In theory it is better in every way so what went wrong?

>>28423440

Because some can be uncomfortable as fuck thanks to awkward weight distribution. Also it's not as intuitive to reload.

>>28423440
Seems most are small and might be difficult to deal with the roil campaired to a full stock. idk I don't own a bullpup anything.

>>28423470
>>28423440
+
Poor mushy triggers
Harder to make ambidextrous
Much inferior for bayonet use
Changing to something new takes effort and money
Most soldiers don't have any specific reason to need their rifle to be shorter anyway

>>28423470
Confirmed for never held a bullpup

I'm trying to learn things about guns and i'm wondering, how exactly will having the action behind the trigger allow to make the weapon shorter?

>>28423440
manlets sure love short guns

>>28423503
yes

>>28423440

Nothing went wrong, institutional and industrial inertia are delaying the age of bullpups.

>>28423470

They don't have awkward weight distribution, the mass is further to the rear. This aids in close range target transition.

>>28423473

What youre saying makes absolutely zero sense.

File: 1447604381025.jpg (48KB, 675x380px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 675x380px

>the age of bullpups

>>28423470
>awkward weight distribution
What? Bullpups a very comfortable to hold. My FS2000 is my favorite gun by far because of how well balanced it is.

When I took my sister and her friend shooting, they both fell in love with my PS90 because of how easy it was to shoulder and hold. They didn't care for my 8" SBR'd AR because they said it was too awkward to hold.
>intuitive to reload
This is largely because most people are brought up with traditional rifles. If you learn on a bullpup, it will feel intuitive.

>>28423489

-granted, fixed with better machining

-no

-absolutely retarded

-true, see institutional inertia

-true, doesnt mean they are not superior

File: A3M1.jpg (153KB, 1024x637px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 1024x637px

>>28423511
They're made for the same role as intermediate rifles, firing intermediate cartridges from a gun half the size and a little over half the weight. Recoil is an issue unless you're using a hilariously awkward design like a Vector.

There's also the fact that you just don't need a battle/assault rifle to be that short. If you wanted a short rifle, you'd be using a short barreled rifle, not a short actioned rifle. What you thought you were saving in length you actually need for a good chin weld anyway, so you put all that length back on with a stock. Why bother shortening the rifle in the first place?

>>28423489
Nobody gives a single shit about bayonet use, military triggers are generally terrible. Supposedly most soldiers don't have a specific reason to need their rifle shorter, but that didn't stop the US military from adopting the M4 as its primary infantry rifle. Weight distribution/money/ambidexterity seem like real reasons. Trigger and ambidexterity just need the right rifle and then they're irrelevant.

>>28423503
For rifles the butt has to be a certain minimum distance from the handle and trigger.

>>28423570
alright thank you

File: MDR-Barrel-Length.jpg (515KB, 695x1600px) Image search: [Google]

515KB, 695x1600px

>>28423440
in theory NOTHING.

Bullpups have their pros, and their cons, EXACTLY like any redesign of existing machines.

what could be considered "wrong" is simply mechanical difference, or vast changes in doctrine after such doctrine has become set (for example, reloading the magazine behind the trigger is not as intuitive as normal firearms, ONLY because for the last 150 years, firearms were loaded either in the grip or in front of the trigger, if bullpups were in common usage and had been in common usage for the last 75 years it' wouldn't be a problem.

the mechanical differences are a bit different, their is a obvious tradeoff in triggers because there is a massive increased distance between trigger and the sears, this lead to mushy triggers, a reconised problem (but one, in which alot of improvements have been made, for example the kel tec RFB trigger feels similar to a standard military ar trigger (from what i've heard, hadn't actually fired one myself) such improvements could work the trigger issue out over the next 25 years to where it's no longer a problem, but the trigger difficiny was balance against the pros of the platform.
the smaller package, with a standfard size barrel makes bulpups incredibly efficient as a war fighting weapon (because it has adaptability across common ranges military units could be expected to engage at)

basically TL;DR bullpups aren't wrong, they are on par with conventoinal actions, and only will another 75 years of service will we see the end result of the platform and then be in a place to truly judge it.

>>28423538
The point of bullpups are for standard soldierings which will have their primary taskings being outside, patrolling forests and mountains and shit, but will occasionally have to navigate tighter enviorns like a house or a small village or an industrial facility.

A bullpup trades off some speed on reloads (Everyone reloads fucking slow anyways since no one is Costa, so the equals actually become equal) and some weight in different places / different recoil - with the primary issue being a mushy trigger.

In exchange you have a "full length" rifle that is much, much easier to use in close quarters than a full length M16.

If your primary mission is door kicking, or law enforcement where you will use the gun at close ranges or for a shorter time, an SBR is still the optimum gun.

