Bullpup discussion

>inb4 ar babbies crying about ergos
It wasn't developed by a superpower during a time where mass production of small arms and mass adoption of a new small arms platform was happening, as with most failed service rifles that were actually better than what it was supposed to replace

>>35176417
Lack of development, demand, as well as it really doesn't offer that much in terms of benefits.

>>35176417
>Why isnt bullpup the dominant rifle design of modern militaries /k/?
wow, another thread by a nongunz.

>>35176417
Because AR-15 and nobody can be fucked to actually fix all of the flaws inherent to bullpups, despite the fact that many rifles fixed at least some of them already.

>>35176445
>as well as it really doesn't offer that much in terms of benefits.
Except rifles with much greater range than a 10.5" barrel AR-15 with the same, or less, OAL.

>>35176417
Ease of access with the magazine, typical reloads are quicker on rifles that have the magazines in front of the trigger similar to AR/AK platforms.

Granted when training/drilling you can almost match the time, but with a bullpen the mag well is in an area where its not as natural to grab for reloads, and the bolt release is on most bullpens in an awkward location.

File: F2000.jpg (68KB, 695x302px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 695x302px

Because they don't understand the glory that is.

Also the AR-15.

>>35176417
>make a short compact rifle suited for small confined places
>can't shoot them ambi (inb4 the rdb and f2000) so if your turning left around a corner in a house in Fallujah you'll get a face full of hot brass when you shoot with your left hand
>trigger is horrible because the link from the trigger to the sear
>shorter sight radius
>awkward reloads
>can't have a telescoping or folding butt stock

A 14.5 inch m4 with a collapsed butt stock in the hands of a guy wearing armor is better than the same guy with an AUG or tavor or sa80 or whatever it's called

File: 1486129527473.jpg (270KB, 1592x1600px) Image search: [Google]

270KB, 1592x1600px

>>35176460
Militarily speaking, who's going to bother to accurately engage at those extended ranges? At best you're taking pot shots and suppressing so that extra "range" doesn't mean anything.
Don't get me wrong, I like bullpups but they really don't offer much of a tactical advantage whatsoever. This lack of a real noticeable increase in performance basically halts their development as conventional rifles are much more common and have a much more substantial backing (with regards with AR type rifles).

>>35176549
The only one of these cons that cant be fixed through better design and training is the shorter sight radius, but given the shorter ranges of modern combat it might be a moot point.

>>35176549
How to argue against bullpups
>ignore bullpups that fix a nonexistant problem
>never shoot a bullpup and regurtiate memes

>>35176575
Or just use an optic, who the fuck is ising irons these days

>>35176615
True but I was just giving the benefit of the doubt, because I honestly cant think of a performance based reason as to why non bullpups even exist.

>>35176678
>giving retards benefit of the doubt
Huehue
Literally every anti-bullpup argument is a fucking meme

>>35176417
It's not as modular.

>>35176569
>Militarily speaking, who's going to bother to accurately engage at those extended ranges?
Extended ranges like 3 to 400 yards? Like, a ton of people? Look how many M16s and M4s had ACOGs on them in the ME.

>>35176575
Sight radius isn't really important once you learn how to shoot. It's more of an aid for novices since it allows for less error when lining the sights up.

>>35176417
>plastic trigger groups
Why is this still allowed?

>>35176507
Is this the best bullpup ever made?

File: 1488756228901.png (495KB, 500x720px) Image search: [Google]

495KB, 500x720px

>>35176417
my x95 is my goto rifle and is my favorite but bullpups costs almost twice the money of a decent bcm ar. also bullpups are weighing almost around 8lbs (minus the rdb) and this triggers a lot of people despite them rocking 10-11 lb rifle with a lot of unnecessary shit on them
I feel like the aftermarket trigger is pretty forced considered good ar triggers cost a lot of money as well but mil spec ar trigger >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shit >>>>>>>>>>>> tavor oem trigger

basically it costs a lot of money.

>>35176549
>can't shoot them ambi
Yes, you can.
>trigger is horrible because the link from the trigger to the sear
The trigger is horrible on which guns? How? The only bad thing about the AUG trigger is that it's long and creepy because it's supposed to be a 2 stage but can't be in our market. Others may be heavy and shitty, but so are most conventional rifles.
>shorter sight radius
Big deal, especially since optics are king, now.
>awkward reloads
Please.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXvUtvC7nxs
>can't have a telescoping or folding butt stock
VHS has an adjustable stock, but why the fuck would you need an already 26" or so OAL rifle to have a folding stock?

>>35176417
Idn but the Atrax F90 MBR gets my dick hard. Idn why but I love the idea of a 20in AR with less OAL then a 14.5" AR

>>35176417

>bullpup general thread

please no

>>35176800
>bullpup owner who doesn't damage control and shill his gun
Nice proxy, ar fag

It is way too much of a situational gun to warrant its price. That being said, the only gun out of my safe besides a pistol is my X95, for home defense. The pros being that I can open a door, use a cell phone, flashlight, etc without lowering the weapon far easier than with my AR15. I also love how short it is without having to fuck around with the bs that comes with SBRs.

Ask yourself; "What does ANY bullpup do that an M4 doesn't already do?"

If you say "muh barrel length/muh velocity", immediately kill yourself. Literally what the fuck is M855A1, Mk 262, and Mk 318, not counting civvie rounds? Stop living in the past with M193 and M855.

There's a fucking reason literally EVERY country that's not Australia is replacing their shitpups with AR's or AR-style weapons.

>inb4 desperate memepupfags try and damage control away from that last point.
>inb4 I end up having to write walls of text that get largely ignored by the memepupfags who prefer to live in their own fantasy realm
>inb4 someone start posting those TFB articles that trigger the shit out of memepupfags for some reason.

>>35179133
Fit a 14.5" barrel in a gun that's some 2/3 the size?
>countries switch their small arms for performance reasons and not economic reasons

>>35179575
>Fit a 14.5" barrel in a gun that's some 2/3 the size?

Literally diminishing returns? Literally not as important as you make it out to be? Literally fuck your ability to mount a GL if you so choose? Literally ANY FUCKING NUMBER OF THINGS!?

That has to be one of the worst possible things you could have said... Wait...

>countries switch their small arms for performance reasons and not economic reasons

>The sound of the eternal memepupfag trying to damage control and excuse their shitty memeguns into literal "good boys, dindu nuffin'" territory.

I expected as much desu.

>>35179615
Not even that guy but you seem like you'd come off as a huge sperg in person.

File: IMG_3669.jpg (591KB, 1478x979px) Image search: [Google]

591KB, 1478x979px

>>35179615
Post a real argument against bullpups
>anon is too retarded to understand economics

>>35179675
>Post a real argument against bullpups

See >>35179133

You didn't respond to any of my points, just came out with "muh short OAL" as a general assertion with no understanding of the larger tactical implications of that "benefit", no backing up of claim, nothing, just "hurr durr, muh OAL! Now u."

Provide SUPPORTING EVIDENCE of your assertions or fuck off.

>Muh economics!
>You don't understand them!
>It's OBVIOUSLY more economical to retire all your current bullpups and replace them with AR's/AR-style carbines than it is to develop or upgrade new/existing weapons!
>Muh F90 doesn't count!

You'd think, if bullpups were so superior, all the nations that had ample opportunity to test/evaluate them over decades (They had bullpup proposals dating to just after WW2 with things like the T30, to entrants into the SPIW program (that ended up getting dropped funnily enough), to whatever the program was for the XM8 (Huh, new weapons, all conventional, not bullpups... Really actives the proverbial almonds, doesn't it?), to the German government heavily looking at an entirely new HK gun, when, if bullpups were so much better, you'd think that R&D and RFI would have been for bullpups, and so on.) would have adopted them, but they didn't. I WONDER WHY THAT IS!?

>Literally posts an X95 with lengthened barrel to try and disprove my point.

>>35179670
>huge sperg in person.

Like the incessant bullpupfags that try and act superior, like their guns are the greatest thing ever, and sperg the fuck out if you so much as slightly disagree with them?

Yeah, nah, I think it's you. Instead of arguing logically, it's ad hominem.

Gas yourself.

>>35179675
Whoever designed that pistol grip to function as a thumbhole is a fucking ergonomic genius.

>>35179769
>It's OBVIOUSLY more economical to retire all your current bullpups and replace them with AR's/AR-style carbines than it is to develop or upgrade new/existing weapons!
Yeah... it is. How do you not see that?

>>35179769
>better weight distribution when loaded down
>shorter oal for oper8
>longer barrel for mv and operational distance
If ARs are so good why does Russia and other combloc nations not retire and adopt them?
Every rifle in the early 2000s trial to replace the M4 performed better but the M4 was kept anyway, why did that happen?

File: OTs-14.jpg (695KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

695KB, 1280x960px

>>35179793

Why don't more designs put the trigger in the existing trigger guard, or link the existing trigger? Seems the most ergonomic.

Honestly? Money. All the major fuck ups on service bullpups were the direct result of bureaucrats getting cold feet when they got the bill. Britain has yet to be topped in the pencildick skinflint category, hence the l85's. The French suddenly deciding disposable magazines were expensive and being shocked when they failed after a few years of reuse is also a good example. Bullpups can definitely be done well but part of the motivation to even produce them is to cut costs by having a unified weapon for multiple roles, all in one caliber. Small arms really get the small end of the budget stick after WW2 ends and some of the most useful pieces wound up being stamped steel.

from https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/the-ef88-versus-the-m4ar-15-a-special-operators-perspective/ :

Another problem with the Steyr is that it’s a bull-pup system. While this results in a shorter overall weapon length, this advantage creates a range of problems. For one thing, the placement of the magazine at the rear of the Steyr means that—unlike the M4 we employ in Special Forces—soldiers must look down when conducting stoppage drills. This is problematic as it involves a loss of situational awareness of the battle space—a far more significant concern than John’s worry about the need to hit the forward assist on the M4/AR-15 when addressing a stoppage.

Finally, for today’s modern combat soldier, having the ability to keep oneself behind cover as much as possible, while still being capable of returning effective fire at the enemy is critical. It’s really quite simple to train off-handed shooting if the weapon is capable of doing so effectively—which the Steyr, including the new EF88, isn’t. After less than one day of training with the M4 we have our soldiers shoot LF6 both strong and off hand and all soldiers can achieve this within two or three attempts.

>>35179769

Retard it's not even about bullpups with me I like both platforms for different reasons. I'm just saying that you come off as an autist because of how worked up you get in your post.

