Reply With QuoteIt got a mention earlier in the thread, a 7.62mm Bullpup Kel-tec RFB rifleOriginally Posted by kongman
http://world.guns.ru/sniper/sn75-e.htm
Don't see why they couldn't...........if i had a choice between styer and a SLR ide still pick the SLR .......so do they make any ???
My SLR has the main recoil spring in the buttstock, but there were folding stock models of the FN FAL so it certainly should be possible.
Have also seen bullpup models of the M14 and of course the bullpup model Dragunov SVU if you want to use an eastern 308 round.
It got a mention earlier in the thread, a 7.62mm Bullpup Kel-tec RFB rifle
http://world.guns.ru/sniper/sn75-e.htm
I never found the bullpup to be anything but a nice design with many flews.
this can be a debate that becomes the AK vs. AR or the 308 vs. 556, or Coke vs. pepis......
I can't transition to support shoulder for CQB, slower mag changes are mostly my complains.
F2000 resolved some of those problems, but I just did not like the gun with some those mechanicism that lift the spent brass into the ejection tube along with the ejection tube spiting the brass forward out of a portal.
and mag changes are still slow....
Last edited by SMGLee; 12-29-2007 at 11:52 AM.
This have nothing to do with the gun and its abilities, but that is just one of the ugliest gun out there.
great rounds, but poor egronomics, and poor overall form and platform design.
Recently one of my mates was doing range trials with the FN2000 here in Ireland. Same complaints as what have been said. Too big and bulky and stoppages regarding spent brass collecting in the ejection port requiring stripping of the weapon.
Weapons training here in Ireland is right hand only shooting, has been even with the FN FAL and Lee Enfield. With the ejection port of the Steyr AUG directly across from the cheek weld position on the left side, its effectively canceled out left shoulder firing.
Two issues with this.
In FIBUA (CQB), you might have to fire from around a left side open corner. Being able to shoot from this position without bringing the whole body out would be nice.
secondly. Lying down or in confined spaces, you might have a perfect Point of Fire but can only be used if left shoulder fired.
With the P90 i fired. I tried it out both right and left handed. While grouping was terrible on the left shoulder I still was able to hit centre mass at 40m. Down to practise I guess.
So to sum up. Any bullpup that calls its self ambidextrous should be that, with out modification. Seems the best way of doing that is eject casings forward or down.
I think the L85A2 is an excellent weapon, but that is indeed a problem on patrol.
The L85A2 has fantastic accuracy, but I find - as do others - that shooting from the kneeling unsupported position is extremely difficult to achieve an adequate standard compared to non-bullpup weapons. I find that because the weight is concentrated differently that it makes even the steadiest left arm wobble slightly.
Gun balance is, to a great extent, a matter of what you are used to. Bullpup users usually prefer the rearwards weight balance, arguing that it is easier to hold one-handed, or for extended periods, and makes the rifle quicker to change aim. What is undoubtedly true is that a bullpup is far more evenly balanced once an under-barrel grenade launcher, optical sights and other tactical kit (e.g. torches) start being added: a traditional rifle then becomes massively front-heavy.
Who fires a rifle one handed other than Arnold? Wouldn't the recoil from the larger cartridge make anything more than one shot off target? And as far as just holding it single handed in a non-combat ready position, isn't that what a sling is for?
PS. I'd let those two Chinese girls in the second picture slap me around a bit.
Make that the American 5.56. The British, and possibly other European versions, have strengthened jackets that prevent fragmentation. So you end up with the same sort of performance as a 5.45 (but probably tumbling later than that round).
- 5.56 differ in composition - a lot of NATO stuff is mild steel core with a gliding jacket and it doesnt break up easily. Swiss RUAG has a lead core which makes it heavier with different characteristics.
Allegedly the L2A2 rounds that Radway Green produces were designed specifically not to fragment. Even more allegedly, it was to avoid press attention in Northern Ireland re the use of what could be (stupidly) seen as "dum dum" bullets.
No evidence for this mind you, besides the L2A2s definitely sporting nice thick jackets over the original 5.56 round.
As far as I'm aware, there is only one 5.56mm ball round which is the subject of a NATO standardisation agreement, and that's the Belgian SS109 (made in the USA as the M855). This has a hardened steel element in the tip, with a lead base. There may be detailed differences in production (thicker jackets have already been mentioned) but the idea is that they should be interchangeable and have more or less the same performance.
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum
It was my understanding that it wasn't jacket thickness that was at issue, though I have heard that some shots with the very early M193 rounds didn't hit targets because they disintigrated in mid air on the way down range.
It is the cannelure on the bullet that creates the weakpoint for the fragmentation. As the bullet tumbles after impact (note all bullets tumble after impacting another medium, not just high velocity projectiles) when it turns to 90 degrees off its direction of travel the bending forces on the bullet itself are quite high. If the barrel is 20 inches and the bullet is travelling above x velocity (ie it hits the target within xxx metres of the muzzle) then the bullet will fragment along the cannelure or crimping indentations around the projectile.
Have had a lot of people claim that the cannelure is there for bullet seating reasons to stop it being pushed into the case and increase pressure to unsafe levels. Of course most of the 223 calibre ammo I have seen haven't had the case neck bend into the crimp line so I really don't understand how the cannelure is supposed to work... except if it is there just to create a stuctural weakness in the projectile design.
Regarding where bullpups eject their cases there is no reason why the magazine can't be moved a little forward and allow the mechanism to recoil back behind the mag one cartridge length clear so the empty case could be ejected downwards behind the mag position. Sure it would make the barrel slightly shorter, but you could make it work by changing to a 5.45 type projectile to make the 5.56 more lethal but not requiring 20 inches of barrel to be effective. It would guaranteed the rifle could be made ambidextrous without flipping anything over... cheekpads on both sides for example.
In my opinion you might lose 2 inches of barrel but the extra recoil distance should improve handling and lower rate of fire to make shooting bursts more managable.
I am curious, are there any members here other than our Chinese members that have fired the QBZ-95? What is your overall impression?
- I'm not sure how rigidly we stick to it. I've been told that the L85 has problems
with US ammo and they have bought RG ammo but its cleared for training only. Now if they were one and the same - why the restrictions ?
Incidently, I've been picking up a lot of RUAG ammo cases on MoD ranges recently - a potential supplier perhaps now that we're set on losing RG ?
RUAG has been supplying the British military for some considerable time now. 20mm Oerlikon ammo, grenades etc., etc., nothing new. RUAG have a British company.
Posting Permissions
