Why bullpups?


PDA






Tony Williams
December 26, 2007, 05:09 PM
I have added a new article to my website to consider the pros and cons of bullpups vs traditional military rifles, here: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/bullpups.htm

If you enjoyed reading about "Why bullpups?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Roswell 1847
December 26, 2007, 05:50 PM
Found this in one of my old gun magazines yesterday while looking for something else.
http://hillbilly.diinoweb.com/files/bullpup%201903.jpg

An 03 Springfield modified for testing as a bullpup Calvary Carbine prototype.

If I can find it I have an image of a Lee Enfield or perhaps Lee Medford done up in the same manner.

Hoppy590
December 26, 2007, 06:43 PM
Proponents of bayonet fighting will also point to the shorter length of the weapon, which means that you have to get closer to the enemy.

i believe the brits had a very successful bayonet charge in afghanistan. i imagine they used the L85

RLsnow
December 26, 2007, 06:56 PM
"i believe the brits had a very successful bayonet charge in afghanistan"

of course they did! viking blood and all! (even though they wussified it a little..)

CountGlockula
December 26, 2007, 07:04 PM
Are there any bullpup models available for civilians?

Chipperman
December 26, 2007, 07:20 PM
Bushmaster has one
FN P90
a few others.
Styer AUG may be made again.

Avenger29
December 26, 2007, 08:07 PM
Are there any bullpup models available for civilians?

A few.

-FN P90 and the FN 2000
-Dixie Consolidated, Muzzelite, and Ironwood Designs all have bullpup kits for the 10/22. There are Muzzelite kits available for some other rifles, too- not that they are worth much.
-Bushmaster M17S
-Keltec is supposed to come out with the RFB
-Mossberg made some bullpup shotguns based on the M500
-There are some Chinese bullpup AKs and supposedly some newer ones made into bullpup form, but the AK platform doesn't seem to translate well into the bullpup configuration. The Chinese bullpups are quite expensive b/c of the import ban
-Same deal with the Steyr AUG (One will cost you $4000+, plus mags are expensive), but another manufacturer or two is supposed to be building new ones soon.
-Magpul has a bullpup on the drawing board
-Some of the .50BMG rifles- I think a couple of the Barretts, are made in bullpup form.

nalioth
December 26, 2007, 08:29 PM
The US AUG clones are already being made and several customers have received theirs already.

http://www.msarinc.com/home.html

MCgunner
December 26, 2007, 08:36 PM
The AUG is a switch hitter, but many aren't and I'm a south paw so I'm out. I don't really like 'em anyway. Of course, I don't have to carry one into battle.

Fu-man Shoe
December 26, 2007, 09:14 PM
There is an AK bullpup kit out there, called the "AKU-94",
made by K-Var firearms, that will result in a decent bullpup
when built up carefully. It's not really a "drop in / bolt on"
conversion though, and requires you to permanently alter
your rifle in a number of ways, such as drilling and tapping
several holes, removing bayonet lugs, etc.

I built one from a Romanian "G" parts kit, and am generally
happy with it. My only complaint is that the fire control group
is operated from the front trigger via a spring wire. No other real
way to do it without completely redesigning the Kalishnikov
platform from the ground up, as the chinese did with their AK
bullpup.

Anyway, the spring wire results in a "mushy" trigger feel.
You just do not get that nice, crisp, mechanical feel of the
trigger pull when using a trigger wire operated FCG.

Here's a picture for you folks who may be curious.

http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h88/Phineas_Phizzlebottom/AKU-94%20Bullpup/DSCN0348.jpg

nobby
December 26, 2007, 10:26 PM
To the poster above, almost all bullpups have long mushy triggers. It is a tradeoff of the pup's design.

Moonclip
December 27, 2007, 07:24 AM
Some Valmets were also imported as bullpups as well as the FAMAS. they are expensive due to import ban. The Walther G22 .22lr as well. I want the Mossberg 500 or 590 that was made as a factory bullpup. I generally do not like them though. The British had a lot of problems whith their design as well as finding out it's hard to fire from behind a corner with this type of gun.

PercyShelley
January 6, 2008, 03:31 AM
I have to take exception to the claim that bullpups will inevitably have a degraded trigger pull. Certainly, some hasty bullpup lashup conversion kits do, but there's no reason that a gun designed from the ground up as a bullpup should have a crummy trigger. Pistols, except for those monstrous things made out of chopped down rifle receivers, necessarily require their trigger groups to somehow connect to a distant hammer or striker. There are pistols with quite adequate trigger pulls, ergo, there is no reason for bullpups to have lousy triggers aside from manufacturer indifference.

Even that may be changing. The Kel-Tec RFB is slated to have a trigger design that circumvents entirely the problem of transmitting high-fidelity forces to the aft portion of the gun.

Furthermore, as Mr. Williams points out, lots of other rifles have mediocre triggers as well. Indeed, most factory rifles have downright mediocre to lousy triggers, so saying that most bullpups do as well is hardly a point against them vis a vis conventional designs.

Double Naught Spy
January 6, 2008, 12:00 PM
[Even that may be changing. The Kel-Tec RFB is slated to have a trigger design that circumvents entirely the problem of transmitting high-fidelity forces to the aft portion of the gun.

