This Day in History

Daily Cartoon provided by Bravenet

Old 05-05-2008
Grenadier Toebanger Grenadier Toebanger is offline
Super Senior member - Has no life and spends a lot of time here
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 243
Default 'Walther G556' Assault Rifle

Originally this idea is not mine but from a forum user named 'HARDMAN476', But have took some interest in the concept though. Would it be possible to manufacture somthing similar in form to a Walther G22 but as a 5.56NATO calibre Assault Rifle?. , The "G556" may not be a Walther product but heavily based on thier design though, The weapon would be lighter than the Steyr AUG in weight and easy to clean/maintain and would match an AK type rifle in simplicity/manufacturing.

But firing a rifle cartridge means using either Delayed Blowback or Gas Piston to delay unlocking the breech so therefore it will be internally different to an existing G22. An 'AK Simple' type mechanisim/layout can be the ideal operation for the "G556" but using Lever delayed blowback/Direct Gas to ease the manufacture as mentioned before.

Here are some edited images of a 'Walther G556':

Last edited by Grenadier Toebanger : 05-06-2008 at 06:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2008
PT-The Italian Commie's Avatar
PT-The Italian Commie PT-The Italian Commie is offline
Super Senior member - Has no life and spends a lot of time here
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sardinia, Italy
Posts: 2,611

The project is technically feasible, I am not saying not. But I have some personal doubts about the proposed layout:

#1 - We are speaking about scaling-up a carbine originally made for semi-automatic .22-Lr rimfire (plinking) operation to a 5'56x45mm, select-fire operation. The entire working system would have to be re-engineered, from the short-recoil operation that's typical of rimfire rifles to a much more resistant and proper (but also bulkier and harder to make) gas-operated rotating bolt system. The chassis should be re-engineered too, to resist the stress of a bigger cartridge, fired in bursts. The weapon would undoubtably result bigger, heavier, bulkier. Don't expect to have a select-fire version of the Walther G-22 as handy and light as the original carbine, unless you want it made for small cartridges such as 5'7x28mm-FN or 4'6x30mm-HK. The weapon is definitely NOT going to be lighter than the AUG, like you think. Otherwise, you would most probably NOT getting it work properly and have a dangerously fragile item in your hands.

#2 - Who on hell came out with that double trigger feature? Something straight outta a 1930s Beretta MAB... that never appealed anybody except the Italians. It was functional in the 1930s/1940s/1950s when an "Automatic Muskeet" (machine-carbine) was supposed to be mostly fired in full-auto (hence why the back trigger is for bursts) with only rare uses on semi-auto (hence why the advanced trigger is for shot-by-shot fire). Try sticking with a single trigger and put a selector there. Maybe straight over the grip, at thumb reach. The Israelis have it on the Tavor. Besides, putting there a fire selector will give you a better trigger pull. Two-stage triggers (like the one found on the AUG, short pull for single-shot, full pull for full-autofire) leads to some very, VERY bad things. I have extensively fired the semi-automatic AUG rifle, and IMHO its trigger pull is awful. This 'cause the trigger system is patterned after the military one, but in the semi-auto AUG, in order to fire in semi-auto you have to put on the trigger the same force that it takes to fire in full-auto on the military AUG. Not good.

#3 - Move the cocking handle somewhere else, like, to say, upside or forward, and put a forward-ejecting mechanism, not complicated like the one of the FN F-2000, something more simple like the one found on the Kel-Tec RFB or the Russian KBP A-91M (the first forward-ejecting bullpup to be marketed, in case somebody forgets it). The layout of the weapon as you post it has the typical drawback of bullpup rifles, not being usable by left-handed users or from the hip, and not just because of the ejection port placed on the right side: that cocking handle will most probably be a reciprocating one, moving with the bolt, and would hit the face of anybody trying to fire the rifle from the left shoulder. And you -DO- need to be able to fire your rifle from both the left and the right shoulder, to be able to exploit for the best any cover you can take. This can be done in a very simple way, without ever putting a forward-ejecting mechanism there: move the cocking handle somewhere else, and equip the ejection port with a built-in case deflector on both sides and on the upside. The case will be forcefully ejected downwards.

