TFBTV: Five Decent Rifles That Failed Commercially

Some rifles regardless of features, price, or quality just never pan out or find a home in too many safes across the globe. We take a look at five long guns and try to figure out why a few of these never took off. These are not all necessarily bad rifles, but for one reason or another flopped and never found a large group of buyers.

For the first time ever, we are now offering this video with subtitles in Russian, French, German, Japanese and of course English. Thanks to our awesome translation team for their hard work! I hope this will make our videos more accessible to our international readers, and maybe help some of our gun loving English speakers readers who are learning one of these foreign language. This video was translated by Mikel, Val, Taka and Tempest.

So check out our latest video and let us know what you think. Also, hitting that subscribe button is easy and helps us out greatly!

Thank you all for your enduring support. We really appreciate you helping us grow our channel!

The english transcription is below …

– Hey guys, this is Alex C. with

And today we’re back with another five guns video.

The theme for today is Five Guns That Were Commercial Failures.

What you here is kind of a smorgasbord of different guns that were all produced from mostly in different countries.

And we kind of have a little collaboration here.

This is Patrick, by the way.

You probably recognize from past videos.

And for one reason or another, they’ve just never caught on.

So let’s kick it off here with a really weird gun that I didn’t know existed until I it saw on a gun broker auction.

(gun charging click) This is called a Bushmaster M17S, (gun charging click) S being semi-automatic.

The M17 of course is the (gun charging click) select fire version.

You noticed when he charged it, the charging handle’s in about the worst location possible.

If you’ve got big hands, or if you’re wearing gloves, you just can’t charge the gun.

Also, the side plane is only about four or five inches.

It’s hidden under this Picatinny rail.

And if you have an optic on top, then you don’t have a cheek weld, you’ve got almost a chin weld going on.

So you can see why this gun was a failure.

It’s just not ergonomic, it doesn’t come together.

And then, just shouldering it, you can probably tell there’s some deficiency there.

– (mumbling) I mean, unfortunately I’m not real well-versed in the use of this firearm.

Or did anyone adopt it? I mean was it– – No, it was a spectacular failure based on the AR-18 like so many other guns, but in bullpup form.

It was designed to actually in Australia.

And then it made its way here through Bushmaster.

(Patrick laughing softly) So you know, it’s an interesting firearm.

I have it in the collection because (gun charging click) I got it for almost nothing, (gun charging click) it’s basically just a giant rectangular piece of– – You know it makes me think of is those big cattle guards on Australian trucks.

You know what I’m talking about.

– [Alex] I think I know what– – [Patrick] Yeah, yeah, it looks like some guy just saw one of those, you know, I know you can make a gun out of that. (Alex laughing softly) – Yeah, well who knows, they definitely had a pretty cool gun industry before the 1996 gun legislation.

But anyways it was a commercial failure.

They sold them here for cheap.

They were so cheap at one time they were blowing them out of CD and in and, you know, a long time ago, for almost nothing.

But I wouldn’t recommend anyone buy one.

They don’t shoot well, the sides are horrible.

It’s no way to really just make one work.

– I know and it’s really rather heavy for what it is.

– Yeah, and of course, don’t forget the bullpup trigger.

It’s just there– (gun click) Surprisingly, it’s not bad on this gun.

I don’t think.

– It’s not as bad as other bullpups but– – No, it’s not good by any means.

– Anyways moving on to a gun that I would consider spectacular but was still a commercial, a failure.

– It just didn’t catch on.

This of course is an AR-180.

The select fire version (gun charging click) of the AR-18, this gun’s very famous, because almost all modern assault rifles have borrowed (gun charging click) it’s operating system. (gun charging click) It’s got a very famous tepid design that doesn’t impinge, it just hits the carrier.

This has a dual spring design though as, that’s opposed to the single guide rather than spring design of more modern guns.

It’s all stamped, it was basically designed so other countries that would have difficulty machining aluminum to make M16s could make these in lieu.

They were one of the first military style rifles brought to the US commercial market which is kind of cool.

They were made in three places, Costa Mesa in California, in England, it’s at the Sterling Plant, and also by Howa in Japan.

