hope it's not a dupe

anarchangel.blogspot.com/2005/03/why-bullpups-are-persistently-bad-idea.html

what does everyone think?  i must admit that the author makes some good points, but i disagree with his statement that a 7-8" shorter OAL isn't a big enough benefit to make some sacrifice in terms or ergonomics or mag change speed.

opinions are like assholes

try them, if you dont like them, dont use them.

Nice.  Good info.  

I think it makes perfect sense.

Bullpups offer shorter over-all length as an advantage.  That is it.

Gimme the M4 any day of the week.  

Opinions are like assholes---Everyone has an opinion--- so that make me--- yup, an asshole, Thank you very much!!  That is:  'Mister Redneck asshole' to y'all!!! Hee hee!  ---- By the way, I likes my AUG, 'cause it got more BLING! Yo.!

I don't feel like dissecting his article, but most of his comments are BS, at least as far as the AUG is concerned.

Quoted: I don't feel like dissecting his article, but most of his comments are BS, at least as far as the AUG is concerned.

you don't have to dissect the whole thing, but can you explain why you think it's BS in just a couple sentences?  i'd really like to hear your reasoning.  (not trying to be sarcastic here, i just really want to learn more)

He says that the mag on a bullpup makes it hard to fire from the prone position because its the lowest point of the rifle.  Bull...and the mag isnt the lowest part on an AR?

He says that they are balanced un-naturally.  Wrong...the point of balance on my AUG is right at the pistol grip.  You could fire it one handed with no problems

He says "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 with your support hand."  Wrong...i can charge the AUG while its still mounted on my shoulder and looking through the sight.  Can you do that with an AR?

What it sounds like to me is someone that was conditioned using conventional rifles and bullpups are just too different for him.  People who learn rifles on bullpups dont seem to have issues with them

Quoted: you don't have to dissect the whole thing, but can you explain why you think it's BS in just a couple sentences?  i'd really like to hear your reasoning.  (not trying to be sarcastic here, i just really want to learn more)

Although most of my practical experience has been with my M-17, I've got a little time playing with AUG (Irish Army) and L85s (British Army Exchange). As it's not a military rifle, I'll leave out the M17.

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

True, if exaggerated. Not that I would consider a single metal link rod to be 'mechanically complex'. Granted that the L85's auto/full selector is in an awkward position, but British military policy rarely recommends the use of full auto, except in situations where you will quite likely have sufficient advance notice to select it. (FISH, ambushes, etc). This issue doesn't even come up with the AUG, the semi/auto is decided by how you pull the trigger.

If a bullpup has a catastrophic failure, instead of the explosion being six or 8 inches in front of your eyes, its right at your eyesocket,

How many catastrophic failures have there been of bullpups? And how many people tend to be unharmed when a conventional rifle blows up? Pointless scaremongering.

Mag changes on a bullpup are much slower because they require more repositioning, and are difficult to see (if necessary) without fully dismounting the rifle.

I was amazed at how quickly I was changing the magazines in the L85 in exercises. Although I'm a definite bullpup supporter, mag changes are one area where I would conceed before even getting out the starting gate. The amount of time it took me to change a 30-round magazine on the L85 was about the same as makes no difference as the amount of time it takes me to do it on an M-16. And that's without my being practisced on it. Aug was a little slower, the British mag release is very easy to use. (Used to be too easy, until they modified it!)

The bit about the long magazine kindof threw me as well. An M-16's 30-round magazine's base is going to be exactly the same distance below the barrel as an L-85's 30-round magazine. I don't know what he's smoking.

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 with your support hand.

Let's see. M-16, raise head, release pistol grip, draw hand back, grasp handle, pull, release, return to pistol grip, replace head. L-85, release forward grip, reach over, pull back (No grasping required, the edge of the finger will work quite well), release, return to forward grip. I don't see the problem. Indeed, after having worked with left-side handles (FAL), right-side handles (L85) and center handles (M-16) I think I prefer the right side.

