Bullpup rifles????
- Thread starter soren57
- Start date
- Status
colostomyclown
New member
because all bullpup rifles function the same?????
davlandrum
New member
If you already decided, why ask for opinions?
Silent Titan
New member
i like the fact that they can be more compact guns but switching mags doesnt feel as natural to me. Ill stick with traditional layouts just because it is what im comfortable with. if thats not an issue for you then i see no reason not to get one. i dont know if you are but the RFB and FS2000 have taken care of left handed shooters by ejecting the cases forward, so thats not the issue it once was with bullpup's.
My experience with an AUG clone:
Lighter up front = easier offhand shots.
Triggers are a little creepier due to the trigger bar.
Mag reloads are a little more involved than a traditional AR style, although not too different from say, a FAL reload. You will have to train for it.
KBs may maim your face. Although I have yet to see it.
Harder to shoot weak side, as your cheek may block the ejection port.
Lighter up front = easier offhand shots.
Triggers are a little creepier due to the trigger bar.
Mag reloads are a little more involved than a traditional AR style, although not too different from say, a FAL reload. You will have to train for it.
KBs may maim your face. Although I have yet to see it.
Harder to shoot weak side, as your cheek may block the ejection port.
I have a F2000 and I've shot AUGs and PS90s (and a crappy 10/22 in a Muzzelite stock) so I have some experience with them. I find that what most people said is mostly true. They are more compact and follow up shots seem to be easier. Mag changes are slower than on an AR, but once you get used to it, about on-par with a FAL, HK91, AK . . . pretty much anything else. The main issue is you can't just tap a button and have the mag drop out, you have to pull one (easy to do one handed) and then seat the replacement. Also the triggers do tend to have more creep, but I don't find my F2000 to be worse than a basic AR-15, HK91 or AK trigger (although I hear the RFB has a very good trigger).
glockcompact
New member
The chamber is much closer to your ear. Could be bad if you find yourself in a situation where you have to shoot without hearing protection. 
They were a '70s effort to make a shorter, more compact firearm. The idea was to have the power of a main battle rifle in a carbine length gun.
The compromises to do that are right out there and obvious. The short sight radius was too inaccurate, even for the 2MOA standard of combat, so the designers all included a 2 or 3X optic on top, which was very leading edge for the time. The magazine location prohibits fast magazine changes in high rate consumption tactics, which impedes it's use in precisely what it was built to improve - CQB tactics. That's a major fail right there, and why so few countries have adopted them. Of course China saw things differently and has issued one since 1995. They no longer use the AK.
Most of the other considerations are minor, the whole point was to get a full length barrel telescoped into a short carbine. The military basically didn't ask the question "Can you build a full power carbine?" by moving to intermediate calibers, anyway.
If anything, bullpups are best suited to collectors and range shooters interested in the design. They have a poor reputation in field use with the few countries that have them, not so much reliability as simply not being user friendly and more difficult to handle compared to conventional designs.
The compromises to do that are right out there and obvious. The short sight radius was too inaccurate, even for the 2MOA standard of combat, so the designers all included a 2 or 3X optic on top, which was very leading edge for the time. The magazine location prohibits fast magazine changes in high rate consumption tactics, which impedes it's use in precisely what it was built to improve - CQB tactics. That's a major fail right there, and why so few countries have adopted them. Of course China saw things differently and has issued one since 1995. They no longer use the AK.
Most of the other considerations are minor, the whole point was to get a full length barrel telescoped into a short carbine. The military basically didn't ask the question "Can you build a full power carbine?" by moving to intermediate calibers, anyway.
If anything, bullpups are best suited to collectors and range shooters interested in the design. They have a poor reputation in field use with the few countries that have them, not so much reliability as simply not being user friendly and more difficult to handle compared to conventional designs.
Bullpups are fine. That they haven't caught on as a main battle rifle has less to do with the design and more to do with military contracting issues.
But, Israel has the Tavor and that is a good endorsement for the combat effectiveness of the bullpup design. When I was transitioning through Kuwait I had a quick talk with a Digger who was transitioning out of Afghanistan where he had nothing but praise for his AUG over the M4/M16.
The KelTec RFB in 308 with a 20" barrel is probably the bullpup that intrigues me the most. If I didn't already have a semi-auto 308 it would be on my acquisition list.
Jimro
But, Israel has the Tavor and that is a good endorsement for the combat effectiveness of the bullpup design. When I was transitioning through Kuwait I had a quick talk with a Digger who was transitioning out of Afghanistan where he had nothing but praise for his AUG over the M4/M16.
The KelTec RFB in 308 with a 20" barrel is probably the bullpup that intrigues me the most. If I didn't already have a semi-auto 308 it would be on my acquisition list.
