Sneak Peek at Thorneycroft to SA80 with the Author, Jonathan Ferguson

Jonathan Ferguson, author of our newest Headstamp Publishing book “Thorneycroft to SA80: British Bullpup Firearms 1901-2020”, has just gotten his advance author’s copy of the book! Let’s join him to take a look through its contents…

Copies are in transit now, and should be available in stock in a couple weeks. Kickstarter preorders will be shipping immediately upon our receipt of the books, and we will have plenty more available for sale from our web site:

Order your copy now, and we will ship it with the other preorders for a minimum wait!


  1. Congratulations on the book publishing! It looks beautiful and I am looking forward to my copy on such an interesting topic

  2. Congratulations on your new book. Een if it is about a collection of the most mis-begotten firearms ever built – the bullpup (grin)

    • Looks like a super book. The bullpup is a good idea. Yes! If you use a 25″ barrel. Is SA80’s had lsw length barrels “and that was silly gun; in 5.56, reckon it would be good in 7.62 nato personally” well then we would have the extra range needed without bringing in 7.62 nato rifles. You get “with a bipod” 200m extra easy with the long barrel in 5.56mm.

      Same length as the em2; not too long, the slr was too long 6″ plus, longer.

      • Silly gun as a support weapon= 30rd mag of 5.56mm. 30rd of 7.62mm for support auto given everyone else was .223 semi by choice; bren idea, but with bolt guns. 7.62 nato is a much more powerfull round. They were good though the lsw’s in semi, honestly I was really impressed; got one as a crow, became very good with it, really wanted to keep it. Very accurate, with the bipod, rear handle, funny shoulder rest. Long range 800m. True fact I outshot a l96. Now I don’t know of mine was a fluke; someone at the factory paid attention to that one, but that long barrel… Which I thought was due to more rifling as oppose more powder burn untill coming on here… Swear down, I thought this thing is great compared to the rifle, and I am quite a good shot.

        • Bullpup; no longer than a the m16 a1 via said layout. Bet nobody was that enamoured with the long barreled “shorter than the lsw” but same/similar overall length, m16.

          And I am not a fan of the l85 a3 or whatever. Long barrel; success! He he.

          • So to round off, I think criticism of bullpups is because bullpups have short barrels; the correct length is that of the em2 & lsw. What you then get is significantly increased firepower compared to a m16 a1 length gun which is the same but with a shorter barrel.

            Russia have discovered optics, they will actually be able to see us as oppose with soviet ak’s it’s not fair. M4’s will be to small; taliban problem, outranged. Air strikes will be more difficult against a fellow gunpowder power so to speak.

            (Not suggesting Russia is an enemy, but by nato parlance)

            M4 = to short. Put you 50p they switch back to 7.62x39mm in a month. Lsw length barrels probably cancel that advantage.

            Thus the bullpup is a good idea.

          • With a bipod, he he. A good one! Best one available, do it, it will be worth 8 hits out of ten fired; so good.

          • Bet you get 2-5 usually. Especially under stress. An exceptionally well designed bipod, will be worth its weight in guineas. Yes how about that for rocking the boat. Pump action bipod, something. Aye it wants to be 5 times as good as a harris five times as expensive. Result= ping, ping, ppping. Average soldier increases hits by 99%. Long barrels be the thin red line; at balaclava.

          • They are in the prone postition anyway to avoid being shot or blown up by flak, set on fire etc. Pay for a good bipod, the best.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.