Yeah, a lot of closed-minded people don't get it. They don't get the reduced noise. The reduced recoil. The reduced cost of ammo. Lighter ammo with commonality.
Right now Natchez has 1000rds of 9mm for $219.
Best I can find for decent quality .223 is Independence at Midway for $340.
The .223 might be slightly more effective but it's a lot of added noise, added blast and added expense for range that you might not need. :roll:
If bullpups COULD be produced competitively in price, they would be. Again, the market is efficient. Supply, demand, economies of scale, R&D, etc are all at play. The cheapest you can get a new bullpup is around twice that of a carbine in the same caliber. So let's say that's a difference of around $500.
Ammo prices fluctuate, but lets assume that you save $130 per 1000 rounds. You BREAK EVEN on ammo prices after a few thousand rounds versus the added expense of the rifle. For most people, that's not worth the added cost for a LESS effective round. And that's assuming prices stay as they are. Prices could in theory flip flop or change up or down for either caliber.
The arguments seem to work against each other. If you want/demand ammo commonality presumably this is a duty/self defense situation. Presumably you'd also want the most effective weapon, not the tradeoff of a pistol caliber in a rifle platform. If it's a plinker then who cares about commonality?
The ammo commonality is a silly argument. Assuming you want ammo commonality, simply carry a secondary sidearm that uses the same mags - they are lighter, easier to carry, and less expensive. Want more range than a pistol offers you say?? Well then, USE A RIFLE with a RIFLE caliber. A PCR pays the penalty of a rifle (size/weight) without the benefits of the platform.
I've fired my Uzi rifle 9x19 under lights at night. You can literally watch the slower moving pistol bullet arc trajectory over the 200 meter range and the holdover is significant to hit the gong at that distance. Conversely, the 556 and 7.62 is flatter and you cannot see it, and it's much more accurate at that range.
556 only 'slightly' more effective? Get real. The 556 is much more effective than any 9x19. No debate. More energy, speed, distance, penetration, etc. In rough numbers, under 100 yards a 556 offers about 1400 ft/lbs kinetic energy, whereas the 9x19 offers much less at around 300-400 ft/lbs at the muzzle. It's a no-brainer that the 556 is much harder hitting. Real world? Military/LEO entry teams dumped the 9x19 SMGs in favor of the SBR AR15s in 556 for this reason - they are harder hitting.
Noise? That's what earpro is for. No time for earpro? That speaks to me as self defense, in which case again I'll refer to wanting the MOST effective practical rounds not a less effective round from a PCR.
Recoil? I'm unaware of a single adult that complains of the recoil of an AR15, SKS, or AK47. I've taught dozens and dozens of people on these platforms, and not a single person even hinted or had problems with the recoil. The AR recoil is comparable to that of a 9x19 or .40 from a rifle, in my experience.
I simply see (as reflected by the very low sales in PCR) very low demand for PCRs and making them expensive bullpups would be an exercise is failure.
Proof - there are several companies that make aftermarket bullpup stocks for various guns including the Ruger 10/22... not really flying off the shelves and I've never seen on in person at any range. Never seen many bullpups for that matter. Costly and unnecessary for 99.9% of gun owners. PCR bullpups even less so.
Rifle PCRs, and particularly bullpups, have too much working against them. No demand. High prices of the bullpup design, economies of scale. ECONOMICS and SCIENCE working against them...