They made a few of them there.

They shoot well, they’re really nice.

But for some reason, they didn’t sell well.

– You know, I want to say, Nathanial F.

on the blog has had a couple of these maybe.

And I think he said he had some issues with these.

– He had AR-180B which was an attempt at modernizing this with a Palma lower that takes AR-15 magazines.

I don’t believe he liked it.

I think he got rid of it pretty quickly, but he’ll have to comment on that.

But these shoot well.

The Costa Mesa guns are good.

The Howa guns are good.

I had a Sterling that I had to get rid of just because it was not put together very well.

Generally English guns are, you know, decent.

But the stock lathes board wouldn’t line up.

It was, it’s just (mumbling)– – I hate to make a joke about you know, things in England, but you know, it holds true.

– Yeah, well– – You know, especially (mumbling)– – It’s like if you need replacement wiring out of smoke for your English made car.

(Patrick chuckling) Sorry, if you’re from England, I apologize.

I am a fan of your country.

But anyways yeah, it’s a great gun, it’s a cool gun.

You can actually find it for pretty good deals.

It just didn’t sell well.

I think it’s because they were priced competitively with SP1 Colt AR-15 derivatives.

So why would you not get the better gun (mumbling)? – I agree with you.

I know and some people are really fond of this gun.

I believe there’s a Texas ranger, he wrote a book, you know, One Ranger, or something like that.

And he seemed to just love it.

I even think he went so far as to comment that he didn’t like the AR-15 but for this.

But it may be a perfectly viable gun.

It just didn’t catch on here.

– Well, there was one place where they caught on that we were talking about.

– Yes, yes, the IRA use these.

– The IRA was quite fond of these.

They actually turned them into Widowmaker.

And I believe they used them to great extent.

Or at least as much as they possibly could.

‘Cos they can’t come Sterling England, presumably they made their way over to the Irish Neu-mer-ald Isle.

– You know, they used them enough to go ahead and you know– – Cement themselves in the kits of the IRAs. – [Patrick] Yeah.

– So anyways yes, so is a failure but it’s a good gun.

It’s unlike the M-15’s assets, it’s a great gun.

But next up is the, a modern gun.

A more modern gun that has been very controversial.

This of course is the Bushmaster ACR.

– (sighs) Hmm…

– Exactly, um-zee is all I have to say about it.

It’s, you know, we were promised a lot when Magpul designed the Masada.

(gun charging clicks).

Magpul did a great job designing the gun.

However, Bushmaster’s done a poor job producing it.

– I remember reading the articles, a few years before this came to market.

And (gun charging clicks) I was, I saw the articles.

I was like, you know, I’m buying one of those.

And then it was produced, and it just didn’t deliver (mumbling).

– Absolutely, we were promised caliber conversion kits, which it’s been years, And there’s been no – [Patrick] There’s none.

– caliber conversion kits.

We’re promised, all sorts of things.

Short barrels and this and that.

And they failed to deliver.

It’s almost like they forgotten about the gun.

– You know, I really think they have, ‘cos I don’t know, maybe the numbers just don’t add up.

Maybe it’s not quite as profitable as something like the AR-15s, you know. – [Alex] Correct.

Also, they promised an MSRP of something of $1,500.

– Yes.

– Came to the market $2,000.

– [Patrick] Which (sighs). – [Alex] That made a lot of people mad understandably.

– I’m one of the sucker that bought one because I thought, yeah I’ll pay the extra money because I want 6.8 SPC, I want 762 by 39.

And if someone from Bushmaster’s watching this video, which is unlikely, I want my caliber conversion kits.

(Patrick laughs) But that’s probably not going to happen, it doesn’t say– – Yeah, I don’t think it’s going to happen Alex.

But I mean it’s a great gun, you know. – [Alex] You’re right, it shoots well, some people have problems with them.

They say they’re fragile, but this one specifically, it’s worked well.

I run it suppressed sometimes.

And I really don’t have much negative to say about it other than they haven’t delivered on what they promised they would have.

