Why Bullpups Aren't A Good Idea

[orthoboy]

I like my tavor. It's my go to rifle for knocking holes at 40 yds

 

[Athrun[Zaft]

catastrophic failure with the T97.

Don't worry about it; the only time I've ever heard of a "KB" situation in a bullpup was with an FS2000, and the thing held up like a champ. The round was toast, but the gun was more or less ok; definitely no grenading going on. Hell, the barrel survived in serviceable condition! I'd be more concerned about what shooting the thing's going to do to your wallet, than your face...

 

[adriel]

Don't worry about it; the only time I've ever heard of a "KB" situation in a bullpup was with an FS2000, and the thing held up like a champ. The round was toast, but the gun was more or less ok; definitely no grenading going on. Hell, the barrel survived in serviceable condition! I'd be more concerned about what shooting the thing's going to do to your wallet, than your face...

There's an OK metal shroud on the left and a moving shroud on the bolt carrier itself. It should help protect your face in the case of an out of battery slam fire, but I wouldn't want to try it!

 

[Vancouvergunnut]

^ you mean for the t97? Also dumb question, but does anyone know if the t97 uses a free floating firing pin or spring loaded? And is it necessary to clean the firing pin to prevent slam fires or "kabooms"?

 

[Ditchdogger]

If you can't educate, amuse. That's my motto.

You are good at it,

 

[daniel_250r]

^ you mean for the t97? Also dumb question, but does anyone know if the t97 uses a free floating firing pin or spring loaded? And is it necessary to clean the firing pin to prevent slam fires or "kabooms"?

Free floating keep it clean

 

[Vancouvergunnut]

Usually when I clean the rifle I just remove the bolt. How do you remove the firing pin to clean it?

 

[5440fight]

You are good at it,

I really just a poor educator. I mean, I "am" a poor educator. See?

 

[MPI]

Agreed. It's like saying that a Porsche is not as good as a Corvette because the engine is in the back...
Different strokes for different folks.

I was going to comment but then Greentips said it better

There is nothing wrong with the bullpup as a concept, but most bullpup designs suck because they are designed by committees or people who are not very good shooters. It is like people who expect Porsche 911 performance from a VW Beetle just because they both have rear mounted engines. There is nothing wrong with mounting the engine in the back of car, just like there is nothing wrong with mounting the bolt group behind the pistol grip of a rifle. On the other hand, you won't find a race car driver who thinks the Beetle is a great racing car, but millions of people who know nothing about race car driving are happy with the mediocre Beetle because it is a good enough car for them. Just like the bullpups, most of the bullpups are designed by people who are not "race car drivers" in the shooting community, and the end users are average grunts(and sometimes conscripts like the IDF), not super duper direct action dudes that shoot 20,000 rounds a year. For end users like that, it is more important to have a rifle that is handy in a moving box, easy to carry when jumping over walls and crawling through conduits, easy to rig when got pushed out of an airplane.

I have fired a few military Bull Pups, the SA80 which I didn't like, an AUG which I liked and the FAMAS which I liked a lot. And the Tavor which I like but don't like the price for what you get. I have yet to fire one that I liked better then a good AR. The only benefit of a Bull pup is length but a well made SBR AR takes that advantage away IMHO. In Canada for NR my first choice still would be a re-barrelled Swiss Arms carbine but next bang for buck is a Tavor. But with the refinement of the AR over the last decade I would say it' a great rifle platform now and I can't say that about any current 5.56/7.62 bull pups. Too bad AR's can only be a range gun...

 

[JoeOnePack]

They're just opinions. Like a**holes, everybody has one.

If it works for you, who cares what others say?

Let me finish that for you.

They're just opinions. Like a**holes, everybody has one, and they're usually full of s**t.

 

[canucklehead]

Hmmm... with an OAL of juuust over 26", my FS2000 is shorter than a 12.5" shotgun with short LOP stock. When it's slung on my back, it totally fits inside my sillouette, which makes walking through the woods a breeze. Plus the ballistic benefits of an 18.6" barrel over a short barreled AR, and the ABILITY to even walk through the woods, makes a bullpup a winner for me.

