Bullpup rifles????

[Technosavant]

Originally Posted by RedDaemonFox

Screw ARs, bullpups are the way of the future. Downward ejection solves many issues, gravity aids extraction, both sided firing is easy

You say that like one has to choose.

[loose_holster_dan]

my thread on my new piece
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=455854

[tobnpr]

While it's always cool to have something different, I fail to see a real purpose for them for recreational shooters, other than a SD weapon.

If I could afford a DTA, maybe...it's .5 MOA and better accuracy give it value to recreational shooters as well. Otherwise they don't have the accuracy I demand. No desire to own one.

[RC20]

I guess I don't get a lot of the responses.

All guns are a some and some. None are perfect for all uses and situations.

The Bullpup allows full use of the 5.56 velocity (range and effect) out to its intended distances which the M4 gave up to be "handy".

The Brits use the Bullpup which no one has mentioned. It seems to have been effective for them (post HK fix).

Their BAR version has proven to be quite effective in Afghanistan with its 24 inch barrel.

The Bullpup does give up rail space and the rail mount flexibility of all 4 sides and limited on the top (though rails were not standard when it was first made).

I would buy one if I could afford it. Its a most intriguing gun that the users adjust to quite well from the reports.

[micksis86]

I was in the Australian Army not that long ago and used the Steyr AUG or Austeyr F88 (as it's called in Australia) extensively. I definately agree with the quick mag changes being an issue. They are difficult to reload quickly and keep the barrel on target. The quickest method when on the move is IMO to lift the rifle vertical and do the mag change or when stationary by tilting it 90 degrees and bringing it slightly forward in order to undertake the mag change. like someone has already mentioned if it's something you practice and train with then it isn't really a huge problem but as far as mag changes go the m4/m16 platform is far quicker and can be done without eyes being taken off targer which in my experience is a massive plus.

I don't know about other bullpups but I've shot and seen many others shoot groups of about an inch and a half from the prone unsupported position so the Austeyr is a very accurate rifle that is with the standard 1.5X scope. Shots on man size target from a supported position at 300m is a norm and part of a regular shoot that is done by most units. The standard Australian army 556 round shoots a 62 gr projectileout at over 3000fps from a 20" barrel

It's pointability is excellent it comes up nice and quick and i found it great in room clearances and other close quater situations due to it's short length.
Also due to the materials that are used they are quite heavy (7.9lbs as standard) compared to an M4 but once you put a pec2, torch and scope on an M4 there isn't a huge different and with the same attatched to a Steyer it doesn't become very front heavy like i've found m4's with that setup to be. They point very naturally and balance quite well with accessories up front due to the magazine being a bit of a counter weight.

Another interesting thing about the Steyer (some of you may already know this) is that semi and fully automatic are done on the one trigger the first stage is single shot and if squeezed a bit more then it fires fully auto no switches or anything else.

I'd go with the bullpup even if it's just for something a little different.

That's my take on bullpups anyway, hope it helps.

[SurplusShooter]

Not a fan of bullpups overly expensive and they really do nothing for me.

[BlueTrain]

The orginal poster did not mention that the rifle was a military rifle, although most of them are. But I was going to mention custom bullpups and someone already has. The 1950s were (I thought) the peak of true custom rifles and I didn't know they had been made before the war.

Obviously they weren't for everyone but the biggest drawback everyone seems to mention is the trigger, seeing as how it has to have a longish linkage. The biggest advantage, if not the only one, is the handy size for a given barrel length. I suspect, however, that for a sportsman, the biggest appeal may simply have been it's novelty. I don't see how having the action (of a bolt action) just behind your face would be any worse than having it right in front of your face but manipulating the bolt would be a lot more difficult and the balance would be quite different, which is also true of the semi-automatic military rifles. I've only handled the A.U.G. but I don't recall my impressions of it at the time.

[tirod]

For another take from an experienced user group: http://soldiersystems.net/2011/07/22...e-austeyr-f88/

Note VERY CAREFULLY that troops under fire in combat went to the M4 specifically because of design deficiencies in the issue bullpup.

Not only the mag change, the length of pull issue with armor is mentioned, along with others. Again, it's not me, it's their own professional user base. It's not just one persons opinion, it's a command level dump of the weapon in a combat zone for something that they say works better. Senior decision makers had to mull over real combat use and spend money to back up their choice.

The one Army in the world that could prove the bullpup's combat usefulness is very clearly saying that when their life is on the line, they don't want it. They aren't sucked in by all the hype, and they would know. When you're under fire, an unwieldy gun with obtuse mag changes suddenly becomes much more critical than a sunny Saturday afternoon at the range.

How they got there is important - they cut down M16's and saw they were better, they were just too old to rely on. So, they bought new M4's and moved out.

The experts in bullpup use are saying, when your life is on the line, buddy, dump it and get an M4.

If that sticks in some craws, well, they can't accept professionally qualified and experienced combat veterans' opinion on what they prefer to use in war - soldiers who got to try them back to back.

