PDA

View Full Version : Dreaming about American made Daewoo rifles


lawdog
August 08, 2012, 15:05
Every now and again I wonder why an American made Daewoo rifle couldn't be pulled off.

Why not? Some trigger parts can come from AR supplies. Would it really be that much of an issue for a barrel maker to mod some AR barrels to get the job done.

The receivers are aluminum and wouldn't be overly daunting for CNC work. In fact, it might lend itself to modding the upper just enough to permit co-witnessing.

With as popular as the Daewoo seems to be, does anyone think that it could be done and sold at a price point below the plastic fantastic 5.56 rifles (ACR, SCAR) or other piston ARs?

I know I'd be in for a couple.

Yeah, I'm just dreaming, but it's a good dream.

N4KVE
August 08, 2012, 15:37
The start up costs would be astounding. Look at all the other 223 rifles available now. AR's by the boatload, AR 180, Sig 556/551, & soon the Beretta ARX160. Now these last 2 guns are already being made in Europe, so they just have to send the machinery here & make the guns. In the case of the Daewoo, is it possible for someone to buy the machinery in S. Korea, & send it here to make the guns like JLD did when he purchased the Portugese HK FMP factory machinery. To start from scratch would take tons of cash, & they'd have to sell a bunch before they'd break even. I already have an unfired K-2, & a DR 200, so I'm good. They are great guns. GARY N4KVE

Dasho101
August 09, 2012, 10:27
now it would be nice to get an American made complete upper receivers, with bolts and all that fun jazz.

s0b3
August 09, 2012, 21:52
the XCR is pretty close a woo so you'd have an idea of what pricepoint they would need to be at.

i think a better option would be to make an upper that would mount to an ar15 lower with the daewoo gas system (piston, bolt, carrier, etc...). it would need to use the ejector in the bolt vs a fixed one like the daewoo but this is probably the most financially feasible approach.

Dasho101
August 09, 2012, 22:26
that would be nice to... but it would have to be set up to take standard ar bbls... so proly custom leinght piston and piston tube

s0b3
August 10, 2012, 00:21
the rra lar pds is pretty close to a daewoo. still more than a preban daewoo though.

dawg180
August 12, 2012, 09:25
the XCR is pretty close a woo so you'd have an idea of what pricepoint they would need to be at.

i think a better option would be to make an upper that would mount to an ar15 lower with the daewoo gas system (piston, bolt, carrier, etc...). it would need to use the ejector in the bolt vs a fixed one like the daewoo but this is probably the most financially feasible approach.

The XCR truly is a "modernized" or "Americanized" Daewoo, save for using an AK style bolt instead of an AR style bolt. Having handled and shot both, I was shocked how similar they were.

Unofortunately for us, and despite my love of them, I do not think the Daewoo does anything special enough that would attract a large audience to it.

dawg180
August 12, 2012, 09:30
the XCR is pretty close a woo so you'd have an idea of what pricepoint they would need to be at.

i think a better option would be to make an upper that would mount to an ar15 lower with the daewoo gas system (piston, bolt, carrier, etc...). it would need to use the ejector in the bolt vs a fixed one like the daewoo but this is probably the most financially feasible approach.

Won't work. Daewoo needs a longer receiver for the proper bolt stroke with the spring in the upper. RRA ran into this problem when designing their PDS pistol and rifle, when using a threaded plug in the back of the lower receiver the threads were actually deforming due to too short of a proper recoil stroke.

If you look at the AR-15 compared to AK's, Daewoos, XCR, FNC, etc, you will see the receiver of the AR-15 is about 1.5" shorter than these other rifles. It is also the reason the AR-15 has the spring riding in a buffer tube. Simple physics based on the cartridge. It looks like the design team decided good ergonomics and the ability to place the mag button where you could reach it were the first priority on the design, thus necessitating a shorter receiver.

