H&K G36 civilian photos and details. UPDATED

[bacon1337]

Rumours? There were nation-wide investigations into the allegations and they found the rifles had a short life-span, the idiotic optical sights built into the carry handles on the early series were completely defective and heat dissipation problems.

Just like most German products, and specifically their cars, it's a defective product with an inflated price. When you buy German you're basically paying for their socialized state benefits and wages.

Too bad the Japanese aren't making guns, they'd be kicking German ass all day, every day, just like their cars are right now. At least we have Norinco and decent American brands that respond to their consumers.

Don't like the sights? Ditch them, there is a flat top available. your arguement is invalid, Short life span? why don't you validate that statement with some documentation? Oh wait, you can't.

When you buy german you are buying a quality products.

The japanese do build guns. Weatherbys with howa actions are japanese guns.

which nation was doing these "investigations"? I had one of the G36 dual optics that are mounted in the carry handle that stood up to many thousands of rounds, what was defective on them?

It's ignorant e-intellect. Just like m4s jamming all the time and ak47s not being able to hit the broad side of a barn. He dislikes german products for some reason so he has to try and justify it.

 

[Miraclejoe]

That being said if I was in charge of of the army and I was procuring a new rifle it would be the 416.

bacon1337, I don't know you and your post history is too sort for me to get an idea of where you are coming from. Would you care to flesh out a bit of your experiences to add weight to your comments?

 

[mikethebike]

Is it just me or is the length of pull on that rifle ridiculously short? Looks like a folding stock, not a telescopic stock...
I cant shoot that rifle with that stock on.

 

[bacon1337]

bacon1337, I don't know you and your post history is too sort for me to get an idea of where you are coming from. Would you care to flesh out a bit of your experiences to add weight to your comments?

My experience is very little. I'm going off articles written by the likes of some of the industry professionals and insiders. My reasoning for picking the 416 is the identical manual of arms to current c7/c8. The hk416 has been proven to be superior for suppressed use. And has a better otb capability of almost no wait time as opposed to a few seconds of the m4. The rated srf of the 416 is 150 rounds as opposed 90ish for conventional m4 which incidentally is now the same as the east block. Akm are also rated at 150 rounds srf. And a fair percentage of 416 parts works with existing m4 parts simplifying logistics.

For the g36 while it is a stellar rifle arguably the best from a pure engineering point of view. Almost no one uses it. The mil spec g36 uses propietary mags. And its later derivative the xm8 smashed pretty much all of its rivals but again too much propietary parts around it makes it expensive and not viable. The canadian gov is cheap as is when it comes to the mil. The jtf2 would be lucky if they get 416s let alone the normal army.

Keep in mind I am no professional. That's just my take on it from what little research I have done.


Also keep in mind this is for mil application. For me myself i would shock myself if i can bust a quality ar like a bcm or dd to a point where i need a 416 for myself.

 

[Moe]

I learned of these new usa made g36 rifles a while back. Guys were saying a ump would be made there too. Anyone know if a ump is also being made with this g36 rifle?

Moe

 

[Ebola]

Is it just me or is the length of pull on that rifle ridiculously short? Looks like a folding stock, not a telescopic stock...
I cant shoot that rifle with that stock on.

It is a collapsible stock. You can see the bottom half of the but is made off two pieces in the pictures. Also if you compare the pictures in post 1 of this thread you can clearly see that the but stock is in two different positions. As for the LOP I wouldn't worry to much. I hardly doubt HK could #### that up. The pictures don't show the but fully extended is all.

 

[greentips]

The first G36 entered service in 1996. They may just buy new ones instead of doing fleet upgrade, hence the new version. It is indeed the 20 th anniversary for the original version.

 

[sparrow]

Well I'm spending the all next week running my C model ... will let you know if I like it any better or it ends up on the business end of a C8 ... =)

 

[t_102]

Wow!!

 

[Evil_Edie]

bacon1337, I don't know you and your post history is too sort for me to get an idea of where you are coming from. Would you care to flesh out a bit of your experiences to add weight to your comments?

as much as i'd like to disagree i'm going to have to agree with him. From a purely military acquisition point of view the 416 would be a better option just because of the fact that it's manual of arms is practically identical to that of our current service rifle. Not to mention the internal mechanics and parts. The simple fact that it would require us to completely retrain our weapon techs and replace tools and manuals would be reason enough for our government to not consider many potentially superior options. We want the best, but our government will only give us what's enough for the job.

 

[GTOVR4]

If you look the picture close enough
It come with new bolt hold and release
The mag does drop free with new dual side mag release too
(With its own g36 mag)
The new super low profile top rail make the sight height perfect with European optical like aimpoint and zeiss
And the IDz stock does allow it to shoot when it folded

Hk keep Upgrade the g36 why peolpe always look at the oringal model and said its outdated

I just hate AR‘ s charging handle and the stock never fold

They are reliable guns for sure, burned 1K through Monday. I will probably get a Non-R model. There is however much to not like. Height over bore is "unfriendly", more so with optics. OEM stock is too long, M4ish stock does not allow for folded shooting. Charging handle reciprocates and is a pain to access, mags don't drop free, OEM mags are a pain to do Tactical Mag changes with, hold open device is inside trigger guard(DUMB), fixed pistol grip, too tall, no bolt release ... did I miss anything? On the plus side it is waaaaaaaayyyyy nice to shoot suppressed...the DI C8 blows(literally, crap back at you). I think a Suppressed 416 is the next procurement mission. Still the C8 is a nicer gun to carry and manipulate, it is far more intuitive. My .02c...YMMV.

