This wasn't really what I was getting at...It's obvious that the money and logistics mess it would create isn't worth the switch...I was merely asking people's opinions on the two...I did want to know why ORIGINALLY(originally being after m16 was introduced, but perhaps while it was still contesting with the m14 and not widely accepted...or rejected for that matter) they didn't switch to the bull-pup system...but what i was more interested in was everybody's general opinion on the bull-pup vs a more traditional design...
"What about you Pete?" you may, or may not, find yourself asking...Well, I think the bull-pup design is very inovative and the reduced overall length while maintaining of the barrel length shows a true engineering spirit. But, I wouldn't give up my AR-15/M16/M16A1/M16A2/M4A1 FOR ANYTHING!!!...I love that gun(and all of its beautiful variants) and I always will, just as an old WW2 veteran loves his M1 Garand.
Although....in regards to the WW2 vet. analogy, no m16 has saved my life, so i wouldn't quite have the same attachment(Hasn't saved my life YET...I just know in my heart of hearts that one day it will)