PARA FN FAL
August 13, 2012, 07:10
The start up cost issue is BS. If Century Arms can make a H&K 93,CZ58 or a Galil?Golani for 500 bucks. Then why not a Daewoo? Daewoo still builds these for their armed forces so why not just send over the parts that we can't make here? We could make or use AR15 internals, US barrels, US lower receivers and an ACE or Stormworks stock. The ROK would have to supply the Bolt group, Gas piston and upper receiver.

dawg180
August 13, 2012, 09:45
The start up cost issue is BS. If Century Arms can make a H&K 93,CZ58 or a Galil?Golani for 500 bucks. Then why not a Daewoo? Daewoo still builds these for their armed forces so why not just send over the parts that we can't make here? We could make or use AR15 internals, US barrels, US lower receivers and an ACE or Stormworks stock. The ROK would have to supply the Bolt group, Gas piston and upper receiver.

1. South Korea by their own laws can no longer export military armaments or parts. People have already tried. You aren't going to see original Daewoo parts over here in the U.S. beyond what is already here.

2. Century weapons are made off demilled parts kits, they are not at all representative of the true costs of manufacturing a rifle from scratch. Century is not having to make furntiure, gas blocks, or all those little parts from scratch. Just an AK safety selector costs about $50 when U.S. made, the $10 you pay for a surplus one does not reflect the "true" manufacturing cost of a new part.

3. You would need to make new forging dies for the upper and lower receiver, plus castings for the front sight base, and molds for the forend, stock, and grip. Dies are $3K-$6K each, casting another $1-$2K for the die give or take, molds for the furniture (not just urethane one offs a few at a time, but true fiber reinforced nylon or thermoset polymers) are going to run you $30-$40K, and you also need to do metal heat shields and a stamping die for this (both left and right) will run you $5K give or take.

So to do it "properly" and not just half ass it you are talking $40-$55K before you ever have purchased raw materials, barrels, or pay labor to assemble. You also have to machine the bolt, carrier, the rather pain in the ass gas piston carrier rod (the design pretty much sucks as far as machining and manufacturing is concerned, and it is probably easiest to make an extrusion to machine away at if you are going to make a lot of them, so shell out another $3K-$5 for that).

You can certainly get Green Mountain or whomever to make barrel blanks, and some AR-15 trigger parts would work in the fire control group, but even things like the rear sight (which is clever but extremely complex with a lot of parts) are going to cost a lot to make.

I am not saying it can't be done, but the startup costs to do it as a production rifle in the 1000+ units really are not B.S.

mountainman
August 13, 2012, 14:31
Not to mention dancing through ITAR hoops here in the US. Would there be enough demand out there to pay for a couple of 6 year old or younger FADALs and Haas VMC's. forget about dies, lost wax or billet machined parts will do it.

crosse
October 25, 2012, 19:50
1. South Korea by their own laws can no longer export military armaments or parts. People have already tried. You aren't going to see original Daewoo parts over here in the U.S. beyond what is already here.

2. Century weapons are made off demilled parts kits, they are not at all representative of the true costs of manufacturing a rifle from scratch. Century is not having to make furntiure, gas blocks, or all those little parts from scratch. Just an AK safety selector costs about $50 when U.S. made, the $10 you pay for a surplus one does not reflect the "true" manufacturing cost of a new part.

3. You would need to make new forging dies for the upper and lower receiver, plus castings for the front sight base, and molds for the forend, stock, and grip. Dies are $3K-$6K each, casting another $1-$2K for the die give or take, molds for the furniture (not just urethane one offs a few at a time, but true fiber reinforced nylon or thermoset polymers) are going to run you $30-$40K, and you also need to do metal heat shields and a stamping die for this (both left and right) will run you $5K give or take.

