Jump to content
DrakeVanders

Bullpup Drop-In Kits

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, KRDucky said:

don't put words in my mouth I didnt say asshole. If the FN P90's Effective Firing Range is 200m and the Maximum firing range is 1800m, The FN P90 can each out and touch you at 1800m.

I'd love to see an actual source of anyone hitting anything at 1,800m. Even with a 50 round magazine it's literally almost impossible for you actually hit anything at that distance. Not that distances like that would actually matter in Tarkov. 

 

Just now, KRDucky said:

Conversely, The M16A2, which was my service rifle by the way. Has an effective firing range of 550 - 800m for iron sights. It's maximum firing range is 3600m. Therefor, the M16A2 can reach out and touch you at 3600m. The likelihood is slim, but it is possible. 

 Welcome to the 21st century with that M4 life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an interesting discussion with dissenting opinions. I would be curious to see what qualifications you all have (Amateur/expert) to make claims about these firearms. Seems like a few of you are current/former military? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Tactical_Fister Don't see what point all this complaining is for. When bullpups get added, the devs will deal with the stats, if they are as bad as you like to think they are, then they will be represented as such. It really doesn't matter if a gun is bad for whatever reason, if it gets added it will represent the gun in real life and will include the performance issues with it, but that itself won't deter it from being added to the game - just look at the vpo-209 and the mr-133.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tactical_Fister said:

Tacticool Timmeh copypasta wall of text

Ho-lee-chit that is a long ass wall of text rambling that doesn't apply jack to EFT. 

1. Height over bore, IRRELEVANT: guys in EFT are already pulling 6+ inches of height over bore with AR optics on AK side mounts with red dots stuck on top without issue. Height over bore isn't going to cause you to miss in this game (or even IRL) because we're shooting HUMANS, not trying to hit a 1" square. 

2. Triggers, IRRELEVANT: trigger pull has zero effect in game. 

3. Bullpups having greater muzzle climb: LOL no. I've shot the piss out of a dealer sample FA Tavor, no harder to control than an MK18 or M4 pattern rifle in FA. 

4. BPs going kaboom: 100% irrelevant in game and IRL. Just hand wringing BS from retards who are 100000000000x more likely to shove .300BO into their 5.56 AR while simultaneously bitching about BPS. 

5. Ejection: no shoulder changes in game so IRRELEVANT

6. The rest of that BS article: ALL IRRELEVANT IN A VIDEO GAME and all comes down to training anyhow. The only issue is reloading from prone which requires you to just simply tilt the gun, whootydoo yo

 

Tacticool Timmeh BS

1 hour ago, Tactical_Fister said:

 

Edited by txgunner87
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Am 10.12.2017 um 21:35 schrieb Tactical_Fister:

If people want to deal with the atrocious decrease in accuracy and poor design that goes with bullpups sure. 

There we go someone who reads fancy tactictal magazins and websites, dont believe all what marketing of weapon companys try to sell you as a truth ;). 

Steyr AUG A3: Short as an SBR but with a full length barrel. Modular to a degree but not to the degree of an M4. Easy to change barrels.  Easy to add necessary accessories. Ambidextrous use is challenging..for now. High grade, high quality, and extremely refined construction. The bullpup brings attributes to the table that allow it to be run almost as a big pistol. Something the full sized M4 cannot do. Since the absence from the market of the FS-2000, the AUG is the finest bullpup rifle in existance.

Google problems with aug weapons systems  and then try ar15 ;).

Good shot accuracy same as AR15 platform so from my experience. As long as the optics are equivalent, the AUG and the AR will hang together out to 550m or 600y plus.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Tactical_Fister said:

And they're more inaccurate, have horrendous reliability issues and have terrible triggers in them (lower TF out of ergonomics)

No idea why would you keep whining about a bullpup. Their design is pretty great, and more reliable than an M16. When the actual weapon jamming comes in, which one will be breaking more frequently? Would love to see that an m16 explodes due to dirt =)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In this thread: People who have never touched a gun before try to lecture the person who has on "believing tactical myths" (whatever that means) while posting the most ignorant and flat out wrong drivel imaginable.

