HK416 Damaged in Combat

I believe we had a disagreement the last time I logged on here about a month ago. I'm not sure what the outcome was, as this is the first time I have been back on here since then, and I haven't bothered going back to the other thread.

Regards.

Mark
 
MWL said:
I believe we had a disagreement the last time I logged on here about a month ago. I'm not sure what the outcome was, as this is the first time I have been back on here since then, and I haven't bothered going back to the other thread.

Regards.

Mark
Click to expand...

Well then apparently we should let bygones be bygones cause honestly I don't remember at all. :)
 
TheGamer### said:
Im curious if on a DI gun the gas tube being struck at just that angle, would it be sheared off and driven into the bolt carrier anyways.

I drink HK coolaid too often, but its a lucky shot nothing more.
Click to expand...

The back end of the gas tube just sits in the gas key on the carrier. More likely the gas tube would be sheared off and bend at the impact point. Probably the tip of the gas tube would just stay were it was. Otherwise manually racking the action would most likely cause the gas tube stub to be pushed forward out of the upper, allowing the gun to continue to work as a straight pull action. Obviously this would be less than ideal in an active gunfight.
 
Hah, if that was a G3 it would still be working.

And now back to bickering about AR'ish Matty Mattel aluminium sissy rifles:stirthepot2:
 
Suputin said:
G3's are good but they are overly heavy and have a ton of felt recoil compared to a comparable semi-auto rifle. I have an L1A1 hanging on my wall if you want to go down that route? :)
Click to expand...

Haha yup but they were a mans gun. I have trigger time on the G3 (I immigrated from across the pond) but not the FAL thanks to Kim and Allen. F#@&er$!
 
L42A1 said:

My favourite part is how he doesn't even bother putting on headgear for the HK.
Click to expand...

Because the HK bolt still had lugs.
Water filled M4s fail at the mid point of the barrel(where it is lightest), HBs and CHFs pop gas tubes, and the 416s bend op rods. All get beat up shooting with a barrel full of water, anyone who says otherwise is trying to sell something.
 
Zeroed-In said:
Of course that's with a USA Colt not a Canadian Colt where no helmet is required.;)

Cheers D
Click to expand...


I was clearly warned not to do this with a C7 or C8 well in the CF on multiple occasions either when talking to Diemaco back in the day or by other weapons technician in Cf and experienced soldiers. CC improvements over Colt USa were minimal in many regards.
 
Stoner99 said:
I was clearly warned not to do this with a C7 or C8 well in the CF on multiple occasions either when talking to Diemaco back in the day or by other weapons technician in Cf and experienced soldiers. CC improvements over Colt USa were minimal in many regards.
Click to expand...

Yes and in many regards the CC upgrades were a vast improvement over the USA spec. rifles.

Like Gunnerlove has stated though this practice is hard on all rifles...

Cheers D
 
Another gun that has passed the NATO over the beach test is the SIG 516.

The reason it has done so, is because they made three modifications to the design, which they carried over to their M400.

1) They screwed a small nub into the inside of the barrel extension right where the extractor site when the bolt is locked into battery. This stops the extractor from blowing out, which is the weakest part of the breach end of the barrel.

2) They machined a slight bevel into the inside of the upper receiver where the cam pin sits. This allows the cam pin to begin rotating with slightly less force.

3) They drilled a few more holes into the indents in the underside of the lower receiver extension. This allows water to exit the extension faster and reduces the hydraulic effect of a water filled tube.

Regards.

Mark
 
Stoner99 said:
I was clearly warned not to do this with a C7 or C8 well in the CF on multiple occasions either when talking to Diemaco back in the day or by other weapons technician in Cf and experienced soldiers. CC improvements over Colt USa were minimal in many regards.
Click to expand...

Actually because of itar issues of getting a m4 that was a c8. I only came across the info recently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom