Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Why isn't every rifle a bullpup design?

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by streetstang67, Oct 1, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. streetstang67

    streetstang67 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Messages:
    178
    Location:
    SC
    Bullpup stocks seem to make a lot more sense to me than other 'long' stocks. It seems like a simple concept, design the rifle with the firing action at the base, and the trigger farther forward; it dramatically reduces the size of the rifle, and theres no wasted space as there is with a long butt stock.

    So why aren't they more popular, not just in military usage, but also civilian weapons, hunting rifles and such.
     
  2. Tony Williams

    Tony Williams Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    666
    Location:
    UK
    Tradition (aka people stick to what they're used to) plays a large part in it.

    There's also often a degree of nervousness that the chamber's right by your face - just in case...

    Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum
     
  3. Bigfoot

    Bigfoot Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Location:
    Oregon
    Shooters are a traditional bunch, they'll make up an arguement against anything new.

    Build a lightweight, well made bullpup stock with a LOP under 14" and a nice trigger pull for an OA-93 AR-15 and change things. Offer it in .204, 5.56, 6.5 Grendel, 243WSSM, 25WSSM, 30WSSM and 458 SOCOM.
     
  4. hksw

    hksw Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    4,157
    Location:
    OH
    Not including the more recent F/FS2000, have you ever tried shotting a right side ejecting bull pull left handed?

    IMO, the farther the sear is from the trigger, particularly the distance a bull pup must span, the less precise the feel.
     
  5. rustymaggot

    rustymaggot Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2005
    Messages:
    838
    for me bullpups are ballanced like poo. ive only ever fired ruger 10/22's in bullpup and the weight is all rearward and it sucks.

    maybe if one comes along i like ill change my mind about em. id really like to try one for a m1 carbine. i think they call em heszi stocks. last i heard they were not available yet.
     
  6. Spencer

    Spencer Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Messages:
    176
    Location:
    Georgia
    The barrels are shorter and muzzle velocities are lower than a conventional assault rifle. This is why I don't like them.
     
  7. Deer Hunter

    Deer Hunter Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Messages:
    4,097
    Actually, spencer, from what I have seen many bullpup rifles have longer barrels than conventional rifles. This applies to both military and civilian use. The Bushmaster M17S has a 23" barrel, if memory serves, and is a little shorter than an AR-15 shorty with a 16" barrel. The design of the rifle allows for a much longer barrel in a smaller space.
     
  8. AFhack

    AFhack Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Messages:
    175
    Location:
    NM
    some good points made above - but one of the main reasons is sight radius. You don't get as much sight radius with the average bullpup as you do with a more conventional design.

    Of course, this particular preference might be changing as reliable electronic sights become more and more common, but as long as the need for a 300 yd plus mechanical sight exists, many folks will prefer a non-bullpup arrangement.
     
  9. Dave R

    Dave R Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    3,628
    Location:
    Idaho
    I read on the internet somewhere :rolleyes: that many bullpups have lousy triggers, because the trigger is at the other end of the gun from the action (and the sear.) So its by definition a long remote control operation.

    Can anybody verify?
     
  10. Tony Williams

    Tony Williams Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    666
    Location:
    UK
    The main advantage of a bullpup is compactness, and that is far more important in a military weapon than a civilian one. If I wanted a hunting rifle, then I'd get a traditional one. If I were choosing a rifle for an army, I'd prefer a bullpup. Much better for urban combat, and getting in and out of vehicles.

    A crisp target trigger really isn't an issue in a military rifle, unless you're a sniper. The left-handed issue depends on the gun - the F2000 is ambidextrous, and some others can be switched from right to left-hand use.

    The bottom line is that compactness is seen as very valuable in today's combat scenarios, accounting for the popularity of the M4 in the US Army. And a Tavor with a 15" barrel is eight inches shorter than an M4 with a 14.5 inch barrel, ready to fire...

    Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum
     
  11. Spencer

    Spencer Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Messages:
    176
    Location:
    Georgia
    The FN F2000 was the one I was thinking of and it has a 15.6 inch barrel which is shorter than my 18-20 inch preferance. I wouldn't really like the muzzle velocities.

    I have read the bullpup is supposed to be about a longer barrel in a more compact design, so for the most part I stand corrected.

    But as someone already said, it's not that I have contempt for the bullpup appearance, I just prefer a rifle that looks a little more traditional i.e. magazine in front of the trigger.
     
  12. .38 Special

    .38 Special Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,303
    Location:
    Orange County, CA.
    Because they're ugly.

