Quoted: Quoted: Because the US doesn't use PDW's and hardly any western military does. Everyone is supposed to have a Rifle or Carbine period - thus there is no room for the PDW concept in our doctrine. It's designed for supply people and such.

And we don't use it as such, thus it is a failed concept in the west.

M4>P90

Hell a Commando Length M4 > P90 and it still retains mag commality.

I've wondered if you could load a 5.7x28mm sized case to 5.56mm levels of power.

If you could esentially do that, then you'd be making headway in making an effective PDW/General issue carbine.

It would probably take some exotic powders and/or a beefy and thick walled brass case.

Quoted: Quoted: The Russians also used vacuum tubes in their aircraft and pencils for their space program. In the West, we throw money at a problem, and want a sexy, sexy solution. And the vacuum tubes made their aircraft less susceptible to EMP than our own and their pencils cost nothing while we literally spent millions on a pen that could write on glass in zero gravity. Keep It Simple, Stupid. Go with what works, not the latest new gadget that looks cool.

Well, the funny thing is, they used vacuum tubes because they couldn't figure out how to make microchips cheaply and efficiently.
Western analysts attributed intelligence to the Russian decision, where there was only necessity.

I prefer .45 ACP chambering for pistol and submachine guns. If I need AP, then I get the .30 caliber rifles and carbines.

Quoted: Quoted: The Russians also used vacuum tubes in their aircraft and pencils for their space program. In the West, we throw money at a problem, and want a sexy, sexy solution. And the vacuum tubes made their aircraft less susceptible to EMP than our own and their pencils cost nothing while we literally spent millions on a pen that could write on glass in zero gravity. Keep It Simple, Stupid. Go with what works, not the latest new gadget that looks cool.

Uhhh you are so wrong about the space pen. You're just restating a false urban legend.

www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp

First, we both used pencils for a while in space. Fisher developed the pen on their own without NASA seeking them out to do so. It didn't cost the .gov anything to develop it because Fisher absorbed the cost. Both the Russians and the Americans used the pen.

Quoted: I've wondered if you could load a 5.7x28mm sized case to 5.56mm levels of power. If you could esentially do that, then you'd be making headway in making an effective PDW/General issue carbine. It would probably take some exotic powders and/or a beefy and thick walled brass case.

I'm no expert, but >60kpsi in a bullpup design doesn't sound safe.

No need. The KAC PDW and the new Magpul bulpup design that takes AR mags exist as good replacement ideas for the microcartridges.

I wish they had finished their plans to make the Calico in 5.56 before the AWB. Then we would have our cake and eat it, too. Besides, that's where the helical magazine idea came from. 100 rounds, bottom ejecting, quasi-bullpup

Quoted: I prefer .45 ACP chambering for pistol and submachine guns. If I need AP, then I get the .30 caliber rifles and carbines.

I'd imagine a small SMG in .45 Super with an AP bullet would be a hell of a gun.  

The Kriss Super V looks promising, what do you guys think of it?

http://world.guns.ru/smg/kriss4.jpg

Quoted: Quoted: I've wondered if you could load a 5.7x28mm sized case to 5.56mm levels of power. If you could esentially do that, then you'd be making headway in making an effective PDW/General issue carbine. It would probably take some exotic powders and/or a beefy and thick walled brass case. I'm no expert, but >60kpsi in a bullpup design doesn't sound safe. No need. The KAC PDW and the new Magpul bulpup design that takes AR mags exist as good replacement ideas for the microcartridges.

Well I was thinking more along the lines of a P90 sized weapon replacing general issue rifles and carbines on the fornt line.  You'd be getting M4 levels of firepower in a P90 sized weapon with 20 additional rounds per mag.

When I was in the Army suply clerks and truck drivers used M16A2s, now they can have M4s. (or at least everyone else does.)  The Army seemed to work fine then.  The whole PDW thing is a solution looking for a problem to me.

What needs to happen is those REMF types need more training with their weapons, because it seems in future asymetric contflict they are more liekly to need them.

Quoted: Quoted: I prefer .45 ACP chambering for pistol and submachine guns. If I need AP, then I get the .30 caliber rifles and carbines. I'd imagine a small SMG in .45 Super with an AP bullet would be a hell of a gun.

SMG's in 10mm Auto firing AP bullets.

