The AR15 / M16 has a ridiculous design for gas operation. Sure, it may work most of the time, but the HK416, which uses the G36's piston-driven design, goes 50,000 rounds without failure.

A regular AR cannot do that.

If you got rid of the plastic, the G36 would be MUCH much better.

But since the G36 is plastic, it's betterness is slightly less than it should be.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the G36 is much more gooder.

The AR15 design is going on 50 years.
It is still the premier assault rifle in the world, IMHO.
I would choose an SP1 from the '60's over a G36, or an AK.

Quoted: The AR15 / M16 has a ridiculous design for gas operation. Sure, it may work most of the time, but the HK416, which uses the G36's piston-driven design, goes 50,000 rounds without failure.

Well, I clean and maintain my AR much more often then every 50,000 rounds.  In fact, I'm sure the barrel would be shot by the end of *that* test.

The HK416 is a moot point as no one can buy one.  Even if I could, I'd still rather have my RR with my Leupold scope and  thousands and thousands of rounds to practice with for the same price.  I guess that's an argument against the G-36 as well.

You can't buy a G36 either . . . and it's the same gas system . . . uh . . . how is it moot?

Well those that have adopted a new rifle in the last few years seem to have chosen the G36...Germany, Spain, Britian (are very close to switching), Portugal

I thought britain used enfeild L82A1 bulpups are they switching again or am I just mistaken

Quoted: Quoted: AR = relatively tight tolerances, excellent accuracy,, good reliability, great at multiple ranges, poor for CQB and close combat. Hmm...  I wonder what weapon was chosen by Delta Force, the Navy SEALs, British SAS, Australian SAS, Canadian SF, and virtually every security contractor in Iraq for "close-in" work.  Must be the AK, right?  hr

No it wasnt, there are newer better weapons for CQB, and "close-in" work than the AK-47. No they did not choose the M16, they chose the M4 and other SOCOM weapons. this WAS DIRECTED AT M16 AND AK-47, NOT OTHER WEAPONS.

We werent talking about special ops, we were talking about standard issue rifles. If you want to talk the best weapons for SPECIAL OPS, then fine lets talk SPECIAL OPS. I can guarantee you I would not include the M16 in the discussion (excepoting the M4), but would include the AK.

Quoted: The AR15 / M16 has a ridiculous design for gas operation. Sure, it may work most of the time, but the HK416, which uses the G36's piston-driven design, goes 50,000 rounds without failure. A regular AR cannot do that. If you got rid of the plastic, the G36 would be MUCH much better. But since the G36 is plastic, it's betterness is slightly less than it should be. I guess what I'm trying to say is that the G36 is much more gooder.

I think you are wrong. I the AR-15 is much gooder and the goodest of all good guns. I think if you get a gooder gun, you will get gooder groups...

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: AR = relatively tight tolerances, excellent accuracy,, good reliability, great at multiple ranges, poor for CQB and close combat. Hmm...  I wonder what weapon was chosen by Delta Force, the Navy SEALs, British SAS, Australian SAS, Canadian SF, and virtually every security contractor in Iraq for "close-in" work.  Must be the AK, right?   -Troy No it wasnt, there are newer better weapons for CQB, and "close-in" work than the AK-47. No they did not choose the M16, they chose the M4 and other SOCOM weapons. this WAS DIRECTED AT M16 AND AK-47, NOT OTHER WEAPONS. We werent talking about special ops, we were talking about standard issue rifles. If you want to talk the best weapons for SPECIAL OPS, then fine lets talk SPECIAL OPS. I can guarantee you I would not include the M16 in the discussion (excepoting the M4), but would include the AK.

jay
the units that troy mentioned also have 20" M16's in their inventories.
Look it up if you choose to.

Quoted: The AR15 / M16 has a ridiculous design for gas operation. Sure, it may work most of the time, but the HK416, which uses the G36's piston-driven design, goes 50,000 rounds without failure. A regular AR cannot do that. If you got rid of the plastic, the G36 would be MUCH much better. But since the G36 is plastic, it's betterness is slightly less than it should be. I guess what I'm trying to say is that the G36 is much more gooder.

It's such a ridiculous system that when the Danish Army subjected the Diemaco C7 in trials, it fired 15,000 rounds without a malfunction, without cleaning.