>ejects in the face of lefties
>shitty trigger pull by design
>yeah it's short, but who cares? it's only useful for rear echelon faggots in vehicles or tanks or whatever.
>awkward having your face so close to the action
>awkward to have to reach behind your trigger hand to remove mag

>>28423602
Why do bullpups have shit triggers?

File: hahaha.jpg (72KB, 930x612px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 930x612px

>french operators

>>28423608
It's because the trigger isn't really connected to the trigger group. The trigger is attached to a bar, which is connected to the trigger group.

There is probably some torque term, like how "torque" can be used to describe why a longer wrench is better or something, to describe why it's shittier overall, but the end result is you are squeezing a trigger which is pulling a bar that runs a good couple of inches in length

>>28423618
Thought so. Hope that gets fixed through magic firearm engineering eventually.

>>28423538
>a little over half the weight
M16A4: 8.79 lbs (loaded, I'm assuming)
Steyr AUG: 8.1 lbs loaded
They have all the same mechanics they just arrange them differently.

>Off-hand shooting == brass to the face
>Shorter OAL == less comfy to shoulder for gibbon-armed ogres like me
>Creppy triggers
>Awkward to reload in prone

>>28423627
Oh, I forgot.
>Catastrophic failure == kablooey right under your cheek

>>28423440
It has to eject spend casings between your trigger hand and your body, where-as traditional rifles can eject casings forward of the shooting hand.

The FS-2000 does sort of mcguiver them up to the front of the stock for ejection. but then we get to the second part of why bullpups are bad: Over Engineering. Because your face is cheek welded to a part of the gun directly on top of the breech and chamber, the guns have to be built in ways that make them universally difficult to maintain, or repair.

File: MEU_SAMR_2.jpg (241KB, 1050x750px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 1050x750px

>>28423618
>some torque term
technical term

I gotta stop posting so late at night

>>28423622
Maybe. Who knows. Really it comes down to what the mission / deployment is, and if your country really thinks you need a gun with 18 inches, of if a shorter traditional rifle would be just as good.

I can see the advantages of a bullpup from a force that is deployed into a forest, and then has to go deal with a populated area and housings.

Pic related is, holy fuck, imagine having to clear houses with shit like that looking for terry taliban

File: F090630TA36.jpg (83KB, 725x408px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 725x408px

>>28423639
in comparison

shit looks fucking comfy

>>28423637
>the guns have to be built in ways that make them universally difficult to maintain, or repair.
Ever field stripped a Tavor? You literally push 2 pins and pull the action out. That's it.

>>28423649
>Field stripping is hte saim as proper maintenance

I LOL AT U

File: 34th_Infantry_Division_soldier_in_Iraq.jpg (1MB, 3072x2048px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3072x2048px

>>28423647

>>28423653
That's also how you do repair and "proper maintenance" you dunce, you can take down every piece of the bolt and carrier after you field strip it.

>>28423440
The AUG called.

File: F090630TA34.jpg (75KB, 737x414px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 737x414px

>>28423660

>>28423653

To play devil's advocate, field stripping may not be the entirety of maintenance, but most of the time that's all you need. The only time you'd need to really take it apart and clean it completely would be when you have plenty of time and space to do it, where the overengineering and difficulty isn't as big a deal.

File: steyr_aug_l7.jpg (340KB, 1024x667px) Image search: [Google]

340KB, 1024x667px

>>28423666

>>28423667
I agree that it's usually all you need, but looking at the detailed repair manual for the Tavor, I'd still safely say it has been overengineered.

>>28423618
torque is rotational force. increase radius(use a bigger wrench), and you increase the circle/force vector

File: 060303-A-0559K-015.jpg (198KB, 1023x673px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 1023x673px

>>28423668

>>28423674
Yes, I understand how torque works, I just don't know the term for why the trigger bar would suck in relation to the trigger being directly part of the trigger group, or what to call it.

File: article-2214609-0062610600000258-14_306x423.jpg (34KB, 306x423px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 306x423px

I'm done posting photographs now, but basically if you can't understand why some countries are under the assumption that a bullpup makes a better multi-role weapon platform then there is no helping you.

It's down to preference, but clearing tight spaces with a full length M16 sucked dick.

>>28423610
>hahaha.jpeg
>not honhonhon.jpeg

1/10

File: royal-marine-42-commando.jpg (63KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 600x400px

>>28423684
I lied, gonna post one of the L85.

Nothing.

People just don't like change.

I like bullpups, honestly. For modern soldiers, I really don't see many downsides besides being harder to make ambi.

They're compact, they balance well, recoil seems to be distributed better compared to a traditional rifle, it's easier to manage muzzle rise, and it can be held 1-handed a lot easier than a normal rifle. Not to mention the CQC and transport benefits.

I'm thinking about buying a Tavor soon, or an RDB since my LGS keeps a fuckload of Kel-Tec products in stock. It'll be my first rifle, and after experiencing bullpups at the range with friends... I quite like them.