*pees a little*

Quoted: Why do we have the P-90 and MP-7 when there are better solutions? Their calibers are just glorified .22's with poor lethality (proven in the field), despite their soft-armor penetrating abilities. The Russians, meanwhile, haven't had to spend much effort on getting weapons that seem better suited to anti-personnel work. SMG's in 7.62 Tokarev have better range and penetration than most pistol calibers, while having the virtue of a .30-caliber bullet instead of a .22. And now their SMG's and pistols use a special 9mm round that is higher-powered than most and uses armor-piercing rounds to punch through soft armor. We use 9mm in our pistols and SMG's, and the same AP ammo the Russians use would work in our guns, so why not use it instead of spending money on all-new guns with an entirely different caliber? An MP-5 is just as compact as a P-90, and with AP ammo it'll penetrate soft armor just as well as the 5.7 AP round, but with a bigger hole. And unlike the P-90, you can carry and fire the MP-5 one-handed if necessary, something made quite awkward thanks to the P-90's shape.

The 9mm armor piercing rounds fired by their pseudoSMGs is 9x39mm. It's a 7.62x39 case necked up to 9mm. We don't domestically manufacture anything chambered in this caliber, AFAIK.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I prefer .45 ACP chambering for pistol and submachine guns. If I need AP, then I get the .30 caliber rifles and carbines. I'd imagine a small SMG in .45 Super with an AP bullet would be a hell of a gun.   SMG's in 10mm Auto firing AP bullets. *pees a little*

Sounds like...win !

Quoted: Well I was thinking more along the lines of a P90 sized weapon replacing general issue rifles and carbines on the front line.  You'd be getting M4 levels of firepower in a P90 sized weapon with 20 additional rounds per mag.

If the guys in the white lab coats make the right propellant advancements, that would be possible and totally sweet.

Quoted: The 9mm armor piercing rounds fired by their pseudoSMGs is 9x39mm. It's a 7.62x39 case necked up to 9mm. We don't domestically manufacture anything chambered in this caliber, AFAIK.

You're thinking of the suppressed rifles in 9x39. No subgun is chambered in x39.

There have been numerous improvements in propellant design, but even the best seem to add only a few hundred feet per second.  Of course, they reduce pressure heat and fouling at the same time.

<---Wants some hybrid powder.

Quoted: Quoted: The Russians also used vacuum tubes in their aircraft and pencils for their space program. In the West, we throw money at a problem, and want a sexy, sexy solution. And the vacuum tubes made their aircraft less susceptible to EMP than our own and their pencils cost nothing while we literally spent millions on a pen that could write on glass in zero gravity. Keep It Simple, Stupid. Go with what works, not the latest new gadget that looks cool.

urban legends. Dork.

Quoted: Quoted: The 9mm armor piercing rounds fired by their pseudoSMGs is 9x39mm. It's a 7.62x39 case necked up to 9mm. We don't domestically manufacture anything chambered in this caliber, AFAIK. You're thinking of the suppressed rifles in 9x39. No subgun is chambered in x39.

That's why I said pseudo-SMG. What other armor-piercing 9mm round do the Russians make?

Quoted: Quoted: Texas, that SWAT team does OK. What they relly didn't like was how the guns beat themselves to death suppressed, and how the ammo is so expensive that FN told them "It's OK, these guns are so easy to shoot that you won't have to practice as often." Now that last one I hadn't heard before. That's out of .

I am sure that the SWAT team is very good.  I'm not trying to put them down at all.  The P90 is a great idea on paper and a fun toy for the range.  It cannot replace the M4 in a CQB role without a calibre change.

I am just pointing out that even the most proven rounds still do weird stuff sometimes.

I really wish that the no recoil=no need to practice.  It would make life much more simple.

Quoted: Quoted: Why do we have the P-90 and MP-7 when there are better solutions? Their calibers are just glorified .22's with poor lethality (proven in the field), despite their soft-armor penetrating abilities. The Russians, meanwhile, haven't had to spend much effort on getting weapons that seem better suited to anti-personnel work. SMG's in 7.62 Tokarev have better range and penetration than most pistol calibers, while having the virtue of a .30-caliber bullet instead of a .22. And now their SMG's and pistols use a special 9mm round that is higher-powered than most and uses armor-piercing rounds to punch through soft armor. We use 9mm in our pistols and SMG's, and the same AP ammo the Russians use would work in our guns, so why not use it instead of spending money on all-new guns with an entirely different caliber? An MP-5 is just as compact as a P-90, and with AP ammo it'll penetrate soft armor just as well as the 5.7 AP round, but with a bigger hole. And unlike the P-90, you can carry and fire the MP-5 one-handed if necessary, something made quite awkward thanks to the P-90's shape. The 9mm armor piercing rounds fired by their pseudoSMGs is 9x39mm. It's a 7.62x39 case necked up to 9mm. We don't domestically manufacture anything chambered in this caliber, AFAIK.

