Why do most new flagship PCPs from various manufacturers look FX Impact-alike?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
fe7565 said:
You are correct, the EVOL's action is not part of the entire length of the "stock", so not FX Impact-like. You may be a little confused about the Priest and the Prophet (not sure when you entered the airgun scene), because they definitely came out after the FX Impact. And they are the only models offered by RTI...thus their flagship(s) by default. LCS and Rattler are almost identical riles, but different manufacturers and it is their flagship product because LCS offer only that one, and the Ratter is Western' most expensive by a good margin in its line up of three riles. Scout Epoch is in the prototype stage and AEA's TAC seems to be on paper...so for your convenience let's drop them from the line up because they are not a standard production items...thus not meeting your self-set criteria over my list.

We can go on splitting hairs if that better serves your desire ;)
Click to expand...
Long enough to be well into it when I was watching the Impact come out. also the Priest came out so close to the Impact that there's no way they had the time to copy, design and go though the developing, so the guns must have been in development in the same time

my friend, only going by your words ........."Most new Flagship PCPs from various brands " ....most is a big number, very big number in todays PCP world with soooo many manufacturers
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pale_Rider
Upvote 0
fe7565 said:
Yes, it's a personal preference on looks and purpose, and if they resemble an AR or not. But in general, the FX Impact and its various similar cousins from other makers have one thing in common besides the AR-style grip: the action extends all the way to to back without any of the traditional-look stocks extending...well actually there no stock in the traditional sense. While many bullpups have a stock that looks traditional, except their action extends all the way to the rear.View attachment 274453
Click to expand...
Maybe I am misunderstanding you but I cant think of a single bull pup that has a stock that looks traditional in fact a bull pups design makes it impossible to have a traditional stock since the action sits where the back of a traditional stock would be. same with a bull pups trigger they dont have a traditional trigger again because the design of a bull pup doesnt allow for a traditional trigger setup. Traditional trigger may be the wrong term but bull pups use a linkage system to reach back to the action where the trigger normally sits in a traditional stocked rifle. The trigger works the same but its not sitting under the action engaging the sear in a traditional way
 
Upvote 0
LDP said:
Maybe I am misunderstanding you but I cant think of a single bull pup that has a stock that looks traditional in fact a bull pups design makes it impossible to have a traditional stock since the action sits where the back of a traditional stock would be. same with a bull pups trigger they dont have a traditional trigger again because the design of a bull pup doesnt allow for a traditional trigger setup. Traditional trigger may be the wrong term but bull pups use a linkage system to reach back to the action where the trigger normally sits in a traditional stocked rifle. The trigger works the same but its not sitting under the action engaging the sear in a traditional way
Click to expand...
As you described, the trigger is mostly actuated by a linkage in the newer bullpups. But that is part of the action and not part of the stock even if actuated by a link. By traditional stocks I meant traditional-shaped stock as in a rifle that in the bullpups shows up in various forms/sizes of the of a traditional buttstock, grip, stock, cheekpiece, etc. while the FX Impact has only the stock part missing but has a cheekpiece of sort, and a standalone buttpad.
 
Upvote 0
fe7565 said:
As you described, the trigger is mostly actuated by a linkage in the newer bullpups. But that is part of the action and not part of the stock even if actuated by a link. By traditional stocks I meant traditional-shaped stock as in a rifle that in the bullpups shows up in various forms/sizes of the of a traditional buttstock, grip, stock, cheekpiece, etc. while the FX Impact has only the stock part missing but has a cheekpiece of sort, and a standalone buttpad.
Click to expand...
Ok I see what you mean by that comment. Yes the impact has a butt plate if you will that is attached to the receiver where some bull pups have a stock that the action sits in.
 
Upvote 0
Hodauh said:
LOL.... The Impact is not a unique format, it's a typical "skeletonized" AR style framework. FX didn't invent the format, it's simply a copy of contemporary weight reduced AR frame. Pretty hard to make them look like anything else.
Click to expand...
Of course it's unique, please show me a gun that has the valve adjuster (did others have that before?) where it is on the impact, is a true bullpup with no trigger rod, has a hammer preload wheel, had side lever cocking, ability to change calibers in minutes, ability to change twist rate in the same caliber in less time than above. Others had a pull open valve?

Right but it's a copy of the AR that isn't a bullpup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pale_Rider
Upvote 1
The question is why they look so ugly, in this case, function over form,FX has no patent over functional-looking Bullpups.
No one in copying ,it just that the form and adjustability has lead the way...
As others have said there are different-looking Bullpups out there.
Too much FX. YES!! The ugly tactical stuff has taken over the minds of wannabees....forgive me I have sinned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Firewalker
Upvote 0
The most simple answer is because they sell. They sell very very well and that is what you make when you are in any business. You either create demand or you replicate the formula.
Do they look like an FX? Yeah but how do you make a skeletal PCP without looking like an FX to one degree or another.
I don’t see any problem with it at all. Just a trend and one day it will lose steam and another format will appear and you will see makers move in that direction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fe7565
Upvote 0
Glem.Chally said:
Of course it's unique, please show me a gun that has the valve adjuster (did others have that before?) where it is on the impact, is a true bullpup with no trigger rod, has a hammer preload wheel, had side lever cocking, ability to change calibers in minutes, ability to change twist rate in the same caliber in less time than above. Others had a pull open valve?

Right but it's a copy of the AR that isn't a bullpup.
Click to expand...
Skeletonized AR is what said, and the "bullpup" is assumed unless to you a staionwagon is a sports coupe.
 
Upvote 0
I think you are mistaken here. They do not look like an impact or trying to copy the impact looks. I think you meant to say, why are some high end airgun look like an AR15. Lots of airgunner like the tactical look of the AR. The AR15 is the most sought rifle out there. So making an airgun look like an tactical AR15 is gonna sell. That is why the impact and lots of guns look similar.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: fe7565
Upvote 0
I am really split between getting a Bullpub style or a more traditional style.
The Prophet II has many features. Study built as I understand and accurate, powerfull but not so nice looking.
The Daystate WOlverine Forester is a gracefull looking rifle. Made well by the best, but lack options.
BZ6BAdvl.gif

uUF7Ikdl.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: fe7565
Upvote 0
fe7565 said:
May be a rhetorical question...

Is it because it's a very popular chassis with the consumers, looks-wise, so best way to compete?

Or Is it because it is the "leanest" possible chassis design for a performance PCP with all extras (stock, etc) removed?

Like a Formula 1 car that has to be deigned in a certain way or it will not be aerodynamic enough and handle well on the road? Either way....are we "stuck" with this chassis?
Click to expand...
Form generally follows function
 
  • Like
Reactions: fe7565
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu