Details, details, DeLisle thoughts.

General silencer discussion. If you want to talk about a specific silenced rifle or pistol, it is best to do that in the rifle or pistol section for that brand.

All NFA laws apply.

Moderators: mpallett, mr fixit, bakerjw, renegade

User avatar
Richard/SIA
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 368
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 3:51 am
Location: Nevada

Details, details, DeLisle thoughts.

Post by Richard/SIA »

I've been considering small details regards my DeLisle project.

1. Insert in the bolt handle to prevent metal on metal contact when closing the bolt. Pretty easy, should be durable.
I think originals used a small block of wood.

2. Firing pin click.
The shoulder of the Enfield firing pin hits the base of the bolt head.
It's fairly loud on a well suppressed gun.
This can be muted by fitting a fiber, plastic, copper, or aluminum buffer washer under the firing pin flange (A).
Or between the end of the bolt and cocking piece (B).
The main issue with this is that in order to mute noise the buffer is going to be soft enough to wear.
Too much wear would lead to excessive firing pin protrusion and pierced primers, possibly even a broken firing pin.
Military armorers take care of their shooters so that such items are not an issue.
But dare I expect civilians to keep an eye on this sort of small buffer?
Replacement is pretty easy, but would require either unscrewing the bolt head (#A, Very easy) or #B, removing the firing pin with a couple of simple tools.

Is this perhaps a bad idea as civilians are not to be trusted with detailed maintenance, or are U.S. suppressor owners more careful than the average shooter? :?:

3. The main down-fall of the original DeLisle appears to have been the flimsy and easily misaligned baffles.
Originals had a rod to set alignment, it seems they needed to be checked often.
I'm thinking of a mono-core design, keyed to the muzzle and the end cap.
I think this should help to eliminate alignment issues?

4. Weight.
The Enfield is not a light action.
I am looking for good quality aluminum tubing, seems hard to find.
I understand that the later original DeLisle design used an aluminum tube.
Should I stick to steel for durability, and resistance to careless handling or abuse?


Yes, I am striving to make the gun so quiet that these details should be relevant.
Of course, adding all of these would drive the work involved and price up a bit, decisions, decisions! :)
At these prices I want my gas 100 octane, leaded, and my windshield washed!
alanparsons
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 116
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 4:53 pm

Post by alanparsons »

I would make the gun as tough as I could. Mono-core is the way I would go. New guns like the SCAR and ACR are coming out at 2500 plus. I see no problem with you making 1 value version and 1 "elite" version. For a good one that is as quiet as my S&H 77/44 I would give 3K. In a second. :wink:
BriggsRi
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1265
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 4:26 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV

Post by BriggsRi »

Sounds like nice improvments!
bullyforyou
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 106
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 9:32 am

Post by bullyforyou »

i'd be hard-pressed to believe that the military takes better care of their weapons than the type of "civilian shooter" who would be looking for a delisle.
puppis
New Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:53 am

Post by puppis »

I think 1,3 and 4 are great ideas.

2 would be ok if you included detailed instructions on how to detect the wear and how to replace the parts.
Skunk
Silent Operator
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 8:50 pm

Post by Skunk »

Increase the firing pin diameter & adjust protrusion a bit long, decrease the spring weight; the shoulder will not strike the bolt head when a cartridge is being fired. Lots of room to adjust these parameters in an Lee Enfield.
BriggsRi
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1265
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 4:26 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV

Post by BriggsRi »

alanparsons wrote:I would make the gun as tough as I could. Mono-core is the way I would go. New guns like the SCAR and ACR are coming out at 2500 plus. I see no problem with you making 1 value version and 1 "elite" version. For a good one that is as quiet as my S&H 77/44 I would give 3K. In a second. :wink:
3K that just closed the door on a lot of people :(

Keep it reasonable say 2K +/-
User avatar
este
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2235
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 9:22 pm

Post by este »

Even 2K would be tough for me to swing on this. Other than the historic value, it's pretty much trumped by a bolt gun in 300 whisper.

