They're shittin' a brick now.   DefDist is to relaunch soon I believe.

had no idea they made them remove it from their site til i read the article tom posted.
i downloaded the original design cad pdf files if anyone wants them. someone needs to find a free uploading site first. i dont think its small enough to email, but it may be.

I was surprised that the printer they used only cost $1700.  Everyone is always saying how expensive 3D printers are.  $1700 ain't too bad!

I was surprised that the printer they used only cost $1700.  Everyone is always saying how expensive 3D printers are.  $1700 ain't too bad!

ive read staples offers a consumer model for either $1200 or 1400 i cant remember.

the commercial models are still 5 figures.

I'm amused that according to the article, the catastrophic failure was due to a "misfire."

Seen a video stating that the guy who designed the gun uses a high end commercial printer, about $10-15,000 not one of the "cheap" ones. And even then it only lasted about 4 rounds before failure. After all, it is plastic

I wish someone with a cheap-o printer would build one and remotely fire it into ballistic gelatin...

I'm not really sure why everyone is so enamored with this idea.

Its kinda techno-sexy, sure, but this isn't the groundswell of democratizing force that it is being made out to be. Its not even a foreshadow of it. For far cheaper than a 3D printer you can make a pipe gun. Other than that the plastic gun can make it through an airport scanner (the ammo is another matter) I don't see what the big deal is. 3D printing technology is NOT an avenue for cheaper production of anything other than plastic. It makes prototyping things MUCH easier and cheaper but buy nature of the materials you just aren't going to see a printed plastic gun that's worth the price of admission. Gun parts, sure, but not the parts that take all the pressure.

I did notice that the article didn't say how many shots before the "misfire."

The way this thing is designed (if I understand it correctly) its actually easier to have a bunch of barrels that are loaded and swap them out after each shot. Probably wouldn't have a KB that way.

I'm not really sure why everyone is so enamored with this idea.

Its kinda techno-sexy, sure, but this isn't the groundswell of democratizing force that it is being made out to be. Its not even a foreshadow of it.

See, I think that's where you're missing the point.  You're like IBM, commenting on the microchip, saying "But what is it good for?"  The point isn't about making guns, or at least, that's how you and I see it.  But this definitely is the beginning of something truly astounding.  Today, it's plastic guns that break.  Tomorrow, it's carbon nano-tube cutlery that lasts an eternity until you recycle it into a new sprocket for your bicycle.  That you printed.  The next day, you're printing your own cell phone, a cute little antique.

Sure, the printers in two days won't look like these.  They won't operate in the same manner.  It's like we're in the days of ENIAC.  But ENIAC was commissioned in 1946, and today, 67 years later, there's enough computing power in your smart phone to launch the space shuttle. 

So, yes, we can pooh-pooh the little plastic toy gun.  It's ineffective and inefficient in every conceivable way.  Well, every conceivable way save one: it opened a door that liberated popular imagination.  (Cause, you know, it's not like this is the first thing ever made by a 3D printer.  I mean, a dress from a 3D printer debuted in Paris just a couple of weeks ago.  So, you know, there's that.)

Sure, I get that.

What everyone who is going ga-ga about this is missing is that building anything substantial requires substantial materials... and last I looked the prices on those raw materials have continued to go up. And for 3D printing you need those substantial materials in a printable form. And each different kind of material is likely to require a different printing method...

Since when has making things one off ever been more cost effective than mass producing them? More convenient, yes, but the price of admission to 3d printing is likely to remain MUCH higher than buying conventionally produced items for a looooong time.

Exciting! And not nearly as practical as it is being made out to be, except for certain things like product development and prototyping and special circumstances (like military or space station situations) where a stock of certain raw materials can be used to produce a variety of things that might be needed instead of having to stock that whole variety of things - which might not all be needed.

edit: Keep in mind how expensive ink cartridges are now. Imagine how expensive stainless steel and copper cartridges are going to be...

edit: Keep in mind how expensive ink cartridges are now. Imagine how expensive stainless steel and copper cartridges are going to be...

Imagine a 3D printer that uses the aluminum soda/beer cans you feed it...

Imagine a 3D printer that uses the aluminum soda/beer cans you feed it...

No way, man! That's what I make gas checks out of! 

No way, man! That's what I make gas checks out of! 

"Imma get fucked up then make me a GUN!!" 

I stopped giving a damn about 3D printed guns when I realized a home CNC milling machine can be had for under ten grand.  Plastic popguns are neat, but I'd much rather be able to machine production-grade metallic pistols!

I'm not really sure why everyone is so enamored with this idea.

Its kinda techno-sexy, sure, but this isn't the groundswell of democratizing force that it is being made out to be. Its not even a foreshadow of it. For far cheaper than a 3D printer you can make a pipe gun. Other than that the plastic gun can make it through an airport scanner (the ammo is another matter) I don't see what the big deal is. 3D printing technology is NOT an avenue for cheaper production of anything other than plastic. It makes prototyping things MUCH easier and cheaper but buy nature of the materials you just aren't going to see a printed plastic gun that's worth the price of admission. Gun parts, sure, but not the parts that take all the pressure.

I did notice that the article didn't say how many shots before the "misfire."

The way this thing is designed (if I understand it correctly) its actually easier to have a bunch of barrels that are loaded and swap them out after each shot. Probably wouldn't have a KB that way.

i think this is more of an exercise in idea, than it is something practical.