So to do it "properly" and not just half ass it you are talking $40-$55K before you ever have purchased raw materials, barrels, or pay labor to assemble. You also have to machine the bolt, carrier, the rather pain in the ass gas piston carrier rod (the design pretty much sucks as far as machining and manufacturing is concerned, and it is probably easiest to make an extrusion to machine away at if you are going to make a lot of them, so shell out another $3K-$5 for that).

You can certainly get Green Mountain or whomever to make barrel blanks, and some AR-15 trigger parts would work in the fire control group, but even things like the rear sight (which is clever but extremely complex with a lot of parts) are going to cost a lot to make.

I am not saying it can't be done, but the startup costs to do it as a production rifle in the 1000+ units really are not B.S.


+1
Definitely difficult. I too as well heard about the restrictive korean legislation to keep Daewoo military weapons within their borders. Sucks as a Korean American to not have access to weapons my friend rave about when they get back from service in Korea.

cz75fan
October 27, 2012, 06:11
Check this out!!!! Not a Woo, but probably as close as we'll ever get these days. Watch the video where the upper is taken apart. Very similar to the K2/DR200 gas system & bolt carrier.

http://www.guns.com/new-faxon-firearms-arak-long-stroke-piston-ar-upper-receiver-556-nato-300-aac-blackout-video-11290.html

dwkfym
November 03, 2012, 17:24
I heard rumors that people are in talks (all legit, of coruse) to get some of these rifles available for sale again in the U.S. :)

vandal968
November 04, 2012, 01:50
You guys are not the only ones dreaming of a US-made woo.

http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/7756/screencapdaewoorender14.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/16/screencapdaewoorender14.jpg/)

Woo!
v :)

Murphyd
November 06, 2012, 21:25
THAT is way cool

vandal968
November 07, 2012, 01:31
Thanks. Here's a pic that includes the stock adapter block. These are tricky parts, I don't know if I can machine all of them or not.
http://img842.imageshack.us/img842/5143/screencapdaewoorender9.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/842/screencapdaewoorender9.jpg/)

cheers,
v

dwkfym
November 07, 2012, 10:03
You'll want to be very careful reverse engineering any product that was designed by someone else, even if any applicable patents have expired.
How did you take the measurements? Tolerances are surprisingly narrow even on lower receivers.

vandal968
November 07, 2012, 15:45
I'm a mechanical engineer and I've been reverse-engineering parts for over 20yrs, so I'm pretty confident. Most of the measurements have been taken using a surface gage, angle-blocks, gauge pins, radius gages, etc. Daewoo borrowed very heavily from the AR-15, so many of the dimensions just need to be confirmed against an AR blueprint which includes tolerances. Other dimensions are derived from the AR, but shifted by a fixed amount. These values were measured from multiple datums and cross-referenced against each other to check the math. I've been doing this type of thing for a long time and I am very confident in the quality of this model. The machining, however, is tricky. For the moment, I'm just concerned with making a perfect model, once it's done I'll see if it will be practical to machine one or not.

cheers,
v

frigginchi
November 07, 2012, 20:39
Looks really, really nice. Maybe leaving out the hinge will make things simpler machining wise. You can always add the hinge as an accessory later.

Thanks. Here's a pic that includes the stock adapter block. These are tricky parts, I don't know if I can machine all of them or not.
http://img842.imageshack.us/img842/5143/screencapdaewoorender9.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/842/screencapdaewoorender9.jpg/)

cheers,
v

s0b3
November 07, 2012, 21:18
my opinion would be to change the specs a little to ar15 dimensions so you can utilize easy to find replacement parts.

things like the mag catch. the receiver also needs to be made a little narrower so ar15 trigger/hammer pins can be used and an ar15 safety would work.

unless there is a reason to have the magwell so short, i'd lengthen it so a standard ar15 trigger guard could be used as well.

what are the plans for an upper?

frigginchi
November 07, 2012, 21:36
I request a MP5 style collapsing stock option please.