Jimro
sc928porsche
New member
Although they feel a bit uncomfortable at first. They are a good design. Their biggest advantage is that you get a longer barrel in a shorter package. This allows for a little higher velocities in bullets and because of balance points, you can use a bit heavier bbl without making the weapon front heavy.
reconcoupe
New member
If your just interested in the design/look, and want to get some looks at the range, consider one of the numerous AK bullpup conversions. Gunbroker is showing a few with a Buy It Now price of around 600-700 dollars. (just search bullpup) Hell, theres a company that makes a kit compatible for the Saiga12's
I admit the RFB, the FS2000 and the PS90 are some sweet weapons, but I can't justify spending more than a few hundred bucks to look cool.
I admit the RFB, the FS2000 and the PS90 are some sweet weapons, but I can't justify spending more than a few hundred bucks to look cool.
i have a MSAR E4 and i love it. it's small, light, and accurate. i used it on teh range for an executive protection course and it was one of the very few rifles that didn't have a malf. i just wish they were more prevalent (bullpups in genera) and had a bigger aftermarket selection.
Larry Vickers has had segments on his show "Tactical Arms" about the FN P90 & has said many good things about it. He's my personal favorite when it comes to commenting on whether a weapon is the real deal or not. He likes the design & so do many other special operators. That's a great endorsement for any weapon.
The original "bullpup" rifles were bolt actions (often single shot) varmint rifles! m They were built by custom gunsmiths in the years before WWII.
The idea was to be able to use a long barrel (24, 26, or even longer) for maximum velocity in a rifle no longer than a standard one. Balance for handling in combat was not a consideration. Combat was not a consideration!
Various designers have tried to convert the bullpup concept to a battle rifle, with varying degrees of sucess. While the shorter than standard length with a full length barrel is useful, other features resulting from the bullpup design have not been considered as succerssful in the field as conventional rifles.
As has been mentioned, the "awkwardness" of changing magazines, balance of the rifle, issues with trigger mechanisms and problems with ejection when fired from the "off" shoulder have led to very few designs being adopted by the world's militaries. Austraila, is leaving the AUG, because of issues they have had with theirs, and Austria hasn't been fighting anyone (that I know of) since they adopted theirs.
The bullpup military rifle (as fielded to date) has not proven to be a superior weapon to conventional designs. They work, but have their own drawbacks, and have not provided enough of an advantage to become standard infantry rifles in most nations. The list of nations using a bullpup rifle that is NOT made (designed) in that nation is very, very short.
The idea was to be able to use a long barrel (24, 26, or even longer) for maximum velocity in a rifle no longer than a standard one. Balance for handling in combat was not a consideration. Combat was not a consideration!
Various designers have tried to convert the bullpup concept to a battle rifle, with varying degrees of sucess. While the shorter than standard length with a full length barrel is useful, other features resulting from the bullpup design have not been considered as succerssful in the field as conventional rifles.
As has been mentioned, the "awkwardness" of changing magazines, balance of the rifle, issues with trigger mechanisms and problems with ejection when fired from the "off" shoulder have led to very few designs being adopted by the world's militaries. Austraila, is leaving the AUG, because of issues they have had with theirs, and Austria hasn't been fighting anyone (that I know of) since they adopted theirs.
The bullpup military rifle (as fielded to date) has not proven to be a superior weapon to conventional designs. They work, but have their own drawbacks, and have not provided enough of an advantage to become standard infantry rifles in most nations. The list of nations using a bullpup rifle that is NOT made (designed) in that nation is very, very short.
WARNING! RFB, F2000 and any other tube-eject rifles..
http://media.winchesterguns.com/pdf/om/02079_wfa_1892_om_s.pdf
[[Winchester
IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS for MODEL 1892 LEVER ACTION RIFLE
Page 11
"USE ONLY AMMUNITION SUITABLE FOR USE IN A CENTERFIRE RIFLE WITH A TUBULAR MAGAZINE.
Use only flat point, hollow point, round nose flat point of similar bullets. Never use pointed or conical point bullets in a centerfire rifle with a tubular magazine. Failure to follow these instructions may result in injury to yourself or others, or cause damage to your gun."]]
Which advice I would generalize to:
"Never use pointed or conical point (spitzer) bullets in a centerfire rifle with a tubular magazine of a tubular ejection chute."