Also, maybe it's harder for lifelong shooters to get used to bullpups since they're a relatively new concept. Given I've owned guns for barely a year, it's easy for me to adapt to a given firearm since I don't have much in the way of experience.

>>28423440
Cost / mushy trigger

/thread.

>>28423489
>not ambidextrous
How about you just train your soldiers to shoot with the correct hand. Problem bloody solved.

>>28423602
None of this is a problem if you train your soldiers properly.

>>28423440
tradition/fear of change+cost to replace millions of perfectly good rifles

why fix something if it isn't necessarily broken

>>28423503
>how exactly will having the action behind the trigger allow to make the weapon shorter?
With only minor exceptions, all the functional gubbins in a rifle lay between the bolt (in the fully-open position) and the muzzle. The muzzle is almost always the forward extreme of the rifle, but the rearmost extreme is the butt of the stock. So in-between the rearmost extent of the bolt's range of motion and the butt of the stock, most rifles have a good 10-15 inches of mostly-dead space. But by moving the entire action rearward, so the bolt, magazine and chamber now sit BETWEEN the trigger and the shoulder thus filling this previously-dead space in the stock, the overall length of the firearm can be shortened by a good degree without compromising the action or barrel length.

In other words, picture taking an ordinary rifle, hacking off most of the stock and moving the trigger forward of the magazine so that what remains of the rifle can still be held comfortably against the shoulder. Same basic principle.

>>28423804
The Kel-Tec RDB and the Desert Tech MDR BOTH have better triggers than a stock AR.

>>28424037
Don't forget the aftermarket Tavor triggers on thr market now.

Yes, aftermarket, but they exist.

>>28423602
>ejects in faces of lefties

That's what you get for being a disgusting devil worshipper

>>28423858
Seems like it'd be more expensive than just making the rifle ambidextrous

File: large.jpg (50KB, 366x300px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 366x300px

I've never really understood the "awkward and unintuitive to hold" argument. Isn't that mostly because mist gun owners learnt to use traditional firearms and are just unfamiliar with bullpups?
When I take new people shooting and hand them my Swedish Mauser It's not uncommon to see them take the "dangerous outside the kitchen" if they are short and considerable chick lean is the norm among pretty much all new shooters.
Handing them an AUG you see much less chick leaning due to the weight distribution and even the most ignorant hipster will shoulder it correctly because there is literary only one way to hold it.

>>28423440
I can't speak for any other gun, but the weight distribution on the l85a2 makes it kind of weird to hold.

In addition to that, it doesn't help that the gun is counter intuitively designed.

Is the faster turn rate relevant?

File: Eddie-MDR.jpg (368KB, 1600x1071px) Image search: [Google]

368KB, 1600x1071px

The future is coming

>>28423440
>Move Trigger
>Better in every way
Pick one.

>>28423858
>How about you just train your soldiers to shoot with the correct hand. Problem bloody solved.

Make not being a freak/southpaw an enlistment requirement

>>28426231
You'd be excluding the majority of presidents from military service.

>>28423440
Why not just get a regular ar with short barrel? Better weight distrubution. Can you even relead a bullup without raising the weapon, keeping on target?

File: 1448550027864.jpg (60KB, 560x473px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 560x473px

>>28426373
It doesn't completely suck being wrong handed. You just get a little messy from gasses, debris, oils, and lead.

>>28426654
The microwave door handle will always be on the wrong side

>>28423543
clearing rooms faggot

>>28423532
>They didn't care for my 8" SBR'd AR because they said it was too awkward to hold.
>8"
They just shat themselves after thing went off.

>>28426405

Because 5.56 is at it's best when being shot from a 20" barrel. With SCHV rounds, you need all the velocity that you can get.

File: 14378460261301.jpg (246KB, 610x784px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 610x784px

>>28423440
>Glorious PRC propaganda
>China hardware is best hardware
>If it's not stolen tech, it's looks fucking horrendous
>These types of threads everyday

Why do you people respond to these fucking Chinese government shills?

>>28423610
Speaking of frogs, did they finally get a replacement for the famas? Is it also a bullpup? They should get a good budget to fight the terrists, no?

>>28423511
>institutional and industrial inertia are delaying the age of bullpups.
Nigga bullpups are dead, Everyone is dropping them for AR type rifles, the French, NZ'ers, Choina, Think there was someone else as well.

>>28427478
Speaking of the FAMAS, how good is it?

>>28427478
They haven't yet.

The most likely candidate is the Thales F90.

>>28427537
The lever delayed blowback tends to mangle brass, which meant steel core ammunition, which meant no NATO commonality.

>>28424649
>lack of td
Future of NDs.

>>28427579
>Thales F90
I like the look of it.
Shame no iron sights.

>>28427582
He's testing the trigger pull

>>28427591
In a building?

>>28423532
So unless you grew up nogunz then it's always going to feel awkward, got it.