This is pretty much why this forum became unreadable and probably why the suggestions thread was moved/killed. Good job guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, KhandE said:

In this thread: People who have never touched a gun before try to lecture the person who has on "believing tactical myths" (whatever that means) while posting the most ignorant and flat out wrong drivel imaginable.

This is pretty much why this forum became unreadable and probably why the suggestions thread was moved/killed. Good job guys.

Touching a gun doesn' t make you an expert, and vice versa. Bullpups are part of the weapon industry, and reliable enough for military forces to use. Some of them are bad, some are better, but no matter how reliable it really is, if weapon implentation in EFT was about reliability, its would only be about AK.

FAMAS : operational conditions proved the weapon to be reliable and trustworthy under combat conditions

The M82 Barrett : One of the very best sniper rifle on earth is a bullpup

The FN P90 : Its a bullpup

The L85 : I know, it wasn' t reliable, but later versions were made, and its way better than it was before.

I can go on and on

Edited by PIG-Mathieu
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to see Iran's KH2002 Khaybar (5.56) in the game. Maybe even a Chinese QBZ-97/95 rifle (the 97 has 5.56 ammo, so it'd fit).

Bullpups are great looking guns, and seem to function just fine. Of course, I'm an IWI fanboy and my agenda is to see the Israeli Tavor 21 in the game...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tactical_Fister said:

You know the difference between Effective range and Max range right?

Either way, the P90 isn't suited for those ranges in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DreTaX14 said:

No idea why would you keep whining about a bullpup. Their design is pretty great, and more reliable than an M16. When the actual weapon jamming comes in, which one will be breaking more frequently? Would love to see that an m16 explodes due to dirt =)

Please do some research in regards to weapon reliability, and the different reasons as to why the original M-16 had issues. Then look at modern combat reports about the reliability of the same platform. Your opinion will change significantly. 

There's only a single advantage to the Bullpup design, and multiple shortcomings that designers have yet to be able to overcome. There's a reason Bullpup's never took off like people seem to think they would. (Personally blame Sci-Fi TV shows). 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, KhandE said:

In this thread: People who have never touched a gun before try to lecture the person who has on "believing tactical myths" (whatever that means) while posting the most ignorant and flat out wrong drivel imaginable.

This is pretty much why this forum became unreadable and probably why the suggestions thread was moved/killed. Good job guys.

8 years service British Army (L85, L86, L129, [C7, M4 once or twice, admittedly])

Don’t assume, makes you look silly. 

Also Bullpups most certainly have their place in the arms market and in this game, so I look forward to destroying your PMC with one@Tactical_Fister:P, you can create as many walls of text inspired by airsoft and tactical weapon magazines as you wish. The devs will implement bullpups and their apparent list of flaws if they so wish, so I guess we’ll wait and see!

I have found over the years the majority of disregard for bullpup systems comes mainly from the US, not sure if that’s the case here though! 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, txgunner87 said:

Ho-lee-chit that is a long ass wall of text rambling that doesn't apply jack to EFT. 

1. Height over bore, IRRELEVANT: guys in EFT are already pulling 6+ inches of height over bore with AR optics on AK side mounts with red dots stuck on top without issue. Height over bore isn't going to cause you to miss in this game (or even IRL) because we're shooting HUMANS, not trying to hit a 1" square. 

2. Triggers, IRRELEVANT: trigger pull has zero effect in game. 

3. Bullpups having greater muzzle climb: LOL no. I've shot the piss out of a dealer sample FA Tavor, no harder to control than an MK18 or M4 pattern rifle in FA. 

4. BPs going kaboom: 100% irrelevant in game and IRL. Just hand wringing BS from retards who are 100000000000x more likely to shove .300BO into their 5.56 AR while simultaneously bitching about BPS. 

5. Ejection: no shoulder changes in game so IRRELEVANT

6. The rest of that BS article: ALL IRRELEVANT IN A VIDEO GAME and all comes down to training anyhow. The only issue is reloading from prone which requires you to just simply tilt the gun, whootydoo yo

 

Tacticool Timmeh BS

Attitude aside, these are all very good points indeed 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DanExert said:

8 years service British Army (L85, L86, L129, [C7, M4 once or twice, admittedly])

Don’t assume, makes you look silly. 

