The 10K keyholing was with a full auto rental gun at BF Vegas, and folks have reported that proper cleaning of the factory unlined barrel is a definite must for higher round counts.

Also... "no" to IGF... I've heard they did good work in the past, never used them personally, but:

https://www.baxtercountysheriff.com/press_view.php?id=2034

That being said, Tom Bostic and others can and do great HK barrel work, including nitriding.

I generally like LMT, but in terms of the piston systems themselves, I would go HK over LMT, I like LMT a lot, and use a lot of their products, but between the two piston systems specifically, it's a fairly tough sell for me to recommend too many other systems over the HK from a technical standpoint--however, that's not an inexpensive path to go down, and the MR556 Competition is probably the worst "out of the box" configuration for a piston "fighting gun" out there. The upside is that it's not that hard to fix, the downside is that it's not inexpensive to do, and will require at least some wait time.

IMHO the MR556, especially if you get it at a good price, can be made into a great duty gun, but it's sorely in need of barrel cut down/reprofile and nitriding from the factory, and a new handguard if you're getting a Competition model.

I've got a couple 416s, and had some others in the past, including cut down MR556 uppers, and my current 14.5" upper is a cut down MR556 and I've got no complaints with it. The reality is that either will likely serve you well, and to a certain extent the real "meat" of the decision is honestly probably just which one you like better.

~Augee

I actually deleted several paragraphs about this because I felt like it was veering off topic, hahaha.

I don't dislike Sigs, and I have an MCX and Rattler which I honestly probably shoot more around the house than my 5.56 guns, and which, in a roundabout way are derivatives of the 516.

Regardless, the thing about the 516, Caracal, etc., that boast an "HK416 lineage" so to speak, is that they're in many ways analogs to the AR18. Not from a technical design standpoint of the piston system, which, well, that's it's own discussion--but in terms of the fact that they were redesigns of the "original" where the primary purpose was to a) build it cheaper, and b) not infringe on the original's IP. Did the designers attempt to improve them/add in newer features based on their experience with the original system? I'm sure, but they also ultimately had to try to make it different enough from the original design, simply for the sake of being different (IP infringement) as much as pure design considerations.

Doesn't make it better or worse, just something to think about and be aware of.

Now, guns like the PWS. I have nothing bad necessarily to say about the PWS guns, I don't have a whole lot of time on them, but I've shot them, played with them a little, and most of the owners seem pretty happy with them. No problem.

That being said, earlier this year DPMS and Bushmaster both shuttered their doors. Blame it on Cerberus, Remington, whatever. And maybe it'd been a long time, if ever, that either of those companies were "on the top," but what you can't deny is that they were once huge power players in the AR market at large. And now they're gone.

Logistics is not necessarily something that concerns everyone, but they're certainly something that concerns me, so when it comes to critical operating components, long term availability is absolutely something that's meaningful to me. And I recognize that if everyone thought like I do about these things, there would potentially be a lot less innovation, because no one would want to take a chance on anything without the full force of military adoption behind it, I get it. Some people just like to try cool new guns, and I'm all about it, and we all benefit from their feedback and experiences.

But for me, the bullet launcher is kinda just that, and all it really needs to do is work. Optics and other force multipliers, etc., I'm obviously much more willing to try new things (wouldn't be very useful in product development if not ), so I'm not against novelty and/or innovation, etc., either at all.

Then again, while I do carry and use guns for work, I don't work for a gun company, so my level of priorities might be slightly different than some other people's.

I just want my guns to work and keep working, and to not have to worry about them, so I can test and employ all the other stuff I have to test and use without being bothered by whether or not the guns work and will keep working and can be kept working. Which is why most of my "test mule" guns are ARs (including the 416s) and Glocks. That's not all I have, but that's what I use the most, and to be honest, military or other reputable organizational adoption is a big check in the box to me, a) because it's something my end-users/customers may be using/encountering, and b) it means that most likely someone else tested it at least enough and had a high enough degree of confidence in it, and c) especially if it's a product under a long-term lifecycle type contract, it means that the company will still keep making the parts and supporting the platform for at least the life of the contract, usually much longer, meaning that the parts will always be out there.

In terms of the 416 specifically--the parts have never necessarily been hard to get, they're just expensive, and in some cases require waiting a long freaking time to get imported, the only part that is really "hard to get" is the barrel, but not only has aftermarket support for the barrels picked up over the last couple of years, but it doesn't hurt that true HK416 barrels are fairly legendarily long-lived, and that's true of many of the 416-specific components--the ones that are proprietary fail extremely rarely, while the ones that are more prone to (e.g., disconnectors on some guns depending on the gas setup and other component configurations) are interchangeable with standard AR components.