The downside for me is pretty bad trigger (compared to a nice AR trigger), but that's pretty much it. I can swap the standard forend for a railed one in seconds, and then have the ability to either run a bipod for precision shooting, or a VFG if I choose. Plus it's got a great sling system (Urban ERT) and very easy to disassemble and clean. Parts availability scares me a bit, but it's been insanely reliable and rugged so far.

The NR status, short OAL, and ability to take 10-round LAR mags makes the FS2000 my 'never sell' rifle. Some hate the looks, but it grows on you, and the ergos (for me as a lefty), just awesome.

 

[JoeOnePack]

Hmmm... with an OAL of juuust over 26", my FS2000 is shorter than a 12.5" shotgun with short LOP stock. When it's slung on my back, it totally fits inside my sillouette, which makes walking through the woods a breeze. Plus the ballistic benefits of an 18.6" barrel over a short barreled AR, and the ABILITY to even walk through the woods, makes a bullpup a winner for me.

The downside for me is pretty bad trigger (compared to a nice AR trigger), but that's pretty much it. I can swap the standard forend for a railed one in seconds, and then have the ability to either run a bipod for precision shooting, or a VFG if I choose. Plus it's got a great sling system (Urban ERT) and very easy to disassemble and clean. Parts availability scares me a bit, but it's been insanely reliable and rugged so far.

The NR status, short OAL, and ability to take 10-round LAR mags makes the FS2000 my 'never sell' rifle. Some hate the looks, but it grows on you, and the ergos (for me as a lefty), just awesome.

You mean 15 round Beo mags right?

The above pretty much sums up why bullpups are so like in Canada. So many benefits, so few drawbacks (for average gun owners)

 

[MPI]

Hmmm... with an OAL of juuust over 26", my FS2000 is shorter than a 12.5" shotgun with short LOP stock. When it's slung on my back, it totally fits inside my sillouette, which makes walking through the woods a breeze. Plus the ballistic benefits of an 18.6" barrel over a short barreled AR, and the ABILITY to even walk through the woods, makes a bullpup a winner for me.

The downside for me is pretty bad trigger (compared to a nice AR trigger), but that's pretty much it. I can swap the standard forend for a railed one in seconds, and then have the ability to either run a bipod for precision shooting, or a VFG if I choose. Plus it's got a great sling system (Urban ERT) and very easy to disassemble and clean. Parts availability scares me a bit, but it's been insanely reliable and rugged so far.

The NR status, short OAL, and ability to take 10-round LAR mags makes the FS2000 my 'never sell' rifle. Some hate the looks, but it grows on you, and the ergos (for me as a lefty), just awesome.

I would consider the FS2000(if I could find) vs a Tavor if was looking for a NR Bull Pup. I have never fired the FS2000 but I think most are saying the FS2000 is more accurate/has better precision then the Tavor. But I feel that somewhere on a graph with a SB AR with a good trigger and a Bull Pup with a 18.6 barrel (with good ballistics) and bad trigger the advantage will fall to the SB AR. It's a mute point as the AR can't picnic in the woods today but there is ammo that will give SB AR the same ballistics as a 16"-20" barrel, and no doubt there is good hunting ammo in the states to be had.

I do think you have a rare and cool rifle, I'm likely making this argument because I don't have one.

 

[eltorro]

@One Lung Wonder: I like the bullpups, but the points you made to support them are just as subjective and even more uninformed that those of the original poster. Without disagreeing that BP rifles are going to find their way more and more into our field, and without any personal attacks towards you, I would disagree with a few things you wrote. Please find them in blue, below.

There are a lot of folks that dislike them and a few hate them outright. I used to follow the gun bloggers and the self proclaimed gun experts and Chris happened to be one of them. Chris has a world view and politics typical of men that exist on a higher moral and intellectual plane of existence than I do - but he is still a great kid in spite of it. He put together one of the best lectures on the subject that can be seen here:

http://anarchangel.########.ca/2005/03/why-bullpups-are-persistently-bad-idea.html

You have to remember this was written back in 2005. All the cool kids and gun bloggers at the time were busy hating on the AR15 (even as they pimped them and chambered them in wildcats) - and just to prove they were all the coolest thing since sliced bread most of them hated the emerging bullpup rifles too!

