View Full Version : KelTec RFB?
http://www.kel-tec-cnc.com/rfb.htm
looks kinds cool, any reviews?
You can see it in action on YouTube.
looks like more recoil then a G3
be interesting to see how well it works in sand with the way it ejects the casings... very.... unique design.... not sold on it at all.....
Mr.Goodtimes
05-01-09, 05:53
im interested to see how well it ejects when shooting up.
I saw one in a store. Very clever design. Fully ambidextrous and the best trigger I've ever tried on a bullpup. WAY better than the FN2000 or AUG.
No idea how well it fires or how reliable it is.
I've shot one on a couple of occasions now.
Here is a post I made on another forum about the RFB
Quote Hojutsu
I know they have approximately 80 rifles out too the public, but have not seen any reviews on anyone having actually shot them . . . they seem to have more "Collector" status at this point it seems.
A buddy of mine got one a few days ago and several of us have been waiting to try them.
Demographics
We had three main shooters. All of us are life long shooters, rifle oriented and range in age from 45 to 55, and range in height from 5'6" too approximately six foot. Two of the shooters are left handed, one is right handed
The rifle used is completely stock, literally pulled from the box it was received in, loaded and shot. Two different optics were used during the shoot. A Trijicon TA33R-9 and a Trijicon RX30-14.
A single Metric FAL magazine was used during the shooting.
The Ammunition used was Russian Copper washed 7.62x51 that had been imported and purchased approximately ten or more years ago.
Loading the magazine and charging the rifle, the rifle failed to work in a semi-automatic mode. Instead it had to be manually cycled after every shot. the problem was quickly tracked down too the gas system. I'm thinking this is going to be a problem for folks not used to an adjustable gas system, say like the FAL. A quick adjustment was made to get the rifle up and running, but the gas system was not "fine tuned", which no doubt would have softened the firing impulse even further.
Firing the rifle, "Recoil" (rearward motion of the rifle due to the firing of the projectile) was negligible. Considerably more then an AR type platform, but well within reason. Again, fine tuning the gas system and the addition of a Limb Saver recoil pad to replace the rubber pad and it would be a pussy cat. What all three shooters found interesting about the shot impule was the "Muzzle Flip" (normally the vertical rise of the muzzle due to the firing of projectiles), the "Muzzle Flip" was not vertical, but horizontal to the right. With each press of the trigger, the shot fired caused the muzzle to ride to the right off the target at 33yards. At approximately 55yards the muzzle popped to the right a perceived foot. No doubt a properly tuned Comp would keep the muzzle rock solid on target
Of the two sights, I preferred the 1x dot of the RX30. It was very simple to get on target and move from target to target. but the ACOG was perfect for engaging targets as well. The perfect optic for this rifle would most likely be a 1-4x optic, like the Trijicon AccuPoint, like the TR24-R, that's what will go on mine when I get it.
The RFB is a compact, "BullPup" style rifle that has a full 18" barrel, while only being 26" in length . . . for perspective, that's only about 1.5" longer then my AOW pistol gripped Shotgun! It's a battle rile you could hide under coat. We didn't use it for any shots over a bit over 50yards, but it was plenty fast and accurate. Next time we'll stretch it out a bit.
Because the rifle is a BullPup, the "Manual of Arms" is a bit different, but everyone adapted pretty rapidly.
The only issue that all of the shooters mentioned was heat. Granted, we were in a pretty hot, poorly ventilated outdoor pit, with the sun beating down on the shooters, as well as the Black rifle all during the shoot. But after approximately 160rds fired, the rifle got pretty toasty, especially at the forward hand guard area, which runs directly below the full length barrel. It should also be noted that the hand guard has a series of vent holes that are directed right into the shooters support hand palm while firing the rifle. 7.62x51 rifles tend to get pretty warm under steady firing strings, but we all felt that the Kel-tec held heat in more then the average Battle Rifle. We also speculate that adding a suppressor is only going to make the heat an issue sooner (all are experienced suppressor shooters)
I have since gone out again and shot the rifle. The walking to the right mentioned in the post is for right handed shooters. I personally shot the rifle from the left shoulder and from there it walks to the left.