#4 - Last but not least... why on hell should Walther manufacture a gun that would not sell anyway? The world is already gluttoned with assault rifles designs, the most prominent coming from Germany itself (do you REALLY think that H&K would allow Walther to market something in concurrence with the G-36?), and new models are being added year by year.

Sorry, but IMHO, the Walther G-556 is
"It is criminal to teach a man not to defend himself, when he is the constant victim of brutal attacks. It is legal and lawful to own a shotgun or a rifle. We believe in obeying the law." -- Malcolm X

"We (atheists) act in good conscience because we believe in moral principles, not because we expect a reward in Heaven." -- Margherita Hack

Last edited by PT-The Italian Commie : 05-06-2008 at 03:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2008
JCoyote JCoyote is offline
Super Senior member - Has no life and spends a lot of time here
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Choctaw, OK
Posts: 615
Send a message via AIM to JCoyote
Default Re: 'Walther G556' Assault Rifle

I don't know why you are sure this would end up being lighter than an AUG, once you make all those changes to handle the cartridge. It would probably land in about the same weight,
propa·gandist n.

A person convinced that the ends justify the memes.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2008
Grenadier Toebanger Grenadier Toebanger is offline
Super Senior member - Has no life and spends a lot of time here
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 243
Default Re: 'Walther G556' Assault Rifle

The "G556" will not exactly be a 5.56x45 NATO calibre Walther G22 or anywhere near one, or even manufactured by Walther but heavily influenced by its design layout. Below are diagrams of the ideal layout for the weapon. As you can see the components are near 'AK Simplicity'. I left the bolt clear as it may use Delayed Blowback/Direct Gas.

Last edited by Grenadier Toebanger : 05-06-2008 at 07:26 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2008
Armorer's Avatar
Armorer Armorer is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Hahira, Ga.
Posts: 360
Send a message via AIM to Armorer
Default Re: 'Walther G556' Assault Rifle

Simply the worst idea yet...
The G22 is a POS-- plain and simple. The front sight assembly on most I've handled would conveniently swing out of the way-- and never mind the feeding issues.
he Carl Lothar Walther name is simply a name these days built upon a previous reputation for olympic match grade quality barrels. However, their last several "innovations" have hardly held true-- from the P99 to the PPS. The accuracy barely above par, but all of them extremely fickle in ammunition selection in terms of proper feeding.
I've owned a P22 and worked on P99 and G22-- none would cycle worth a fuck even using match grade ammo or low pressure defensive rounds.
The general concept in and of itself leaves very little be desired-- the fact the bolt carrier is directly part of the buttstock means ever bit of the recoil is being driven into the collar bone area.
No matter how you try to "drop in" this assembly-- the stroke system will not work-- you've not got enough room for the necessary over travel to eject, and furthermore, you've simply reaffirmed an open-bolt settup like a mac or UZI-- thus inviting the same kind of issues..just that much closer to your face.
I urge you to look at the actual AUG and reconsider the fundamentals-- your attempt to hybridize isn't a hybrid at all. The additional weight found in the AUG is from the gas blowback system--the gastube, piston, etc.

This design simply won't hold true due to an additional short stroke system, inline recoil, and poor feeding/ejection. Even if you add a rotary bolt face, an innertial driven bolt, and recoil reducing system, you're going to have an awful lot of explosive material right underneath your ear.
Look at where you've stuck the ejection port and think of where your cheek wield is... You've put the port directly below the temple, hayway between the eye and ear.
No thank you.
Idea rejected.
Take it to Zoran or HUWS. :lol:

If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping a human face...forever" ~George Orwell

Last edited by Armorer : 05-06-2008 at 02:16 PM.
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:36 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1995 - 2009