Norica Goliath 88 Classic Carbine – Part 1

by B.B. Pelletier


Norica Goliath 88 Classic Carbine is anything but classic. A bullpup design, the rifle is compact, yet powerful.

When I visited Pyramyd Air’s garage sale in May of this year, just prior to their recent move, I was shown a pile of Norica spring guns and asked to comment on each of them. Pyramyd owner, Joshua Ungier kept handing me guns to take to the indoor range and try out. The one he was most excited about is today’s rifle, the Norica Goliath 88 Classic Carbine. When he showed me that it came in a double-locked hard case and looked like a tactical black rifle, I knew why he was excited. I’ve been sitting on this rifle since June, waiting for Pyramyd’s orders to come in, and now that the time draws near, it’s time to get started with the reports.

The Goliath (I’m shortening the name to save keystrokes) is a conventional breakbarrel spring rifle encased in a dark gray tactical stock. It’s short, at only 33.5 inches long, but the weight of 6.25 lbs. seems heavy in such a small package. The buttpad extends by pressing a button on the right side of the stock, making the length of pull adjustable to three distinct lengths–14-5/8″, 16″ and 17-1/2″ fully extended. A normal adult pull length is about 14.5″, so this is a small gun sized for big shooters.


Second notch out gives a 16-inch pull.


Third and final notch out gives a gigantic 17.5-inch pull, suitable for giants and Klingons

The stock is synthetic, and indeed the only external parts that are metal are the barrel and the safety switch. There are no sights, so the dot sight included in the combo package is necessary. The carry handle does not detach from the stock and it has a Picatinny rail on top–so Weaver bases will be required. I think the red dot sight compliments the look of the rifle, but I wasn’t sent one, so I opted to mount a scope, instead. More on that in the accuracy report.

Also mounted to the stock when you get the gun are two auxiliary rails–one on either side of the forearm. So you can mount flashlights, lasers, rangefinders, night sights or whatever extra accessory you like and not impede the scope or dot sight.

It’s a bullpup
What’s a bullpup, you ask? A bullpup rifle is one that has been shortened by running the action back into the buttstock. In the case of the Goliath, that means pushing the spring tube back into the butt. That makes the overall length much shorter and gives a cool, compact look to the rifle..

The problem with bullpups is their triggers. To put the trigger blade in a place the shooter will naturally grasp, it has to be moved forward of the place where the sear resides. A link is then needed to connect the trigger blade to the sear, and that link can cause a reduction in the crispness of the trigger. I’m not saying what the Goliath’s trigger is like–yet. I’ll reserve those comments for the second report. This trigger has a single adjustment screw that controls the length of the stage-two pull.

Power
The power claimed for the Goliath is astonishing, to say the least. Looking at the rifle, you get the feeling that the gun was made from a youth model, but when you cock it, the 34 lbs. of force required snaps you back into perspective. This may be a short gun, but it’s no youth model. This one is for adults, and for those who don’t mind a hard-cocking rifle! I say that because the two short pieces of the gun you grab to cock it when the barrel is broken open don’t provide the same leverage found on a conventional rifle like the Crosman NPSS or Beeman R1. You’ll think this is harder to cock than it really is. We’ll see what the power is in the next report.


This is what the bullpup design does to the cocking stroke. The Goliath is a mighty mite!

The two-piece articulated cocking link plus the barrel come back very far when the rifle is cocked. The barrel is 14 inches long, but is augmented by a soft plastic muzzlebrake. You’ll have to treat this brake with care because it doesn’t look that strong. The safety is automatic, but there’s no beartrap device, so the rifle can be uncocked without firing. You can apply the safety at any time. The detent is a ball bearing that is the hardest ball-type to open I’ve ever seen. You have to slap the muzzle to open the barrel for cocking, which bodes well for the conservation of air during firing.

Ambidextrous
The rifle is completely ambidextrous. Nothing favors one side over the other.

Quick look
I know you want to know everything about this new airgun, and I’m about out of things to show you in this report, but for us all I took a couple shots–in addition to the shots I had taken back in May when I saw the gun in Cleveland. The gun seems powerful and quick. And the vibration isn’t too bad. But she recoils more than you might think.

The box
I don’t usually comment on the box guns come in, but this one is the exception. How about a dedicated hard case with TWO resettable combination locks? Pretty neat!


Hard case has–not one–but two resettable combination locks!