All in all, very cool little rifle and should make quit a splash when it gets into full production
Thomas M-4
08-01-09, 21:27
A long time friend hates .223 and loves bullpups :rolleyes: I told him about keltec RFB he was very interested in it. Who is carrying it how much is going for on the street? Pretty sure I can talk him in to it if it is not to much.
Thomas M-4
08-01-09, 21:34
im interested to see how well it ejects when shooting up.
There is a video on you tube it has decent ejection as far as I can tell there is also a one way trap door in the ejection tube
Here is the vid http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLO7rHjHerk
From the info that I can find it is not that different of an ejection system that you find on some belt feed MG.
A long time friend hates .223 and loves bullpups :rolleyes: I told him about keltec RFB he was very interested in it. Who is carrying it how much is going for on the street? Pretty sure I can talk him in to it if it is not to much.
"Retail" is $1888. Street price is higher at this point due to limited availability, but it'll come down
Outlander Systems
08-01-09, 23:53
I've owned one bullpup.
I currently own no bullpup.
To me, the bullpup design is great in theory, bad in execution.
variablebinary
08-01-09, 23:57
Saw one locally for $1200. It felt well built, and not cheap at all.
Outlander Systems
08-01-09, 23:58
Let me correct myself.
I think the bullpup design, as a workhorse, fails.
I think the bullpup design, if implemented entirely in a DMR role, would be outstanding.
variablebinary
08-02-09, 00:03
Let me correct myself.
I think the bullpup design, as a workhorse, fails.
I think the bullpup design, if implemented entirely in a DMR role, would be outstanding.
I would love to get my hands on a Desert Tactical rifle. QD barrel, multi-caliber, bullpup layout.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2008-07/31/xinsrc_33207053113313901189369.jpg
http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2008-07/31/xinsrc_3420705311331968611570.jpg
http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2008-07/31/xinsrc_35207053113317032667771.jpg
The Desert Tactical's bolt looks a little far back to be comfortably manipulated; here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4N8gN3Z-_I) is a video of the rifle in use. Might take some getting used to, reaching back rather than up to work the bolt.
-B
Outlander Systems
08-02-09, 00:41
I would love to get my hands on a Desert Tactical rifle. QD barrel, multi-caliber, bullpup layout.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2008-07/31/xinsrc_33207053113313901189369.jpg
http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2008-07/31/xinsrc_3420705311331968611570.jpg
http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2008-07/31/xinsrc_35207053113317032667771.jpg
Now THAT'S what I'm talkin' 'bout!
Keep talkin', they start at $4k. :p
-B
I think the bullpup design, if implemented entirely in a DMR role, would be outstanding.
I've never messed with a bullpup before, but I'm thinking this is a bad idea.
It doesn't seem like a bullpup receiver can be finely tuned for each shooter. On a conventional rifle, aftermarket stocks exist and can be setup by the user exactly the way they prefer it.
The second reason I think it would be a bad idea is just a theory of mine that some forum members who shoot both conventional and bullpup rifles can confirm. A DMR seems to be a weapon that is to be used mostly from a supported position. Bi pod, window edge, off of a vehicle, from a table, etc, etc, etc.....
If that's the case, then wouldn't it be more comfortable to have most of the rifles' weight in front of your firing grip?
Funny I spoke to Ms Lake and the lead engineer for the RFB Friday about this.
I'm working on a capablity paper for DMRs. They were responsive and willing to come up for capablity/tech demo. Our current m-14EBRs are great big tanks of a rifle. The availibaly of a sub 10 lbs with optic DMR system has possiblity.
IF the capablity paper is actioned hopefully I'll get to be there for the tech demo(more likely they will chain me to the desk). Until then I'm on a few wait lists and looking for someone to pin a PWS brake on for me. If I get on a actual computer later I will try to add some of the disscussion points. For now I am tagging the thread .
I think the bullpup design, as a workhorse, fails.
