Talk:Kel-Tec RFB

Mention of round limitation?

It's been rumored on the usual gun forums that the RFB's receiver will only have a life of 5,000 rounds? While this hasn't been substantiated since the RFB hasn't hit the market, it may be relevant to add if it turns out to be true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.134.156.193 (talk) 19:59, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Kel-Tec has a statement on their website at www.kel-tec-cnc.com that all of their firearms are rated to fire at least 6,000 rounds; however they have never released any statement claiming a round limitation on the RFB receiver. Based on personal conversations with the owner and designers at Kel-Tec, there is no currently known upper limit on the RFB receiver's service life (examples have been tested well in excess of 10,000 rounds without sign of problem). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.169.234.135 (talk) 03:17, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Renaming article to "Kel-Tec RFB rifle"

Hello there,

Shouldn't this article be renamed "Kel-Tec RFB rifle" instead of "Kel-Tec RFB carbine" ? Since the RFB rifle exists in three versions (sporter, hunter and carbine), the actual article title can be misleading, as one could believe it is only about the carbine version of the RFB rifle, whereas it's about the RFB itself and all its variations. breversa 11:56, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree on all counts ^^ T3hm00t 03:01, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Technically it counts as a carbine from what I know of the gun world since its design is to be compact. The caliber doesn't effect the guns purpose/design specifications.184.56.29.78 (talk) 21:48, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Great.

I just created an article for this rifle because I couldn't find one anywhere. Hayden120 11:22, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I think all the moving is done. Had to do it all manually to keep the full title 'Kel-Tec RFB High Efficiency Rifle' as it was already taken by my article. Now all the edit history has been lost. Excellent. Hayden120 11:44, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Battle rifle?

The article infobox listed it as a battle rifle, and this isn't really correct. The most accepted definition of a battle rifle is a select-fire military service rifle chambered in full-power rifle cartridges. The RFB only meets one of those criteria, as it is neither select-fire nor a military service rifle. Therefore I'll remove the references to its being a battle rifle.--72.129.224.32 (talk) 15:04, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Kel-Tec RFB. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081014050751/http://www.freshwaterseas.com/bullpups/Kel-Tec%20RFB.htm to http://www.freshwaterseas.com/bullpups/Kel-Tec%20RFB.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080704182704/http://www.kel-tec-cnc.com/images/downloads/RFB_Flyer_SHOT_2007_web.pdf to http://www.kel-tec-cnc.com/images/downloads/RFB_Flyer_SHOT_2007_web.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090514092431/http://www.striketactical.com/newsletter/?id=33&archive=0 to http://www.striketactical.com/newsletter/?id=33&archive=0
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100103050935/http://www.keltecweapons.com/specifications.htm to http://www.keltecweapons.com/specifications.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:40, 3 May 2017 (UTC)