Is bullpup the best design and inevitable future of firearms?

I just had a thought. Why doesn't somebody make a telescoping bolt for the standard non-bullpup layout? That could be used to shorten the rifle's length because the bolt's length could be displaced forward, over and around the barrel, and need less room for the bolt to move backwards.

with training a soldier can himself perfect his technique that`s not a big problem when you take every thing to the table user

>benefits
You mean benefit. Singular.
>benefit
Longer barrel shorter gun.
Negatives:
>more expensive manufacturing
>worse trigger
>increased mechanical complexity, and therefore by default decreased reliability
>inferior ergonomics
I don't think we'll see any new military adoption of new bullpups in the next 20 years. In fact we'll see the opposite as the remaining holdouts ditch theirs for AR derivatives.

like the uzi? I think the main reason is the machining on the parts

>with training a soldier can himself perfect his technique
More training is a problem. More training is less field effectiveness, and more cost.

That would break easy and threading would be off.

>more expensive manufacturing
>worse trigger
>increased mechanical complexity
an good engineer can fix those problems,
they already started it won`t take long untill they perfect the concept user maximum 30 years user

I mean weapons familiarity and shooting sessions it won`t take more training than they already do it just means they will need to practice how to reload their rifles in a diferent way their dad and grandpa did

your move asshole

Attached: reeeeeeee.png (1000x583, 946K)

>an good engineer can fix those problems
Then why haven't they? Bullpups aren't new. The concept has been floating around for more than a hundred years. Countries have had them adopted for decades.
>hey already started
They started, and every major manufacturer did a complete 180 and are back to spend their R&D on traditional rifles.
>it won`t take long until they perfect the concept user maximum 30 years user
Wrong.
Wrong. There's a reason SF are all NOT using bullpups. Because they are inferior ergonomically.

And I'm sure someone said the same for powder boxes, direct blowback, rolling blocks, etc. But instead people found better alternatives. Do all those things still exist? Sure. But people moved on to better designs.

It shouldn't take 30 years to perfect any engineering problem in todays CAD and CNC world. You can simulate things and perfect geometry and stresses in simulation. Making a precise 1 off prototype isn't nearly as hard as it was 20 years ago. Any company with the CNC mills at their disposal can go through iterations of prototypes very quickly.

maybe you re right but as private gump said life`s like a chocolate box or something like that, you never know what you get

Alright retard, you sound

Would be much better to use a Sig MCX so you get rid ofbthe buffer tube. That AR bullpup has no advantage since it still has a buffer tube. That guy is retarded. With a MCX you could have your shoulder on the back of the receiver.

Attached: sig_mcx_10l_2.jpg (5184x3456, 533K)

The benefit of the ar15 buffer tube vs an ar18 derivative is the buffer tube gives a direct in line recoil impulse. They simply handle better when the pew pew starts.

And he runs the fuck away. Huh. Who'd have guessed.

nope, shut the fuck up

bullpups are a thing of the past

the AUG is a 70s design and if you think thats futuristic youre gonna be amazed when you find out whats in most peoples pocket every day.

the fact ching chongs are going back to standard rifles is proof enough bullpups arent good enough

they can serve a niche purpose but should not be standard infantry rifles.

Attached: 1547784132167.gif (720x480, 126K)

Yes. I own ARs. I agree.
But we are talking about bullpups. Bullpup AR with buffer tube is fucking retarded. All you do is gain a shitty trigger and keep the same length of gun. A MCX bullpup would at least make sense because it is shorter.

The only reason a telescoping bolt exists is to get extra mass in a blow back gun to slow the cycling down to allow chamber pressure to be safe for extraction. Any locking (multi-lug, tilting, flapper, roll, ect.) preforms the same task of delaying the opening of the action; therefore this would be useless on any conventional rife design.

I have said it before and I will say it again. Bullpups with 30 inch barrels for tungsten core 5500 fps fuck your plate carrier rounds are the future.

what if you were to use the gyroget hammer system? Where the hammer swings forward instead of backwards, then instead of your standard ar-15 buffer spring design, where the bolt slams into a plate, why not have 2/3 of the bolt sit INSIDE the spring and have a ring around the bolt, this way, there's literally nothing mechanical behind the magwell/ejection port, it can just be room for the bolt to slam back, want a pistol variant? drop in a tighter spring, and swap the stock, ill draw some god awful diagrams

Attached: gyro.jpg (286x176, 10K)

I think you would need an electronic trigger or something to fix the trigger issue.

