Saiga-Groza

[einherjrar 0]

Hey there, just bought a second factory saiga-12 about a month ago, and am looking to convert this shotgun to a groza/groza-clone platform.

 

If you're not familiar with groza, these pics:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OC-14_Groza

 

http://pookieweb.dyndns.org:61129/Groza/images.htm <--- probably the best set of pics I've found yet for groza.

 

http://pookieweb.dyndns.org:61129/Groza/gr...ery/Image15.jpg <--- especially this one

 

http://sleekupload.com/uploads/groza_2.jpg <--- (GRR, I really don't like linking to gaming site's, but here's some 3d rendering of a groza from some FPS that google found, silly that they have the charging handle on both left and right renderings.)

 

 

Looks not too dissimilar from other bullpup kits I've seen, I like the elevated sight array, but I'm feeling iffy about the front sight post being so close to the rear sight aperture, and pistol-grip placement looks awkward/impossible for camming an S12 magazine in. Those shortcomings aside, I still want it/want to build it.

 

I've been working on a magwell for about 4 months (only drawings, no finished product), so I'm not overly concerned about magazine cam clearence. If I can actually assemble a parts kit to do the rest, I'd fab it up (assuming it can retain an overall length of 26"). bbl will stay factory 18", with an extended muzzle brake welded in place to add overall length to match legal limit if needed. Worst case scenario with magwell, my design doesn't work and I have to drop $500-$700 USD on a magwell I've seen imported. Mine ought to work with factory saiga standard and AGP mags (with small amounts of plastic removed from the upper ridges. Enough about magwells though, if I ever made one, I'd make ONE; Cobra or MD ought to have theirs out before I'm too senile to shoot anymore.

 

Now, I haven't been able to even find the groza rifle for sale, let alone a conversion kit, to say nothing of one for a saiga shotgun, but it's something I'm very interested in building, and soon. All information available points to being still experimental, with units being issued to Russian military and police special units. I have not found any civilian sales after around 12+ hours of internet searches.

 

Anyone got any info on something like this? Or am I as mad as a hatter?

 

Another option (that I'm not as crazy about) is a gas tube picatinny rail (cobra's probably) with an AR-15/M-16 elevated removable rear sight array (the piece with the carrying handle), with a barrel mounted front sight post, and a different buttstock (possibly custom to meet overall length limit, I'm continuing education at the college right now, and can't drop enough money to convert to an SBS). though if possible I'd like to keep it as close to the groza as possible, *if* I have to go custom.

 

I already have a handsome full size Springfield M1A,Colt AR-15(A3),Steyr made HK-91(G3), and Izmash S12, but have no bullpup to round out my collection. I want one/want to build one, no matter how much of a PITA I've heard they are to work on.

 

Edit: Hrmph! removed two dead image file links. they worked when I posted and a few hours after, but this morning linked to a junk image. *shrug* Every other link still operates.

 

Edit: >_< removed another dead image file link.

Edited September 9, 2008 by einherjrar

[gunnysmith 4]

The short sight radius on several of the pictures, suggest it's main

roll is as a PDW Personal Defence Weapon.

[MD_Willington 11]

FYI

 

pookieweb...

 

hcpookie is a member here and at a lot of other AK forums...

[einherjrar 0]

The short sight radius on several of the pictures, suggest it's main

roll is as a PDW Personal Defence Weapon.

 

If I can find a kit or clone that I can mill out to fit on my saiga-12, I'll see to it that it's a HDW home defense weapon.

 

I get what you're saying, it's not designed for long range applications, but neither is a shotgun. Still looks like a bitch to zero, I hear similar things about FAMAS (never used one though).

 

FYI

 

pookieweb...

 

hcpookie is a member here and at a lot of other AK forums...

 

Think I should PM him about this? I really like the look of the buttplate and elevated sight more than anything else I've seen in the AK bullpup catagory.

 

Contenders based on appearance would be:

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...tar-M_REMOV.jpg <--- could use a better buttplate/stock

 

http://world.guns.ru/assault/korobov_tkb408.jpg <--- could use an elevated sight for that straight profile stock.

