Interesting New Pistol Design

Steve Johnson
by Steve Johnson

Timothy Lindsay (USA) and Renaud Kerbrat (Switzerland) are listed as the inventors on the recently published patent application #20100077643. The patent describes a new pistol recoil mechanism that is similar to is the mechanism used by the TDI KRISS.

Like the TDI KRISS, the bolt recoils downwards to reduce perceived recoil and muzzle rise.

Prototype .45 Pistol
Steps showing the bolt recoil
The inventors envisage some pretty wacky rifle and carbine designs.

UPDATE: Some astute commenters pointed out that Renaud Kerbrat is credited with the KRISS design. So this could be said to be the KRISS patent. What is interesting is how long they took to submit a patent application to the USTPO.

You can read the full patent after the jump …

(more…)

Steve Johnson
Steve Johnson

I founded TFB in 2007 and over 10 years worked tirelessly, with the help of my team, to build it up into the largest gun blog online. I retired as Editor in Chief in 2017. During my decade at TFB I was fortunate to work with the most amazing talented writers and genuinely good people!

More by Steve Johnson

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 47 comments
  • RP RP on Jul 22, 2010

    Patent drawings are done by trained artists, not inventors themselves. The drawings are intended to provide just enough information to meet USPTO requirements to secure the patent without giving any more information than absolutely necessary. This is why they appear so basic. "Prior art" is a specific legal term meaning the state of the art in a field - that is, if an invention or part of an invention is prior art, already available to the public generally, it cannot be patented. It applies to the patent applicant's claims of originality.

  • Tim Mullins Tim Mullins on Jul 28, 2010

    Yes, that's the definition of prior art. But I did not know about actual artists doing the drawing. I just picked up on the fact that everybody seemed to be interpreting the drawings on this page literally, instead of looking at them like an electrical schematic or similar. Interpreted on a literal basis, then yes, this weapon would be a bit clumsy at best.

    My point is just this: you have to see the manufactured product before passing judgment on a product, because the "art" isn't going to do anything more than clarify the concept. When it does that. There is more than one reason patents are infringed after all.

Next