this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2025
125 points (95.0% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

4022 readers
326 users here now

Rules:

  1. Posts must abide by lemmy.world terms and conditions
  2. No spam or soliciting for money.
  3. No racism or other bigotry allowed.
  4. Obviously nothing illegal.

If you see these please report them.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So from a mechanics standpoint what are the pros/cons of a bullpup design? off the top of my head I'm guessing more barrel length but less space for any kind of recoil supression?

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago (7 children)

Pros: Longer barrel in the same overall size, or a shorter total length for the same barrel. A longer barrel means more exit velocity, while a shorter weapon means more agility in small spaces (indoors, for example).

Cons: the ejection port is close to the shooter's face, making ambidextrous weapons nearly impossible. The chamber is also closer, making it more dangerous in the (relatively rare) case of a catastrophic failure.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

the ejection port is close to the shooter's face, making ambidextrous weapons nearly impossible

Keltec RDB

Keltec RFB

Springfield Hellion

DesertTech WLVRN

... I probably missed some, but there are many bullpup rifles that are swappable between left sided and right sided ejection ports, and swappable mag release, charging handle, bolt catch, safety selectors... or have some other solution to this problem.

Not exactly nearly impossible.

I would add in as a detriment of bullpups... that their internals are generally more complex, and properly identifying the cause of a failure to fire, and fixing it, while under stress, is often more difficult, and general maintenance tends toward being more time consuming as well.

Also: generally notorious for requiring a lot more foot lbs of force to pull the trigger, and that trigger pull is 'crunchier'.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

making ambidextrous weapons nearly impossible

Kel-tec calls bullshit

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 days ago (2 children)

B-but the FN P90 is ambidextrous and ejects the casings downwards.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The FN P90 is weird no matter how you look at it.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 days ago

It's safer to look at it from the rear I believe.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Hard to scale that particular design up to longer cartridges, unfortunately. A 5.56 P90 would be so cool, though.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (3 children)

The Keltec RDB has bottom eject and fires 5.56

Ckr even more noncredibility, the Keltec RFB is a bullpup with forward eject.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Two projectiles for the price of one?! Count me in.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

Borderlands ass gun lmao

[–] Revan343 6 points 2 days ago

Keltec just can't stop making cool shit

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This is how the RDB rendered on my mobile browser:

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

we need wide zelensky with stout rdb rofl

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Hot brass bukkake is the price you have to pay.

[–] Revan343 8 points 2 days ago

Cons

Also generally a more complex mechanism, with the associated negative effects on reliability, cost, or both

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

making ambidextrous weapons nearly impossible

Angry FAMAS noises
well, it's not strictly ambidextrous but it's allegedly pretty easy to change the side of the ejection

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

Also weird ergonomic issues and a different manual of arms. Those can both be trained around, but that's a big ask for most militaries.