>>35179864
>you can't reload or clear a bullpup without looking down
T R A I N M O R E

>>35179850

>It's more economical to retire your current weapons and replace them, possible with new designs. (HK433, LMT CQB16, whatever that Chink gun is.)
>Than it is to keep your current weapons, and upgrade them.
>This makes sense.

Anon, you're a fucking moron.

>>35179853
>better weight distribution when loaded down

No, it's not. Putting more pressure on just one arm instead of distributing it more is bad, it has a tendency to flip upwards on a sling or if you fall, and so on.

TFB actually had a decent article explaining this, I can dig it up if you want.

>shorter oal for oper8

There's diminishing returns. ~26" is plenty, hence the popularity of the Mk.18. If it's shorter than your arm, it can be detrimental, such as for loading it up with shit like said oper8r's like doing.

>Longer barrel for mv and operational distance

Literally not an issue anymore. Mk.262, Mk.318, M855A1, M995, etc. (Not counting civilian rounds) all perform just fine out to their intended ranges. Practicing marksmanship and using the right optics, paired with aforementioned ammunition is entirely adequate.

>If ARs are so good why does Russia and other combloc nations not retire and adopt them?

A few of them are. Which is doubly funny because of two reasons;

A) The bullpup version of the MSBS isn't going to be adopted, so even a new-manufacture bullpup loses out to a "conventional" design.
B) Said conventional design vs bullpups are what I'm specifically talking about, not just AR's. (AK's, AR's, G36's, HK433's, ACR's, SCAR's, etc. are all objectively "better" than ANY bullpup.)

>Every rifle in the early 2000s trial to replace the M4 performed better but the M4 was kept anyway

Realize you just proved my point a few times over?

>None of the replacement candidates were bullpups.
>None had so much of a benefit over the M4 that it warranted replacing, yet any perceived "advantage" lost with retiring bullpups for an AR-style weapon weren't deemed big enough to warrant keeping them.

>>35176477
You don't know what you're talking about, and everybody knows it but you ^_^

>>35179961
>spend out of pocket money to upgrade your inventory or let someone else foot most if not all your bill
HMMMMMMMM

>>35179961
>Anon, you're a fucking moron.
>Anon
Yeah, I'm the fucking moron. Clearly.

Also, yeah it is more economical to adopt an AR that can be customized to whatever you want and has a wealth of commercial available options through which you can source said upgrades, or replacement parts and servicing. EVERYONE makes AR parts. Fucking FORD does phos coating for some iron sights. It's absolutely cheaper and faster than maintaining a state arsenal for a gun that isn't interchangeable with your allies (AKA, America, the country that you're relying on to defend you).

>>35176800
>10-11 lb rifle with a lot of unnecessary shit on them
Yeah that's because they can do math and know that starting out with a 8lb gun over a 6lb one would make it 12-13lbs after they add "unnecessary" shit to engage/illuminate.

>>35179889

You saying you like both plays into a basis I have for not being able to stand bullpupniggers.

I like both as well, I just think, *as a military firearm*, they're not the best choice, which earns me the ire of all the bullpup spergs who can't control themselves.

On top of that, I've literally had retards walk up to me at the range and try and tout how great bullpups are compared to the AR I was shooting that day, OR, have them come up to me when I'm shooting my RDB and think I'm gonna circlejerk with them about the supposed greatness of bullpups.

If we could all just be adults and acknowledge each other's preferences as well, that'd be great, but this is the internet, and worse, this is /k/.

>>35179891

>Has objective comparison between an AR and a bullpup.
>Hurr durr, muh training.

Why do articles like this trigger memepupfags so hard? Even innocent things like this; http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/04/15/bullpups-better-balance-different-perspective/ that are generally less-biased and make attempts at being more objective and conciliatory or whatever still draw shit from memegunfags.

>>35180071
Why does a different control layout or world economics trigger AR fags so hard?

>>35179993

If I'm being facetious:

>Pay money
>Or still pay money

If I'm being LESS facetious:

>Company doesn't do the R&D
>Company doesn't do the upgrades
>The government does it all.

Gee willikers, you really showed me!

>>35180038

>namefag

Sorry I don't suck the dick of and pay special attention to (You)whores like yourself m'lord, this also TOTALLY debunks what I was saying, you're right!

>Also, yeah it is more economical to adopt an AR that can be customized to whatever you want and has a wealth of commercial available options through which you can source said upgrades, or replacement parts and servicing. EVERYONE makes AR parts. Fucking FORD does phos coating for some iron sights. It's absolutely cheaper and faster than maintaining a state arsenal for a gun that isn't interchangeable with your allies (AKA, America, the country that you're relying on to defend you).

So literally, the AR is BETTER? It has more modularity, it has more R&D being done on it, it's more easily produced, companies that could easily do the same for bullpups that have been around for decades have chosen NOT to do it for the memepups, alleged "pros" of bullpups are actually bullshit in the grand scheme and any time you try to bring up ANY benefit (yes, even costs, which is a fucking benefit) about AR's or other "conventional" styles, you get ridiculed?

Damn, that really proves that bullpups are superior and not, you know, less modular, less simple to manufacture, have less industry behind them (I WONDER WHY!?), modern bullet construction making the barrel length meme obsolescent, etc.

>>35180140
>ignoring the fact that an 11.5 ar is maybe good to 300m no matter how much bullet design you have
It's almost like all of it is economical like we told you the first time?

>>35180089

Why do the pros of AR's (or other "conventional" carbines) trigger memepupfags so hard?

You idiots can't seem to get to grips that there are downsides to bullpups. You just brush them aside as a "training issue" or "muh big gubmint only cares about muh money" (both ways, confusingly) or what-have-you.

>Muh bbl
M855A1? Mk.318? M995?
>MUH REEEEEEEEE!!!!! WOULDN'T HAVE TO USE ANYTHING ELSE!!!
-
>Muh OAL
Training? M4 being plenty short? Diminishing returns?
>REEEEEEEEE!!! TRAINING CAN ONLY FIX BULLPUPS (that are somehow supposed to be "perfect"), THAT DOESN'T APPLY TO AR'S/AK'S!!!
-
>Muh balans
Literally a lie? Literally a non-issue as well? Literally just get a heavier stock/lighter forend? Literally use the sling as support? (Unless you're a 3-pointfag. Literally kill yourself?

>>35180183
>what is engaging at distances further than 300m
>"train away oal"
>"i don't know shit about balance so just add more weight lol"
Post that ar

>>35179615
>Literally diminishing returns?
???
What?
> Literally not as important as you make it out to be?
It's important if you want your standard issue rifle to be good at both clearing buildings and fighting in the open.
>Literally fuck your ability to mount a GL if you so choose?
Are you fucking retarded?

>>35180174

>Literally have reports of Mk.18's shooting Mk.262 and getting kills out to 600m
>Mk.262
>The round that is literally worse in EVERY WAY than M855A1 or Mk.318

Please, do go on. Also tell me how most combat doesn't take place within 400m. Also tell me how, within 300m, a Mk.18 is in any way inferior to any bullpup. Then, tell me how a bullpup's alleged "benefits" are of any use when typical engagements are FURTHER than 400m? Most of the time they'll be mounted (and don't tell me the weapons are too long for the inside of an MRAP/MATV/JLTV, you've clearly never been in one or are a clumsy faggot.), they'll have no need for "muh ultramicrocompactpdwbuzzwords", short-ass weapons suck off bipods (imo), etc. This is literally a no-win for you morons. That also brings up something interesting for modularity.

>Be me
>Carryin' 24" DMR in .308
>Swap upppers, use mag insert
>Have 10.5" SBR in .300Memeout

It's retarded and not something that's likely to be used a lot, if at all, but tell me, what bullpup other than the MDR can do that? (Even then, an AR would take less time)

>>35180295
>reports of ar jamming
Better swap to new rifles then bucko

Post some more retarded shit, this is making my night

>>35180295
ARfags are fucking cancer

>>35180218
>what is engaging at distances further than 300m

What is not reading the fucking thread? M855A1 and Mk318 are completely adequate in making even Mk.18's (which we're not talking about, but M4's really.) be able to shoot out to at least 500m, where it's more about optics and skill than weapon for the most part.

>train away oal

Have you never served? Have you really never tried to clear your house with an AR?

You're going to be bringing even a micro bullpup up and down just as much as a 20" AR, trust me. They used to teach muhreenz to put the stock over their shoulders when building clearing with A4's. (Then they realized you can do it just fine even with the 20"-ers without over-shouldering it.)

>i don't know shit about balance so just add more weight lol

You've clearly never held a well-balanced AR or have an understanding of body mechanics. It's not efficient to put 90% of something's weight on one arm, and if it is, a two-point sling can do that, but better, with even long-ass AR's.

Not only that, but AR's tend to be lighter than bullpups anyways, so even with a heavier stock, you'll probably end up lighter than most bullpups still, or, doubly lighter since I also said LIGHTER FOREND.

Though, personally, I prefer front-heavy guns anyways, but that's just AN OPINION, not something I can say is better factually. If we're trying to talk ultra-tacticool though, why is it that most 2 and 3-gunners use AR's? Even in countries that have military teams compete in international competitions where their service weapon is a bullpup? Also, why are most raceguns front-heavy? Also also, why is rearward balance such a big deal now when it was literally never an issue before? Most people seem to tend to prefer centrally-balanced weapons in the first place, so the rearward balance (especially of shortened bullpups) is, again, less than ideal. (I do admit though, it's nice for adding shit up front if you like doing that sort of thing.)

>>35180242
Not him, but I'd say it is retarded to spend millions of dollars to make the marginal upgrade to a bullpup. You're spending so much more money in trials, purchase orders, and training only to have a slightly smaller package when you already have something "good enough."

If you've ever wondered why the M16 has been revised rather than replaced for so many years, there's probably a reason.

>>35180438
>, but I'd say it is retarded to spend millions of dollars to make the marginal upgrade to a bullpup.
Yea, that's agreeable and I would say that is a case of diminishing returns, but he said it in response to the OAL, period. Which was nonsensical. There's a reason the AR-15 can't be unseated, they're cheap and so many people make them.

>>35180383
>(I do admit though, it's nice for adding shit up front if you like doing that sort of thing.)

Again, I should add though, a very lightweight AR could be loaded up with shit front and back and probably still be as light, if not lighter than most bullpups.

>>35180242

>What?

