Personal Defense Rifle?

www.defensereview.com...












Projected MagPul PDR (TM) Weapon Specs (from MagPul company document):

"Purpose:

Compact Personal Defense Weapon for use in vehicle cabs and tight spaces. Will serve as single-solution replacement for standard issue M9 (pistol) and M4 (carbine) weapons.

General:

- Barrel: 10.5 & 12.5" polygonal rifling
- OAL: 18-20"
- Weight: 3-4 lbs
- Caliber: 5.56x45mm NATO/.223 Rem. (5.56mm NATO). Weapon can be refitted with 6mm, 6.5mm (i.e. 6.5 Grendel, 6.5 MPC, etc.), 6.8 SPC (6.8x43mm SPC), etc.
- Std. Mag: USGI 15-20-round custom polymer box mag
- Effective Range: 300 yds with 12.5" barrel

MagPul is currently in the process of developing a 5.56x45mm NATO/.223 Rem. NATO (5.56mm NATO) bullpup PDW (Personal Defense Weapon)-sized subcarbine/SBR (Short Barreled Rifle) called the "PDR", which stands for "Personal Defense Rifle". The MagPul PDR(TM) is approximately the same size as an FN P90 PDW, yet surprisingly lighter in weight, without resorting to a proprietary sub-5.56mm PDW caliber like the 5.7x28mm cartridge developed by FNH (FN Herstal) for the P90 PDW or 4.6x30mm cartridge developed by Heckler and Koch (HK) for the MP7A1 PDW.

In fact, that's the whole idea behind the MagPul Personal Defense Rifle (PDR)--give the warfighter a lightweight 5.56mm NATO weapon in a compact PDW-sized package. Since it doesn't require special ammo (i.e. a proprietary cartridge), there are no ammo supply and procurement difficulties, other than the occasional shortfalls of 5.56mm NATO ammo supply, due to inadequate U.S. ammo production capability in the face of an ongoing war (Iraq and Afghanistan).

Small as the P90, but fires the 5.56 rounds. Impressive looking weapon. However its a mockup so theres no guarantee that it would come to reality, but its an interesting concept. Looks like they couldn't keep their hands off the weapon.

MP-7 IMO would be a better choice. The MP-7 looks more promising and capable. This just looks like a futuristic mini-FN2000.

Shattered OUT...

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
MP-7 IMO would be a better choice. The MP-7 looks more promising and capable. This just looks like a futuristic mini-FN2000.

Shattered OUT...

What? You hate the FN2000?

Thats what I use, I dont think you want to take out your neighbours in the middle of the night

i expect the recoil is gonna be a bitch.

I love the FN-2000! I just think that an MP-7 is a better complement weapon than this mock-up.

Shattered OUT...

reply to post by tomcat ha


Also the short barreled, short coupled nature of the rifle predisposes the user to shooting his left hand or finger if he doesn't keep the hand properly on the grip provided. Any short rifle has this predisposition but note how close the left hand is to the muzzle on this one!

How exactly is the barrel utilized?

Shattered OUT...

reply to post by ShatteredSkies


I was wondering that too. 6 holes around a central bore? The central bore appearing larger. My guess is that the outer 6 are cooling or weight reduction and the central has the rifling. Nothing in the article to clarify. At first I thought it was some variation of a gattling gun but doubt it now.
Again from a safety viewpoint note how close the shooters left hand is from the muzzle. All he has to do is point that index finger and he looses it. Wish I didn't speak from experience but I do! The makers of this one put a little downward projection for apparent protection??

To small for the ammo. Anything with a barrel that short is gonna lose far to much power firing 5.56, even more with the SPC load (Which I would personally prefer.) If I remember correctly from my firearms training is a 5.56 round needs at least 10 to 14 inches of barrel or it loses power from the gases no expanding enough. Something in that size you'd be better off with a P-90 or MP-7. I'd go with the 90 myself, more ammo Plus I don't see how a SMG sized weapon can replace a sidearm.

Also, why are they still harping the 5.56 anyways? Last I hear the US Army and Marines were looking into a larger round. The 6.8 was made by Spec Ops in the first place to replace the 5.56.

Did anyone notice that the barrel length appears to be about as long as a 223, the proposed round? (ie. no effective rifling ahead of the cartridge) This one won't have much punch or accuracy! How long should a .223 barrel be to efficiently utilize the round?

reply to post by plumranch

Just noticed that the effective range is listed as 300 yards with a 12.5" barrel. So the rifle shown has a chopped or minimal barrel. Previous poster mentioned 14" so that must be about right for efficient length.

What makes this rifle any better than the MP-7? I hope it has armor-piercing rounds and a higher clip capacity.

Shattered OUT...

reply to post by ShatteredSkies
The advantage of the .223 round is in the choices and availability. Shoot whatever you want or can get.

There are weapons that have already accomplished what this gun is trying to. I, like everyone else, think this round is unfavorable in this kind of weapon.

The barrel holes could be some kind of integral silencing.

I meant in terms of performance.

What will this new personal defense weapon bring to the table that weapons such as the MP-7 and P-90 don't already do if not better?

Shattered OUT...

Specifically this PDR would simplify the supply chain, that is the main angle they are going for in this proposal. First off no matter how bad even this initial concept is in some ways I'd still rather strap this to my hip rather than an M9 if I had to pick between the two for a primary armament. Second though this can use M16 mags so it's got Plug and Play on it's side versus the p90 or mp-7. No matter how hard you push a P-90 mag won't fit in your m-16!!

On a side note while I don't particularly like their initial concept I think it shows extreme potential. And after having seen an article about Magpul corp.'s MASADA battle rifle concept I have no doubt they will iron out the kinks and blow us all away with the finished product. This company is most definitelly a group to watch,

Btw it's headed up by a former marine which means snow jobs and ubertech gizmos of imminent friendly casualty causing do not hold water with former marines.

Originally posted by plumranch
Did anyone notice that the barrel length appears to be about as long as a 223, the proposed round? (ie. no effective rifling ahead of the cartridge) This one won't have much punch or accuracy! How long should a .223 barrel be to efficiently utilize the round?

I don't think that these pictures show the complete weapon system. Like you point out, if you look at the working parts of the weapon, the front of the bolt seems to indicate that the round would almost be sticking out the front of the barrel.

If you take a look at the 4th picture down, the 6 holes around the barrel and the larger hole beneath the barrel seem to suggest that there is a bolt-on barrel attachment that secures through these holes. This would tie in with the 10- or 14-inch claims from the manufacturers and allow complete modularity and mission specific profiling.

If this is the case, then I like the basic concept. It allows for training in a single weapon system while still allowing for different weapon lengths. This can then be adjusted for the user, i.e. longer barrel for infantry, shorter for armour etc.

Judging by where the ejectin port is, this is doubtless the 10.5 inch model, the 12.5 inch would probably have a flash hider on the barrel extension.

Not sure I would want a 5.56mm going off that close to my face what with the attendant muzzle blast.

Just as a side note, that receiver cover (and receiver) in the photo looks like it has been broken and glued back together by Helen Keller.

Come to think of it, the weapon does look like it's been put together utilizing in the most advanced of shotty workmanship techniques.

I don't think it's even made of composites or metals. I think it's all plastic.

Shattered OUT...