View Full Version : up side down pump shotgun?
April 7, 2006, 06:01 PM
well I had an idea, why not put the magazine tube on top of the barrel? you could load through the top and eject through the bottom. This would lower the bore, and reduce muzzle climb. And with the shells ejecting out the bottom it would be ambidextrous. and the with the tube on the top you could make it double stack since you dont have a hand there.
one problem that I just though of would be heat, from the barrel near your hand.
April 7, 2006, 06:08 PM
So what would you gain over a load from the bottom/eject from the bottom gun?
April 7, 2006, 06:39 PM
Did you even read what he said?
I know the Russians made some like this, but I don't know if any were imported. The RMB-93, if I remember right.
There is also the South African Neostead, which isn't quite double stack, but rather has two separate and distinct magazine tubes.
April 9, 2006, 12:35 AM
You just described the shotgun from Halo.
April 9, 2006, 12:50 AM
Did you even read what he said?
It'd be ambidextrous - just like a bottom load/bottom eject
Reduce muzzle climb - maybe, or more likely it would just invert the force, especially with the extra weight of the shells creating a downward moment.
Double stack - I'll give you that one, but we already have 9 (or more?) shot guns. How many more are we talking here?
Heat in your hand - he debunked that one himself in his edit
So yeah, I read what he wrote and saw the only real advantage being more capacity. I hoped there was something profound I had missed. I suspect if it was that advantageous, we'd have them in production.
April 9, 2006, 08:19 AM
Well, I suspect designers have looked at that idea and passed on it.
1. Top loading presents a large opening to weather/debris. You could possibly switch to a side loading gate like a lever action rifle.
2. Don't forget the action of ever present gravity...shells no longer just sit on the carrier, waiting to be lifted into position. Now they want to fall and so must be restrained...and yet be placed in the path of the moving bolt at the right time...this will require more complexity than standard designs. They would tend to fall out the bottom ejection port...more restraint required or better yet, switch to side ejection.
3. Certainly this is doable mechanically, but there's also the hidebound market to contend with....the only thing that will sway it from proven designs is...money. Pumps are very price sensitive so you'd have to make it substantially cheaper than existing designs to attract buyers. You'd have better luck in the semi-auto market.
April 9, 2006, 08:39 AM
The Russians have had an upside down shotgun (RMB-93 ) for sometime now. Also the Neostead is currently in limited production in South Africa by Truvelo Armory.
There are several advantages to the design concept. I have been working some with Mr. Stead, one of the Neostead designers, to bring his gun to the states. There are a couple of military specific requirements that it would be ideal for. The trouble is my current contractor position is to closely related to requirements of the XM-26 for me to effectively work on the project without conflect of interest problems.
My contract position is over in August and I hope to return full time to the Neostead project then.
For that I will need a US production partner. The comments about pricing are right on, I doubt that you will ever see this has a commercial gun in the US.
April 9, 2006, 12:03 PM
That thing's ugly. A function over form situation I geuss.:cool:
April 9, 2006, 10:15 PM
Why not just get a bps?
April 10, 2006, 05:37 PM
Well, I'd think that a toploader would be faster to load, and you could keep it on target while you load shells more easily. Other than that, I don't really know why it would be that great.
I say you should just take a mossberg 500 to the skeet range and shoot it upside down...........It's actually pretty fun.;)
April 11, 2006, 06:38 PM
A strange concept indeed , but I think the comrades did it right with this one.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.