-Lighter
-Quieter
-Better B/C
-More Accurate
-Cheaper

I would love to have a DeLisle clone but it would need to have an eccentric suppressor for historic accuracy's sake, and even then it would really only ever be a novelty. I could shell 1.5K for an average novelty item.

Then if 300-221 isn't your thing there is x39 subsonic, 458 SOCOM, 450 Bushmaster (if they ramp up production like they say they will), 338Federal, 44Mag, 45LC, 510 Whisper, 338 Whisper, etc etc etc.

The idea is cool, for the price it would exclude me right away and I love novelties :) Monocore would definitely be the way to go though.
jandbj
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 995
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 1:55 pm
Location: Southwestern NH

Post by jandbj »

I like the idea of your version shedding some weight with the aluminum tube. The mono core would more than make up for any strength lost by going to an Al tube. Since you are planning a product improved version of the Delisle, there is no reason you need to stick with the steel tube as traditional. You could even go titanium, if you so desired.
User avatar
este
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2235
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 9:22 pm

Post by este »

jandbj wrote:I like the idea of your version shedding some weight with the aluminum tube. The mono core would more than make up for any strength lost by going to an Al tube. Since you are planning a product improved version of the Delisle, there is no reason you need to stick with the steel tube as traditional. You could even go titanium, if you so desired.
Ti is difficult to source because aside from the cost, it's hard to find pieces at that diameter that also have the proper wall thickness. Come to think of it though that shouldn't be much of an issue with 45ACP.

Ti just seems to make everything more difficult though, and I mean everything.
User avatar
Smilodon
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 489
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 11:14 am
Location: Central WI
Contact:

Post by Smilodon »

Monocore, w/SS tube would be my vote. Externally could appear historically correct. Nobody needs to know what's goin on inside! Or, just modernize, you'd have a market either way. Another thing, make a descent magwell for 1911mags, not the modded Enfield thing, as it looks horrible! Just my $.02. :wink:
www.sabrewerks.com
[email protected]
User avatar
Richard/SIA
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 368
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 3:51 am
Location: Nevada

Trying to keep retail under $2K, so there are some limits.

Post by Richard/SIA »

I am trying to keep retail under $2K, so there are some limits to just how "Trick" I can get.

Lots of details are possible, I just have to prioritize if I am going to stay within my target market.
One thing I intend to do differently is to make the tube integral, so the gun can transfer on a single tax stamp.

This is not intended to be a museum grade exact re-creation!
Valkerie tried that, I understand that many of their units have problems.
An exact copy also copies the original flaws.

Mine will appear correct to casual observation, it will utilize the off-set tube.
It will not require special magazines, use a shortened bolt, or sheet metal baffles, etc., as the originals did.

I have several mono-core sketches, I have to decide which to try first.
Once I get the tube and core material in hand I can begin making chips.
At these prices I want my gas 100 octane, leaded, and my windshield washed!
Dweezil
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1015
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 6:35 pm
Location: Arizona

Post by Dweezil »

Are you planning to go with the full 2.5" tube diameter like the original DeLisle? That would seem a bit excessive with an improved baffle stack providing similar, if not better suppression with less volume. Maybe 1.75-2" diameter so it still looks similar to the original DeLisles.
"I'm from the government...I'm here to help."
User avatar
Richard/SIA
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 368
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 3:51 am
Location: Nevada

Tube will be original diameter as it is a replica.

Post by Richard/SIA »

Tube will be original diameter as it is a replica.

