User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 7:36:48 AM EDT
[#1]
Don't get me wrong. I think you are right and kudos to Sig. I like the rifle and would probably buy one. But the pic is funny. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 7:39:08 AM EDT
[#2]
Oh, the pic is hilarious!
Hope they iron out that little detail before they go on sale 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 7:42:55 AM EDT
[#3]
The reaction shouldnt surprise you. Of all the communities I knew for sure that ARFCOM would be most voilently against any new SIG carbine. I really dont feel like going into the reasons why, but by no means am I shocked. I'm number 8 on the list for the 556 SWAT model as of 9:27 AM |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 7:43:12 AM EDT
[#4]
I hope they offer it in both TDI AND folding stock. Shit, now I am going to not only have to buy the rifle, but probably an addition 700-1000 dollars worth of stuff to make it look like a pre-'89 sig 55x. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 7:45:50 AM EDT
[#5]
To all the guys wanting a folding stock, how do you figure that's gonna happen?
 The part where the AR buffer tube threads into the lower looks to be one piece. WIZZO |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 7:46:40 AM EDT
[#6]
700 to 1000 bucks? How so? We're talking forend, stock and grip, right? I can almost guarantee you someone will have an adaptor to make the original 55X stock fit this puppy inside a year. Less if it takes off like I hope it does. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 7:47:28 AM EDT
[#7]
Couldn't have said it better myself. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 7:49:33 AM EDT
[#8]
Not many people pay extra for shitty plastic railed handguards, shitty replacement stocks that cost nothing, and shitty out of spec Picatinny rails. Well I guess some people do, but some one has to keep Tapco in business.
I love the original, I love the concept, but the execution is a major let down. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 8:00:23 AM EDT
[#9]
I am also talking modifications to mag well to take original sig magazines. Part of the appeal of the sig rifles was that it was all swiss design for the most part; this 556 looks like a 55x had bastard children with the AR-15. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 8:02:02 AM EDT
[#10]
Considering an AK rear receiver block is riveted in place, and people have come up with folding designs for that, I would just venture to guess someone will come up with a design for this as well. But thats a guess. I mean who wants to make money............. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 8:15:31 AM EDT
[#11]
I will get one
Why not go with an A2 stock or maybe even a skeleton sotck of some sort. If the grip is AR spec I would think a plain old A2 or maybe a Magpul Miad might look good? I have a very strong suspicion, that if the quality is what we think it might be these things will grow on us a bit. I mean come on - M16 mags and accesories will interchange with the AR platform? That's worth something right there. lets shoot one first and then decide....My $.02 |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 8:18:28 AM EDT
[#12]
http://ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=263554
The new MAGPUL stock would look right at home on the new sig, it would look like the original folding stock but with the ability to adjust for LOP. I think the new rifle looks great and with the new MAGPUL stock it would look even better. What is with the people saying the rails are out of spec do you have one of the new rifles to be able to make that assumption? or are you just mad that SIG didn't consult with YOU before they decided to produce a NEW DESIGN. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 8:21:13 AM EDT
[#13]
BS, most people wanted the real 550 with it's classic furniture ( nostalgia and never could have before at a decent price reasons ). Instead, we are getting an abomonization of a fantastic rifle. However, I for one do like it taking AR mags, since they are so abundant and own so many already. And, inevidably, the furniture issue will be solvd to some extent by aftermarket I'm sure. Also, the raised rail is awful, but by the sounds of the SWAT model, hopefully that will be resolved. But, most people commenting are commenting on what SIG is currently showing, and it is hideous in it's current form. I bet the reactions would be a little different if they would have shown the SWAT model first, at least from the sounds of the SWAT model, and if they wouldn't have gone with such a hokey doke stock and grip  But all that can be changed easily.
