Opinon re Bull-pup Assault Rifles - Page 2

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Opinon re Bull-pup Assault Rifles (Page 2 of 2)

Posted: 8/8/2005 7:28:41 PM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:
Quoted:

Bullpup with a tristacked or quadstacked mag (50-60 rounds per mag) and a HBAR type barrel. Would elminate need for a SAW.

what if your saw gunner is laying in a pile of his own intestines screaming for his mother because a grenade blew him to shit and his saw looks like a slinky it is alwaysbetter to have a thing and not need it than to need a thing and not have it. Bullpup weapons with the exception of the FN2000 are not as usefull all the time as regular rifles are. try joining the military and doing MOUT work you have to position your weapon in all kinds of strange angles. I dont want to worry about a face full of brass when I should be worrying about engaging enemy soldiers

Not to mention that a bullpup (or any rifle) with extra magazines (quadstacked or not) and a heavier barrel does NOT a SAW make.

Posted: 8/8/2005 8:31:36 PM EDT

[#2]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v379/kbi/SHOT0520016.jpg

Neither one does it for me.

Posted: 8/8/2005 8:37:39 PM EDT

[#3]

They feel way too awkward. The magazine well behind the pistol grip is what did it for me.

Posted: 8/8/2005 8:39:55 PM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
Quoted:
fs2000, already got mine preorderd. But its gonna come in a goofy color

www.impactguns.com/store/media/fn_f2000.jpg

I have already talked to FN and had the info back at the end of janurary, they where originally to be in the OD only... flattop and also called "sporter" version or something goofy like that.

Posted: 8/8/2005 8:42:07 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
Quoted:
fs2000, already got mine preorderd. But its gonna come in a goofy color

That's what they make spray paint for brother!
~Dg84

Thinking of the option, Also hoping some one comes up with a dying idea like was done with the SL8 and USC. Either way its a sweet gun.

Posted: 8/8/2005 8:45:46 PM EDT

[#6]

Debating what provides suffficient firepower for a squad is different than arguing the differences between a automatic rifle and a light machine gun. As a squad automatic rifle, a heavy barrel automatic rifle is what they all used to be. A BAR, a Bren etc were all magazine fed automatic rifles. There are many "automatic rifle" versions of current Assault Rifles, the MG36, the Canadians have a version of the M16 with a heavy barrel-which might even been easily removable. The M249 is more light machine gun because its belt fed. The reason for modern disfavor of magazine fed SAWs are that they don't provide sustained firepower like a saw can with a belt. You have to reload to often with 30rd mags. If the entire squad has 50 or 60 rounds per mag and can fire longer bursts due to a heavier barrel then the need for a belt fed LMG in the role as a SAW is not really needed. The reloading time would be haved plus if the entire fireteam has what amounts to a automatic rifle then the differences are even less.

Posted: 8/9/2005 4:29:41 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Just fyi...there WERE pics in my post above

Mine too. I even previewed it to make sure...

Posted: 8/9/2005 4:45:15 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
fs2000, already got mine preorderd. But its gonna come in a goofy color

www.impactguns.com/store/media/fn_f2000.jpg

I have already talked to FN and had the info back at the end of janurary, they where originally to be in the OD only... flattop and also called "sporter" version or something goofy like that.

WTF? Ya got a source on that? (that I can personally refer to)

I was thinking of getting one when it came out, but now that I can't get it new with integrated optics, there's no way in hell I'd get one. I don't want a gun that a company went cheapo on, and then pussified it further when BBL and OAL, and COLOR were enough to satisfy legal requirements (I basically want it out of the box just like it's offered to the military, sans happy-switch).

BTW, I've got an M17s. I've added a foregrip and red-dot sight. It's an awesome little gun; only REAL problems with it are the lack of ventelation up front and the left-side mag release (the left-side release sticks because it was never REALLY designed to be operated like that).
It's not very photogenic, it looks much better in real life than it does in the photo on BM's website.

Posted: 8/9/2005 5:08:26 AM EDT

[#9]

mcantu the photo you have labeled SAR21 over on page two...isnt a SAR 21
I demo SAR21's to police department here in the states..the ejection port is far enough forward that it can be fired from either shoulder with no modification or problems..also has Kaboom shielding in the stock.
Here is a pic of a Ultimax MKIII LMG and three SAR21 variations

and another of the SAR21/M203

Posted: 8/9/2005 5:57:44 AM EDT

[#10]

pillbox,
This isnt an SAR-21?

world.guns.ru/assault/as31-e.htm

Posted: 8/9/2005 3:37:54 PM EDT

[#11]

ooops my bad, could have sworn that you had the pic of the chinese type 95 labeled as a SAR21

Posted: 8/9/2005 3:58:57 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
(I basically want it out of the box just like it's offered to the military, sans happy-switch).