 

[Gunnerlove]

My experience is very little. I'm going off articles written by the likes of some of the industry professionals and insiders. My reasoning for picking the 416 is the identical manual of arms to current c7/c8. The hk416 has been proven to be superior for suppressed use. And has a better otb capability of almost no wait time as opposed to a few seconds of the m4. The rated srf of the 416 is 150 rounds as opposed 90ish for conventional m4 which incidentally is now the same as the east block. Akm are also rated at 150 rounds srf. And a fair percentage of 416 parts works with existing m4 parts simplifying logistics.

For the g36 while it is a stellar rifle arguably the best from a pure engineering point of view. Almost no one uses it. The mil spec g36 uses propietary mags. And its later derivative the xm8 smashed pretty much all of its rivals but again too much propietary parts around it makes it expensive and not viable. The canadian gov is cheap as is when it comes to the mil. The jtf2 would be lucky if they get 416s let alone the normal army.

Keep in mind I am no professional. That's just my take on it from what little research I have done.


Also keep in mind this is for mil application. For me myself i would shock myself if i can bust a quality ar like a bcm or dd to a point where i need a 416 for myself.

So where did the Xm8/g36 smash all comers? I am still waiting for a test where they put the 416 head to head with brand new M4s.

 

[sharpsway]

Sounds like a dream has finally come true.

 

[enefgee]

I am still waiting for a test where they put the 416 head to head with brand new M4s.

Given that the original tests weren't done with brand new M4's I'd be very confident betting you won't see that test any time soon. I wonder why they didn't use new ones in the first place..............hmmmmm.........

 

[C77]

The over the beach test is a red herring. It's a made up test to invent a shortcoming for the M4.

Any AR can be made to pass this test by eliminating the safety factor built into stoner's design wherein the case head is not fully supported to allow for controlled case rupture in the event of a bore obstruction. Combine that with an over gassed gun and OTB test passed.

Not sure I would want to be near that rifle if it had a squib stuck in the throat or a pistol powder charged cartridge.

Also not a great rifle to maintain after heavy usage since over gassed + aluminum receiver + tipping piston bolt = extra wear.

Here is 600 rounds in a german piston AR.



The G36 is not the holy grail either. It is a re-engineered SA80A2 that was itself a re-engineered AR18.

AR18 and G36:



G36 and SA80:

 

[bacon1337]

So where did the Xm8/g36 smash all comers? I am still waiting for a test where they put the 416 head to head with brand new M4s.

The margin of victory will probably not be as big but I am quite certain the 416 would still come out on top.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/124758039/XM8-vs-M4-5-56mm-Comparison-Moot

http://www.m4carbine.net/archive/index.php/t-9789.html

It dusted it's rivals <- see what I did there?

The over the beach test is a red herring. It's a made up test to invent a shortcoming for the M4.

Any AR can be made to pass this test by eliminating the safety factor built into stoner's design wherein the case head is not fully supported to allow for controlled case rupture in the event of a bore obstruction. Combine that with an over gassed gun and OTB test passed.

Not sure I would want to be near that rifle if it had a squib stuck in the throat or a pistol powder charged cartridge.

Also not a great rifle to maintain after heavy usage since over gassed + aluminum receiver + tipping piston bolt = extra wear.

Here is 600 rounds in a german piston AR.

The carrier tilt issues you are referring to were never that bad in the 416 and just to be safe they upgraded it further still to prevent it.

 

[C77]

You just linked to more red herrings, that's what you did there.

XM8 was cancelled as it was no significant improvement over the M4.

The 416 does have carrier tilt issues and there is no back pressure on the rotating bolt to resist slamming open into the cam pin notch - completely negating the advantages that stoner put into the material choices and design. That's why the G28 had to have a steel upper. Also needs wheels because it is so heavy. Have you fired many 416s?

The tests you are referring to tested old beat up M4's against so called improved systems. The few tests that used new M4s were not allowed any improvements over the M4A1. And there are lots. A higher top rail, accelerated wear, an overcomplicated anti - slam fire mechanism and an SVT-40 gas system are not really an improvement. The over powered system and over weight FP actually snaps retaining pins. Just to name a few issues.

Why so many extra parts?



The G36 has some serious shortcomings like the poi shift under heat and cracked and broken receivers - plastic guns don't like being jumped.

Don't get me wrong, I would happily ad a G36 to my collection as it is one of the best rifles out there. Based on combat experience in afghanistan and 13 years in the industry testing ammunition these weapon systems, I would not drop a C7 or C8 to pick up a G36 on the battlefield. And I would not want to have a 416 anywhere near me on any range - one way or two.