>>28423440
Increased cost
Increased production time
Increased chance of failure due to increased parts count
Reduced responsiveness in the trigger
Additional effort to design ambidextrous designs

>>28424570
>training soldiers to use their weapons is more expensive than making their weapons easy to use
Which would betotally correct, if not for the fact that you have to train your troops to use their weapons anyway.....
>>28426231
IIRC the British Army just makes you learn to shoot right handed, you just have to man up and shut up.

>>28427624
Basically bullpups are the political correctness of the gun world.
We do it because we're told to do it.

>>28423440
Left handed people.

General balance issues, awkwardness while reloading, hard to use prone, etc.

What's really bothering me is how nobody has bothered to make a trigger that latches onto the front of the action so you don't need a fucking bar.

File: barrel6.jpg (31KB, 650x433px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 650x433px

>>28426934

According to experts, you NEED 2,500 fps which any barrel over 10 inches can deliver, to inflict desired fatal effects on target.

>source: Dr. Philip H. Dater of "Small Arms Defense Journal."

>>28427638
They have niche uses
PC police do not

>>28427676
Because we are dealing with enemies just out of punching distance ofcourse

>>28423680
The term you're looking for is probably "play".

The more joints between your finger and the sear, the "mushier" the trigger is, because each joint/pin/whatever the fuck can wobble a bit, which adds up.

>>28426951
What the fuck are you talking about?

>>28427579
The F90 wasn't preselected.

The five competitors are:

- Scar-L
- HK416
- HS VHS-2
- ARX 160
- An upgraded SG 550

None have been selected yet.

>>28423503
it's not really about having the action behind the trigger. forget that stupid shit for a sec

the reason a bullpup is shorter is literally because they lopped the stock off and made the end of the receiver into the stock. once you do this you have to relocate the trigger because it's too close to your chest to use.

>>28423532
It's actually simply biomechanics. It's not as intuitive to go behind your hand.

>>28427597
Probably at SHOT, the rifle is flagged, there's no ammo allowed, it looks like he's probably pointed away from people.

>>28426683
FUCK

>>28423440
the first time I ever held a Tavor I instantly hated it. If felt heavy as fuck.
I liked the AUG that I held downrange a lot more

>>28427676
>>28427695
Exactly. And a 14.5" carbine will barely pull 100m, nevermind the 'common' standard of 300m.

>>28423492

Not him but I have fired Steyr AUG and the balance is really weird for someone who has been used to front heavy guns.

Then there are other issues like slow reloading and poor trigger.

It was super accurate though, despite being strange and borderline uncomfortable to use I still got much better groupings at 150m range than I get with my own AK.

>>28428695
Tavor was heavy?
I held it and was light as fuck to shoulder since all the weight is closer to the shoulder than an AR.
I could extremely easily shoulder it with one hand.
Which for home defense is perfect.
Open door with one hand, aim rifle wherever you want it with the other.
Every bullpup I've held has felt lighter than any AR I've held, even if the pup literally was heavier they are way easier to shoulder due to weight balance

>>28423470
That's only because you're used to convential rifles.

>>28428735
>despite being strange and borderline uncomfortable to use I still got much better groupings at 150m range than I get with my own AK.
That should tell you all you need to know about exactly how 'familiar and comfortable' and 'biomechanically effective' are related. You're not alone, by the way:
>http://pro.sagepub.com/content/58/1/1844.full.pdf

>>28428768
For me it felt like one heavy mother fucker. I was an armorer at the time, for sensitive items I hold all ~150 M4 we had in about 30 minutes.
It could all be in my head, but it felt heavy as shit. Certainly more balanced wth one hand, and not uncomfortable, just heavy

>>28423538

That is the worst optic I've ever used. If you're considering buying an AUG, I'd suggest getting the flat rail or better yet the older AUG so you can have an optic and BUIS.

why do people think shorter is automatically better? think about it
prior to the 1900s everyone had two meter long rifles and nobody gave a shit about making guns smaller
obviously thats too long by the time wwii rolls around and you start to see things with 20 inch barrels
that length seems to work perfectly fine for house to house battles

then you keep going smaller and smaller to the point where a 20inch m16 is considered huge and too lange for use in a house and the standard is 14.5
the only reason being convenience so you can get in and out of a car easier and we are all lazy fucks who want a gun as light as possible

>>28428822
The tavor is particularly bulky (I'm pretty sure the contact dimensions are larger than the FS2000, despite that one looking much bulkier) and is actually quite heavy. Not that surprising if you're used to M4s.

>>28428841
>convenience so you can get in and out of a car easier
You literally answered your own rhetorical question.
And if it doesn't sacrifice any real performance, which the next generation of bullpups looks to be finally accomplishing, why not go for the more 'convenient' size?

Shit, will you still be complaining if future-tech brings us PDW-sized small arms with main battle rifle ballistic performance?

>>28423440
Bullpup remind me of when drag cars use to have the engine in front of the driver. Now drag cars are required to have them behind the driver.