Blueprints I have do not give the exact dimension, but I will find it.
Last edited by Richard/SIA on Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
At these prices I want my gas 100 octane, leaded, and my windshield washed!
User avatar
Artful
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 4392
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 10:47 pm
Location: Phx,AZ
Contact:

Post by Artful »

see if some of these help ya

http://www.prexis.com/sten/Commando%20Carbine.pdf
overall length: 887mm
Mk2(folding version folded): 635mm
Lenght of Silencer: 393mm
Diameter of Silencer: 50mm
Silencer Volume: 770 CC
Sight Radius: 320mm
Length of Silencer Stock: 195mm
Weight 3.75 KG (has Duralumin Silencer casing)
http://www.rifleman.org.uk/The_DeLisle_carbine.htm

http://www.surplusrifle.com/shooting/delisle/index.asp
Barrel Length: 8.27in
http://www.prexis.com/sten/homebuilder/ ... pic=1997.0
"Trying to tax yourself into prosperity is like standing in a bucket and trying to pick yourself up by the handle." - Winston Churchill
User avatar
Richard/SIA
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 368
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 3:51 am
Location: Nevada

"50mm" = 1.97". so the 2.00" tube I have

Post by Richard/SIA »

"50 mm" = 1.97". so the 2.00" tube I have is pretty close.

One of the links article states the suppressor diameter at 50mm.
2.0" ID tube is readily available, it is what I used for my prototype.

I don't see 0.030" being a real issue in a replica.
At these prices I want my gas 100 octane, leaded, and my windshield washed!
User avatar
Diomed
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 7543
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 12:59 am
Location: VA

Re: Details, details, DeLisle thoughts.

Post by Diomed »

Richard/SIA wrote:1. Insert in the bolt handle to prevent metal on metal contact when closing the bolt. Pretty easy, should be durable.
I think originals used a small block of wood.
IIRC the insert was a block of bakelite. I do hope this makes it to the final version.
Is this perhaps a bad idea as civilians are not to be trusted with detailed maintenance, or are U.S. suppressor owners more careful than the average shooter? :?:
Anyone with an Enfield should know they are their own armorer. Stuff like bolt takedown is easy enough that I can do it, and I'm stupid.

You could always throw in the relevant Skennerton picture books with the gun.
User avatar
Richard/SIA
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 368
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 3:51 am
Location: Nevada

Just an update, worked on tooling and fixtures today.

Post by Richard/SIA »

Made a new insert for my action wrench, the No. 1 actions really do not fit the No. 4 type insert too well.
Now No. 1 barrels come off MUCH easier.
The DeLisle is built on No. 1 actions.

Got to try out the new .45 ejector design on the bench.
It is built into the magazine adapter instead of being screwed into the wall of the receiver.
Going to incorporate it into a nearly completed gun to fully prove it works.
With this new design there will be no need for the black knob on the left of the receiver.
Seems like a worthy upgrade for the DeLisle, not sure if all guns justify the extra time/expense.

Also bought some machinable plastic to play with the baffle design.
I prefer a part in front of me over a CAD drawing.

I also obtained excellent pics of an original DeLisle fore-end today, from several angles.
Sitting on graph paper, so I can get the dimensions to duplicate it.

Progress is slower than I like, but it is coming along.
At these prices I want my gas 100 octane, leaded, and my windshield washed!
User avatar
Steve S
Elite Member
Posts: 380
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 4:15 pm

Re: Details, details, DeLisle thoughts.

Post by Steve S »

Richerd,
The new ejector design that is incorporated into the magazine adapter. If this proves to be a viable alternative to your original design, can your "earlier" suppressed Enfields be upgraded? I don't mind having the small hole in the side of the receiver if the new design will alleviate broken ejectors.
Steve

P.S. Every time I have mine out at the range, people ALWAYS have a huge grin on their faces when they hear how quiet it is! :D
User avatar
Richard/SIA
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 368
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 3:51 am
Location: Nevada

Re: Details, details, DeLisle thoughts.

Post by Richard/SIA »

Still need to test it on an actual firing gun, bench test look good.

Trying to keep the DeLisle replica cleaner by eliminating the side mounted ejector.