I've always wantd to do an AK bullpup conversion but I'm a lefthanded abomination redpill me on this picture I drew and tell me why it's a bad idea. Call me an idiot and a faggot if you have to thanks.

Attached: lefthandedgrozavariant.jpg (900x675, 206K)

Ignore this, I forgot that a rear slamming hammer requires a fixed firing pin, unless I were to create some over engineered telescopic firing pin, that would have enough spring tension that it can set off a firing pin, but little enough to allow the casing to compress it and eject

I suppose I could over engineer the bolt so that when the round is slammed into the bolt it would release a firing pin, however that would leave the design open to the sigshit flaw of dropping = firing

>awkward reloading,
It's not, though.

Try doing it prone, a position soldiers often are in.

Only issue is that the charging handle is going to get extremely hot.

>standard ar-15 buffer spring design, where the bolt slams into a plate
>bolt slams into a plate
What?

>hot
This. The original AR-10 design had a similar charging handle. They swapped to the traditional AR-15 style charging handle because after a few magazines this would burn the fuck out of your hand. The gas piston on an AK gets super hot really fast.

Attached: jerryar1403.jpg (600x441, 66K)

No. The AR is the end of all significant firearms designs until we move beyond standard cartridges I think. May not be the absolute best performance wise but it's economic power is unstoppable.

If not being able to comfortably reload without taking your sight off target is the future then sure.

Attached: 1542053912955m.jpg (1024x378, 34K)

Prone reloading sucks with a bullpup, I say this as someone who owns and likes them

Bullpups with 30 inch barrels for tungsten core 5500 fps fuck your plate carrier rounds are the future.

Sure, if you want a 250 round barrel life. IIRC, 5500 fps is basically impossible with modern powders anyway.

Either way, it doesn't matter. Infantry rifles are not important enough in modern warfare to justify jacking up your entire procurement and logistics system. The M16/M4 are here to stay until someone makes something vastly superior, and I don't foresee that happening. Maybe (and that's a huge maybe) the LSAT program will be worth it, but that's just an ammunition upgrade. The modern infantry rifles is essentially a solved problem as far as big militaries are concerned.

we need p90 style mags for more pups desu. Imagine if they could function with 5.56 or 5.45

>The M16/M4 are here to stay until someone makes something vastly superior, and I don't foresee that happening.
SCAR demolishes it in every conceiveable metric

Yeah too bad it's expensive and the military is barely buying them because the minuscule upgrades aren't worth changing your standard service rifle for the millions of people in the US military. Kinda like OP said.

Except cost, weight, accuracy...

And magazine compatibility

its never going to be the best layout because smaller doesnt mean better.
the only reason you need a small gun is for shit like getting in and out of vehicles or doorways. this can be done just fine with a standard m4 or foldingstock ak.
you want a smaller gun for convenience and transportation but when it comes to shooting you want something large enough to hold comfortably while not being oversized or bulky. thats pretty much what a 10-14.5 inch ar is.

sometimes, Russia gets it soooo right

Attached: peach vss.jpg (513x1173, 119K)

Tldr:

>Why does no one use bullpups in competition? Because no competitions care about the lethality of the rounds fired. If you had a powerfactor rule that punished using shitty 14.5 inch barrels the way terminal ballistics do IRL, 20 inch barrel bullpups with 30 inch OAL would dominate over 14.5/30 inch conventional carbines and 20/36 inch conventional rifles.

>Why do SF not use bullpups?
Because the M4 got there first with a standardised rail system for optics and accessories and by the time other rifles managed to do it (~5-10 years later) all SF were already committed to M4 clones. USSOCOM were so shitty at the M4's crap reliability and lethality that they kicked off the SCAR program as soon as they started having to use the M4 in real combat. Colt mostly fixed the reliability (still no where near as good as a pistol AR like a AUG or 416), but the lethality is inherent. If you are non-US Western SF, you need to interoperate with USSOCOM at the individual level, so you want the same manual of arms, mags etc, so you're tied to whatever USSOCOM is using.

>Why are militaries moving away from bullpups?
No one refined bullpup designs much. People kept shitting out more and more refined AR15 derivatives because of the US consumer market, but you just didn't see the same bullpup development. Then the 416 comes along and the HK marketing juggernaught shills it. Just about the only exciting bullpups in the last gorrillion years are the EF88 and the new Tavor.

