Nothing stirs more of an emotional divide in the 2A community than the bullpup. While there are factual arguments for the practical use of the platform design, the emotional responses are rarely middle ground. The bullpup is a rifle that end users either love or hate; rarely is it undecided.
The bullpup is a rifle design that needs no introduction. At this point, if an individual has not seen a bullpup, then they grew up on Sentinel Island. With the understanding of what a bullpup is well established, the next rational question is: why was the bullpup created? The idea is to retain barrel length to improve accuracy and ballistic performance in a compact platform. The bullpup was created with vehicle deployment in mind. The combination of confined spaces and practical use clashed in the early years of bullpup development. The first modern design, pioneered by the British Military in the 1940s, was the EM-1. A first step that looked to create a weapon that provided improved balance and reduced size, but maintained the advantages of a longer barrel.
Over time, the bullpup developed a reputation for mushy, heavy triggers, cumbersome handling, and right-hand use only. These qualms were well deserved, and thus the repute of the bullpup remained in place for decades to come. It wasn’t until the war on terror that new innovations would take a bold step forward, moving hand in hand with technological advancements in design, that the bullpup would start to see a resurgence in both technology and application.
Today, with dedicated designs like the Tavor, VHS2 (Hellion), MDRX/WLVRN, AUG, Olcan, and many others, the bullpup has taken on a significantly improved image. Add in the advent of chassis that utilize pre-existing platforms; the bullpup is now gaining favor and a prolonged affectionate gaze of many of us that would not have considered one in the past.
Not all bullpup designs are useful for every role; one must take the overall layout of the weapon and barrel length into consideration. I would argue a more streamlined design coupled with a shorter barrel provides advantageous characteristics for the intended use as a truck gun. A truck gun needs to be very compact for ease of movement while still retaining an ability to have an effective engagement range of at least 100 meters. The platform necessitates the ability to utilize a modern cartridge and must be in a common caliber.
Two main categories are being examined for the bullpup truck gun: the dedicated design and the chassis. A dedicated design is the traditional platform we see regularly, while the chassis is just that: a chassis that a regular full weapon will mount into. Both have their benefits and contradictions, but regardless, the bullpup is primed and arguably designed to be a truck gun. The point of this article is not to present which is better, a dedicated design or chassis, but rather to display and discuss options for those seeking to squeeze more performance out of their truckgun.
Weapons designed from the ground up to be a bullpup are, from conception, a planned, engineered platform. With any design, there is more room for adaptability and engineering; such a platform, while more expensive and time-consuming, allows engineers to create the desired weapon as they intend. Dedicated designs have the benefit of being organic and can alleviate pre-existing design parameters that can create engineering problems. Dedicated platforms can also allow for a more ergonomic and efficient layout and manual of arms. This can present a lower cost up front to the end user, as the individual using a dedicated design is not relegated to solving issues that may present themselves with a chassis.
A chassis is a system that a pre-existing weapon will be retrofitted into, providing the external controls to interface with the weapon and allow for the bullpup configuration to be attained. Like the dedicated design, the chassis provides a full-size rifle the ability to shorten itself considerably by moving the receiver to what would be considered the stock of the weapon behind the individual’s hands. Chassis allow for a proven platform to be retrofitted into a new configuration and also present the individual with the known accuracy and reliability to be retained without having to step up into a new platform.
There will be many that will most definitely comment below that bullpups are inferior, have terrible triggers, and their manual of arms is less efficient; this is, of course, a matter of opinion. While the triggers of bullpups have been, in the past, less than optimum, bullpup triggers have made significant steps forward, and I commonly argue that American Shooters are the greatest and are weapon snobs; myself included. We in America have had it so good for so long that we expect tier-one level performance at swap meet prices. We want sub-minute angle accuracy with budget ammo, precision barrels and triggers, and the latest technology for 1980s prices. We demand that everything be the latest brand names and the newest hotness from Instagram, YouTube, or what’s in COD.
