I ran across this on another site. Its supposed to be officially announced at the Shot Show.
It appears to be a double action rifle. FA says its NOT semi-automatic. I'm guessing its aimed for the more restrictive states where out right semi-auto bans are possible.
Interesting concept with equally interesting possibilities I'd like to give it a try.
What do y'all think?

Franklin Armory Providence Rifle

Solution in search of a problem?

__________________
I always take precautions

My guess is that its a possible solution for what may be a future problem. F.A. is just trying to get ahead of it.
I'd like to shoot one just to try it. But I doubt I would buy one.

I'm kinda surprised this hasn't generated more discussion. It is interesting. If nothing else, where are all the naysayers?

It’s interesting, not a self loader. The trigger brings back the bolt then releases the bolt to pick up and fire the round. Question is the the firing pin in the face of the bolt or separate?

I predict this will go down in flames like their “not an SBR/SBR,” that didn’t have rifling but fires football-like projectiles. While I’ll give them the nod for trying, I don’t expect anything other than gimmicks at SHOT.

__________________
Some Might Say.

Reminds me of the Troy Pump Action AR.

Conceptually, it strikes me as a cross between a DA revolver and an open bolt subgun.

Interesting concept - particularly for places that are placing burdensome restrictions on semi-autos.
My biggest question is: how heavy is the trigger pull? If it is cycling the action and extracting the case, it has to take a lot of force to do all of that mechanically. Sounds like it would make for a a really heavy trigger pull..

That's why I said it is like a revolver - the trigger pushes the cartridge out of the mag, fires it and extracts it (but not in that order, necessarily). The amount of force necessary to do that would be similar to loading a blowback pistol with the recoil spring removed.

I don't think this concept would work very well with long rifle rounds, but stubby 9mms means the bolt doesn't have to travel very far. And since extraction doesn't happen until the next trigger pull, the brass has zero residual pressure to cause drag.

So they may have managed by combining a longish trigger travel with a something like a 12 lbs pull, which wouldn't be so hard to deal with in a rifle.

There have already been DA shotguns and subguns, so that part isn't new for long guns.

Perhaps spring loaded levers giving a leverage assist?

So, are you saying that you pull the trigger twice per shot? First one loads a round and second one fires it?
If it breaks the cycling of the action and the firing of the round into two separate actions that would make it better - and reduce the force necessary.

I was thinking the way it worked was that most of the of travel of the trigger pull cycled the action and loaded a round and only the last portion released the striker to fire a round. If that is how it works, even with a short round like the 9mm, the portion of the trigger pull that cycles the action is going have to be pretty heavy - especially if it includes cocking the striker AND cycling a round into the chamber.

I would think that would require such a long, heavy trigger pull that it would make accuracy difficult. Even with the off hand to steady it, the amount of force required would seem like it would make holding steady throughout really difficult for most people.

Compared to a revolver where the DA pull only rotates a free-spinning cylinder and cocks the hammer, working a slide against a recoil spring with the upward pressure of the rounds in the magazine pushing up against the bottom of it seems like it would take a lot of mechanical force.

Look at how much difficulty a lot of people have with accomplishing the same thing when racking a slide using their whole hand. In this case you're trying to do all of that with ONE FINGER.

The design may have some tricks of mechanical advantage (levers and springs) to make that easier. I really look forward to seeing more about how it works - not to mention how WELL it works. It's certainly an interesting idea.

If semi-auto bans continue gaining steam I can see these becoming big sellers.

No, I meant one trigger pull does it all.

Why would this thing have a recoil spring? It doesn't recoil.



Another advantage of this design is that it could be very light, just like a revolver action can be really light. You don't need high mass bolt parts if you don't have any recoil forces.

Oh but it DOES have recoil. Any firearm that fires a powder powered projectile has recoil. What it doesn't have is a reciprocating slide powered by the explosion of powder. And that is a good point. HOWEVER, the bolt is being drawn back by the mechanical action of the trigger and SOMETHING has to close the bolt before it fires. Presumably that is a spring action.

It isn't quite a recoil spring in terms of absorbing recoil and then returning the slide/bolt into battery after being cycled by the energy of the powder charge, but it does have to return the slide/bolt into battery.

Maybe it would be better called a return (rather than recoil) spring. Maybe not as stiff as a recoil spring, but all of the energy to compress it has to come from the mechanical action of the trigger, rather than being assisted by the energy of the powder charge.

I look forward to seeing some more specs - the trigger pull weight in particular.

"It" being the bolt in relation to the rifle, not the whole rifle.


And you don't need a spring loaded bolt at all. The bolt could be cycled back and forth with a bellcrank, just like a piston in an engine. That's what I'm betting is going on here. So no spring force to overcome.

Not quite sure what you mean by that. The bolt doesn't recoil - the whole firearm does. Just like a bolt action or a single shot. The bolt is locked in position, so it won't recoil by itself. If it did it would be a semi-auto. Unless it did everything EXCEPT pick up the next round. I guess you could argue it wasn't a semi-auto if the bolt cycled and it didn't feed the next round. But what would be the point of cycling it if it didn't pick up the next round as the bolt closed?

So then the first half of the trigger pull would have to open the action, then the second half would have to pickup a round and close the action, and then at the end release the striker? Seems like a heck of a lot to accomplish with the amount of movement offered by a DA trigger. Maybe possible, but it seems unlikely.

Plus, the limited amount of leverage available with a trigger that length would make operating a bell-crank with enough throw to accomplish all that really difficult. The mechanical dis-advantage would mean that the trigger would be really, REALLY stiff - even worse than if you were compressing a return spring.

We can speculate all we want, but in the end I guess we'll just have to wait and see. More info about how it works and what the trigger pull weight is will come out soon no doubt. I'm betting on a trigger pull in the 20 pound range.