Also Bullpups most certainly have their place in the arms market and in this game, so I look forward to destroying your PMC with one@Tactical_Fister:P, you can create as many walls of text inspired by airsoft and tactical weapon magazines as you wish. The devs will implement bullpups and their apparent list of flaws if they so wish, so I guess we’ll wait and see!

I have found over the years the majority of disregard for bullpup systems comes mainly from the US, not sure if that’s the case here though! 

First, Hats off to Comrades in Arms across the pond, 4 Years US Army (M4 primarily). all of my interaction with 'other' rifles has been within the Three Gun Community.

 

In terms of Gameplay prospective it really comes down to how they're modeled in game and how the Dev's choose to model various issues or advantages that exist with the platform. I.E Ergonomics +/- stat based on X value or whatever. In the scale of Tarkov though, where the primary advantage of a Bullpup would be it's CQB capability and you're not shooting past 300m even on the larger maps, There's no significant difference between the other main competitor for that weight class (carbines). The big ole Walls of text were primarily to point out the issues present with Bullpup's that people ignore, and i'll openly admit only one had anything actually to do with the scale of Tarkov. 

When speaking to general disregard for Bullpups I think primarily it comes down to training Doctrine and Logistics. The better part of the world, uses either American or Russian based doctrine for the majority of their armed forces, Where both Country's have such a large military and logistic base oriented around a conventional rifle setup that it'd be a massive undertaking in order to change over to what some (like myself) would call a Fetish rifle. 

Many of the issues associated with Bullpup's on a Tactical level are linked directly to training. And regardless of where people stand on the matter, I'd wager that the reason Bullpup's never took off, was simply due to Nations not being willing to change their entire training and logistical doctrine to support them. Just my few cents. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Tactical_Fister said:

First, Hats off to Comrades in Arms across the pond, 4 Years US Army (M4 primarily). all of my interaction with 'other' rifles has been within the Three Gun Community.

Respect, mate. 

And yeah of course you are more than within your rights to point out the numerous flaws with different weapon platforms/styles etc and that's cool, you just gave off this 'Bullpups are the worst thing to ever have been invented' sort of vibe, which is obviously not the case :P 

Also with regards to long range fire, the L86 and its 25.4" barrel was effectively used for ranges up to around 600m (max rated to 1000m, although slightly unrealistic lol) for a long time, at least until the L129 was introduced. The L86 was fondly regarded almost as a mini sniper due to its bipod, as well as longer and heavier barrel. It also had a rear grip which further improved the stability of the firing position while prone, giving as many as 3 points of contact with the ground (bipod and both elbows). It also carried the name 'crow cannon' as it was usually dumped on the new guy due to its increased weight (if there wasn't a GPMG to hand over at least!)

On the flipside, the L22 'Carbine' version has a 11.2" barrel and is extremely manageable in CQB, although of course it suffers at longer ranges due to the reduced barrel length, muzzle velocity, weight etc. The vertical foregrip it comes with is a nice touch, too.

I also find the bullpup design to have a more manageable centre of gravity, as all the working parts, weight and magazine etc are closer to the body. Changing mags while prone can be a cutie but all it takes is a 45 degree roll and you have adequate room to move, something that becomes muscle memory like most drills!

I think both styles have their place for sure, I just wished bullpups weren't so easily disregarded as I had much success with them in my relatively short career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DanExert said:

Respect, mate. 

And yeah of course you are more than within your rights to point out the numerous flaws with different weapon platforms/styles etc and that's cool, you just gave off this 'Bullpups are the worst thing to ever have been invented' sort of vibe, which is obviously not the case :P 

Also with regards to long range fire, the L86 and its 25.4" barrel was effectively used for ranges up to around 600m (max rated to 1000m, although slightly unrealistic lol) for a long time, at least until the L129 was introduced. The L86 was fondly regarded almost as a mini sniper due to its bipod, as well as longer and heavier barrel. It also had a rear grip which further improved the stability of the firing position while prone, giving as many as 3 points of contact with the ground (bipod and both elbows). It also carried the name 'crow cannon' as it was usually dumped on the new guy due to its increased weight (if there wasn't a GPMG to hand over at least!)

On the flipside, the L22 'Carbine' version has a 11.2" barrel and is extremely manageable in CQB, although of course it suffers at longer ranges due to the reduced barrel length, muzzle velocity, weight etc. The vertical foregrip it comes with is a nice touch, too.

