Don't get me wrong as I think the rifle looks great as a whole, but the vids of the takedown make it look like a piece of junk.
I'm hope it is not the case, as I may try and get one.

I was surprised by how solid it feels actually. Watching the vids I had the same concern that it would feel like cheap flimsy sheet metal that would wobble etc but it's definitely a step up for keltec.

Not sure what "cobby" means.  Please explain.

Maybe cobbly? Like cobblestones? That's what I thought he said!

.
It breaks down alot like an AK as far as the components look disassembled. It never struck me as junky. The bolted together look takes a bit of getting used to but a close inspection reveal a solid build. Initially  anyway

I'm taking Cobby to mean cobbled together.

Ditto on "Cobbled"....where, with stone it can be a nice appearance...with other things...not so much.



 

I figure he is asking if the weapon is put together in a haphazard  fashion with expediency  and low cost being the main goals at the expense of quality. I would say that while the two halves of the lower being bolted together are a cost saving measure, I believe that durability was at the top of the list while designing and manufacturing and assembling this weapon. The lower is lined with steel where needed and reinforced.   The upper is all metal besides the handguard.

It looks(since I can't touch)like the grip of my xdm which is pretty good but now I also see "cobbled" as meaning half-assed, like duct taping two ammo cans together then slapping a label on it and dropping it off at the shipper!

Anyone look at Desert Tech precision bullpup's?  Theirs is a clam shell design that is bolted together in the same manner as Kel-Tec.  I haven't heard anyone bitch about their construction, in fact they even produce a 50BMG that is bolted together.  They are about to come out with the MDR that is a similar construction to the RDB.

Not really sure I see a correlation between a bolt rifle with a solid aluminum receiver covered by AI type skins vrs a rifle coming apart in two pieces with parts flopping around and held together with pins.

just sayn...

There are advantages and disadvantages to having a rifle having a solid chassis  or  being bolted together.

The FS2000 is bolted together and there are some parts that require the two haves to be split to replace, like the buffer or BCG latch.

The AUG has the two halves of the body ultrasonically welded together, but the design avoids having anything that can't be accessed after the chassis is assembled.

I don't think that by itself being bolted together is necessarily a bad design or a sign of cheapness. There are a lot of other ways sloppy design and manufacturing shows up.

AJ

"Aesthetically pleasing" to one can be horrendously ugly to another.  A lot of folks aren't old enough to remember much of the revulsion over the M16 back in the day over its appearance.  Whether a rifle chassis, stock, or frame is designed around a clamshell or otherwise, as long as the function, durability, and reliability is accomplished successfully, people's preference can reign supreme.  I only find it annoying when someone tries to dictate style and appearance to others in a one-size-style-fits-all manner.  Frankly, I think some of the motivation of negative commentary on many bullpups is based on AR entrenchment or even older traditionalism.  That's OK.  Just leave out the "soapbox" aspect and make it a real discussion.

On clamshell designed stocks...if they are designed to offer true service access without compromising the integrity of the weapon, I think that's awesome.  Those of you who are mechanically inclined and tend to perform many home and automotive repairs on your own, how many times have you cussed the designer/engineer of a particular device who assembled that device with no good way to access the necessary serviceable components?...like cars requiring a motor mount to be unbolted so the engine could be tilted a bit to access spark plugs.  The RDB appears to offer that nice, easy access to the innards.  If the durability and integrity of the gun holds out well, then I'm sure even a few Kel-Tec naysayers might even be impressed.

I dont see where you think this description even remotely describes the RDB.   Nothing flops around on this rifle... everything is solidly assembled and gives NO IMPRESSION of flopping.  The lower half is bolted together... but the lower doesnt do anything but hold a magazine and the trigger. The top half has no plastic besides the Hanguard.  It is ok to hate on Kel -tec because of a past experince...but to put out insinuated or  blatant falsehoods  does not do anybody a good service.

So, the rear half doesn't separate to give up the front, with the top flopping in the breeze?  Comparing this to a DT SRS is silly.  I have no ill towards the RDB, just calling it as I see It...

No flopping at all. Mine just lied there  like most metal objects. I imagine if I jostled the table enough it might have bounced around a little,  but that would happen with any upper on a sufficiently jostled table..... still hardly what can be considered  "flopping". Flopping requires a good bit of flexibility and/ or flaccidness . A live fish on dry land is a good example of independently powered flopping.

I am willing to conduct experiments to see if air movement can cause this alleged flopping. ... but I don't think a breeze is going to do it.... maybe a good 40 to 60 mph gust at just the right angle....

If you say so...  

I still see no resemblance to a DT SRS, or an AR15 for that matter.  

Wait, all 3 have bolts...  You got me...

All around the cobbly bench, the bullpup chased the weasel. All around the cobbly bench, this thread is too personal to remain feasable.