Attached: 56352743_10157253759253385_8763583912233402368_o.jpg (1200x859, 85K)

>the new Tavor.
i wonder who could be behind this post?

Cost and weight you're right about, but accuracy is sheer bullshit. Standard M4A1 PIP has horseshit accuracy. Sure you CAN make very accurate AR15s, like the MK12, but then claiming >cost and >weight starts to become bullshit.

>reloading
Speed reloads aren't relevant in the grand scheme of war

>trigger
See above

Imo the biggest advantage is the weight distribution when you start hanging 5 pounds of shit off the front.

An Australian who works in small arms design you absolute retard. You >>'d the wrong gun.

Attached: 55604930_2148922051850018_1701138865504387072_n.jpg (940x788, 58K)

Any idiot can build a 1 MOA AR in their basement for a few hundred bucks.

Yes, but that process doesn't scale, which is why the military pay a few g's on average per rifle for 2-4 MOA guns (depending on what procurement batch you're talking about).

I like how much of a retard you are that you ignored literally everything else in his post but shit your pants and screamed the moment someone said "tavor".
Rent fucking free, take your medication.

Tell them need to stop being virtue-signalling cunts and start exporting again Atrax again. As a leaf it’s my best shot at getting an AUG

Did they say they're not selling it to civilians in general or was it just Americans?

this right here is the ergonomic problem with bullpups
hands are too close together
red box on the ar is where you would be holding on a bullpup. magwell grip might be fine for some people. if magwells the only location to hold thats shit. majority of people want their other hand farther out.

then youve got length of pull
m4 can go shorter and fit more people bullpup starts at long then can only be extended more.
the korobov exists and could solve the lop issue but nobody understands its slav magic

im aware not all bullpups are augs but the location of the trigger from the butt and handguard space are roughly the same give or take an inch.

Attached: IMG_0800.jpg (1039x1600, 448K)

“No F-90 variants have been sold to non-government/civilian users either directly or through distributors,’’ he said.

“Lithgow Arms is Australia’s sovereign industrial capability in small arms design and development and will only sell semiautomatic and automatic rifles to military and law enforcement agencies,’’ it said.

So no semi-Atrax. Maybe a straight-pull that could be converted?

Fucking cuckolds. We need a local business to get a new pup manufactured, or maybe even designed and exported for Norinco to build.

most people aren't manlets like you.

>average global height is below 6'

manlets cant deal with the length of pull
big guys cant deal with the handguard location
its a shitty compromise for everyone

>including insectoid asian races in the global average

Are you retarded? Do you really think the military pays several thousand dollars per rifle?

>implying manlets cannot be any other race including white

>manlets
>human

>several
No. It's ~1100-1800 USD depending on the batch, and I know with certainty.

Oh look. Another bullpup tard thread. No, it's not catching on. Militaries that used bullpups are transitioning to using regular rifles again. Bullpups are dead.

>shit your pants and screamed
no u

Attached: burgeratitude.jpg (850x536, 78K)

People keep saying this but never provide source for the claim

How exactly do you know with certainty?

>humans
>worth a damn
Check 'em.

You are comparing where to hold a rifle. One rifle has most of its weight in your shoulder and can accurately and quickly be fired with only one hand on the weapon system. The other is a gun which is not balanced into you shoulder and typically requires two hands to be properly held and manipulated.

Congrats, you have the shittiest argument I have seen yet

>1 off

France just switched from a bullpup to a standard layout rifle.

Holy fugg...

Depends on how good someone is at putting one together. And still keeping the same ergonomics as a shortened carbine.

Attached: tumblr_ljt404TNl11qg5z8jo1_1280.jpg (800x401, 34K)

Procurement docs for US procurements, tender docs for some other countries where FN and Colt have put US mil spec M4s in against ((other rifles)) and procurement docs for ((other countries)) that use US mil spec M4s (under different designations).

People wildly underestimate how much it costs to build an M4 to the US Army tech data pack, mostly because it seems like really crappy value because so much of the cost is sunk in specific QA practices and supply chain assurance rather than features and quality end users want.

>France
Dropping the FAMAS. Adopting HK416
>New Zealand
Switching to LMT from AUG

There will be more in the coming years. Only a handful of countries ever even adopted bullpups. Of those, most do not even issue them to their SF, who would theoretically see the most gain from a more compact yet effective gun. This is because bullpups are bad, and so are the people that like them.