Edit: whoops, looks like the above pic 'koborov' isn't built on an AK platform. It's just russian. still has a better look than many russian bullpups I've looked at.

Edited September 9, 2008 by einherjrar

[Geezer59 1]

Bullpups are a bad idea - just my personal opinion, but backed up by others.

 

Care to discuss?

[Twinsen 86]

Bullpups are a bad idea - just my personal opinion, but backed up by others.

 

Care to discuss?

 

Why's that?

[BobAsh 582]

Bullpups are a bad idea - just my personal opinion, but backed up by others

 

Care to discuss?

 

Well, I don't know about a "bad idea", but I don't like to shoot them, personally. The triggers suck and having the action under your chin is distracting.

 

Just an opinion, shoot a few of them and draw your own conclusions

[SuAside 2]

Bullpups are a bad idea - just my personal opinion, but backed up by others.

 

Care to discuss?

 

stated disadvantages on the mentioned blog:

The bullpup rifle only has one real advantage; in that bullpup designs allow a longer barrel for a given overall length of arm.

euhm, how about better use in FIBUA (i believe that's MOUT in the US)?

easier use in vehicles (or getting out of said vehicle)?

faster aiming/targetacquisition?

reduced fatigue due to the balance being more to the rear rather than to the front?

 

just to name a few.

Bullpup designs are mechanically more complex, requiring a long trigger linkage, and control system linkages. This seriously degrades both control feel, and reliability, and increases bulk and weight.

i understand that when compared to an AR15 match rifle, most bullpup triggers are a bit stiff and mushy. but guess what? those are usually military weapons, and the type of trigger an AR15 has is usually the exception, not the rule.

 

still, many bullpup triggers are quite good (see south african and israeli bullpups) while others include special features (the belgian P90 has a stepped trigger, allowing easy single shots with a light pull and full auto if you pull it in all the way).

 

the bullpup triggers are obviously no problem for military use, if you how many countries are moving to pullpup designs for their army.

If a bullpup has a catastrophic failure, instead of the explosion being six or 8 inches in front of your eyes, its right at your eyesocket, or touching your cheekbone or ear. The only good thing is if the bolt flys back, it doesnt end up in your eye socket.

most, if not all, bullpups have been designed to keep potential problems such as this to a minimal. that's not to say there's never been problems, but i doubt you can say that the AR15 never caused any damage to a person either.

They also tend to eject hot brass, and vent hot gasses in the vicinity of your eyes and ears

this is less & less the case, since we've moved on to ejection out the bottom or to the front.

Mag changes on a bullpup are much slower because they require more repositioning, and are difficult to see (if necessary) without fully dismounting the rifle.

 

-- A conventional rifle allows you to see your mag changes, and is more easily maneuvered with your dominant hand, which makes mag changes easier in general. More importantly a human being can naturally bring their hands together in the dark. Magazine wells should ALWAYS be either in your dominant hand, or just in front of it, because it is far more difficult to manipulate anything dextrously that is located behind your dominant hand.

reloads are a matter of doctrine and training.

 

just like martial arts and so on are a matter of training correct muscle memory and reactions, the same is true for bullpups.

 

give a austrian grunt an AR15 and i guarantee you that his reload will be slower than with his AUG.

 

it's a matter of training...

[SuAside 2]

(continued)

Because of the positioning of the mag, bullpups can be difficult, or impossiple to fire while prone (though this is common with some other rifle designs as well). Note in the pictures below, the magazine is by far the lowets point of the rifle, and being located behind the dominant hand, it will tend to strike the ground forcing the muzzle downward. This also causes problems with mags being warped or ripped out of the magwell, or the rifle itself being ripped out of the users hand when hitting the deck; that a conventional rifle doesnt have (the muzzle will just bounce up)

this is hardly a problem, unless you're going to hit the deck with an AUG and a 42 round magazine...

Charging the rifle and manipulating the operating handle is often more difficult, and sometimes can't be done without dismounting the rifle, or reaching over with your support hand.

more difficult? how? you keep your hand on the pistolgrip and cycle the bolt with your support hand instead? this aint hard since the balance of the gun it towards the rear.

