Fecundpossum

joined 2 years ago
[–] Fecundpossum 3 points 3 months ago

It’s fun to learn about over the years but it’s a deep fucking rabbit hole for sure.

[–] Fecundpossum 5 points 3 months ago (2 children)

You don’t adjust springs for subsonic loads. That’s not a thing. His can didn’t have a Nielsen device. Simple as.

On an auto loading rifle platform you could adjust an adjustable gas block if the weapon is equipped with one, allowing you to tune the gas pressure to ensure reliable function, but a Nielsen device is necessary on any modern handgun that doesn’t have a fixed barrel design.

Not trying to dunk on you, just trying to educate, because I keep seeing a lot of fanciful interpretations of how firearms function.

[–] Fecundpossum 4 points 3 months ago

ITT: people who don’t know what a Nielsen device is.

His “solvent trap” kit built, or street obtained suppressor was not equipped with a Nielsen device, also known as a “piston” or “booster” that allows handguns with a tilting barrel design to cycle with the added weight of a suppressor.

[–] Fecundpossum 6 points 3 months ago

See my comments below. I’m pretty convinced he was manually cycling his slide because his suppressor, whether homemade or street sourced, lacked a Nielsen device or “piston” or “booster”

[–] Fecundpossum 12 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It’s A LOT to learn, and has been a primary interest of mine for a couple decades, so I love sharing. I also love your big pp energy for updating the original comment.

Edit: decades not days

[–] Fecundpossum 19 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I’m also of the mind that knowing the limitations of his setup, he trained around his need to manually cycle his weapon. In the video, he did so smoothly and efficiently without any perceptible panic in his movements.

[–] Fecundpossum 18 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I don’t want to be a hater, but you’re wrong about a lot of things in this post. Supressors do not slow a projectile, and in most cases actually increase muzzle velocity due to increased dwell time for gas expansion. They suppress muzzle flash and report by containing said gasses. Sonic booms still happen, and supressors work more effectively with specific sub sonic ammunition, which is usually achieved with a heavier projectile weight lowering the velocity.

I’m not trying to dunk on you here, just trying to educate.

Obtaining a supressor isn’t too difficult, but you do have to be thoroughly screened by the ATF after submitting photos, fingerprints, and a form, and a $200 tax, which leads me to believe this suppressor was homemade and lacked a Nielsen device, see my thread above.

[–] Fecundpossum 22 points 3 months ago

So, many older pistol designs used a barrel in a fixed position in relation to the pistols frame. Due to this configuration, the added weight of a suppressor hanging from the barrel does not impede the mechanical operation of the slide cycling.

Modern pistol designs utilize variations of John Brownings tilting barrel design. Because the barrel tilts during the cycling of the pistol, the weight of the suppressor interrupts the movement of the barrel and slide preventing a full stroke of the slide to eject the spent case and feed another round from the magazine. Not good.

In response, something called a Nielsen device was developed, basically a cylinder with a spring in it that encourages the pistol slide to fully cycle. These are sometimes referred to as a “piston” or “booster”.

Suppressors are heavily regulated by the ATF, and id have to guess that when seeking one on the grey or black market, or manufacturing your own, a Nielsen device is not easy to replicate with crude means, nor easy to find on the street.

TL:DR dude was missing a part that makes a pistol work more gooder with a suppressor.

Source: I gun.

[–] Fecundpossum 2 points 3 months ago

Believe it or not, when I had my old 2060 laptop I used EndeavourOS for the same reason. But now I’m on a full AMD system, and the quirks of nvidia are no longer an issue for me. So yeah, good two cents. Everyone’s Linux journey involves some trial and error and finding what works for you.

[–] Fecundpossum 1 points 3 months ago

lol no.

Canonical has left a bad taste in my mouth far too many times. Snaps are generally awful, collecting analytics without user knowledge at one point. If I was going to use something Ubuntu based it would be mint, but I prefer a native vanilla gnome experience.

[–] Fecundpossum 1 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I run workstation with Gnome. KDE is fine, and fedora implements it in vanilla fashion without any tweaks, which is good. I personally stopped using KDE because it doesn’t always work the way I want it to, and Gnome does. Games can easily be swapped between monitors if it opens on the wrong one initially. Gnome took some getting used to but it’s fantastic. Give it a shot.

view more: ‹ prev next ›