Incorrect. The PP-19-01 and Bizon PP-19 use 7N21 9x19mm AP ammunition. You're thinking of a proprietary silenced rifle caliber that the Russians use. Their GSh-18 pistol, chambered for 9x19mm, also uses AP ammo, the 9mm 7N21 AP ammo used in their SMG's and a 9mm PBP AP round developed specifically for the pistol. Two types of hot-loaded armor-piercing rounds for 9x19mm handguns and SMG's. 7N21 and PBP are both noted to be equivelent to 9mm +P+ or higher, making them very hot rounds before you factor in the AP bullets.

And to say that the Russians can neck a 7.62x39mm case up to 9mm and we can't is the height of stupidity.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Why do we have the P-90 and MP-7 when there are better solutions? Their calibers are just glorified .22's with poor lethality (proven in the field), despite their soft-armor penetrating abilities. The Russians, meanwhile, haven't had to spend much effort on getting weapons that seem better suited to anti-personnel work. SMG's in 7.62 Tokarev have better range and penetration than most pistol calibers, while having the virtue of a .30-caliber bullet instead of a .22. And now their SMG's and pistols use a special 9mm round that is higher-powered than most and uses armor-piercing rounds to punch through soft armor. We use 9mm in our pistols and SMG's, and the same AP ammo the Russians use would work in our guns, so why not use it instead of spending money on all-new guns with an entirely different caliber? An MP-5 is just as compact as a P-90, and with AP ammo it'll penetrate soft armor just as well as the 5.7 AP round, but with a bigger hole. And unlike the P-90, you can carry and fire the MP-5 one-handed if necessary, something made quite awkward thanks to the P-90's shape. The 9mm armor piercing rounds fired by their pseudoSMGs is 9x39mm. It's a 7.62x39 case necked up to 9mm. We don't domestically manufacture anything chambered in this caliber, AFAIK. Incorrect. The PP-19-01 and Bizon PP-19 use 7N21 9x19mm AP ammunition. You're thinking of a proprietary silenced rifle caliber that the Russians use. Their GSh-18 pistol, chambered for 9x19mm, also uses AP ammo, the 9mm 7N21 AP ammo used in their SMG's and a 9mm PBP AP round developed specifically for the pistol. Two types of hot-loaded armor-piercing rounds for 9x19mm handguns and SMG's. 7N21 and PBP are both noted to be equivelent to 9mm +P+ or higher, making them very hot rounds before you factor in the AP bullets. And to say that the Russians can neck a 7.62x39mm case up to 9mm and we can't is the height of stupidity.

When did I ever say that we couldn't possibly make such a round?

I said that we don't domestically manufacture anything in that caliber. Reading comprehension...

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: It is my understanding the P90 and MP7 were designed to be used by people who normally do not use firearms in their duties, IE supply and file clerks in the rear who are not accustomed to the recoil of a "real" gun. CIA field operators like them, add a suppressor and the little MP7 is a lightweight CQB weapon that is very accurate inside of 100 meters. You talk a lot about the CIA.  A little too much.

What color is the schoolhouse at Langley?

Quoted: Quoted: The 9mm armor piercing rounds fired by their pseudoSMGs is 9x39mm. It's a 7.62x39 case necked up to 9mm. We don't domestically manufacture anything chambered in this caliber, AFAIK. You're thinking of the suppressed rifles in 9x39. No subgun is chambered in x39.

I have given serious thought to the idea of a 9x35mm cartridge, with the cartridge dimensions being based on .308 or .30-'06 (more powder capacity in a short overall length).  Such a cartridge would be nice in a short-barreled AR10.  I chose .308 or .30-'06 brass (in this application, either would do) as the basis because it is rather commonly available and easy to work with; the cartridge cases could be easily manufactured by anyone with a supply of brass, the tools to cut the brass, and the ability to size the brass (dies would have to be produced).  

