Rise of the Bullpup
- Thread starter JJGunner
- Start date
I have never fired a gun in anger, and hope never to do so...and perhaps that's why I don't understand this objection. You are stating that the non-standard design of guns that don't eject out the side, through an open port, is somehow a function of the bullpup configuration. It isn't; there are plenty of bullpups that still use a more-or-less "classical" mechanism, but installed into a stock that moves all that hardware closer to your body. The fact that some of them may or may not be legal in Canuckistan may argue against their choice by the typical CGN shooter, but it certainly isn't any kind of indictment of the bullpup concept in general.
So...this word-of-mouth opinion from guys with "real combat experience" is that they want a longer rifle, rather than a shorter one that does the same thing? Again, I claim no such experience, but that seems a bit hard to swallow. Even if it's true, the vast majority of CGN members are recreational shooters/hunters; I'll bet there are far more examples of a short gun (firing the same cartridge out of the same length barrel) being superior to a longer one than vice versa.
onetwentyish
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- East Central AB (AKA Northern Texas)
While I can see where this comes from, especially with the FS2000, I find it pretty easy to overcome once you take everything else into consideration. The FS2000 is the only bullpup I ever expected more of than what was delivered. That said I want another fish gun.
r34skyline
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
The disadvantage of bullpups are numerous. One being fixed lop. Most bullpups except augs usually have a fairly high sight over bore however this is not bullpup only both the SCAR and G36 suffer from the same issue. Offhand shooting and transitions suck on most bullpups, the fs2000 resolves it with its unconventional forward ejection. The downside being malfunction drills can get... tricky. Triggers on pretty much all bullpups suck. I found even geisselle equipped tavors were... meh. And while well balanced a lot of bullpups are on the porky side. And the guts are by your face. If there is a kb... it aint gonna be pretty. Amd the more compact layout of the receiver also limits mounting options for accessories such as peq lasers and flashlights etc
But... bullpups also have their advantages namely the balance allows for good quick target acquisition and the compact package while simultaneously offering the ballistics of a full size gun can help with its effective range.
You can argue its relevance to a sport shooter and yes for a square range pretty much all of it is irrelevant so pick what you like and go with it, bullpup conventional... it's irrelevant.
But... bullpups also have their advantages namely the balance allows for good quick target acquisition and the compact package while simultaneously offering the ballistics of a full size gun can help with its effective range.
You can argue its relevance to a sport shooter and yes for a square range pretty much all of it is irrelevant so pick what you like and go with it, bullpup conventional... it's irrelevant.
Well if you ever get your hands on one definitely write up a review on it. I've had my eye on one but have yet to read anything about them. Mostly interested to see how it works with the extended chokes.
r34skyline
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
The FS2000 (while it has its own quirks) has a fairly low sight over bore...much lower than an AR.
I said most not all. And lower than an ar? You got some data to back that up? Looks same height as an ar with the fixed irons. It has its issues but it is a neat gun. Always wanted to play with one. But could never justify the cost.
Just for fun I dug the three I've got out of the safe to compare with my AR. I used a seam on my floor lined up with the tip of the built-in front sight (or in the case of the sight-less PS90, the centre of the Aimpoint). Here are the results:
The AR has a lower sight over bore distance than all three, although the FS2000 is pretty close. One thing that I like about the FS2000 is the slightly raised sight rail that allows for lower mounts on optical sights compared with an AR. The PS90 is not bad, but the Tavor has the highest sight over bore, which I wasn't really surprised by.
If you don't like your bullpup, just add a folding stock. If the rifle is not long enough in combat, just extend the stock and enjoy the tactical benefits. A second trigger would provide extra utility here, a small amount of complexity granted, but the only thing preventing the widespread adoption of 10" length extenders on bullpup rifles.
I don't think there is general problem with bullpups, but some bullpups suck more than the others.
The height over bore issue is not so much of a bullpup's fault but the engineers who are not given a limit on the space allowed for the push rod and gas system. This happens because the people who set out the parameter doesn't understand it is that important and therefore give no limit to the engineers and designers, especially with European companies because they were so used to putting ad hoc scope mounts on G3, MP5....and wear huge face shields. HK416 is so successful because the engineers were told to make sure it doesn't deviate from AR15's characteristics. Everyone now figures they can shoot and move faster that way, instead of turtling up behind face shield and bulky armour.