A lot of the members in this site shoot theirs (myself included) several thousands rounds without cleaning, and they work perfect.

Yeah right. Got vid?

What we need is an AR vs. G36 face off.

I'm sure the G36 would last longer.

Quoted: Quoted:AR = relatively tight tolerances, excellent accuracy,, good reliability, great at multiple ranges, poor for CQB and close combat. AK = Extremely loose tolerances, crap accuracy, best reliability, excellent at short ranges, Better than the AR in tight spaces, CQB, and short range combat. Somewhere there's a crackhouse with a missing Gold Club member.

Yeah, anytime you see a comparison of the "knockdown power" of various firearms you know you are going to end up explaining physics to a monkey.

Quoted: Yeah right. Got vid? What we need is an AR vs. G36 face off. I'm sure the G36 would last longer.

A video of an AR15 shooting thousands of rounds would be quite a long video.

And, who cares about the G36 lasting longer? You clean the damn weapon and it works fine. I'm positive that the AR system will last for quite a long time without cleaning. Did you see the pics I posted earlier? There are members here who have fired thousands of rounds of WOLF ammo in their AR15s and never cleaned them. I've seen them and they all work just fine with shit all over the bolt, bolt carrier, and inside the barrel.

Your "Yeah Right" comment shows just how little you know about the system.

Some of the stuff I've read here sounds like it came from an XBox forum. If you haven't shot at least one of the weapons we are discussing, AR15, AK, and G36, then let the big boys talk it out.

Quoted: Yeah right. Got vid? What we need is an AR vs. G36 face off. I'm sure the G36 would last longer.

I don't see why you're ignoring common facts.

The AR15/M16/M4 requires more maintenance. This does not make it unreliable by any means. Your barrel will rupture before you have to worry about cleaning in one firing session.

The G36 runs very clean, and can go much longer with out maintenance then the AR15/M16/M4. However, the plastic attachment points in the upper receiver are not up to the task of high cyclic rates of fire, especially suppressed. I'd imagine a place like Iraq would surface these failures even quicker.

Now, as for the HK416 against the direct impingement gas system, that's a no brainer. I myself would like to see a show down between the HK416 and the Leitner Wise system. I have heard a few rumors that the HK416 over heats rather quickly, but again, rumors aren't always true, so I'd like to see a fair and unbiased testing of them both. I myself think that both of these offerings are light years ahead of the G36 and AR series of rifles when it comes to performance. I don't know if the author considers those to be relevant to this topic though. Factoring in the piston conversions kind of makes it unfair to the G36.

Quoted: Somewhere there's a crackhouse with a missing Gold Club member. Yeah, anytime you see a comparison of the "knockdown power" of various firearms you know you are going to end up explaining physics to a monkey.

Yup.  It's why they invented AGNTSA.

Quoted: Yeah right. Got vid? What we need is an AR vs. G36 face off. I'm sure the G36 would last longer.

Why is it when someone provides what several members here have done you want vid, but when you smear your intellectual feces across the CRT it's based on what you're sure of?

Hmmm.  Contest.

1.  Fire M16 and G36 on full auto, swapping out magazines as fast as you can until one of the weapons quits.  I'm thinking the G36 will suffer a catastrophic failure due to the melting of major plastic components before the M16 or M4 bites it.

2.  Accuracy.  I believe it has already been established that the AR/M16/M4 is inherently more accurate.

3.  Brits changing to the G36.  Don't know about that.  At one time it seemed to be under discussion, prompted largely because HK was owned by BAE at the time.  That isn't the case any longer and I've not heard of any switch.  However, when the British SAS and SBS needed new rifles, they bought them from Diemaco in Canada (C7, C8, i.e. M16/M4)

As for nations buying one or the other for their regular forces, you need to dig a lot deeper than just the announcement.  We didn't adopt the Beretta 92FS as the M9 because it was the better pistol.  We did it in exchange for a huge Italian purchase of Bell helicopters.  It would be nice to think that weapons were procured on the basis of performance only, but sadly enough, politics is actually the predominant reason.  

Is the M16/M4 perfect as is?  Far from it.  But its still the best there is when all things are considered.

Quoted: And, who cares about the G36 lasting longer? You clean the damn weapon and it works fine. I'm positive that the AR system will last for quite a long time without cleaning.