I also find the bullpup design to have a more manageable centre of gravity, as all the working parts, weight and magazine etc are closer to the body. Changing mags while prone can be a cutie but all it takes is a 45 degree roll and you have adequate room to move, something that becomes muscle memory like most drills!

I think both styles have their place for sure, I just wished bullpups weren't so easily disregarded as I had much success with them in my relatively short career.

I feel that the reason they're disregarded so easily is due to the cult followings that conventional and bullpup rifle user's have acquired. If I had thousands of hours on a Bullpup I'm sure I'd hold it in a different regard, But I don't, My thousands of hours of practice are between an AR-15 Platform and an AK Platform. The largest issue I have with Bullpup's isn't strictly the weapon themselves but rather the Fetishists that form around the weapon because they watched to much Star Gate SG-1 ect. They do have an undeniable advantage in having longer barrel length in a more compact package, However, Whether that actually 'matter's is entirely up for debate and is often times where people butt heads, And more often than not, Everything else is training based whereas most Civilian and Military shooters across the world, Have, generationally speaking, used a conventional rifle setup which makes Bullpups a bit frowned upon IMO because it's 'new and strange'

The joke I've often heard when people cutie about the M4A1's being a little front heavy (Reinforced barrel and all metal upper.) Is 'Get Stronger'. Which admittedly I haven't had much of an issue with weight even when running a bunch of stuff on the end (Grip, PEQ-15, Light). In the scale of Tarkov though, Since, as far as i know (?) Damage isn't modeled based on muzzle velocity, There's literally no disadvantage to running a 10" Barrel on say, an M4 when your drop in Muzzle Velocity between the 10" barrel and the 14.5 is minuscule at best. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Tactical_Fister said:

I feel that the reason they're disregarded so easily is due to the cult followings that conventional and bullpup rifle user's have acquired. If I had thousands of hours on a Bullpup I'm sure I'd hold it in a different regard, But I don't, My thousands of hours of practice are between an AR-15 Platform and an AK Platform. The largest issue I have with Bullpup's isn't strictly the weapon themselves but rather the Fetishists that form around the weapon because they watched to much Star Gate SG-1 ect. They do have an undeniable advantage in having longer barrel length in a more compact package, However, Whether that actually 'matter's is entirely up for debate and is often times where people butt heads, And more often than not, Everything else is training based whereas most Civilian and Military shooters across the world, Have, generationally speaking, used a conventional rifle setup which makes Bullpups a bit frowned upon IMO because it's 'new and strange'

The joke I've often heard when people cutie about the M4A1's being a little front heavy (Reinforced barrel and all metal upper.) Is 'Get Stronger'. Which admittedly I haven't had much of an issue with weight even when running a bunch of stuff on the end (Grip, PEQ-15, Light). In the scale of Tarkov though, Since, as far as i know (?) Damage isn't modeled based on muzzle velocity, There's literally no disadvantage to running a 10" Barrel on say, an M4 when your drop in Muzzle Velocity between the 10" barrel and the 14.5 is minuscule at best. 

I got you, and the 'fetishists' I'm not fond of either! Not a huge fan of fundamentalism or 'this is 100% better and that is my final answer', especially when said speaker has little to no experience with the different platform, idea, style whatever it may be. I'm all for choice and keeping an open mind. And we all know one of the greatest features of a video game is player choice!

Yeah the training and familiarity definitely plays a huge part, and people are generally more inclined to say the thing they are more familiar with is 'better', which is understandable, just not strictly true. Same thing happens in the car scene, with people arguing over engine layouts, aspiration types etc.

With regards to muzzle velocity I'm not entirely sure what effects it has on Tarkov's game mechanics. Perhaps it affects a round's penetration chance/ability, damage drop-off and bullet drop/trajectory, but that's entirely speculation on my part. I would imagine it should affect accuracy to some degree, as the round has spent more time in the barrel therefore being subject to the rifling for longer - whether or not this is implemented in game is definitely worth investigating. With regards to damage, that could definitely benefit from a devs input or player testing.

