Ok. so I haven't posted for a few days. I spent some lazy time with my family. I didn't pay much attention to the news, did read a few chapters of the book on globalization and media I blogged about before Christmas. So, while I am sure there are things I should pay attention to regarding East Asia, Central Asia, Africa, the world in general, I have decided not to blog on international affairs until after the new year.
So today you get my two cents on Bull Pups. First, for those of you who have no clue about what I am blogging, a Bull-Pup is a style of rifle, used primarily by military forces. Cringe if you want all you whining semi-pink libs and all of you do-gooder scared of a firearm neocons as well. But generally a rifle is considered a Bull-Pup variant if the action is located behind the trigger group and alongside the shooter's face. Technically, this eliminates wasted space for the buttstock and permits a shorter firearm length for the same barrel length for improved maneuverability. Designers claim it reduces weight as well. I contest this latter as a well made carbine version of the FAL weighs little more than an SA-80, and the M4 and CAR-16 weigh about the same as the TAR-21.
So, let me just say that I am not a big fan of the Bull-Pup. I have this thing about the aesthetics of firearms. Which is why I carry a 1911 and havenever owned a Block (excuse me, Glock). However, as with all firearms these are tools and people have different preferences for tools, usually reliant upon taste and anyone who says Bull-pups are good looking guns is offering proof that all of their taste is in their mouth.
I have fired a few given opportunity from time to time to travel the world and interact with military people who have obliged me with the opportunity to pop some caps and make holes in paper. To my feel, the Tavor TAR-21 from IWI is the best of the crop. The balance is surprisingly similar to the old CAR-16 (different from M4) and the sight picture was dead on every time I lifted the rifle. The Enfield SA-80 and the GIAT FN 2000 "FAMAS) are both ok, the FAMAS seemed a steadier platform and both are much heavier to appearance and feel (but not really by true weight) than the TAVOR. Interesting note on the TAVOR, the rifle has no separate receiver. The polymer body and frame have all the relevant parts attached internally (really does cut down on weight).
I have never had the opportunity to fire the Steyr AUG A1. Would like to to say I have one day. So, here is my question to all of my adoring fans*--To Bull-Pup or not to Bull-Pup?
*Adoring fans, my blog has been read by folks in 32 countries using 8 different internet platforms and has been found using 12 different search engines. So, I consider you an adoring readership.
So today you get my two cents on Bull Pups. First, for those of you who have no clue about what I am blogging, a Bull-Pup is a style of rifle, used primarily by military forces. Cringe if you want all you whining semi-pink libs and all of you do-gooder scared of a firearm neocons as well. But generally a rifle is considered a Bull-Pup variant if the action is located behind the trigger group and alongside the shooter's face. Technically, this eliminates wasted space for the buttstock and permits a shorter firearm length for the same barrel length for improved maneuverability. Designers claim it reduces weight as well. I contest this latter as a well made carbine version of the FAL weighs little more than an SA-80, and the M4 and CAR-16 weigh about the same as the TAR-21.
So, let me just say that I am not a big fan of the Bull-Pup. I have this thing about the aesthetics of firearms. Which is why I carry a 1911 and havenever owned a Block (excuse me, Glock). However, as with all firearms these are tools and people have different preferences for tools, usually reliant upon taste and anyone who says Bull-pups are good looking guns is offering proof that all of their taste is in their mouth.
I have fired a few given opportunity from time to time to travel the world and interact with military people who have obliged me with the opportunity to pop some caps and make holes in paper. To my feel, the Tavor TAR-21 from IWI is the best of the crop. The balance is surprisingly similar to the old CAR-16 (different from M4) and the sight picture was dead on every time I lifted the rifle. The Enfield SA-80 and the GIAT FN 2000 "FAMAS) are both ok, the FAMAS seemed a steadier platform and both are much heavier to appearance and feel (but not really by true weight) than the TAVOR. Interesting note on the TAVOR, the rifle has no separate receiver. The polymer body and frame have all the relevant parts attached internally (really does cut down on weight).
I have never had the opportunity to fire the Steyr AUG A1. Would like to to say I have one day. So, here is my question to all of my adoring fans*--To Bull-Pup or not to Bull-Pup?
*Adoring fans, my blog has been read by folks in 32 countries using 8 different internet platforms and has been found using 12 different search engines. So, I consider you an adoring readership.
No comments:
Post a Comment