The 7.62x39 variant will use STANAG compatible mags.
Two different magazine types will be used: SR-25/DPMS spec magazines for 7.62x51mm/.308 (this includes MagPul P-MAGs), STANAG 4159 compliant magazines for all other calibers, including 7.62x39mm.
That make the 7.62x39 version a nonstarter for me. Magazines are the most critical part of a self loading firearm and the STANAG 7.62x39 mags don’t hold a candle to the tried, proven, and ridiculously robust AK mag.
They diss the FS2000’s ejection mechanism but apparently have never seen one in operation.
This means that in urban operations − when the muzzle is almost kept upright, as operators have to be on constant watch for hostile fire coming from windows − these designs may have not enough force to eject the spent cases, and jams may occur.
Can’t say much good for the RFB, as the one I’ve seen shot in person had serious issues with functioning and ejection. I do have a FS2000 however, and the forward ejection on that is positive and reliable. The fired cases are ejected positively and smartly forward.
Let’s not count our chickens before they are hatched. While I’d love to have a 6.8SPC bullpup the track record of firearm projects from small companies isn’t great. Developing a new firearm design isn’t easy. Self loading arms are complex machines that require close timing, robust parts, and skill in manufacture.
Cost is said to range from ~$2150 for MDR-C to $2400 for full size MDR; if that’s the case then the price is reasonable in my opinion.
I’d be really interested in a head to head comparison with the new Radom MSBS, but that’s still even further away. The article says the MDR should be released in about 8 months, which isn’t too far away.
I really like the look of that MDR-C model, I wonder if there’ll be a “Non-NFA” route to get one; although it’ll defeat the purpose. I didn’t read too far into the article, but if barrel swaps are easy then it shouldn’t be hard to just but one with a 16" barrel as a placeholder for SBR.
I don’t want to get too excited about these since living in CA brings too much uncertainty with laws from year to year. I’ve been tempted to get a bullpup; I had my eye on the AUG, but seeing this should come in 2015 I might just wait.
ETA: the biggest thing I see going for this is the caliber conversion from 5.56 to .308. 7.62 x 39 mm is great as long as it takes AK mags, without the AK mags it just defeats the purpose IMO. I feel the only people who would use the 7.62 x39 mm feature would be those of us with AK’s already
Can we try to keep this thread about technical merits and demerits of the MDR?
Drive by postings that it’s not a AR (and therefore isn’t perfect) aren’t very helpful, either.
Apologies for the apparent drive by posting. The thread got locked before I could further explain my logic.
Suffice to say that I wish the MDR incredible success. My post was borne of extreme frustration with most attempts at a next-gen carbine that have significantly underwhelmed. I would love to own an MDR if it works as well as or better than a top-tier AR due to the ambi-friendly features (I’m a lefty) and the NFA-friendly, yet compact 26" OAL.
I would love to see a new American made carbine (bullpup or std) that could surpass the performance of a mil spec M4 carbine. Having said that, I want to know how well this gun will run suppressed and how well the ejection system will work in reality. The ejection system seems complicated, and it will be hard to surpass a Steyr made AUG in the reliability department. Shootability (ergonomics) is another ball park, but the two will have to come together and surpass all other bullpups to catch on. The Tavor and AUG at least have military contracts and spare parts readily available. Regardless, I would like a 5.56 NATO bullpup with a 16" barrel that doesn’t run afoul of NFA rules. If they put an adjustable gas regulator on the gun for better suppressed use, they might have a winner for a CQB/home defense rifle. The use of Magpul PMAGs and Lancer AWMs would be a must in my book. Will it be better than a FN SCAR-16? We won’t know until we get to shoot it.
I agree that the use of an old STANAG magazine design for the 7.62 Soviet version is a disappointment. I’m not sure who even makes those magazines anymore. If it works though, more power to them. A bullpup that uses AK mags would be pretty darn awesome though…
I also want to say that DesertTech’s bolt action rifles merit a closer look. I was really impressed by them at the NRA convention. One of their reps was at the EuroOptic booth, and it looks like a well thought out system. If I had $4k to burn, I would consider one, especially when one can swap between 308 and 300 win mag easily.