Really? Bullpup seems to be the direction that working rifles are heading because they are more compact than the standard configuration rifles without compromising barrel length. The bullpup design is better for house to house / CQB stuff than a rifle using the traditional layout.
The AUG and FAMAS have been around in military use for decades and worked well. The F2000 is starting to get fielded by multiple military forces and Israel has begun fielding the Tavor. China, Iran and Singapore all have bullpup designs that have seen some use.
One of the military bullpup designs that initially had a lot of trouble was Britain's SA-80/L85A1/L85A2 but that was more of an issue having to do with that particular rifle than the bullpup concept. I wouldn't look at Britain's problems with its rifle or anything from Kel-Tec as the final word on the concept.
There have been some major steps forward to making bullpup rifles truly ambidextrous i.e. F2000 and P90 designs. By taking care of ejection in order to make them ambidextrous that has taken care of one of the major complaints of bullpup rifles. Now that people use lots of accessories on the front ends of rifles, the bullpup is going to be a better choice due to its better balance.
Since the bullpup design is different, people are going to be resistant to accepting them. Look at how much resistance there was to the M-16 and Glock pistols simply because they were very different from the familiar designs. Now the M-16 and Glock have become the entrenched norm here and people discount things that are different from them.
variablebinary
08-02-09, 13:59
There is only one bullpup I really want
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/wordpress/wp-content/features/2003oob/famas.jpg
Nice FAMAS picture. I remember the Legionnaires carrying them in Beirut. Only got to handle one then, got to shoot a few rounds through one a few years later. A bit heavy but a very flexible little rifle.
Really? Bullpup seems to be the direction that working rifles are heading because they are more compact than the standard configuration rifles without compromising barrel length. The bullpup design is better for house to house / CQB stuff than a rifle using the traditional layout.
The AUG and FAMAS have been around in military use for decades and worked well. The F2000 is starting to get fielded by multiple military forces and Israel has begun fielding the Tavor. China, Iran and Singapore all have bullpup designs that have seen some use.
One of the military bullpup designs that initially had a lot of trouble was Britain's SA-80/L85A1/L85A2 but that was more of an issue having to do with that particular rifle than the bullpup concept. I wouldn't look at Britain's problems with its rifle or anything from Kel-Tec as the final word on the concept.
There have been some major steps forward to making bullpup rifles truly ambidextrous i.e. F2000 and P90 designs. By taking care of ejection in order to make them ambidextrous that has taken care of one of the major complaints of bullpup rifles. Now that people use lots of accessories on the front ends of rifles, the bullpup is going to be a better choice due to its better balance.
Since the bullpup design is different, people are going to be resistant to accepting them. Look at how much resistance there was to the M-16 and Glock pistols simply because they were very different from the familiar designs. Now the M-16 and Glock have become the entrenched norm here and people discount things that are different from them.
Thing is, you can only find one benefit to the bullpup when comparing it to a conventional rifle design. One. It isn't a matter of people resisting change for the sake of doing so (I agree that for some this is the case), but that there aren't any real advantages to the design save for a shorter overall length, and many would argue that this is offset by the lack of adjustable features to allow the rifle to better fit the shooter. Either a bullpup or conventional rifle can be made ambidextrous, so that argument's a wash. Where balance is concerned, neither an FS2000 or Steyr AUG felt any more balanced than an M4. If I expect to hang stuff on a rail, I can use a different (better) buttstock.
Frankly, that the rest of the world wants bullpup rifles is irrelevant to whether or not they're a good idea.
Speaking strictly as a civilian, I think a bullpup bolt action rifle is a cool idea. Having never carried a rifle to war, though, I'm dubious about whether or not it's a good idea.
-B
Outlander Systems
08-02-09, 17:16
The ergonomics for the bullpup are what turn me off.
I really wanted to like the FS2000, but the design turned me off.
The railed AUG is cool, but the rails available that I've seen don't allow for optimal light placement.
The only bullpup I've owned was the M17S. What sold me on it was a full-length barrel in a compact package. Overall, the weapon was solid.
Modularity, thus far for bullpups sucks. I bought into the whole, "bullpup = wave of the future".