Performance would probably fall somewhere between .357 Maximum and .35 Remington.  9x35 would be to .35 Remington as 7.62x39 is to .30-30 in ballistic performance.  I've been thinking of something along the lines of a 158gr .357 bullet with a muzzle velocity of 2000 FPS.  By my calculations, recoil in a weapon roughly the same size and weight of a M4 would be like that of 7.62x39 or 6.8x43 SPC.  Might very well make for a nice short-range autoloading deer cartridge, too.  

Ballistically, the same performance could be arrived at with a 9x45 cartridge (5.56 brass necked up to 9mm), and 9x45 would probably make more sense in an AR15 or M16.  You'd just need a new barrel and modifed mags (in this case, a straight 30 round mag).  Take a 20-round mag and find some way to make it long enough to hold 30 rounds.  

It wouldn't be hard to modify an AK to take 9x39, if 9x39 were available in the US.  You'd need a new barrel and possibly different magazines.  A person would have to neck up 7.62x39 brass and handload the cartridges here in the US.  I'd recommend a diameter of .357 or .358 rather than .355 because of the availability of suitable projectiles.  I don't know of any load data for 9x39 floating around (I have looked, but I haven't found), so an experienced handloader would have to engage in some carefully controlled experimentation.  

I think cartridges of this type would be outstanding in short-barreled AR's, like the Commando with a 10.5" barrel as they would not depend on fragmentation for terminal effectiveness.  Cartridges like this will most likely have a point-blank range somewhere around 200 yards, which is roughly equal in effective range to the .30 Carbine.  

I made a drawing of what I think a 9x35mm cartridge would look like:  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The 9mm armor piercing rounds fired by their pseudoSMGs is 9x39mm. It's a 7.62x39 case necked up to 9mm. We don't domestically manufacture anything chambered in this caliber, AFAIK. You're thinking of the suppressed rifles in 9x39. No subgun is chambered in x39. I have given serious thought to the idea of a 9x35mm cartridge, with the cartridge dimensions being based on .308 or .30-'06 (more powder capacity in a short overall length).  Such a cartridge would be nice in a short-barreled AR10.  I chose .308 or .30-'06 brass (in this application, either would do) as the basis because it is rather commonly available and easy to work with; the cartridge cases could be easily manufactured by anyone with a supply of brass, the tools to cut the brass, and the ability to size the brass (dies would have to be produced).   Performance would probably fall somewhere between .357 Maximum and .35 Remington.  9x35 would be to .35 Remington as 7.62x39 is to .30-30 in ballistic performance.  I've been thinking of something along the lines of a 158gr .357 bullet with a muzzle velocity of 2000 FPS.  By my calculations, recoil in a weapon roughly the same size and weight of a M4 would be like that of 7.62x39 or 6.8x43 SPC.  Might very well make for a nice short-range autoloading deer cartridge, too.   Ballistically, the same performance could be arrived at with a 9x45 cartridge (5.56 brass necked up to 9mm), and 9x45 would probably make more sense in an AR15 or M16.  You'd just need a new barrel and modifed mags (in this case, a straight 30 round mag).  Take a 20-round mag and find some way to make it long enough to hold 30 rounds.   It wouldn't be hard to modify an AK to take 9x39, if 9x39 were available in the US.  You'd need a new barrel and possibly different magazines.  A person would have to neck up 7.62x39 brass and handload the cartridges here in the US.  I'd recommend a diameter of .357 or .358 rather than .355 because of the availability of suitable projectiles.  I don't know of any load data for 9x39 floating around (I have looked, but I haven't found), so an experienced handloader would have to engage in some carefully controlled experimentation.   I think cartridges of this type would be outstanding in short-barreled AR's, like the Commando with a 10.5" barrel as they would not depend on fragmentation for terminal effectiveness.  Cartridges like this will most likely have a point-blank range somewhere around 200 yards, which is roughly equal in effective range to the .30 Carbine.   I made a drawing of what I think a 9x35mm cartridge would look like:   i18.photobucket.com/albums/b101/Bob_2002/9x35mm.jpg

It's an interesting concept. Do you think you could market it? What would be the application of such a cartridge?

