The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

tackb wrote:

R.G.C wrote: David,
A bullpup for a single shot rifle is an idiot idea from the start. Just imagine the arm twist needed to reload......

And for repeaters; if it was of any real value, the principle would have developped much more than it is.....

Semi-full autos is an other concept, and, even here, the loading handle has often be placed at a more accessible location than a bolt handle.

Yoy mentioned the triggering issue, then I do not have to....
R.G.C

I would say try the DTA ? Although it it very expensive it does shoot your arguments down flames!

...& Barrett Firearms offer bull-pup bolt-actions in .416 & .50-BMG
I think R.G.C. better inform the Barrett company chairman that the concept is flawed, before he makes an idiot of himself by actually trying to sell such failed designs on the open market.
Best hurry...

(& WTF is a "loading handle"?) ...anyone??

Lula & Sten gun magazine loaders are fitted with such things, never seem them on a bang-stick yet...though I suppose the Israeli's may already be installing them, adjacent to the bottle openers, as another inbuilt widget...

saddler wrote:
If it was down to me I'd kill the linkage issues dead in the water; electronic triggers can be fitted anywhere without linkage a assembly in sight.

Excellent idea, ooman. We were wondering how long it would take you to come up with that one !

With a K31, you could also take advantage of the straight pull design and utilise a pump action to reload the system - a simple shift of the left paw on a forward mounted pawdle connected by a rod to the bolt would cycle the action simply and efficiently. Combined with an electronic trigger release you'd have a wonderful rifle.

saddler wrote:...& Barrett Firearms offer bull-pup bolt-actions in .416 & .50-BMG
I think R.G.C. better inform the Barrett company chairman that the concept is flawed, before he makes an idiot of himself by actually trying to sell such failed designs on the open market.
Best hurry...

The bull pup is fine in some applications however I agree with Robert it is awkward to maintain cheek position and cycle the rifle especially with a Barrett which was designed in this form to reduce the over all length.

In the world of target shooting in any form I am yet to see a bull pup design near the top and yes the DTA is an accurate rifle however all the people I know who shoot them lift their heads to re load.

saddler wrote:

tackb wrote:

R.G.C wrote: David,
A bullpup for a single shot rifle is an idiot idea from the start. Just imagine the arm twist needed to reload......

And for repeaters; if it was of any real value, the principle would have developped much more than it is.....

Semi-full autos is an other concept, and, even here, the loading handle has often be placed at a more accessible location than a bolt handle.

Yoy mentioned the triggering issue, then I do not have to....
R.G.C

I would say try the DTA ? Although it it very expensive it does shoot your arguments down flames!

...& Barrett Firearms offer bull-pup bolt-actions in .416 & .50-BMG
I think R.G.C. better inform the Barrett company chairman that the concept is flawed, before he makes an idiot of himself by actually trying to sell such failed designs on the open market.
Best hurry...

(& WTF is a "loading handle"?) ...anyone??

Lula & Sten gun magazine loaders are fitted with such things, never seem them on a bang-stick yet...though I suppose the Israeli's may already be installing them, adjacent to the bottle openers, as another inbuilt widget...

Do please read my post...
SINGLE SHOT
I cannot fpllow you in english ironic expression, sorry.
R.G.C

Dangermouse wrote:I like the idea of being able to swap barrels without special tools.

How long before someone fires a barrel up the range though?

DM

If you can change a wheel - you can change a barrel.

Gun Pimp wrote:

Dangermouse wrote:I like the idea of being able to swap barrels without special tools.

How long before someone fires a barrel up the range though?

DM

If you can change a wheel - you can change a barrel.

AA/RAC on speed-dial it is then...

ovenpaa wrote:This is the Model 75 so it uses the C.G INCH Action and is single shot only, if you want a repeater you need the Model 66, best I get a picture posted. tongueout

Yes, picture of the magazine fed version when you get it please?

While I prefer 'tree-guts' rifles, I can see the appeal from a 'bulls-eye machine' for competitive shooting point....

Sorry if this overlaps with Badger's thread...but a few questions if I may....

Firstly, what action is the Model 66, and are there less barrel switching options than the 75?

Second - IF you wanted a rifle for 200/300 yard McQueens (single shot options included), and also F/TR up to 1000 yards ...would there be an advantage to using different barrels for each discipline? And if so, what would be the Ideal choice of calibers for 2 different barrels?...I know this is difficult to answer, as it depends on twists and bullet types as well, but generally what would be the ideal caliber for either discipline?

Looks like a single shot Tubb T2K to me. Nothing new really.

Dougan wrote:

ovenpaa wrote:This is the Model 75 so it uses the C.G INCH Action and is single shot only, if you want a repeater you need the Model 66, best I get a picture posted. tongueout

Yes, picture of the magazine fed version when you get it please?

While I prefer 'tree-guts' rifles, I can see the appeal from a 'bulls-eye machine' for competitive shooting point....

Sorry if this overlaps with Badger's thread...but a few questions if I may....

Firstly, what action is the Model 66, and are there less barrel switching options than the 75?

Second - IF you wanted a rifle for 200/300 yard McQueens (single shot options included), and also F/TR up to 1000 yards ...would there be an advantage to using different barrels for each discipline? And if so, what would be the Ideal choice of calibers for 2 different barrels?...I know this is difficult to answer, as it depends on twists and bullet types as well, but generally what would be the ideal caliber for either discipline?

Dougan,

Pleasure to reply to questions of goo sense.......

There will be no magazine for the 75,as ii is intended for the INCH rear locking 3 lugs single shot match action... For this, go to next post for the front locking '66' who exist in the 2 versions as repeater and single shot. The particularity of the '66" js that the centre chassis of the stock is the receiver itseld. Ovenpaa has published a full description of it, therefore, no reason for me to repeat. Just to say the 66 is the complement of more classic actions intendes as steel and light metal receivers, both single shot and repeaters...

The 66 has a barrel switch capacity; however not as efficient as the INCH does. This is a design imperative; as the short bolt strpke of the INCH (85mm as compared to the 105mm of most SA front lockers) allowed a longer (35mm barrel shank. The 66(tube) and the 59 (conventional) is shorter to comply with the Remington footprint of the 59. It is however based on the same principle.

Sincerely, I have no answer to the barrels question...a question of preferences.

R.G.C

Thanks R.G.C

...So more options and flexibility on switching barrels on the single shot version....

I'm still curious about hearing anyone's 'preferences' for 2 different barrels, one for short and one for long range? - I can understand why being able to switch calibers is good for hunters, but am still trying to work out if it can be advantageous to a paper-puncher....?