I’ll be in for a 5.56 for sure and then maybe a 7.62x39 if they change it to take AK mags and a 6.8 if it takes the new Pmags. It really depends on how much I like gun overall. I’m hoping it’s a winner because I think it would be cool to to have this rifle in multiple caliber setups, but the calibers have to have the correct mags.
I’m thinking a 10.5 inch 300AAC with a pinned and welded suppressor would be a perfect truck gun or HD setup.
I like having a adjustable gas system as it makes tuning for different ammo easy. FN’s system of having a 2 position gas regulator and replaceable gas screws with 0.05mm increment sizes is nice in that the unit armorer can set up the rifles to have the gas regulator function as either ‘suppressed’ & ‘normal’ or ‘normal’ and ‘adverse’. The end user just has to flip the 2 position regulator. Minimal parts for reliability and ease of use.
As far as the ejection system goes the FS2000 maintains positive control of the fired case until it’s in the ejection tube and past the anti-return spring, which keeps fired cases from moving backwards into the action. On the extraction stroke the fired case comes back with the bolt while the switch (similar to a shotgun loading gate) swings down. The extractor maintains its grip on the case until the extractor paddle hits its lug in the receiver, releasing it. The ejector then pushes the fired case into the switch. As the bolt runs forward the stripping lugs push the next cartridge into the chamber as in most other self loading arms. At the same time, the bolt carrier is pushing the switch up into alignment with the ejector tube. As the bolt carrier finishes running forward the rammer forces the case from the switch into the ejection tube and past the anti-return spring.
By maintaining positive control of the fired case FN made sure their ejection system worked. It can’t have been easy to engineer the design.
I’ve never seen it documented anywhere why the FS2000 does not have a automatic BHO activated by the last round leaving the magazine. I suspect it’s because that would result in leaving a fired case in the switch, where it could be dislodged.
I see people constantly mentioning using suppressors in home defense and I have to shake my head. You realize that in the event of having to use your suppressed home defense firearm, the police will come, and will likely take your firearm and suppressor as evidence. Even in the most straightforward “good” shoots they will need to have a forensic ballistic expert test the firearm that was used with the same brand of ammunition to confirm that you didn’t lie to the police about the circumstances of the shoot. You will more than likely not see that rifle for weeks to even years depending.
So do you want the risk of a $1,000+ can and a $3,000+ rifle staying in police custody until they see fit (or you get a court order) and the possibility of every single evidence jockey fingering your equipment? Not for me, ear pro’s are cheaper, or I would just go without and hope my hearing holds out for however long the encounter takes.
Getting back on topic, the MDR looks promising, but until it’s in the hands of users who run it hard and are willing to be honest with any firearms shortcomings I won’t be wrapping one up to take it home.
If you’re ever having to defend yourself in a shooting that happened inside you’re home the $4k you dropped on the rifle and accessories are going to seem cheap.
I can guess where you are going with your own thought process, what if you have kids, how is their hearing going to be protected? My answer is simple in these situations, you should have a safe room picked out and ear pro for the wife with normal shooting muffs for the kids. That room should also contain a back up carbine/shotgun/pistol that your wife is proficient with. It should also have a cell phone so while you are “protecting the King” she will be calling for the Police.
And should your case go to court, having to explain a sound suppressor to uninitiated jurors is supposed to be easy? If a prosecutor decides to file charges that means that there is sufficient evidence and that your screwed up by being far too talkative with Law enforcement officers. Best to clam up and ask for a lawyer rather than making a statement about what happened than and there.
An integrally suppressed compact model would be seriously awesome.
I’m still not wild about any of the ejection schemes on bullpup PDW setups, and this looks the sketchiest, but if it runs I’d certainly take a good hard look at it.