I have had some preliminary play time with the Tavor and would like to take exception and umbrage to some of Chris' points. My rebuttals are in bold. Without further adieu:

Bullpup designs are mechanically more complex, requiring a long trigger linkage, and control system linkages. This seriously degrades both control feel, and reliability, and increases bulk and weight (there may be engineering solutions to this problem).

True. The same argument can be made of jet fighters, helicopters, and any other modern weapons. But here in the west we are mechanically inclined and sophisticated enough to appreciate and practice preventative maintenance. Properly maintained weapons seldom go down without warning and properly done, periodic maintenance and checks vastly reduces the numbers of failures. No engineering solution really required...just common sense. The Tavor has a crappy trigger but it still shoots as well as a service grade AR, and better than ex-Soviet junkers like the SKS and AK's

Jet fighters have trained personnel that have them in their care 24/7. I doubt any firearm would benefit of such attention, or should require it.
"In the west?" you are mechanically inclined? As opposed to the Japanese? Or did the Israelis also reflect your vision of "western"?
If you call SKS and AK junkers, that is a staple enough to truly assess what you are saying.


If current munitions infrastructure and laws allowed for electronic trigger, feed, and ignition systems, this would be a non issue, and the bullpups advantage may outweigh it's several disadvantages; but for now, that's not an option (also, electronic systems have their own issues).

Yeah - namely batteries and their reliability in cold environments. No thanks, when you get a unit that works in +40~-40C - then we'll talk

Are you sure of this?

If a bullpup has a catastrophic failure, instead of the explosion being six or eight inches in front of your eyes, it's right at your eyesocket, or touching your cheekbone or ear. The only good thing is, if the bolt flys back, it doesn't end up in your eye socket.

Well if some idiot wants to think he is safer because the grenade goes off 4" from his face rather than 2" under his chin - it won't make any difference in the aftermath.

I believe you should read a little about how firearms are designed. Again, not saying that the bullpups are faulty, but your comments are compelling.

Most bullpups also eject hot brass, and vent hot gasses in the vicinity of your eyes and ears (some eject downward or forward, which is a better solution for a bullpup, if it's engineered properly).

Hasn't been a problem for me so far with my Tavor.

Surely you have turned it sideways and shot with it from less "classic" positions?

Mag changes on most bullpups are slower (sometimes much slower) because they require more repositioning, that positioning can be awkward, and can be difficult to see (if necessary) without fully dismounting the rifle.

A conventional rifle allows you to see your mag changes, and is more easily maneuvered with your dominant hand, which makes mag changes easier in general.

More importantly a human being can naturally bring their hands together in the dark. As a basic design guideline, magwells should either be in your dominant hand, or just in front of it; because it is far more difficult to manipulate anything dexterously that is located behind your dominant hand.

This is subjective and I disagree with it. I have been watching the Youtubers and some of those gun geeks are swapping out mags faster than your wife can change her mind! Speedy mag changes are a function of practice and conditioning. If you can swap a mag on a regular rifle in the dark you can do it with a bullpup too.

It is rather objective. Mag exchange times don't lie. Or is this one of the point you were trying to also make regarding the "junk" AKs?

Because of the positioning of the magazine (usually the part of a gun extending lowest) close to your shoulder when the weapon is mounted, bullpups can be difficult to fire while prone (though this is common with some other rifle designs as well).

This I have to look into. I don't anticipate a problem, I use those shorty 5 rounders for precision work anyways but I could see a potential problem with the 30 rounders, maybe. I will be looking into this. I have concerns about how this rifle will sling up for precision shooting as well.

You haven't even tried it and lecture others about "subjectivity" ?

Note in the pictures below, the magazine is by far the lowest point of the rifle; and being located behind the dominant hand and close to your shoulder; when you drop prone it will tend to strike the ground forcing the muzzle downward.

This can also cause problems with mags being warped, ripped out of the magwell, having the baseplate broken off, or the rifle itself being ripped out of the users hand when hitting the deck.

A conventional rifle with a long magazine can have issues with dropping prone as well, but because the mag is positioned forward of the dominant hand, instead of forcing the muzzle down, it will tend to force the muzzle up; and though it's not advisable to use the magazine as a monopod, it's possible. With a bullpup, it isn't.

