Yes and even so the C7/C8 rifles the CF are using are so good there is no need for change other then a railed FF handguard which is pretty easy to spec out for procurement.
There junk compared to anything from H&K!
Yes and even so the C7/C8 rifles the CF are using are so good there is no need for change other then a railed FF handguard which is pretty easy to spec out for procurement.
Your absolutely right, that's why we need a general with balls that can make major changes that cancel these people out of the equation.
There junk compared to anything from H&K!
Dude, your doing a Jim Jones with that CoolAid...
Keep in mind from the Dust Tests - ALL - (yeah HK with XM-8, and Hk416, FN with Mk16, and Colt M4) barrels where crapped out at the end of the test and headspacing was so worn on ALL guns that they where unsafe.
Testing in a lab or range only shooting give you a very poor idea of the capabilties of the system.
Dude, your doing a Jim Jones with that CoolAid...
Ian Hogg in one of his books expressed the opinion that infantry small arms have reached a plateau in development and cannot be advanced any further without either a huge technological breakthrough and/or huge money, and it is not justified.
Look at any new military rifle. All are mix and match bits of existing designs. Most look like copies of the G-36 or AR/H&K416. Stoner rotating multi-lug bolt or Kalashnikov bolt, AK style gas system, or AR-18 style short stroke piston etc etc. Other than Optics and polymer materials, not much new. FN has managed to make an ambidextrous bullpup, but not much else. The H&K caseless was cool, but too expensive, not NATO STANAG.
All the money spent on SPIW, SCAR, and all the other projects were unable to get an infantry weapons system that would perform in any way significantly better than the M-16A2 in the hands of the average soldier. Fancy radio controlled proximity fused 20-25mm buck rogers guns are too heavy and too expensive. Flechettes and duplex rounds etc did not produce enough of a performance increase to justify the cost.
Any modern AR/M-4/H&K etc will shoot more accuartately out of the box with good ammo than any soldier can actually shoot them in combat, and all are about as reliable as you need them to be. Torture testing that says rifle "x" has a MRBF of 5,500 while rifle "y" has a MRBF of 6,000 so rifle "y" must be better doesn't really mean anything in a practical sense.
If you spend the money to replace the M-4 with SCAR or ANYTHING else, will you get better performance? The accuracy won't be any better. The terminal ballistics won't be any better. You might get a marginal improvement in ergonomics, but not so you will really notice it on the target.
The Iraq war and the emergency purchases of M-4s in large quantity for general issue saved Colt's ass! They were in deep doo-doo up until that point. FN and other built cheaper M-16s, but the M-4 was exclusively available from Colt (see the last chapter of American Rifle: A Biography by Alexander Rose).
The US Army is not going to get a new rifle system for general issue anytime in the near future because of the reasons I gave at the beginning of my post. SOF may get 416s or whatever else they want, but they already do that.
By taking over the rights, the army will get to tender out any new procurement, and so get a better volume discount that they do buying exclusively from Colt under the now expired sweatheart deal. So really, this proves that the M-4 is here to stay for the forseeable future.
The quality from Germany is never lacking, and most importantly things are made properly from the start, as far as I'm concerned.
...
H&K does it right the first time.
Other manufactures just copy what they have done, in one form or another!
do we forget metal storm?
http://ww w.youtube.com/watch?v=OqW5bG2M3x4
if they made a metal storm pistol why not a metal storm carbine?
or for that matter replace out current one shot&toss shoulder fired rocket with a 4 tube shoulder fired rpg stystem, if you listen to what he says about the pistol only the
"magazine-barrel in one" is needed. imagine a soldier being able to put 6 clusters of 4 40mm grenades in a phone book at 200 yards in under 2 seconds!... i should copywrite that idea lol
Stretch To 500 Yards
I next set some targets at 500 yards and fired another four five-shot groups. This was done prone off a rest using only Black Hills 77-grain Mk262 Mod 1 load. Even with a 12 mph full-value crosswind I was immediately rewarded with a tight five-shot group that measured just 3.7 inches. The SCAR 16S went on to average an impressive 4.2 inches at this distance.
link to this article
http://www.tacticalgunfan.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=555&Itemid=1
Some of you should keep in mind that very few organisations in the CF actualy does any buying of substance. PWGSC does all of the buying for all of the Government of Canada.