I already told one reader that the Norica guns have a high level of build quality, and that observation extends to the Goliath. More after I test her for velocity.


Goliath is 100 percent ambidextrous.

43 thoughts on “Norica Goliath 88 Classic Carbine – Part 1

  1. Wow. Just in time. I just saw this online last week and was wondering how well a bullpup springer could perform. Looking forward to the velocity and accuracy tests…

    -Carlo



  2. B.B.
    An interesting piece you have there.
    With the center of balance so far to the rear, is ths going to be a "wobbly goblin" ???

    I know that I have trouble with guns that are too light, or balance too far back.

    twotalon


  3. Well…I don't want to trash an innovative product, but have to ask – where's the point of bullpup springer breakbarrels? It is well known that the barrel length of a springer can be as short as 10" without losing power. So you could make a breakbarrel carbine with the same overall length as the new long-barreled Norica without loss of power. Add the awkward cocking geometry and, even more important, the high line of sight that will result in an extreme parallax (try shooting that on different short ranges without sighting in – and remember, we airgunners tend to shoot at targets that are smaller than the distance between the Norica's barrel and its line of sight!, plus the necessary linkage between trigger and sear, and I see in no way why one would want to use such a design…

    just my personal thoughts on this, tough.


  4. Mel,

    Some people like a very compact gun. This fits the bill.

    B.B. has found the Air Arms Pro Sport an oddity because of the same cocking difficulty you mention about the Goliath, yet the Pro Sport is a very popular gun & is used on the field target circuit.

    From what I've heard from B.B. so far, the Goliath is a keeper.

    Edith



  5. BB or any others who may know: I have always wanted a .25 cal springer, and looked into the Walther Falcon Hunter, but the early reviews are not very favorable. There were problems with the triggers, sears and barrel hinge pin. Also issues with the plastic stocks cracking. Recently there have been posts that these problems have been corrected, and the gun looks different from the earlier versions. It only has two screws in the forend. Is the gun that Pyramid is carrying now a improved model? Has anyone shot it or and can anyone comment on it? Thanks, Robert





  6. Wow. Cool looking gun. I have been waiting for the reviews of this gun.

    The things that matter the most to me are accuracy, power, and trigger. If any of those is missing it is a no buy!

    In particular I am concerned about the trigger and it's ability to be modded if it is not as good as it needs to be.

    So I am real anxious to see your report about these things!


  7. Good morning Edith,

    What a neat looking rifle. Ajustable for length of pull is a real plus. Gotta ask why the soft plastic for a muzzlebrake cause that's where people will hold the gun for cocking and also where we'll slap it to open the action.

    I've got to agree with Mel about the high line of sight and the resulting parallax problem.

    Mr B.


  8. I think it looks great, and am looking forward to the velocity and accuracy tests.
    Part of the reason I like the Nightstalker so much is that it is semi-auto…but as well I like the looks (which should answer Mels question…some people just like the tactical look of these guns).
    If it is really as powerful as claimed it could possibly see a way into my collection, especially if my Nightstalker ever falls prey to the leaking cartridge issues that seem fairly common. I'm hoping it doesn't fail because the Nightstalker has proven to be one of my favorite guns. I've now put 9 of the .88gm cartridges (and about 2000 rounds) through it and it has performed flawlessly. But I have to admit the reports of cartridge leaking are so common that I cringe everytime I put in a new one…expecting to hear the hiss of all that escaping CO2…fingers crossed.
    CowBoyStar Dad


  9. BB,
    Thumbhole, bullpup, tactical, breakbarrel — I'm sure that will be a winner for Norica and I hope for PA as well, but I'll pass:).

    The LOP adjustment is nice, but once again it highlights what is either anomalous physical characteristics in airgunners or a Napoleon complex. The shortest setting (14 5/8") is almost an inch longer than most centerfire stocks. No wonder eye-relief is such a critical factor in scope decisions.


  10. About a week ago I was wandering around the PA website when I stumbled over the Goliath. I was going to ask BB to do a review on it but figured he'd get to it soon as it's new and unconventional. Sure enough a week later the first part of the review has been posted to the blog.

    Thanks BB


  11. B.B.

    I'm a fan of military designs, and this one looks good to me until you cock it. The high-tech bullpup look and the breakbarrel seem incongruous. I'm curious about the bullpup design in general. I believe the first generation of bullpup designs like the British model currently in use were disasters, and yet they persist.

    The other day I met a young woman at an orientation event. She said that her name was something like Eun Jin, so I said she must be Korean. She was agreeably surprised and asked me how I knew. I couldn't very well tell her that her name sounded like a pellet even if it is a good one.

    Herb, hadn't heard that comment of Truman about statisticians. It sounds like Don Rumsfeld's formulation: the unknowns that we know we don't know and the unknowns that we don't know we don't know. I think the mismatch between statistical modeling and reality can have large implications as big as the whole Vietnam War to take one example. I was watching a segment on the top ten combat rifles of all time on YouTube. Number 2 was the M-16 (bad choice) and in describing the procurement process, this one guy began talking about the policies of Robert McNamara. He claimed that the McNamara team was devoted to advanced mathematical modeling for everything from shoe procurement to body counts to rifle selection. Our man said, "As a way to run a war, it was just dumb." Nobody would claim that McNamara was dumb by any academic measure. He was a super-success in his professional life instrumental in designing the Dresden firebombing in WWII as well as the Vietnam War (that's quite a load on the conscience at the end of the day). Anyway, he could crunch the numbers, but there was something seriously out of joint between his statistical models and reality.

    Incidentally, the YouTube commentator gives good information, but he sort of looks like a bullet himself.

    Matt61


  12. RE: Rejecting one shot from one group

    Ok, I have a ten shot group.

    9 shots are in a groups size of 0.500 inches, but one shot is wide and would make the group size 1.15 inches.

    ASSUMPTIONS:
    (1) Horizontal Errors squared and Vertical errors squared are equal about mean position.

    This is assumed in paper below…

    Basically just means that the shots should form a circle around the POI. Not an entirely trivial assumption.

    (2) Values in paper below are valid given assumption above(which seems reasonable…).

    "Approximate Probability Distributions for the Extreme Spread"
    http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA006586&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf

    (3) A two-sided 99% confidence interval will be used

    Thus the test will be conservative.

    I'm not going to get into one-sided vs. two-sided test. [I'll never get out of this if I keep digging myself deeper ;-) ]

    ————-
    Analysis

    From table 1, column 2, we can lookup a factor of 3.710 for 9 shots.

    So the standard deviation of the group size, as estimated from our 9 shots, is:
    0.500/3.710 = 0.135

    ————–
    NOTE(1): We can't just use +/- 3 std dev for confidence interval since the GS measurement isn't truly Gaussian for just a few shots in a group. If a lot of GS measurements were plotted the distribution would be skewed. Now if we shot a group of say 100, then the results for a number of GS measurements would look more like a normal curve.
    ————
    Note(2): Sort of any easy way to smell a rat here for statistical analysis. GS can't be below 0. But if we take:
    0.500 – 3*Std Dev
    we get:
    0.500 – 3*0.135 = 0.095
    0.095 is getting awful close to 0, so it seems likely that distribution is skewed.

    Consider if we had shot a 5 shot group and were trying to reject one shot.

    Std Dev = 0.500/2.787 = 0.179

    3*0.179 = 0.537

    0.50 – 0.537 = -0.037
    Which is impossible! can't be a negative measurement, so clearly the normal distribution for the GS measurements doesn't hold in this case.

    ————–
    Now for a 99% confidence interval we have 0.5% on high side and 0.5% on the low side.

    So in Table two we in the column for 0.005 we find 2.030.

    So:
    2.030*0.135 = 0.274 which is the low side of our confidence interval.

    now for the high side we lookup in the column 0.995 for 9 shots and find 5.930.

    So:
    5.930*0.135 = 0.801

    This gives us our high side.

    So for the nine shots our best estimate of of the 99% confidence interval for the GS is:

    0.274 < GS < 0.801

    More conventionally this would be written as:
    0.500 +0.301/-0.226 @99%

    Since the questionable shot results in a GS outside of this confidence interval, we can reject it. Thus 0.500 is the best estimate for our Group size at the 99% confidence interval not 1.15 inches.

    Note however this doesn't mean that 0.500 is the absolute word according to God. It is like the weather man saying that there is a 10% chance of rain today. Regardless if it rains or not today, the weatherman is right!


  13. RE: Rejecting one shot in a group again…

    Take same shots as above.

    Now I'm going to use Range estimates from a few days ago where the value for the GS is ASSUMED to be normally distributed.

    The CI is
    0.092 < GS < 0.908

    So by using the right statistics our test above is a bit more sensitive (has a smaller CI).