I have never tried using the mag as a monopod - what's the point? If you sling up properly you can effectively shoot out to 300 yards and the younger punks with better eyes and steadier nerves can probably go out past that! But what do I know, I am a gun club stubfart and not a gun expert, veteran and whatever else Chris is...

Really? How many rounds you shot out of that Tavor?

This isn't an issue for rifles that are generally fired off bipods, so in an SAW or LMG role, the bullpup may be an appropriate solution (though having the feed system in such tight quarters with your shoulder and cheek is its own issue).


Charging the rifle and manipulating the operating handle is often more difficult, and sometimes can't be done without dismounting the rifle, or reaching over the rifle with your support hand (again, some conventional rifles do share this weakness; and this is a problem that can easily be solved with proper engineering).

Might be something to that...but again...if it were practiced...maybe not. The IDF folks don't seem to be too concerned about it...

Neither were the Russians. Until they found out from you that they make junk rifles, that is. Now that Kalashnikov is dead, I am sure they'll reconsider.

Most bullpups can only be operated from the right shoulder; or if switchable, can only be operated from one shoulder without being reconfigured (this is changing, with the adoption of forward ejection mechanisms).know of, can be fired from the left shoulder.

I hear the Tavor solved that, and there are many conventional semi-autos with the same problem, or so I've heard. If I have to fire from my weak side I use my pistol...but that's just me.

It is just you. I like the Tavor as well, but why try to make all it's weaknesses as is they are strong points, and blatantly ignore reality? What is this accomplishing?

Because of the way most bullpups eject their brass, and cycle their actions; attempting to operate the weapon from the wrong shoulder will result in hot brass being ejected directly into your face, and possibly injuring the user... or they my simply not be able to cycle at all.

Bullpups are naturally balanced in a non-instinctive way.

Who says? Chris, if you want to stick to instinctive weapons, you have your fists, your teeth, and maybe the club and the spear. These guns swing and point like a hot damn.

Your comments are all over the map. First helicopters, now fists. Please....

This is really the biggest problem, and the one that is hardest to solve with engineering.

The balance point on most bullpups is in between your hand and your shoulder when mounted, which is unnatural. We have a natural tendency to try to balance things between our hands, not between our hand and shoulder.

The only way to correct this is to put heavy things in front of your dominant hand, or to make the weapon short and light enough that this won't make a difference (and even then it will still be more awkward and less instinctive to point; but several modern bullpups have taken the second approach).

Practice will work too...

Some comments are made by people with a tad bit of practice. No disrespect intended, but you sir, do not have much, or at least it does not permeate from your post.

This balance will tend to make a bullpup tend to shift its butt under recoil, unless it is very tightly mounted to your shoulder; particularly during rapid fire. This tendency is somewhat countered by the position of your support hand so far forward on the barrel, by the fact that the overall leverage moment of the muzzle is lower (the muzzle isn't as far from either your shoulder, or your dominant hand), and by the fact that most bullpups have straightline recoil.

A conventional rifle is balanced in between your dominant and support hands, and there are good reasons for that. A human being naturally handles things that balance in the palm, or in front of your dominant hand, better, because we naturally want to balance things between our hands.

Under recoil, the muzzle of a conventional rifle rises, but just from gravity will fall into you support hand again without actually holding or pulling it down, because the fulcrum of the lever is in your dominant hand, and the balance point is in front of the fulcrum.

Oh yeah? The engineers also proved mathematically and scientifically that honey bees can't fly. What bothers me here in all this isn't necessarily the comments - it is the same problem most old school engineers have: they sit in their offices in front of a computer and they read something somebody else said and then come up with the math and physics to prove their viewpoint - but at no time do they actually get down to the range and start shooting or running drills or talking to the squaddies that will use the damned thing.

Should I understand that you are an Engineer yourself? So much insight into the life and capabilities of the practitioners of this profession must recommend you as one, yes? And which one of them has proven that a honey bee can't fly, if you don't mind me asking?

The other thing that bothers me is that these guns are an evolving concept. I look at some of the junkers on this post and want to laugh. The guns emerging today are becoming weapons of choice for a lot of well informed shooters - and I don't think the show is over yet either.