I want the exploding parts in front of my face and not next to my face. Seems safer if the gun wanted to go kaboom

>>28428896
That was a pretty shit analogy.

>>28428896
You realize because of the DI gas piston inside the bolt carrier, AR15s tend to have much more destructive catastrophic failure events than any military bullpup save perhaps the FAMAS?

The worst I can find for bullpup KBs are the .300BLK in a FS2000 thing, no injury to the shooter in what is probably the single worst case scenario, and an AUG blowing the shooter-side ejection port cover off into his cheek, again, no injury.

Meanwhile, AR15s are splitting receivers and spitting shrapnel all over the place.

>>28428887
yes
at a certain point the the gun will be too fucking small to comfortably hold and shoot
p90s are pretty nice for that but imagine a p90 sized weapon with all the crap from a modern m4
theres no space on the gun

people so focused on close quarters combat when its obsolete
why bother clearing a building with cqb tactics when you have grenades drones or airstrikes
vehicle combats going the same way that scene went down in sicaro you dismount at which point length isnt critically important and the guys still stuck in the car are fucked even with the shortest weapons known to man

it would be nice if someone made a long bullpup something with the same overall length of an m16 with like a 30 inch barrel in it
that would take full advantage of a bullpup design

>>28423666
ACOG has a 1.5 inch eye relief. That's a fucked photo.

>>28429041
It doesn't seem like he is looking through his ACOG in this particular frame.

File: barrett_m99.jpg (7KB, 400x309px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 400x309px

>>28428997
>overall length of an m16 with like a 30 inch barrel

File: IMG_6842.jpg (89KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 800x600px

>>28428997
>>28429081
The reason you won't see that when discussing common bullpups is that most people are talking about military service rifles, ie, .223, which are already maxing out in carbine length rifles with 20" barrels like the AUG, FAMAS, F2000, etc.

File: GM6_LRG.jpg (53KB, 1000x564px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 1000x564px

>>28428997
>>28429081
>>28429090
And a particularly cool one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBntnnCFvOk

more like bullPOOP am i right fellows ha ha ha high five

>>28423440
Bullpups are the way of the future, but for me, I was trained on ar by the marines. I don't have any gucci range-toy guns that aren't fudd-tier, so I'm really not interested in anything that's not highly standardizes and combat proven.

Also I'm not buying a bullpup that isn't bottom-ejecting, that should be a requirement.

>>28427676
>>28428730
I guess you don't mind to be hit by 5.56 at 2000 fps then. Wanna post video on youtube?

>>28423489
The british manage fine with bayonets on bullpups

>>28423618

Waaay back in the day, cars had manual brakes.

Nowadays, they have power brakes.

I could go into the yadda yadda on the differences between the two, but I will keep it short, and apply what I assume could help /k/ in the same way it helped me, an aut/o/.

On the pedal (trigger), the bar that pushes the piston on the Brake master cylinder, is usually near a 7:1 ratio. Now on non-powered brake cars, that ratio is closer to 4:1. Would this help bullpups trigger pull?

>>28427622
This. Just because some nogunz likes it better doesn't mean it's great.

>>28426373
How many of this "majority of presidents" actually went into service?

>>28423440
How on earth is it "better"?

More complicated, more expensive, shittier trigger, slower reloading all come to mind. Not to mention the shitty QBZ you posted, burgers really aren't missing out on anything

If you legitimately need a shorter weapon of equivalent power (most troops don't), just use a carbine and a more powerful cartridge.

>>28423804
>/thread-ing yourself

>>28423882
Tell this to the French

>>28429101
This gun makes me wet

>>28430881
1) "Car auto brake systems" cant handle the abuse a grunt would put on their rifle
1a) especially since that shit would be tiny
2) EMPs yo
3) batteries yo
4) overall cost of weapon yo

>>28423440
Gun politics.

>people have discussed there are upsides and downsides to each design
>people have brought up its easier to have a bullpup to navigate cqb and getting out of cars and shit

why are people still even discussing this?

>>28423647
im seeing something i havent considered yet.

say you have a regular m4 or m16, whatever.
And you're using cover with an opening and you need to stick you're barrel out a bit to return fire.
with the regular rifle you have a solid 2 feet from the opening, if firing out straight anyway, so you have a good 2 foot buffer from the end of your barrel or the covers opening and your face.

but with the bullpups your face is a lot closer and vulnerable to debris and fire from the flank.

Not to mention if you have a tiny hole opening like how snipers use (though im sure regular infantry can use them as well, im sure) you dont want your fucking face so damn close to the hole.

>>28432149
>>people have brought up its easier to have a bullpup to navigate cqb and getting out of cars and shit
isnt there an AR-15 style rifle thats as short as bullpups or shorter?

oh wait, the POF P416

>>28432961
>issuing CQB weapons to those in multirole deployments and unpredictably changing AO

I shiggity diggity do

>>28433044
you know, it probably doesnt even matter in the real world.

