Dlask custom Canadian legal bullpup

Jäger said:
Has anyone considered 7.62x54r?

Plenty to be had and cheaply for paper-punching and plenty useful on the hunt as well.
Click to expand...

I think it's sort of a bad idea for a few reasons.

A lot of people don't like dealing with corrosive ammo, especially considering as the supply is drying up fast.

Commercial ammo for that round is a lot more expensive and harder to come by than .308

It is a lot harder to reload and find reloading components and tools for 7.62x54r than .308
 
Jäger said:
Has anyone considered 7.62x54r?

Plenty to be had and cheaply for paper-punching and plenty useful on the hunt as well.
Click to expand...

Shep546 said:
I think it's sort of a bad idea for a few reasons.

A lot of people don't like dealing with corrosive ammo, especially considering as the supply is drying up fast.

Commercial ammo for that round is a lot more expensive and harder to come by than .308

It is a lot harder to reload and find reloading components and tools for 7.62x54r than .308
Click to expand...

--Not many spare mags floating about, so it would need new proprietary mags.

--Very tapered round, so a very curved mag.

--As noted above, the cheap ammo is corrosive so needs cleaning. Depending on how complex the bullpup design is, this could be a major PITA.
 
I want this SOOOOOOOO BAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ive debated on gOing down to he USofA and mailing one to my neighbour. LoL. Just kidding. But seriously, i want this.
I really want this for my m14 so it could be the worlds greatest bush gun.
 
For those questioning price keep in mind the closest things we can get to the M14 that aren't Norinco are a Springfield M1A or a custom LRB. The M1A starts at $1995 (going off Epps price for that as it's all I can find) for a bone stock rifle, and a custom LRB can go upwards of $4000. I for one would love to see another option on the market that would shorten the M14 and have the availability of parts, mags, and ammo.

Now why make another bullpup in the $2000 - $2500 price range when the RFB is already on the market? Well I guess then why make another AR-15 since we have soooooo many manufacturers, hell why make another .223 ever again since the Mini-14 is on the market, why design the ACR when the XCR made it to market first and they're basically the same platform (for the record that whole sentence is sarcasm, you see the silly here right?)? More choice is a good thing, Canadian manufactured guns are a great thing for our own economy, and the availability of parts, mags, and ammo for this concept is perfect.

What's the availability of parts for a RFB? How easy is it to find mags? Could the possibility of us seeing more AIA 10 round mags in the future that might seat in a M14 action be appealing, would those same mags seat in the RFB? Don't get me wrong the RFB is a neat rifle and I like choice, but this Dlask bullpup is a different concept entirely that gives us mass parts availability and choice of readily available magazines (even polymer mags :eek:).

I for one would pay more any day for a Canadian made product over Norinco. Given this is also a neat design concept that could make it non-restricted and shorter OAL than a M1A Socom with similar features and I predict a feeding frenzy.
 
Dlask Arms Corp said:
Because the m14 action is being used right now......overseas in Afghanistan and Iraq.....the RFB is not....nor will it ever be used by any military. The Tavor is used by a tiny little country and a few others. The M14 action is a proven battle action for 40 years. We would be using an m14 action.
Click to expand...

Dlask, why don't you post what your initial ideas are for this concept.

I am interested but as stated the tavor is on the market and is a reliable battle proven rifle. The Tavor can be had between 2500-2800 which Im more then willing to pay for a Bullpup. To make this worth while and capture the attention of the market you have to do something unique that will set you apart from the competition and I'm afraid doing M14 action wont be enough. I love supporting the Canadian market and that is enough to get my attention but now you have to reel me in.

So far the suggestions iv seen are:

Must be affordable.
2500 for a bullpup is more then reasonable. (I think using the Tavor as your benchmark would be wise as it is a well know, well liked bullpup design.)
Caliber, lots of controversy around that one. 223 or 308 are both good calibers that have lots of options, Id like to see a 308 but in the end i would be happy with a 223 or something ells.
Non-res is crucial, no way around that.
Maintenance is another big one that I think should be addressed, I don't own a tavor but I have seen my friend take his apart to clean and holy crap... It simple and easy.

anyways just somethings to considered, Id love to hear what your initial ideas are.
 
I'd be willing to pay 2000-2500 max. But for me to spend that type of money on a new to the market rifle, it would have to be something new. If you could build something piston ar10ish, thats light weight and optics friendly, than i would probably be willing to spend more.......and of course it would HAVE to be NR
 
Well, these are my considerations:

-Nonrestricted, this is quite possibly the most important. This alone would have people buying it even if it's chambered in some weird proprietary 6.3x42mm caliber that you only make ten of a month. Being able to take it outside of ranges would probably increase your chances of selling it by at least a third, especially since many ranges have been switching to members only policy.