As in, once you get to a certain length, the "benefits" of ultra-compactness start to drop off. Things like the standard length bullpups, the M4, or the Mk.18 is plenty short. Beyond that, it's just frivolous min-maxing and doing things just because they can. Standard bullpups were touted as being "so short! omg!", but you still see compact bullpups, which goes to show people just do shit because they can, they use the wrong weapon for the job sometimes, etc. (Unless we're talking about something like the JS9 or the PDR concept. Those are fucking sweet. I'd buy them in a heartbeat if they were available.)

>It's important if you want your standard issue rifle to be good at both clearing buildings and fighting in the open.

Which an M4 is already completely fine for? If you're in the open anyways, you'll probably have access to heavier weapons that are much better suited to far-distance work than your infantry weapon anyways, which is how it tends to go nowadays. You can also have doctrine addressing this such as pre-employment of heavy weapons, steps to using longarms to clear buildings (if you've ever served, you know the dudes with 240's not giving a fuck.), etc. As a matter of fact, sending troops in to clear buildings is dumb if you can avoid it. In Fallujah for example, they oftentimes just lit buildings the fuck up, leveled them, or so on before sending in troops, if at all. If we're talking "future wars" in "megacities", then again, M4's are completely fine, especially since 300m+ shots are unlikely there to begin with, so why get a bullpup?

>Are you fucking retarded?

Are you? I'm talking SHORTENED bullpups. I know standard-length AUG's and shit can take GL's.

>>35176417
>price
>not every nation thinks they need a shorter package
>if they do, they'll just cut the barrel
>shorter sight radius
>non bullpup rifles are more common therefore easier to transition to and from
>AR shit is more common

The reloads aren't that bad and can be trained around in maybe a bit more time than the more common AR

The triggers aren't that bad (AUG is kinda bad) I doubt most faggots have had enough time on a match grade AR trigger for it to matter all that much

For most, bullpups are too awkward to use without quite a bit of time and effort put forth. Tavors feel weird as shit but AUGs are the best


This entire thread is just autistic shit singling about people's preferences

>>35180323

The fuck are you even talking about?

It shows it can be done, and trying to compare jams is apples to oranges. Do bullpups never jam then? See how dumb that sounds?

Strange how "muh economy" is a *negative* talking point. Just goes to show how asshurt bullpupfags are that their egopieces are trash. AR's have been constantly improved, and will be for the foreseeable future, something that can't be said of bullpups. Just because you can't accept that and have to try and make it out to somehow be bad, doesn't change the facts. Though, honestly, something like the ACR would be even better perhaps.

>>35180328

Memepupfags are fucking cancer.

(Not an argument.)

>>35180462
>but he said it in response to the OAL, period.

I should also add that SOCOM is looking at a "PDW" in .300Memeout with a folding stock and 5" barrel, which is absolute retardation, but whatever. (Instead of saving money, some seem hellbent on spending it.)

If they want an "under-the-coat" style PDW, why not just get something like the PDR-D or MDR-C in .300MO with a 5" and suppressor? That shit'd be ultra-short. This is one of the occasions I'd prefer bullpups. (That, or just use a fucking pistol.) If it's not "under-the-coat", the fuck is the use? Mk.18's would be just fine, for example.

>>35180532

I'm the anti-bullpup sperg, but let me add something to this;

>Reloads

I don't even get this. Are people really needing to speed reload often? The only thing I could think of about "reloads" is that perhaps long mags or very large drum mags might be weird to use on bullpups, depending.

>Sight radius

Who even uses irons anymore?

>Triggers

I kind of get, it's a problem with the trigger bars, but really, just get an upgrade package, they're not that horrible. Not 3rd Party AR good, but still nice.

>Tavor shit, AUG best
>AUG

Weird way to spell RDB.

>>35180559
>why not just get something like the PDR-D or MDR-C in .300MO with a 5" and suppressor
1. They don't exist
2. They would be 20% longer.

Though, yeah PDW? They already have one. MP7.

>>35180605
>reloads
For most, reloading as fast as possible is the goal. A loaded rifle is more useful than an empty one. Anyone can get good with both but the most common rifles are fed by inserting the ammo infront of the shooter. Some don't want to look down or hold their rifle in the air to reload.

>sight radius
I'd imagine most people who can even afford a bullpup won't but the short sight radius is still a thing

>triggers
Of course.

I wish I could shoot an RDB and RFB. Dream rifles. They're how bullpups should look. They're so fucking sweet looking

>>35180669

>Don't exist.

True enough, which is probably why they're going AR-based, but still, it'd be nice.

>Longer

Than an SBR MCX? Maybe if you take the can off and fold the stock...

>MP7

More like P90, friend. (Another GOOD example of a bullpup/role for a bullpup. Others *might* be the KSG and the HTI)

>>35180697

>RDB

The M-LOK version especially. Can't wait for the .308 version.

I was thinking about getting an MDR at some point in the future, but I really don't know. Thinking about having an AR in a super meme caliber built instead. I hear the Army is looking into "Shorter than .308, longer than .223" rounds like ".264 USA" and the like, and there's that 7x46mm UIC or whatever, so if the .mil does go through with it, perhaps that style will become more available. 7.62x45mm Czech in my Vz.52 is fun, would be great in an AR methinks. Though, maybe, I could have a mag insert and barrel made for the MDR and then just reload myself...?

>>35180753
desu the RDB/RFB aesthetics have ruined bullpups for me, I would never buy one other than an AUG just because how fucking sexy they are.

Getting into boltguns has made me only like the 308 because of commonality and price. Other than that, a lot of better options exist. Sad but true

>>35180784

Do you mean the OG AUGs or the flat-tops? I much prefer the A3-esque styles. (Especially since I can mount an RMR like a fucking dumbass.)

As for bolt guns, you don't have to tell me. 3rd fun I ever bought was a 1903 and fell in love with boltguns instantly.

Recently received a Type 38 from a friend's relative who passed that I was close with and a few boxes of ammo, it's a fun little thing to shoot. Don't know what I'm gonna do when I shoot through the ammo I have left for it though. Dunno if 6.5 Jap is hard to find or not.

>>35180860
>Type 38

I should also add I like it better than my Carcano. Both 6.5's are fun to shoot, it's just that the Carcano rifle itself is a piece of shit.

>>35180860
Both. Augs are a beaut. My old man bought me a Yugo Mauser chambered in 308 and I fucking love it. I spent so much money from my min wage summer job in high school lmao I miss it though. When I was younger I only wanted one of type of weapon (one semi auto intermediate rifle, one pistol, one boltgun, one semi battle rifle etc) but there's a lot of bolt guns I fucking want. At my local pawnshop I found an old old old Arisaka that I assume is 6.5 jap. the owner says he doesn't know where to get ammo and only wants 280 for it. Probably gonna haggle him down by 50 or so because of the ammo. Don't know much about jap guns but it's never to late to learn eh? :^)

>>35176776

Hahahaha.

>>35179133
>there is a reason no one uses them

That reason is money fagboi and nothing more.

>>35181057

And that they are shit.

>>35181091
Says you faggit

>>35176710
Not as much as a bARbie doll

>>35180605
>it's a problem with the trigger bars
It's literally not. They are more than stiff enough that they won't affect the trigger pull.

>>35181153
Modularity is not a bad thing. What are you trying to say here? That because the AR platform is both ubiquitous and extensively modular, it's somehow feminine? Like it's a negative factor? My first gun was a 9mm carry pistol. My second was an AR in 5.56/.223 that I instantly bought a 9mm conversion kit for. I put more rounds through that basic-bitch $600 AR as a pistol caliber carbine than I did as a rifle for the first five years I had it because it was financially sensible to do so, given my situation. Could I have done that with an AUG at that price point?

>>35181057
The fact of the matter is that militaries must function under economic constraints. Weapons must be sourced, maintained, and eventually replaced. When doctrine no longer hinges in large part upon the rifleman to ensure lethality (like it hasn't since fucking WW1), the amount of expense that can be justified on giving every rifleman the "best" rifle is greatly reduced. AR's are longer than bullpups. They aren't as well balanced as bullpups. But they are cheaper, lighter, and still punch in the same weight class as bullpups. They're good enough in the lethality department, and as good/better everywhere else. Which makes them better as a military weapon, because a penny saved equipping Pvt. Dipshit is a penny that can be spent on a missile capable of leveling any city block within a thousand miles.

>ejection
RDB, RFB, F2000, P90, MDR, KSG, or any gun that naturally kicks casings forewards
>nobody uses them
AUG, FAMAS, tavor, P90, MSBS, and the myriad of precision and anti-material rifles
>trigger
overblown and can be modified just like your other weapons that you modify after purchase
>sights
get an optic ffs you're not simo hayha, plus shorter overall length means you can get a longer barrel that will give you the same sight radius
>reloading/jams
lrn 2 train

did i miss any?

>>35179133

THIS POST IS FILLED WITH SUCH UTTER RETARDATION I WILL POST IN CRUSE CONTROL

>"MUHH AR FIVETEEN MUHH AR15 DOZ BULLFAGS DOZ NOTHING BETTER???"

THE TYPICAL BULLPUP CAN BE SHORTER THAN AN AR15 IN OAL EVEN WHEN THE AR HAS A 10 INCH BARREL AND THE PUP HAS A 16 INCH FULL LENGTH BARREL AND NOT BE SUBJECT TO ANY OF THE FUCKING CANCER INDUCING BRACES OR SBR TAX BULLSHIT

>.MUHHHHH BARRIER BLIND HYPER .223

LOOK, .223 IS A LOW END RIFLE ROUND OUT OF A FUCKING 20' BARREL IT WAS DESIGNED FOR, ITS A FUCKING MEME ASS RETARD ROUND AT 10.5 INCH BARREL AT ANYTHING PAST 200 YARDS IF YOU ACTUALLY NEED ME TO GO GET OUT THE BAL CHART THEN KYS OR AT THE VERY LEAST GET STERILIZED SO THE NEXT GENERATION WONT ANY ANY CHANCH TO BE CORRUPTED BY YOUR SPAWN

> MUH AR 15 IS SUPER POPULAR AND URR BULLPUP SITS AT THE LUNCH TABLE ALONE

NATION STATES HAVE VASTLY DIFFERENT NEEDS AND REQUIREMENTS WHEN EQUIPPING TROOPS WITH A GENERAL ISSUE RIFLE AS OPPOSED TO AN INDIVIDUAL CIVILIAN. IF YOU ACTUALLY MAKE YOUR PURCHASE DECISIONS BASED ON WHAT GUCHI SPEC OPS TEAMS USE OR WHAT YOUR FANTASY ARMY TEAM USES THEN YOU ARE NOGUNZ OR JUST A FUCKING MORON TO STUPID TO LIVE.

