apparently!
http://gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=111881477

dont really see any kind of advantage to this though

Thats crazy, i was thinking about something like this just the other day.

_________________
The morning is dead And the day is too,
There's nothing left here to meet me
But the velvet moon.
All my loneliness I have felt today,
It's like a little more than enough
To make a man throw himself away.
~ J. Hendrix

IF memory serves, I believe George S PATTON designed something like this for the M 1903, way back in his early career. Something to do with rifles for mechanized troops. Gotta admit, the guy was always thinkin'..

_________________
The only rights you really have are those you are willing to defend.

Well with the long barrel it will be accurate and easy to handle in close quarters or the woods.

But for a rapid follow up shot, you would need someone to give you a reach around to get it done quickly.

Nope a crew served bolt action rifle is just a waste of a nice stock.

_________________
This is so easy, If my dog had thumbs, He could do it!

U.S.N. Retired 1985-2005

The bolt-action bullpup is not a new idea, of course. It has been tried many times....and always, two negative issues kill the idea. First, with the bolt handle so far to the rear, fast followup shots are impossible. One must remove the weapon from the shoulder, change one's grip of the weapon, cycle the bolt, then resume the firing position - and THEN and ONLY then, reacquire the target. Ridiculously cumbersome. Reloading is equally cumbersome, of course. In a military scenario, as a sniper weapon, all of this would require so much movement as to eliminate almost any possibility of maintaining concealment, which is vital to the very survival of a sniper. Second, the bullpup design requires that the sights or scope be jacked up WAY above the centerline of the barrel, which NEVER has anything but detrimental effects on accuracy, especially at long range, because of the introduction of excessive parallax into the system. Again, ridiculously cumbersome....and impractical. The ONLY advantage to this layout, in the bolt-action weapon, is the ease of handling, due to the short length....and the fact that a long barrel can be incorporated into such a design. Also, it may look "cool" to some. Other than that, the design is totally impractical.

I'll agree with "a waste of a good stock." Bullpup designs are "tactical" by nature, not fancy sporters. Should use a laminate or a plain walnut stock for that job. I guess it would be good for the first shot, but if it's a single shot idea, why not use a single shot rifle? Now what I'd like to see doable is a pistol-grip Mauser with a nice tactical buttstock.

_________________
Then said Jesus unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. - Luke 22:36

Remember: June 27 is 2nd Amendment Day June 27-July 4 is Freedom Week

Cant see the point to have a bullpup bolt action, just reaching back to cycle to bolt.

Well I am just guessing on this one. If it would have worked and been a good idea we would have seen it a long time ago on some military bolt guns. I also have to say that’s the first time I have seen that done.

_________________
"Let us speak courteously, deal fairly, and keep ourselves armed and ready."
Theodore Roosevelt, San Francisco, CA, May 13, 1903

What a waste of a good looking piece of maple.

_________________
http://redneckfrankenstien.wordpress.com/

There was an experimental .303 rifle made as a bullpup. I have ONE photo in a book and this rifle is so obscure that even a google search on the Thornycroft carbine of 1901 will only give a few results.

Here's the best image and link:



http://ww2chat.com/forums/weapons-technology-equipment/1259-thornycroft-bullpup-carbine.html

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Thornycroft+carbine&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

_________________
Milsurps are Classic! Not Plastic!

Nations do not survive by setting examples for others.
Nations survive by making examples of others.

You don't win a war because you said so.
You win a war when your enemy says so.

So who made the experimental .303? the poms or the us cons.

The poms. Note how the muzzle resembles a SMLE in profile. I couldn't imagine the US making a rifle (even a prototype) in .303. It would have been .30-40 Krag at least.

_________________
Milsurps are Classic! Not Plastic!

Nations do not survive by setting examples for others.
Nations survive by making examples of others.

You don't win a war because you said so.
You win a war when your enemy says so.

Except for Savage #4s and P-14s

_________________
- Jeff

_________________
I do not relish to feel what the men that used these weapons felt when they saw the elephant. For the elephant has tusk and to see him is to have his tusk dig deep into your soul. You will always have a part of you that will be cold and empty.
Semper Fi

They were contracted orders to an existing design. I was referring to a completely new design in my previous post.

Anyway, Thorneycroft are a British firm also known for high-performance water craft, such as PT Boats.

_________________
Milsurps are Classic! Not Plastic!

Nations do not survive by setting examples for others.
Nations survive by making examples of others.

You don't win a war because you said so.
You win a war when your enemy says so.