-Common intermediate caliber such as 7.62x51/.308. Reason being, if you pick a caliber new and fancy or old and surplus you run the risk of the ammo supply becoming very rare. Sure we have buckets of surplus 39 or 54r now, what about in five years, ten years? Giving it affordable ammo, in a caliber that's in current production and going strong on a worldwide basis, will make a high pricetag a lot more palatable for many people. If we need to spend three bucks for a single cartridge, we're not going to use it very often and you risk turning it into something only sponsored shooters or the seriously wealthy can shoot. 308 is widely accepted and supported for all aspects of shooting.

-Standardized for use with existing optics and accessories. If people can use the scopes and rail accessories they already have they are much more likely to buy the rifle.

-Cost:Value ratio that is worth it. Though it sounds like this is already one of your core principles. I don't want something that I'm afraid to use because it's expensive. I want to know that's it's worth it, and can roll with the punches. I'd say about $2000-$2500 would be my max for the commercial version. Special versions might merit increased pricetags. However, the higher the initial cost the fewer aftermarket mods it should "need" to achieve a specific function such as left handed use, or scopes, or PDW CQB, or long range, or custom threading for brakes and other muzzle devices.

-Ambidextrous and/or configurable controls. It seems like the first question I heard about the Tavor was "how to get a left handed version?". Maybe it's just me, but I kind of dislike the base AR platform for having the bolt stop set up in such a way that it's the only control I cannot use with my right hand on the grip where it belongs without having to insert an empty mag and yank the charging handle. Being able to swap mag releases and ejection ports from one side to another, or having them set up in such a way as to be accessed from both sides, would gain you major points with some people. Of course, extra parts like duplicated mag releases and bolt stops and what have you will add weight, and there are people who will dislike the idea of "useless" junk. I've got a Walther PPQ pistol, it's fully ambi out of the box, and I'm in love with the idea of not being stuck with only a single way of doing something, even if only one way is the most efficient in most cases. I've got a major chub for options. In your case, maybe make it easy for the user to swap out parts for right or left handed operation, or use both for ambidextrous. That way you can allow some control over weight and set up. In short, think of how it's going to be used, in all cases and all functions and not just doing the 1,2,3 on the bench. Since you're going to be developing the rifle from the ground up, plan it all the way to the roof. If you're going to set it up a certain way, at least plan for aftermarket modification such as the B.A.D.A.S.S and other things.

-User serviceable without requiring specialized tools. By this I mean that we're going to have to clean it eventually, so make it vaguely easy to access the barrel and internals. If it's a pain in the ass to clean, people aren't going to be out using it and giving you publicity.

-Wieldly. That's a word I use to mean how easy it is to wield the rifle. A 12 pound benchrest rifle is heavy and unwieldly. A custom four pound large bore rifle is also unwieldly, but for the opposite reason. I think 6-7 pounds would be your magic weight to make it heavy enough that recoil does not seem obnoxious, but light enough to consider as a field rifle for people who are not paid to carry it. However, to do this and retain a primarily metal constriction you might have to carefully allocate rail real estate. Perhaps even by designing rail slots, and then allowing us to purchase and position rail segments to bolt on. In fact, Mr. Potato rails would be pretty damn cool in general.

There, that's my thoughts for now. I can't wait to see what you come up with.
 
Stevebot-7 said:
Well, these are my considerations:

-Nonrestricted, this is quite possibly the most important. This alone would have people buying it even if it's chambered in some weird proprietary 6.3x42mm caliber that you only make ten of a month. Being able to take it outside of ranges would probably increase your chances of selling it by at least a third, especially since many ranges have been switching to members only policy.

-Common intermediate caliber such as 7.62x51/.308. Reason being, if you pick a caliber new and fancy or old and surplus you run the risk of the ammo supply becoming very rare. Sure we have buckets of surplus 39 or 54r now, what about in five years, ten years? Giving it affordable ammo, in a caliber that's in current production and going strong on a worldwide basis, will make a high pricetag a lot more palatable for many people. If we need to spend three bucks for a single cartridge, we're not going to use it very often and you risk turning it into something only sponsored shooters or the seriously wealthy can shoot. 308 is widely accepted and supported for all aspects of shooting.

-Standardized for use with existing optics and accessories. If people can use the scopes and rail accessories they already have they are much more likely to buy the rifle.

-Cost:Value ratio that is worth it. Though it sounds like this is already one of your core principles. I don't want something that I'm afraid to use because it's expensive. I want to know that's it's worth it, and can roll with the punches. I'd say about $2000-$2500 would be my max for the commercial version. Special versions might merit increased pricetags. However, the higher the initial cost the fewer aftermarket mods it should "need" to achieve a specific function such as left handed use, or scopes, or PDW CQB, or long range, or custom threading for brakes and other muzzle devices.