– Yeah, had they devoted the resources to this gun, thought they should have, yeah, I think they could have something really fantastic. – [Alex] It really, it really could have meant something.

But really nonetheless, it wasn’t, it isn’t.

– No (laughs).

– They’re for sale though.

They’re for sale.

You can go buy these right now.

And I’m sure they’re, you know, someone might have a birthday sitting in gun shops.

(Patrick laughing softly) You know? – I mean it’s really a shame.

– It is, so that’s the ACR.

Unfortunately, it never came to be.

Now, next up is a gun that was just as spectacular a commercial failure.

And I’m almost not a hundred percent certain why they made it.

This is a Benelli MR1.

(gun clicks) The MR1 uses the same (loud clank) operating method as (gun charging click) some of Benelli’s shotguns.

It’s a 5.56 rifle or.223, some people call it the European Mini-14.

One thing that, when you pick it up, you realize there’s a blatant design flaw, is you can’t reach the magazine release with your finger by without taking your hand off the grid.

– [Alex] Which these days that’s just unacceptable to me.

– Yeah, I don’t understand why they would have even done that.

Maybe it has to do (gun clicking) with the action used.

– (gun charging click) Yeah, I know they make hunting rifles that use the action.

And I think basically they thought, hey we’ll add a pistol grid, make it tactical.

Sell to those, you know (voice drowned out).

– Yeah, I mean if this gonna be produced with a nice wood stock and you know, just and it could be a great hunting rifle.

I just don’t see the point of it being tactical.

– A tactical rifle, yeah.

So anyway, it failed, it doesn’t have a threaded barrel.

It takes AR-15 magazines though which is great.

It functions fine. (gun charging click) I mean people who have them on the Internet say they liked them.

They’re popular in California because they have a featureless, featureless, you know, non-band version where they can have detachable mags.

So i think it’s found a nice market there.

But all in all, do you know anybody else other than me that has one of these? – No, I don’t know why – [Alex] Yeah, thought so.

– anyone other than you would buy one, to be honest. – [Alex] (laughs) Thank you.

But– (Patrick laughs) But yeah, it is a strange gun, However, I’ll probably do a review on it just for, you know, why not? – Yeah when we pulled the side of the safe we were talking about it.

We just can’t come up with a use for this at all.

– Especially in the days of $600 AR-15s.

– I mean (sighs) – [Alex] In this, this doesn’t happen then market here, at least in places where we’re not California.

And we can have you know, pistol grips and stuff.

Even then I’d rather have a Mini-14 than this guy.

– I agree with that, you know, I mean this may be a little bit more reliable than the Mini-14 if you’re good at dirty and muddy – [Alex] (mumbling) I– – or something, I don’t know.

But I mean it doesn’t seem to look cool.

– Yeah, it doesn’t look cool.

– I’m sorry Benelli.

– Yeah, anyways, last but not necessarily least, this is no particular order here, is a gun we recently did a video on.

This is an Egyptian Rasheed rifle.

Now the Rasheed is interesting.

They only made I think 5,000 of them.

It’s based on the Hakim, which is an eight millimeter gun, which is based on the Swedish AG42 Ljungman.

So it’s actually DI in it’s purest form.

Not the AR-15 DI but the gas is actually just slamming into the carrier, that’s how it works.

– And I would want to touch on that.

This gun was issued with one magazine.

Their training doctrine in Egypt at the time was to use tripli-colts to reload it.

And when we tried doing that, to do the article, I would burn my fingers on this gas tube, just about every time I put my finger in there to push them around in the mag.

– It is one of the biggest pains in the rear end.

It’s one of those things where they took a gun in a large caliber that worked in that large caliber and I think when they scaled it down, it didn’t work as opposed to when they went from the AR-10 to the AR-15.

It really did work well after some trial and error (mumbling) – [Patrick] Yeah.

But, there’s a reason they ditched this really fast, they only made a couple of thousand.

And then they started using the AK (snaps finger) like that, I mean it just went the way the dinosaur.

There’s not that many– – [Patrick] Thank god.

– (laughs) They don’t, this particular example kind of works most of the time.

It’s got a kind of a finicky gas regulator and a– – See the regulator right here.

