Monday, December 29, 2008

On Bullpup Triggers.

One of the common complaints about the bullpup-configuration rifle is the lousy trigger that almost always results from the long linkage between trigger and sear.

Why not make it a single set trigger? Add a sprung hammer or striker above the trigger. When the trigger is pulled, the hammer/striker strikes the trigger linkage, with force independent of trigger pull weight, and lets off the sear. Reset the second hammer/striker on recoil somehow.

You add 3+ parts to the overall package (depending on configuration of parent rifle), but the trigger is much more configurable for the end user. There would be a tiny amount added to lock time, but hardly enough to affect accuracy for 99% of shooters.

I realize the bullpup is considered sub-optimal by many, but since so many militaries out there issuing AUGs, L85s, Tavors, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if someone out there already tried it.


AmericanMercenary said...

Going with electronic ignition fixes the lock time problem, even if it adds a thermal management problem.

A hybrid electro mechanical option gives you fast lock time with good thermal management, but then you need a battery in the mix.

Bunnyman said...

Full electronic, as in no primer, or electronically primed, like certain automatic cannon? I wonder how much juice it'd take to touch off fixed ammunition.

The hybrid system is interesting...perhaps an electromagnetic sear relase with a mechanical back-up. Best of both worlds.

I wonder if the piezoelectric effect could be employed somehow, either for primer ignition or to charge the trigger mechanism for the next shot.