Beyond that, the gun runs and runs and runs, and picks up more contracts seemingly every day (sure, it loses some too, but things like "all Marine Corps Infantry Battalions" and "the whole Bundeswehr" tend to make losing things like "Estonian Defense Forces" seem not like that big of a deal), meaning that I'm going to be able to keep it running for quite a long time.

Ultimately, I'm not sitting around trying to tell everybody that the HK416 is the best uber German Space Magik infallible weapon system out there, it's not. A lot of guns can do what the 416 does, some cheaper, some lighter, some with better recoil impulses, some with more technical innovation or novel features, some (some would argue) all of those things.

But for me, for a no muss, no fuss bullet launcher that runs no matter how much I neglect it, short barreled, suppressed, full auto, so I can focus on other things that (IMHO) make a much bigger difference in combat effectiveness than slightly less recoil (e.g., plus, throw an IR laser, white light, and can on that sucker, and everything will shoot flat ) that I will pretty much always be able to get parts for, it's worth the initial investment.

It may not be for anyone else in any other situations, but depending on what your needs and priorities are, I would certainly say it continues to be a worthwhile platform to consider, and still generally my number one recommendation for most folks if you want to move into a proprietary-format piston AR system for a "duty-grade" weapon, because it's very few people's #1 job to shoot people, even if they are "armed professionals" (and a lot of the ones whose it is... are using 416s incidentally, but that's neither here nor there), so quixotically, the less you have to worry about your weapon, the better off you'll be.

~Augee

Sorry, I disagree.

They may not have been the "hip" companies anymore, but Bushmaster and DPMS? Quality Parts of Windham, Maine was one of the very first commercial manufacturers of AR parts and components.

Sure, Windham Weaponry, whatever, the "Company Guidon," so to speak, went with Remington, and now it's dead. Again, blame it on whatever you want, but those were big companies with a lot of market share in their heydays. They may have been in decline (that's usually how it works), but the number of rifles that even a one of those companies made at their height would probably knock the shit out of all four of those companies combined in terms of rifle production at least.

But even among those, KAC and LMT still have several viable military contracts that make them a little bit more stable and secure. LWRCi is probably kept more alive by MATECH BUIS than they'd probably like to admit.

Even in that company, PWS is the odd man out, and the most proprietary of them all (honestly not sure how or why KAC got thrown into this mix, as they don't build a piston, but that's neither here nor there). What's to say they, or honestly, any of them, couldn't one day get bought out by a capital management company that mismanages them into the ground?

Like I said in my earlier post--

That's just my reasoning, and I fully understand that it's not going to apply to everyone else the same way, and even acknowledged that if everyone thought like I did, it would stiffle innovation in the marketplace at large.

The industry and the market need people who like new and unusual things and are willing to take the risks on them--it's just not me. I just want a proven gun that I don't have to worry about or think too hard about and that will always run, and the neigh legendary ability of the 416 to take neglect and abuse coupled with a strong track record of combat service and organizational use when properly configured fits that bill pretty well for me.



~Augee

You know good and well that that's not what this forum about.

By the time this thread is done, you're going to end up getting both the LMT and the HK.

~Augee

My one HK416 and two complete spare parts kits.



~Augee

I never said “crazy,” man. I said it’s not for me, I explained why, and I acknowledged that those reasons might not apply to others, and told the OP to get what he likes, and then I told him to get both.

Nor did I ever say that the HK was the best gun out there—just that it works for me and why.

PWS wasn’t even a part of this thread until someone else brought it up when the OP said that his choices were between LMT and HK, and now seem committed to dying on this hill that no one else is fighting over.

If you hadn’t noticed, logistics is kind of important to me, so once I commit to a platform, I start collecting spare parts like a squirrel on Adderall a week before the frost, and we all know what happens to spare parts, hence the joke.

Finally, your crystal ball is cracked. You might want to get it repaired.

...if you can find spare parts.



~Augee

You can do whatever you like my dude, and you can buy, own, and shoot whatever you want. It’s not like I said your dog was ugly.

The fact that I choose to build up my own supply stockpiles has nothing to do with the validity of considering long term production, product support, and parts availability when it comes to initially selecting a particular weapon system or not—if that kind of thing concerns you.