BULLPUPS HAVE MORE REARWARD BALANCE AND ARE WAY EASIER TO USE ONE HANDED ON A TYPICAL AR 15 ITS JUST ABOUT IMPOSSIBLE TO USE IN THAT MANNER, THEY ARE SHORTER AND WORK FANTASTICALLY WITH A SUPPRESSOR.

THE BIGGEST AND ONLY LEGIT CRITICISM IS THAT THE TRIGGER AND HIGH BORE AXIS COMBINED WITH A SHORTER OVER ALL LENGTH AND NON FREEFLOAT BARREL OF THE WEAPON OFTEN CAUSE THE WEAPON TO BE LESS ACCURATE THAN HIGH END AR 15S. THEY ARE EQUAL TO THE RETARDED "KISS" AR 15 MEME BUILDS HOWEVER.

SO QUICK RECAP, IF YOU NEED A WEAPON THAT IS GOOD IN CARS AND CLOSE QUARTERS, BULLPUP, IF YOU NEED A ONE SIZE FITS ALL RIFLE GET AN AR 15

THE BULLPUP IS A SPECIALIZED WEAPON BUT WHAT IT DOES, IT DOES MUCH BETTER THAN MUHHHHHHHH AR15

File: IMG_3613.jpg (61KB, 600x404px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 600x404px

>>35181460

File: 1393015300087.gif (802KB, 264x264px) Image search: [Google]

802KB, 264x264px

>>35181500
>comparing guns with different barrel lengths

>>35176417
For the US at least, the AR is still good enough for the time being. Honestly, the only gripe that I have with it is the buffer assembly not allowing you to have a folded stock. 5.56 isn't so powerful that you need that to dampen recoil. I get that it's a holdover from the AR-10 design.

>>35181460
>LOOK, .223 IS A LOW END RIFLE ROUND OUT OF A FUCKING 20' BARREL IT WAS DESIGNED FOR
Holy shit shut the fuck up.

>>35181500
That makes the x95 look sexy as he'll,

>not even a pup guy

>>35181687
.223 is on the rifle doe spectrum pretty weak, the only round with less enegery that's a real rifle round is maybe. 30 carbine

>>35176569
If you're getting shot at, you gotta shoot back, even if its relatively inaccurate

Combat isn't like CoD or Battlefield

>>35181952
>Combat isn't like CoD or Battlefield

NOOOOOOOOOOO

>>35176417
Everything is next to your ear, so it's FUCKING LOUD whenever you fire it. Would double-up on hearing protection.

>>35181952
>If you're getting shot at, you gotta shoot back, even if its relatively inaccurate
taliban combat handbook: edition three

File: 1490467641463.jpg (62KB, 550x550px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 550x550px

>>35176448
>>35176507
>muh ar
holy fuck have you ever shot a fucking rifle that isn't the AR?

with the AR you're in two options
>carry a 20" AR to get full 556 potentional, can't clear buildings
>carry a 10" AR to clear buildings, can't shoot farther than 200 meters
Now this of course won't sound significant to you unless you watch combat footage of marines in fallujah who from engaging a 300 meter sniper to clearing buildings in a heartbeat. and one of the marines' biggest hindrances in clearing was that they were using the big ass M16A4, might as well clear buildings with a fucking SR25

Needless to talk about the AR's unfoldable stock

Now bullpups fix this problem, you can have a 20" barrel 556 rifle that is as short as a 10 inch barrel AR.
>>35176569
>who's going to bother to accurately engage at those extended ranges?
a trained fucking soldier
who the hell teached you to shoot? al qaeda?

>>35179133
>Ask yourself; "What does ANY bullpup do that an M4 doesn't already do?"
fit a 20 inch barrel in a shorter rifle
not have a waste of size buttstock
>M855A1
>Mk 262
>Mk 318
does not change anything.

>>35182317
but how are they going to take advantage of the increaced accuracy afforded by their 10"
freefloated barrels if bullpups won't let them have a retarded tube sticking out the back? :^)

>>35176417
>Why isnt bullpup the dominant rifle design of modern militaries
Pretty sure it is.

File: 1498974677385.jpg (52KB, 295x196px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 295x196px

>>35182388
holy shit nigger it's not about accuracy
it's about producing much more velocity and energy, therefore making you able to shoot farther than 200 meters

>>35182417
>increaced accuracy afforded by their 10"
freefloated barrels

He's clearly taking the piss here m8.

>>35182417
fuck's sake dude i even end it with a ":^)" do i have to spell it out for you?

>>35182441
>>35182432
poe's law

File: smua.jpg (9KB, 248x233px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 248x233px

>>35182411
this desu

>>35182463
...which is exactly why i ended it with a ":^)" to make it super obvious.
dorito face is the new lenny, get with the times old man.
it's the bantmaster's signature.

File: 1505337072184.gif (1MB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 500x500px

>>35180040
>add t2, sling, and foregrip to memepup
>8.5 ish
>people complain it's heavy because they have to add heavy ass muzzle devices like sf warden, ir bullshit that isn't even used half the time, and other bullshit
Also >implying average ar weighs 6lbs, let alone the meme guns with full length rails most people own

Post ar

>>35176549
People don't understand this buttstock problem. There is no space left to waste in the close-to-shoulder area now (if ever was) because of armor plate, padded straps, chest mounted crap, restraints, raincoats, radio, helmet etc. etc. Bullpups cut into this space more than conventional because their action and magazine is there. Everything is harder to do.

>>35182744
clearly it's not bad enough to stop soldiers from fully extending their buttstocks.
a simple google image search shows most soldiers fully extend their buttstocks when the option is given.

>>35176417
>France adopts FAMAS, replaces it with HK416
>New Zealand adopts Steyr AUG, replaces it with AR platform
>China adopts QBZ-95, is currently moving to replace it with a conventional design
>UK adopts SA80, wants to replace it with AR platform but is too poor
Has there been a single country to adopt a bullpup rifle, and then replace it with another bullpup? I mean, there's Australia and the EF88, but that's just a dolled-up AUG anyway.

>>35183083
>UK adopts SA80, wants to replace it with AR platform but is too poor
citation needed
>>France adopts FAMAS, replaces it with HK416
because the famas is a shit rifle with reliability issues
>>China adopts QBZ-95, is currently moving to replace it with a conventional design
yeah they're going for the qbz97

>>35183123
>>UK adopts SA80, wants to replace it with AR platform but is too poor
>citation needed
Since they only had the budget to convert 200k (a bit north of half the production run) to A2 standard, the UK's subsequent involvement in the 'stans led to the guns being used hard, and put away wet, so to speak. This led to most of the A2s in service today not having much life left in them, and spares are somewhat hard to come by as by design a2 parts aren't interchangeable with a1 parts. Initially, MoD wanted to use this as an opportunity to replace the aging SA80s with something better, and more importantly, something standard in the C7, but budget shortfalls led to this being downgraded to an A3 upgrade programme (see also: CSP -> CLEP)

>>35182317
>20" AR
>can't clear buildings
>implying 18", 16", and 14.5" ARs don't exist
>implying you can't room clear with 20" AR
>implying adjustable stocks aren't a thing

Also sauce your claims.

>t.AR fag
I actually appreciate the AUG a lot, but gotta back yo claims right.

>>35183180
>implying 18", 16", and 14.5" ARs don't exist
why use those when why i got 20" barrel in a shorter rifle?
also notice the energy/velocity loss at those shorter barrels
>implying you can't room clear with 20" AR
you can't, try to pie slice a door with a rifle that long, might as well do it with an M60
>>implying adjustable stocks aren't a thing
i'm talking about a fully foldable stock.

>>35183162
I asked for source not for elaboration

Bullpupfriends,

I'm considering buying my first bullpup. Should I buy an XB95?

>>35183198
tavors are shit, garbage trigger, 4MOA accuracy gay ergonomics, etc..

get an AUG

File: Princess_Bride_That_Word.jpg (36KB, 506x284px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 506x284px

I love the idea of bullpups, but I'm also believe guns should have great triggers, so I'll probably need to wait until some company decides to take electronic firing mechanisms seriously.

>>35176802
>The only bad thing about the AUG trigger is that it's long and creepy because it's supposed to be a 2 stage but can't be in our market.

You really should look up wtf a two stage trigger is, you noguns.

File: IMG_5666.jpg (37KB, 650x433px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 650x433px

>>35183187
>energy loss
Negligible, bullets will still frag and yaw effectively with 500 and 300 meters, especially so with heavy grain rounds.

>you can't pie slice with a 20" AR
Yet it is done.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5OctwulUiM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5OctwulUiM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeI6l2DxGa8

>fully folding
Why?

>>35183227
they're fitting their rifles in first when entering doors
none of these guy are doing corner slices
do you even know what pie slice is?
also they're using 14.5-16 inch barrels

if you could clear rooms with 20" barrel rifles FBI HRT would be using FALs and not SBRs.

>energy loss is minimal
in SBRs 556 energy almost reaches pdw energies. what a joke

>fully folding
Why?
oh i don't know maybe it has somtething to do with easily going inside a car or room clearing

>>35183211
>You really should look up wtf a two stage trigger is, you noguns.
Ok, buddy. How would you describe it?

File: P90 happy .jpg (117KB, 610x538px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 610x538px

>>35183874
>Ok, buddy. How would you describe it?

It's a progressive trigger of the Spz-kr type.
It's also sometimes called a staged trigger. The D is important here.
For them a short pull produces a different firing cadence than a full pull rearwards. Usually single shot vs full auto.

However a dual stage or double stage trigger is not the same thing. These have slack or take up, which you first need to pull past, then you hit a wall. Once you break the wall, the gun fires.

Google it, if you don't believe me.

>>35183915
Ok cool. I know what a 2 stage trigger is, in other guns, I just wasn't sure what else to call the AUG's trigger design.

File: when_the_revolver_just_ocelots_by_rustledjimmys-d9qks0q.jpg (146KB, 977x818px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 977x818px

>>35176569
>no tactical advantage whatsoever

>>35184071

See

>>35176841

Being able to keep the weapon shouldered with one arm with ease is a tactical advantage.

>>35183203
bullshit, they are 2 MOA at worst. they could be 6 MOA and still be more than accurate for the job they are expected to do, 3 inch groups at 50 yards is combat effective

>>35180697
>Keeps talking about short sight radius on rifles meant to be used with optics.
Stop licking the walls in your basement.

