- Location
- SW Ontario
scottie_ said:
Eactly what I was thinking...
Posibly the pay cash......
HK 416 on Future Weapons 22:00
- Thread starter Gunslinger
- Start date
Eactly what I was thinking...
Posibly the pay cash......imagine_74714 said:
Several industry leaders beleive that it is ALL hype. One comment at the shot show was that HK has set the industry back ten years chasing thier piston gun tails.
SOCOM was never in charge of the TDP, and wants, correctly, to choose and configure thier own weapon system. That leads them to criticise an Army weapon that SOCOM used beyond it's design parameters - as an LMG.
The M4 is on top and it's up to the losers to try to knock them off. HK does this through TV shows with fake tests and comparing worn out M4s with new 416s and paid actors. You can shoot any NATO weapon upside down. All NATO weapons have to pass that sand test and the water test only proved you could dip the barrel in the water and then fire it.
I've fired submerged M4s and M16s with NO damage. Three Colt guns passed the OTB SCAR trials, and not one HK passed. Hmmmm.
HK also points to M16 shortcomings from Viet Nam that were addressed and fixed thirty years ago - while at the same time making the same mistakes in the current 416 (look at the overwieght firing pin that looks just like the XM15 pin that had to me modified due to slam fires - HK fixed this with a FP spring and the ducktail mechanism).
Colt offered the Model 703 piston gun in the 60's and Armalite offered the AR180 - both rejected by the US Army due to poor accuracy, piston fouling and other problems.
The 416 claims to be "new" technology, but it is an M4 with a 1940's SVT-40 gas system. It even needs M16 gas rings on the piston to function.
why would firing upside down be any different to firing any other way. Besides, what exactly would be the circumstances under which you would need to do this - and how many hits would you register doing so? I did see Mel Gibson do it in Lethal Weapon though - so it must be necessary.
- Location
- Calgary, Alberta
Leg said:
Absolutely, a point that is not made often enough. I've fired an SG550 on full-auto, nice gun, but harder to control on full-auto than an M16, even with all the extra weight. And that has to be about as pleasant as a piston-operated assault rifle is going to get.
- Location
- Calgary, Alberta
tekriter MK 1 said:
I always thought the XM8 would amount to nothing as it's basically a G36K with some minor alterations. The only really big deal about it was the carbon-fibre wrapped barrel, and that was the bit H&K was having a hell of time getting working. The prototypes with the regular G36K barrel, were... well... G36Ks that looked different. Is it better than an M4? Probably, and just to contradict my previous comment, with such a light gas piston it's a nice gun, and it is more reliable than the M4. But only marginally. Not enough to spend billions of dollars on replacing it and the M16.
As soon as anyone saw the XM29 it was obvious it was never going to happen because it was too impractical. So then they separated them out and the rifle bit was then just a 5.56mm rifle. So what?
It was the same with all the hype about replacing the M9 with an H&K .45. Eventually when it's subjected to objective testing, the reality is that the H&K 45 is only marginally better than the M9, if at all. Once again, they're not going to spend millions and millions to get something only slightly better.
.45 FMJ isn't going to penetrate armour any better than 9mm FMJ and the terminal ballistics are about the same.
Does anyone here think that an issue Colt Defense M4 is better than a HK416 ? It seems that there are alot of people defending the M4. We all know the M4 is a great weapon. Maybe the HK416 is not enough of an improvement to spend millions on replacing the Colt Defense M4 but does anyone realy think the M4 is better?
I'll take the HK416. It may not be that much better and there are pros and cons to both weapons but you will have a hard time convincing me the M4 is superior.
Rich
I'll take the HK416. It may not be that much better and there are pros and cons to both weapons but you will have a hard time convincing me the M4 is superior.
Rich
If the real operators who has to depend on their rifle day after day says M4 is as good as any, then I guess I'll go with it as well. Even though I'm just a range monkey, assualt rifles are born of combat, so if they are good enough for soldiers, then it is more than enough for me.
But HK416 sure is ###y beast. I'd love one, if only for the satisfaction of having one.
But HK416 sure is ###y beast. I'd love one, if only for the satisfaction of having one.
Reaper said:
In the common theme of the feelings of many here...I'll use the analogy that it's like comparing the utility of watches. The Casio GShock is a basic, no frills timepiece that works but a Swiss timepiece while 'cool' and worth the money in many aspects, serves no real advantage for the main objective.
cybershooters said:
Based on what evidence?
The Canadian C8 (basically and M4) proved to be more relaible than the G36 in the UK SF trials (plus three others). I don't know of any other supervised military trial.
Maybe a new G36 would be more relaible than an old beat up M4, but compare apples to apples and the G36 does no better. And the M4 doesn't break in half when you jump out of airplanes.
Plastic is for handguards.