If not, no big deal either. Still not sure what point you’re trying to make or why. If you don’t like the 416, or like something else better, or don’t agree with my reasoning, or don’t think it’s an important consideration, no one is forcing you or trying to convince you to buy something you don’t want.

You keep contorting yourself to try to find some sort of “flaw” in the argument so that you can have some cathartic moment of vindication that no one else will care about, when you could simply say “not my jam, I think my gun is better,” and I’d’ve said: “cool deal, truck on.”

Meanwhile, your information is wrong again. HK is building rifles in the U.S., and there are also aftermarket sources for components, which on the one hand may not be of the same level of quality, but speaks to the level of support and saturation the platform has in the marketplace.

Again, it may not be important to you, and that’s okay. But it’s probably something that would at least be worth being aware of if you were trying to decide between two different systems, whether or not it’s the deciding factor, no?

~Augee

First, @firedog51d my apologies for what this has turned into... hahaha

Oy. Where to begin?

You brought up the HK416 first, not to mention military contracts as a rationale for choosing one over the other:

My first post was then to state the simple fact that the MR556 is not that different from the 416 minus barrel profile and chrome lining/corrosion treatment, both of which can be solved by a simple trip to a smith, but not to use a guy who has recently been in trouble with the law among other things. Are there some other minor differences (BCG without the auto sear trip and lack of sear clearance cut on upper), sure. But the MR556 is 99% HK416, and the one difference of any substance is not that difficult to change.

Your next post was to say (paraphrased) "well I don't have one, but the PWS is a better gun."

To which I said fine, but there are other considerations in terms of long term support of the platform, and that companies sometimes go away.

See, here's the thing, three complete rifles didn't magically appear out of thin air when I decided on the platform, it took a few years to get to that point. So when you're buying a new gun for the first time, it's still worth considering what parts availability is going to be into the future. I chose the platform in part because I knew I could continue to support it. I collected more not just because of logistics, but because I really like the gun and ended up buying more--this is a thing that happens.

And maybe I'll want something else badly, badly enough that it's worth selling or trading one of these rifles, because, let's face it, they're pretty nice, at least I think so, so I can turn and burn 'em quick if I needed to, whether that's for new toys, or new expenses. And I can do that, because I'm not worried about being able to replace them and replace parts as an eventuality. If I were not so certain of the fact that they will continue to be supported into the foreseeable future (to say nothing of the number that have already been produced and already exist in the United States alone).

Okay, so you didn't like that answer.

So you brought up that LMT has been in business for 40 years, and they're probably not going anywhere. Agreed. But that doesn't mean that their piston is going to stay in production.

Others have intimated it as well, but let me tell you, LMT's not super enthusiastic about the thing, and never was. It is not their production or marketing focus, and it has never been a very strong seller--I don't work for LMT, but we did a joint marketing event with them, you've probably seen pictures of it. They sent a grand total of one piston upper that they were pretty "meh" about, saying "you can use it if you want," in relation to about six or eight DI MRP complete guns, a MARS-H, an M203, etc., that they wanted us to make sure definitely got used.

LWRCi is just barely old enough to drink, and PWS is a sophomore in high school. It was pointed out to you that older, more storied, larger, and more successful companies have fallen. Somebody else (not me) pointed out actual reported production numbers from those companies. Note: no one said LWRCi or PWS were definitely going to fold. But none of us can tell the future, so it's worth considering.

So next you call me "crazy" for having so many HK416/MR556s. That's fine, my wife calls me that all the time, and then you make a snide comment about how I choose to spend my money.

Meanwhile, you post wrong information based on what you've read on internet forums and facebook about "what is going to happen," when you seem not to even understand what the distinction is between SOCOM and JSOC, which, spoiler alert, are different organizations with different funding and procurement among a lot of other things.

But fine, I shrugged it off and tried to make light of it.

And then you keep on going, now bringing up some noise about Executive Orders and overseas manufacturers, apparently not realizing that M27s and MR556s have been being built in the U.S. for years now, before defaulting back to "well they're not making HK416s for the civilian market."

Which brings us full circle to your very first comment "the MR556 isn't the HK416." Except minus the barrel, it pretty much is. And HK sells those spare parts to the civilian market. And Marvin Pitts, among others, can modify AR barrels and HK uppers so that you don't need to rely on HK if you don't want to for new barrels. And properly protected for corrosion and wear (nitriding or chrome lining), HK carbine barrels last for some stupid round counts, especially for civilian semi-auto fire.