The ergonomics were something I did NOT enjoy. I want to be able to control everything on the weapon, without having too move to far from FC or unshoulder the weapon. Reloading mags sucked; the weapon had to be entirely removed from the operator's workspace, due to the mag well being so far back.
I was willing to give the platform an opportunity; I'll do it again, but everything released since has not been for me.
YMMV
The ergonomics were something I did NOT enjoy. I want to be able to control everything on the weapon, without having too move to far from FC or unshoulder the weapon. Reloading mags sucked; the weapon had to be entirely removed from the operator's workspace, due to the mag well being so far back.
I was willing to give the platform an opportunity; I'll do it again, but everything released since has not been for me.
YMMV
Here are a couple videos of an RFB owner working on reloading drills
http://tinypic.com/usermedia.php?uo=MSazeq4CIlNImu0otb3GsYh4l5k2TGxc
http://tinypic.com/usermedia.php?uo=MSazeq4CIlPBzptQ8nHu6Ih4l5k2TGxc
Note the recoil or lack of recoil from the 7.62x51 cartridge
There is only one bullpup I really want
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/wordpress/wp-content/features/2003oob/famas.jpg
Its bolt group scares me.
http://www.sturmgewehr.com/bhinton/FAMAS/FAMAS_DiagramBoltGroup.jpg
Anyone have any information about the KelTec?
Anyone have any information about the KelTec?
There's some videos on youtube. Maybe something on the kel tec forums out there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4K_PPe5Rnk
Is it me or does it have a HUGE bolt carrier?
And this....
http://www.kel-tec-cnc.com/images/downloads/RFB_Flyer_SHOT_2007_web.pdf
Anyone have any information about the KelTec?
http://www.kel-tec-cnc.com/images/rfb-cross-view.jpg
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
Calibers : Carbine
Weight unloaded (no magazine ): 8.1 lbs
Length : 26"
Barrel Length : 18"
Magazine : 10 or 20 FAL
Practical range : 600m
http://www.kel-tec-cnc.com/images/downloads/RFB_Flyer_SHOT_2007_web.pdf
http://www.kel-tec-cnc.com/videos/rfb_cutaway.wmv
Personaly I completely discount the long version, but the "carbine" has my interest. From talking to them the other day they have been in low rate production, but are transitioning to full production now. I gave them some intial commentsbased on the photos and vidios I've seen. Good people to talk to and they seemed to listen and understand the concerns that I had outlined.
I would have loved, but didn't, to talk to them about gettingsome of these out to the SME's to provide them some more end users input. I'm not clear on how much they have recieved. Of course if the SME's unts requested a "Tech Demo" they seemed that they would be responsive.
If it proves relable and accurate, i see them as a potential DMR system. If when I get mine in, I'll work on the assesment. From the no longer a "end user" perspective.:(
bongogator
08-03-09, 22:25
Hmmm, had a SU-16c from Kel-tec and it was a hunk of junk. Id wait on this one for a bit.
bushjockey
08-31-09, 07:31
Here are a couple videos of an RFB owner working on reloading drills
http://tinypic.com/usermedia.php?uo=MSazeq4CIlNImu0otb3GsYh4l5k2TGxc
http://tinypic.com/usermedia.php?uo=MSazeq4CIlPBzptQ8nHu6Ih4l5k2TGxc
Note the recoil or lack of recoil from the 7.62x51 cartridge
That's me and mine in the vids. I got lucky to find one of these and it has been a real joy. It really doesn't take much practice to get the hang of the bullpup peculiarities - I think I can work the gun as fast as my ar type rifles. The build is extremely solid - no rattle or movement like on the halves of an ar. Recoil is rediculously mild and muzzle climb is litterally non-existant. My M1A has much more recoil impulse and muzzle climb. The mags are FAL metric - hit or miss on quality. I'm waiting for the new ones from DSA to hit the market.
I've had no firing malfs of any kind in the first 400 rounds - never a ftf or fte. Sometimes the bolt sticks on the initial release but I think a little more break-in will loosen everything up. Certainly not a deal breaker in my mind.