    But thanks for asking! :neener:
     
  13. Spencer

    Spencer Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Messages:
    176
    Location:
    Georgia

    Hahaha. :D
     
  14. Deer Hunter

    Deer Hunter Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2005
    Messages:
    4,097
    To a soldier, I doubt the appearence of his rifle would mean much. :)
     
  15. Spencer

    Spencer Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Messages:
    176
    Location:
    Georgia
    What if it looked like a plunger?
     
  16. noresttill

    noresttill Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2005
    Messages:
    329
    Plunger? Sounds like a good SHTF rifle.

    Jesse
     
  17. mp510

    mp510 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    Messages:
    3,046
    Location:
    PRKt
    There is also jurisdictions where bull pups are illegal.
    Also, remember, even if you get a longer barrel with less OAL, you are giving up an important reason for the longer bbl- a longer sight radius. IE: A .22 LR gets max velocity out of a 16" tube. However, iron sight 3P rifles have barrels about 26" or 16" with a sight extension for better sight radius and accuracy. Same reason why there is a sight extension attached to the top of the slide giving even more radius on some .45 bullseye pistols.
     
  18. rangerruck

    rangerruck Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    Messages:
    8,374
    Location:
    Texas, baby!
    they are good for city work , but they are hard to hump, hard to one hand carry, have crap balance, you cant use the buttstock for breakin, hammerin, and killin, and have a short site radius, harder to clean, over heat easier, these are a few good reasons. Oh, and imagine cost to a military.
     
  19. MisterPX

    MisterPX Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Messages:
    759
    Location:
    Amerika's Doyleland
    Side ejection is a PITA if you switch up shooting sides, a kaboom is right next to your face, stocks are usually non adjustable, plus mag swaps are a little more consuming.

    However, that being said, I'd love an AUG with an adjustable length buttplate.
     
  20. 'Card

    'Card Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2006
    Messages:
    1,506
    Location:
    Raleigh, NC
    I've always wondered about that myself, because the basic bullpup concept seems so simple and obvious that is amazes me they aren't more common.

    I don't think a bullpup will ever be popular to people interested in military-style rifles unless they see a lot of military people using them. As for the civilian market, I'm sure traditional appearance has something to do with it... (1911's are still popular, after all) but I think the real reason is that no one (as far as I know) has ever produced a good, reliable, cost-effective bullpup rifle targeted at the civilian market in a hunting caliber.

    Gun makers are risk-averse folks, and marketing a mass-produced (and therefore cost-effective) bullpup for hunting would be a pretty risky proposition.
     
  21. Coronach

    Coronach Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    11,109
    Generally:

    1. Poor triggers

    2. Ejection issues if you switch shoulders, or came from your Maker in non-milspec left-handed format.

    3. firing out of battery could be very interesting indeed.

    4. Poor sight radius for irons.

    5. Bad balance.

    6. Awkward magazine changes.

    7. Limited stock adjustments (though, to be fair, the main reason for that is OAL, which is shorter on a bullpup)

    There are others, and not all bullpups have these limitations. Also, none of these are really dealbreakers- you can live with and work around all of them. In general, though, the single advantage of the bullpup (shorter OAL for a given barrel length) just doesn't seem to make up for the many minor shortcomings.

    Oh, #8. They're ugly.

    Mike
     
  22. Prince Yamato

    Prince Yamato Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2006
    Messages:
    4,411
    Location:
    Texas
    I know that cosmetics shouldn't matter, but I honestly believe that having something that 'looks' cool, can improve self-image. In the case of ARs, they are functional and look cool to boot. Say what you will, but humans are programmed to recognize natural beauty. Don't believe me? Would you rather go to bed with a 'sexy' woman or a 'functional' one?

    ARs. Sexy AND functional.
     
  23. Eightball

    Eightball Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2005
    Messages:
    4,257
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    Because a bolt-action bullpup would suck.
     
  24. 50caliber123

    50caliber123 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Messages:
    640
    "Would you rather go to bed with a 'sexy' woman or a 'functional' woman?"

    Depends, really. As far as looks go, this applies to everything, what good are looks if they're not functional? An AK is very functional, some of us like their look (like me), some find them ugly. But they work, and are simple.
     
  25. Civilian Armory

    Civilian Armory Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2006
    Messages:
    4
    Location:
    UT
    The bolt action bullpups from Barrett don't bother me in the least.

    I'd be interested in knowing in what jurisdictions a bullpup rifle is banned - not that I don't believe it - just never heard of such a thing before.

    Rather than write a long-winded opinion I'll just say that I think the bullpup hasn't been adopted by all militaries because there haven't been enough examples of a great bullpup that performed better than conventional rifles. I say that while being a fan of the AUG and FS2000.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page