Then prepare to spend upwards of $3000 for it. That's not a cheapy optic on the .mil version.

It's not marketable to civies with the optic because nobody would buy it at the price they'd have to charge.

Posted: 8/9/2005 4:02:17 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
fs2000, already got mine preorderd. But its gonna come in a goofy color

www.impactguns.com/store/media/fn_f2000.jpg

I have already talked to FN and had the info back at the end of janurary, they where originally to be in the OD only... flattop and also called "sporter" version or something goofy like that.

WTF? Ya got a source on that? (that I can personally refer to)

I was thinking of getting one when it came out, but now that I can't get it new withintegrated optics, there's no way in hell I'd get one. I don't want a gun that a company went cheapo on, and then pussified it further when BBL and OAL, and COLOR were enough to satisfy legal requirements (I basically want it out of the box just like it's offered to the military, sans happy-switch).

BTW, I've got an M17s. I've added a foregrip and red-dot sight. It's an awesome little gun; only REAL problems with it are the lack of ventelation up front and the left-side mag release (the left-side release sticks because it was never REALLY designed to be operated like that).
It's not very photogenic, it looks much better in real life than it does in the photo on BM's website.

A FN rep some one who would know their shit about FN new offerings

I could be wrong but I do not belive the f2000 comes with integrated optics, I belive those are a pretty penny to add.

Posted: 8/9/2005 7:12:52 PM EDT

[#14]

The .mil sight has things like a laser rangefinder in it

Posted: 8/9/2005 7:18:17 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
Debating what provides suffficient firepower for a squad is different than arguing the differences between a automatic rifle and a light machine gun. As a squad automatic rifle, a heavy barrel automatic rifle is what they all used to be. A BAR, a Bren etc were all magazine fed automatic rifles. There are many "automatic rifle" versions of current Assault Rifles, the MG36, the Canadians have a version of the M16 with a heavy barrel-which might even been easily removable. The M249 is more light machine gun because its belt fed. The reason for modern disfavor of magazine fed SAWs are that they don't provide sustained firepower like a saw can with a belt. You have to reload to often with 30rd mags. If the entire squad has 50 or 60 rounds per mag and can fire longer bursts due to a heavier barrel then the need for a belt fed LMG in the role as a SAW is not really needed. The reloading time would be haved plus if the entire fireteam has what amounts to a automatic rifle then the differences are even less.

You need a lot of rounds for a light round. A light machinegun doesn't provide the same kind of power as a heavier more conventional machineguns so it makes up for it in volume. That would be the major drawback to a bullpup being used to fill that role. A magazine doesn't load with the same speed as a belt. That's why with the m249 you're instructed to be careful in using very short bursts when using magazines. The magazines won't allow for the volume. And even a 50 round magazine won't provide the sustained volume essential for the light round.

Posted: 8/9/2005 8:13:57 PM EDT

[#16]

Yea but wouldn't the other members of the team/squad having the same ability in the weapon make up for it? I'm not saying replace the two LMG's with bullpup/50rd but replace all teams weapons with it.

Posted: 8/9/2005 8:42:33 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:

Uh, yes please!

Now all they need is a free float barrel, downward eject and that will be a perfect rifle.

Posted: 8/9/2005 8:47:43 PM EDT

[#18]

I like mine:

Posted: 8/9/2005 9:07:36 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Yea but wouldn't the other members of the team/squad having the same ability in the weapon make up for it? I'm not saying replace the two LMG's with bullpup/50rd but replace all teams weapons with it.

The point you're basically coming close to is an upgrade of the standard rifle that still won't replace the medium-to-heavy machinegunners. I think we need a better design than the bullpup though. Heavier barrel, larger magazines, etc. is making good points for the next rifle though. Could this compensate instead of using a larger round?

Some good ideas now that I get what you're referring to. I don't agree with the bullpup platform but a larger standard-issue mag and heavier barrel might be the improvement we need? Something to think about I guess.

Posted: 8/9/2005 9:29:35 PM EDT

[#20]

I don't get it. A larger capacity magazine will probably make the rifle unwieldy. Maybe my 20rounder in my M-4 was spoiling me, but I think the 30 is pushing it as it is. Going to a larger calibre at the same time will make capacity even more of an issue.

There are bullpups available with heavier barrels, that's not an issue in itself. (The L86 and the AUG SF come to mind)

Assume a forward eject, and where's the catch?

NTM

Posted: 8/11/2005 4:08:57 PM EDT

[#21]

Well the AUG also has a 42 round mag

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Opinon re Bull-pup Assault Rifles (Page 2 of 2)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us