I guess next you're going to say that the M4/M16 series is capable of being fired for say, a 24-36 hour period while the operators are in constant contact and go through several basic loads while in an Eastern African nation without reliability issues?  
Well, are you?
I mean, why cloud a perfectly good display of asshattery?

Quoted: The AR15/M16/M4 requires more maintenance. This does not make it unreliable by any means. Your barrel will rupture before you have to worry about cleaning in one firing session.

I think that's the important point.  The M4/M16 is not unreliable if it is maintained.  And don't give me any crap about how hard it is to run PMCS.  That is BS and indicative of a leadership failure or lazy troops.  What the AK has is the ability to be handed to TWR (Third World Rabble) that is semiliterate with a minimal logistics tail and the weapon will perform.  It's not ergonomic, it's not overly accurate, and it doesn't have some of the "comforts" of the M4/M16 series.

Quoted: I guess next you're going to say that the M4/M16 series is capable of being fired for say, a 24-36 hour period while the operators are in constant contact and go through several basic loads while in an Eastern African nation without reliability issues?

Chad,
Please let's not get into the Battle of the Black Sea again or the monkeys will be screaming "lack of 'knockdown' power".

Quoted: Quoted: And, who cares about the G36 lasting longer? You clean the damn weapon and it works fine. I'm positive that the AR system will last for quite a long time without cleaning. I guess next you're going to say that the M4/M16 series is capable of being fired for say, a 24-36 hour period while the operators are in constant contact and go through several basic loads while in an Eastern African nation without reliability issues?   Well, are you? I mean, why cloud a perfectly good display of asshattery?

Yes, I am going to say that.

Quoted: Chad, Please let's not get into the Battle of the Black Sea again or the monkeys will be screaming "lack of 'knockdown' power".

Sorry, I don't know what I was thinking.  I'm a .gov type so I have a tendency to get lost sometimes.

Quoted: A dressed up SL8 is as close as you are going to get to a G36 here.  I want to vomit thinking about how much my friend spent on his project. www.adcofirearms.com/junkpics/strezSl8.jpg

He may have spent alot, but it's still pretty damn cool. (Aside from the carry handle optic)

I wouldn't drop that much for a G36/SL8 myself, but it still has appeal to me.

Quoted: Yes, I am going to say that.

But, dcdreamboat is SURE that the G36 will last longer and that the M16 will fall apart.  How can this be?

Quoted: A dressed up SL8 is as close as you are going to get to a G36 here.  I want to vomit thinking about how much my friend spent on his project.

Dude, that has got to be some serious change.  Just think of all the hookers and blow Chuck Norris could buy with that.  Down on 87th street.
Did I miss any arfisms?

Quoted: Quoted: Yes, I am going to say that. But, dcdreamboat is SURE that the G36 will last longer and that the M16 will fall apart.  How can this be?

Oh, you were bieng saracstic in your original post? I didn't pick up on it, I thought you were bieng serious.

Quoted: Oh, you were bieng saracstic in your original post? I didn't pick up on it, I thought you were bieng serious.

Yeah, it's a skill I accquired after years of serving my fellow man.  I tell the leadership that it's a coping mechanism.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: AR = relatively tight tolerances, excellent accuracy,, good reliability, great at multiple ranges, poor for CQB and close combat. Hmm...  I wonder what weapon was chosen by Delta Force, the Navy SEALs, British SAS, Australian SAS, Canadian SF, and virtually every security contractor in Iraq for "close-in" work.  Must be the AK, right?  hr No it wasnt, there are newer better weapons for CQB, and "close-in" work than the AK-47. No they did not choose the M16, they chose the M4 and other SOCOM weapons. this WAS DIRECTED AT M16 AND AK-47, NOT OTHER WEAPONS. We werent talking about special ops, we were talking about standard issue rifles. If you want to talk the best weapons for SPECIAL OPS, then fine lets talk SPECIAL OPS. I can guarantee you I would not include the M16 in the discussion (excepoting the M4), but would include the AK. jay the units that troy mentioned also have 20" M16's in their inventories. Look it up if you choose to.