While we in the SOF community do not utilize bullpups, that is primarily from the standpoint of standardization and what is issued. Even when a unit can choose, we tend to choose what we know. It is an unfair assessment to say bullpups are not worth using. I would happily have used a bullpup as my duty weapon when I was contracting, conducting mobile protection and operations. To be able to have a higher level of performance while still running a rifle as small or smaller than my 10.5” HK or DD would have been optimum; both of those platforms had their issues as well, and I can say there are several platforms I would have happily run: a dedicated designed rifle or a chassis for my HK, DD, or LWRC.
The bullpup was designed to allow a full-size rifle to be no longer than the torso of an adult male, thus making debarking vehicles, aircraft, or moving in and around urban environments easier and more efficient while not having to sacrifice ballistic performance. The trade-off is design that affects ergonomics and the manual of arms. Let us examine some choices of calibres, barrel lengths, and accessories as to what would provide some excellent performance, all with clearly established parameters as to what we are choosing and why.
Choosing the right caliber is as important as the weapon itself. While it may seem common sense in the US to choose 5.56 as our baseline for a truck gun, depending on the conditions, choosing a different caliber and weapon configuration will lead you in a different or less obvious direction. The use of 5.56 is a common-sense approach; I feel it is important to state that pistol calibers are suboptimal for primary weapon systems, while they have their place as a primary. For myself, it plays best when my primary uses the same ammunition and magazine as my secondary, but even then, this application is very limited.
My go-to stems directly from either 5.56 or 7.62x39 for optimising a truck gun’s performance. That said, I do like the performance of 5.45x39, 5.7, and .308. There are a few others we can look to, but my wild card caliber is 9x39. This iconic round may be alien to some of the readers, but this caliber is known for its performance and lethality, stemming from its combat-proven performance over decades of use in the VSS and SR-3 rifles from Russia. Even .308 can prove to be extremely useful out of short barrels. I have seen gelatin tests showing .308 ball ammunition shot from a 9” barrel not overpenetrating 15” of ballistic gel at short CQB ranges. Given the average engagement distance for police in traffic stops is 10’ 70% of the time, with the remaining almost entirely at shorter distances, velocity is not the only consideration for terminal effects on target. Without going down rabbit holes on what calibers, grain weights, and projectile designs, I would prefer to keep this above water and leave the iceberg alone. For myself, based on the experience and data, 5.56 is a go-to for the US market, but I am still a massive advocate for .30 in both ComBlock and NATO chamberings. Choose your caliber and type based on the environment you will have to defend yourself.
The platform we choose is also significant. A dedicated design will provide some history for your choice of firearm. Depending on the design, I would argue some platforms offer better choices for a truck gun than others. I am a strong advocate for the Hellion rifle, particularly with upgrades from Manticore, BlackTalon, Blk Lbl, and others, but the overall design is a bit bulky for a vehicle-oriented platform. The Tavor X95 is an excellent platform when upgraded, and DesertTech WLVRN/MDRX are also impressive given the options for barrel length and configuration.
The real paradox comes from the chassis platforms. These allow the end user to take a pre-existing firearm and simply drop it into a platform to create something entirely new. The performance of the weapon does not have to be challenged or interrupted, as the precision trigger and barrel harmonics remain unchanged. A quality AR alternative like the Jakl, BRN180, and FM15 can be dropped directly into these chassis systems and allow for optimized performance from well-trusted and pre-existing firearms. For myself, I have a long-standing trust in long-stroke piston systems, given how the Jakl has become a well-proven system over the few years since its release, I can say with confidence that the system is reliable and meets US standards for accuracy. There have been plenty of burn-downs showing how the Jakl performs at a level expected for a military firearm.
I have tested two primary platforms for the Jakl as a bullpup and one other platform for AR-15. Starting with the AR-15, the chassis is the Reap Weaponry Scy. The Scy is a chassis machined from Delrin (an industrial-grade polymer) that allows a virtually unchanged AR rifle to be configured into a bullpup. I did, however make a few small changes to ensure a more manageable platform. I changed out the BCG and buffer for a Dead Foot system with their mini buttstock, installed a Devil Dog Hard Charger charging handle and custom cheek rest, and a left-side magazine release. The end result is a full-size AR that is easily maneuverable in a vehicle with the full performance of a 16” barrel. There are a few small quirks with this configuration, but other ARs with side charging will also work well. The trigger is still incredible given the single-stage match trigger. The system is reliable, accurate, and compact.