Furthermore, as Mr. Williams points out, lots of other rifles have mediocre triggers as well. Indeed, most factory rifles have downright mediocre to lousy triggers, so saying that most bullpups do as well is hardly a point against them vis a vis conventional designs.

At 3 grand, I would hope the Kel Tec bullpup has a decent trigger. Sure, lots of rifles have mediocre or lousy triggers, but bullpups have (traditionally) some of the worst on a consistent basis and yet come in a much more expensive package. Heck, the other Kel Tec rifles I have fired fit Mr. Williams' classification of having mediocre or lousy triggers.

I have shot a Bushmaster and FN bullpups, the FN more recently. The trigger felt like I was crushing a rotting plumb with no clear sensation of trigger break until you realized the gun was firing and the trigger ceased moving rearward.

I like the concept of the bullpup, but I get about the same size results with my AR15 with a collapsed stock, measuring in at 32" and that is how I shoot it. There is no squishy trigger and if I want the gun to be longer, I can extend the stock.

MCgunner
January 6, 2008, 12:27 PM
I've not fired too many mil surps, especially AKs and SKSs, that had what I'd call a "decent" trigger, let alone a good one. But, then, I suppose it's all relative. The bolt mil surps, Mausers and such, tend to have decent triggers if two stage. But, none of 'em come close to a sporting decent rifle, let alone a target grade trigger. Any bastardization of the gun into a bullpup with the triigger far away from the sear cannot help the situation. They are what they are.

Even if I shot right handed, I would not want a battle rifle I couldn't fire weak hand. I'll let you figure the scenarios out as to why. I really don't see the bull pups taking over the world for this reason alone. How the heck short to you need a battle rifle, anyway and why? Of course, I tend to like the real wood and ergos of a M1 or M14 or M1 Carbine or an SKS, so whadda I know? Want it short for carry, just get a folding stock.

GunTech
January 6, 2008, 12:37 PM
Good triggers have never been a requirement of military rifles. While most bullpups made have poor triggers in comparison to conventional rifles, just about any bullpup made has a better trigger than the HK G3.

The biggest issue seems to be 'feel'. For those of use raised with, and familiar with conventional rifles, the neutral balance of the bullpup will never seem right. For those who have never used a conventional rifle (like most British soldiers) the bullpup will seem natural.

Vermont
January 6, 2008, 12:45 PM
From the article: The necessarily straight-line stock means that the firer cannot sight along the top of the barrel, so if iron sights are used they have to stick up high above the barrel and the firer therefore has to expose more of his head 'above the parapet'.

Isn't this true of the M-16 too?

Edit: Oops...I should have read the second half of the article first.

El Tejon
January 6, 2008, 12:45 PM
I disagree, Gun Tech. "Feel" is subjective and can be changed if the weapon is handled enough.

The disadvantage to bullpups is gun handling. The more you train the less you like bullpups.

The main advantage is handling inside your IFV. A grave concern to most THR members.:rolleyes::D

mokin
January 6, 2008, 01:00 PM
GunTech has a good point about the balance of a bullpup. I find them very easy to shoot and handle comfortably. Loading them takes a while to get used to. I still find it easier to load an M-16/AK type weapon without removing it from my shoulder than I do my bullpups.

The coments about squishy triggers a valid as well. Interestingly (at least for me) I found that the combination of trigger assemblies on DC Engineerings SKS conversion make for a better trigger pull than what the rifle had to begin with.

MCgunner
January 6, 2008, 01:13 PM
The coments about squishy triggers a valid as well. Interestingly (at least for me) I found that the combination of trigger assemblies on DC Engineerings SKS conversion make for a better trigger pull than what the rifle had to begin with.

Well, it'd be hard to make it worse....:rolleyes: I used to order a lot of SKSs and I found that about 2 in 10 would be pretty crisp, lacking creep. I kept one of those to convert to a hunting rifle. Well, the result is rather less than impressive, but at least it don't have a real creepy trigger. :D

mattf7184
January 6, 2008, 02:59 PM
The Kel-Tec RFB has a great trigger, at least on the prototypes.

Shipwreck
January 6, 2008, 04:32 PM
I love my PS90!

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g320/mistershipwreck/PS90/fn-ps902.jpg

MCgunner
January 6, 2008, 05:04 PM
Is that a gun or a pretzel?

armoredman
January 6, 2008, 06:25 PM
Guntzel. I would like one of the Bushy AR bullpups some year, but I have been told the M-17S isn't the best made/operating rifle, as truth to that?

Domino
January 6, 2008, 10:13 PM
Well I have an M17s and while it has ergonomic issues it has been very accurate and reliable. It is a tack driver with the right optics although it can be hard to prove because of the poor trigger. It has shot all amuntion well and doesn't require much maintenance beyond cleaning the barrel. For the money (~$600) I feel that it was worth it, although the design should have been somewhat improved.

As far as bullpups go in general, I feel that they can be useful when a compact design is desired and the round thats used requires velocity in order to be effective. To put it plainly, if I am using a 5.56mm rifle I want a 20" barrel in order to have confidence military grade m855 grade ammunition. That means that I feel that if a compact weapon design is desired than only a bullpup could suffice. Now if I am using another cartridge than perhaps a bullpup and its limited shortcomings are not worth it.

If you enjoyed reading about "Why bullpups?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!