I found a really cool experiment conducted on barrel lengths which is definitely worth a read: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/10/daniel-zimmerman/the-truth-about-barrel-length-muzzle-velocity-and-accuracy/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, PIG-Mathieu said:

Touching a gun doesn' t make you an expert, and vice versa. Bullpups are part of the weapon industry, and reliable enough for military forces to use. Some of them are bad, some are better, but no matter how reliable it really is, if weapon implentation in EFT was about reliability, its would only be about AK.

FAMAS : operational conditions proved the weapon to be reliable and trustworthy under combat conditions

 

For the record, this thread was about "drop in" bullpup kits, not dedicated weapons, drop in kits are significantly worse, as the the actual weapons listed, The FAMAS was pretty average, and wasn't even compatible with NATO standard ammunition. ever used one with brass case ammunition on full auto? the action it uses is so rough on the casings it will mutilate them to the point broken casings will render the weapon inoperable after a couple mags. it has some other annoying issues, not a bad weapon overall, but it wouldn't be my 1st or 2nd or 3rd or even 4th choice if I had to be dropped in an open conflict zone like Iraq or Syria and had to fight my way out.

There's a reason the French are replacing it with an AR-15 derivative. It's also funny how some of the people in this thread calling fister an armchair tactical expert are bashing the AR-15's reliability and think it will simply explode if it merely touches dirt, when the AR-15, not counting the very first batches used in the opening half of Vietnam are easily far more reliable than any bullpup system currently or formerly made.

Lastly, It probably wouldn't even appear in a 2028 video game considering GIAT made less then half a million of all variants of the gun and stopped production in 2000, with the G2 variant in particular being rare as Hen's teeth.

8 hours ago, PIG-Mathieu said:

The M82 Barrett : One of the very best sniper rifle on earth is a bullpup

1. The M82, contrary to popular belief by internet fanboys, is actually poorly accurate by the standards of a "sniper" rifle and there's a reason it's used an an AMR rofle almost exclusively except by those who are exceptionally talented shots. Infact, most AMRs for that matter will get destroyed in mechanical accuracy by purpose built precision rifles.

.....It also has the distinction of "not being a bullpup whatsoever" so I'm not even sure why this is here.

 

 

8 hours ago, PIG-Mathieu said:

The FN P90 : Its a bullpup

It's a fine PDW but has quite a few design quirks, It was literally a rush project by FN because they were on the verge of bankruptcy after their previous project, the BRG-15 was going to lose most of it's potential buyers due to the cold war ending, they literally just looked at the Steyr AUG and tried to make a top fed PDW based around it due to lack of time to make a weapon with a more unique internal layout and built around that. FNH is a good company and they got it to work, but the P90, as much as I like it, is far from a perfect gun.

 

 

8 hours ago, PIG-Mathieu said:

The L85 : I know, it wasn' t reliable, but later versions were made, and its way better than it was before.

I can go on and on

I'm sorry to tell you this, but the L85 is a contender for the worst automatic rifle to ever enter military service along with the INSAS. the L85A2 is better yeah, It's still rather subpar and the Army should've taken the SAS' advice and bought some C7s and C8s instead.

 

Then again, this post was about drop in kits, Fister's was about the downsides of bullpups (which sould be reflected in game just like any other weapon) and people who attach their identities to inanimate objects getting mad at him when they're called imperfect, so I don't even know why this is relevant.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To settle the argument, BSG should remove all inferior (subjective) weapon variations from the game so we are left with only the 'best' (subjective) weapon of each caliber. 

So we'll have what, 9 or 10 weapons to choose from with the existing calibers already in game? AK74, AKM, M4, MP5/MPX, SR1M, 9x19 pistol, 9x18 pistol, VSS, RSAS, 7.62x54r sniper of some sort. Then BSG will only bring in the very best (subjective) weapon for subsequent calibers.

Scratch that, we should probably delete everything and just have the M4 and a pistol. Sounds good to me :) 

Spoiler

PS no bullpups allowed because they are the devil and worst guns to ever be made ever in the history of making guns and will kill their user, the user's team and civilians as well as any livestock, buildings, schools, hospitals, churches, orphanages and derivatives thereof on first use (subjective), the inventor of the bullpup should also be put on trial for war crimes and crimes against humanity because they are the worst human being to ever live.

Closed-minded doesn't even start to describe you lot. God forbid we have any choice in video games.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2017 at 9:35 PM, Tactical_Fister said:

If people want to deal with the atrocious decrease in accuracy and poor design that goes with bullpups sure. 