One thing that makes HK a superior firearm has nothing to do with the gun's design and everything to do with quality control. As far as I know, every part of the 416 is manufactured in Obendorf, by well-paid, skilled employees, and subjected to HK's rigorous quality control tests. American-made ARs, on the other hand, outsource manufacturing to a million different outside suppliers and have no direct control over parts quality.Reaper said:
tekriter MK 1 said:
I admit that I was quite fond of the G36 when it came out...but slowly lost the admiration. Cool in many respects as it may be, it just seems like an expensive piece of kit. The XM8 project was even more ridiculous.
Most I know with an issued G36 think it's 'just' a rifle...
IF a unit is doing a LOT of work suppressed with short barrelled uppers -- then I see an advantage in some piston designs.
I know some guys issued Hk416's and they love them --BTW they loved their Colt M4A1's and Mk18's too --
Capp325 -- you CANNOT say AR's and 416's that is apples to oranges - If you say Colt/Diemaco weapon and Hk416 - then its apples to apples -- and Colt/Diemaco parts are inspected and rigorously QC'd.
A Military/Gov't weapon is not some hacks homebuilt frankengun.
I know some guys issued Hk416's and they love them --BTW they loved their Colt M4A1's and Mk18's too --
Capp325 -- you CANNOT say AR's and 416's that is apples to oranges - If you say Colt/Diemaco weapon and Hk416 - then its apples to apples -- and Colt/Diemaco parts are inspected and rigorously QC'd.
A Military/Gov't weapon is not some hacks homebuilt frankengun.
When I attended Shot Show in 06 Colt released there Gas piston M-16 ,and at the 07 Shot Show Long Range Shooter and me stopped and talked to the Colt Defence Rep about there piston drive uppers basically they were here to stay .BTW I find the HK 416 needs to be on a diet it is on the heavy side hell it weighs more than my Colt AR15 Match w/steel float tube
Where I DO see a huge advantage for pistons guns is in 7.62 NATO 16" and shorter barrels.
NONE of the 7.62mm DI guns in that size do well -- even Noveske's 12" apparently does not do well with high round counts suppressed - better than a lot of others -- but still no where near a 5.56mm DI gun would do.
(there seems to be groups out there that want short suppressed 7.62mm)
Hk417's 12" is still apparently having some teething issues suppressed (high round count days) but no doubt they will get it to market.
I was always dismayed by Colt and Diemaco never being interested in getting into the 7.62 NATO gas gun market.
NONE of the 7.62mm DI guns in that size do well -- even Noveske's 12" apparently does not do well with high round counts suppressed - better than a lot of others -- but still no where near a 5.56mm DI gun would do.
(there seems to be groups out there that want short suppressed 7.62mm)
Hk417's 12" is still apparently having some teething issues suppressed (high round count days) but no doubt they will get it to market.
I was always dismayed by Colt and Diemaco never being interested in getting into the 7.62 NATO gas gun market.
Impingement systems have a problem with running suppressors and that is the Cyclic rate go thru the roof which in layman's terms beats the hell out of the gun the SCAR and most other systems can be adjusted by the operator to reduce the cyclic rate. Impingement systems IMO should be considered the worst engineered system of the 21st century .If you look back to when the M16/AR15 was developed it's requirement has changed dramatically since it was first adopted ,Does it need a an update you bet .Is the gas piston system the answer yes at this time, it may not be perfect but it defiantly works better than the impingement system that is currently used. BTW I have always believed that the AR should have been a Gas Piston Rifle
While the DI sytems is novel and works for the most part it certainly isn't the best solution. I can't see any advantage in venting propellant fowling and heat into the bolt and cycling area of a firearm designed for combat, that's just bad design. An adjustable piston is far more dependable.
Last edited:
Keep in mind that ANY weapon running with a suppressor will not be as clean as w/o. BackPressure generated will cause fouling in the chamber - be it DI or Piston.
I fired 16 mags from my M4A1 out of the back of our CAT car when the PKM went down (you know your having a bad day when a PKM ####s the bed) almost all on auto in 30 rds bursts for supression - since I could not aim the thing due to the way the armoured glass is in the LandCruiser.
That is way beyond what common sense would demand from a carbine...
(funny thing that Colt barrel is still a submoa shooter with Mk262)
I'm not the biggest Colt/Diemaco cheerleader as I think there are some issues they could have been more inovative with.
BUT the systems work - and I dont think that the piston is a revolutionary item, or is it necessary for all but the 1% of 1%
I fired 16 mags from my M4A1 out of the back of our CAT car when the PKM went down (you know your having a bad day when a PKM ####s the bed) almost all on auto in 30 rds bursts for supression - since I could not aim the thing due to the way the armoured glass is in the LandCruiser.
That is way beyond what common sense would demand from a carbine...
(funny thing that Colt barrel is still a submoa shooter with Mk262)
I'm not the biggest Colt/Diemaco cheerleader as I think there are some issues they could have been more inovative with.
BUT the systems work - and I dont think that the piston is a revolutionary item, or is it necessary for all but the 1% of 1%