>>28433071
>every military in the world, for whatever reason, seems to really want to give their soldiers long barrels
>overall length of weapon begins a big issue
>don't just simply cut down the barrel to like 8 inches to make weapon small and compact
>instead engineer entirely new weapon where you have reduced overall length while maintaining barrel length

But yeah I guess it doesn't matter at all in the real world

>>28433127
yeah because we have this badass invention called the shotgun.

Or how about make a rifle where you can just change out the barrel lengths with a twist and click?
that way you can have short, medium, and long.

problem fucking solved, with benefits because every rifleman can go short or long with ease.

>>28433365
>giving shotgun to multirole

No.

>multiple barrels

Instead of one compact weapon platform that does it all anyways without hauling extra shit. Yep. Great idea.

>>28433429
>Instead of one compact weapon platform that does it all anyways without hauling extra shit. Yep. Great idea.
yeah but my solution doesnt have the disadvantages of a bullpup.

also you wont look like a fucking fag.

>giving shotgun to multirole
no, just for close quarters.

>>28433469
Your solution also doesn't have the advantages of a bullpup. There are pros and cons, it's not just OAL.

>>28429041
the lower power/more compact acogs have more eye relief

>>28433127
>>28433365
why do you want more barrel length?
average grunt does not need barrel length

>>28433604
>literally almost every country on the planet issues barrel length to grunts
>grunts don't need barrel length

Pick one

>>28433626
m8y no fightin' gun needs more than a 20 inch barrel
a 20 inch barrel for the grunt just improves his sight radius
setting that 20 inch barrel back into the stock worsens his sight radius while giving him the improvement of less overall length
if you really want less overall length, just shorten the barrel for the reduced overall length with the added bonus of a shorter barrel

>>28423440
because long barrels are not your friend, even set back behind the trigger

>>28433687
>sight radius
>the previous year

>>28427512
That's less to do with the 'overwhelming superiority' of the AR platform and more to do with the fact that many countries used to have gun industries developing military rifles 30/40 years ago and now don't.

>>28433687
I get it, 20 inch AR15s are very common in the American civilian market and you have to justify that.

>>28433798
no one wants the 19" barrels on what >28423587 posted when there is no improvement of sight radius

>>28433851
my point is that if you don't care about sight radius then you don't want a longer barrel--IE: no reason to bullpup

and if you do care about sight radius then a bullpup with the same length barrel would have shittier sight radius

>>28423440
>they have bad triggers!
Not anymore.
>they're harder to reload!
They're really not, just turn it sideways in prone.
>you can't shoot them left handed!
Many newer designs you can as they eject forward or downward.
>you can't adjust the length of pull!
Some new designs you can, though few because the LOP is already generally longer than a conventional rifle and few people are lanket status tall, plus that's more moving parts that can possibly break when most people would likely leave it on the shortest setting anyway.

>>28433870
No one cares about sight radius period, but plenty of people would prefer an 18~20" barrel for 5.56 with as short an overall length as possible.

Seriously. Sight radius? It's practically less relevant than bayonet effectiveness.

>>28433940
>people would prefer an 18~20" barrel for 5.56 with as short an overall length as possible
who?
and why?

>>28433938
Optics are a thing and highly recommended with bullpups. Generally you want one on a fighting rifle regardless.

>>28433939
The answer to the LOP question is replaceable buttpads, no additional parts and those who want longer LOP can simply swap it. Also gives the option for softer pads for pussies.

>>28423440
>wrong
Nothing went wrong. It's just not better enough to justify spending millions to transition a large military to the new platform.

>>28433955
Anyone who has to shoot 5.56 effectively beyond 100m.
For adequate fragmentation velocity.

>>28433955
It's been brought up many times in this thread already. Scroll up.

But if you need to be spoon fed
>TLDR
Multirole, where you may go from mountains, to woodlands, to villages, to urban enviorns, and back again

In otherwords, literally 100% of modern military operations.

>>28433938
>my point is that if you don't care about sight radius then you don't want a longer barrel

>sight radius
>sight
>radius
>SIGHT RADIUS
If only you could somehow magnify the image what you were looking at. Man, that would be a great invention, it would probably make shooting distant targets much easier desu

>>28434013
what is adequate fragmentation velocity for 5.56?

what range does a 16" barrel stop having it? what range does a 14.5" barrel stop having it?

>>28423503
because in short all the magic happens inside the stock, and everything ahead is barrel. In theory you can have the same barrel lenght with half the weapon lenght

>>28433687
>need

>>28433955
You get the most out of 5.56 with a 20" barrel.

>>28434115
how much more do you get?

>>28434086
200m

>>28434086
>>28434135
Depending on bullet and load,
14.5" 75~150m
16" 100~175m
20" 200~225m

>>28428735
same here. The forward weight actually helps mitigate muzzle rise when using select fire, doubles, and hammers. AT least in comparison the the AUG 5.56 and AKM bullpup I tried.