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 8:21:48 AM EDT
[#14]
Onlything I do not like is the fact that the reciever rail is so high up. Looks like it will prevent practical use of an EOTech
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 8:22:51 AM EDT
[#15]
SIG forum pix show it live with the Vortex courtesy of SIGForum member   and this last one is offered with the following question. Is this the longest 16" barrel ever, or a very long receiver? Looks like 20" from this vantage point. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 8:25:09 AM EDT
[#16]
Out of spec.  In spec.  Maybe I'm a freak for the differences being that obvious to me. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 8:33:06 AM EDT
[#17]
So you are saying that because there is a center channel this is a problem? I'm talking about the rail external dimensions. Who cares if there is a center channel the only accessory this would affect is a Knights VFG, and I see no reason to attach one of those too an optics rail. All the optics mounts I have seen have a cross bolt which clamp to the exterior surface of the rails hence the reason for correct dimensions. The only rail that should not have a channel milled out of it is the one on the bottom of the fore grip, so you have the option to use the Knights VFG. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 8:34:15 AM EDT
[#18]
If it had been in the original 55x configuration people would have bitched about the flash hider, a limited use folding stock, rocker reloads, lack of accuracy compared to the AR15, and the specter of bad American QC compared to SWISS QC (which is bullshit) |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 8:35:43 AM EDT
[#19]
No way in hell that barrel is 16" |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 8:41:28 AM EDT
[#20]
I agree, there has to be a misprint in the specs here. SIG 556 SPECIFICATIONS & FEATURES ............................SIG 556 L.......SIG 556......SIG 556 SWAT Caliber: ---------------------- 5.56 mm ---------------------- Overall Length: ........36.5”..........36.5”............36.5” Length w/ Stock Folded: 33”........33”..............33” Barrel Length: ...........16”............16”.................16” Sight Radius: ............21”...........17.75”.............17.75” Forearm: --------- Polymer SIG TriRail --------Quad Rail Rifling: ----------------------- 1 in 9” ------------------------ Weight w/o Mag.:.......7.2 lbs........6.8 lbs........6.8 lbs Operating System:------- Gas Operated, Rotating Bolt ------ Magazine Capacity: 30 Rnds........30 Rnds........30 Rnds MSRP ......................$1,299........$1,299........$1,799 I'll bet we are seeing the 556L which must a longer barrel (16" barrel and 21" sight radius?????). I'll bet the 556L is a 20 incher and the 556 is a 16 incher. I want to see pics of the SWAT!!! |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 8:45:47 AM EDT
[#21]
No I'm saying they are out of spec which is what you were originally inquiring about. You asked me why I said they are out of spec, I showed you, and now you're off on another subject. Why make a longitudinal cut in a rail that brings up the cost and makes it further out of spec? That cut has no benefit except to make sure the rail is not the standard Military Specification M1913 Picatinny rail. I know some companies do it to "save weight", but I hardly find the few ounces that may save as being neccessary. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 8:53:26 AM EDT
[#23]
What an ugly piece of SH*T!!! What kind of bullcrap is that? I thought we were supposed to be getting a SIG55X, not a SIG made AR15. What a waste of time.
  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 8:54:56 AM EDT
[#24]
+1 I'm on the fence really. On the one hand I'm... TheMocoMan Posts: 143 | Registered: April 17, 2001 @ SigForum.com on the other... TheMocoMan Posts: 780 | Registered: June xx, 2005 @ AR15.com I think Sig pistols are the finest handguns in the world. Not sure how to feel about a 5xx series rifle. I know this, the people at SigForum want it to be as far removed from an AR-15 as it can be. And the people on Arfcom want it to be more like a real 55x series not some plastic Tapco fu**ed thing. ROFL!  Edit to Ad:  I like the one on the bottom |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 9:03:05 AM EDT
[#25]
Wanting it to have in spec rails like the 552 is not wanting it to be like an AR at all. I think it's obvious on both here and all of the other gun boards that people wanted a 550 series clone, and not this new rifle. The biggest complaint thus far is it's AR likeness. BTW, if you Tapco'ize a gun, typically that means you are putting AR shit on it, and cheap low grade AR shit at that. I want an original 550 looking rifle, the original folding stock with the additional Swiss Arms cheek piece, only with a 552 receiver, and some Brugger and Thomet four rail handguards. (The 552 does use a M1913 spec integrated Picatinny rail in it's upper receiver.) |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 9:03:25 AM EDT
[#26]