We did the prototype by modifying a spare magazine adapter half, so should be able to modify any mag adapter in a similar fashion.
This design also requires a modification to the bolt head, similar to what we do for the 7.62x39 conversions.

Current ejector plungers should not be damaged unless the bolt is being re-inserted improperly.

The question of the moment is, will the buying public readily accept an additional $75.00 or so for this design change just to gain slightly improved (should be perfect) ejection?
It is noticeably more work to make, and requires the bolt head to be sent to us for modification.
At these prices I want my gas 100 octane, leaded, and my windshield washed!
jlwilliams
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2080
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 7:15 am
Location: NC

Re: Details, details, DeLisle thoughts.

Post by jlwilliams »

I'd think that the improved ejector would be worth the added cost.

At the risk of side tracking; Are you still planning on making dedicated pistol caliber actions? As much as I like the DeLisle repro, a purpose built gun would solve the weight issue and make for the slickest all around option in a suppressed carbine.
User avatar
Richard/SIA
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 368
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 3:51 am
Location: Nevada

Re: Details, details, DeLisle thoughts.

Post by Richard/SIA »

Yes, I am still interested in manufacturing the strait-pull pistol caliber carbine/pistol project.
But it is going to have to wait until I recoup some of the current project expenses and free up some time.
At this point it is last in line, unlikely to happen this year.
I have to limit how many irons I have in the fire at one time.

I get enthused with new projects, damn ideas come to me when I'm supposed to be sleeping.
Then I have to get up and write them down, or make a sketch.
It's too bad I do not have a large engineering staff to pursue them all for me.

Currently working hard on the mag adapter mounted ejector, for all .45 conversions including the Delisle.
Correct fore-end wood for the DeLisle should be fairly easy with the pics I just got.
Major remaining issue is the final baffle design.
I have several sketches, just need to make them and see which works best.
I want a design that lives up to the legend.

I also have to complete my "K" suppressed in 7.62x39, not much more to do there beyond making .30 baffles.
Lots of 7.62x39 adapters and magazines on hand, so no real delay for production.

There is also my 1885 Gardner Gun replica, which is very complex and way overdue for series production.
Working on it as a priority too, selling a couple of them would fund the other projects very well.

Just completed making a run of our new production Picatinny Enfield scope mounts.
No more having to slowly whittle them out on the manual mill for each order!

Already trying to get ready for SAR in December, where did the year go?
At these prices I want my gas 100 octane, leaded, and my windshield washed!
User avatar
jreinke
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1226
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: WI, USA
Contact:

Re: Details, details, DeLisle thoughts.

Post by jreinke »

I've long lusted after the DeLisle carbine, but have decided to go modern. After much analysis, I've decided to convert a Remington 788 from .308 to .45 ACP with a 5" bbl and slap on either a Ti-Rant or an Osprey on it.
[url=http://militarysignatures.com][img]http://militarysignatures.com/signatures/member1236.png[/img][/url]
apochachuva
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2338
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 9:38 pm
Location: Houston, Texas

Re: Trying to keep retail under $2K, so there are some limit

Post by apochachuva »

I am very interested in the results of this product. I know if I owned one I'd be willing to replace wear parts that keep it quiet.
"You'll put yer eye out with that thing"

"How a politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual; as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of." - Dr. Suzanna Gratia Hupp
User avatar
Richard/SIA
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 368
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 3:51 am
Location: Nevada

Woo Hoo, new mag adapters nearly complete.

Post by Richard/SIA »

Finally getting the new run of mag adapters completed.

Running them on my own CNC this time.

Incorporating an integral ejector in the adapter for the guns I build, This will allow a cleaner DeLisle conversion.
Kits will still use the external ejector for ease of amateur assembly.

Here's a pic and some movie links of them being profiled.

Image

http://www.specialinterestarms.com/100_7119.MOV

http://www.specialinterestarms.com/100_7121.MOV
At these prices I want my gas 100 octane, leaded, and my windshield washed!
Post Reply