HK Wins the US Army CSASS Competition - RUMOR HAS IT
- Thread starter mildot
- Start date
Only FN and HK have experience with designing,manufacturing and actually delivering quantities of hard use weapons like LMG, GPMG and crew served weapons like GMG, among all small arms makers in the western world. They are certainly more capable than others.
FN is always about delivering low cost solutions that are good enough to work to the requirements, you can see how they make SCAR, FN 2000 and the 80's weapons like FNC and Minimi.
The HK in the 90's was trying to do what FN does with the plastic guns. The big flop of the UMP saved HK, I guessed they figured out there is a niche for more expensive weapons that actually last and work. If you have the chance to look at weapons after the 2000's like HK416/417, MG4 and MG5, they are not made the way they are totally based on achieving the lowest cost.
Is HK the best , yes, because as a company they have more successful weapons of wider variety in their portfolio than anyone. Colt has one AR15, (which is designed by armalite ), beretta has the 92f and M12 (and a bunch of rifles that no one wants outside of Italy), Steyr has AUG, Kalashnikov/izhmach has AK .... Fn has FAL, hi-power, P90, Minimi, Maximi, mag58 and 50 HMG, HK has G3, g36, mp5, MP7,MG4, MG5, GMG, hk416,hk417, USP....
You can basically arm an infantry company with purely HK weapons ( FN too)
FN is always about delivering low cost solutions that are good enough to work to the requirements, you can see how they make SCAR, FN 2000 and the 80's weapons like FNC and Minimi.
The HK in the 90's was trying to do what FN does with the plastic guns. The big flop of the UMP saved HK, I guessed they figured out there is a niche for more expensive weapons that actually last and work. If you have the chance to look at weapons after the 2000's like HK416/417, MG4 and MG5, they are not made the way they are totally based on achieving the lowest cost.
Is HK the best , yes, because as a company they have more successful weapons of wider variety in their portfolio than anyone. Colt has one AR15, (which is designed by armalite ), beretta has the 92f and M12 (and a bunch of rifles that no one wants outside of Italy), Steyr has AUG, Kalashnikov/izhmach has AK .... Fn has FAL, hi-power, P90, Minimi, Maximi, mag58 and 50 HMG, HK has G3, g36, mp5, MP7,MG4, MG5, GMG, hk416,hk417, USP....
You can basically arm an infantry company with purely HK weapons ( FN too)
Last edited:
Yes. Really.
I'm actually not a fan. I really like HK products but their semi 308 AR rifles don't do anything for me. My guess, is the trend for shorter barrels when using the 308 as a semi auto DM rifle has made the piston designs a lot more favourable. It's too bad ADCOR never got around to their hybrid piston design for the 308.
I'm a big fan of some of the HK products and wish I could own some of the older ones that are prohibited. But not their current 308 semi auto.
I'm a big fan of some of the HK products and wish I could own some of the older ones that are prohibited. But not their current 308 semi auto.
Last edited:
Well put Greentips.
Epoxy7, not being a fan of HK's 308 AR rifle puts you in the minority. Look how many Army's world wide have adopted some form of the HK417. Also comments from use in the field reflects operators saying they will take a HK 417 over others due to it's reliably and longevity, even if they have to give up a bit of accuracy. The list of users of the 416 / 417 is growing constantly. Not even all the anti HK 416 / 417 US propaganda in the world can stop it.
Rich
Epoxy7, not being a fan of HK's 308 AR rifle puts you in the minority. Look how many Army's world wide have adopted some form of the HK417. Also comments from use in the field reflects operators saying they will take a HK 417 over others due to it's reliably and longevity, even if they have to give up a bit of accuracy. The list of users of the 416 / 417 is growing constantly. Not even all the anti HK 416 / 417 US propaganda in the world can stop it.
Rich
I can understand that. But it doesn't mean I have to drink the Getränkepulverkonzentrat.
HK is a safe choice. I'm not as wowed though. But yes it is a safe option due to the reasons Greentips has already listed. Much like in the old days in office IT when the old saying was no one ever got fired for choosing IBM.
Well, interestingly enough, the HK417 failed the German army's accuracy requirements for a DM rifle. They had to come back with the G28 based off the MR308. Also of note is that the now more accurate G28's accuracy guarantee of 1.5 moa for example would have disqualified the HK from the CANSOFCOM (Canadian) trials of 1 moa at 300 metres suppressed.