Ah I got ya that makes sense. I think the channel is made because of the flip up rear sights, they probably use a long length of bar stock and cut the channel down the center for the rear sights then cut the length into sections, then do the 1913 slots. This would actually speed up the MFG process as they are making multiple rails at once. Instead of machining a space for the sights alone on each individual sight rail. Or I could be totally wrong if you look at the first picture on that WIZZO_ARAKM14 posted on this page the rails on the HG are in spec. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 9:17:51 AM EDT
[#27]
You could be correct on the machining process. The handguard rails do appear to be closer to spec. However, I think if I got one, the first thing I'd do is find out if a B&T railed forend fits. There's a post saying that the stock set up is meant to be modular, so there is a good chance of getting a folder on there. Hopefully the original folding stock will be available at some time. It may not be that bad, but that has yet to be seen. I'm still very let down, but I'm starting to have a more positive outlook on it. Worst case scenario would be me not buying one, so I hope SIG does offer a more 551'ish set up. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 9:52:58 AM EDT
[#28]
I agree. I am a little disappointed in the way they did the stock; think it would have been better to offer a folder that used an AR stock, like the one Gemtech had on display at last year's SHOT show. That being said, I'm definitely going to buy one, possibly two of these rifles. I bet there will be a number of people making quality replacement parts for these (calling Mr LaRue.....Mr LaRue, we need a good rail system here  )And you can still find stripped Sig 55x lowers over in Germany. These could be imported and used to bring the 556 back to its more European lines. Josh |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 10:27:56 AM EDT
[#29]
I agree with macman and joshNC in this
Many if not most here are critical of it, and the majority of members at SIGForums love the thing I suppose it has something to do with how different it is than our beloved AR15. we reject the differences, they love them. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 11:13:10 AM EDT
[#30]
No shit, you hit the nail right on the head. Damned if you do, damned if you dont. Good for Sig. I love it. Cant wait to get one. ETA: kind of an ironic post number for this topic 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 11:19:14 AM EDT
[#31]
I dont think so, the cons of a 55x vs an AR where well known way before anyone saw a chance of a domestic 55X, When people said they wanted a 55X (with or without the ARwell) they wanted a 55X not some Sig/tapco/Ar thing. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 3:32:23 PM EDT
[#32]
I was just at the tapco site and I didnt see any 556 accessories. You want to link the tapco page with those products? |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 3:33:34 PM EDT
[#33]
 Why o why did they have to go and change eveything? And what is with that raised optics rail? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 3:53:39 PM EDT
[#34]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 4:23:20 PM EDT
[#35]
I have a Sig Pistol. The slide wont lock back unless its swimming in oil. Whooopidie Fucking Do. HOWEVER Doesn't mean I'm not happy about the release. Hell, we're getting (well supposed to be) the XCR, FS2000, SCAR, and the SIG. Hell, lord knows I dont mind putting some accessories on rifles. Stock isn't bad to me. Raised rail is horrendous. Pistol grip and handguard leave alot to be desired. Oh well, those are easy to change. If the rifle is a performer, hell, I'm in if the price is right. I will keep my AR for SHTF (of which I plan on eventually adding a piston to), but wouldnt mind ANY of the aforementioned rifles, and will most likely own one of each. Hell. I got the ammo. I got the mags. All I need now is the money, and maybe a few spare parts, and this thing will be a damn nice rifle to own. The only thing I have noticed is this- Most people ON THIS SITE seem to like the Sig series for what it was. The Sig is a bit outdated. I do not like the charging handle one bit. That alone right there is enough to make me think twice, especially with other rifles coming out that offer AR like ergonomics (XCR comes to mind), the same accuracy as Sig/AR series, take AR mags, and have piston reliability. IT simply doesnt do anything better than what we have available, or will have available in the near future. Right side charging to me is...well, aweful, and makes the others much more appealing. To me, I just see the Sig as an old design that they butchered to make fit modern "standards". I think Sig would have done better releasing the original design. Those loyal to Sig don't care either way. Those who love the old design who have lusted after a 55x would be thrilled. Those who want to upgrade to rails and AR stocks have relatively inexpensive TDI gear to add on. IMHO, they should have released it old styling with AR mags. That would be a "neat" rifle to own to me. This one however, is an attempt to compete with modern rifles that just went wrong. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 4:37:05 PM EDT