http://www.gunpartscorp.com/images/catalog/1086890.jpg

dwkfym
November 07, 2012, 21:43
I'm a mechanical engineer and I've been reverse-engineering parts for over 20yrs, so I'm pretty confident. Most of the measurements have been taken using a surface gage, angle-blocks, gauge pins, radius gages, etc. Daewoo borrowed very heavily from the AR-15, so many of the dimensions just need to be confirmed against an AR blueprint which includes tolerances. Other dimensions are derived from the AR, but shifted by a fixed amount. These values were measured from multiple datums and cross-referenced against each other to check the math. I've been doing this type of thing for a long time and I am very confident in the quality of this model. The machining, however, is tricky. For the moment, I'm just concerned with making a perfect model, once it's done I'll see if it will be practical to machine one or not.

cheers,
v

Very cool, and an even cooler project. Good suggestions here too. I was referring to legal problems. Firearms industry is full of sometimes frivolous and other times not so frivolous IP lawsuits. Its also full of a lot of BS patents. Its one of the ways the big companies keep little guys out.

I want to send you a PM; I'm interested in your project. I am a n00b to this forum and not really sure how !

vandal968
November 08, 2012, 01:43
my opinion would be to change the specs a little to ar15 dimensions so you can utilize easy to find replacement parts.

things like the mag catch. the receiver also needs to be made a little narrower so ar15 trigger/hammer pins can be used and an ar15 safety would work.

unless there is a reason to have the magwell so short, i'd lengthen it so a standard ar15 trigger guard could be used as well.

what are the plans for an upper?
I might change some areas to accommodate more common AR parts, specifically I was thinking about the mag release. The AR trigger pins work fine even though they are a little short and look funny. The magwell seems to be short mostly to reduce the amount of wasted material when the part is machined, I intend to keep the short magwell, but may incorporate the trigger guard into the lower itself as many others have done on cnc'd AR10/15 lowers. This first version of the solid model is intended to be as close to original as I can manage, once complete, I'll tweak it to make it easier to machine.

I'm considering making an updated upper incorporating modern conveniences like a built-in rail, but that is a MUCH lower priority than completing the lower. A lower would allow DR200's to be converted into K2's, it would also allow K2's to be legally brought into certain kommunist states that ban the K2-type rifles by name. For now, this is just something that I want and can't buy so I'm seeing if I can make it myself.

cheers,
v

Sicarius
November 08, 2012, 15:08
Thank you for thinking of us in CA. You can also make it an 80% which may make it easier for you and easier for us too.
Kevin

bykerhd
November 09, 2012, 00:10
Very cool.
As the Daewoo was basically an upgraded AR, with some AK flavor thrown in, it would seem logical to incorporate some of the ARs generational advancements in to a "new" American version.

A folding AR style multiple position stock would be a first thing as the standard Daewoo K2 stock is too short and flimsy and has funky angles for some of us.

Ambidextrous AR type selector/safety would be another.

Daewoos use longer hammer/trigger pins than ARs.
This might be a plus but means that spares would need to be available.

It would be nice to be able to use any of the multitude of AR pistol grips that are available without needing a special adapter.
Same with the AR trigger guards.

If you get to uppers at some point ?
A picatinny rail running the length of the upper would be nice.

The ability to run unmodified AR barrels would also be a huge plus.

As would the ability to run AR forends.

Maybe even a monolithic upper with quick change caliber capability ?

Then all I would need is lots and lots of money to buy it.:cry:

dwkfym
November 09, 2012, 00:27
The stock is funky? I found it to be perfect! Very good for a proper cheek weld. Especially firing offhand. I found the funky fallic shape of the stock to be a major plus compared to AR stocks where you are forced to accept a less than ideal cheek weld. Furthermore, changing the cheek weld height would mess with the geometry of the weapon (more muzzle movement when firing) as well as make the sight axis too low.

bykerhd
November 09, 2012, 13:06
Funky stock ?

Yup, for me anyway.