Bullpups are naturally balanced in a non-instinctive way
Bull. Only non-instinctive because he's not used to it. They certainly 'feel wrong' when you're not used to them, there's no doubt about it, but on the AUG, M-17 and L85, you can pretty much balance the rifle on the pistol grip. That's pretty good for me.

The only good thing about a bullpup is the short overall length in relation to their barrel length; and that is not advantage enough to outweigh the disadvantages for most missions.

A lot of mechanised riflemen would argue that point. The M-4 is proving in such high demand these days because people are realising that a full-length rifle is too big. But then, you lose the advantages of the 21" barrel.

Both the Enfield, and the FAMAS have proven to be rediculously unreliable, though at least the SA80 is quite accurate when it functions properly

The L85 is actually incredibly accurate, and by British accounts the A2 version functions as reliably as they could want. Most of the troops I encountered had very bad things to say about the A1, the same troops swear by the A2. Except for the really old-timers, who still think the L1 is a real rifle, not that 5.56mm pansy thing.

The enfield in fact is so poorly designed, that mounting it on your left shoulder will give you a black eye (and can break your cheekbone) and send hot brass and gasses flying into your eyes.
Don't shoot it from your left shoulder so. Besides, some bullpups as we well know, eject forwards and this is an irrelevant argument.

You also cant fire the thing from the left side of cover without exposign your whole head and torso.
As has also been mentioned many times as well, various competent authorities believe that even around the wrong side of cover, the rifle should not be fired weak-handed and that the correct answer is indeed to expose the whole head and upper torso.

Until someone has shot thousands of rounds through them, had to change mags in the dark, and in cramped conditions, had to clear jams under combat condtions etc... they can't know how unsuitable they are

Which by that argument implies that he can't know how suitable they are either.


Please note, that at 20", the gun would be extremely unweildy, and just plain uncomfortable. Your hands would be touching each other, with the muzzle just 2" or so in front of your support hand.

Hmm.. Although this expert believes that it's such a bad idea, the British have put exactly this weapon into production as a PDW. The muzzle is actually almost directly above the support hand, the carbine is so short, that they needed to put an extender onto the forward handgrip. Perhaps he needs to write to Bovington/Lulworth on the issue and set them straight. In the meantime, I'm jealous of the British tankers that have a more suitable defense weapon than I do.

For comparison, the shortest bullpup I can find is the walther G22, (in .22lr) at 28.5" with a 20" barrel.

Ah, that explains the above. The L85A2K has a 16" barrel, and a 20" length, give or take rounding errors from millimeters. This either dates his article, or he's not very thorough.

Given that, I think my 21" number as an absolute minimum is solid
Aha.. We have a position statement. An inch longer than I calculated for the L85A2K. Oops. Admittedly, however, he's ranting on about a .45ACP bullpup, which as he points out, is completely pointless.

Bascially, the man has preconceived prejudices. There's probably a reason most militaries are selecting a bullpup to be their new rifle, and I don't think it's just because it 'looks cool'

NTM

BULLPUPS RULE.
BEST USE OF SPACE.
LONGER BARREL IN A SHORTER PACKAGE.
BETTER ERGONOMICS AND ROOM FOR CUSTOM ERGONOMIC DESIGNS.

You're just pissed because you don't own an 'Aug or a FN FS2000.

NUFF SAID.


- rem

I will say that the mag release on the AUG sucks ass, and the condition is made worse by the stupid plastic thumbhole bits on the USR, but other than that it's an awesome rifle.

From what I read, the Brits are happy with the L85 series, after the last couple of refits. If only Bushmaster put some effort into the M17...

Opinions are like tires. And what goes up must come down, so dont cry wolf.

Or something like that.

Quoted: I will say that the mag release on the AUG sucks ass, and the condition is made worse by the stupid plastic thumbhole bits on the USR, but other than that it's an awesome rifle.

If you were in a free state, you could register your USR as a SBR, cut the barrel to 15.75" or so (just enough to make it NFA) and then put on a regular stock. Bingo, AUG A2 for half as much as the real deal.