The next chassis is the new chassis from Black Talon named the Raptor (formerly of SRU); this chassis is very well made and has minimal impact on the weapon installed. The trigger bar, like that of the other chassis in this article, is smooth, light, and crisp. The system ensures a seamless integration and keeps the weapon compact. The integrated optional forward grip is amazing and akin to the MDRX SBR; I highly recommend this option as it provides excellent hand placement while ensuring your support hand will not slide forward and become injured by the muzzle; this becomes more apparent with short-barreled systems. The system is well built but could benefit from a little more metal support; to be fair, there have been no signs of stress that would cause the system to fail, and like all chassis, the entire rifle upper and lower are integrated, so the system is wrapped around a complete firearm. The platform, when configured on a 10.5” Jakl, is as small as an MP5K with the stock collapsed but spewing 5.56. This is a serious tool for its intended purpose.
The next is the A3 Tactical Triad. The Triad is a fully encompassing chassis that envelops the entire firearm and replaces the lower handguard of the Jakl with its own. There are options for the industrial-grade polymer or aluminium for the chassis. The Triad is substantially bigger in terms of integration with the donor weapon, so weight is higher, but the engineering of the Triad is significantly more advanced than that of the Raptor; this is not a detractor against either system. The Triad, like the Raptor, provides a cheek rest for the Picatinny rail section on the upper receiver, but unlike the Raptor, the Triad has a more ergonomic forward selector and comes standard with a flat match trigger for installation while providing a cover for the selector on the donor weapon. The Triad does come at a higher cost, but the end user is receiving a larger footprint in terms of parts and interface. When choosing your platform, ensure it matches the weapon barrel length to ensure proper configuration.
The final chassis tested is a bit of a dark horse and perhaps harder to acquire. I had an AK-47 provided by M13 converted with the use of a Kochevnik clone kit and then refined by Daniel Fisher of Halcyon Defence to create an updated custom version of the famed bullpup from Russia. The system takes a 12.5” AK-47 SBR and converts it into a very viable bullpup system that has the hallmarks of the AK but shifted into a small lethal package. The all-metal design combined with full accessory capability allows the Kochevnik to operate with the best of both: the durability of an AK combined with the legendary 7.62x39 cartridge and compact nature. The Kochevnik is a terrifyingly small effective platform. The platform is tailor-built with vehicles in mind; by use of an inline comp and shorter barrel, the platform optimizes the strengths of the cartridge and its size. The Kochevnik uses a Med-Evil Grip with its forward-swept design providing a more ergonomic grip angle and making greater use of space for rapid, easy magazine swaps. Another bonus is the forward non-reciprocating charging handle reminiscent of the MP5/G3 and the magazine well. Combining these provides a significant step forward in high efficiency of operation. There will be a follow-on article for the Kochevnik later this year.
It is important to understand why the bullpup has a distinct advantage over the traditional layout rifles. The bullpup was designed with vehicles and tight spaces in mind; this is a platform configuration intended for compact spaces. The distinctive layout does require some training to acquire the needed muscle memory that comes from drilling with your bullpup. Once a more comfortable manual of arms is developed, the bullpup, like any rifle, becomes second nature to operate.
The ability to have more velocity without having to sacrifice barrel length allows the bullpup to operate in a space between. In the end, it is the ability of the end user to show their ability; the rifle is not inferior, just the level of training of the end user. There are arguments for the manual of arms of the bullpup when compared to a conventional layout, but if lethality and mobility are the needed traits and not split times, the bullpup is the superior platform for a truckgun.
This article is sure to draw heated debate based more on personal feelings than a robust fact-based argument about viability. The bullpup is not intended to be a race gun; it is a combat platform that was, from its inception, a combat rifle. Today, with the advancements in design and the engineering that produces exceptional triggers with highly effective ergonomics, the bullpup can truly be placed into a category that it has long worked toward. The bullpup is a true mobility platform intended for confined spaces and ease of use. The bullpup is the quintessential truck gun and will punch above its weight if the end user takes the time to tame it.