Bullpups are a curio and relic, a sideshow in the progress of firearms.

[RC20]

I will continue to disagree.

French, Australians, Brits and Chinese are all users. Thats 3 of the larger military organizations in the world. With China, that makes it the single largest type (grin). Numbers don't lie (they can mislead).

I have shot an AR and the trigger is an atrocity. Only worse one I shot was an AK.

Mag loads seem to be the only issue.

Offset by the fact you actually have the muzzle velocity the 5.56 was deigned around to be effective.

The AR has the worse ergonomics for controls I can imagine. You could not have set out to make them any worse.

Like I said, its a some and some.

Like striker fired, I don't think its for me, but I would convert if I needed to.

[micksis86]

RC2O you're right not a single army uses the bullpup design there are several.

Tirod that's total crap I've used a bullpup in combat and my life is just as valuable to me as anyone. And trust me we weren't disadvantaged in anyway by using bullpups in combat we kicked some serious ass along with our British and tench allies.

You say it like the troops have a choice in the rifle they carry I'm not having a go at you but I take offense to your comments about soldiers using a bullpup not valuing their life very ignorant and insensitive.

[Jo6pak]

Fact is, very few of us will ever have to fire a rifle in anger (god willing)
Fact is, very few of us will be in a combat situation
Fact is, even fewer of us will be able to compare rifles in real world combat situations.
micksis86 is one of the few opinions that matter on the subject of bullpups being effective in the field, as he has been in the fray with one.

So chairborne rangers aside......
If you like bullpups buy one, if not get something else.
I've fired a few (P90, FS200, an that mossberg bullpup 500 shotgun)
Some I liked some I didn't.

[Father Time]

The AR has the worse ergonomics for controls I can imagine. You could not have set out to make them any worse.

I guess you haven't spent much time shooting AK's then have you? And just so I know, what don't you like about the AR's ergo's?
All the controls are easy to reach without adjusting your shooting grip. You can't ask for any better than that.

I have shot an AR and the trigger is an atrocity. Only worse one I shot was an AK.

Strange my AK has a trigger thats 10X's better than any bullpup I have shot. The location of the trigger makes it very difficult for a good trigger on a bullpup rifle.


Bullpup rifles are good and the advantages are undeniable. However I prefer the superior ergo's of AR's to any of the bullpups (not to mention the longer sight radius). Even if I have to trade off 4-6 inches of barrel its worth it to me.

[44 AMP]

The AR has the worse ergonomics for controls I can imagine. You could not have set out to make them any worse.

This has me a bit confused. I have always found the AR controls to be their most ergonomic feature. The safety and mag release are within reach with little or no shifting of the shooters hand (for the average person), and the bolt catch can be hit with the off hand as it replaces the magazine.

I'm not a big fan of the charging handle though.

Other rifles (and I will admit to not having used all of them), don't have all the controls as well grouped for the average hand.

The simple fact is that while some nations field bullpup combat rifles, those that do are a significant minority. And while economics may be a big part of the reason, its not the only part. We have not yet come up with a bullpup design that is clearly superior in all major aspects to conventional rifles. Its possible, we never will.

I am not saying that bullpups are junk, or not usable, or anything like that, just that they have their own advantages and drawbacks, different from conventional designs, and to date, not clearly superior enough to replace regular designs.

[rdf.hack]

@44 AMP

I like controls on the right side of the gun, near the trigger, because, as I previously said, I can reach those controls easier, and I prefer using controls with my dominant hand, thats why I dont like the bolt release, selector (thumbs can't easily reach it).

AK ergonomics, with the selector above the trigger, and right hand side reciprocating handle is more well suited for me.

With the G3, I have less of an issue because of the position of the handle above the handguard.

Never used an FN FAL.

The AK bullpups, P90, AUG and FS2000 are all better than any AR in my experience.

[Technosavant]

The AK bullpups, P90, AUG and FS2000 are all better than any AR in my experience.

I've gotta say, then, you're in the vast majority. There's not too many people who dislike the AR ergonomics in favor of the AK and G3. But that's the good thing. Nobody's forcing you to buy an AR, you can go get whatever rifle you like, and those who like bullpups can go get those too.

[tahunua001]

French, Australians, Brits and Chinese are all users. Thats 3 of the larger military organizations in the world. With China, that makes it the single largest type (grin). Numbers don't lie (they can mislead).

if some one wants to argue this quote they could say that russia(the USs nearest competetor) and at least 70% of third world militias/rebellions/armies use the AK47 so it must be better than any bullpup (I am not saying that, I'm just arguing a point ).

if you do get a bullpup you will have to spend a lot to get a decent one. I did a lot a research when I was considering one and I came to the conclusion that conversion kits are all garbage, they take a gun that was never designed as a BP and move the ejection port right next to your face and the muzzle right in front of it. so AK47 and 22lr are probably out of the question. if you do want a decent bullpup design, the A2 enfields that the brits use are supposed to be decent and the AUG and F2000 are supposed to be the best designed to date but even with semi auto copycats you are still looking at spending enough to fund 2 AR15s.
also I see an argument that the M4 gave up accuracy and velocity in exchange for handiness.
I own an m4 style AR15 and it's a tack driver out to 300 yards, I'm sure if I was a better shooter it would be much greater. for an assault rifle that's well beyond your demographic fighting range so anything beyond 200 is probably going to be a snipers domain anyway.
if I had the money to blow I'd buy the FS2000 in a heartbeat just because it's an odd piece to have in anyones collection.

