.

And bless her heart, my Wife, on the other hand, has been incredibly supportive as I’ve taken over a considerable portion of the house to manage all this.

As is always the case, please reach out if there are questions, etc.

MB

Any updates on the parts kits?
Keep up the good work!

 

[RAVAGE88]

Any updates on the parts kits?
Keep up the good work!

Parts are still churning at two vendors. I dumped a lot of parts on them at once, so they're digging through the pile.

Thanks, Dude.

MB

 

[Csafisher]

Adjustable in what way?

MB

Feed angle.

Which would be very minimal. However I’ve noticed a couple mags I had tended to push the round high. They would stick on the edge of the chamber. Seemed to be a spring problem but have a different follower would fix that?

 

[RAVAGE88]

Feed angle.

Which would be very minimal. However I’ve noticed a couple mags I had tended to push the round high. They would stick on the edge of the chamber. Seemed to be a spring problem but have a different follower would fix that?

Proper feeding of a 22LR isn't about just one thing, or even two things. The basis of proper feeding is timing due to the need to control the round on its path to the centerline of the bore.

Properly accommodating the distance of the magazine from the breech, departure angle of the follower and the two paths associated with the movement of the round from the magazine until the two paths converge and where the extractors are at the point of convergence. The two paths are the rim of the round and the meplat.

The picture below has two sketches (I removed the dimensions as info is proprietary) that represent the two paths as the round is pushed forward by the front of the bolt. If the departure angle, distance from the breech, bolt face configuration, extractor set up, and so on, are off (any one or more) by even a little bit, feeding is a failure. It doesn't mean the round won't go in the chamber, but it does mean the bullet will sustain damage, at the very least. And of course, there's a point where it won't make it into the chamber at all.

So, to adjust feed angle without making other accommodations still leaves one chasing his tail, which is exactly what adjustable magazine releases and catches have folks doing.

So, my thoughts on an adjustable follower are, it's a sloppy way to deal with feeding issues when foundational information is available that ensures things can be done right the first time.

MB

 

[David Nissen Kahn]

Proper feeding of a 22LR isn't about just one thing, or even two things. The basis of proper feeding is timing due to the need to control the round on its path to the centerline of the bore.

Properly accommodating the distance of the magazine from the breech, departure angle of the follower and the two paths associated with the movement of the round from the magazine until the two paths converge and where the extractors are at the point of convergence. The two paths are the rim of the round and the meplat.

The picture below has two sketches (I removed the dimensions as info is proprietary) that represent the two paths as the round is pushed forward by the front of the bolt. If the departure angle, distance from the breech, bolt face configuration, extractor set up, and so on, are off (any one or more) by even a little bit, feeding is a failure. It doesn't mean the round won't go in the chamber, but it does mean the bullet will sustain damage, at the very least. And of course, there's a point where it won't make it into the chamber at all.

So, to adjust feed angle without making other accommodations still leaves one chasing his tail, which is exactly what adjustable magazine releases and catches have folks doing.

So, my thoughts on an adjustable follower are, it's a sloppy way to deal with feeding issues when foundational information is available that ensures things can be done right the first time.

MB

View attachment 8729509

This isn't a response to the above, but my membership level disallows me to post directly. I'm not aware of another way to address this group without starting another thread that may not be noticed.

I've been watching from the sidelines, intensely interested in rimfire precision but heretofore unable to play for various reasons. I bought a Terry Cross stock from Paul Parrott in 2019, talked with him about a build mimicking Mr. Cross's Sentinel S.W.S. rifle and using his bottom metal. I was poised to jump into the Vudoo pool when the pandemic and other stuff hit. Now, I'm thinking about reentering and having built what's likely to be the last rifle of my life.

Aside from the entertaining Peyton Place aspects of the thread, the mechanical design discussion has been fascinating. I'm a retired physician, so numbers don't scare me, but Mr. Bush's and others' detailed analyses are fascinating. You're covering things I've never needed to think about before--never knew such questions occur.