AR collapsible stocks, six position ones, seem to work best for me, but not my beard. As in ouch ?
Nothing is QUITE perfect.:wink:

Sicarius
November 09, 2012, 13:16
AR LPK optimized and AR PG compatability would be awesome. Just adding to the wish list. Maybe an ace hinge/stock mount in the rear since they are fairly standardized.
Kevin

Dasho101
November 10, 2012, 10:23
why not start smaller... and make some extractors and bolts

vandal968
November 12, 2012, 13:09
why not start smaller... and make some extractors and bolts

Good question. The Short answer is that I currently have no need for either an extractor or a bolt and if I did, I could purchase either one from daewoorifleparts. More info in post #24.

cheers,
v

D.Brown
January 09, 2013, 18:39
Vandal,

I like the thought of the lower incorporating the trigger guard.

I would also be interested in a railed upper. Could the upper be made to use standard ar barrel, extension and bolt?

DB

vandal968
January 10, 2013, 01:20
Vandal,

I like the thought of the lower incorporating the trigger guard.

I would also be interested in a railed upper. Could the upper be made to use standard ar barrel, extension and bolt?

DB

Yes to barrel & extension, but no for the bolt.

v

preston1026
January 10, 2013, 15:22
Looks really, really nice. Maybe leaving out the hinge will make things simpler machining wise. You can always add the hinge as an accessory later.
How would you source the stock? It would cost a good coin to get the mold for that.

vandal968
January 11, 2013, 01:51
How would you source the stock? It would cost a good coin to get the mold for that.

Molding the stock might not be too bad, it's a pretty simple part. I was thinking about machining one from a block of hardwood. Retro :)

I modeled a few more parts today, I've decided to do the whole thing. Here's some eye candy.

v

http://imageshack.us/a/img836/8550/screencapdaewoorender10.jpg
http://imageshack.us/a/img843/3061/screencapdaewoorender12.jpg

D.Brown
January 11, 2013, 03:34
Vandal,

Continued excellent work. Let me encourage you to visit the Valmet dot org site and examine Sako1984 's images.

DB

vandal968
January 11, 2013, 12:08
Vandal,

Continued excellent work. Let me encourage you to visit the Valmet dot org site and examine Sako1984 's images.

DB

Thanks DB, I just found it, here's a link for anyone that's interested:
http://www.valmet.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3298&highlight=

His work is definitely more impressive than mine, really first-rate. I'd love to look over his shoulder for a few hours and see what I could learn.

The one gotcha is that it sounds like he's guessing at some of the dimensions since he doesn't have the actual article to work with. The model that I'm doing, while less impressive visually, is 100% to-scale with an eye toward being able to machine any replacement part that is needed.

Thanks for posting that, awesome.

cheers,
v

vandal968
January 16, 2013, 01:03
The upper is MUCH simpler than the lower. I've drawn it both ways, with the original optic mounting posts and with a built-in rail. I like the rail.

http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/7756/screencapdaewoorender14.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/195/screencapdaewoorender14.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)
http://imageshack.us/a/img854/332/screencapdaewoorender15.jpg


v

D.Brown
January 16, 2013, 17:16
Vandal,

How about one with the rail from one end of the upper to the other with no rear sight base. Nothing to get in the way of the scope. I am sure a riser could be made to bring any of the ar rear sights to the correct height.

If you did not live so far away, I would just bring a valmet over so we could take the measurements for Sako_1984 as well. I don't possess micrometers. I have a friend with a hobbyist shop up north, or maybe time to visit the small business incubator which also has a bridgeport.

DB

vandal968
January 16, 2013, 17:34
Vandal,

How about one with the rail from one end of the upper to the other with no rear sight base.
DB

DB,
I've been thinking the same thing (fully flat-top) but keep talking myself out of it because the height of the sights on the AR and the Woo are different. I've got a post-it note somewhere with the measurements (not in front of me). I was actually thinking about a new gas-block to match the heights so that AR BUIS sights could be used front AND rear, but I think that your idea of a riser is probably better. It certainly simplifies the machining on the upper and shrinks the billet a bit.