– Yeah, it just did, it failed, it failed spectacularly.

I think Egypt is the only one that actually used it – [Patrick] You know, – [Alex] in any capacity.

– [Patrick] but like unlike, – [Alex] (mumbling) – unlike a couple of these other guns, like the AR-180 and the ACR, there is a reason that this one failed.

Yeah I mean– – [Alex] Yeah.

It’s got faults, it’s got blatant design faults that just ended its adoption and use.

So, I think that about sums up our video here on Five Guns That Were Commercial Failures.

(gun clicks) (Alex laughs) You know not to say they’re all bad, not to say they’re all good, but you know, here they are.

Anyways this is Alex C. with

Thanks again for helping me out with this video Patrick.

– It was my pleasure again.

– If you liked our video, hit the Subscribe button, and we’ll keep thumping these out for you guys.

Alex C.

Alex is a Senior Writer for The Firearm Blog and Director of TFBTV.


  • Paul White

    There’s at least a couple of those that, based on your description, I’d have a hard time describing as decent

    • Ha, understandable.
      But they shoot, work, and are reliable which was more or less the criteria.

    • Patrick R.

      Do understand that Alex and myself are a bit jaded when it comes to firearms, our opinions can be a bit more harsh than most shooters. In this video we really didn’t spend much time talking about the merits of a rifle, just why we think they were failures.

  • Bil

    There were more Rashids made in Baghdad as the Baghdad (the Iraqis under Saddam renamed anything they produced locally). They either stole or bought the plans and machinery for the rifle during one of Egypt’s revolutions. We captured a crap ton of them during the initial phases of OIF – beautiful, pristine rifles with gorgeous tiger striped wood…and no way to get any of them back to the USA.

    • Interesting!

    • Patrick R.

      No wonder they lost the war ……

    • Any reason why you couldn’t take one? I know I sound daft here, but I’m not all that knowledgeable about these sort of things.

      • Patrick R.

        The procedure to bring back a rifle from a conflict zone is pretty daunting. I don’t know of anyone who has pulled it off.

        • Eric S

          I know of an officer who managed to acquire a proper Dragunov while East Germany was still a thing. Had to transport it back mixed in with his personal firearms via a cargo plane, to avoid customs. It can be done, but ya gotta ask yourself if it is really worth risking a discharge.

  • Interestingly, a lot of modern designs are often assumed to be based on the AR-18, but aren’t. Examples of this would be the SCAR (a weird fusion of G36, FNC, and M1 Carbine), Steyr AUG (little bit of ’18 influence there, but it isn’t operated the same way), Howa Type 89 (lot of people confuse this one; it’s not closely related to the ’18 in the gas system, but its bolt carrier design is similar), and SAR-21(fixed Garand-type gas impingement with operating rod, and a simple two-lug bolt).

  • I owned a 180B, and it had a lot of issues. From a quality standpoint, it’s a very different gun than the originals. A friend of mine still owns a Sterling 180, and my experiences with that have been more favorable, but there are still quirks to it. For a start, the stock latch is fragile; on his it needed repair. Second, the magazines are a little problematic. Original mags work well but are rare, and modifying AR-15 magazines is tricky. However, besides those two issues I think it is a very sound design.

    A lot of folks think the Vietnam experience would have been a lot different if we’d issued AR-18s instead of AR-15s. This doesn’t hold up well upon closer examination, for three reasons. First, the AR-18 was designed essentially as a response to military adoption of the AR-15; Ordnance had essentially rejected the .22 caliber AR-15 early on, and Armalite sold the rights to the AR-15 to Colt as a result, “cashing in” on what it thought would be a dead-end. Work on the 7.62mm AR-16 began soon after. Then, when the Army bought its “one-time buy” of 85,000 AR-15’s in ’63, that’s when the AR-18 project began. So the DoD was already invested in the AR-15 by the time the AR-18 was developed. Second, the AR-18, like the AR-15, lacked a chrome-lined bore. This was a major source of issues for the AR-15 during the Vietnam conflict, arguably the greatest flaw in the early rifles. Third, the AR-18 used the same ammunition, which also had serious problems (lack of case hardness standards, and propellant issues).