I know that, yes they do have 20" M16a4, and probably have used M16a2, and a3. But there also many others. But for a mission primarily short range and CQB they DO NOT use a M16. But they do have the AK-47, and AK Krinkov in their inventory too.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: AR = relatively tight tolerances, excellent accuracy,, good reliability, great at multiple ranges, poor for CQB and close combat. Hmm...  I wonder what weapon was chosen by Delta Force, the Navy SEALs, British SAS, Australian SAS, Canadian SF, and virtually every security contractor in Iraq for "close-in" work.  Must be the AK, right?   -Troy No it wasnt, there are newer better weapons for CQB, and "close-in" work than the AK-47. No they did not choose the M16, they chose the M4 and other SOCOM weapons. this WAS DIRECTED AT M16 AND AK-47, NOT OTHER WEAPONS. We werent talking about special ops, we were talking about standard issue rifles. If you want to talk the best weapons for SPECIAL OPS, then fine lets talk SPECIAL OPS. I can guarantee you I would not include the M16 in the discussion (excepoting the M4), but would include the AK. jay the units that troy mentioned also have 20" M16's in their inventories. Look it up if you choose to. I know that, yes they do have 20" M16a4, and probably have used M16a2, and a3. But there also many others. But for a mission primarily short range and CQB they DO NOT use a M16. But they do have the AK-47, and AK Krinkov in their inventory too.

You keep running circles around yourself. Your beat, but you won't admit it.

Running Circles? Beat? No simply trying to get my opinion across.
Ok, if Im beat, yes for aruments sake Im beat.

But I still have these same opinions:
AK beats out an AR for reliability.
AR beats AK hands down for accuracy.
AK wins on knockdown at close range.
AR wins at long range knockdown, shoots much flater.
AK wins in CQB, standard AR/M16 (not variants) is big for CQB.
AR is way easier to control on rapid fire, the AK kicks like crazy.

Are there better guns than both of these in certain situations. Absolutely yes. By no stretch of the imagination is the AK-47 the perfect CQB rifle. Nor is it the perfect field rifle.

Overall I prefer my AR-15 if I was going to have one weapon for ALL combat situations, But my AK has its pluses too.  

Both of these weapons are becoming outdated. The piston design of the AK is/has been the inspiration for many newer rifles, including the G36, HK 416, Sig 550, M96, Galil, Valmet, and a few others. The AK is dirty, innacurate, and handles horrible at rapid fire. The AR is incredibly accurate for an assault rifle, and extremely reliable considering its tight tolerances. It is a very reliable rifle, just not as reliable as the AK.  But its gas system is outdated, extremely dirty. Take a look at the HK416, awesome rifle that combines the best of the AK with the best of the M16/AR-15.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: AR = relatively tight tolerances, excellent accuracy,, good reliability, great at multiple ranges, poor for CQB and close combat. Hmm...  I wonder what weapon was chosen by Delta Force, the Navy SEALs, British SAS, Australian SAS, Canadian SF, and virtually every security contractor in Iraq for "close-in" work.  Must be the AK, right?  hr No it wasnt, there are newer better weapons for CQB, and "close-in" work than the AK-47. No they did not choose the M16, they chose the M4 and other SOCOM weapons. this WAS DIRECTED AT M16 AND AK-47, NOT OTHER WEAPONS. We werent talking about special ops, we were talking about standard issue rifles. If you want to talk the best weapons for SPECIAL OPS, then fine lets talk SPECIAL OPS. I can guarantee you I would not include the M16 in the discussion (excepoting the M4), but would include the AK. jay the units that troy mentioned also have 20" M16's in their inventories. Look it up if you choose to. I know that, yes they do have 20" M16a4, and probably have used M16a2, and a3. But there also many others. But for a mission primarily short range and CQB they DO NOT use a M16. But they do have the AK-47, and AK Krinkov in their inventory too. You keep running circles around yourself. Your beat, but you won't admit it.

Oh, I forgot to mention. When I said "I can guarantee you I would not include the M16 in the discussion (excepoting the M4), but would include the AK." I would not include it in my discussion of weapons for CQB. The M16 is not the weapon you (well maybe you would) want for CQB or close in combat or home defense. I can think of a half dozen other guns I would rather use, and so can SOCOM.

I have alot (read A LOT) of time behind a G36, and I will tell you a few things.  The time frame was 1998/99, multi agenct state SWAT team.