What do you mean, OP?
Bullpup
>Britain
>France
>Israel
>China
Non Bullpup
>America
>Germany
>Russia

Those are the modern militaries that matter so...

>>35176417
heavy
tail heavy
awkward trigger
only a few ambidextrous designs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMmaIZ8Umnk
not modular enough
its advantages are uncalled for

>>35184341
if you were using the world MODULAR ironically please pour water all over your motherboard and throw you device out of the window

>>35184286
Doesn't France have 416s, now?

File: 47406.jpg (50KB, 530x956px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 530x956px

>>35184357
ehh ?

>>35184377
Do they? I thought they still had the FAMAS

>>35183083
>France adopts FAMAS IN NINETEEN FUCKING SEVENTY EIGHT, replaces it with HK416 FORTY YEARS LATER AFTER THE ORIGINAL FACTORY CLOSED

>>35184152
>3 inch groups at 50 yards is combat effective
AHAHAHAHAHAHAH

>>35184461
3 inch groups at 50 yards is looter and intruder effective, which is my bullpup's sole purpose.

>>35183083
Slovenia adopted the F2000, but I'm not sure what they were using before. Pretty much guaranteed it isn't a bullpup though.

>>35181305

>People use them

Not for much longer.

>Longer barrel, same sight radius.

No, bullpups allegedly are shorter, so, according to one retard here, a bullpup can have a 20" barrel and be as short as a Mk.18, you're not getting the same sight radius unless you're putting a 30" barrel on your bullpup, which kind of defeats the supposed advantage of them in the first place.

Though, as you said, it really doesn't matter since optics are a thing.

>Training

Only applies to bullpups, huh? Can't train around any perceived deficiencies associated with AR's?

>>35181460

>Muh OAL

I can understand not wanting to deal with the NFA, but outside of that, 4" isn't as big a deal as you're making it, and anything shorter than 26" is heavily diminishing returns.

>Muh M193/M855 meme.

Get the fuck out of the 80's you stupid nigger. M855A1, Mk.318, & Mk.262 are entirely capable out of shorter barrels. The M4 is short enough and it's 14.5" does just fine. Please, show me the chart where M855A1/Mk.318 aren't doing >2900fps out of an M4. Even then, if you can get faster, it doesn't make the rounds out of an M4 any less effective. Especially at distances and situations most are engaging in.

>AR15 super popular.

With bullpup-using nations dropping their bullpups for AR's, or issuing them to some units that normally use bullpups (Since bullpupfags tend to be bongs or bong-lovers for some reason, let's use the Royal Marines and SAS using C8's as an example.), it'd lead one to believe bullpups aren't all their cracked up to be, no matter how much you try to headcanon it away.

>Muh balans

Again, AR's can be balanced that way if you want, but it's literally not as important as you make it sound. Putting so much weight mostly on one arm is inefficient, and you can one-arm an AR in a pinch if need be, but that's rarely ever done outside of niche applications. If you think otherwise, you've never fucking served. Plus, if you REALLY want to one-arm shit, get a fucking sling.

1/?

Bullpups were part of the "new age of war" back in the 70s and 80s. Everyone recognizes their pros and cons and most militaries see more cons than pros now.

>>35184532
I imagine if the Korobov design were to be used in a modern bullpup, yes you could theoretically stuff a 20" barrel into a gun that's shorter than than a Mark 18.

>>35184478
we're not talking about civilian applications here we're talking about military
a decent soldier's rifle should be between 1.5 and 2 MOA
US army in afghanistan and iraq engaged guerrillas up to 400 meters

>>35184532
>which kind of defeats the supposed advantage of them in the first place.
What is this assumption based on?

>>35184544
I know that everyone has been talking military applications. If anything I am agreeing with you by saying that it is an overpriced civilian gun best suited for dealing with looters and intruders.

>>35184532
not that guy but literally who gives a fuck about sight radius
AUGs come with integrated optics and who the fuck does not have an optic on his rifle in 2015+3?

>>35184565
That being said, if I hear a crash downstairs, I am reaching for my X95 over my AR15.

>>35184532
>and anything shorter than 26" is heavily diminishing returns.
like what

>>35176549
>>can't have a telescoping or folding butt stock


What is VHS?

>>35181460
>>35184532

2/?

(Bullpup or AR, doesn't matter, use a fucking sling.)

>Bore Axis, non-freefloat

Do you wanna know how I can tell you know fuckall of what you're talking about?

Bullpups are in-line just like AR's, the "Bore Axis" is usually about the same, and plenty of bullpups have free-float barrels. For example, doesn't the new A3 version of the L85 have a free-float with that mememod handguard from HK?

>Cars, close quarters

No-one in the military is shooting from a car, and the vehicles they use are plenty large enough to comfortably get in and out of with an M4, or even full-length M16.

As for "Close Quarters", it's as if they just simply can't with M4's, right? I mean, not once in history has anyone taken an M4 (or M16 for that matter) indoors and made it work, right? Of course, it's so obvious! This is why we need bullpups! Our dudes have never been able to clear houses properly before now!

Also, you know, it's not as if "clearing buildings" is so generalistic and vague in the first place anyways. I mean, have you ever fucking read an urban warfare manual or watched videos from Fallujah or shit? You know, where they fucking vaporize the building if they can first, and if not, will frag the fuck out it, etc.? In such "close quarters" anyways, even a 10.5" barrel is fine, so why even use a bullpup? (Again, dunno why such "elite" forces like the SAS, Israeli tunnel clearing engineers, etc. use AR's for that shit when you'd think, according to every fuckstain in this thread, bullpups are SO MUCH BETTER, NO MATTER WHAT!)

>Better than AR

Still nope. Not just AR either, by the way. Nearly ANY "conventional" carbine (SCAR, HK433, ACR, AR18-inspired weapons like whatever the Japs and Koreans are using, AK's in nearly all their forms, etc.) is objectively "better" than most any shitpup.

>>35176802
>VHS has an adjustable buttstock
It's LOP is already M16A2 size, and it just gets longer. Bullpups move the entire action rearward, so LOP is fucked and that's bad when .mil dudes are doing shit with armor on.

File: 002.jpg (69KB, 631x572px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 631x572px

>>35184627
Call Kellgren. He will fix this.

>>35184532
>>35184606
>>35182317

3/?

>Accuses people of being retards
>Doesn't mention 14.5" M4's
>Thinks only M193/M855 exist
>Doesn't think you can clear buildings at all with M16's
>Brings up Fallujah
>In said videos, they do just fine with full-length M16's, Marines kicked ass in Fallujah
>This is bad somehow.
>Unfoldable stock
>No collapsible models, no folding models available at all, ever.

>Teached

It's taught you fucking imbecile. Don't give me any "muh dictionary" or "muh english professor" shit either.

>Shorter rifle

You're too stuck on "muh 20 inch!". And if "not waste stock space" is the best argument you have for bullpups, it sure as shit doesn't make up for all the deficiencies laid out.

>Handwaives ammunition that destroys his narrative.

Nice desu.

>>35182411

But it's not. And even if you try asspulling about the countries use them, you're going to be in for a shock when you hear all (minus Australia) of them are replacing them with AR's or other "conventional" styles.

>>35182417

Again with the "every round is M193/M855" meme.

You literally don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

FFS, even retard-length AR barrels get good results with Mk.318 for example. (IIRC, there's a video of some dude on JewTube shooting the stuff out of a 7.5" (maybe even 5"?) AR at 100yards (?) into gel and it still performing great.)

>>35182627

I think the "heavy bullpup" meme just comes from the absurdity that is the original L85. (IIRC, that's mostly due to the SUSAT.)

AR's can be much lighter than bullpups, yes, but for most things, bullpups/AR's are about the same weight, as far as I know.

>>35182744

See >>35182780

Adjustable stocks have a purpose. Especially when most people I've met/seen dislike being scrunched up on bullpups. AFAIK, only the RDB and VHS solve this, but it's less versatile and modular.

>>35183123

>FAMAS is shit, unreliable
>France picks an AR instead of another bullpup

GEE!

File: 20170813_162920.jpg (149KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 800x450px

>>35184544
https://bullpupforum.com/index.php?topic=12164.0

IF THIS FUCKING MEME OF BULLPUPS ARE INACCURATE MYTH KEEPS GOING ON GOING TO FUCKING SPERG OUT,

PLENTY OF PEOPLE ARE MAKING 1-2 MOA GROUPS ONCE THEY LEARN THE PLATFORM, THEY HAVE A HIGH BORE AXIS SO LEARNING HOW TO KEEP CANT CONSISTENT IS CRITICAL, ITS WHY ALL THE FUCKING MUHH AR 15 GUYS CANT FUCKING SHOOT THE RIFLE BECAUSE THEY DONT KNOW HOW TO ACCOUNT FOR CANT.

ALSO IF YOU THINK YOUR GOING TO BE BENCH REST SLOW FIRING ON A TWO WAY FIRING RANGE AND PRINTING NICE LITTLE TIGHT GROUPS GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE YOU MORONS YOUR GOING TO BE HAMMING THE TRIGGER AND HOPING TO GOD YOUR BRAINS ARENT ABOUT TO BREATH FRESH AIR

>>35184683
Well somebody's mad not everybody's using his old fashioned squirrel gun.

>>35184532
>>35184606
>>35184683
>>35183123

4/?

>QBZ-97

No they're fucking not you fucktard, that's the export Type 95, just in 5.56, the fuck would they adopt that for? (Unless the QBZ-03 has another name I'm unaware of.)

>>35183187

>Why use anything other than 20"

Because 14.5" work just fine? Because they're lighter?

>Energy/Velocity meme, AGAIN.

FFS, everything's not M193/M855, see the response to you with the chart. Let's not even get into civvie rounds that can expand and shit down to, like, less than 1900fps.

>reductio ad absurdum

Moving past that...

Nigger, have you ever even tried clearing your home with an AR? (If you even own guns.) It's not that hard and it's actually not much different than a bullpup to be honest. HossUSMC has a video on this, but comparing a 16" AR with a fucking pistol and shows you literally bring the guns up and down in the same way.

Furthermore, you obviously don't know doctrine for room clearing, watch a fucking video. That, or actually get off your ass and do it with a long AR and see it's not that fucking hard. Or, if I want to meme, watch spergs play airsoft at like, those "wargames" or whatever they have. Some of those idiots have retarded long guns (SPR "clones" with cans and shit, for example) and still run in and out of houses. (There was one of those games on base and I watched the people play, so correct me if I'm missing something.)