Quoted: opinions are like assholes try them, if you dont like them, dont use them.

Opinions are like assholes,
If you don't have an opinion (or an asshole),
You are full of shit.  

If the L85s were so great, why did they need zee Germans (H&K) to fix them?

Quoted: If the L85s were so great, why did they need zee Germans (H&K) to fix them?

they tried to mass produce a hand fitted machine.

Quoted: Quoted: opinions are like assholes try them, if you dont like them, dont use them. Opinions are like assholes, If you don't have an opinion (or an asshole), You are full of shit.

Opinions are like assholes,
Everyone's got one,
And they all stink.

Quoted: Quoted: I don't feel like dissecting his article, but most of his comments are BS, at least as far as the AUG is concerned. you don't have to dissect the whole thing, but can you explain why you think it's BS in just a couple sentences?  i'd really like to hear your reasoning.  (not trying to be sarcastic here, i just really want to learn more)

- the worries about KBs are unfounded. if a KB happened, the magazine would blow out just like an AR, and the gases and such would vent out the ejection port which is on the opposite side of the stock from your head. the rifle wouldn't just explode

- magazine changes are a little slower. this is the one argument that bullpup bashers always bring up. it's a combat weapon, not an IPSC or 3-gun rifle. obsessing over 1-2 seconds of difference is silly

- the AUG is not "more complicated", it's actually much simpler, as well as easier to maintain. the barrel is quick detachable and replaceable by the user, so is the trigger pack. try that with your AR

- the charging handle on an AUG is actually much easier to manipulate than an AR, and it can be done without un-shouldering the rifle, from either side

- the AUG vents gas at the gas block, instead of from the ejection port and out the back of the receiver. much better than an AR especially left-handed

- the magazine doesn't stick out any further down that it does on an AR. not sure what his point was with that one


Hope that gives you an idea. The AUG is not perfect, no rifle is, but IMO it's closer than anything else so far.

As long as your right handed that's fine. Then again I guess once you shoot one round you'll probably figure that shooting it left handed isn't a good idea.  Hard to maintain a cheek weld when your cheek is flopping around on the operating rod.

Quoted: If the L85s were so great, why did they need zee Germans (H&K) to fix them?

Who the hell said they were so great, before HK fixed them?

Quoted: img22.imageshack.us/img22/6492/l85a2k3pg.jpg From what I read, the Brits are happy with the L85 series, after the last couple of refits. If only Bushmaster put some effort into the M17...

Is that a Maglite?

Quoted: Quoted: img22.imageshack.us/img22/6492/l85a2k3pg.jpg From what I read, the Brits are happy with the L85 series, after the last couple of refits. If only Bushmaster put some effort into the M17... Is that a Maglite?

Dunno. But is sure is awfully shiny...

Quoted: If the L85s were so great, why did they need zee Germans (H&K) to fix them?

Before it was fixed, it wasn't. That's not a fault of the basic design, just the execution. H&K properly executed, and the design works now.

NTM

Quoted: You're just pissed because you don't own an 'Aug or a FN FS2000. NUFF SAID. - rem

Too bad you're talking out your ass

This guy is wrong on nearly every point.

He is correct on the trigger linkage but that is about it.

Quoted: I will say that the mag release on the AUG sucks ass, and the condition is made worse by the stupid plastic thumbhole bits on the USR, but other than that it's an awesome rifle.

The mag release on an AUG is designed to be engaged with the mag you are going to replace it with.

Quoted: img22.imageshack.us/img22/6492/l85a2k3pg.jpg From what I read, the Brits are happy with the L85 series, after the last couple of refits. If only Bushmaster put some effort into the M17...

You are talking about people who are happy with a minimag-lite on the side of their guns.....

I am personally not a fan of bullpup designs. But that's just me, totally a personal thing.

However, I see no inherent problems with the design and anyone could be trained to use them just as well as any other weapon.