New military rifle concept?

major liability said:
HK416 is nice if you're trained on AR-15 pattern weapons but I still prefer a bullpup. Lighter, shorter, more ergonomic.

They aren't really any more ergonomic than the M4 or HK416, actually. As for shorter overall, yes, but that also redistributes the weight.

Bullpups have a heavy butt, trigger pulls aren't so hot because of the long trigger linkage, and you can't fire them from the weak side, which is a disadvantage when doing MOUT.

You mentioned the Tavor, which is about 2.4kg empty, the M4 is about 2.5kg empty, so "lighter" isn't really a factor. In fact, most weigh more than the M4. (FAMAS, FN, Steyr, SAR-21 are some examples).

Like with most weapons, there are advantages and disadvantages to choosing one or the other. Conventional infantry can certainly make the the bullpup work to their advantage, but again, it has no great advantages over the traditional carbine either.

As for the SAR-21 isn't a bad weapon, and it is fairly accurate, but that myth that you don't have to zero it is crap. You do.
 
I'd like to see a company produce a 7.62 X51 nato rifle with a 3 round burst fire. If it already has been made can anyone tell me what it is?
 
PJ24 said:
They aren't really any more ergonomic than the M4 or HK416, actually.
I guess it's a matter of taste.


PJ24 said:
As for shorter overall, yes, but that also redistributes the weight. Bullpups have a heavy butt, trigger pulls aren't so hot because of the long trigger linkage, and you can't fire them from the weak side, which is a disadvantage when doing MOUT.
The FN F2000 can fire from either side.


PJ24 said:
You mentioned the Tavor, which is about 2.4kg empty, the M4 is about 2.5kg empty, so "lighter" isn't really a factor. In fact, most weigh more than the M4. (FAMAS, FN, Steyr, SAR-21 are some examples).
All of those have longer barrels than the M4; it would be fairer and more correct to compare them with the M16A2, which is heavier than the M4.


PJ24 said:
Like with most weapons, there are advantages and disadvantages to choosing one or the other. Conventional infantry can certainly make the the bullpup work to their advantage, but again, it has no great advantages over the traditional carbine either.
Apart from the longer barrel, which gives better accuracy and better stopping power (which the 5.56 round needs).
 
Doug97 said:
I guess it's a matter of taste.

It is a matter of preference. One is no better than the other.

The FN F2000 can fire from either side.

Yes, that's the only one to date.

All of those have longer barrels than the M4; it would be fairer and more correct to compare them with the M16A2, which is heavier than the M4.

Not really, because the barrel isn't long enough to compare with the M16. It is closer to the M4.

Apart from the longer barrel, which gives better accuracy and better stopping power (which the 5.56 round needs).

Will the slightly longer barrel help? Yes, but there isn't that much difference, not enough to rate.
 
Remember how the assault rifle was born. It's a compromise between the SMG and the full rifle. A compromise is neccessary because you can carry only one.
 
PJ24 said:
Not really, because the barrel isn't long enough to compare with the M16. It is closer to the M4.
The Steyr AUG, the FAMAS, the L85A2 and the SAR21 all have barrels that are much closer in length to the M16 than the M4.

Barrel length makes a significant difference to the range at which the 5.56 bullet will fragment, which is when it's at its most effective.
 
I know its off topic but seeing as we are onto the usual bullpup v standard debate how come no-one has used helical magazines in an assault rifle?
 
sven hassell said:
I know its off topic but seeing as we are onto the usual bullpup v standard debate how come no-one has used helical magazines in an assault rifle?

They provide a good amount of ammo on tap, but it also makes reloads slow and clumsy. They also have a lot of problems when they're exposed to mud, dirt and sand. I don't think they would work very well on an assault rifle, with the size and length they would have to be, it would seem to me they would wear very quickly, especially the spring. Then there's the added weight and reload time. Just not very ergonomic, I would think.

We have C-mags, but they're pretty much worthless with all of the problems they have. They look cool for pictures though, so sometimes we'll bring them out when doing dog and pony shows.


 
Back
Top