Wow, two examples, one of which is completely irrelevant on the geopolitical stage. What's next, we pretend Canada is relevant?

Completely wrong, you're a retard.

Unit cost for an M4 is roughly $700.
>wow, two examples
That's like 20% of all countries that ever mass issued a bullpup retard.

How many countries even adopted Bullpups to begin with? Not many. So two examples matter a lot when the numbers were so small to start with.

He's right though. His reasoning is eh, but the trend has definitely been away from bullpups. No countries with standard layouts have recently swapped to bullpups, while several countries with bullpups have swapped to conventional rifles (mostly for shitty reasons).

The NZ LMT procurement was honestly a farce. They ended up paying about 6000-7000 dollars per rifle and had two full safety recalls on them in their first year of service. Add to that the fact that they didn't supposedly exceeded the service lives on their AUG's barrels, extractors and pistons a few times over and you start to not read too much into their decision not to go with an updated AUG....

You got that off Wikipedia, and it's flat out wrong; try verifying its source. I vote you keep on trying.

guns.com/news/2013/02/26/fn-lands-army-m4-contract-underbids-colt-remington

So, I posted source. Now what?

You know government contracts are publicly available information, right? Why would you even lie about something so easily verifiable?

They weren't delivered at that price, because that was tendered under the 1993 TDC, not the M4+ or M4 PIP spec.

Every. Single. One. Of those rifles had to be remediated with depot action. The low initial delivery price was just clever pentagon accounting.

Countries that use the Tavor or X95:
>Angola, Azerbaijan, Brazil, Cameroon, Chad, Chile, Colombia, Cyprus, Ehtiopia, Georgia, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Ivory Coast, Israel, Kenya, Mexico, Mongolia, Nepal, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Rwanda, Senegal, Thailand, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Vietnam
Countries that use the AUG:
>Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bolivia, Canada, Central African Republic, Croatia, Djibouti, Ecuador, Gambia, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Republic of China, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, UK, Falkland Islands, Uruguay. Used in LE for Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Germany, Indonesia, Lithuania, Malaysia, Pakistan, Turkey, Venezuela
Countries that use the F2000:
>Belgium, Croatia, East Timor, India, Libya, Pakistan, Peru, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Slovenia, Spain
Countries that use the P90:
>Argentia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Cyprus, Colombia, Czech Republic, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, France, Germany, Georgia, Greece, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Netherlands, Nigeria, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Spain, Suriname, Taiwan, Thailand, Trinidad, Turkey, Ukraine, USA, Venezuela, Vietnam
Miscellaneous in use and emergent bullpups:
MSBS rifle (Poland, Pakistan is procuring), Qbz-95 and variants (QBB-95, QBu-88, QCW095) (China), SAR 21 (Botswana, Brunei, Indonesia, Morocco, Peru, Singapore, Thailand, Sri Lanka), HS VHS (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Iraq, Syria, Togo)

>BULLPUPS ARE DYING NOBODY USES THEM GUISE

Attached: 1555053129549.jpg (300x300, 13K)

Now how many of those countries have them as actual general issue? Post that number.

I don't care that some police department in Ecuador ordered five bullpups one time in 1990 or some SF unit in the middle east used their oil money to buy F2000s

>moving the goal posts
C O P E

>moving the goal posts
No, I quite plainly stated
>that's like 20% of all countries that ever mass issued a bullpup
You are actually the one moving the goalposts here.

>m4+
You mean M4a1+? It'd be pretty hard for them to deliver those, since that wasn't even a thing yet.
>PIP
Are you actually trying to tell me FN went ahead and delivered 3 round burst m4s to be converted to full auto, got new bolts, and rebarreled them all? Nah.

youtube.com/watch?v=WunXN70AKOk&t=502s

vs

youtube.com/watch?v=WunXN70AKOk&t=502s

This speaks for itself.

youtube.com/watch?v=SdTNUvV9KyM&t=239s

PIP was a program, not a project. It delivered a total of about 150 changes to the TDC over its life.

And yes. FN delivered rifles that were just going to be rebuilt to a different standard. Not 3rb, but from memory that particular batch had the wrong HB profile amongst a few other things.

How many of those countries have bullpups as standard issue? Face it. Bullpups are a meme