I would add that LMT has been doing fairly well in the last few years for contracts with their LMT MWS (collaboration with KAC) 308 rifle. So I'm not convinced that the propaganda is US anti HK 417. The UK which had HK fix that horrible bull pup of theirs also chose LMT for their 308.
Also it's been said that the SIG 716 G2 based off the 716 DM rifle has won the Canadian contract. Although some reputable sources still list the LMT as the winner. The RCMP ERT have also been evaluating the LMT.
Frankly looking over a couple of the HK MR308 rifles I was less than impressed. They were awkward as heck. Those that think the LMT is heavy and too front heavy should shoulder one of these HK 2x4 rifles. Yes, you do give up accuracy for reliability. But let's also not forget we are talking about DM rifles here, not battle rifles. If using as a carbine then other considerations do come into effect. But for a DM rifle... accuracy is kind of important.
Last edited:
An individual weapon's characteristics may win out, but mass producing 4000 to 6000 precision weapons with consistent quality is not easy for some manufacturers. You certainly do not want to let your bid winner to " learn on your money", unless it is one of those programs to use tax payers money to create industry capabilities ( like what Canada does....)hk and FN certainly have the know how and are already set up to do that kind of things. Not to disparage other manufacturers,some of the vendors entering these bids do not make high volume precision weapons ( or any weapons) for the government. There is probably a line on the score sheet in the bid. From the government perspective, it is a risk to deal with new vendors with no proven track records. No one wants headaches, delays and QC issues, even if there are penalties.
Last edited:
I think the L129 was an urgent requirement buy and they wrapped up the trial quickly, but obviously the British army is happy enough with it so it went on and bought more. The British army is fairly active so it does give LMT a lot of credibility and it is no doubt an adequate solution. I suspect a lot of hk417s entered Australia and France through the same route. Lots of urgent buys during the height of the war.
Last edited:
Kampfhamster
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Switzerland
Not a huge surprise as Sigarms USA is known to have QC issues.
Doesn't surprise me. I wouldn't have picked the SIG. I don't think it's with regards to the stringent accuracy standards that they aren't reliable. The Czech military cancelled their Sig 716 orders based on the barrel life being shorter than what was claimed and break downs. Those rifles were to replace the SVD dragonov so not the same accuracy requirements.
By the way didn't Sig hire a number of HK engineers to design their piston AR system? I seem to recall reading that.
Well, we are going to disagree on the importance of that UK contract for the reasons I've already stated. Plus the LMT is now proven in combat for it's purpose as well. Again the collaboration with LMT and KAC seems to be often overlooked with this firearm.
Last edited:
Gunnerlove
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Vancouver Island
Are you saying that on the first try HK delivered serviceable 416s to the USMC and Norway?
Don't get me wrong. I love the LMT rifle, I thought that it would start cleaning up once it won the UK contract. The problem is that is has not, HK 417 is poping up all over the place in NATO and the rest of the world + numerous European Police Forces. It just seems to have gained much more traction than the LMT and now it wins the CSASS contact. The LMT and HK417 are both heavy and were initially disqualified from the US Forces CSASS trial. Because they were both let back in begs one to question what happened during the initial stages of the trial in the first place.
Rich
Rich
![-[Crosshair]-](/forum/data/avatars/m/31/31565.jpg?1718745216){kind=avatar}
So can any one tell me what great strides have been made to make AR 10/15 platform DI system a better and more innovative ,KAC bolt and other junk that you can put on a gun does not count versus the HK 416/417 piston ? I don't know but a lot of armies SOF units have switched over or are in the process of switching over to the HK 416/ 417 platforms .
Wrong and unless there was alignment issue with the suppressor that caused the bullets to strike the baffles the suppressor is still serviceable .In fact test's that have been done by the CF and Colt Canada with C7/C8 and C9 have shown that suppressors will out last up to 4 or more rifles even when firing on Full Auto the only noticeable performance issue with the suppressor was a increase in DB and they were never cleaned .With regular cleaning with an ultra sonic cleaner they would be as good as new .
You know that G28 handguard does have me looking again at them now and then. I had concerns regarding the bipod placement, but it does look cool. Also the weight isn't too bad, compared to the pounds I've seen listed for the military ones.
LMT has done fine with police and military contracts lately. What I'm wondering is what is KAC going to do?