-Ambidextrous and/or configurable controls. It seems like the first question I heard about the Tavor was "how to get a left handed version?". Maybe it's just me, but I kind of dislike the base AR platform for having the bolt stop set up in such a way that it's the only control I cannot use with my right hand on the grip where it belongs without having to insert an empty mag and yank the charging handle. Being able to swap mag releases and ejection ports from one side to another, or having them set up in such a way as to be accessed from both sides, would gain you major points with some people. Of course, extra parts like duplicated mag releases and bolt stops and what have you will add weight, and there are people who will dislike the idea of "useless" junk. I've got a Walther PPQ pistol, it's fully ambi out of the box, and I'm in love with the idea of not being stuck with only a single way of doing something, even if only one way is the most efficient in most cases. I've got a major chub for options. In your case, maybe make it easy for the user to swap out parts for right or left handed operation, or use both for ambidextrous. That way you can allow some control over weight and set up. In short, think of how it's going to be used, in all cases and all functions and not just doing the 1,2,3 on the bench. Since you're going to be developing the rifle from the ground up, plan it all the way to the roof. If you're going to set it up a certain way, at least plan for aftermarket modification such as the B.A.D.A.S.S and other things.

-User serviceable without requiring specialized tools. By this I mean that we're going to have to clean it eventually, so make it vaguely easy to access the barrel and internals. If it's a pain in the ass to clean, people aren't going to be out using it and giving you publicity.

-Wieldly. That's a word I use to mean how easy it is to wield the rifle. A 12 pound benchrest rifle is heavy and unwieldly. A custom four pound large bore rifle is also unwieldly, but for the opposite reason. I think 6-7 pounds would be your magic weight to make it heavy enough that recoil does not seem obnoxious, but light enough to consider as a field rifle for people who are not paid to carry it. However, to do this and retain a primarily metal constriction you might have to carefully allocate rail real estate. Perhaps even by designing rail slots, and then allowing us to purchase and position rail segments to bolt on. In fact, Mr. Potato rails would be pretty damn cool in general.

There, that's my thoughts for now. I can't wait to see what you come up with.
Click to expand...

Pretty fair assessment and logical. The more I look at the OP picture the more I realize it's impossible for a lefty to use without shouldering and firing from the right.... or eating brass and a charging handle :runaway:.

The way modern sporting rifles seem to be headed lately are with ambi controls and some have the ability to swap out which side charging handle and or ejection is located. Pretty much already built into the M14 mag release, but could take some doing with the bolt release and charging handle/ejection.
 
Now another recommendation for Dlask to assure a minimum amount of units are moved from day one could be to act as a wholesaler and retailer. Move as many units as you can into the retailers throughout Canada, and retail at the same price point as the MSRP from your own shop as well. Of course be careful not to undercut your own retail chain or they'll drop the product, but this can assure that a minimum amount of units are "spoken for" straight off of launch date.

Of course this is just a thought as I must admit I don't fully understand what being a firearms manufacturer or wholesaler entails, if the retail locations buy up front or expect goods on credit, and a whole slew of things that will obviously go along with wholesaling to other retailers. For that matter I don't know that this is a avenue that Dlask would be in the least be interested in pursing, but at least it's a suggestion that I thought I'd throw out there. Take it for what you will.
 
Dlask Arms Corp said:
We still have a Tavor sitting here that is months in inventory that no one wants to buy. Not sure what all this sold out business is. If you only bring in a handful of guns....of course you are going to be Sold Out.
Click to expand...

Dlask Arms Corp said:
I don't think you can beat and muddy a plastic rifle the way you can an all metal m14 rogue or troy or sage. Am I missing something here? Or are people just "high" on the RFB and tavor.
Click to expand...

Dlask Arms Corp said:
Because the m14 action is being used right now......overseas in Afghanistan and Iraq.....the RFB is not....nor will it ever be used by any military. The Tavor is used by a tiny little country and a few others. The M14 action is a proven battle action for 40 years. We would be using an m14 action.
Click to expand...

Wait, did you just bash AND try to sell Tavor's in the same thread? Badass. :p
 
I like the m14 action. The only difference I'd like to see is for the charging handle to be on the left side of the gun. Other than that I could care less if its in the $2500 range as long as the quality is there.
 
If this is non restricted then it would be my next purchase. (I'd buy 3 or more)
Restricted - I'd still buy one.
 
Originally Posted by Dlask Arms Corp
We still have a Tavor sitting here that is months in inventory that no one wants to buy. Not sure what all this sold out business is. If you only bring in a handful of guns....of course you are going to be Sold Out.

You have a Tavor in stock?

The bullpup is an interesting idea in the M14 spec... very positive action.
 
I like bullpups so I am interested in seeing how this turns out. But I won't buy a restricted long gun because I don't shoot any of my guns, including handguns, enough, so another range-only toy isn't on my wish list. I would want hunting accuracy. I won't mind if DLask uses Chinese copy M14 actions to keep the cost down. If the cost got up to Kel-Tec RFB level I'd probably get an RFB instead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom