Keltec announces RFB ship date (again)

I wonder how the trigger is.

Awesome! I hope they stick to it this time. I don't think the price will be discounted for a while and most likely sell for over list by "entrepreneurs" who like to cash in on the me-first crowd. At least it's below the $2000 prediction, but still over what M1As and other 308 battle rifles go for.

It'll suck. But it'll be tactical.

You mean blacktical tacticool, bogie?

And were you commenting on the trigger or the rifle in general?

That looks like quite the personnal defense weapon! Ya gotta hand it to the engineers that can come up with the ideas for this sort of new ejections system!

The price is too steep for me, though.

i am going to have to save up a bit...:banghead:

Armor can protect against a shotgun, but it's not like head shots with a shotgun are difficult.

So what does this do that a FAL, PTR-91, M1A, AR-10, or LR-308 doesn't do?

I guess it being a bull pup?

So what does this do that a FAL, PTR-91, M1A, AR-10, or LR-308 doesn't do?

Click to expand...

it does what those do in a shorter package i believe.

Shorter package, ambidextrous bullpup design.

I love my BAR-10, so I don't need to pick one up... especially with the price of 7.62NATO ammo these days.

i would love to rechamber it to 6.5 creedmoor of 6.5x47 laupa. Awesome LR hunting rifle in a little package. good match rifle too it looks like...

Just to give some perspective on price...

The MSRP for the SU-16C is $770.
Normal street price is about $600.

The MSRP for the P-3AT is $324.
Normal street price is about $250.

The MSRP for the RFB is $1880.
I strongly expect to see street price settle around $1400-1500 once the initial surge of pent-up demand subsides.

about the same as a good ar with mods. Yeaaa!

about the same as a good ar with mods. Yeaaa!

Click to expand...

Tell us more about the results of your T&E.


I'm skeptical about this rifle. Bullpup pro: short package. Bullpup con: trigger.

Short barrels are generally preferred for portability and CQB. Longer barrels are generally preferred for the added ballistic abilities.

Don't the trigger problems of bullpups cancel out the long-range benefit of the longer barrel? That is, who cares if you get an extra 200fps if the trigger causes aiming problems?

For serious use (especially CQB), IMO, I think there are better choices.

I'd also be curious to see the accuracy reports. The rifle seems like it'll be more expensive than some of its competitors with proven accuracy potential.

Armor can protect against a shotgun, but it's not like head shots with a shotgun are difficult.

Click to expand...

o rly?

The entire purpose of the RFB was to get a 32" barrel .308 into the smallest overall length package, in this case a mere 40" in OAL.

The "target" model with it's barrel of 32" can fire a very heavy .308 win 7.62 NATO bullet of +200 grains at over 2500fps, giving it a muzzle energy and sectional density superior to .300 Win mag out of other rifles with shorter barrels and longer OAL's. The ballistics with a 210gr .308 and a 32" barrel (which would be a joke in a bolt-action, AR, HK, or M-14 action) are even within spitting distance of the low-end of .338 Lapua mag. ballistics. When you plug the numbers into one of the free on-line ballistics calculators, the super-heavy .308 combined with the monster 32" barrel getting an extra 10-15% in fps, has something like more than 50% more retained energy at 1000 yards, and will also buck cross-wind much more than 50% better, because the heavy .308 will have both velocity (time exposure to cross wind at a given wind velocity/vector) and extra mass to create lateral inertia to fight that cross-wind too.

So in essence, Kelgren or whoever at KT who came up with the idea of the RFB, they took the one advantage of the bullpup design, the savings in OAL, and gave it ALL back to the barrel length to eek every last ounce of ballistic potential out of the .308. And other deficits bullpups have, like the high-bore axis of scopes that bullpups have shrinks to become meaningless when you're playing at over 500 yards, and have a high quality scope that has a massive amount of vertical deflection to take advantage of extreme range. The bullpup's mag-change done practically in your armpit is awkward, especially as compared to the AR-15/AR-10 family, but it's still light-years ahead of many of the bolt-actions that are still in wide use...

That is the "point" of the RFB.

The sporter and carbine variants, of which I'm sure will comprise 90%+ of Kel-Tec's sales are to make them sale-able to a wider audience so the investment in tooling and R&D at least have a chance to pay off for Kel-Tec.

I'm still hoping that they come out with a production version of the .223 bullpup the "Sub-16", at more Kel-Tec'ish prices that was the initial inspiration for the RFB…

http://world.guns.ru/sniper/sn75-e.htm

It'll suck

Click to expand...

You just can't say that. No one knows. It might. It might not at all.

It could be anywhere on a scale of 1-100 in durability, reliability, accuracy, shootability, user-friendliness, etc. To me, the big questions are durability and reliability, espec. durability. It's awfully expensive, but after I fondle one, if it looks durable and initial reports are positive, then I'll be getting one, yup.

The MSRP for the RFB is $1880.
I strongly expect to see street price settle around $1400-1500 once the initial surge of pent-up demand subsides.

Click to expand...

Yes, but that may take 6-9 months or more.

Good post, AJ Dual. A 32" barrel could be most impressive. Who is making the barrels for Kel-Tec? Any real accuracy reports yet?

I'm skeptical about this rifle. Bullpup pro: short package. Bullpup con: trigger.

Short barrels are generally preferred for portability and CQB. Longer barrels are generally preferred for the added ballistic abilities.

Don't the trigger problems of bullpups cancel out the long-range benefit of the longer barrel? That is, who cares if you get an extra 200fps if the trigger causes aiming problems?

For serious use (especially CQB), IMO, I think there are better choices.

I'd also be curious to see the accuracy reports. The rifle seems like it'll be more expensive than some of its competitors with proven accuracy potential.

Click to expand...

Heh. How about a fully adjustable, 2-pound trigger pull on the Target model? It really IS that smooth. Even the Carbine's trigger is still comparable with, or superior to that of a normal run-of-the-mill AR-15.

As for accuracy, last I heard (quite some time ago), it was doing something like .75 MOA at 100 yards with Gold Medal. You'll never see quarter-MOA bolt-action accuracy out of a semi, but sub-MOA is more than enough considering its purpose.

Once people get over the whole skepticism thing, and actually play with one...Kel-Tec is going to have a helluva time keeping up with production.

Take a look at the cross section from the SHOT 2007 flyer. The trigger isn't like a normal bullpup's; it lacks the usual connector between the trigger and the sear. Instead, the hammer has a long op-rod.

A few field reports of the prototypes from arfcom suggest that the trigger is good, actually.

Actually this comment set in the press release is the part that caught my eye.

There have been some improvements made to the RFB design including the ability to change barrels, straight-in/Drop-free magazine changes, Click adjustable gas system on all models,

The barrel change, I assume, means you can change from Carbine to Sporter to Target with a barrel swap not a new rifle. It MAY also lead to the possibility of easy caliber change, a la Robinson Arms XCR.

Straight In/Drop free mag should appeal to the AR-15 purists, who's manual dexterity can't handle a rock and lock....

Looking VVV interesting, damn them