    If you'll read my post about using the range a few days ago, you'll notice that I very carefully stated my ASSUMPTION that the normal distribution applied. Like the fine print of a finance contract!



  14. And now for the most generic of airgun questions…
    Why an airgun over a conventional firearm?

    Of course there are some obvious reasons such as the reduced noise, cost of ammo and lack of registration requirement. There seem to be a number of negatives also, small caliber (for the most part), comparable initial purchase cost and they take extra practice to shoot well.

    I’m new, I’m hooked and I’d like to why everyone else is also.


  15. Variety is good thing. Bullpup designs are okay in my book. Plastic fragile muzzle brakes are not. I guess you'd be paying for that handy case going by the price.


  16. I don't think it's airgun vs. firearm. Get both. Why airguns? I can shoot in my basement all day or night if I please. I can't do that with firearms. Small caliber? Ever hear of Bigbores?


  17. Airguns over firearms?

    Well for starters, who say we can't have and shoot both? I certainly do.

    But a reason you forgot is SAFETY. An airgun that can kill a squirrel at 50 yards will not also kill a person in the housing development a quarter-mile past the tree.

    As for the extra practice to shoot well, what do you suppose that does to your firearm shooting skills? It makes you a better shot. The artillery hold works on firearms as well.

    B.B.


  18. RE: Group sizes – another example

    Ok, here is another example of how this type of analysis can be used.

    In this log BB shot 4 different types of pellets, 10 shots each.

    http://www.pyramydair.com/blog/2009/09/gamo-lady-recon-part-3.html

    Assumptions:
    (1) No idea relative errors to shooter, ammo, or gun.

    (2) No prior knowledge of what a "good" group size for gun and shooter would be using "perfect" ammo.

    In other words, using data at face value with no other knowledge, which BB certainly has…

    —————

    If you run through the numbers @99% CI you get:

    Gammo Match
    0.65< GS(meas=1.15) < 1.87

    Crosman Premier
    1.04 < GS(meas=1.856 < 3.02

    RWS Meisterkugeln
    0.57 < GS(Meas=1.018) < 1.66

    RWS R10
    0.58 < GS(meas=1.029) < 1.67

    So the Crossman Premiers are out, but there is not enough data at the 99% Confidence Level to say that the other three types of pellets are different.

    But wait are the Crossman Premiers out? Looks like a flier on upper left. If I use the photo to scale the group without that point I get:
    1.86 inches *12.8mm/17.8mm= 1.33 inches.

    Now running through 9 shots I get a CI of
    0.73 < GS < 2.14 @99%

    Since 1.86 is within this interval, I can't reject the shot as a flier at the chosen Confidence Interval.

    So in order to be able to say that remaining three brands of pellets were different at the 99% Confidence Interval, I'd have to shoot more groups. Probably a LOT more to find a difference between the RWS Meisterkugeln and the RWS R10.


  19. As with the others, shooting airguns does not preclude firearms.
    I like 10m target shooting.
    A 10m pistol is as difficult to shoot as a rimfire at 25m. I have a 10m range in my basement…don't have a big enough house for a 25m range. So if I feel like practising I can go down to my basement at any time rather than pack up for the range.
    But also for my kids. I wanted my two young sons to learn about shooting at an early age. My 8 year old is a very good shot, with both airpistol and rifle, and my 6 year old is learning the basics.
    And I feel comfortable that if they do something incredibly stupid before I intervene that in all probability they could badly hurt themselves or each other…but probably not (prayerfully) cause a lethal wound.
    CowBoyStar Dad


  20. Anonymous,

    Re: Why an airgun over a conventional firearm?

    There will always be a place in my house and heart for airguns and firearms. There are things airguns can do that firearms can't and vice versa. I'll add to the growing list of reasons to be addicted to airguns:

    6-Ease of being able to shoot. Don't have to load up the car and drive to the range. Step outside or walk down to the basement or swimming pool room and begin shooting.

    7-Become a better shoot because of more trigger time. See reason #6 above.

    8-As easy to shoot as a firearm if the airgun is a pcp.

    9-The challenge of learning the technique of shooting different springers.

    As for "comparable initial purchase cost" being a negative I'm not sure I understand. If you research and buy the right airguns, the resale is as strong or maybe stronger nowadays, than the typical firearm. Initial purchase cost means little to me since I view the airgun as worth as much or in many cases more than I paid (I buy many guns used). If I need to sell the gun it can usually happen within 24 hours if it's priced well.

