H&K should dust off their G11 and get going with its caseless ammo. They seem to have lost their truly innovative designs in the past and are merely trying to re-invent the wheel. I think that it would be best to spend DND funds on weapon platforms other than general issue small arms; Armoured vehicles, new attack helicopters come to mind.
US Army acquires rights to M4
- Thread starter CV32
- Start date
G36 with KAC sight rails and attached flip-up sights. No doesn't interfere with anything at all. If you shoot several thousand rounds on full auto all in a row you can melt the receiver. Other than that, smartest, one of the best 5.56mm rifles, hammer forged barrels. Light weight, and able to fire 24000 rounds with no lube or cleaning (no other rifle can match this).
Very tough to beat. The mags are plastic and although a bit big are very reliable. Just needs an adjustable folding stock (I think there are some out there now), near perfect assault rifle.
Rich
Very tough to beat. The mags are plastic and although a bit big are very reliable. Just needs an adjustable folding stock (I think there are some out there now), near perfect assault rifle.
Rich
I'm a big fan of the G36 for sure. But it has one major flaw, the charging handle is in such a wierd place. Optics could be a whole inch closer to the bore if they had used a floating design similar to the Masada or AR15. The Mexican's saw this and changed it when they made their own version.
The G36 is typical of HK products in that they take a problem and then create an entire platform to solve that one problem without consideration for future variations. In its original format and original intended use its a great rifle. Sadly that format is already out of date and attempts to bring it up to date are somewhat difficult because of the layout of the charging handle. But for that one flaw I would be all over the G36. HK needs to learn to think modular rather then proprietary.
That said I'm sorry for how OT this thread went
.
The G36 is typical of HK products in that they take a problem and then create an entire platform to solve that one problem without consideration for future variations. In its original format and original intended use its a great rifle. Sadly that format is already out of date and attempts to bring it up to date are somewhat difficult because of the layout of the charging handle. But for that one flaw I would be all over the G36. HK needs to learn to think modular rather then proprietary.
That said I'm sorry for how OT this thread went
.
I would put PMAG's at $9 and Hk at $35 as that is the close gov't costing.
I am not saying the Hk416 is bad, I think it is a good weapon system, perhaps great. My point is you need to buy X upper, and X buffers and action springs to convert, plus the non weapon hardware specific changes (training and manuals).
Grant Timberlake of G&R Tactical built a 10.5" DI gun that suppressed had less fouling than an unsuppressed Hk416 at the end of a 3 day class.
I piston test I have observed, especially suppressed, it offers no real advantages, and is louder, and some have much greater weapon signature (flash) at night due to the way they vent gas.
The point I was trying to make is the Hk416's claim to fame (long bolt life, long barel life, less lube) can be done with a conventional DI system.
Secondly IF I where going to adopt a new weapon, I would require the OAL to for a folding or completely telescopting buttstock.
With a new round of ammuntion of either a case telescoping round or a caseless round.
Neither the Hk416, or the Mk16 offer any revolutionary advantages, that for the budget dollar, to me the best fix is issue PMAG's Army wide (which has no KAC value at all...)
I am not saying the Hk416 is bad, I think it is a good weapon system, perhaps great. My point is you need to buy X upper, and X buffers and action springs to convert, plus the non weapon hardware specific changes (training and manuals).
Grant Timberlake of G&R Tactical built a 10.5" DI gun that suppressed had less fouling than an unsuppressed Hk416 at the end of a 3 day class.
I piston test I have observed, especially suppressed, it offers no real advantages, and is louder, and some have much greater weapon signature (flash) at night due to the way they vent gas.
The point I was trying to make is the Hk416's claim to fame (long bolt life, long barel life, less lube) can be done with a conventional DI system.
Secondly IF I where going to adopt a new weapon, I would require the OAL to for a folding or completely telescopting buttstock.
With a new round of ammuntion of either a case telescoping round or a caseless round.
Neither the Hk416, or the Mk16 offer any revolutionary advantages, that for the budget dollar, to me the best fix is issue PMAG's Army wide (which has no KAC value at all...)
I posted this in ther MR223 - and then noticed most of it pertained here.
The Sig 551 - I think BigRed saw a broken charging handle once, I like them, but they are heavy... The unit that had them swapped their 551's for M4A1's, as the 551 was not compatible for the Sound Suppressors and Night Fighting gear that are force multipliers in the modern age.
I think their are plenty of systems out there that have the potential to better than the M16FOW, however price tag of the coating, and materials used to design them are prohibitive in a general issue weapon.
The G36 system was a low cost gun forced on the German Army due to the costs with reunification. Its done abysimally in any external military testing.
Heck for a while you could see KSK running around Afghan with Diemaco C8SFW's... Until Tuetonic National Pride made the Hk416 a necessity.
Its not just how much more expensive than the M16FOW, its the entire lifecycle cost that just skyrockets with a new system.
The Colt M4 MWS as it comes from Colt with our M4RAS and the Matech BIS is around $1200 The entire infrastructure is set up around it - for 50 years.
A new weapon means new spare parts, new manuals, new training, new rifle racks, new parachute instructions.