[#36]
I'm willing to give it a chance. Let me handle the thing, and see some range reports first. I don't have any preconceived notions about the old classic Sig rifles, so what'll sell me on it is: the gas piston system, the increased reliability, the ability to use my AR mags, good rails...who cares if the flash hider is upside down. Turn it right side up and use some peel washers to make it right. Easy. A folding stock would be nice, but I won't cry if I can't get one. Wait and see guys. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 4:57:53 PM EDT
[#37]
It's a Cheaper Than Dirt stock, not a Tapco stock. www.cheaperthandirt.com/ARR081-20983-1888.html |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 5:46:57 PM EDT
[#38]
Cheaper than dirt?! Oh you mean the guys that sell these www.cheaperthandirt.com/18267-20759-1887.html Guess that stock is okay afterall  |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 6:23:02 PM EDT
[#39]
That thing is as ugly as two boys fuckin', and it still has the charging handle on the wrong side.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 6:23:05 PM EDT
[#40]
I guarantee you, hell I'll bet you, that CTD does not make it they only sell it. Sure looks a lot like the DPMS abortion. 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 6:36:31 PM EDT
[#41]
Images altered by rocker of SIGforum. SIG 55x furniture is going to become quite popular. I'll have my clone soon enough when they drop into dealers sometime in august
 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 7:20:58 PM EDT
[#42]
Now that I've ridden myself of the day's stress, I would consider one if it were $1k. It's damn ugly as it sits, but that's not everything.
If SG551 looking furniture is offered, a Brugger and Thomet rail fits it, and they dump the elevated rail, I'm in. I might grab a 556 SWAT if I like the way they shoot. ETA: After toying around in photoshop and looking at other people's work as well, I realize the things that make it so ugly are specifically the stock, the grip, and the elevated rail. Add in a Magpul UBR, a MIAD, and photoshop some real rails on it and it looks pretty sweet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2006 7:34:41 PM EDT
[#43]
Why are you looking at the right side of the real SIG and comparing it to the left side of the neautered SIG> Here is a picture of a real SIG on the left side. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/9/2006 1:04:55 AM EDT
[#44]
The elevated optics rail is an OPTION. It has been said several times in a few of these threads and also over at sigforum from someone in the know
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/9/2006 2:33:33 AM EDT
[#45]
I agree. It will be even better if the complete 55x lower drops on. One of those, an original set of HGs or the B&T rail, and it will be a sweet setup. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/9/2006 3:20:38 AM EDT
[#46]
The center channel on the SIG rails is irrelevant and if you cannot understand why you have no concept of how MIL-STD-1913 rails actually work and which of their dimensions are critical. Do the SIG rails fail to conform to every single dimension on the MIL-STD-1913 blueprint? Of course they do. That is obvious. Do SIG rails fail to conform to the critical dimensions necessary for accessory interface on the MIL-STD-1913 blueprint? Nobody can tell until they measure them. And anyone who pisses on the design of the rails without FACTS, and on the basis of a photograph, is being laughed at right now. You can try to defend your earlier statements with any kind of argument you like. But in the end it just makes you look like a kool aid drinker to people who manufacture machined parts for a living. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/9/2006 3:57:21 AM EDT
[#47]
People rushing to defend a rifle they've never seen in person, let alone fired, are just as ridiculous as they claim the "haters" are.
This rifle does nothing new, performs no new function, and is a whole new manual of arms for someone to learn. If it's going to be your one and only, or you're a collector, or you like to shoot at the static range and then take it home to detail strip and clean every crevice, you might enjoy it. For action shooters, gamers, and people that actually have to use their rifles (or think that they might) for what they were intended it's a complete waste of time and money. These are observations which you do not need to handle one to be able to see from the pictures. Claims to it's accuracy, reliablity, quality of machining, or quality of finish are nothing more than conjecture by those either blinded by lust or by hate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/9/2006 4:17:09 AM EDT
[#48]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/9/2006 4:20:32 AM EDT
[#49]
 ......................................I like it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/9/2006 4:27:42 AM EDT
[#50]
well said. |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