PWGSC is all about lowest complinant cost and avoiding litigation. In my mind, this is a comflict of interest with military procurement imperatives, but it is still the reality of what the CF has to contend with.
It would be like the average CGNer describing to his wife a 416 upper (without naming it), and leave her to do the shopping for it. What do you guys think she would return home with?
The procurement process as it is today is wrong for the military (in my opinion), but it isn't the fault of the guys trying to get the kit to the soldiers.
Look KevinB, I have been buying H&K for many reasons now for a little while.
The quality from Germany is never lacking, and most importantly things are made properly from the start, as far as I'm concerned.
Although I support, and buy products made from here in North America as well, I do this because I feel a need to support our firearms related manufacturing here in NA.
I have never been let down by H&K, they are a true leader in firearms development, its as if their company is filled with Stoner type people.
Although it is German, and my background is German, I prefer their design performance.
Conclusion =
H&K does it right the first time.
Other manufactures just copy what they have done, in one form or another!
Well Colt & other manufactures are more interested in selling more parts down the line, and basically milking their customer.
As for "Kool Aid" and keeping up with Jones, I was purchasing firearms based on experience & performance.
I love many other manufactures but European firearms(H&K, Steyr,Sig) have been the best to me when putting large amounts of ammo down range or out in the bush.
Is this why you keep looking for HK 416 magazines despite being told by many there are far cheaper and better alternatives out there?
1. this thread is about military procurement not an individual putting at most a few thousand rounds out while camping or whatever one likes to do. The HK you buy and the HK a country buys are not entirely the same, nor the same application. BTW I generally like HK stuff too.
2. Although I'm sure Colt likes parts sales I doubt you will find HK denying sale of parts because "the end user will never need them". All machines break including ones made in Germany.
3. Stoner did create the M16, the same one that initially failed horribly in Viet Nam (yes I know the M16 is now a fine rifle so back off) If all of the people at HK are like Stoner then... Ugg well you get the point.
4. HK does not always get it right the first time. Look at the G36, a very nice rifle with some fantastic innovations. But... the sleek simple cocking handle design ruins all of that. Standard optics are hard to mount without interfering with the cocking handle and forget co-witnessing setups unless you want a horrible cheek weld. etc etc. HK steel magazines are poop in the real world and on and on we go. Everyone make mistakes and sometimes our solutions are worse then the problem.
5. Every HK product I've seen is about 1.8 times the price or more of a similar product made in the US or Canada. Yes HK stuff is good but you also pay through the nose for it. Sometimes the quality does not justify the price for HK stuff. HK416 being a fine example. (Kevin, I like you but don't forget before you went to work for KAC you had nothing but praise for the 416)
Unfortunately, specifications are often drafted by inexperienced or incompetent individuals.
And unfortunately sometimes they are also drafted to force a particular piece of equipment into service for political or personal reasons.
Also I find it amazing how many people just say this particular item is crap without even using it or even holding it. People just base there opinion on one individual who works for the competition.
There excellent magazines, and i have not had the problems that KevinB has mentioned. I own these mags, and want more. I also like Tapco mags and of course Pmags as well. I need the new Emags as well too.
keep in mind when the SA/80 mag came out it was top dog, H&k was going to make plastic mags for it too, but the US army didn't want them from what I herd.(I know that is not Fact, but it from a knowledgeable source of mine).
Compared to so many other mags i have used they are the best, but so many company's now have been making newer better stronger versions in the last 5 years, so who cares.
Also I find it amazing how many people just say this particular item is crap without even using it or even holding it. People just base there opinion on one individual who works for the competition.