Why bother?  .338 Spectre.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The 9mm armor piercing rounds fired by their pseudoSMGs is 9x39mm. It's a 7.62x39 case necked up to 9mm. We don't domestically manufacture anything chambered in this caliber, AFAIK. You're thinking of the suppressed rifles in 9x39. No subgun is chambered in x39. I have given serious thought to the idea of a 9x35mm cartridge, with the cartridge dimensions being based on .308 or .30-'06 (more powder capacity in a short overall length).  Such a cartridge would be nice in a short-barreled AR10.  I chose .308 or .30-'06 brass (in this application, either would do) as the basis because it is rather commonly available and easy to work with; the cartridge cases could be easily manufactured by anyone with a supply of brass, the tools to cut the brass, and the ability to size the brass (dies would have to be produced).   Performance would probably fall somewhere between .357 Maximum and .35 Remington.  9x35 would be to .35 Remington as 7.62x39 is to .30-30 in ballistic performance.  I've been thinking of something along the lines of a 158gr .357 bullet with a muzzle velocity of 2000 FPS.  By my calculations, recoil in a weapon roughly the same size and weight of a M4 would be like that of 7.62x39 or 6.8x43 SPC.  Might very well make for a nice short-range autoloading deer cartridge, too.   Ballistically, the same performance could be arrived at with a 9x45 cartridge (5.56 brass necked up to 9mm), and 9x45 would probably make more sense in an AR15 or M16.  You'd just need a new barrel and modifed mags (in this case, a straight 30 round mag).  Take a 20-round mag and find some way to make it long enough to hold 30 rounds.   It wouldn't be hard to modify an AK to take 9x39, if 9x39 were available in the US.  You'd need a new barrel and possibly different magazines.  A person would have to neck up 7.62x39 brass and handload the cartridges here in the US.  I'd recommend a diameter of .357 or .358 rather than .355 because of the availability of suitable projectiles.  I don't know of any load data for 9x39 floating around (I have looked, but I haven't found), so an experienced handloader would have to engage in some carefully controlled experimentation.   I think cartridges of this type would be outstanding in short-barreled AR's, like the Commando with a 10.5" barrel as they would not depend on fragmentation for terminal effectiveness.  Cartridges like this will most likely have a point-blank range somewhere around 200 yards, which is roughly equal in effective range to the .30 Carbine.   I made a drawing of what I think a 9x35mm cartridge would look like:   i18.photobucket.com/albums/b101/Bob_2002/9x35mm.jpg It's an interesting concept. Do you think you could market it? What would be the application of such a cartridge?

As for me marketing it, I don't really have the background or the resources.  Just an idea I came up with one day. The goal is to improve the terminal performance of short-barreled rifles at ranges of 200 yards and below, while retaining an armor-piercing capability with AP bullets.  The idea is to create a useful general-purpose SBR cartridge that can do a little bit of everything with the correct bullet choice under 200 yards.  

This is a cartridge concept offering respectable terminal ballistics, controllable recoil and the ability to penetrate many forms of body armor with the right bullets, all in a format that could be made to work in existing weapons with modification.  I would expect wounding potential to at least be on par with .357 Magnum when fired from a rifle-length barrel.  

With a muzzle velocity of 2000 fps and a velocity of about 1150 fps at 200 yards, good expansion of 158 gr. JHP's and JSP is practically certain.  Muzzle energy would be about 1403 foot pounds, and energy at 200 yards would be about 470 foot pounds; more than enough for many applications.  Most deer-sized game is taken at around 75 yards, energy at that distance would be about 900 foot-pounds; quite sufficient to get the job done.  

I would never intend for a cartridge like this to replace conventional rifle cartridges, but I think it would make a worthy supplement.  This cartridge would be outstanding for military CQB and PDW use.  Civilians could use a semi-auto carbine in such a caliber for survival, hunting or self-defense.  Police could use the same carbine as a patrol rifle, and the usefulness for LE tactical operations should be easy to see.  

All the cartridge components currently exist, are relatively common and are not proprietary in nature.  Can't say that for many other PDW cartridges.  It is possible that some new dies and tooling might have to be made, as well as conversion parts for firearms, though everything could be based off of existing items.  

As said before, 9x45 would make more sense in AR15's as there would be no need to change the bolt because necked-up 5.56 brass could be used.  A 20-round mag would probably be able to feed this cartridge, and a 30-round mag could be had by simply making a longer version of the 20-round mag.  The magazines may need a modified follower to handle the wider bullet, and a new barrel is an obvious requirement in any case.  