1.) The rifles,G36K's (all 70, thats right I said 70) came with the funky optic/red dot handle combo and a one week tactical rifle course taught by Hk.  The course was scrubbed because the optics would not hold a zero.

2.)  Hk replaced the optics with aimpoints (after being told they could provide a sighting system or have their rifles back) good customer service, I guess, and rescheduled the tac rifle course.

3.)  During the tac rifle course, the G36k consistently shot about 5 to 6 moa!  Not just in the hands of "inside the house" dopes like me, but same results from the long rifle squad, prone and bagged.

Yeah, it's "cool looking" and "clean firing",  but it is not as reliable and accurate as a AR product, and cost twice as much!

If you aint got one, thank the gods you didn't drop $1200 on it.  If you got have one, by two M4s instead, same money twice + the bang for the buck!  ($1200ish/$600ish LEO prices)

Allright this AK vs AR crap has been beaten to death by everybody (myself included!), lets talk G36 and M16/Ar-15 again.

How about that HK416? Something like this is what the US Military should be getting into. Essentially an M4 with a new upper gas piston design and a few minor mods to the lower.

I read an article in Janes and it stated this thing shot over 20,000 rounds with not one single failure. It also shot 1" groups at 100m with a carbine barrel(under16")!!!!

This is amazing accuracy, incredible reliability, and way cheaper than anything the military can come up with. Awesome, has all the benefits of the M16 and none of its flaws.

Has the G36 ever won a Battle? When is the last time a M16/M4 has lost a battle against a AK?

And yes I have shot both the G36k and a M4a1 in FA.

Quoted: Has the G36 ever won a Battle? When is the last time a M16/M4 has lost a battle against a AK? And yes I have shot both the G36k and a M4a1 in FA.

G36 hasnt been in battle yet, and from what Ive heard on this thread it doesnt sound too good, sounds like an M16 or an Ak would beat it.

As for the M16 losing out to an AK, that easy. Remember Vietnam? The M4 has some extraction/feed problems that the standard M16 doesnt have. M16 kicks butt, but not in high humidity or extreme cold.

I've handled an SL8 conversion and my observation is that it feels like it is made from cheap plastic that would easily break if pressed.

So far the only durable synthetic material for firearms seems to be in the handgun world. The polymer on my Glock feels ten times more durable than the AR180b, SL8, UMP/USC etc etc.

I dont have anything against polymer in firearms, but it has to be done well and so far that hasnt been the case. For long guns that fire rifle rounds I would stick with Wood, steel or aluminum. For now...lets see what the future holds

I like the design of the G36 just not the materials used

I've got a fair amount of time behind G36s, but more on ARs/M4s.  I'll share my opinions and correct some information from earlier posts.

1. Spain and Germany use the G36.  Spain has not yet completely converted.  You still see some Cetme Model L's (5.56mm) around in Spain.  
2. Portugal has not yet adopted the G36, other than by the GNR (Gendarmerie Police) in very limited numbers and maybe a few with the DEA (Marine Commandos). The GNR still uses mostly MP5s.  It looks as though Portugal will adopt the G36, but the only other weapon allowed in for the trials was the Sig 552.  No other weapon manufacturer submitted bids because the tender specs were written specifically for the G36.  (Portugal usually follows Spain's lead). No one is really sure how the Sig even got included since it didn't meet specs.  No competitive testing was performed, except against the Sig 552.  Several weapons manufacturers have filed official protests over the tender process. Portugal is still using a mix of G3s, Galils and Sig 543s., depending on the unit.
3.  Considering many European countries will only buy from other European countries, it is understandable why the G36 has been adopted.  Germany had to adopt it to keep H&K alive. (Say "Government subsidy") However, If you look at Greece and Turkey, they are both looking to go with the M4 carbine built indiginously under license from Colt.  (Although neither have signed contracts, yet.)  
4. The G36C and G36K are widely used in the U.K. by the Police (those few that actually have guns), but is not in use by the military.  The U.K. military does use an HK weapon - It's called the SA80A2.  The L85A1 (also known by it's export designation of SA80) are still undergoing rebuilding at H&K in Oberndorf.  They are stripping them down to the bare receiver, welding in strenghtening lugs, and then completely rebuilding them with almost all new parts.  Very little of the original weapon is being reused. (I have seen the operation personally.)  The SA80A2 is not scheduled to be replaced until 2015 or later.  You're not likely to see the G36 being adopted by the U.K. military in large quantities before then. The U.K. Special Forces and Royal Marine Commandos use the Diemaco L119A1 (SFW), while the rest of the forces use the SA80A2.
5. The Netherlands and Denmark use the Diemaco C7 and C8s.  The Norwegian and British Special Forces also choose the Diemaco.
6.  Norway is likely to purchase some 10,000 new rifles in the coming years.  They will probably be G36s or Diemaco SFWs, however, the rifle program has been going on for 10 years and they are starting over next year.  The original quantities have dwindled from 80,000 to 10,000.  They still use the G3 and have hundreds of thousands of 1960s manufactured, but never fired, G3s in warehouses.  It could come to pass that they stay with the G3, especially now that the US and other countries are looking at possibly converting to a larger caliber than 5.56.

