In the wake of Luigi Mangione’s alleged killing of a health care CEO with a partially 3D-printed pistol, we built the exact same weapon ourselves—and test-fired it.
I wonder why they don’t work so well. Maybe I don’t understand how they operate but it seems like if the frame is in the correct precise shape it should work like a regular Glock.
Probably better for everyone that they don’t work like the real thing.
In The Philippines there is a thriving underground industry making illegal pistols from scratch. Last I heard the 1911 was the favorite, here’s a newer video from 2023
Yeah, I did know that. It’s just the frame that’s “plastic”. I remember years ago when they got popular some people were freaking out that a “plastic gun” could go though a metal detector and others had to correct them.
The problem with building rigid objects with 3d printers is that their weakest point is usually along the layer lines. So even if pieces of real firearms are made of nylon or ABS, they would be injection molded or use a process that forms more durable shapes.
It’s the suppressor. Since most semi-auto pistols relies on the recoil from firing to cycle, adding a suppressor can mess up the cycling without a Nielsen device.
There are plenty of examples of unsuppressed pistols with 3d printed frames working just fine on yt
Seconded, this is the best explanation here. The browning action, on which most semi automatic pistol operate on, does not function well when a suppressor is added w/ out a Nielson device or ‘booster’.
The design is made assuming the barrel weighs ____ oz, if suddenly it weighs more then the reliability is impaired.
3d printed material has a lower tensile strength than injection molded or stamped materials. Most prints are weakest between the layers, and it’s not always immediately obvious where the weakened points are. Even the parts that don’t get hot or explode are moving and rubbing against other parts.
Gun parts are subjected to rigorous testing and grading. Not only do they know roughly how many uses before a part will break, but also what to look for on a worn or breaking part.
3d printed guns, you never know which bullet will be the last.
3D printing isn’t meant for production-level accuracy. It’s a prototyping technology that is good enough for a lot of different applications, but not when sub-millimeter precision is necessary.
Can you make something that works? Of course! Will it work as reliably as something made using better processes? Usually not.
You can definitely reliably get sub-millimeter precision with a consumer-grade 3d printer. Even with a 0.4mm nozzle, once dialed-in, you can make print-in-place models with a clearance of 0.1mm, and the default layer thickness is typically 0.2mm.
While layer adhesion is usually the weakness of 3d-printed parts, some materials like PETG or TPU have very good adhesion, to the point that printing on a glass plate can damage the glass when removing the model.
Material shrinkage is another factor to consider, and there are a myriad of other reasons why there are more accurate ways to mass produce things.
Even assuming a perfect print - no blobs, no zits, and, just for the sake of argument, let’s ignore the Z seam - I disagree that you can reliably get 0.1 mm precision off of a FDM machine in all directions. I’ve been able to get parts to fit each other to within 0.3 mm reliably in the best conditions on a properly-calibrated Prusa MK3S+
I wonder why they don’t work so well. Maybe I don’t understand how they operate but it seems like if the frame is in the correct precise shape it should work like a regular Glock.
Probably better for everyone that they don’t work like the real thing.
In The Philippines there is a thriving underground industry making illegal pistols from scratch. Last I heard the 1911 was the favorite, here’s a newer video from 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ok43dZAVdQM
Objects are more than their shape
If you made a Glock out of frozen custard, would you expect it to perform the same as the real deal?
So it’s a lack of integrity of the 3D printed plastic? What’s a Glock made of, nylon?
Bang bang part is metal
Yeah, I did know that. It’s just the frame that’s “plastic”. I remember years ago when they got popular some people were freaking out that a “plastic gun” could go though a metal detector and others had to correct them.
I’m assuming you partially know the answer to that given nylon is a random thing to pull out if you didn’t
But it’s a specifically engineered polymer of nylon… And steel.
The problem with building rigid objects with 3d printers is that their weakest point is usually along the layer lines. So even if pieces of real firearms are made of nylon or ABS, they would be injection molded or use a process that forms more durable shapes.
I guess it’s nylon because that’s one of the hardest plastics we have. Many of my tools have “plastic” parts that are nylon.
Velma pulls off the mask and it’s an I-beam yelling about pesky kids
It’s the suppressor. Since most semi-auto pistols relies on the recoil from firing to cycle, adding a suppressor can mess up the cycling without a Nielsen device.
There are plenty of examples of unsuppressed pistols with 3d printed frames working just fine on yt
Seconded, this is the best explanation here. The browning action, on which most semi automatic pistol operate on, does not function well when a suppressor is added w/ out a Nielson device or ‘booster’.
The design is made assuming the barrel weighs ____ oz, if suddenly it weighs more then the reliability is impaired.
3d printed material has a lower tensile strength than injection molded or stamped materials. Most prints are weakest between the layers, and it’s not always immediately obvious where the weakened points are. Even the parts that don’t get hot or explode are moving and rubbing against other parts.
Gun parts are subjected to rigorous testing and grading. Not only do they know roughly how many uses before a part will break, but also what to look for on a worn or breaking part.
3d printed guns, you never know which bullet will be the last.
3D printing isn’t meant for production-level accuracy. It’s a prototyping technology that is good enough for a lot of different applications, but not when sub-millimeter precision is necessary.
Can you make something that works? Of course! Will it work as reliably as something made using better processes? Usually not.
You can definitely reliably get sub-millimeter precision with a consumer-grade 3d printer. Even with a 0.4mm nozzle, once dialed-in, you can make print-in-place models with a clearance of 0.1mm, and the default layer thickness is typically 0.2mm.
While layer adhesion is usually the weakness of 3d-printed parts, some materials like PETG or TPU have very good adhesion, to the point that printing on a glass plate can damage the glass when removing the model.
Material shrinkage is another factor to consider, and there are a myriad of other reasons why there are more accurate ways to mass produce things.
Even assuming a perfect print - no blobs, no zits, and, just for the sake of argument, let’s ignore the Z seam - I disagree that you can reliably get 0.1 mm precision off of a FDM machine in all directions. I’ve been able to get parts to fit each other to within 0.3 mm reliably in the best conditions on a properly-calibrated Prusa MK3S+
But that’s just my experience.
Are you mad?!? My wife might read this!!
I give you my permission to “attack the source” on my comment since attacking the fact won’t get you far.
deleted by creator