 

46 minutes ago, KhandE said:

 

For the record, this thread was about "drop in" bullpup kits, not dedicated weapons

He was talking about bullpups in general.

46 minutes ago, KhandE said:

I'm sorry to tell you this, but the L85 is a contender for the worst automatic rifle to ever enter military service along with the INSAS. the L85A2 is better yeah, It's still rather subpar and the Army should've taken the SAS' advice and bought some C7s and C8s instead.

As i said, more reliable version of the weapon were made, i quoted the L85 to give a general name, but weapons such as the SA80 were better and is a great gun for those who enjoy the L85' s design.

46 minutes ago, KhandE said:

 

1. The M82, contrary to popular belief by internet fanboys, is actually poorly accurate by the standards of a "sniper" rifle and there's a reason it's used an an AMR rofle almost exclusively except by those who are exceptionally talented shots. Infact, most AMRs for that matter will get destroyed in mechanical accuracy by purpose built precision rifles.

 

So you are saying that only snipers who are "exceptionally talented shots" are using a "poorly accurate" sniper ?

46 minutes ago, KhandE said:

It's a fine PDW but has quite a few design quirks, It was literally a rush project by FN because they were on the verge of bankruptcy after their previous project, the...

It' s not about weapons that aren' t rush project, its not about how it was made.... its about nice piece of weaponery, that can have a purpose in a firefight.

IMO Bullpups design are great, you do not enjoy it ? Fine i do not enjoy AR15 with LVOA handguards on it. But i don' t think anyone can come here and say that bullpups have "atrocious decrease in accuracy and poor design".

There' re facts, it' s used and people can like it or not, you prefere glocks ? Well i prefere 1911s. It' s how it is ! One day both will be in the game anyway :D

Edited by PIG-Mathieu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, PIG-Mathieu said:

There' re facts, it' s used and people can like it or not, you prefere glocks ? Well i prefere 1911s. It' s how it is ! One day both will be in the game anyway :D

And one day I will own them all :P regardless of their design!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, PIG-Mathieu said:

 

He was talking about bullpups in general.

As i said, more reliable version of the weapon were made, i quoted the L85 to give a general name, but weapons such as the SA80 were better and is a great gun for those who enjoy the L85' s design.

So you are saying that only snipers who are "exceptionally talented shots" are using a "poorly accurate" sniper ?

It' s not about weapons that aren' t rush project, its not about how it was made.... its about nice piece of weaponery, that can have a purpose in a firefight.

IMO Bullpups design are great, you do not enjoy it ? Fine i do not enjoy AR15 with LVOA handguards on it. But i don' t think anyone can come here and say that bullpups have "atrocious decrease in accuracy and poor design".

There' re facts, it' s used and people can like it or not, you prefere glocks ? Well i prefere 1911s. It' s how it is ! One day both will be in the game anyway :D

Well we all know it's about that CZ-75B Master Race :D

20151229_182451.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Tactical_Fister said:

 

 

Going to respond to all of you at once, Since y'all are basically saying the same thing. And this is going to be a big ole wall of text so apologies on that. 

First, Western Service Rifles generally speaking are for the most part all accurate. Anything past 300m is gravy when looking at a realistic engagement scenario.

Imma lay out a list of issues with Bullpups, Only have physical experience with two (TAR-21 and FN2000). So there is going to be some Copy-Paste on this. But it gets the point across.

Accuracy

Bullpup rifles typically have a higher sight offset, or "height over bore." For example, the IWI Tavor's sights are almost 4 inches over the bore, compared to the AR-15, which is as low as 2.5 inches. This may not be a factor for long-range shooters, but when considering a close-quarters tactical rifle for law enforcement or home defense purposes, users may find themselves needing to compensate for that drastic height over bore for close-up shots. Additionally, shooting from a structure or through a portal such as a window will require more care using a bullpup firearm as the muzzle must be clear of the structure to ensure clear shot placement. Just because you can see the target doesn’t mean your bullet is going to strike it.  

 

Trigger Pull
Standard rifle: Conventional rifles have perfected trigger mechanisms over the years. By being located immediately next to the action, there are few problems that occur with the triggers.           