I've seen numbers that support a 4-5x increase in costing over the actual system cost for system transition.
The Sig 551 - I think BigRed saw a broken charging handle once, I like them, but they are heavy... The unit that had them swapped their 551's for M4A1's, as the 551 was not compatible for the Sound Suppressors and Night Fighting gear that are force multipliers in the modern age.
I think their are plenty of systems out there that have the potential to better than the M16FOW, however price tag of the coating, and materials used to design them are prohibitive in a general issue weapon.
The G36 system was a low cost gun forced on the German Army due to the costs with reunification. Its done abysimally in any external military testing.
Heck for a while you could see KSK running around Afghan with Diemaco C8SFW's... Until Tuetonic National Pride made the Hk416 a necessity.
Its not just how much more expensive than the M16FOW, its the entire lifecycle cost that just skyrockets with a new system.
The Colt M4 MWS as it comes from Colt with our M4RAS and the Matech BIS is around $1200 The entire infrastructure is set up around it - for 50 years.
A new weapon means new spare parts, new manuals, new training, new rifle racks, new parachute instructions.
I've seen numbers that support a 4-5x increase in costing over the actual system cost for system transition.
Okay KevinB I respected a lot of things you said till now, I must say I question you big time now! That is so bull####! The reason they were using the Diemacos C8SFW was because they would be more compatible with everyone else they worked with in joint operations.
The G36 is a hands down far better rifle than a standard M4/M16 Colt even with most upgrades in parts, until you get in the specialty market!
All be talking to some of my buddies over there in a few months to specifically ask about that, it came up before, but not for the reasons your mentioning
(Until Tuetonic National Pride made the Hk416 a necessity.) That's a nice anti-German statement their, the reality from I herd was that your beloved C8 SFW never reached their standards.
You realise the L119A1 (SFW) beat out the G36 and Sig551 in UKSF trials...
Nothing made by man is perfect - and frankly no new system is ever stellar. However I dont beleive anything on the radar right now is more effective than the M4 in the hands of the combat soldier, and the potential incrimental advantages elsewhere very unlikely outweight the huge increases.
A drop in system is much more feasible, if this is the Hk416 and a WHOLE drop in, fine I never said it was a bad system, just that is not without its own issues.
I still feel money spend on upgrades or replacements would better serve the soldier in terms of a better magazine, and more ammo and realistic training.
Nothing made by man is perfect - and frankly no new system is ever stellar. However I dont beleive anything on the radar right now is more effective than the M4 in the hands of the combat soldier, and the potential incrimental advantages elsewhere very unlikely outweight the huge increases.
A drop in system is much more feasible, if this is the Hk416 and a WHOLE drop in, fine I never said it was a bad system, just that is not without its own issues.
I still feel money spend on upgrades or replacements would better serve the soldier in terms of a better magazine, and more ammo and realistic training.
According to who? You?
So what is the military cost of the 416 compared to the cost of a similar KAC offering? Just curious
. This logic applies to not only the military but civilian shooters as well. That said the CF needs a decent rail system.
The UK is not going to use a German made G36 no matter what, they already had H&K upgrade there L85, SA80, just think of the embarrassment. Plus their are a lot UK that have reservation towards Germans in general.
As for a better magazine there are Emags that are even better in that system. The tavor and 416 and Scar are all unable to utilize the PMAGs.
So we agree that magpul should have one contract at least.
Dude get over your preoccupation with the father land and think clearly. The brits use/have used the G3, MP5, Upgraded SA80, IIRC ColtCan C8 etc etc. I think they are more interested in things working then godlike worship of their domestic arms industry.
HK makes fine firearms, so what? This was never really in question. What is in question is are their options viable for wide distribution to anyone besides the German military. The even more important question is, what if any upgrades are practical for the US Army? It seems that some minor changes to the M4 would solve the issues of consequence without major investment in a new platform. Canada is in a similar situation, although the C7/C8 are a solid platform we have had real difficulty implementing some of the force multipliers Kevin mentioned previously on the existing platform. For Canada this can be fixed with a few minor changes.
Small specialized units may field any number of systems in a variety of situations that doesn't mean a solution that works for an organization of 150 pers in the field is applicable to a military of 30,000+.
All that said can we get off the HK pony for a while and discuss actual plausible options for the M16FOW?
Is your main point that the UK will not acquire the G36 because it is German made?
*facepalm*
Not exactly, more on the lines that another army(Germany) uses the G36, there were a lot of articles in the UK that did not support H&K(German) making there rifles. There was big deal made about the SA80! Which was relatively recent.
Do you even own a Tavor? I do and Pmags work fine in it.
My mistake! I meant FN F2000. I have used that rifle though(tavor), but we had standard STANAG-compliant, M16 type magazines..
That's why I need some E-Mags(Export Magaines) from Magpul.
- Location
- Scarborough, ON
And there was no "buy domestic" bias at all in the German military selecting the G36...
I'm not saying it's not a good weapon - frankly I don't know enough to say otherwise. But to use international politics as an excuse for less than stellar performance in one competition and ignore it's effect in another is quite inconsistent.
