Gauging interest in a compact .300 BLK Bullpup 'Rifle'

[Hamby Strategic Armament]

I'm looking into commercially making a .300 Blackout Bullpup. I want to know the scale of market interest and, specifically, who here is interested.


Gonna start this off somewhat like a story: A friend of mine is an avid Nerf collector. I was hanging out with him the other day after going to the range and he was showing me his 'prized blaster:' A Nerf N'Strike Elite Rayven. It's a bullpup style gun that looks like an unholy mating of a Keltec RDB and an FN P90.

Anyway, I had the idea that, hey, this thing is pretty small, maybe it would make a decent gun. It would about have to be chambered in .300 BLK because .223 loses too much velocity out of that short of a barrel.

I went down and bought me one of these rayvens to take measurements, and it seems like it would have about a 8.5 to 9 inch barrel if the barrel started where it realistically would. Now I'd probably have to make a 16 inch version for it to be commercially successful. Fortunately, the geniuses at Hasbro have already figured that out for me:

That is the Rayven with a 'barrel extension module' attached. In real life terms, it's basically a quad-rail/handguard. It brings the barrel length out to about 16.5 to 17 inches, measured from 1cm in front of the magwell to the end of the very orange muzzle.

Realistically I'd probably make the handguard KeyMod to decrease weight, but this is why I want input; What would you rather, a slimline KeyMod handguard or a MIL-1913-STD Picatinny Quad-Rail? What is overall interest for a Rayven style Bullpup chambered in .300 Blackout? Would you rather other calibers?

Other than that, I basically have already figured out in my head how this would work in terms of real physics. A few modifications would have to be made to the body, but I think this is doable.

Also, for everyone worried about bullpup ambidexterous ejection, I have a plan. See the battery compartment of the Rayven above? (The bulge on the side of the magwell.) I think I will make that a little chute for casings to fall down, thus allowing side extraction like a standard rifle, but with downward ejection like a P90 or an RDB.

 

[Hamby Strategic Armament]

Reserving Space Here.

 

[Kame B.]

Get a Ruger Mini 14 in 300black out and put it in a bullpup stock
http://www.cbrps.com/Ruger.html
Scroll down to the bottom of the page in the link I posted, and you will find the bullpup stock you need for it.

 

[kozak6]

I'm not interested in .300 blk. It's too expensive and really only seems to be for suppressor enthusiasts.

5.56, 7.62x39, or even 6.5 Grendel are all more interesting to me.

I can't believe there currently isn't a 9mm bullpup on the market. Straight blowback would also make it relatively easy to design and build. This is probably your best option.

Or, maybe a bullpup kit for an AR15.

 

[LoonWulf]

If you can make it reliable, affordable, and with a decent trigger i could see a market.
Id go with a slim handguard on the longer model, keep it near receiver diameter if possible. Also with your case chute id see if you couldnt make it removable, i for one almost never switch hands and would take it off, having an option to direction of ejection would be nice as well.
I would offer a 5.56/223 option, im assuming your going to use AR mags.

 

[dh1633pm]

I have a 300 AAC Blackout rifle. Its short enough already. Interesting idea.

 

[jmorris]

There is a butt for every seat as they say, someone will buy anything.

An FN F2000 would be a good start, you can think of it as the P90's big brother. An added benefit would be the way they dribble brass out the ejection oraface and places them at your feet. Never seen a ranch rifle that does that...

Bullpups tend to have bad triggers and I am reminded of that every time I pull the trigger on one. They do run well and use normal AR 15 mags.

 

[Varminterror]

Here's the problem - real firearms designers, the kind with engineering degrees and professional gunsmiths on staff - don't start with nerf guns as their design inspiration. They aren't worried with converting a battery compartment into an ejection chute (which is a hard pass from me, since it'll be nothing but an opportunity to jam), they conceptualize a design, and draw it up.

Relative to the market demand, there are lots of bull pups on the market. There's a reason they aren't more popular.

There are also plenty of 5.56's in short 7-10" barrels, a proper gun designer knows that too. Your choice of 300blk seems relatively arbitrary. .458 socom hits harder than 300, and loses even less in a short barrel, based on your selection process, why overlook that? I can appreciate the principle of "selling what's hot," but by the time you R&D this thing and fabricate a prototype, it might not be hot any more.

Also, consider, you'll want the muzzle blast to be farther away from the shooter than it is on that TOY. That angled foregrip on that nerf TOY puts the shooters finger within inches of a ~20,000psi explosion. That's why REAL BULLPUP FIREARMS have barrels extending past the end of the forend, long enough to protect the shooter's hands, as well as their ears and eyes.

 

[Hamby Strategic Armament]

If you can make it reliable, affordable, and with a decent trigger i could see a market.
Id go with a slim handguard on the longer model, keep it near receiver diameter if possible. Also with your case chute id see if you couldnt make it removable, i for one almost never switch hands and would take it off, having an option to direction of ejection would be nice as well.
I would offer a 5.56/223 option, im assuming your going to use AR mags.