[Bond007]

For my $0.02, if you are curious about a bullpup, try a Walther G22. It's a really fun 22lr.

It's definitely different and really fun to shoot. May help you decide on way or the other if it's the right platform for you.

[manta49]

test

[manta49]

The British use the SA80 Bullpup rifle probably one of the worst rifles to go into production for the military. After 20 years of motivations the main ones by H&K at a cost of £90 million is now a serviceable rifle, the only advantage of the design is a full length barrel on a short package. The disadvantages are a poor trigger pull -bad balance - bad ergonomics-in the British case can only be fired form the right shoulder meaning you have to expose your body when shooting round cover ect

[Katophract]

I find most bullpups to fit me exceptionally well. The one I don't like is the AUG. I've fired the full auto P-90 and found it very fun. (useful? shrugs) The FS2000 has a decent trigger. It wasn't horrible, but it wasn't great. The Kel-tec bullpups are very innovative, ambidextrous and strengthened against catastrophic failures. They're moving forward and progressing, much how the AR has. They're not for sportsmen who shoot from benches and worry about.00025 MOA. They're combat rifles and for people who like combat rifles they're fantastic.

[tahunua001]

also a much cheaper option you could go for would be a carbine. Beretta Cx4, and hi-point are good choices, they are fun to shoot and still lighter and shorter than your average AR/AK plinker rifles.

[SR420]

soren57


Bullpup rifles????
just want your opinion on bullpup rifles.
Just want to get some basic feed back before i buy a bullpup.

I wanted a .308 bullpup so I looked at the RFB when they 1st came out. It's very nice, but I prefer the ability to visually inspect the chamber.
I have been interested in a bullpup conversion for the M14, but the only one out there for the past 3 years has been virtually unavailable.

My patience paid off last Saturday when I converted one of my MK14s into a bullpup M14 using the Rogue stock from Juggernaut Tactical.
The results thus far have been fantastic. The trigger is crisp, the mag changes are not problematic and the balance is outstanding.
I like the Rogue so much I became the distributor.

My YouTube Video ... Picture #1 ... Picture #2 ... Another YouTube Video

[ROCK6]

Last year I enjoyed a little informal range time in Kandahar with some Aussies. The signal troops were using the F88 (AUG), the guys operating with our special guys had M4’s. The M4 was much better when used with armor. The AUG balanced very well as most bullpups do. I own a dozen or so AR variants but I really like the balance of bullpups. The MSAR and RFB are on my list, but only for recreational use and home defense…if the MSAR is pretty consistent with the AUG, it’s a battle proven design.

As to complaints on handling, magazine changes, etc…those are all valid unless you plan to spend some time to train and practice with them. I know the M4 has a few advantages in that department, but as mentioned training can lesson that gap on a bullpup. The trigger on both the AUG and SA80 that I’ve fired were pretty decent, although I would concede you could get a better trigger on an AR much easier.

About the only disadvantage I can see that training can’t address is the length of pull when wearing body armor. The bullpup has several great features and whether you care for them or not, you have to admit they are a unique development in small-arms and I for one wouldn’t mind having a couple more for in the inventory.

ROCK6

[Daekar]

Do you guys know of anybody who makes custom bullpup bolt-actions? Cause if I could get a lefthanded bullpup boltaction in stainless with a 24" barrel chambered for max pressure 357 magnum... that would be awesome. Stick a decent red-dot on it and go. I don't care about follow up shots, really... that would be a fast-pointing little midget brush gun with a punch. :-)

EDIT: I just love the idea of shooting heavier bullets at the same velocity with a longer barrel... that energy retention would just go up and up.

I wonder if you could rig a T/C contender to be bullpup?

[chadio]

As the proud owner of an FNH PS90 since Father's Day :

- the engineering is amazingly innovative
- mag changes are a bit cumbersome, but hey .. it holds 50
- Mag loading is easy once you do it a few times, the rounds go into place like butter
- the trigger creep is very creepy
- the portability and size are undeniably handy, think ATV, mtn bike, backpack, etc.
- ammo is spendy
- it is the runaway crowd pleaser "Hey, can I try that? Can I just hold it?"
- I am not going to war with it, combat effectiveness is a non-issue with me
- that being said, I would hate to get hit by a 5.7
- I am not hunting with it, just plink and targets for now
- LOP is same as where I set my AR stock so it sits right with me when shouldered
- recoil is like a BB gun
- plink and target shooting enjoyment is off the charts