So...let me drop an ignoramus's thought here: I like shooting a lot. As Jeff Cooper said, trenchantly, "the purpose of shooting is hitting." That's why all this business is going on: Folks here want to hit targets that are, for their ballistical milieu, tiny and far away. That's what I want to do. What I don't want to do, and what I'm not equipped to do by situation and by inclination, is to fiddle with my rifle. Yes, of course, I clean my guns. Yes, of course, I've learned to disassemble them to a reasonable extent and do kitchen table parts exchanges. But at the bottom line, I want to set it and forget it.

What I want from an M5/M5x, is a finished package. I'm willing and happy to pay for lot testing, because unless one includes a barrel tuner in their setup (thus tuning rifle to whatever ammunition they can get into the magazine), that's the only way to find what'll work. But I don't want to jigger with the magazine catch, the follower, or anything else. Within the limits Mr. Bush sets for workable ammunition, I want everything to go, first pop out of the shipping box. I want nothing to be adjustable, because with this action mated to an approved barrel with an approved chamber and approved bottom metal, the magazines, the mag latch, nothing should need tuning. Mr. Bush hasn't said that outright, but clearly that what he thinks is proper product and production design.

Maybe I'm being impertinent. Maybe I'm butting in where I don't belong. But maybe what I said ought to be said.

Anyway, thanks for your time.

 

[RAVAGE88]

This isn't a response to the above, but my membership level disallows me to post directly. I'm not aware of another way to address this group without starting another thread that may not be noticed.

I've been watching from the sidelines, intensely interested in rimfire precision but heretofore unable to play for various reasons. I bought a Terry Cross stock from Paul Parrott in 2019, talked with him about a build mimicking Mr. Cross's Sentinel S.W.S. rifle and using his bottom metal. I was poised to jump into the Vudoo pool when the pandemic and other stuff hit. Now, I'm thinking about reentering and having built what's likely to be the last rifle of my life.

Aside from the entertaining Peyton Place aspects of the thread, the mechanical design discussion has been fascinating. I'm a retired physician, so numbers don't scare me, but Mr. Bush's and others' detailed analyses are fascinating. You're covering things I've never needed to think about before--never knew such questions occur.

So...let me drop an ignoramus's thought here: I like shooting a lot. As Jeff Cooper said, trenchantly, "the purpose of shooting is hitting." That's why all this business is going on: Folks here want to hit targets that are, for their ballistical milieu, tiny and far away. That's what I want to do. What I don't want to do, and what I'm not equipped to do by situation and by inclination, is to fiddle with my rifle. Yes, of course, I clean my guns. Yes, of course, I've learned to disassemble them to a reasonable extent and do kitchen table parts exchanges. But at the bottom line, I want to set it and forget it.

What I want from an M5/M5x, is a finished package. I'm willing and happy to pay for lot testing, because unless one includes a barrel tuner in their setup (thus tuning rifle to whatever ammunition they can get into the magazine), that's the only way to find what'll work. But I don't want to jigger with the magazine catch, the follower, or anything else. Within the limits Mr. Bush sets for workable ammunition, I want everything to go, first pop out of the shipping box. I want nothing to be adjustable, because with this action mated to an approved barrel with an approved chamber and approved bottom metal, the magazines, the mag latch, nothing should need tuning. Mr. Bush hasn't said that outright, but clearly that what he thinks is proper product and production design.

Maybe I'm being impertinent. Maybe I'm butting in where I don't belong. But maybe what I said ought to be said.

Anyway, thanks for your time.

Sir, you summed it up to a "T." Thank you, and no, you're not being impertinent, and you said what ought to be said. The supposed solutions have become distractions that have led to bigger problems. You've also recognized the reasoning behind developing a system based strictly on data and foundational information. No guesswork, no conjecture, no belt sanders....

Thank you.

MB