In any event - all of this does make for interesting discussion when the weather is cold and crappy and the range is uninviting...

Hope your forecast has some warmth in it as mine does - I can't wait to get out and shoot!

I hope so too. Maybe if you have some experience with both types o firearms, you will start to understand rather than slander. Good luck!

 

[Matt_dal123]

Whatever floats your boat. I'll take my bullpup over any AR-15 platform any day. That's not me saying AR-15's are crap as we know fine well they are not. It's just that this is the rifle I'm used to, am accurate with and suits my shooting style.

 

[canucklehead]

I would consider the FS2000(if I could find) vs a Tavor if was looking for a NR Bull Pup. I have never fired the FS2000 but I think most are saying the FS2000 is more accurate/has better precision then the Tavor. But I feel that somewhere on a graph with a SB AR with a good trigger and a Bull Pup with a 18.6 barrel (with good ballistics) and bad trigger the advantage will fall to the SB AR. It's a mute point as the AR can't picnic in the woods today but there is ammo that will give SB AR the same ballistics as a 16"-20" barrel, and no doubt there is good hunting ammo in the states to be had.

I do think you have a rare and cool rifle, I'm likely making this argument because I don't have one.

To be fair, if AR's were non-restricted (and short barrels didn't matter), you'd likely be hard pressed to find someone with something else. Same reason I own an ACR. It's like an AR, but NR. So.... better.

However - it's a MOOT (not mute ) point as you suggested since AR's ARE restricted, and will likely remain that way for my lifetime.

 

[rhino62]

Free floating keep it clean

T97 is very easy to clean because of the take down. I think this is because the T97 is a 5.56x45 equivalent of the QBZ-95 which is 5.8.x42 and when introduced this cartridge was corrosive, however I believe the latest version of this cartridge are non-corrosive as used with the QBZ-95-1. I wonder if rifles such as the AR15 with Stoner/Johonson type bolts would ever have been designed if corrosive ammo was all that was available, since they are more difficult to clean compared to rifles such as the AK47 etc and also less reliable.

 

[paisley70]

Oh man, with an FN bullpup like this, I have to rethink my stance on black rifles. I've been avoiding these for too long just to see how the cards fall in the long run.

Imagine spending $3K on a gun and then having to turn it in to the RCMP. This bullpup may be worth the risk (not saying there is one, but who knows?).

Many of his points aren't valid on the best bullpup out there. The Belgian-made FS2000.

Fully ambidextrous, forward ejecting, nicely balanced...and the trigger is about 10x better than the Tavor... what's not to like? Plus the toilet-seat cover will protect my face from any kB's.

I like it so much, I'm thinking about selling my NR ACR!

 

[JoeOnePack]

To be fair, if AR's were non-restricted (and short barrels didn't matter), you'd likely be hard pressed to find someone with something else. Same reason I own an ACR. It's like an AR, but NR. So.... better.

However - it's a MOOT (not mute ) point as you suggested since AR's ARE restricted, and will likely remain that way for my lifetime.

To be honest, even if AR's were non restricted I would still have a bullpup. They are just smaller, period. Thats not to say I wouldn't own an AR, but bullpups have so many advantages for me. Especially that new Desert Tech MDR rifle, looks super sweet.

 

[rally guy]

There is nothing wrong with the bullpup as a concept, but most bullpup designs suck because they are designed by committees or people who are not very good shooters. It is like people who expect Porsche 911 performance from a VW Beetle just because they both have rear mounted engines. There is nothing wrong with mounting the engine in the back of car, just like there is nothing wrong with mounting the bolt group behind the pistol grip of a rifle. On the other hand, you won't find a race car driver who thinks the Beetle is a great racing car, but millions of people who know nothing about race car driving are happy with the mediocre Beetle because it is a good enough car for them. Just like the bullpups, most of the bullpups are designed by people who are not "race car drivers" in the shooting community, and the end users are average grunts(and sometimes conscripts like the IDF), not super duper direct action dudes that shoot 20,000 rounds a year. For end users like that, it is more important to have a rifle that is handy in a moving box, easy to carry when jumping over walls and crawling through conduits, easy to rig when got pushed out of an airplane.

It maiby the alcohol but it funny cause of the fail!