Steve Johnson

Founder and Dictator-In-Chief of TFB. A passionate gun owner, a shooting enthusiast and totally tacti-uncool. Favorite first date location: any gun range. Steve can be contacted here.


  • Carl

    Or are those rubber balls?

    • Carl, rubber I think.

  • That would be a real crowd pleaser!

  • El Duderino

    An M79 for the 21st century. Looks great for riot control. I am at a loss as to the purpose for all those rails though. A laser would be nice for the beanbag/rubber ball loads, but beyond that I don’t know.

    Ammo looks like 37mm with the bulge near the casing to adapt to 40mm. In my admittedly limited experience most non-lethals are 37mm and all lethal/combat grenades are 40mm. I’m 99% sure the actual weapon is 40mm without doing any research.

    What is so “adaptive” about it though?

  • Lance

    I take a M203 or M230 thanks.

  • Jonathon

    The ammunition is detailed a little more here
    3rd page

  • El Duderino

    Jonathon, thanks for the link. I’ve fired rubber ball, bean bag, and CS rounds out of an M203. Bean bag is like the 12g version, just many times bigger and somewhat slower. Cops used them in the Seattle WTO riots in 1999 BTW.

    I like page 3 where the police are shooting rubber ball rounds at what looks to be a mullet convention 🙂

  • Clodboy

    ElDuderino: “What is so “adaptive” about it though?”

    I’m pretty sure Bushmaster/Remington are going to market this in conjunction with their Adaptive Combat Rifle.

    What we see in the picture is most likely an optional buttstock-and-rail kit to transform what is originally an under-barrel grenade launcher into a stand-alone system, similar to the stock kit KAC makes for the M203 (compared to which it will be able to use a wider range of ammunition types due to its swing-out breech design)

  • Crabula

    Sounds like this is Bushmasters new “ASP” or “ADAPTIVE SALES PITCH”. Hopefully Bushmaster doesn’t think that their products will automatically sell as soon as they give them a three letter acronym starting with the word adaptive.

    My guess would be that the copius use of rails makes it “adaptive” or something like that.

    Two things seem really odd to me. First of all, it looks to me like there is hardly anything actually securing the barrell to the rest of the mechanism though that could just be the angle that the picture was shot at. Second of all, I see a lot of big gaps and empty space that just seem to make the whole thing un-necessarily bulky. Until I get more information on this thing it just does not appear to be that well thought out and I don’t really see anything revolutionary or amazing about it.

    Also, why is it that designers have this obsession with putting a collapsible M4 stock on absolutely everything? Unless there is a frickin buffer and a recoil spring in there I don’t see anything wrong with going with a proprietary design.

  • Cymond

    Crabula, re the M4 buttstock: some don’t believe in reinventing the wheel. It also gives the end user the option to change the stock to fit their preference. A telescoping buttstock has numerous advantages not worth discussing at the moment. However, I do think they should mount that buttstock on a hinge to let it fold too. (Now that I look again, it might be on a hinge).

    El Duderino, I can guarantee that it isn’t 37mm. If a 37mm launcher is ever paired with anti-personnel ammo then it becomes a Destructive Device just like a 40mm. Even non-lethal bean bag rounds would classify a 37mm as a DD. The whole point of 37mm is that they don’t require registration as DDs. That’s why you only see smoke and flairs and confetti ammo for 37mm launchers.