Personal observations on the G36:
1. It's an o.k. weapon, but not as ergonomic as the M4.  It is very front heavy and not well balanced, especially on the full length G36.
2. It's reliable, but still gets dirty and requires cleaning and oiling, just like any other firearm.  The myth that it goes 15,000 rounds without a cleaning is bunk.  I've shot them. I've cleaned them. They get dirty.  There is less fouling on the bolt and carrier compared to the M4/AR but the gas system gets filthy with crud.  I've been with HK reps during live-fire demos and I've helped to clean and lube the guns during and after the demos. We expended a lot of ammo and had to clean and lube the guns as the demos were ongoing.  That said, they worked with very few flaws.
3.  The G36 is well engineered, however, I have been told by those that use it that it does not hold up well under field conditions.  I've spoken with current members of the German KSK Special Forces.  They do not particularly like the G36.  They told me it was not very reliable and the plastic body does not hold up well to hard use.  I asked one KSK officer what weapon he would prefer. His answer was "Colt M4".  This is absolutely a true statement - His words, not mine, no bull.  I was suprised to hear him say this.
4. Magazine changes are faster with the M4/AR, but the see-through and clip together mags of the G36 are a nice feature.
5.  ARs have an advantage in accuracy and certainly in ergonomics and accessories.
6. The integral optics on the standard G36 are crap.  Even the HK people will admit this, and trust me, it is nearly impossible to get a German engineer to admit his product is not perfect!  This is why they are now offering the G36 with an aluminum "KSK" Picatinny rail as standard instead of the integral optics.  The red dot and 1.5x or 3x optics made by Hensoldt for the G36 are junk compared to an Aimpoint, EOTech or Trijicon.  

IMHO - give me an M4/M16A4 any day. In a pinch, I'd pick up a G36 and use it if I had to.

Quoted: AK wins on knockdown at close range. AR wins at long range knockdown, shoots much flater.

Exactly how do you define knockdown power? On what facts are you basing your opinion? Have you shot any living creature with either caliber or even fired either weapon? Were you aware that 5.56mm produces a larger wound profile than 7.52x39 in ballistic gel?

Both of these weapons are becoming outdated. The piston design of the AK is/has been the inspiration for many newer rifles, including the G36, HK 416, Sig 550, M96, Galil, Valmet, and a few others.

Look, you aren't doing your argument any favors by discussing things you obviously don't know about. The AK uses a long-stroke gas piston like the SIG550, Galil, Valmet, and M96 (although the M96 gas piston is a different arrangement than an AK). The G36 and HK416 use a short-stroke gas piston. In fact, the G36 isn't based on an AK at all; but is based on the gas piston of Eugene Stoner's AR180 design, which in turn borrows from the StG44.

Little details like that may explain why your opinions don't get a lot of credence. It tends to give the impression you don't know what you are talking about when you suggest a G36 is inspired by an AK47.

Quoted: 5. The Netherlands and Denmark use the Diemaco C7 and C8s.  The Norwegian and British Special Forces also choose the Diemaco.