    I'm like you. I'm new to this and I'm hooked.

    kevin


  21. Airguns vs firearms…
    Yes, the reduced noise factor of an airgun comes in very handy. In my yard, we had a gopher problem, and all attempts at trapping them resulted in failure. Same with drowning attempts. I could see their little heads popping up at their burrow mounds, and discharging a firearm in a residential area is illegal and completely unsafe. Enter the airgun!!! No more gophers!!! There's even some airguns like the Benjamin Marauder, that are virtually silent. Raccoons, skunks, possum, and other pests can be dispatched with an airgun…safely…without disturbing the nieghbors.


  22. The big-bore and PCPs are excellent examples. Big bore guns are no safer and yet there is a market for them even though they are designed to be firearm replacements in countries were firearms are banned. PCPs require support equipment, pumps or scuba tanks to operate making them more complicated than a firearm yet they are also popular. There are air guns that go way beyond the “utility” reasons covered. When I see post on mods and historical guns.

    Please don’t misunderstand and think I’m passing a value judgement on anything, I also enjoy both. I just get a very different feel from an airgun, it feels humble and simplistic. Probably due to the gun providing the means of propulsion rather than the bullet. The limitations of air gun are also part of the fun and the challenge.

    that’s my $0.02… i’ll get off my soap box now.


  23. Twotalon,
    I have a Walther G22, a propose built bull-pup rifle. The center of balance is in the butt stock of the rifle, but it doesn't seem any more wobbly than any other rifle. To me it feels more stable because the weight is off my support hand and is braced by my shoulder. The gun is heavy for a .22 but feels very light because of how well balanced it is.
    Most firearm traditionalists don't like the balance of a bull-pup but from what i can tell, most of them wont even give these rifles a chance. My G22 is heavier than my Marlin 60, but I can hold my Walther on target with more stability for a much longer period of time than I can my Marlin. The Walther also recoils strait back, like an AR 15, so there is next to no muzzle flip when compared to other .22 rifles.


  24. Kevin,

    Are pcps only as easy to shoot as firearms? I thought with no recoil they would be easier up to their effective range of 50 yards or so.

    I wouldn't overstate the safety of airguns. I expect that within 100 yards and probably further, they can easily be fatal, and most shooting distances in any populated area are much smaller than that.

    Matt61


  25. Mechredd…
    Depends on how well the gun fits the individal. Different rifles will fit and hold well for different individuals.
    One size or design will never fit all. Sometimes we can get used to them, and sometimes we can't.
    Then, once in a while you find one that is perfect…… that's the one you want.

    twotalon


  26. Excuse me, but big bore airguns are FAR safer than centerfire rifles!

    They do not project their bullets even one-quarter as fare as standard hunting centerfires.

    Shotguns are mandated for hunting deer in some eastern states, because they don't carry as far as centerfire rifles. Well, big bore airguns don't even shoot as far as shotguns shooting rifled slugs.

    B.B.


  27. Matt,

    The safety fan for an airgun of any kind is MUCH smaller than even a weak centerfire round like the .223 Remington.

    For safety it doesn't matter what the bullet does on target at the appropriate range. What matters is what happens AFTER the appropriate range is passed. For example, you and I would probably be hard-pressed to shoot a deer beyond 250 yards. But your M1 Garand bullet is still traveling with lethal force out beyond 3,500 yards.

    Now, a big bore airgun may drop a deer at 75 yards yet fall harmlessly to ground at 800 yards. Which gun is safer in that context?

    Safer doesn't mean the gun won't kill, or that in killing it won't hurt. Safer means the gun won't kill accidently well beyond the intended target.

    And everything I've said about a bullet carrying also applies to ricochets.

    B.B.


  28. B.B.

    I have no doubt that airguns have much shorter range limits than firearms. But the phrase "my yard" conjures up distances much shorter than an airgun range. So if the airgun can do damage in the neighbor's yard or the street, it still seems to be a great cause for concern.

    Matt61


  29. Matt61,

    Re: Are pcps only as easy to shoot as firearms? I thought with no recoil they would be easier up to their effective range of 50 yards or so.

    You make a good point. I think it depends on the firearm and the pcp. I think in my limited experience with pcp's you would have to move to at least 100 yards to start seeing a significant difference and with minimal wind a pcp could be more accurate than many, but not all firearms.