People are going to cycle live rounds through the actions of rifles for various reasons: as a way to empty a magazine by preference of by necessity, or as a commonly taught and accepted way to clear a jam. Anyone who cycles live pointed rounds through the action of a rifle with a tubular ejection chute produces the same problem caused by using pointed bullets in tubular magazines - stacking live rounds point-to-primer. Only the problem is worse: Rounds are driven into the ejection tube by the return spring with much more force than rounds being hand-pushed into the loading port of a tubular-magazine rifle. Not only that, the rounds in the tubular ejection chute are not contstrained from moving back and forth by the magazine spring, the rounds are free to move back and forth and generate momentum and bang into each other point-to-primer.
http://www.gunblast.com/images/KelTec-RFB/DSC09882.JPG
Picture of EMPTY rounds in an RFB ejection tube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLO7rHjHerk
VIDEO of EMPTY rounds in an RFB ejection tube.
Cycling LIVE rounds through the action by hand stacks ammo spitzer-point-to-primer in the tube, causing them to explode and killing the opeartor. Rounds enter the tube with the same force as a round enters the chamber - with the full force of the bolt driven by the recoil spring. Rounds enter the tube with much more force than rounds enter the tube of a Winchester Model 1892, where rounds enter only with the force of the thumb.
Cycling the bolt to empty the magazine is not only a common procedure, but a necessary one for many rifles with no floorplate..
..as described on page 9 of the owners manual for the Remington ADL..
.. and many guns fall into this category including the Mauser pistol.
Cycling the bolt to clear a stoppage is not only a common procedure, but a taught one for many guns..
FROM http://www.lejeune.usmc.mil/
Camp Lejeune - This is an Official U.S. Marine Corps website.
http://www.lejeune.usmc.mil/2dfssg/med/files/110.htm
[[5 Discuss the immediate action to clear stoppage procedures for the M16A2
service rifle.
1. Execute Immediate Action
a. Definition: Immediate action is an unhesitating response to a stoppage
without investigating the cause.
- TAP: Slap the bottom of the magazine
- RACK: Pull the charging handle to the rear and release.
- BANG: Sight and fire.]]
http://media.winchesterguns.com/pdf/om/02079_wfa_1892_om_s.pdf
[[Winchester
IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS for MODEL 1892 LEVER ACTION RIFLE
Page 11
"USE ONLY AMMUNITION SUITABLE FOR USE IN A CENTERFIRE RIFLE WITH A TUBULAR MAGAZINE.
Use only flat point, hollow point, round nose flat point of similar bullets. Never use pointed or conical point bullets in a centerfire rifle with a tubular magazine. Failure to follow these instructions may result in injury to yourself or others, or cause damage to your gun."]]
Which advice I would generalize to:
"Never use pointed or conical point (spitzer) bullets in a centerfire rifle with a tubular magazine of a tubular ejection chute."
People are going to cycle live rounds through the actions of rifles for various reasons: as a way to empty a magazine by preference of by necessity, or as a commonly taught and accepted way to clear a jam. Anyone who cycles live pointed rounds through the action of a rifle with a tubular ejection chute produces the same problem caused by using pointed bullets in tubular magazines - stacking live rounds point-to-primer. Only the problem is worse: Rounds are driven into the ejection tube by the return spring with much more force than rounds being hand-pushed into the loading port of a tubular-magazine rifle. Not only that, the rounds in the tubular ejection chute are not contstrained from moving back and forth by the magazine spring, the rounds are free to move back and forth and generate momentum and bang into each other point-to-primer.
http://www.gunblast.com/images/KelTec-RFB/DSC09882.JPG
Picture of EMPTY rounds in an RFB ejection tube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLO7rHjHerk
VIDEO of EMPTY rounds in an RFB ejection tube.
Cycling LIVE rounds through the action by hand stacks ammo spitzer-point-to-primer in the tube, causing them to explode and killing the opeartor. Rounds enter the tube with the same force as a round enters the chamber - with the full force of the bolt driven by the recoil spring. Rounds enter the tube with much more force than rounds enter the tube of a Winchester Model 1892, where rounds enter only with the force of the thumb.
Cycling the bolt to empty the magazine is not only a common procedure, but a necessary one for many rifles with no floorplate..
..as described on page 9 of the owners manual for the Remington ADL..
.. and many guns fall into this category including the Mauser pistol.
Cycling the bolt to clear a stoppage is not only a common procedure, but a taught one for many guns..
FROM http://www.lejeune.usmc.mil/
Camp Lejeune - This is an Official U.S. Marine Corps website.
http://www.lejeune.usmc.mil/2dfssg/med/files/110.htm
[[5 Discuss the immediate action to clear stoppage procedures for the M16A2
service rifle.
1. Execute Immediate Action
a. Definition: Immediate action is an unhesitating response to a stoppage
without investigating the cause.
- TAP: Slap the bottom of the magazine
- RACK: Pull the charging handle to the rear and release.
- BANG: Sight and fire.]]
- Status