9x35 would work for AR10-type SBR's and other rifles and carbines using a similar-sized bolt face.  9x35 could be adapted to work in an AK, but it would probably make more sense to just neck up 7.62x39.  Any way you go about it, similar ballistic performance can be obtained.  

Quoted: Why bother?  .338 Spectre.

I just looked it up.  Looks like it'll do the kinds of things I was talking about in earlier posts.  I hadn't heard of this cartridge before.  Thanks for posting !  

Why not just use one of these? Rifle caliber, compact package.


Each weapon system is a tool designed for a specific task, use the weapon that fits the task you are wanting to do.  PDWs weren't made to be used all the time, they usually fill the role that was filled by a pistol.  One thing you aren't taking into consideration is the fact that the P90 has alot more bullets than the MP5. It is also shorter, lighter, and ambidextrous.

And the P90 has a safety that is difficult to use, the sight is worthless, and changing magazines requires three hands.

Quoted: And the P90 has a safety that is difficult to use, the sight is worthless, and changing magazines requires three hands.

Agree on all points.  Also, as a left-handed shooter, bullpups wouldn't work out so great for me.  Even with a bullpup that ejects down, transitioning the weapon from shoulder to shoulder is likely to be slower and more diffcult than with a weapon using a conventional layout.  

From a military standpoint, bullpups would be more difficult to maneuver and rather clumsy if they had to be used as a melee impact weapon in close quarters.  And with all that plastic, it's virtually guaranteed that you'll damage the weapon if you use it as an impact weapon.  

Look at the picture of the MagPul above.  I see a lot of cracks in that plastic.    I realize that that is just a prototype, but all those cracks can't be a good thing.  

Quoted: Each weapon system is a tool designed for a specific task, use the weapon that fits the task you are wanting to do.  PDWs weren't made to be used all the time, they usually fill the role that was filled by a pistol.  One thing you aren't taking into consideration is the fact that the P90 has alot more bullets than the MP5. It is also shorter, lighter, and ambidextrous.

exactly. the p90 was orginally to fill a void for artillery, vehicle and tank crews, something that gave an edge over armor than a pistol or pistol caliber smg but something that they were only going to use %5 of the time.

Quoted: Quoted: Each weapon system is a tool designed for a specific task, use the weapon that fits the task you are wanting to do.  PDWs weren't made to be used all the time, they usually fill the role that was filled by a pistol.  One thing you aren't taking into consideration is the fact that the P90 has alot more bullets than the MP5. It is also shorter, lighter, and ambidextrous. exactly. the p90 was orginally to fill a void for artillery, vehicle and tank crews, something that gave an edge over armor than a pistol or pistol caliber smg but something that they were only going to use %5 of the time.

Made to be carried a lot and shot a little, and likely to get the user killed if he ever has to use one in actual combat, especially against OPFOR armed with automatic rifles.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Each weapon system is a tool designed for a specific task, use the weapon that fits the task you are wanting to do.  PDWs weren't made to be used all the time, they usually fill the role that was filled by a pistol.  One thing you aren't taking into consideration is the fact that the P90 has alot more bullets than the MP5. It is also shorter, lighter, and ambidextrous. exactly. the p90 was orginally to fill a void for artillery, vehicle and tank crews, something that gave an edge over armor than a pistol or pistol caliber smg but something that they were only going to use %5 of the time. Made to be carried a lot and shot a little, and likely to get the user killed if he ever has to use one in actual combat, especially against OPFOR armed with automatic rifles.

but then again if your in a tank, you better hope all that OPFOR has is automatic rifles...again it was made to fill a void, whether it does it successfully or not only time will tell....so far it doesn't look to good.

That is a prototype made from a cheaper plasic than the production model will be.

that magpul bullpup is sweet.  However, I wonder why they went with that funky thumb-hole thingy in the front instead of a traditional VFG.

Quoted: that magpul bullpup is sweet.  However, I wonder why they went with that funky thumb-hole thingy in the front instead of a traditional VFG.

Probably to decrease the likelihood of snagging on the user's LBE, sling or other gear.  Sometimes, VFG's get caught on things.  

