The Bullpup design.

Kel-Tec makes a very nice .308 Bullpup rifle called the RFB, I like it a lot.



I also had one of the Ayg clones in an MSAR E-4 in .223 that shot very well, I sold it but I kept the RFB

cept for the horrible drawback of bad things happening if shot left handed bullpups are probably a better way to go. longer barrel for the same OAL gets the lost velocity back or allows shorter OAL without further loss. bottom/front eject is a requirement in my book.

as for replacing the M16, that's alot of rifles to replace. Maybe once we've gone a while without a war and realized our existing stock is work out that'll be acceptable. Of course what we have now does work so it's a tough sell.

Converting an existing AR, ewwww. Aluminum wont do anything to contain an accident, just turn into shrapnel. Personally I would want a bullpup to have a steel shell between my face and the bolt area. Beyond that I know nothing of conversions/

(all comments are just my opinion and Ive been known to be wrong)

cept for the horrible drawback of bad things happening if shot left handed

Click to expand...

Kel-Tec solved that by being forward eject.

And FNH with the F/FS2000

Other Bullpups can have the bolt switch out to a left handed one such as the
AUG
MSAR
G22
Tavor
to name a few

The optimum method would be to go with the bottom or forward ejection. That way soldiers can shoot weak side when needed without ejection issues.

And it would deal with the issue of the long but more ballistically effective barrel causing the gun to be a trifle awkward in CQB situations. With a bullpup style you can retain the longer barrel length but still produce a compact and easily pointed weapon system.

The optimum method would be to go with the bottom or forward ejection. That way soldiers can shoot weak side when needed without ejection issues.

And it would deal with the issue of the long but more ballistically effective barrel causing the gun to be a trifle awkward in CQB situations. With a bullpup style you can retain the longer barrel length but still produce a compact and easily pointed weapon system.

Click to expand...

And that's why I like my FS2000. It has the longest barrel of any 5.56 rifle I own yet it's also the shortest rifle I own. I can shoot it from either shoulder w/o having to change anything and once I got used to seating the mags (you have to use some authority) it's been a 100% reliable rifle.

The FS2k might look like a junky rifle because the shell is plastic it's actually very well made. FN didn't cut any corners when they were designing the rifle and the ergonomics are very well thought out.

BSW

Due to the weight balance the Steyr AUG, and other bullpups, are easily shot in a controlled manner with one hand. You can actually shoot the AUG easily left handed but with stock still in the right shoulder.

I wonder why the US hasn't considered [the bullpup design].

Click to expand...

Because the top brass in charge of procurement are very conservative and very political when it comes to firearms. I mean, look how long it took to get the M9 and even still there are arguments about the tests that were unfair to the M1911 (which they were).

As a lefty, I will say that reversible is not ambidextrous. Ambidextrous is when I can go to the range, shoot the gun, and hand it to my right-handed friend and he can shoot it, too.

The bullpup is nice in that you get the same barrel length in a shorter platform. However, I've found the design has:
*Shorter sight radius (unless using optics)
*Worse trigger
*Worse ergonomics
*Longer reloads (more movement from the ready position, slightly more awkward placement
*Worse balance, especially if not shouldered

I've considered the design, but ultimately decided it wasn't worth the disadvantages.

*Shorter sight radius (unless using optics), *Worse trigger

Click to expand...

1. Given that everyone is issued an optic now, this should probably not be an issue.
2. I don't see why the trigger design is *inherently* worse? Sure the disconnector is longer, but that doesn't mean it has to have a bad trigger by design.

At the moment, I have no interest in bullpup designs, but that's mainly a result of having handled a few poorly designed ones with poor weight balance and bad triggers.
Rear heavy meant they were hard to hold at ease, and they tended to want to swing up and point at your face, especially with a loaded mag.
The bad trigger seems to be the hardest problem to solve. The extra metal you have to move to make the trigger group halfway up the rifle talk to the firing pin at the back....seems to be hard to design around.
I would love to get my hands on a few of the newer designs, I've heard many of the problems have been mitigated.

*Shorter sight radius (unless using optics)

Click to expand...

A little bit shorter not really enough to really matter, but since more are going to red dots really IMHO becoming a mute point.

*Worse trigger

Click to expand...

Many are, especially the conversions in which many are awful. But I find the MSAR and AUG triggers to be no worst than most off the shelf ARs and the FS2000's trigger is greatly improved with the addition of installation of a product called the neu-trigger (can be found on gun broker). I find the RFB trigger in fact better than most off the shelf ARs. Proper design can go a long way in fixing.

*Worse ergonomics

Click to expand...

Some yes, some no, but much of it is the fact that things are arranged a bit different from an AR and you're probably just not used to a particular one, people got used to the AR didn't they? Train with one for a while and the controls become 2nd nature.