Manx, you must be mistaken.  Jay assures us that the M16 cannot handle extreme cold or high humidity.  I am sure that a nation below sea level surrounded by levees could not use an M16.  I'm pretty sure that the cold enviornment of Denmark and Norway would stop that M16 flat.  Oh, and wait a minute, I think they have things called fjords up there as well, and lots of water.  So I guess they would kill the M16 twice.  Come on Manx, Jay wouldn't mislead us would he?
Then again, he's using Vietnam as his point of technical reference.  Maybe he really has no clue as to what the hell he's talking about.
ETA:  Now that I think about it, the C7 and C8 is a Canadian weapon.  Could somebody please tell me if there is any humidity or cold weather in Canada?  I can't remember.  Oh wait, I know what Jay is talking about:  all those nations are buying the C7/8 to issue to their deployments along the equator in arid desert environments.

Quoted: Quoted: AK wins on knockdown at close range. AR wins at long range knockdown, shoots much flater. Exactly how do you define knockdown power?

That pretty much defines his level of understanding.  When "knockdown power" rolls out it should set off all kinds of alarms.

Quoted: Allright this AK vs AR crap has been beaten to death by everybody (myself included!), lets talk G36 and M16/Ar-15 again. How about that HK416? Something like this is what the US Military should be getting into. Essentially an M4 with a new upper gas piston design and a few minor mods to the lower. I read an article in Janes and it stated this thing shot over 20,000 rounds with not one single failure. It also shot 1" groups at 100m with a carbine barrel(under16")!!!! This is amazing accuracy, incredible reliability, and way cheaper than anything the military can come up with. Awesome, has all the benefits of the M16 and none of its flaws.

Your talking in circles now with your whole debate.  

Why is it "amazing accuracy" ?  You say it like a shorter barrel can not have very good accuracy.  Many AR's with shorter barrels are this accurate with barrels of these lengths.  Longer barrels are not necessarily more accurate.

An AR with a gas piston hands down superior.I think LarryG36 broke a trunions on his a couple of times...cant say that about the L&W system and over 70,000rounds on the test rifle.G36=garbage thats why XM8 is dead..a G36 with a different body look.

Quoted: People lust for it for the simple reason they can't get it.

Bingo.....HK Snobbery at work.

Quoted: Quoted: Look at the industrialized militarys around the globe and what weapon (out of the two listed) do you see most in use? I will take an AR thank you. Well those that have adopted a new rifle in the last few years seem to have chosen the G36...Germany, Spain, Britian (are very close to switching), Portugal

HK, like Harley Davidson, has done a great job of creating the mystique and aura that make people think they must have their product or they are un-cool or behind the times.

Hk. In a world of compromise, some have better marketing......

Quoted: If you ask this question in the HK forums, you'll get a different answer...

Well, I'd give a differant asnwer too if I had to justify why I spent so much for a gun that is no better or worse than a 40 year old M-16 design.....

Quoted: Quoted: The only reason AR15 may out shoot an AK47 outside of 50 yards is the use of optical sights. Have you ever watched a slow motion video of the AK firing?  You will see why your statement is wrong about the reason for the inaccuracy of the AK.

jardax.ethernet.cz/Gun/Video/ak47_slow.avi

Ok, you really know what you are talking about. Im not here to start an argument over something as stupid as this. Just here to talk and post some opinions. If you dont want to believe the AK inspired these future designs fine, I'll still believing it.

The gas piston design goes back to WWII with the STG44, and combines some similarities to the AK, the roller locking (like on a G3 or MP5), and the "modern" gas piston design. If you want to get technical all assualt rifles owe some kind of lineage to that gun, including the AK.

Enough already, give this a rest.

Quoted: Quoted: AK wins on knockdown at close range. AR wins at long range knockdown, shoots much flater. Exactly how do you define knockdown power? On what facts are you basing your opinion? Have you shot any living creature with either caliber or even fired either weapon? Were you aware that 5.56mm produces a larger wound profile than 7.52x39 in ballistic gel? Both of these weapons are becoming outdated. The piston design of the AK is/has been the inspiration for many newer rifles, including the G36, HK 416, Sig 550, M96, Galil, Valmet, and a few others. Look, you aren't doing your argument any favors by discussing things you obviously don't know about. The AK uses a long-stroke gas piston like the SIG550, Galil, Valmet, and M96 (although the M96 gas piston is a different arrangement than an AK). The G36 and HK416 use a short-stroke gas piston. In fact, the G36 isn't based on an AK at all; but is based on the gas piston of Eugene Stoner's AR180 design, which in turn borrows from the StG44. Little details like that may explain why your opinions don't get a lot of credence. It tends to give the impression you don't know what you are talking about when you suggest a G36 is inspired by an AK47.