>Foldable.

You can get AR's with them. Though, I personally am talking "traditional" weapons vs bullpups generally, not just AR's vs bullpups. Something like an ACR would be even better in this situation. You can't fold a bullpup as far as I'm aware, and doing so lets "conventional" carbines be shorter than bullpups. (If you are such a sperg as to want MUH ULTRAMICRO PDW!!! shit and 1" is like the biggest fucking thing to you, etc.)

>>35183198

No, get an AUG or RDB.

>>35184688
HOLY FUCKING SHIT YOU RETARDED CUNTY PUNTY NIGGER

I NEVER SAID BULLPUPUS BE ACCURATE
I SAID THE TAVOR IS INACCURATE
YOU NIGGER
HOLY SHIT WHERE IS YOUR READING COMPREHENSION

>>35176819
>What is a containment thread

>>35184756
>>35184532
>>35184606
>>35184683
>>35183123
>>35183333

5/?

>Going through doors
>Not pieing
>14.5" barrels

Gee, it's like the military knows what the fuck it's doing and you don't.

>>35184111
>Being able to keep the weapon shouldered with one arm with ease is a tactical advantage.

No, it's really not. It rarely happens, and if you REALLY need to, you can do it with an AR as well, even long ones. Especially if you're slinged up (no 3-points) or aren't a weak bitch.

>>35184286

>Forgets Japan, South Korea, Canada, or the other multitude of countries using conventional styles.
>Forgets SAS/RM's/etc. using AR's in place of their bullpups.
>Forgets all the countries listed (except Israel?) are going to replace their bullpups with non-bullpups.

Sad!

>>35184357

>Assmad memegunfag can't accept shortcomings of the bullpup.

How surprising.

I was gonna say the MDR, AUG, and RDB might remedy that, but they're still not nearly as modular as an AR, AK, SCAR, etc.

>>35184377
>>35184392

I don't think they started replacing them just yet, but will soon.

>>35184404

>M16 is adopted in NINETEEN-FUCKING-SIXTY-FOUR
>Still uses it today
>Other countries dropping their shitpups for it.

Absolute meme my dude.

>>35184542

That gun is really neat, I'd love to see something like that come to market. That, and the PDR. At least for the PDR I could get a psuedo-copy with the ZK-22 if I ever wanted I suppose.

>>35184557

If you lengthen a bullpup, aren't you kind of defeating the oft-touted "compactness benefit", especially for something as arbitrary as irons? Just use a damn optic.

>>35184572

That's what I'm trying to say. Why lengthen a bullpup to get an AR-comparable sight radius when you could (and should) just slap an RMR or some shit on there?

>>35184578

>Like what

...Like anything shorter than 26"? Most bullpups are above this, and things below it like ultramicro bullpup or AR conversions are dumb. If you want something THAT small, get a purpose-built PDW, like a P90, or a pistol.

>>35184666

Nice digits homie. Is that mag 5.56? Wrapping your hands around that must be annoying.

>>35184688

I think he's just complaining that the X95 is inaccurate, not all bullpups.

>>35184736

I rather countries use an ACR-esque carbine in 6.5 LSAT, but until then, I'm simply saying I really don't think the supposed "advantages" of bullpups are all that.

>>35184834
In regards to shouldering the weapon, your total argument against bullpups would fare better if you left this one alone.

>>35184878
only the first few batches of the x95 suffered the accuracy issues that led to this meme.

>>35184904

Literally not an argument.

>>35184909

That's neither here nor there for me really. I was just pointing out what I interpreted him to be saying.

You know how bad PR can stick around and stuff. I mean, people still judge modern AR's based on Vietnam as the shining example of what I'm talking about.

Now, this isn't directed at you, but just anyone in general:

In the Muhreenz, one of the things we were told was a thing was standing on the magwell of an A4 (full length) as a mini stepladder, has anyone else ever experienced or done this? I'm too afraid of shooting my dick off.

Staying with the theme of the thread, how would you do this with a bullpup?

>>35176615
>who the fuck is ising irons these days
any army with an AK or similar as their service rifle?

>>35184878
>small bullpups r dum because i say so
you have no provided an argument
>get a PDW like a p90
call me back when p90s are chambered in 556

>>35185016

I laid out my argument in the other posts, try reading.

>Below a certain length you see diminishing returns
>Try clearing your house with a pistol, and an AR
>Pay attention to how and when you bring the weapons up and down
>You'll notice you do it a lot, even with the pistol, and any time difference between bringing one or the other to bear would be negligible
>That's with a stockless pistol, with a stocked bullpup, even ultra short, you won't have as much "maneuverability" still, and you'll be bringing up the weapon and putting down to clear corners and shit.
>Otherwise, in more spacious areas, there's next to no difference between using an AR or a bullpup, especially one set up for home defense.
>This is all in regards to home defense, not a military application where these divides are less still.
>Within 50 yards, even a 7.5"-barreled AR is entirely lethal, and that's even without getting into specialty HD ammo.
>Watch videos of soldiers practicing room clearing.
>Notice their "long" M4's/M416's work just fine.
>Notice they also employ other tactics, meaning it's not just about the rifle. (Frags, Flashbangs, having heavy weapons perforate the building from the outside, etc.)

I could go on and on, but instead of single-line "retorts" that do nothing to refute me, how about YOU start making some arguments as to why I'm wrong, hmm?

>>35185084
>Pay attention to how and when you bring the weapons up and down
>You'll notice you do it a lot, even with the pistol, and any time difference between bringing one or the other to bear would be negligible
you don't do that, you always keep your sights aimed unless you're opening a door or something, that's what you should do
>>Within 50 yards, even a 7.5"-barreled AR is entirely lethal, and that's even without getting into specialty HD ammo.
yes, within 50 yards, and that's the main point of this thread which is: billpips are versatile they offer good CQB and mid range solution at the same time
>>Watch videos of soldiers practicing room clearing.
>>Notice their "long" M4's/M416's work just fine.
have you ever trained with simunitions? ever taken a CQB course? paintball? even fucking airsoft or even played shooting videogames?
if you have done any of these you'd know that the average human's reaction speed is relatively fast, about quarter of a second (260ms to be precise)

Meanwhile in the videos of army room clearing posted above they at least take 2 seconds to fit their rifles inside the damn door THEN they start shooting, now listen it does not take a ballistic scientist or an operator to know that if some enemy inside had his sights aimed down the door, combined with the fact that people have a fast reaction speed, those soldiers would've been butchered.

which is why every SWAT unit is using small PDWs like the MP7, the P90 and SF units using SBRs like the MK18, so they can clear around doors fast as fuck and not die in the process
Necessity is the mother of all inventions, if mid length rifles worked fine the MK18 wouldn't have been created

>>This is all in regards to home defense, not a military application where these divides are less still.
then why are you even in this thread 99% of posts have mil applications in mind

>>35185084
>(Frags, Flashbangs, having heavy weapons perforate the building from the outside, etc.)
these are not always available, one should train as if he had the most basic equipment.

>>35184953
No shit it wasn't an argument, it was simply advice.

>>35185192

>You don't do that unless there's a door or something.

Gee, good thing houses don't have doors! It's not as if that was my fucking point about "outside of tight corners, a bullpup and an AR work just as fine as the other" or anything!

>Goalposts

Weird how we were talking explicitly room-clearing, where it doesn't matter (as it was an extreme example anyways), but now you want to deflect to "b-but m-muh mid-ranges..." when, as I already said, an M4 would do as well. (Both close and mid-farish.)

>Muh training

Yes, I have, and I have seen even fucking airsoftfags slay nigs in another room with long-ass "SVD's" and shit, I personally have cleared rooms with an M27 as well as done shit with simunition, as well as watched instructionals that fucking show dudes with A2's going in and kicking ass.

You take practicing as an example of inefficiency, when the fucking point of training is to reduce inefficiency. I'm sure them MARSOC or DEVGRU dudes with their M4's with cans attached are really getting slaughtered left, right, and center, right? Or even Mk.18's with cans that are about as long as an M4, they're in such danger because they're weapon is SO LONG, amirite?

Fuck off you dumb cunt.

>Mil applications

You're the one that brought up "muh CQB", and as an extreme example of that, HD fits just fine, as well as being more relatable to people that own guns and think about HD.

>>35185218

I'm not saying otherwise, just that most times dudes aren't just running into buildings with M4's screaming MURICA!!!!, there's actual fucking procedure, and it just so happens to work extremely fucking well with M4's, 590's, and so on.

Hell, I saw, personally, some Brits with these fuckhuge AR10's clear buildings just fine, even when their buddies with L85's were right next to them.

I mean, it's not as if room clearing wasn't a fucking thing before bullpups were invented. And even then, in the grand scheme of things, carbines do everything bullpups do, but better

>>35176417
itt bullpupfags bitch about ARs

>>35185192

I'd also like to see the fucking SWAT dudes using MP7's or P90's.

Nearly every fucking US-based SWAT I can think of uses an AR of some sort, along with assorted shotguns and pistols, sometimes MP5's and the like. Hell, even our FAST, RTT, MP, etc. teams I've seen in the .mil use M4's, 590's, etc., and those things are apparently SOOPER DOOPER LONG AND IMPRACTICALE for said work. Even European police forces tend to use non-bullpups, even if their militaries use them, and they do just fine. FFS, even Israeli engineers use AR's to clear tunnels and shit, and Merkgunner was even saying he prefers his AR over the Tavor.

>>35185296

Well it's shit advice, friend.

>>35185426

Don't insult their memeguns or they'll write really angry posts at you! Or just try and meme and/or ad hominem you.

Weird how NO-ONE commented on the TFB article, or that other article on bullpups, or at the very least in the case of the latter, just handwaived and tried to meme, not even bothering to refute anything said.

>>35179133

>"What does ANY bullpup do that an M4 doesn't already do?"

Let me rephrase this:

"Will a grunt be able to do his job with an M4 or Mk.18?"

The answer is "Yes." memepupfags, cry more.

>>35185428
>I'd also like to see the fucking SWAT dudes using MP7's or P90's.
literally any european SWAT team

also FBI HRT, US's most elite door kickers use the MK18

I would have said that it's because it's advantages don't warrant the cost of replacing conventional rifles and retraining the troops to use them

But then you have france and new zealand dropping their bullpups for ARs so I don't know

AFAIK the top militaries don't use bullpups so there must be a reason they see.