Quoted: From a military standpoint, bullpups would be more difficult to maneuver and rather clumsy if they had to be used as a melee impact weapon in close quarters.  And with all that plastic, it's virtually guaranteed that you'll damage the weapon if you use it as an impact weapon.

The AUG stock is probably the sturdiest plastic stock I have ever seen. I have no doubts that it would make an effective bludgeoning instrument and not break in the process.

Now, it would probably be clumsy to use as such, but it's not going to be damaged.

Quoted: that magpul bullpup is sweet.  However, I wonder why they went with that funky thumb-hole thingy in the front instead of a traditional VFG.

Mr. Fitzpatrick likes the ergonomics of the P90.

Quoted: Quoted: that magpul bullpup is sweet.  However, I wonder why they went with that funky thumb-hole thingy in the front instead of a traditional VFG. Mr. Fitzpatrick likes the ergonomics of the P90.

I do too, I just wish the 5.7 cartridge wasn't so goofy.

Quoted: Hell a Commando Length M4 > P90 and it still retains mag commality.

...which is where piston ARs might come in real handy. Piston designs tend to be more reliable in really short configurations....thus with the right piston setup you could have a very compact little weapon that has all the benefits of a PDW while retaining all the benefits of a weapon in 5.56.

Quoted: Mr. Fitzpatrick likes the ergonomics of the P90.

I've never understood the ergos on the P90....It feels like you have to twist your fingers in knots to hold the darn thing.

I think H&K has a better layout with their MP7.

Quoted: Why not just use one of these? Rifle caliber, compact package. www.defensereview.com/stories/magpul/Magpul%20PDR_2.jpg Each weapon system is a tool designed for a specific task, use the weapon that fits the task you are wanting to do.  PDWs weren't made to be used all the time, they usually fill the role that was filled by a pistol.  One thing you aren't taking into consideration is the fact that the P90 has alot more bullets than the MP5. It is also shorter, lighter, and ambidextrous.

What kind of Rifle is that??? Nevermind- Magpul PDR. I think I'll take one of those.

You know, it's pretty easy to make SMG's with 50-round magazines. Calico 9mm rifles and pistols have 50 and 100-round helical magazines. Bizon 9mm SMG's have 64-round helical magazines (the 7.62 Tok version has 45-round helical mags and can use the stick magazines from the PPSh-41/PPS-43). The Spectre M4 in 9mm has 50-round box magazines that don't take up much more space than a regular 30-round mag because they're quad-stack instead of double-stack.

The P-90 holding fifty rounds isn't special. We can do the same shit with a modern SMG easily. But really, since we argue with anti-gunners "what's the difference if he shoots someone with a 20-round magazine or two 10-round magazines" all the time, what's the real difference between a 50-round magazine and two 30-round magazines stuck together for rapid reloads? You don't NEED a huge-capacity magazine (except I'll argue that with the P-90, the more lead you throw at the bad guy, the better the chance you'll do something besides piss him off. ) and they often have reliability issues anyway. For most applications, a simple 30-round magazine will work just fine.

Quoted: Why not just use one of these? Rifle caliber, compact package. www.defensereview.com/stories/magpul/Magpul%20PDR_2.jpg Each weapon system is a tool designed for a specific task, use the weapon that fits the task you are wanting to do.  PDWs weren't made to be used all the time, they usually fill the role that was filled by a pistol.  One thing you aren't taking into consideration is the fact that the P90 has alot more bullets than the MP5. It is also shorter, lighter, and ambidextrous.

Is it my imagination, or is the plastic receiver on that gun cracked to shit?

Quoted: Quoted: Why not just use one of these? Rifle caliber, compact package. www.defensereview.com/stories/magpul/Magpul%20PDR_2.jpg Each weapon system is a tool designed for a specific task, use the weapon that fits the task you are wanting to do.  PDWs weren't made to be used all the time, they usually fill the role that was filled by a pistol.  One thing you aren't taking into consideration is the fact that the P90 has alot more bullets than the MP5. It is also shorter, lighter, and ambidextrous. Is it my imagination, or is the plastic receiver on that gun cracked to shit?

It's a mock-up model that got crushed during shipment. It's not a real gun, nor is it made of the same materials that the real gun would be made from.

God i love P90 threads

I bet all the counterstrike servers empty out every time it is brought up here

Funny how 5.7 is now cheaper than .223.