Interesting idea with the removable brass chute. Noted.

There is a butt for every seat as they say, someone will buy anything.

An FN F2000 would be a good start, you can think of it as the P90's big brother. An added benefit would be the way they dribble brass out the ejection oraface and places them at your feet. Never seen a ranch rifle that does that...

Bullpups tend to have bad triggers and I am reminded of that every time I pull the trigger on one. They do run well and use normal AR 15 mags.

Yup in many ways this is an evolution of the F2000. RIP that thing...

Last night I finished up the barrel in 3D and next will be moving on to the rest of the gun. I'm thinking of using a short stroke piston that works somewhat like a G36. What do you think?

 

[jmorris]

Here's the problem - real firearms designers, the kind with engineering degrees and professional gunsmiths on staff - don't start with nerf guns as their design inspiration.

I thing the designers and engineers for Hasbro start with real guns as their inspiration.

Why that first one looks a lot like the F2000 and the 2nd he posted resembles a Bullpup'ed AK, sort of.

Or maybe this one.

In any case the RIP part on the F2000 is a reason I wouldn't put too many eggs into the bullpup .223 basket. It was actually a pretty good execution of the idea, maybe even #2 to the more spacy looking steyr AUG.

 

[wally]

I can't believe there currently isn't a 9mm bullpup on the market.

IMI Tavor is available in 9mm, and as a conversion kit for their 5.56. Don't seem to be a lot of demand for them.

 

[FL-NC]

Personally, I'm more interested in the 300 B-O ROUND than the guns that fire them. To clarify, my 300 B-O is going to be the Ruger Ranch model, which will use one of my .30 cans. If I want to shoot copious rounds with an AR, I'll do it with one of my 5.56 ones, and do it much cheaper. That said, the ease of building a 300 B-O AR pistol (using the now-apparently-legal-to-shoulder-wrist-brace) would make an all-new design (bullpup or otherwise) a difficult sell, unless there would be a substantial savings VS the pistol option, or for that matter buying a $100 barrel and some additional coinage for a new FH, and converting an existing AR, in my opinion.

 

[Hamby Strategic Armament]

Here's the problem - real firearms designers, the kind with engineering degrees and professional gunsmiths on staff - don't start with nerf guns as their design inspiration.

Excuse me for having an idea. I've been wanting to make a compact bullpup in .300BLK for personal protection details, swat teams, etc, for a long time. It's just that seeing my friend's rayven inspired me enough to get off my ass and do it.

Also, consider, you'll want the muzzle blast to be farther away from the shooter than it is on that TOY. That angled foregrip on that nerf TOY puts the shooters finger within inches of a ~20,000psi explosion. That's why REAL BULLPUP FIREARMS have barrels extending past the end of the forend, long enough to protect the shooter's hands, as well as their ears and eyes.

I realize that. I'm not interested in making a rifle that suffers from KSG syndrome. I will have a barrel and stock muzzle device that extend it more than 2 inches past the end of the front grip, with a very protrusive handstop to prevent people from shooting themselves. I've already gone over this issue with my Design&Safety team and my Legal Liability department, and this will not be an issue.

Personally, I'm more interested in the 300 B-O ROUND...which will use one of my .30 cans.

One of the things I am doing with this project, and the 9 inch .300 specifically, is making sure it will work with everyone's favorite suppressors: Sig, AAC, SiCo, etc.

I am very excited to be able to provide the market an opportunity to experiment with .300 BLK bullpups. I realize that, as several have said, most .223 bullpup offerings are not particularly well received, other than a couple of proven options (Styer AUG, IMI Tavor). I know there are a few .308 bullpups, but beyond usage in video games they don't get much recognition. (Keltec RFB, SRSS Bulldog M14, both featured in Battlefield 4 and Call of Duty Black Ops.)

Anyway, I will post updates once I have a render to show off the concept.

 

[Zerodefect]

Maybe gun designers should look towards nerf. It's been pretty stagnant in bullpup land since the FS2000.

I'd like to see the magazine and chamber of the FS2000 moved all the way back into the stock. That way that you can have an even shorter carbine, and still have a leagal 16" barrel. I'd also like to see a more robust steel shield in that stock to keep my head from exploding from a double charge. (you'll never see an FS2000 owner shooting cheap russian ammo) The FS and Keltec shotgun both need substantial handstops added to their designs.

I find the P90 ergos way better than the FS2000. Wide top .300BLK P90 16" could be really cool.

 

[Hamby Strategic Armament]

I find the P90 ergos way better than the FS2000. Wide top .300BLK P90 16" could be really cool.

Wide tops are preferred. Noted.

 

[Tirod]

The premise that 5.56 "loses too much velocity" from a shorter barrel isn't a fact. The evidence to the contrary is that the US military has been issuing 10.5" barreled 5.56 guns as the XM177, CAR, and CQB variants for 45 years.

Putting a handgrip in front of the magazine to make it a bull pup design means working with it at the muzzle. You are going to need a handstop which also functions as a blast shield.

