why not a bullpup?

I have no functional problems with bullpup rifles, but a practical one.
I have an aftermarket restocked M1 Carbine. No, it doesn't shoot as far as some, but I'm not going to be shooting very far. An opponent flinging shots at me from more than a block away is pretty remote.
It works well and is my 'house' gun. I see no point in spending a wad of money on something else I already have covered.

I suppose I could get familiar with a bullpup rifle, but I see no point.
 
From a design standpoint they are neat. I am glad more are coming out as it could eventually lead to a really nice ones with a realistic price point. Seems like just the word bullpup gives justification for a manufacturer to double or even triple the price for a rifle. That then leads the buyer to ask themselves if they are willing to pay inflated prices for a firearm with such strange ergonomics and even stranger opperation. Then there is the asthetics.... some of which are rediculous. Bullpups dont have to look like nerf guns.

People love those FN PS90s. I shot a friends (Semi Auto with a 16" barrel). Interesting but it felt just like it looks. Now those are made for a specific purpose.. basically a modern whipit gun... but they sure left out the whole ergo aspect. Basically like a wood 2x6 with a thumbhole drilled out.

A lot of the Kits for 22lr rifles are fun for the range though. Couple hundred dollars and a cheap 22lr rifle gives you something to try and innexpensive to shoot. Also gives you the option to switch back to a normal stock when you get sick of it.
 
Many seem to have awful triggers but I own some that are an exception.
 
I was working on some bullpup designs back in the late 1980s.
I had gotten as far as a workable bottom-eject system and electronic ignition before I was moved on to other projects.
I had worked out what I called a bullpump shotgun and rifle system as well, although they still had that horrible long-link trigger... .
 
As mentioned earlier the main drawback to using a bullpup indoors is the inability to use it from both shoulders without eating brass. When you pie a corner you lead with the weapon, not your support shoulder.

The Keltec bullpups address this downfall. The forward ejecting RFB .308 is too much for my taste but the 5.56 RDB ejects downward and is quicker to reload than other models I’ve handled and is my preferred ambi bullpup. The trigger design is also better than others I’ve tried. Unfortunately it’s hard to diagnose malfunctions since you can’t see or feel into the ejection port. The deafening noise of shooting a 5.56 indoors is also a downside for me.

For my preferences a (thoroughly vetted) .30 M1 carbine with expanding bullets delivers fight stopping power and defeats soft armor with low recoil and noise.

The Inland M30 IMP M1 is a very handy .30 carbine option, albeit a noisier one.
 

Attachments

  • C38BED33-9596-4EA4-8DA7-09DB7F620811.jpeg
    C38BED33-9596-4EA4-8DA7-09DB7F620811.jpeg
    51.5 KB · Views: 28
Last edited:
There are reasons why longarms from everywhere evolved into the shoulder stock. They point naturally and put your eye in the right relationship with the sights. And they balance properly. The Bullpup has it's uses and followers. It is not going to replace conventionally stocked firearms.
 
upptick said:
This is a very interesting comment. If you ever have to defend yourself before a jury, the make and model of your firearm as well as the type and trademark of the ammunition could easily become important factors in what the jury decides. In other words, a classic revolver or lever gun loaded with basic wadcutters or Federal "Train and Protect" ammunition will leave a very different impression on the jury compared to something like the "Street Sweeper" shotgun or using "Terminator" ammunition. In other words, there is a serious reason why Smith and Wesson markets the "Shield" handgun. And I could see where defending the use of a bullpup design might be problematic...
Click to expand...

Someone I watch regularly on YouTube brought it up as a point, on why he chose a 1911 and a revolver as his carry choices. He made the argument that in court and court of public opinion, something with more limited in capacity.
With the current climate on firearms, I'd rather not make my life more difficult. Until the culture changes on firearms and self-defense, I'd rather keep the cards in my favor.
 
Bull pups have taken over the air rifle market. It seems everything either looks like an AR or is a bull pup. I guess since there is not a 30,000 plus psi cartridge exploding right beside the jawbone maybe it is okay but they are still ugly, ugly, ugly.
 
First, I'm a lefty...don't like them ejecting into my face. Also if shooting "right" I don't like my face close to where a double charge would blow up my cheek or right eye. Other then that, mostly bad triggers, difficult takedown for cleaning, and just plain ugly.
 
They came into fashion and then went out. The advantages they have is barrel length can be longer at the same overall length vs a traditional rifle and they (subjectively) balance better.