Don't get me wrong- its a great idea, just not my style.

>>28423440
COVER ME WHILE I RELOAD

>>28427597
You just really want to be right don't you.

>>28431771
Hydraulics of some sort? I dunno, I don't know that much about hydraulics. Though the whole chance of a hydraulic leak could be an issue. IIRC most hydraulics don't use just water.

>>28423440
>mechanical issues/flaws
-crappy, heavy and mushy triggers
-not enough weight forward, select fire designs HAVE to have a brake instead of a flash hider
-ridiculously short sight radius plus poor optics mounting options

>issues with doctrine and switching
-Saving a massive 4" overall isnt worth getting a new rifle and retraining for it
-for institutions issuing weapons, giving a lefty a right handed rifle can cause serious injury instead of just being a pain in the ass. No design yet has a field expedient, toolless CH/ejection port changeover (doesnt apply to forward or downward ejecting rifles with non reciprocating CHs)

>>28423492
>>28423511
>>28423532


Please note that I said some and some does not mean all. For me personally the sporter tavor 21, Aug, and that godawful ak bullpup had not the greatest weight distribution, and I'm not the only one that thinks this. You are also right that it is because I grew up with conventional weapons, but so did 99 percent of americans. Which probably contributes as to why they aren't as popular here (which was my explanation to op).

>>28427590

Irons are obsolete. Get over it, Fudd.

>>28427622
>>28427638

Jeez, did a Bullpup screw your mom or something?

>>28427624

>Increased cost
>Increased production time
>Increased chance of failure due to increased parts count

Uwotm8?

>>28430589

Shoot some Hadjis from 400m with an M4 and get back to me.

File: Costanza Pimpmygun.jpg (40KB, 386x503px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 386x503px

>>28432961

>10.5" barrel

>>28433836

Fuck off. The AR is the best platform, period.

>>28433955

Armies.

You want as short a length as possible for CQB (this also comes in handy when dismounting from vehicles), but when fighting at longer ranges (especially with a 5.56), you want a long barrel. Now, you can have one rifle fill all roles* instead of issuing a myriad of rifles and carbines.

*Fun fact: AUG is Schnitzelspeak for "Universal Infantry Rifle"

Bullpups suck, and ARfags have a massive hate-boner for them.

Captcha: 420

File: 1450549172645.jpg (3MB, 1520x2688px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1520x2688px

I own an RFB with the 24" barrel, so my critiques will reflect only this rifle and not other bullpups.

I quite like the balance of the rifle. My friend who I shoot with does not, he owns an AR. The gun is easy to shoulder and because the center of gravity is right on the grip I don't feel like my left arm is working hard to keep the barrel pointed up even though the gun weighs like 10 pounds. I could shoot it one handed if need be though I wouldn't hit shit since the .308 recoil is heavy.
The trigger is solid, I have no complaints. I judge triggers against my 1911, and I have not fired a striker fired pistol that had a trigger I liked. The RFB trigger is fairly crisp and not too heavy. It's not my 1911 but I vastly prefer the RFB trigger when compared to a glock's.
I have not trained reloading quickly with either an AR or my RFB so I can't comment as to how hard it is to reload under pressure compared to a standard rifle, but I don't find it hard to do.

So far through around 200 rounds I had one malfunction, it appeared to be a double feed. I've heard that the springs on thermold FAL mags need to be broken in, so I'm gonna say this was probably a case where the magazine spring spit two rounds up into the chamber at once. If I have more issues I may change my mind. I have not even touched the gas system though, which I read could be finicky. Considering how complex the ejection system is I'm ok with 99.5% reliability so far.

All in all I just liked the bulpup design and really liked the way the rifle felt when I picked it up at a gun show. I can't comment on accuracy yet as I've just thrown some iron sights on it and shot in my friends back yard. Once I get a scope and sight it in properly I'll see how accurate it is.

>>28430589
>If it's not quite as lethal as it could be, it must be totally harmless
Dude, you just made the dumbest "let yourself get shot with it" dare ever.

File: thanks george.png (343KB, 941x613px) Image search: [Google]

343KB, 941x613px

>ITT, people who've never owned a bullpup

>>28423470
You're a retard, I can balance my RFB on the trigger guard.

>>28423618
The RFB isnt. The hammer is connected to a bar; pic related.

>>28423637
>Because your face is cheek welded to a part of the gun directly on top of the breech and chamber, the guns have to be built in ways that make them universally difficult to maintain, or repair.
Again no, the RFB solved this by having a couple pieces of thick steel between the breech and the shooter. The gun itself is simple as fuck.

>>28427579
>The lever delayed blowback tends to mangle brass, which meant steel core ammunition, which meant no NATO commonality.
I dont know about 5.56 NATO, but for 7.62 NATO the STANAG 2310 specifies a steel case for ammo, including how hard it should be in various areas of the case; brass faggots are the ones using nonstandard ammo.