The original purpose of coming up with the bull pup rifle design was to reduce the overall length of the weapon. It allowed for a longer barrel without the penalty of it becoming inordinately unwieldy in use, field, urban, or vehicular. At the time it was one way to keep velocity up as ammunition designers were stuck with the powder and bullet construction of the day. Instead of overcoming their issues - which they did - they imposed more issues on the gun designers to achieve their goals. They traded off rapid magazine changes thinking that slow firing soldiers getting more hits by precision shooting would increase combat power. What we have learned in combat, tho is that high rates of fire are superior, and that a large number of hits in combat are achieved by unaimed fire - bullets hitting soldiers who were never the intended target who walked into the line of fire in front or behind it.

Bullpups have been tried by Britain and found wanting in actual combat, not the synthesized fantasy that their original proponents needed to justify them. They are now tactically and effectively obsolete, if they were ever effective in the first place.

If the gun doesn't work and is demonstrated to be the wrong answer even when it was tried, why then speculate there could be a civilian market to profit from? Bullpup fans have no wars, battles, or combat actions to point to as their demonstrated example where it was notably superior. If anything it's an affectation - the gun is built to do something that today's combat rarely presents. Like carrying a brace of flintlocks for self defense, there are better to choose from.

 

[entropy]

The back and down ejection will either introduce a complex mechanism to function it, or rely on gravity like the Kel-tec; just have them eject out either side ala AUG or Tavor, or drop out the bottom like a P-90, much simpler. Also, hot brass bouncing off my arm or landing on my feet doesn't sound fun, or conductive to safety or accuracy.

Big failure point on bull pups; Trigger.

I'd concentrate my design efforts on refining the FG-42/ TRW Low Maintenance Rifle concept before tackling the bullpup.

 

[Robert]

I have zero interest in something like that.

 

[rbernie]

Big failure point on bull pups; Trigger.

Poor triggers and awkward magazine changes are common issues with bullpups, to which I will also add 'weight and balance'. Putting the action all the way to the rear commonly results in a rifle with a CoG so far to the rear that it's difficult to use well in offhand or snap shooting situations.

For these reasons, I have never shot a bullpup that I felt compelled to own.

 

[Hamby Strategic Armament]

The back and down ejection will either introduce a complex mechanism to function it, or rely on gravity like the Kel-tec; just have them eject out either side ala AUG or Tavor, or drop out the bottom like a P-90, much simpler. Also, hot brass bouncing off my arm or landing on my feet doesn't sound fun, or conductive to safety or accuracy.

Big failure point on bull pups; Trigger.

I have a trigger mechanism that I have tested that makes a bullpup trigger much crisper. Not quite match grade, but definitely not mushy like a Tavor.

You are going to need a handstop which also functions as a blast shield.

The original purpose of coming up with the bull pup rifle design was to reduce the overall length of the weapon. It allowed for a longer barrel without the penalty of it becoming inordinately unwieldy in use, field, urban, or vehicular.

As stated in a previous post, I'm going to put a very aggressive handstop on the front. Additionally, one of the primary reasons I'm developing this is for close protection agents, SWAT teams or other people who need more firepower than a pistol or SMG can provide, but still need a compact weapon. Plus, as evidenced by the commercial success of both the AUG A3 M1 and the Tavor X95, there is a decent sized civilian market for bullpups.

 

[Zerodefect]

No reason they can't make a slick metal bushing linked trigger. The P90 and FS2000 triggers are just a metal wire dragging on the plastic.

Simple, reliable, but not a good feel. Fine for the exact type of CQB combat they were designed for. Guarding an embassy from the roof, not so much.

 

[ttarp]

A lot of misconceptions and blatant misinformation about bullpups in this thread. Try one before you parrot complaints and rhetoric against them, and if you still hold your opinion after more than a mag or two, fine and well, different strokes for different folks.

 

[jmorris]

I agree that bullpups can have good triggers, it just adding a linkage and another pivot. The reason I said they tend to have bad triggers is just an opinion I have, having shot a bunch of them. They are not alone there are lots of "normal" triggers that are not that great either.

I built my 50 BMG bullpup and it would have been less work to get the trigger as nice as it is without the extra "stuff" but it's still possible.

Not a short barrel but makes a rifle with a 36" barrel about the same length as a normal rifle.

 

[Prijador]

Ok jmorris that is really sweet!!!

Back to the topic at hand:
I'd second the notion of 7.62x39 over 300 BO, Given similar effectiveness at close range out of short barrels, lower price (and 7.62x39 is going to be around forever).

That said, there are already short-enough weapons that perform well, and don't have egregious balance issues.
Someone will be interested I'm sure.
(Unless you recreate the Valmet 82. Those seem to have a hard time finding buyers on GB)

 

[Hamby Strategic Armament]

I'd second the notion of 7.62x39 over 300 BO, Given similar effectiveness at close range out of short barrels, lower price (and 7.62x39 is going to be around forever).

7.62x39 is as popular as ever, despite my personal hatred of the round. Noted.

On that note, would you rather it feed from those funky x39 Stanag mags, or from an AKM mag?