Knockdown power close range = basing my opinion on shooting game with a 7.62x39, and a 223. Ive shot coyote with both, the 7.62 has a much better knockdown than a 223. I dont give a crap about wound profile in ballistic gel, give me a wider round FMJ with a slower speed and it will do more than a much smaller round FMJ with an extremely high speed. Unless that smaller round hits something solid like bone. this isnt rocket since, simple things anybody who hunts knows, and it applies just as much to killing a human as it does to a woodchuck, coyote, and a deer. Try shooting a 45-70 at a deer in the vitals, goes right down. Try the same with a 223. It will run off with a bullet right through the heart. And yes I have shot both weapons, I own a DPMS A-15, and a preban (serial #3XX) Polytech AK-47 Legend.

If you think the AK and the G36 have nothing in common with their gas systems then with all do respect you really dont know what you are talking about. I will continue to think that the G36 has been inspired by the AK. Its gas system is similar. The AK granted is much simpler. the G36 also has lineage to the STG44 as you stated, as well as the G3, and M63,

As for the opinions being based on anything, I apparently base my opinions on real life experiences. I havent shot a G36, and I doubt most people here have either. Why do you need to make an arguement out of all this? Im just here for conversation, adding my two cents. Everybody here has their opinions.

Quoted: Quoted: Allright this AK vs AR crap has been beaten to death by everybody (myself included!), lets talk G36 and M16/Ar-15 again. How about that HK416? Something like this is what the US Military should be getting into. Essentially an M4 with a new upper gas piston design and a few minor mods to the lower. I read an article in Janes and it stated this thing shot over 20,000 rounds with not one single failure. It also shot 1" groups at 100m with a carbine barrel(under16")!!!! This is amazing accuracy, incredible reliability, and way cheaper than anything the military can come up with. Awesome, has all the benefits of the M16 and none of its flaws. Your talking in circles now with your whole debate.   Why is it "amazing accuracy" ?  You say it like a shorter barrel can not have very good accuracy.  Many AR's with shorter barrels are this accurate with barrels of these lengths.  Longer barrels are not necessarily more accurate.

No, shorter barrels generally do not have better accuracy. And no ARs with shorter barrels are not typically this accurate with the same lengths.  A gun with a shorter 16" barrel that is otherwise the same as a 20" will not outshoot the longer barreled rifle all other things equal. I stress all other things equal. Two identical rifles with different legths barrels of the same contour, thickness, and steel will not be the same.

The hardness of the steel used, cryo-freezing, countour, and thickness of the barrel can all affect the accuracy. So a barrel that is shorter but has certain characteristics stated above on an otherwise identical gun may shoot better.  BUt any assualt rifle that can consistently shoot sub 1" groups at 100m, with a 16" barrel is impressive.

Not to mention the barrel alone isnt the only factor that affects accuracy, but IMO the most important. Add on a free floating handguard and it will improve the barrel harmonics. Make a tighter chamber, more consistent ammo, a lighter trigger with a faster locktime, more precise sight alignment, precision gas adjustments. these can all factor into the accuracy on an AR, along with a bunch of other factors, But no Im not an expert on this, but I do have some clue about it.

I would really like to see a 14.5" or 16" M4 continously shoot sub 1" groups after 20,000 rounds at 100m. Ive heard of standard 20" ARs shooting sub 2" at 100m, but usually around 2-2.5" with an M16. Frankly I dont know what the M4 shoots at 100m. The best Ive managed with the DCM upper on my AR is .8" at 100yds.

Anybody else seen 1" groups out of a standard M4?

Let's get a few things clear here:
1. The STG44 uses a long stroke gas piston where the piston is attached to the carrier - like the AK-47.  However, the STG44 uses a tilting bolt (like an FN FAL) whereas the AK-47 uses a rotating bolt.
2. The G36 uses a gas piston that is a separate piece from the bolt carrier (like an AR18) and uses a rotating bolt, like an AR, or originally, the Johnson automatic.  How can anyone relate the system of STG44 to the G36?  They have nothing in common with either the gas system or the bolt operation.