    I've shot a lot of firearms but never in contests or for that matter paying alot of attention to groups. My guns were not for target shooting but for specific game. When I went to the range it was to verify that the scope was still on and was good to go hunting. I grew up with a .22 semi auto remington tube fed. Still have it. With the right ammo I could shoot clover leafs at 50 yards all day long (that's my memory and I'm sticking to it). Seriously, a stock .22 with open sights and it could group. I have an old remington 700 in .308 (scoped) that could regularly place 5 shots that touched one another at 100 yards.

    I didn't measure group size but have started with pcp's. Don't shoot firearms much at all anymore but it would be an interesting test to get to the range and see what some of my firearms would do compared to this summers obsession shooting the pcp at 100 yards.

    Not sure if your comment about "overstating the safety of airguns" was directed at me. Maybe because I said it's easy to shoot airguns just step outside, go down the basement etc.? Maybe I should have elaborated. I don't, nor would I suggest, that anyone just walk outside or go down into their basement and start shooting. Please use a bullet trap with duct seal behind your target. I do and have never had problems. Know your target and what's beyond your target.

    kevin


  30. Herb
    If you saw the post I'm referring to
    please ignore it.The only people to decide
    who stops and when are BB and Edith.
    Every one else has the option of scrolling past what doesn't interest them.

    To me the feeling here is good morals,
    good will and enjoy our sport safely.
    I think you're a fine example of that,
    even if a lot of what you say is over my
    head :)
    I'm sure we all post things that others
    pass over but that's the beauty of this
    blog,we can have 2,10,or 100
    conversations going on at once.The folks
    responsible for this blog allow it and
    encourage it.So let's keep it to the
    high standards we've come to expect from
    each other.
    I'll get off my soapbox now.
    Best to all

    JTinAL


  31. Kevin,

    I remember B.B. and Robert Beeman saying that airguns are the most accurate 10 meter rifles in the world, presumably because of their lack of recoil (pcps). In their favor, firearms have the flatter trajectory. I guess at some point the flat trajectory takes over although it will vary with different guns. I am working on an elaborate scientific experiment to find this point… :-)

    The comment about airgun safety was not directed at anyone in particular. It was prompted by the picture of backyard shooting. My experience of backyards has been suburbia, and I can't imagine shooting an airgun there without a lot of safeguards.

    Matt61


  32. Twotalon,
    What you say is very true. A flaw with Bull-pups is a relatively long LOP. Luckily with the G22 the 22lr round is small enough to ware there is enough room in the stock for an extra magazine while still having a below average LOP. Lop is also adjustable from about 13.75-15 inches. I have mine set as short as it will go, and the thumb hole stock keeps my thumb from hitting my cheek when firring. I have seen other bull-pup designs with very long LOP that look very uncomfortable. The shortest setting on the Goliath is the standard setting for most rifles, so it should fit most people just fine.



  33. Earl,

    So you tried your scope from 8 ft to 25 ft, checked mounts, rings, stock screws and trigger screws and it still wouldn't group. Is that right?

    What size groups are you getting now using the open sights? What pellets have you tried?

    kevin


  34. RE: Comparing Group sizes

    Dah….

    If you want to compare group sizes then you have to be careful about what you are comparing.

    You shoot ten 5 shots groups, and ten 10 shots groups.

    —————-
    Let's look at the size of the holes….

    From table 1, column 2 in paper cited above,

    5 shots = 3.066
    10 shots = 3.813

    So the 10 shot hole is:
    3.813/3.066*100% or 124%
    the size of the 5 shot hole.

    ——————–
    Noe let's consider the "quality" of the data..

    Assuming the normal distribution (which is wrong, but close enough for this…) let's calculated the relative standard deviations. The expected standard deviation based on group size is in column 3.

    5 shots
    0.828/3.066*100% = 27.0%

    10 shots
    0.745/3.813*100% = 19.5%

    So shooting 10 shots groups is more repeatable.


  35. Not a bullpup, sorry.

    From wikipedia: “Bullpups are firearm configurations in which both the action and magazine are located behind the trigger [...]. This permits a shorter firearm length for the same barrel length, saving weight and increasing maneuverability in confined spaces.''

    This thing does none of that, so it is not a bullpup. Please don't claim properties not evident by calling it a bullpup when it clearly is not.


  36. Of course the Goliath IS a bullpup. The trigger is forward of the action, as your Wiki definition indicates. I even explained that in the blog report.

    How do you see this as anything other than a bullpup? Did you even read the report?

    B.B.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


2 + = 11

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>