Keep the good ideas coming.
http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/323/screencapdaewoorender16.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/707/screencapdaewoorender16.jpg/)
http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/6213/screencapdaewoorender17.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/197/screencapdaewoorender17.jpg/)

cheers,
v

vandal968
January 16, 2013, 22:35
Does anyone know of a 3/8" picatinny rail riser? 1/2" seems to be the standard, but won't work with a standard AR BUIS on this flat-top Woo. Alternatively, is there are common BUIS with a different aperature height above the rail than a normal AR style? The 3/8" rail riser is preferred if it exists.

cheers,
v

ByrnieMac
January 16, 2013, 22:50
Vandal, those cad designs are awesome! If this gains any traction in the production aspect, let me know!

Blain
January 27, 2013, 21:52
If you try to make a Daewoo K2 without the AWESOME durable and ergonomic rear battle iron sights, then you FAIL! And FAIL HARD!!

One of the best things about the K2 is that it has the BEST iron sights on any battle rifle. Durable, fast target acquisition, precise, and quick to switch to battle range settings out to 600 meters.

EVC-3
January 29, 2013, 13:15
They suck. another 12 tiny little friggin' parts which don't do anything a 30 dollar set of Magpul BUISs can't do, cheaper, easier and more versatile.

Lose the sights.

D.Brown
January 31, 2013, 01:14
Dear Blain,

Your young, it shows, and thats fine for now. Your post mentions 600 yards. Trust me, after turning 40, optics will seem like a better and better option.

DB

vandal968
January 31, 2013, 17:27
Here's a possible solution to the rail height not matching the AR rail height.
http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/9109/screencapdaewoorender20.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/7/screencapdaewoorender20.jpg/)

Sexy, no?

v

Blain
January 31, 2013, 21:32
An abomination! Not even a bayonet lug! Only the young tacticool crowd is so obsessed with optics and all of those stupid rails.

They suck. another 12 tiny little friggin' parts which don't do anything a 30 dollar set of Magpul BUISs can't do, cheaper, easier and more versatile.

Lose the sights.

Let's see, be more durable, have a better sight picture, have adjustments (fine, and field expedient for extended ranges), and one less part to buy / fiddle around with.

Optics are not good in the cold and snow, and dust. And if they have batteries....forget about it!

A rifleman should be able to engage targets in field positions out to 500 yards.

We don't have anymore riflemen. Just tacticool ninja want to bes.

vandal968
January 31, 2013, 21:50
An abomination! Not even a bayonet lug!

Actually, I've drawn the front sight post with multiple configurations:

1. Bayo lug
2. Original Sight post & shroud
3. Rail.

The various features can be turned on and off. I didn't stick the rail on the sight post for tacticoolness, I stuck it on there so that standard AR sights could be used if I scratch-build a flat-top upper. The factory sights, while good, increase the complexity and size of the starting billet for the upper by quite a bit.

Here's a pic of the gas block in the DR200 configuration:
http://img547.imageshack.us/img547/4347/screencapgasblock3.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/547/screencapgasblock3.jpg/)

cheers,
v

boomerdog1
February 01, 2013, 08:57
Flat top, bayo lug. Let the end user decide what type of sights to use.

EVC-3
February 01, 2013, 14:41
The realities of manufacturing scores of tiny little parts care not for your "opinion". It's just the facts. Small American manufacturers aren't government contractors. Has nothing to do with "tacticoolness" whatsoever. I'll be sure to tell all our customers who spent time in the Sandbox that their optics were worthless. I'm sure they'll be grateful to be schooled.

An abomination! Not even a bayonet lug! Only the young tacticool crowd is so obsessed with optics and all of those stupid rails.



Let's see, be more durable, have a better sight picture, have adjustments (fine, and field expedient for extended ranges), and one less part to buy / fiddle around with.

Optics are not good in the cold and snow, and dust. And if they have batteries....forget about it!

A rifleman should be able to engage targets in field positions out to 500 yards.

We don't have anymore riflemen. Just tacticool ninja want to bes.

D.Brown
February 04, 2013, 01:49
Vandal,

The work remains impressive. I am not ignorant of the extent of your efforts. It is a princely gift to share the results of your time with us. I don't think it is in your best interest to publish it before production, but, I am glad of it anyway.

Blain,

I STILL shoot, and that in winter. Just these days I tend to use a scope for the ranges you have mentioned. My scopes are nothing fancy, I prefer my Leupold fixed 4x, but, I have never had a problem with them in cold weather. Even when in Michigan's upper peninsula, not that the U.P. really offers long range opportunities.

Yes, I am older and turning to tech to make the same shots. But, even though I am older I am still comfortable carrying a heavier rifle than a poodle shooting WOO for longer range shots.

It is my hope that Vandal continues his work, eventually when I don't care to carry a heavier rifle, I can easily imagine shifting to a 6.5grendel WOO upper instead. I am not there yet. But, I am old enough to acknowledge what is coming and to plan what I will do to compensate. I don't yet have a CZ 527. I will when 6.5g becomes an option.

I am older, slower, meaner and more experienced than I used to be. I still shoot, even in cold weather, and am yet able to lug a scoped .308 around. I just now appreciate a little rail space without feeling a need to fill it all.

DB

D.Brown
February 04, 2013, 02:18
Regarding the bayonet lug, The Galil .308 had a longer barrel and the lug was a separate piece. This is because it needed to be placed in front of the gas block in the correct location to actually engage the bayonet.

If you really require it Apex gun parts sells them.

I am now wondering what a longer barreled WOO could look like.

DB

ByrnieMac
February 04, 2013, 09:13
A rifleman should be able to engage targets in field positions out to 500 yards.

We don't have anymore riflemen. Just tacticool ninja want to bes.

Off topic, but I have a piece of unfortunate news to anyone who appreciates real marksmanship:

the Marine Corps boot camp is now moving (if they haven't done so already) to all ACOGs... IN BASIC TRAINING.

Which means that even if they gloss over the fundamentals of iron-sight marksmanship, none of the recruits are going to give a flying phuck because that is not what they are using to qualify.

I take loads of pride in my ability to consistently accurately put rounds on target with irons...

Just a sad bit of news. And while Trijicon ACOGs don't use batteries, If all you ever learn to shoot on is a 4x optic, you are useless to me.

vandal968
February 06, 2013, 15:46
Barrel added. And a bayo lug for Blain.
http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/6572/screencapdaewoorender23.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/823/screencapdaewoorender23.jpg/)

EVC-3
February 08, 2013, 00:04
I noticed the QC swivel socket on the lower...nice touch.

vandal968
February 08, 2013, 00:29
I noticed the QC swivel socket on the lower...nice touch.

That's actually not a QC, although it could easily be replaced by one. I'm modeling a MaxII which has a non-QC swivel in that location. This hole is missing entirely on the DR's since they attach the rear of the sling to the butthole stock instead.

cheers,
v

Dasho101
February 09, 2013, 11:11
id make it qc just so there are less new desighned parts that need to be fabricated when there are good parts out there all ready made. i do like the bayonet lug (what can i say never use it but its fun to have just to piss of the we hate EBR crowd)

azpackrat
February 21, 2013, 19:08
I have been working on getting a us made woo in production I have a shop that is willing to do all the milling I just need to come up with funds and get my manufacturing lic if I might be looking for partners fyi

vandal968
October 01, 2015, 22:17
I know that this is a pretty old thread to resurrect, but here goes....