    • MPWS

      “Timing is everything” says one famous quote. I wonder if it is not by Stoner himself; he had gotten his own lesson with 63 set. So incredibly meticulous – but nowhere to be seen, except in Knight’s collection.

    • gordon533

      I have a Sterling AR180 that was shipped without furniture to Parker-Hale where they installed a custom built wooden thumbhole stock. I understand that only about 20 were built for some division of the British Military but mine ended up with the Mercy Police Dept. I acquired it when the British past the law banning these firearms from public ownership along with about a dozen other firearms for next to nothing. it is a heavy firearm due to the wooden stock but has run trouble free for over twenty years. If anyone has any further info on this firearm please contact me.

  • Darkpr0

    One more addition to this list has to be the Robinson XCR, at least in the States. It’s a very decent gun, performs well, is reliable, has calibre kits, and is generally good but it is a terrible commercial success. That said, it is spectacularly popular in Canada where the AR-15 is the subject of witch burnings, but for some reason the XCR is totally unrestricted. It just didn’t catch on down South, and it’s neither well advertised nor well distributed, but if you see one for a decent price it’s definitely worth a look.

    • floppyscience

      It only caught on in Canada due to it being non-res. The poor quality control, hostile and/or non existent customer service, and borderline insane owner/spokesperson are what kept it from catching on in the US. It offers nothing you can’t get somewhere else for cheaper and with a better company behind it.

      • Darkpr0

        A quick search of Canadian forums over the last three years shows only two references to QC problems, and both were rectified by the people who sold the gun. It’s true that being NR is a big draw in Canada, but the amount of people that have them when there are so many options out there speaks volumes. It’s holding station against guns like the Mini 14, Tavor, Bushmaster ACR, and Chinese T95. I don’t see any posts at all talking about problematic customer service, but maybe Canada’s just too small for such a thing to be visible.

        • The gun community has decided to hate Robinson Arms, so the usual “well it isn’t reliable, the QC sucks, and some guy who works there disrespected my mama” hoopla ensues. Yes, I know the owner had a meltdown on the internet, but I find it disgusting when people regurgitate information they think they heard one time from some guy at a gunstore a while back to smear a product. Truth be told I know people who are very happy with their Robinsons and I have had no problem with them or their reps. I have an older Robinson gun and it is dead nuts accurate, reliable, and one of the coolest looking guns I own.

          • n0truscotsman

            I miss their Vepr guns. The one I saw was a high quality product.

          • Michael

            I think the XCR is a very cool gun, and I wanted one badly. Then I emailed them with a question that I can no longer remember and got no reply. That, combined with their relative rarity (and therefore thin supply aftermarket support), scared me off.

          • Esh325

            lol that’s so true. To be honest, the only thing to me that isn’t very appealing about the XCR is that it’s a military style rifle that hasn’t been used by a military.

    • n0truscotsman

      I’ve spent an afternoon with a XCR and found it to be a respectable rifle. I dont own one, so my experience is rather limited though. The reason I believe that it didn’t become more popular is because of three things:

      1.) The popularity of the AR and AK. Those are high bars to jump over. This was especially so with the euphoria of the AWB sunset.

      2.) The “cool factor” of the SCAR.

      3.) The insane hype behind the ACR

      However, some people claim that the owner is at fault for his letter posted on the XCR forum. I dont believe that at all (and that is certainly not the only controversial posting made by someone in gun-ville. I can think of another prominent AR manufacturer that got into a flame war with California gun owners and was given a pass. Whats good for the goose…)

      Here is where Ill give Robinson credit

      He went outside the mold where others were simply manufacturing existing designs, with a small company, and sought to compete in the SCAR program. That to me is no small feat.

      Certainly far more accomplishments than many of his internet commando critics posting on forums have made. Its easy to pull your pants down and “paint” somebodys product and legacy when you have no skin in the game.

      The irony of course is that it seems the XCR is the superior rifle when compared to the much hyped ACR. That is my opinion and Im sure many will disagree, but those are my observations.