The disadvantages are more numerous though:

  • The trigger by definition must be located much farther from the hammer so it involves some long linkages that tend to mean bad triggers.
  • Because the action is by the shooter's face they are either right-hand only or need some design concession to make them ambi (ie, downward ejecting for the Keltec, forward ejecting for the FS2000, or switchable ejection direction for some other designs).
  • Magazine changes are almost always more awkward versus a traditional design.
Honestly most of the world has started abandoning the idea and going to shorter barreled traditional rifles. Then again things tend to come into "fashion" now and then and I'm sure the bullpup will make a resurgence sometime or another.

FWIW I've got 2 of them that I like well enough (a Bushmaster 17S and a Steyr AUG), but if I had to take a rifle into battle they wouldn't be the first ones I reach for.
 
No, it's not but you can see how their design mimics the PS90. You can use a longer barrel so that it's not an SBR.
 
If you live in a big enough house where shooting a rifle of any flavor is a viable choice for home defense, then the extra length of a rifle/carbine probably won't matter much. If you live in a regular sized house like most of us, a pistol is probably your best bet. To me, a bullpup is an answer without a question.

If you want a middle-ground choice, then a PCC like a CZ Scorpion EVO 3 might be an option.

3Crows said:
Bull pups have taken over the air rifle market. / I guess since there is not a 30,000 plus psi cartridge exploding right beside the jawbone
Click to expand...
Indeed. I love my Taipan Veteran. Fantastic air rifle.

This is also why I'm not a fan of rifle calibers in bull pup designs. 'Too much near my face, and the sound will already be deafening indoors. I wouldn't dream of any option without a silencer anyway.
 
Last edited:
The 5.56's claim to fame is a small, high velocity bullet. To achieve that velocity requires barrel length, and a long barrel complicates use in armored vehicles or urban environments. Hence the bullpup. Anyone watching the Queen's funeral saw the Tommies marching with theirs (The muzzle disposition at sling arms... :eek: )
Have to wonder if the frequently lousy triggers is due to a heavy sear break, to keep the inertia of the linkage from firing the gun, in case of a drop.
The upside is keeping barrel length in a reasonable sized package (and likely avoiding a SBR), the downside is ergos.
Always lusted after an AUG, but snagged an MSAR some years back; it's always worked, and the trigger, frankly, isn't too bad. Doubt I'd use it to fend off boarders, but it's fun at the range. Using the optic mount as the carry handle helps the ergos.
Plain familiarity with AR style layouts is hard to escape; the PP who wondered how we'd feel if we were raised with bullpups had a great question.
Moon
 
As a close quarters weapon I could see some use, but it's not for everyone. I latched onto a bullpup shotgun for use as a security/defense weapon. After putting on a forward grip and a tac light/laser dot combo, what a perfect weapon for home or property defense.
 
The heavy trigger pull that most have is the only real downside for me. For close range shooting they seem to be a good choice to me.
 
I prefer my rifles to LOOK like a rifle, not some contraption dreamed up for a sci-fi movie. mcb says it all in post #6.
 
Don't buy any furniture from Hera Arms.
I bought their funky forward PS90 style grip some years ago.
Looked cool but wow that's some really cheap toy grade plastic. Like so thin my pic rail literally cut thru a corner of the plastic in the span of months. Mine went in the trash.
And I'm not one to rag on 'airsoft grade' accessories, some are actually pretty good.
This felt like a toy from a grocery store.
I do have a .45 Hi Point in a HTA bullpup stock, that's actually a nice setup. The trigger isn't any worse than the stock trigger.
To me the point of a bullpup is allowing something like a 20" barrel in a compact package, but pointless for shorterbarrels.
 
JeffG said:
I like my face farther away from the muzzle blast. Magazine changes are a bit of a circus. Triggers are generally a linkage affair; not for me.
Click to expand...
My exact thoughts. Especially about my face being too close to the bolt. I'd rather have a 10.5" AR-15.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
Is transitioning between a bullpup and a conventional rifle problematic?
Replies
4
Views
611
scaatylobo
S
sgtstryker
  • Locked
The Bullpup design.
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
d2wing
d2wing
Cowboybebop
  • Locked
Steyr AUG and TAVOR Comparison
2 3
Replies
54
Views
18K
briansmithwins
B
J
  • Locked
new rifle suggestions? maybe a bullpup?
2 3
Replies
54
Views
2K
jason41987
J
DeepSouth
  • Locked
Why no pistol caliber bullpups ?
2 3
Replies
58
Views
7K
Al Thompson
A
Back
Top