I originally modeled the k2 because I was thinking of moving back to CA and the Woo is banned by name, so making myself an off-list lower would have let me bring it. After modeling the lower, I decided to just model the whole damn rifle, because, why not? This was a full-on reverse-engineering effort, so dimensions were figured out to the original spec, I didn't just use measurements from a single example since that can lead you pretty far astray. I ended up staying in AZ, so I never made a replacement lower. The model I did is pretty sophisticated and has multiple configurations where you can turn on/off various features. Bayo lug, on/off. Rear sight ears on/off. Flat top receiver and gasblock, on/off, etc. There are several renders in this thread that show the various options. Anyway, I recently got a new 3D printer for work and I've been spitting out parts pretty much continually for other projects, but I needed a mental health break so I printed out the flat top upper and railed gasblock, then assembled them onto real parts to see how they look and to test the model. Results are below, I REALLY like how this came out. Cheek weld and sight picture are amazing. The rifle looks modern and bad-ass. I'm going to build the upper and gas block from aluminum in another couple of weeks when the temps in my garage become a bit more bearable. Here it is:
http://s23.postimg.org/gwvzv92jb/20151001_195849.jpg (http://postimg.org/image/gwvzv92jb/)
http://s27.postimg.org/sqk6fpvbj/20151001_203830.jpg (http://postimg.org/image/sqk6fpvbj/)
http://s28.postimg.org/bkbffs5pl/20151001_203843.jpg (http://postimg.org/image/bkbffs5pl/)

What do you guys think?

cheers,
c

azpackrat
October 02, 2015, 11:43
hey looks good I have several i\other ideas too we should I sent you an im thaks scott

preston1026
October 02, 2015, 13:24
the upper is what i would e interested in. Full rail, able to accept ar barrels without modification would be great

vandal968
October 02, 2015, 18:18
the upper is what i would e interested in. Full rail, able to accept ar barrels without modification would be great

Changing the upper to take a "normal" AR barrel is easy, the tricky part is that you rarely see AR barrels that don't already have the gas port drilled and it needs to be in a different location. For mine, I'm using a HK33 barrel which, like the Woo, has an extended barrel extension (relative to an AR). In fact, its extension is even longer. I'm going to machine the upper to Daewoo specs and either turn a spacer disc to get the location right, or (more likely), cut a groove in the barrel extension and use a external snap ring to set the spacing. Just to be clear, this is just the spacing of the barrel assy into the upper, NOT the headspace, headspace works in the normal AR way (interaction of chamber, barrel extension, and bolt).

Cheers,
c

azpackrat
October 02, 2015, 21:09
I have looked at barrels and I found a source that will make anything we need

I also have wanted to make a handgard that has a full length rail on top with a rounded lower part that you can add rail sections along with alternating qd points

PARA FN FAL
October 06, 2015, 10:26
Vandal you are awesome.

PARA FN FAL
October 06, 2015, 10:35
This is a little off topic here but has anyone considered using an all polymer lower like Plum Crazy sells for AR 15. The Daewoo looks like the lower is a low stress part during firing and that would allow for the use of cheaper and easier to make parts to be used. That still doesn't solve the issue of the upper but could solve half of the building problem.

vorgain
October 16, 2015, 12:22
Not American made, but Lionheart (the guys who rebrand the Daewoo 9mm handgun) have stated they're working on getting K2s into their product field.

So it's worth a shot to email them and show there's support for Lionheart K2s.

raexcct2
November 04, 2015, 00:02
Not American made, but Lionheart (the guys who rebrand the Daewoo 9mm handgun) have stated they're working on getting K2s into their product field.

So it's worth a shot to email them and show there's support for Lionheart K2s.

Thanks for the heads up.

D.Brown
November 20, 2015, 05:03
Nice work Vandal,

I did not anticipate the HK front sight. The upper looks great.

I am going to hope this eventually leads to multiple caliber woo options.

DB

PS. Is not keeping to the original woo dimensions rather than the readily available parts not more work for yourself?