      But, hey, if he got decent rifles into the hands of Canadians, then more power to him. Its unfortunate our northern neighbors have to deal with bureaucratic nonsense and prove themselves innocent beforehand. No small feat in a world ruled by bureaucrats (and ours is no different either. Its only insidiously inverted in some ways more than others).

      • Darkpr0

        I tend to agree on most points, but it’s hard to compare the XCR against the ACR in their current forms. Having spent range time with both, I feel like the ACR is a little bit better made and a little bit smoother, but of course you pay through the nose for that. The same thing is evident on the SCAR: beautiful FN craftsmanship at hideous FN prices. The lack of calibre kits on an ACR is a solid strike against it when it’s in the market of an AR which has quick-change uppers. I don’t love the AR-15 as a design, but a bureaucracy-dodging ability to switch calibres on the go is nice.
        Honestly I can see why Bushmaster doesn’t support the ACR. It just never got a bite out of the market that would justify the tooling expenditure. As much as accountants ruin my work days, they’re quite a savvy lot and so you know they looked into the cost/benefits of tooling up for calibre change kits, and the numbers didn’t come out nice. Another fun fact though, is that you can get new barrels in Canada. They’re not calibre changes, but barrel length changes so that you can quickly swap between non-restricted and restricted status on the weapon (cutoff being 18.6 inches… If you see that number on any advertisement it means they want to sell stuff in Canada!). So you can tell they wanted to go on the calibre change idea, but I’m about 100% convinced that they were put on a leash by someone in the financial department.

        • n0truscotsman

          THose are excellent points and I didn’t think about the caliber change option. Certainly not *as* useful in the US as it may be for Canada.

    • J-

      Ultimately, the problem with the SCAR, ACR, XCR and all the others is that they are not enough of an improvement over the AR-15 to justify the increased cost and lack of aftermarket accessories. If somebody wants them for the coolness factor, that’s fine. But every time I looked at one, I ended up saying to myself “for that price, I could cobble together an AR-15 EXACTLY how I want it” and I did. That is the same problem the military has with replacing the M4 with something completely new. There is nothing that is head-and-shoulders above the M-16/M-4 to justify the cost of replacement.

      • Darkpr0

        That is only possible with accessories that are well-suited to AR15 type systems. If you were afraid of ammo malfunctions, you might want a reciprocating charging handle so that you have direct control over the bolt group. I suspect it would be difficult to put together an AR15 build that would meet that criterion. If you were extremely concerned about close-quarters mobility, you could also make an argument that a bullpup such as a Tavor would deliver superior performance over a Colt Commando because of the vast barrel length difference.
        It has also been noted by a lot of people that at this point in the government’s game, replacing the M16 and M4 is about politics of it rather than merits of an actual system. I am very hopeful that the LSAT program will get sufficient support between its users and the politicians to be successful.

        • J-

          There are a number of uppers that are designed around a live bolt handle for the AR, either on the right or left side. White Oak Armament makes one, with the bolt carrier to go with it.

          Honestly, I’m not sold on the reciprocating bolt handle on the AR, or on the SCAR (which I have a lot of range time on) or the SIG 556 (which I had). They just are not strong enough. The trick with the Garand or the M14/M1A is that if it got really, really stuck you could put the stock on the ground and stomp on the charging handle. If you broke a shell off in the chamber, inserting a shell removal tool and doing this would rip the casing out or destroy the extractor. Either way, the gun was totally broke at that point.

          A reciprocating bolt handle that held in by a small pin and can be pulled out just seems too weak to be beat on in an emergency. I could be wrong, but that is how I felt.

          As for CQB, bullpups do have better velocities for short overall length. I had the FN FS2000. It’s OK. The Tavor is OK too. Some people are dedicated bullpup fans, and this is fine. The ergos on them never really suited me. The mags always rubbed a sore spot on the inside of my wrist.

          I don’t think there is going to be anything that unseats the AR-15/M-16/M-4 until it comes with a totally new cartridge/propellant combo that is so revolutionary that it makes the 5.56 totally obsolete.