*Longer reloads (more movement from the ready position, slightly more awkward placement

Click to expand...

with proper training and practice that can be cut to within a hair of an AR mag switch.

*Worse balance, especially if not shouldered

Click to expand...

What???????? Have you even handled a bullpup? Better balance is one of their strong points, easily handled with only one hand on the ver grip while not shouldered since more of the weight is centered on the ver grip, not forward of it like in most rifles.

At the moment, I have no interest in bullpup designs, but that's mainly a result of having handled a few poorly designed ones with poor weight balance and bad triggers.

Click to expand...

Well there you go.

Training with a properly design bullpup could change some of your opinions.

What???????? Have you even handled a bullpup? Better balance is one of their strong points, easily handled with only one hand on the ver grip while not shouldered since more of the weight is centered on the ver grip, not forward of it like in most rifles.

Click to expand...

Yep. But then, I have no problem with shotguns with a tube extension that many people claim are too front-heavy.

Some yes, some no, but much of it is the fact that things are arranged a bit different from an AR and you're probably just not used to a particular one, people got used to the AR didn't they? Train with one for a while and the controls become 2nd nature.

Click to expand...

The reason the AR is touted as one of the most ergonomic rifles is not because people "got used to it".

Like I said, the bullpup design has some merits. But for most users, especially lefties, it has a lot of issues. I'll take a conventional rifle with an adjustable stock over a bullpup in a heartbeat.

sgtstryker said:

I read in Gun Digest magazine today the Israel is going to a bullpup design, the Tavor.

Click to expand...

I don't know where Gun Digest has been, but the Tavor has been in service with the IDF since 2001. Maybe it was a newer model they were speaking of or an expansion of its use.

But for most users, especially lefties, it has a lot of issues

Click to expand...

I'll let you know a little secret, I'm left handed. I trained myself to shoot right handed.

There's no doubt that the potential for really poor weight distribution is there if the design is done poorly.

Also don't compare bullpup conversions to original design bullpups. I understand that many of the conversions suffer from lots of the trigger and balance issues due to poor execution of the idea.

But a proper design done from the ground up to be a bullpup can position the components and be properly engineered so the gun balances decently so it's not awkward to hold.

Trigger issues? That sounds like bad design more than any inherent issue. There's simply no reason why the trigger should be poor on any bullpup, even the conversions, if the mechanism is decently designed and executed. Those of you which have felt poor triggers on these things simply handled poor done solutions.

Originally Posted by sgtstryker View Post
I read in Gun Digest magazine today the Israel is going to a bullpup design, the Tavor.

Click to expand...

I don't know where Gun Digest has been, but the Tavor has been in service with the IDF since 2001. Maybe it was a newer model they were speaking of or an expansion of its use.

Click to expand...

Yep, been in service and has been a proven design for some time now.

Currently have a Tavor on order, they're saying late Feb to early March right now.

2. I don't see why the trigger design is *inherently* worse? Sure the disconnector is longer, but that doesn't mean it has to have a bad trigger by design.

Click to expand...

I don't know, but fact is that none have a trigger that would satisfy the average AR shooter -- none I've shot (FS2000, RFB, MSAR, PS90) have a trigger anywhere near as good as what comes in a DPMS AR lower parts kit.

When people ask why "such and such" bullpup is so expensive I usually only half joking reply "because if it was an $800 gun, you'd here nothing about it besides how bad the trigger is!"

W L Johnson, I have severe eye-dominance issues, so shooting right-handed is not an option for me.

The AUG trigger is perfectly fine for it's intended role. The gun is not intended to serve the sniper role. Hitting man sized targets out to 300 yards is not difficult. However, there are things one can do to dramatically improve the trigger. Ratworx actually designed an AUG trigger pack which uses AR trigger parts so one can polish or install match triggers in the unit. That in addition to the Neu Trigger and Trigger Tamer. One must understand that the original AUG trigger was designed so that depressing half way fired once with all the way going full auto.

How anybody can complain about the balance of an AUG is beyond me. The gun can be shot easily one handed. It also is an excellent host weapon for a sound suppressor being so light in the front to begin with.

For those who must shoot left handed a simple swap of the bolt and you're good to go. Its not a problem. If one's strong hand gets injured they can easily shoot with the weak hand with the gun kept on the strong side.

Another huge advantage is the quick change barrel system. No tools and it can be done in a matter of seconds.

Ultimately though the huge advantage of the AUG is that it is incredibly compact. One gets all the advantages of an SBR with no loss of velocity for engagement at distance.

Yeah, mag changes are a little bit slower but standard mags carry 42 rounds with zero reliability issues which negates the mag change speed of a conventional rifle.

I loved my PS90 and it was VERY accurate at short to medium distance but the trigger was definitely on/off. It wasn't hard to get used to however.