Bullpups are naturally balanced in a non-instinctive way; the balance point on most bullpups is in between your hand and your shoulder when mounted. The only way to correct this is to put heavy things in front of your dominant hand, or to make the weapon short and light enough that this wont make a difference (and even then it will still be more awkward and less instinctive to point). This will tend to make a bullpup shift unless it is tightly mounted to your shoulder, and especially will tend to shift during rapid fire. This tendedncy is somewhat countered by the position of your support hand so far forward on the barrel, but not sufficiantly so.

 

-- A conventional rifle is balanced in between your dominant and support hands; and there're reasons for that. A human being natually handles things better that balance in the palm, or in front of it.

an AR15 is pretty well balanced, but today with all the tacticool stuff they put on it, it is very front heavy. do that to a bullpup and you've suddenly got a better balanced weapon.

 

so this is not an issue in military weapons...

A lot of this can be worked around with training, but what it comes down to, is that bullpups are ergonomically incorrect for humans; you dont train someone to do something ergonomically incorrect, you redesign the equipment to fit human ergonomics.

euhm... unless the bullpups offer other benefits which are worth the hassle. guess what? many nations seem to believe they do?

 

The only good thing about a bullpup is the short overall length in relation to their barrel length; and that is not advantage enough to outweigh the disadvantages for most missions.

has already been refuted above. there are other advantages.

[SuAside 2]

(continued)

A lot of folks have watched a lot of stargate (they use the FN-P90 PDW which isnt exactly a bullpup, but follows the same concept), and they do jsut look kind of futuristic.

how is it 'not exactly a bullpup?

The Steyr AUG was designed in 1976, and it still looks like a space gun:

oh noez! looks are far more important than function, amiright?

*rant about old bullpups*

very useful.

 

because obviously, those 2 are the only examples, right?

 

that's like saying that because 2 standard rifles sucked donkey dick, that all standard configuration rifles sucked donkey dick.

I am by just about anyones defniniton qualified to judge small arms quality; having fired weapons in anger, lugged various weapons through the field, jumped out of airplanes and helicopters with various weapons, been shot, trained people with various weapons, repaired and altered various weapons, and sold various weapons professionally.

opinions are like assholes. everybody has got em & they all stink.

*more ranting*

about issues already resolved, i might add.

*and ends with pretty much saying the AR15 is ideal*

lol. yeah, time to halt all weapons research. we got what we wanted, right?

So, bullpups are only slightly shorter than their conventional counterparts (maybe 7 or 8" in the case of an assault rifle), nothing to sneeze at

i lol'ed. i wonder why the army is moving away from M16s and going with M4s...

they are unreliable, they are ergonomically incorrect, and they are more likely to injure their user.

no, no, hardly.

 

 

PS: and i'm not even a bullpup fan...

[Ronswin 26]

Keep in mind that minimum overall shotgun length must be 26 inches or longer, otherwise it may be considered a Short Barrel Shotgun (SBS Class III ?)

 

"In addition, some firearm types that would normally be considered to fall into the Short Barrel Shotgun (SBS) category are not legally considered to be a SBS. A shotgun is legally defined as a shoulder mounted firearm that fires shot. Shotguns and shotgun receivers that have never had a buttstock of any type installed are not shotguns, as they cannot be shoulder mounted. Therefore, cutting one of these below the 18" barrel and/or 26" overall length cannot produce a SBS as the firearm was never a shotgun. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, & Explosives recognizes these firearms as being a smooth bore handgun which is an Any Other Weapon (AOW). Unlike a SBS, an AOW only carries a $5.00 tax and can be moved interstate without Federal approval. However, to maintain its AOW status, one may generally not have a buttstock (making it a SBS) or a rifled slug barrel (making it a Destructive Device (DD); a handgun with a bore over 0.5"). Both SBS and DD weapons require a $200.00 transfer tax and prior Federal approval to transport interstate."

 

Wikipedia-on Legal shotgun barrel length

[Twinsen 86]

I think 99% of that anti-bullpup arguement is bullshit.

[brd 1]

I think 99% of that anti-bullpup arguement is bullshit.

Short firearm with the possibilities of long barrels and sight radius.I like the bullpup idea.