          • Darkpr0

            The demand for full ambi controls has driven the market to switchable operating handles. The demand for low weight and simplicity will tend to make these weaker because beefing up the charging handle means beefing up everything that has to carry the load: The bolt and carrier. As such, most of the solutions out there just aren’t going to be as strong as fixed, integral charging handles like you would see on a Garand, M1A, or AK-type rifle.

            As a shooter of older rifles for which ammo is difficult to find and not always well-made, I like to have very direct control over the bolt assembly, because defective ammo in worn-out guns can create some very strange situations, some of which are better handled being able to both push and pull the whole assembly. Having fooled with a lot of different bolt handle locations (Just take a look at a G41 or G43) I feel like my favorite setup is a reciprocating bolt handle on the left side. Quick access with the non-firing hand (for a righty) so that you do not have to relinquish the ability to threaten a target while reloading, but easy to work with power if something big goes wrong internally. I can live with a non-recip if I have some sort of forward assist. I feel like InRange TV’s recent post on the MPAR 556 does a good job of showing some of the strange scenarios where a recip is a really handy thing to have, though I admit they’re not typical. On the other hand, nobody wants an epitaph “Only accounted for typical scenarios”.

            Personally I feel like bullpups are the way of the future for current ammo types. They take the dead weight of a stock whose usual purpose is only an ergonomic extension, and occupies it with useful machinery while still performing the same function of something to plop against a shoulder. Some more challenges are caused by this, like preventing kabooms from being fatal and how to make a nice trigger, but as time goes on people are warming up to them. From a design perspective, you get a substantially shorter gun with the same performance… It’s a slam dunk. I feel like the area where work is needed is to take that and make it ergonomic for a human body. It doesn’t help when people always want to see the buttons in the same place as on an AR, though.

            I’m still hoping the LSAT produces viable caseless ammo. That would provoke some serious response.

          • J-

            I get the point of bullpups. Perhaps one will come along one day that is more ergonomic than the few that I have handled, and I will warm up to them. But I feel like I should point out that reciprocating charging handles, ambidextrous controls, and bullpup are mutually exclusive. The SA80 tried and failed miserably. I don’t consider a bullpup to be truly ambi if to make it other hand friendly requires a field strip and replacement parts.

          • Darkpr0

            Bullpups are getting better with forward and downward-ejecting models which solve the hot-brass-to-face problem. When it comes to actual controls on the gun I don’t feel like ambidexterity is a must-have or a want. A human can use any ambidextrous gun, but an ambidextrous human can use any gun. Adapting to the machine is a great thing, especially if you find yourself in a situation where you don’t have a choice as to what tools are available. The Type 97 in Canada does a good job of an ambi, recip handle but it bring up another issue of having to pull your entire head out of cover to wield it. But that’s not specific to bullpups, I have the same criticism of any high off-bore optics and irons.

    • Carlos Velazquez

      A buddy of mine had had an XCR. He waited damn near a year for it and it set him back about $1800. I got dibs on the first ACR to make it’s way into my favorite gun shop before it made it off the back of the UPS delivery van. The ACR set me back $2200. My buddy and I spent the next few months comparing the two guns at various ranges. In my opinion the XCR is a better gun then the ACR. I came away disappointed with the ACR and that I spent $400 more on a gun that was not at all better then an XCR.

  • Hokum

    I wonder how is Bushmaster compared to Remington ACR and MSBS Radon and vise versa.

    • The MSBS is a better design in a couple of ways (it is no longer a straight clone, though it started out that way). The Remington guns look fancy, but I haven’t so far been that impressed by what I’ve seen with the Bushmaster rifles. I do not have as much experience with them as those who’ve owned them, however.

  • hami

    I feel your pain with the ACR. I bought one a few years back when prices dropped to $1600 at online retailers. I liked the rifle, it seemed well built, but I sold it off once I realized the caliber conversions weren’t going to become available. Sometimes I regret selling it because it really did seem like a nice rifle.

  • TimothyT

    Great job on the subtitles!

  • MrEllis

    Nice video!

    • Patrick R.

      Thank you so much, give it a thumbs up if you liked it. We have more coming!

