Crusader Arms Crypto

The lower is not short on metal anywhere. There is no need to cheat and go a couple mm deep.
I think that pins have to be the same length on both sides. And I think that at best the maximum length for a pin is in red, but would expect the actual pin length be in blue:

1725943805897.png

How long are these in real measurement?
 
I think that pins have to be the same length on both sides. And I think that at best the maximum length for a pin is in red, but would expect the actual pin length be in blue:

View attachment 816918

How long are these in real measurement?
Did you not definitively say that the pins are embedded 3mm? Why are you asking, when you have already given the answer?
 
Did you not definitively say that the pins are embedded 3mm? Why are you asking, when you have already given the answer?
I want to give everyone an opportunity to make sure I was wrong and it is the best arrangement to keep pins in place ever devised. I think we can all agree on this most noble goal.
 
I want to give everyone an opportunity to make sure I was wrong and it is the best arrangement to keep pins in place ever devised. I think we can all agree on this most noble goal.
Why not prove you are right. You made the claims.


But it is just claims and BS.
I really question your motives.
 
Aero managed to squeeze more metal into their enhanced upper than Colt does.View attachment 816888View attachment 816889
All the recoil is transfered through the front of the little loop of aluminum. If you want to deactivate an AR in a hurry you open it and twist it apart. Takes a pair of hands and a knee. First one I did was an eye opener. The black/grey is a Colt upper.
View attachment 816890
Look at the block that transfers recoil.
View attachment 816891
The tolerances are tight enough that a .010" feeler gauge prevents the rear pin from going through the upper. I will admit that there is some machining blemishes and cosmetic ugliness. Sure to be a deal breaker to some and I hope it gets better after the initial production surge slows. I really don't care because the places I want perfect are. My IBI barrel fit perfect. No shimming or flange sealant required. Probably the tightest I have seen and same with the barrel nut threads. No slop with the Aero nut.
View attachment 816892
Crypto round hole.

View attachment 816893
You might not be able to make it out but ARs have a slightly elongated rear pin hole to accommodate multi manufacturer tolerances. This prevents the lug from transfering recoil. I remember USAR armourers bushing and reaming the two lugs chasing accuracy. Which would make them weaker but must have been strong enough.


Looking at the pins I am going to assume Crusader was not smoking crack and they go into the lower at minimum the same half inch they stick out. I would assume a press fit because that would work and be fast...and work. View attachment 816898
The lower is not short on metal anywhere. There is no need to cheat and go a couple mm deep.

I have noticed the crusader is less sensitive to bipod placement than ARs are. I can only guess it is the lack of slop between upper and lower. Before I found getting the bipod back towards the magwell worked best for consistent POI. This Crypto doesn't seem to care. Pushed out front and bagged at the rear it works like a bolt gun.

I can't speak to the complete guns Crusader is selling, only to the spine.
Thank you so much for posting this!!!

Fantastic!
 
One current production firearm that uses a longitudinal pin for assembly at the front of the lower frame is the very popular Browning BL22.
The lower frame, which carries the firing mechanism with hammer, lever, and buttstock is a non-ferrous casting. Probably Zamak or similar zinc based diecasting alloy. The receiver with boltway and barrel is steel. They are connected with a single pin at the front and a takedown screw passing through at the rear.
The pin is splined, and pressed into the casting. I know of one incident where the pin separated from its socket in the lower. The rifle had been used, abused, rode hard and put away wet. In this case, the casting broke. I repaired it by setting the pin in place with JB Weld. The rifle wasn't brought back to the shop, remained in service.
I do not believe that there is a design problem with use of these pins in the case of the Crypto. It is a clever system for producing a rifle that meets the needs of competitive shooters, hunters and sportsmen. The fact that neither an AR auto sear nor a STANAG magazine are compatible with the Crypto is evidence of thoughtful design.
 
One current production firearm that uses a longitudinal pin for assembly at the front of the lower frame is the very popular Browning BL22.

So a lever action, where bolt does not recoil on itself... with all the power of .22... ohhhkey. I'm glad it is a proven robust design then.
 
Even if the pins are loose. The upper is still secured by a rear take down pin, then the magwell area that the upper reciever sits against becomes the recoil lug. Oh yeah and then the upper to rear of the lower. The front pins are just alignment guides.
 
Even if the pins are loose. The upper is still secured by a rear take down pin, then the magwell area that the upper reciever sits against becomes the recoil lug. Oh yeah and then the upper to rear of the lower. The front pins are just alignment guides.
NOPE!

It's going to bReAk RiGht iN HaLf!!!!

... once you remove the rear takedown pin, and separate the upper and lower.
 
If you believe that front pin does not bear any load why not just remove front pin from you rifle and try to shoot, my friend.
They don't. It utilize the same load bearing as the AR15. Front of the upper to front of the mag well. The rear take down pin. That tab also sits in a slot on the lower. Then you got the upper against the buffer tube area on the lower.

Pins are just alignment pins. To keep the front of the upper from going side to side.
 
On a AR180 they used 2 thin spring guide rods on a plate with a nub. that locked into a hole on the polymer lower reciever. That kept the lower closed and aligned. So I don't see how this design is any weaker. Simply someone that doesn't know AR15 or 180 design, trying to grasp straws to being wrong.
 
Well it seems that it is universally accepted as a fact that front pins have no load up and down. It also seems to be universally accepted that there is no difference between a cross pin side to side and a pin along the receiver and there is no difference between a pin moving freely inside holes and a pin fixed in place by one end. All this have nothing to do with what kind of stress is applied where and to what part of the assembly has to be in what tolerances. Ok fine. All I can do is stand in awe.
 
Well it seems that it is universally accepted as a fact that front pins have no load up and down. It also seems to be universally accepted that there is no difference between a cross pin side to side and a pin along the receiver and there is no difference between a pin moving freely inside holes and a pin fixed in place by one end. All this have nothing to do with what kind of stress is applied where and to what part of the assembly has to be in what tolerances. Ok fine. All I can do is stand in awe.
AR180B used metal guide into polymer. Just don't got cracking it off trees or drop it. But I don't see how it's gonna be a failure point. As it's no different than front take down pin on an AR15.
 
Well it seems that it is universally accepted as a fact that front pins have no load up and down. It also seems to be universally accepted that there is no difference between a cross pin side to side and a pin along the receiver and there is no difference between a pin moving freely inside holes and a pin fixed in place by one end. All this have nothing to do with what kind of stress is applied where and to what part of the assembly has to be in what tolerances. Ok fine. All I can do is stand in awe.


You could go do some dry fire. Go for a run. Be productive. You are adding nothing here.

See you at NSCC 2025.
 
Well it seems that it is universally accepted as a fact that front pins have no load up and down. It also seems to be universally accepted that there is no difference between a cross pin side to side and a pin along the receiver and there is no difference between a pin moving freely inside holes and a pin fixed in place by one end. All this have nothing to do with what kind of stress is applied where and to what part of the assembly has to be in what tolerances. Ok fine. All I can do is stand in awe.
Two press fit pins in single shear loaded longitudinally is better than one slip fit pin in double shear loaded laterally, don't worry that fulcrum with 20 inches of barrel hanging off it will be fine. 🤡

Like an AR15, don't swing this gun around without the rear takedown pin installed.
 
Back
Top Bottom