>>35184878
>Is that mag 5.56? Wrapping your hands around that must be annoying.
It is about action that over-travels magazine twice less then current bullpups.

File: 1gVHskv.jpg (328KB, 2048x1366px) Image search: [Google]

328KB, 2048x1366px

>>35185481
>literally any european SWAT team

Belgian federal SWAT (CGSU/SIE) uses SCAR-L. Local SWAT uses all kinds of stuff, but only rarely P90s. There's way more MP5s than P90s for sure.

>>35184479

AK.

And the F2000 is unsuitable for field use.

>>35184286
Both France and China are dropping their bullpups.

>>35185481
>literally any european SWAT team

I thought we were talking American? Do they even call them "SWAT" in Euroland?

Anyways, I've also seen them use AR's more than anything too. Or, at the very least, some non-bullpup.

Hell, even Germany is issuing in-house AR's to some of their dudes, where's the MP7's? (And, for that matter, the G36's?)

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2016/11/21/hamburg-police-germany-issuing-hk-mp5-haenel-cr223-ar15/

>Mk.18

Ah, so an AR. Got it. Seems like, as I said, that length is completely adequate for their intended purpose. If they wanted to go smaller, since they rarely ever do longshots, they would've. Secondarily, they, and others, use 14.5" or 16" AR's as well, as does the military, making me really think, after what, 70 fucking years, however many countries dropping their shitpups, however many police, even in Europe, using ARs, however many international and national 3gun competitors using ARs, and so on it's pretty readily apparently (to me) that AR's (or most any non-bullpup really) are the "better" choice and completely adequate in their intended roles, and, as much as you morons hate to admit, have the added benefit of being cheaper, simpler, more readily available, more developed and with more research ongoing towards them, etc.

Bullpups literally CANNOT compete.

I cannot think of one single thing where a bullpup would be UNEQUIVOCALLY better or do things a "conventional" weapon couldn't do just fine. Trying to minmax, split hairs, obfuscate, etc. is pointless. Bitching all you please about "muh balans and muh barrel length" (really the only two things you can even ATTEMPT to say) does no good in the face of the FACTS that nations are moving away from bullpups, most research being geared towards "traditional" style carbines, and so on that lay your narratives barren.

File: FN-F2000s-slovanian-old&new.jpg (64KB, 500x403px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 500x403px

>>35185594
>And the F2000 is unsuitable for field use.

wat

>>35185572

I'd be more interested in the kind of rotating chamber or whatever the LSAT guns use for that instead of trying to wrap my girl hands around an AR-size magazine grip.

>>35185592
>There's way more MP5s than P90s for sure.
point still stand and SCAR L is an SBR

>>35185669
>SCAR L is an SBR

And not a bullpup.

>>35184759

Anon, you're the one who lacks reading comprehension.

>>35185630

It's a garbage gun constantly jamming, and every generation there's at least one guy who left the entrails of the gun on the ground as he took a dive into cover.

>>35179133
Not jam

>>35176417
>Why isnt bullpup the dominant rifle design of modern militaries /k/?

Because you trade a shorter OAL for literally everything else. It's a neat idea that has specific applications, such as tank crew weapons, but the standard layout is better for general purposes.

>>35185747

Ebin meme friend.

You can't seriously implying that modern AR's are jam-o-matics like the Vietnam meme goes, and/or that memepups NEVER jam, can you?

>>35185703
i'm not the guy you were talking to far early, my only posts mentioned that in CQB, short rifles and PDWs are better than full sized rifles

>>35185730
>It's a garbage gun constantly jamming, and every generation there's at least one guy who left the entrails of the gun on the ground as he took a dive into cover.

What the fuck are you basing that comment on? I know several people in the belgian army that have used it in combat and they quite liked it.

File: Protect.png (342KB, 1136x640px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 1136x640px

>>35185798
I can when in the Individual Carbine competition the M4 jammed 10 times as often as its competitors.

>>35185810

Ah, my apologies.

I agree. If I had the option of an M4 or Mk.18 specifically knowing I was ONLY going to be doing "CQB", I'd definitely grab the Mk.18.

Now, if you asked me that same question, except added in an AUG or RDB, I'd still pick the Mk.18. (Though I fucking LOVE those two.)

>>35185827

I think he's talking about the Slovenians. They might have different experiences with it, even if it is basically the same gun.

Though yes, I'd also prefer to see a source from who you're replying to.

>>35185428
No it isn't. You have plenty of valid anti-bullpup points to make. Why bother trying to destroy the objectively biggest pro. It weakens your presentation.

>>35185851

>Morons specifically counted burst fire malfunctions
>Morons used worn-ass guns compared to BRAND NEW ones
>Morons had shitty magazines (hence why they adopted the tan followers and PMags)
>It's surprising the weapons did bad.

GEE.

>All the finalists for the Individual Carbine were non-bullpups.
>This somehow proves the superiority of bullpups, which is what we're supposedly trying to prove ITT.

WILLIKERS.

I bet you think Megumin is best girl too.

>>35185827

It's not a comment, it's a repetition of facts and events from people who serve.

File: 1496169264083.jpg (116KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1280x720px

>>35185883
I was just arguing that bullpups were better than the M4 since you literally asked; "What does ANY bullpup do that an M4 doesn't already do?" and I answered that. Also sorry you got assblasted just like the competition holders that your precious M4 is shit.
>I bet you think Megumin is best girl too.
Okay now Im actually offended. Everyone knows Aqua and Wiz are best girls.

>>35179133
>every country

Such as? Britain is looking at SCARs for when the replacement comes up, not ARs.
France is still looking at a replacement but isn't sure on the specifics.
Aus is still using Steyrs.
China still uses bullpups.

Thats about all that has any relevance in the world and they aren't replacing their standard firearms with ARs at all. They are looking at other options instead of just getting a better grunt rifle.

The only drawback with bullpups on a real level is the cost. They tend to be upwards of 4x a M16A4 for no substantial gain.

>>35185878

It literally isn't a pro though.

It's rarely used, putting so much weight onto one arm/shoulder is not "biomechanically efficient" (as memepupfags quite often try to say), especially with weapons that tend to flip upwards and possibly blow your head off (worst case) per the TFB article linked way up above, it is entirely possible to do comfortably with an AR as well, if you absolutely MUST, which also brings me to say, if you're using a decent 2-point, you could also put all the weight on one arm/shoulder, though with a little underarm and back support (which also applies to bullpups mind you.), and so on.

I cannot see how it is in any way an "advantage", or even one that's unique to bullpups.

As a matter of fact, I've seen, with my own fucking eyes, a dude lugging a 240 ripping away at some goatfuckers downrange with one arm (and sling) while dragging some dumbshit civilian out of the way. It's an extreme example, I know, but I think it goes to show my point of it being situational and not at all unique to bullpups, if even true at all, etc.

>>35185863
>I agree. If I had the option of an M4 or Mk.18 specifically knowing I was ONLY going to be doing "CQB", I'd definitely grab the Mk.18.
>Now, if you asked me that same question, except added in an AUG or RDB, I'd still pick the Mk.18. (Though I fucking LOVE those two.)
not that last anon
but i'd pick an AUG for sure

why?
longer barrel is not a joke, here's why
from a 10 inch barrel, 556 produces 700 joules of energy on contact (energy is a biiiig determiner in how hard a bullet hits, penetrates and wounds), but from an 18+ inch barrel you would get 1700. that's more than the DOUBLE

>>35176460
Except their triggers make long range shots pretty much impossible.

>>35185947
>I was just arguing that bullpups were better than the M4 since you literally asked; "What does ANY bullpup do that an M4 doesn't already do?" and I answered that. Also sorry you got assblasted just like the competition holders that your precious M4 is shit.

Except your argument doesn't hold up. At it's base it falls flat because bullpups jam too, but as other non-bullpups managed to do better than the M4, it means bullpups aren't unique in their alleged ability to "not jam". Neither am I saying AR's are the be-all-end-all, more that non-bullpups are generally "better" than bullpups.

>Aqua, Wiz
>Not Darkness

Keep digging yourself that hole, Champ.

>>35185948

That's what I'm saying though, that BULLPUPS are being replaced by NON-BULLPUPS. It's not that I'm saying AR's are the best, but rather non-bullpups are generally better than bullpups.

This keeps getting lost on some people for whichever reasons...

France is literally getting 416's.

http://www.janes.com/article/64230/french-army-selects-hk416-to-replace-famas

I said Australia is keeping their AUGs though? NZ is replacing them though, weirdly enough.

China isn't keeping their bullpups apparently. (Well, at least SOME of them are getting replaced. The QBU-88, JS9, etc. are pretty cool, they're probably be staying I bet.)

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/05/18/chinese-pla-ground-forces-marines-replace-qbz-95-1-completely-new-non-bullpup-rifle/

As I said, it's not about AR's, but non-bullpups replacing bullpups.

The R&D focus has been on non-bullpups, there's cheap bullpups out there like the F90 or probably VHS, maybe even F2000, so it's not an issue of money in my eyes. Even if it were, the alleged "benefits" of bullpups isn't worth keeping them or pursuing new bullpups according to all these countries and more.

The AR is fine, I love it, but more AR18-influenced designs are probably the future. That and ACR-esque weapons, which, to be fair, has a lot of AR18-influence apparently.

>>35176417
>not developed by a world power during a time of mass procurement
>pretty much impossible to shoot (well) prone, the preferred way every military in the world shoots and tests weapons
>until VERY recently, trying to shoot one with your off-hand led to actual injury
>as a whole provided so few benefits over the AR as to be pretty unattractive
>significantly heavier than an M4

>>35185982

With M855A1 & Mk.318, velocity/energy isn't nearly as important as bullpupfags would have you believe.

That, and we're specifically talking about indoors/house CQB-type scenarios exclusively, so being MAYBE 25 yard MAX from someone means even M193 from a 10.5" is fine. We're not even getting into police/civilian loads that are even better than M855A1/Mk.318. TAP or TSX are probably two of the bigger names for example. Hell, there's videos of M855A1 and Mk.318 from 7.5" barrels (which is retarded, but it goes to show they're completely adequate rounds even when lacking the supposed MANDATORY velocity/energy, etc.) doing fine enough at household distances, so why would I take the extra weight of a longer barrel, ESPECIALLY in the form of a bullpup, when I could just an AR that works just fine even with the supposedly "horrible, inadequate" short barrels, etc.?

Plus, I'm not going to take your numbers at face value without supporting evidence, sorry.