The advantages are mostly internet advantages and a slick marketing campaign. Durability in this sense is more than the CGN 300 round best gun ever test criteria. A rifle that costs three times as much and lasts one third the time is not really worth considering when you need 100k or 1m rifles.

Your error-net evidence for replacing CF in service weapons might just be trumped by actual experience and test data.

 

[bacon1337]

You just linked to more red herrings, that's what you did there.

XM8 was cancelled as it was no significant improvement over the M4.

The 416 does have carrier tilt issues and there is no back pressure on the rotating bolt to resist slamming open into the cam pin notch - completely negating the advantages that stoner put into the material choices and design. That's why the G28 had to have a steel upper. Also needs wheels because it is so heavy. Have you fired many 416s?

The tests you are referring to tested old beat up M4's against so called improved systems. The few tests that used new M4s were not allowed any improvements over the M4A1. And there are lots. A higher top rail, accelerated wear, an overcomplicated anti - slam fire mechanism and an SVT-40 gas system are not really an improvement. The over powered system and over weight FP actually snaps retaining pins. Just to name a few issues.

Why so many extra parts?



The G36 has some serious shortcomings like the poi shift under heat and cracked and broken receivers - plastic guns don't like being jumped.

Don't get me wrong, I would happily ad a G36 to my collection as it is one of the best rifles out there. Based on combat experience in afghanistan and 13 years in the industry testing ammunition these weapon systems, I would not drop a C7 or C8 to pick up a G36 on the battlefield. And I would not want to have a 416 anywhere near me on any range - one way or two.

The advantages are mostly internet advantages and a slick marketing campaign. Durability in this sense is more than the CGN 300 round best gun ever test criteria. A rifle that costs three times as much and lasts one third the time is not really worth considering when you need 100k or 1m rifles.

Your error-net evidence for replacing CF in service weapons might just be trumped by actual experience and test data.

Can you provide some documentation? Or am I supposed to believe what you say at face value? Actual experience and test data? Why don't you post it?

What different variety of ammunition has the c7 & c8 been tested with? How many different ammo specifications does it work with? The c7 and c8 are great, but the di ar is no longer the king of the hill. Sorry but that is the truth. Doesn't mean they suck all of a sudden, they are still excellent systems, but no longer the best.

The XM8 did nothing better than its rival? Where is the documentation? all the arguements I get back is people hated it, it performed no better, yet not a single piece of documentation ever comes up to back that statement up. Costs 3 times as much and lasts on third the time? The 416 costs roughly the same as the m4 for the us gov maybe slightly more but nowhere near 3 times as much.

So my links are all red herrings and purple dragons, but I am seeing some pictures that do not support your argument in any relevant manner, show me links how badly is a 416 receiver mangled after 40k rounds of use? How badly is it messed up after 3000 rounds of suppressed use?

I never said pick up the g36. The poi shift was grossly overamplified by media and forums and has been long resolved since, and is now an errornet myth regurgitated just like m4s are unreliable and aks cant hit the barn.

And I mean it when I say this, show me how the c7 or c8 beats the 416. threefold like you said, in cost, in performance, and in lifespan. The only one I can believe is cost. The other two lol, till I see documented proof no dice homeslice.


http://www.hkpro.com/forum/hk416-hk...-why-hk-416-mr-556-superior-ar-15-design.html

 

[knock-knock]

Yeah you should probably believe some of what he has to say, considering you stated yourself that you have next to no actual experience here… whereas he's been to Afghanistan, and he's spent 13 years in the industry testing these sorts of things.

Just sayin'

 

[bacon1337]

Yeah you should probably believe some of what he has to say, considering you stated yourself that you have next to no actual experience here… whereas he's been to Afghanistan, and he's spent 13 years in the industry testing these sorts of things.

Just sayin'

Well then he should have no trouble providing the supporting documentation. To my knowledge no cf unit has used the hk416. Maybe the JTF2, if so I don't know about it. Hitler said jews were bad he was a really good politician, so by that merit alone should everyone have followed him around saying burn the jews?

I respect his experience in the industry, while there is documentation of the 416 outperforming the m4, there is none the other way around, it gets called out as red herring with no supporting arguement. I will happily admit I am wrong if I see documentation to back up his statements.

Also G3Kurz from HKPro has similar credentials of being an industry expert. Why should I discredit him? What about Larry Vickers?
http://www.hk-usa.com/-images/shared/HK M27 IAR.pdf
http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?113471-HK416-question

What about mr reidsma?
http://sadefensejournal.com/wp/?p=1322

Lastly here you go, ya it sure can't last for sh*t right, will break in 100 rounds flat, the carrier wore a hole through 5 receivers. Oh wait it did none of that.
http://soldiersystems.net/2013/03/30/canipe-correspondence-retiring-my-416/

Some of it is common sense sense. A cleaner bolt means it can cycle for longer without cleaning because it isn't as fouled. And a AGR equipped 416 can handle a wider variety of ammunition and is better suited for suppressed use. CHF barrel has been proven superior in bore obstruction situations.