      • MrEllis

        I thumbed it, Patrick. Get TFBTV off and running! Also, sub’d.

  • MPWS

    You are presentable duo, you guys -)))) and appreciate the review.
    If you poked around Asia and South America, you’d find easy another five. From Brazil – all plastic LAPA, from Asia – the last bullpup scream out of ST being SAR21 and Chinese QBZ-95 (Chinese soldiers do not like it). Sooth African Vector – artful non-sense is not much better.

    • Patrick R.

      Thank you for the kind words.

  • G0rdon_Fr33man

    Commercial failures in the US. The Benelli sells in Europe, and it´s gas system is very good, as is the accuracy and reliability. It is superior to the Mini-14 in just about every way.

  • Stephen

    XCR and the MR1 are really popular in Canada because you can take them hunting unlike the AR variants.

    • Chase Buchanan

      But not the SIG SG 550 series, anymore, unfortunately 🙁

  • Miami

    The Rasheed Carbine was never a commercial product. It was an Egyptian designed rifle that was adopted for their own armed forces and replaced with the SKS and AK. The ones brought into the US were surplus guns and that was it. The tooling was sold to Iraq and they made some but not in any large numbers.

    • I definitely thought about that and took it into consideration but I
      figured it is a solid gun that could have been a successful export had
      the AK not dominated Egypt and surrounding countries. Military small
      arms even when sold only to other military or police organizations can
      still be considered a “commercial” success.
      Also the reason I chose
      the Rasheed is that we have a full video review of the gun coming up in
      our usual style (like we did with the Walther MPL, Bond Arms, Luger,
      & AUG). Stay tuned and thank you for watching!

  • Harrison Jones

    That benelli would be an awesome Cali Gun. Glad to know it’s an option there.

  • Steve Martinovich

    How exactly was the Bushmaster bullpup, Benelli and Rashid “decent” when you essentially called all three pieces of crap?

    • Patrick R.

      This video was about why we feel they failed, not their merits.

      • Phil Hsueh

        While that may be true the title of the video however, says 5 decent rifles so it’s a bit confusing when you say X rifle was crap because Y when the title of the video would lead us to believe that all of the rifles being discussed are “decent”.

  • Jeff

    How come NO PICS of these guns?

    • Because there are 12 minutes of video.

  • Michael

    I have roughly the same feelings on the Masada/ACR. I do wish the prices would drop and aftermarket take up the slack on the ‘adaptive’ part of the name.

  • noguncontrol

    I like the Benelli MR 1 and the Rashid. The Benelli MR1 has an under the barrel gas system like the M-14, but it has a true closed receiver design. Not many under the barrel gas systems are developed these days. And it looks like a shotgun because it is basically a shotgun redesigned into a 556 rifle. The Rashid is probably one of the last of the true direct impingement rifles ever made, together with the MAS -49. Such a system isn’t being produced anymore, and probably wont be anymore, not with the popularity of the AR-15 and the AR-180 gas and piston system.

  • idahoguy101

    Why didn’t you include the seniautomatic Daewoo K2?

    • I could do three or four more of the segments. I have all the daewoos in the safe as well.

      • Mack

        That would be interesting, i love hearing about “forgotten” guns or unique ones.

  • lifetimearearesident

    Regarding the Bushmaster ACR – just looked at Bushmaster’s website. The list price for the least expensive version is now $2,600. Ouch!

  • Mystick

    uh-oh. You mentioned the IRA in the AR-180 part. Better pull the video.

  • JumpIf NotZero

    How does anyone do even a passing review on the ACR and not mention it’s a heavy heavy fatty pig?

  • Dylan

    Love the AR-18; though as Nathaniel F. pointed out to me, it had It’s fare share of problems like the AR-15.

    It’s too bad the gun was a commercial failure, with a little more development I’m sure it would’ve given the AR-15 a run for It’s money!

  • Dale

    “Love the AR-18; though as Nathaniel F. pointed out to me, it had It’s fare share of problems like the AR-15.”

    Nathaniel saying that an American gun design is anything less than divinely-inspired perfection? That’s a first.