Honestly, the engineering behind the F2000 and FS2000 is the best thing about the rifle.
But it’s got all the hallmarks of a bunch of bored (and possibly drunk) engineers sitting around and deciding to design a gun without having an end user in mind to test the weapon and provide feedback. It really feels more like a proof of concept or a demonstrator than an actual production combat rifle. Sort of like a Western AN-94.
If someone comes into my homes and I have to shoot them I’ve got bigger problems than losing a $4k rifle setup for the duration of the investigation. Ear pro is cheaper and more effective but I highly doubt I’ll even remember to put them on and frankly I really value my hearing. If I ever get married that might change:lol:.
I think the F2000 was designed to to hit a few performance goals:
Be very ambidextrous w/o having to swap parts. The Tavor is fully ambidextrous but swapping it over requires a left hand bolt and is a armorer level task. The AUG doesn’t flip the CH but swapping only requires a field strip (and a LH bolt). The SCAR is fully ambidextrous but requires a field strip to swap the CH to the other side.
Provide for as compact a weapon as possible while remaining short for better storage inside vehicles and maneuvering in urban environments. This pretty much dictates a bull pup design. The SCAR is almost as short as a F2000 but with a shorter barrel (worse ballistics) and the stock folded.
Provide a solution that’s tightly integrated with the FN 40mm GL. The FN grenade launcher replaces the front hand guard and the huge hollow in the stock is intended for the battery that powers the laser range finding/inclinometer sight.
Be usable while wearing heavy gloves/NBC gear. All the controls work well when wearing heavy gloves, including the mag catch, which is perfectly placed, is huge and yet well shielded against accidental release.
Do all those things and maintain a reasonable weight. Extensive use of plastics where possible to keep weight down, steel almost everywhere else.
I think FN hit their goals pretty well. If you want a example of a truly troubled rifle program, read up about the SA80 debacle. Designed by committee, pushed thru trials (making it thru by ignoring the problems and failures the testing program exposed every step of the way), shoddily manufactured on the cheap, issued with no provision for shooting left handed (would have cost more, you know), and with defects uncovered in active service being blamed on the soldiers saddled with the sorry POS.
The ejection is quite simple, actually it is your standard side ejection, it just happens to have a cover with a tube to guide the case foward, and this cover is removeable. I might be wrong, but it is what I understood from all the shotshow videos I watch on this gun.
It looks like a cool new design. I’ve been wanting a bullpup for years - I don’t have one (well, besides a .22 rimfire Walther) for several reasons:
Price. Except for the discontinued Bushmaster M17S, they all cost a lot. This would be OK, if it were not for:
Proprietary parts. All of them are mostly or entirely proprietary. That makes me VERY reluctant to buy one unless it comes from a big, well established company with a big US presence. For a long time Steyr didn’t have a reliable US presence (that seems to be fixed now). FNH-USA is certainly very well established, but the FS2000 always seemed to be a redheaded stepchild in their line. If you follow MSAR, you know what they’ve gone through. The support of the Tavor is promising so far, but remains to be seen over time. Other designs - uh? Kel-Tec can barely get RFBs out the door and has apparently had to fix some of them. Really, I would want to see the proprietary weapon made by a company I can trust to be around and support it 10-20 years from now. That leaves a fairly small list of companies I’m confident in - FN, Colt, SIG, maybe Steyr.
Desert Tech, fka Desert Tactical Arms, has previously been a small niche maker of very expensive bullpup precision rifles. They seem to have a good reputation, but don’t seem to be that common, and at $5k+ for a complete rifle I can see why. I’ll have to be convinced they can make the job from small niche maker to larger scale, lower price point production, with a long term prospect so my $2-3k investment in a proprietary rifle isn’t worthless in a few years.
All that said, I like the looks of the MDR, especially the full size .308 version. I wish them luck, and will be watching. But not being a first adopter.