There's plenty of dead sandniggers proving a suppressed Mk.18 is plenty fine when dealing with the proverbial shit-covered fan.

Now I'm just waiting for someone to get their hands on M995 and shoot it through a 7.5"-er, lol

>>35186147
>With M855A1 & Mk.318
can you give some charts about their velocity and energy at shorter barrels?

>>35186191

(Skip to 2:50)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNekOq9CBQA

(Skip to 1:20)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIKdstJP7Qw

These are some of the videos I'm talking about.

They're not great (get new gel, damn dude.), and only do a sample of one, but it gives a good enough indication. (Even though it's a 7.5" barrel, which, again, as I said, is retarded.)

Remember as well that this stuff isn't even the good shit like civvies and police can buy. Some of that crap can expand/fragment lower than 1900fps (according to their manufacturer).

That, and if we really want to get retarded, just change calibers. No really, if bullpup aficionados wanna jack themselves off about MUH VELOCITIES and shit, just move up to 6.8 or .300 Memeout. The latter can fuck your day up out of a fucking 5"-er.

>>35186235

Also, if you want velocity, buy some of that 40 or 45 grain shit.

I've even heard of 30-35 grain .223/5.56...

>>35186003
No they don't. Learn to shoot and upgrade the trigger like you would on anything else.

>>35186322
They don't have decent bullet construction behind mass and velocity.

Best fro civilians is
Black Hills 50 gr TSX
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3xgcu2yNRs

>>35186235
these show the velocity (2200-2300) but where's the energy, the most important point?

also note: 2200 is 5.7x28 and 4.6x30 tier

>>35185909
>It's not a comment, it's a repetition of facts and events from people who serve.

Our grenadiers love it.
And the reliability tests we did with them were stellar. Even with some snow & mud crammed down the damn ejection tube the thing would cycle fine shooting straight up?

What exactly are you people doing to it to make it jam?

>>35186458

Ok, ask one of them if his guide rod for spent casings broke already. Troops here are issued spares because they break so often. And that is not a sign of a battle worthy rifle.

>>35186427

Yeah, was just being facetious about velocity.

I haven't heard anything but praise for the various TSX loads.

>>35186446

5.7 and 4.6 are both much lighter rounds though, if we're going to talk about energy.

Regardless though, the results speak for themselves. It's not really about hitting some arbitrary number so long as the round has the desired effects on target, which these (and preferably others) do.

Remember that we're also talking about a 7.5" barrel and CQB ranges as well. 10.5" is the minimum I'd personally use. 14.5" works for everything else basically. ~30" OAL seems to be a sweetspot for me anyways. My HD SBR in .300 Memeout with can is great, and even though I could go shorter, I don't really see the point.

>>35186519
>Ok, ask one of them if his guide rod for spent casings broke already. Troops here are issued spares because they break so often. And that is not a sign of a battle worthy rifle.

Will do when I talk to one of em. Thanks.

>>35176417

ARbaby here. Contrary to what >>35176433 seems to think about AR-15 owners in general, I am actually willing to admit that the platform is not perfect. Furthermore, bullpups do have several advantages over my preferred platform. The primary advantage worth noting which bullpups possess over ARs, IMO, is that they have superior ergonomics for long-distance sniping. I also feel they would be easier to handle in an extremely close-quarters environment, seeing as most of the bulk is situated towards the rear of the gun. You really don't need to worry as much about reload time in either of these situations (if you're sniping, you'd be behind high-cover, taking single shots and therefore not expending ammo very fast... whereas if you're B&E a small house or bunker, you'll have a team backing you up, and it's likely that you'll be able to clear the building in a single magazine.)

That being said... and to answer the question of this thread... the platform is strictly inferior in a number of other ways. For instance, while it might be a slightly more ergonomic choice in situations where you aren't blowing through ammunition at a rapid pace, the simple fact is that bullpups are far slower to reload than ARs or AKs. If you need proof of this, just go ahead and watch any video on the subject on YouTube. This shit has been tested countless times by soldiers and civvies alike, not to mention people who are highly experienced with both platforms, and people who are relatively inexperienced with both platforms; it is a proven fact that bullpups reload slower. In situations as uncertain as war-zones, where you could be fighting in any given environment at any given moment, at any range, and with an uncertain amount of cover, reload speed is going to be a significant factor much more often than a minor difference in ergonomics. One second, or even as little as half a second, could make the difference between life or death.

>>35186722

TL;DR - You can fill out paperwork and fight with a bullpup if you want, but that's why brass doesn't give you one as your default gun.

>>35185950
C'mon, man. Spare me. I'm talking civilian shit. The every day person would have a far, far easier time running to and entering a vehicle while shouldering a bullpup. If you would argue that AR15s are easier to keep shouldered with one arm than a bullpup then you are either an idiot or have never used a bullpup. I'm not saying that an AR can't be handled one arm, I'm just saying a bullpup is easier. I have both so I'm not shilling. If you were ranking them categorically and one of the categories was "one armed handling", bullpup would win. That's all I'm saying. I'm not talking about how useful that truth is in the military or anything like that.

>>35186556
>5.7 and 4.6 are both much lighter rounds though, if we're going to talk about energy.
yet the energy *almost* reaches 556 barrels

File: My AUG.jpg (2MB, 4608x3072px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4608x3072px

>>35176417
Damn missed the thread
This is my AUG

File: K&MM17S.jpg (144KB, 1620x749px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1620x749px

>>35187342
and this is the 308 bullpup that is being shipped to me as we speak
Any ideas on a good scope?
Id like something durable and preferably under $300
Sorry if thats unfeasible, I dont know much about scopes and probably should have been doing research

>>35186722
You can reload most bullpups as fast as an AR, it just takes practice

>>35184532
MSBSs were just recently contracted, tavor isn't going anywhere, P90 isn't going anywhere,
AUGs were just recently contracted, and bullpup snipers/anti-material rifles aren't going anywhere.
yeah the sa80 and FAMAS are getting binned but they're old as hell and were shit from the start, anyone will tell you that.

i never said anything about not being able to train around M4 problems. in fact, none of my arguments were attacks.

File: drradio395.jpg (32KB, 478x270px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 478x270px

22 inch x95, 13.5 inch barrel

Be shorter than an ar 15 pistol with a 5 inch barrel

>>35182780
A normal buttstock is skinnier and less fiddly than a bullpup and there isn't anything has to be done with it. Smaller, better clearance, it can be inserted into an at-shoulder position more easily, and easier to move on the shoulder. You're right about people not usually folding their buttstocks though.

File: 0916171954.jpg (3MB, 4160x2340px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4160x2340px

Got this today, its purty nice

Bought an RDB recently, and love it, but if it ever jams the ejection area is damn near inaccessible. Fun gun, accurate, and doesnt jam often with normal quality military rounds, yet when it does it is a major issue if racking the slide rapodly doesn't clear it. Not good for military use by that fact alone.
A good bullpup trigger is a mediocre trigger at best due to the difference in where the trigger is to where the firing pin is also.
Now I love short OAL guns, and I really want to see an amazing bullpup, that can keep up with something like an HK M27, but that gun doesnt exist yet.
I will be inline to buy when it does though.

>>35189648
i've heard good things about the MDR from those who have used them

not going to lie, I've been debating on getting either a X95 or a Steyr AUG A3 for a H.D. and travel rifle.

On one hand, the X95 has the ability to use STANAG mags and keep the last round hold open, but, the AUG has been battle proven for something like 4 decades and has bee considered by most to be rock solid.

Also, a good chunk of my family immigrated from Austria as well.

>>35189957
there are AUGs that have last round hold open. also the tavor is apparently inaccurate.

>>35189957
Could wait and see how the Atrax is once they release, since its more or less an updated Aug. Not sure when they're actually going to be shipping though.

>>35187378

Oof, you bought one of those? Good luck.

We had one in our gunsmith for about two months.

>>35189527
>Wrong length barrel
>No carry handle optic
At least you got the right color stock.

>>35190443
>>35189957
Early batch had a problem where they were shooting 4moa because of flyers. They fixed the rifle and now it shoots 2moa, can confirm since my neighbor bought one recently. I know people boast Aug being sub moa, but I've never seen actual data nor have seen any Aug owners manage to pull it off.

Both are great gun, similarly priced as well. One thing id edge over Aug is that tavor has the geissle trigger option even it it costs a couple hundred dollars

File: 20170308_223045.jpg (4MB, 2260x1802px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2260x1802px

>>35187342
>>35189527
My niggers

>>35190796
>Carry handle optic
The scope on those are actually mediocre. Aesthetically they're pure sex though

File: pT4ybMl-660x426.jpg (60KB, 660x426px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 660x426px

As 15s can be even shorter than bullpups and with mk262 even a 2 inch barrel can engage targets to 300 yards.

Also it's barrier blind

>>35191487
i bet that thing has the muzzle velocity of a nerf gun.

>>35184666
Interesting but dear god that grip angle. No thanks.

>>35190823
>They fixed the rifle and now it shoots 2moa, can confirm since my neighbor bought one recently.
Let me guess? With bubba 3 rounds group test?

File: 534534.jpg (17KB, 631x572px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 631x572px

>>35192157
>>35185640
fixed!

File: DSC04392.jpg (1MB, 2278x4912px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2278x4912px

France has started to perceive it's first 416, so yeah, FAMAS is definetly on the way out.

I really wanted the VHS to win because it made sense though. Now I'm happy because we chose the 416 over the SCAR, so that's good.

>>35187467
Given the same amount of practice with both, AR reloads are faster.

>>35176417
>changing service rifles is expensive due to production/procurement and retraining
>totally different manual of arms leads to confused or at least uncomfortable and less effective troops
The best way to do it is to adopt or build from the ground up a new bullpup rifle which uses the same rounds and accepts the same magazine as the current issue rifle, and then begin issuing it... To new troops only. Train them with this rifle with special instructors, and then replace those instructors as some of your new soldiers move up the ranks high enough to become instructors themselves. As the older troops die, retire or otherwise leave service, take their rifles in and do whatever it is your country customarily does with old equipment. Eventually, your old rifle has been phased out and everyone is bullpup now. During the transition, you don't have to run too much extra logistics- only maintenance and repair for an extra type of weapon. You keep ammo/magazine commonality (and it's one less part you need to replace). This is probably cheaper than retraining everyone and replacing all the rifles all at once. It'll probably take a decade or two to do it this way, but it may be worth it.

File: IMG_20160928_113328_processed.jpg (253KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 1080x1080px

>>35191415
They're actually nice scopes, but whatevs.