Would this design work?

[Oleg Volk]

(chamber would be slightly cut away for manual extraction of empties)

 

[C.R.Sam]

Looks functionable providing there is something to keep the striker from forcing the trigger rearward as it forces the striker forward.

Ie....stay cocked ?

Realize that tis a simplified drawing.
As if any drawing with a mouse is simple

Sam

 

[Romulus]

Two quick comments...the trigger/sear seems to require an upward rather than rearward pull based on its geometry and pivot location...second, I don't know what kind of spring you'd use, it seems it would not have enough compression based on the receiver dimensions - though that may be due to your drawing not being at scale...

 

[Oleg Volk]

Trigger would move up, sear would move down. Receiver can have lots of space behind the striker, all the way up to the buttplate, but it can be made shorter to keep the striker spring compressed. Does this look like it would re-cock properly? What would be a good starting spring weight for the striker (20lbs?)?

I would imagine that it's best to weld a rectangular locking block to the bolt and attach the bolt handle via a hole going through the locking block and partway into the bolt...most rigid that way.

The receiver would extend over the chamber area for strength. I am reasoning that and the double thickness compared to the designs using better steel would provide a sufficient safety margin. Any materials engineers here who can add suggestions?

 

[Jim Watson]

It looks like a combination of the Phillipine Guerilla Gun stock, a Mossberg or Stevens bolt action shotgun lockup on the root of the bolt handle, and the firing mechanism of one of the cheaper straightline muzzleloaders.

No reason it wouldn't work.

Get a Numrich catalog and look at the parts diagrams for some of the older and cheaper guns. Lots of ideas there.