Bullpup: Bullpups utilize trigger linkages between the forward trigger mechanism and the action in the back of the rifle. Like anything mechanical, extra parts are exposed to additional stresses and are sometimes cited as weaknesses of the platform.

Bullpup designs are mechanically more complex, requiring a long trigger linkage, and control system linkages. This seriously degrades both control feel, and reliability, and increases bulk and weight (there may be engineering solutions to this problem).

 

Weight Distribution: 

Nutshell, Standard configuration weight is centered more toward the front, which makes recoil from successive shots less of an issue, Where as on a bullpup with weight centered at the rear makes recoil more difficult to control. (Yes training alleviates this to an extent but not all of it) 

Safety 

If a bullpup has a catastrophic failure, instead of the explosion being six or eight inches in front of your eyes, it's right at your eyesocket, or touching your cheekbone or ear. The only good thing is, if the bolt flys back, it doesn't end up in your eye socket. 

Most bullpups also eject hot brass, and vent hot gasses in the vicinity of your eyes and ears (some eject downward or forward, which is a better solution for a bullpup, if it's engineered properly).

Reloading:

Mag changes on most bullpups are slower (sometimes much slower) because they require more repositioning, that positioning can be awkward, and can be difficult to see (if necessary) without fully dismounting the rifle. Not to mention reloading from the prone with a bullpup is immensely more difficult than with a conventional rifle 

A conventional rifle allows you to see your mag changes, and is more easily maneuvered with your dominant hand, which makes mag changes easier in general.

More importantly a human being can naturally bring their hands together in the dark. As a basic design guideline, magwells should either be in your dominant hand, or just in front of it; because it is far more difficult to manipulate anything dexterously that is located behind your dominant hand.

 

Because of the positioning of the magazine (usually the part of a gun extending lowest) close to your shoulder when the weapon is mounted, bullpups can be difficult to fire while prone (though this is common with some other rifle designs as well). 

Note in the pictures below, the magazine is by far the lowest point of the rifle; and being located behind the dominant hand and close to your shoulder; when you drop prone it will tend to strike the ground forcing the muzzle downward. 

This can also cause problems with mags being warped, ripped out of the magwell, having the baseplate broken off, or the rifle itself being ripped out of the users hand when hitting the deck. 

A conventional rifle with a long magazine can have issues with dropping prone as well, but because the mag is positioned forward of the dominant hand, instead of forcing the muzzle down, it will tend to force the muzzle up; and though it's not advisable to use the magazine as a monopod, it's possible. With a bullpup, it isn't.

 

Bullpups are naturally balanced in a non-instinctive way. 

This is really the biggest problem, and the one that is hardest to solve with engineering.

The balance point on most bullpups is in between your hand and your shoulder when mounted, which is unnatural. We have a natural tendency to try to balance things between our hands, not between our hand and shoulder.

The only way to correct this is to put heavy things in front of your dominant hand, or to make the weapon short and light enough that this won't make a difference (and even then it will still be more awkward and less instinctive to point; but several modern bullpups have taken the second approach).

This balance will tend to make a bullpup tend to shift its butt under recoil, unless it is very tightly mounted to your shoulder; particularly during rapid fire. This tendency is somewhat countered by the position of your support hand so far forward on the barrel,  by the fact that the overall leverage moment of the muzzle is lower (the muzzle isn't as far from either your shoulder, or your dominant hand), and by the fact that most bullpups have straightline recoil.

A conventional rifle is balanced in between your dominant and support hands, and there are good reasons for that. A human being naturally handles things that balance in the palm, or in front of your dominant hand, better, because we naturally want to balance things between our hands. 

Under recoil, the muzzle of a conventional rifle rises, but just from gravity will fall into you support hand again without actually holding or pulling it down, because the fulcrum of the lever is in your dominant hand, and the balance point is in front of the fulcrum. 


Main article used as reference. 

https://anarchangel.blogspot.com/2005/03/why-bullpups-are-persistently-bad-idea.html

honestly ur the only one hear with a brain.

Thanks for posting this for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Carl_Wheezer said:

honestly ur the only one hear with a brain.

Thanks for posting this for them.

There are a lot of points in the post you quoted which are either false and/or irrelevant to Tarkov, which we have already discussed.

Thank you for your input though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×