>>28428968
RFBs have suffered a few kabooms, worse one I know of was Andrew(?) from KT had one while they were developing the RFB, and it was caused by over pressure proof loads. Only thing that happened was the magazine blew out and put some brass shrapnel in to his arm, which he was able to pick out by himself himself.

>>28438209
>it appeared to be a double feed
If you have multiple magazines and a pair of calipers double check the space between the feed lips. I doubt it'll be a issue with the Thermolds but i've had surplus steel FAL mags which were so loose that even tapping them would cause them to spit rounds out.

File: Screen Shot 2016-01-05 at 1.40.36 PM.png (1MB, 3360x2100px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3360x2100px

>>28438484
>STANAG 2310 specifies a steel case for ammo
And because i'm sure some autist without the STANAG will say i'm full of shit on this; pic related.

>>28438484
I've got 5 mags, all thermold. They also don't seat all the way with 20 rounds in there. I was told the springs needed to break in before they would give that last little bit to seat when full.

>>28438905
>They also don't seat all the way with 20 rounds in there.
Thats normal on the RFB. Technically you can seat the magazine if you use enough force, but you'll crush the shoulder of the case against the bolt.

>I was told the springs needed to break in before they would give that last little bit to seat when full.
nein

File: 2KUrJh2.png (944KB, 872x872px) Image search: [Google]

944KB, 872x872px

>>28438923
>echnically you can seat the magazine if you use enough force, but you'll crush the shoulder of the case against the bolt.
Found my pic

>>28423656
>two foregrips


what

>>28423656
>those fake oaklies

>>28440309
front one is a collapsing bipod, still stupid.

>>28423503
the term you want to research is "length of pull"

>>28436276
optics fail. BUIS will always be needed.

File: 213203.jpg (63KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 600x450px

>>28441556
>BUIS dont fail

>>28423503
its smaller

>>28441691
>buy bottom barrel sight
>suprised when it's shit plastic breaks

How do you people breathe?

>>28427674
Kel-Tec did. They have one of the best bullpup triggers out there. That said, they're pretty much meh compared to a standard trigger, but the bullpup action makes up for it.

Their newest rifles have downward ejection with a fancy hammer that wishbones around the magazine. Pretty neat, check out the M43.

Left handed forner f88 user here. I used the f88 in combat and the m4 in training.
Each has its inherent advantages. The bullpup has a shorter overall length, is easier to manouvre. The tradituonal layout is more intuitive (even to someone who was no guns before the army)and has a more "even" weight distibution.
In longish range shooting with both weapon systems (both with an acog) i shot better with the f88. May hav3 been because it was the weapon i learnt to shoot on may have been the particular weapons. When it came to rapid target aquisition at 25m the m4 easily outperformed the f88. The m4 allowed me to adjust the stock and the positon of the forgrip, allowing me to accomodate to my much larger frame. It also allowed the manelts and the chicks to use the rifle more efrectivly by shortening the stock.
So both are great (ish) designs.
But the one thing that no one has mentioned is how the rifles actually perform in combat. When i was using the f88, reloading from the lrone positon was a bitch to do because the mag is underneath me. This made it difficult to do without losing situational awereness. The same things happened when you moved to CQB style shooting. The IA requires you to look down at the rifle and acertain what has casued the stoppage.
With the M4 i was able to conduct ny IA whilst maintaining situational awerness. I could look over the rifle as opposed to looking down at it.
So the advantage of the shorter barrel in CQB shooting was detracted by the fact that using the weapon properly put me at risk.
Its the main reason so many soldiers in the australian army want to move to an m4 style rifle (that and SF fanboyism) and given the choice i would take a conventional layout over a bullpup based on this alone.

>>28429101
I normally don't give a fuck about the ambi part, but that is seriously "Lefties need not apply."

Still the sickest rifle in a long time, though.

>>28434616
>not enough weight forward, select fire designs HAVE to have a brake instead of a flash hider

>He doesn't use combination muzzle break/flashhiders
>He doesn't use compensators
>He thinks the A2 flash hider is acceptable
Wow, m8.

>>28436340
I'm fairly sure you're joking, but there are a lot of people who think the AR is the last rifle the world will ever need and that technology will never surpass the late 1950s.

>>28441763
>I dont know that plastic BUIS have better drop survivability than metal BUIS

File: disgusted015.gif (128KB, 237x280px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 237x280px

>>28440454
>>28440309
If it's stupid and it works, it's not stupid.

>>28442248

Sauce?

>>28423489
Came here to say all this plus poor performance from prone, and poor performance in full auto.

>>28442715
http://kitup.military.com/2012/07/back-up-iron-sight-drop-test.html

>>28441691

and optics don't?

>>28442794

I stand corrected.