servantofinari
Member
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2009
- Messages
- 93
I have been hearing a lot about this in recent time so I figured I would throw in my two cents and see if I get shot down.
All weapons compared use 5.56x 45mm NATO and do not include light machinegun variants.
Bullpup Rifles
Based off the F2000, FAMAS, L85/SA80, AUG
• Length: 630mm to 900mm
• Balance: Closer to shoulder
• Average Weight: 7.92
• Sights: Shorter sight base or use an optic
• Rate of Fire: 610-1100 rounds/min*
• Highest muzzle velocity: 3,100 fps (AUG)
• Ambidextrous function: most require an armorer to change ejection ports direction. Some are completely ambidextrous with special ejection systems.
*it should be noted that the FAMAS uses a lever delay blow back which has a higher rate of fire than typical rotating bolt gas operation, not counting it the range would be 610-950 rounds/min.
Conventional Rifles
Based off M16/M4, SCAR-L, AK-101, G36
• Length: 720mm to 1000mm
• Balance: Farther forward
• Average Weight: 7.43lbs
• Sights: Longer sight base
• Rate of Fire: 600-950 rounds/min
• Highest muzzle velocity: 3,200 fps (M16)
• Ambidextrous function: Can be fired in the wrong hand but throws casings in to line of sight. Some do not have an ambidextrous fire selection or mag-release.
Personally I prefer the bullpup design. While it does prove more difficult to reload at first, and makes a drop free magazine impractical, its barrel length to overall length ratio is a blessing. My favorite, the F2000, is considered a very fast return to zero for a rifle. The short sight base on some bullpups can be a problem but many are meant to use an optic, such as the F2000 which comes with an x1.6 optic and the AUG with its x3 optic. Despite the minor advantage this gives, especially to people like me who prefer scopes to iron sights, most users buy the railed versions.
Conventional rifles do hold a few very specific advantages. One, they can be fired by left or right handed people without major modification. However the F2000, PDR-C/D and P90 bullpups have solved that issue with forward ejection, a toggling ejection port or by dropping the casing out the bottom (although hot brass in your lap is not good.) the other advantages include things such as drop-free mags, long sight basses and time tested design. It should be noted that some bullpups are known for a long trigger pull due to the use of metal cables or bent metal rods which flex, some use metal plates instead to solve this problem. The last major advantage is the distance between you and the bolt in the event of an accident.
The actual weight of the weapons are about even. As for recoil, it is the same. It doesn’t matter where the bullet rests, when fired the whole gun moves back. In the end it’s all down to personal preference. I see this as the final divide between the Tactical world of military weapons and the hunter minded civilian weapons. Bullpups offer undeniable advantages to the modern soldier, just look at England, Austria, Australia, China, and South Africa, all of which use bullpup weapons, even shotguns like the NeoStead 2000. I personally see the armies of the future using pistol griped, bullpup, and smaller caliber (say 6.5 about .25cal) weapons. I also see the civilians of the world still using the same, larger caliber (7.62 or .30 and up), lever/bolt and slide action rifle grip designs they have been using for centuries. This all simply goes to show that your job determines what you use.
You can be sure that I will be buying civilian versions of military weapons, mostly because I hate rifle grips, like small weapons, and prefer military peep sights to the typical civilian standard horn sights. My advice is this, get and use which ever you personally feel most comfortable with, no gun is useful if you don’t like to use it. But please give both types a chance and don’t go condemning one or the other just because you don’t like it. Oh, and please don’t bring up the G11, that’s a whole other subject in its own right. I may write an article on alternate ammunitions and/or experimental weapons at a later time.
All weapons compared use 5.56x 45mm NATO and do not include light machinegun variants.
Bullpup Rifles
Based off the F2000, FAMAS, L85/SA80, AUG
• Length: 630mm to 900mm
• Balance: Closer to shoulder
• Average Weight: 7.92
• Sights: Shorter sight base or use an optic
• Rate of Fire: 610-1100 rounds/min*
• Highest muzzle velocity: 3,100 fps (AUG)
• Ambidextrous function: most require an armorer to change ejection ports direction. Some are completely ambidextrous with special ejection systems.
*it should be noted that the FAMAS uses a lever delay blow back which has a higher rate of fire than typical rotating bolt gas operation, not counting it the range would be 610-950 rounds/min.
Conventional Rifles
Based off M16/M4, SCAR-L, AK-101, G36
• Length: 720mm to 1000mm
• Balance: Farther forward
• Average Weight: 7.43lbs
• Sights: Longer sight base
• Rate of Fire: 600-950 rounds/min
• Highest muzzle velocity: 3,200 fps (M16)
• Ambidextrous function: Can be fired in the wrong hand but throws casings in to line of sight. Some do not have an ambidextrous fire selection or mag-release.
Personally I prefer the bullpup design. While it does prove more difficult to reload at first, and makes a drop free magazine impractical, its barrel length to overall length ratio is a blessing. My favorite, the F2000, is considered a very fast return to zero for a rifle. The short sight base on some bullpups can be a problem but many are meant to use an optic, such as the F2000 which comes with an x1.6 optic and the AUG with its x3 optic. Despite the minor advantage this gives, especially to people like me who prefer scopes to iron sights, most users buy the railed versions.
Conventional rifles do hold a few very specific advantages. One, they can be fired by left or right handed people without major modification. However the F2000, PDR-C/D and P90 bullpups have solved that issue with forward ejection, a toggling ejection port or by dropping the casing out the bottom (although hot brass in your lap is not good.) the other advantages include things such as drop-free mags, long sight basses and time tested design. It should be noted that some bullpups are known for a long trigger pull due to the use of metal cables or bent metal rods which flex, some use metal plates instead to solve this problem. The last major advantage is the distance between you and the bolt in the event of an accident.
The actual weight of the weapons are about even. As for recoil, it is the same. It doesn’t matter where the bullet rests, when fired the whole gun moves back. In the end it’s all down to personal preference. I see this as the final divide between the Tactical world of military weapons and the hunter minded civilian weapons. Bullpups offer undeniable advantages to the modern soldier, just look at England, Austria, Australia, China, and South Africa, all of which use bullpup weapons, even shotguns like the NeoStead 2000. I personally see the armies of the future using pistol griped, bullpup, and smaller caliber (say 6.5 about .25cal) weapons. I also see the civilians of the world still using the same, larger caliber (7.62 or .30 and up), lever/bolt and slide action rifle grip designs they have been using for centuries. This all simply goes to show that your job determines what you use.
You can be sure that I will be buying civilian versions of military weapons, mostly because I hate rifle grips, like small weapons, and prefer military peep sights to the typical civilian standard horn sights. My advice is this, get and use which ever you personally feel most comfortable with, no gun is useful if you don’t like to use it. But please give both types a chance and don’t go condemning one or the other just because you don’t like it. Oh, and please don’t bring up the G11, that’s a whole other subject in its own right. I may write an article on alternate ammunitions and/or experimental weapons at a later time.