I'm changing the tripower out for a Burris XTR 1-4. I want to keep the quickness and gain a bit out at longer ranges...
If anyone has any questions I can help answer about this rifle - since there are only about 120 of us so far - feel free to ask. If you are in the Atlanta area, come on out and shoot it...
Looking for a replacement for my beloved L1A1 and I've always liked bullpups. I just have two questions:
1. Has anybody shot this turkey in a muzzle-high attitude? Does it still eject reliably?
2. Any recomendations on optics? I was hoping to find an L2A1 SUIT, but those seem to be as rare as hens' teeth these days. I was thinking about the 522 XR308...
Cheers!
Really? Bullpup seems to be the direction that working rifles are heading because they are more compact than the standard configuration rifles without compromising barrel length. The bullpup design is better for house to house / CQB stuff than a rifle using the traditional layout.
The AUG and FAMAS have been around in military use for decades and worked well. The F2000 is starting to get fielded by multiple military forces and Israel has begun fielding the Tavor. China, Iran and Singapore all have bullpup designs that have seen some use.
One of the military bullpup designs that initially had a lot of trouble was Britain's SA-80/L85A1/L85A2 but that was more of an issue having to do with that particular rifle than the bullpup concept. I wouldn't look at Britain's problems with its rifle or anything from Kel-Tec as the final word on the concept.
There have been some major steps forward to making bullpup rifles truly ambidextrous i.e. F2000 and P90 designs. By taking care of ejection in order to make them ambidextrous that has taken care of one of the major complaints of bullpup rifles. Now that people use lots of accessories on the front ends of rifles, the bullpup is going to be a better choice due to its better balance.
Since the bullpup design is different, people are going to be resistant to accepting them. Look at how much resistance there was to the M-16 and Glock pistols simply because they were very different from the familiar designs. Now the M-16 and Glock have become the entrenched norm here and people discount things that are different from them.
Could not agree with you more....
I have said one many occasions (and many threads) there is no such thing as a perfect rifle for every scenerio but bullpup design and use in military HAS increased in the past few years...dont really know what has prompted the change except maybe the brass is looking at a more compact carry package for the average soldier without sacrificing balistics. Just a cop and never been in the military so I can only guess..
I think that since most of us here are pretty conservative, we fear change and straying from what we know and use. Police departments have always been resistant to change in training and equipment. Look how long it took large departments to adopt the semi-auto handgun and how many are just now starting "street" officers carry and use "assault" rifles.
I remember talking to a retired military guy about when he was posted in Delta Junction, Alaska where Eugene Stoner's "plastic" rifle was being cold weather tested during military trials. They all hated it. Hated the caliber, hated the plastic look and feel and hated that some Kennedy thinktank group was forcing this new rifle onto them. Stoner's rifle was hated at first and had it's ups and downs but now almost no one bad mouths the design and (next to the AK) is the most widely used rifle in the world.
I have had similar discussions with my friend about my decision to choose a non-AR platform for a patrol rifle (just thank god we are allowed to choose our own guns at my department). I use a MSAR STG as my patrol rifle (so yes, I am one of THOSE guys). Recently my friend has admitted my choice to use this style of rifle was not as horrendous as he thought (see thread "Have to eat a little crow about the MSAR").
Just remember to have somewhat of an opened mind when looking at different styles or designs on rifles because no matter what type you like, somewhere down the road someone was resistant to that rifle type..:cool:
Just got my American Rifleman magazine and there is a right up on this rifle.
The Dumb Gun Collector
10-26-09, 10:05
I always thought it was telling that H&K only really fooled around with bullpups back in the 70s-80s with the G11 project. After they came out with the G36 and XM8 I figured they decided that the bullpup was a dead end.
I personally really liked my FS2000. I thought it was a really nice rifle. The trigger was pretty terrible, but usable. I wouldn't mind having another.
There is only one bullpup I really want
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/wordpress/wp-content/features/2003oob/famas.jpg
I wonder what holdover is on that! And shooting over obstacles must suck
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.