I have been running the X95 for abit and I have figured out 99% of the IA and transition drills. Shooting left hand is not an issue, yes, the spent casing will scratch up the chin but if it needs to be done it will be done. Grow a beard to absorb the brass, haha. If my job is to assault 10 storey tall apartment building by stairway, going up and down stairway all day long decked out in light and laser, I will pick a X95 day any day over a MK18 (and grow a beard). On a shooting range that has no high angle shots or any activities other than shooting, bullpup has no advantage. Conventional rifle is easier to point fast.
The height over bore issue is not so much of a bullpup's fault but the engineers who are not given a limit on the space allowed for the push rod and gas system. This happens because the people who set out the parameter doesn't understand it is that important and therefore give no limit to the engineers and designers, especially with European companies because they were so used to putting ad hoc scope mounts on G3, MP5....and wear huge face shields. HK416 is so successful because the engineers were told to make sure it doesn't deviate from AR15's characteristics. Everyone now figures they can shoot and move faster that way, instead of turtling up behind face shield and bulky armour.
I have been running the X95 for abit and I have figured out 99% of the IA and transition drills. Shooting left hand is not an issue, yes, the spent casing will scratch up the chin but if it needs to be done it will be done. Grow a beard to absorb the brass, haha. If my job is to assault 10 storey tall apartment building by stairway, going up and down stairway all day long decked out in light and laser, I will pick a X95 day any day over a MK18 (and grow a beard). On a shooting range that has no high angle shots or any activities other than shooting, bullpup has no advantage. Conventional rifle is easier to point fast.
r34skyline
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
So your choice of weapon for extreme close quarter engagements to lug up and down 10 flights of stairs would be the the heavier option with the bigger sight over bore offset and error margins and worse trigger...
Ever notice how the sayaret guys all went back to the stubby m4 pattern guns recently?
The x95 is quite a good gen purpose gun. But I wouldn't trade a c8 for one. Its advantage is it offers a full c8 size ballistics in a mk18 form factor. But the tradeoff is it is heavier, the trigger is pretty bad, and the sight over bore offset is higher which hinders it in extreme close range engagements, and offhand transitions suck more on it than on a c8 pattern gun.
To me the gold standard remains the most modern aug variants including an aussie option I won't name at this point. The trigger apparently still sucks. But the height over bore is quite good for a piston gun, the ergonomics while propietary are not counterintuitive, and they have the rail options needed to get the job done. And i do like the multi barrel options to configure it for missions.
Depends on which C8. The old pencil-barreled-iron-sighted C8? Sure. C8A3? No way. Bullpups are heavy on paper but the weight distribution makes them feel light as a feather if you're spending a lot of time in high ready... like if you were going up flights of stairs...
Honestly negligible, at extreme close quartes you have to aim off anyway, it's really not significantly different. And the Tavor triggers are not nearly as bad as everyone with a whizbang AR match trigger they had to take out a mortgage to buy makes them out to be.
There it is. You don't always just arrive at those close quarters scenarios, you often have to get there first. If I had to go from a street that gives a few hundred meters of line of sight, to a building interior, and back again - or cross a field before jumping into a trench system, I'd take an x95 over a mk18 any day of the week.
r34skyline
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Now you understand why the mrr are going to medcon barrels. It swings better.
I was referring to the shorter c8s that the squirrels use but even the a3 offers a compact enough package. But the mk18 is made for that scenario.
The mk18 was never a gen purpose gun. And i said the x95 is a good gen purpise option. The c8 is a great gen purpose option.
As for the triggers... i was comparing to stock to stock. I have yet to play with a stock bullpup trigger that i deemed good. (P.s. g36 have horrible trigger so thats not to say conventional rifles have great triggers, but usually seem better on average)
Still alive
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Rainy mosquito infested part of BC
Regarding triggers, with my limited experience on a stock Tavor 21 trigger vs. milspec ARs, I have used my T-21 for training and one match. Yes, the Tavor trigger sucks when deliberately squeezing off shots. The creep and take up is spongy and the trigger is heavy. However, when the beeper goes, I honestly never noticed a thing. You just get used to it. I even remember consciously thinking that it wasn’t that bad after a stage.
However, I do think that if one were to put 500 rds downrange quickly at one sitting, your finger might get cramped on the Tavor. This is where the AR trigger is much better.
However, I do think that if one were to put 500 rds downrange quickly at one sitting, your finger might get cramped on the Tavor. This is where the AR trigger is much better.