You claim "not to have anything against" the 416 or HK, but you seem pretty dead set on trying to do everything you can ensure that the OP doesn't buy one. Because you think your guns are better. And everyone else's reasoning is bad, and you have all the answers, and yours are all right.

Meanwhile, again, all I've ever been trying to say is "I like the HK, here's some reasons why, but you don't have to agree, buy what you want."

Regardless, as far as I’m concerned, I’m done here. I’ve given as much information as needed or required for the OP to consider his purchase in an informed fashion, and I had no intention of getting into “HK416 Uber Alles” bickering match.

~Augee

~Augee

Hahaha, I was.

But then you had to go and post something so outlandishly and easily proven untrue, I couldn’t help myself. I’m human.



“Oh, I didn’t realize by ‘bringing it up’ you meant bringing it up.”

But don’t worry, I won’t bother addressing the rest of your “arguments” unless someone else has anything to add or that they want to talk about.



ETA:

@firedog51d it’s your call man, it’s your thread if you want it to go on.

~Augee

Well, if I’m cleared hot...

So tell me, what exactly is your level of experience with HK piston guns? MR556 or HK416?

You’ve already stated you don’t own one, but what do you know first hand versus what you’ve read on the internet?

My first direct hand experience with them, so to speak, was just about ten years ago (next month, technically), somewhere... not here.

Since you’re wanting to make a big deal about what is and is not an HK416, it seems worth knowing what your experience level is with it? For the record, the pictured guns consist of:

Two complete HK416 uppers (the 10.4”ers), a converted MR556 upper (the 14.5”), two MR556 lowers, and one Brownell’s lower with a full HK parts kit from a de-milled gun installed.

Also:



I don’t work for HK, and I don’t know everything there is to know about them, but I feel like I’m at least somewhat knowledgeable on the platform and feel relatively qualified to make a judgment call on what makes a 416 a 416. You may disagree, so be it.

But here’s my thoughts:

I feel like I know a fair bit about what makes the 416 tick, what parts do what, what is important and why, its history, the materials used, who used to build them, who builds them now, etc., and I am confident that the only differences in significant function between an MR556A1 and an HK416 are the barrel profile (obscene on the MR556-agreed), and the lack of corrosion protection applied at the factory (chrome lining).

Let’s go through your list, shall we?

Barrel profile differences - check
MR556 no chrome line, HK416 does - check*
MR556 gas block is different than the HK416 - “ackshully,” the same gas block is used on the MR556 that is now used on the M27. Unless you want to play the “M27 is not an HK416 because it says something different on the receiver” game.
HK416 A5 has ambi-lower receiver, MR556 does not - Most HK416Ds (the U.S. export variant, most commonly used) and the M27/38 do not have A5 lowers anyhow. On a personal note, I don’t care for ambi lowers, and would not own an A5 lower even if I had the option (at least not over a Legacy lower), but that’s personal preference. I also stripped all the ambi parts off my MCX lower.
MR556 has the barrel extension tab + slot on carrier - big whoop. Get it cut off when you get barrel work done if you care that much or plan to use a full auto carrier. Does not change a single thing about the function or design of the weapon. Does not make it any less an HK piston gun and does not make any practical difference.
MR556 carrier does not have OTB design (not sure if this has been changed since I look into a MR556) - yeah, not all 416s are OTB rated—which is done for a complete weapon, by the way, there’s no such thing as an “OTB Upper,” plus, the MR556A1 was developed after the OTB guns were, and integrates most of the “OTB features,” at least as many of the ones that got integrated into HK416 production normally. Some of them are stupid, HK says they’re stupid, and they only get put in guns that are required by contract to be OTB. To reiterate, most “real” HK416s are not OTB either.
HK416 full auto FCG vs. MR556 2 stage trigger  - Indeed, how dare they provide you with a fairly nice two stage trigger instead of a crappy milspec trigger. Drop an ALG in there if that fact bothers you so much, or better yet, upgrade to Geissele. Or, here’s a fun trick—the Sig MCX Matchlite Duo works in the HK, too, yes, even while the FPS is still in there, and it’s pretty nice. Funny how that works, with the MCX/HALO being developed from the 516...
MR556 proprietary take down pins vs. HK416 using standard M4/AR take down pins - Sure. I’ll give you that one. Swap ‘em out for milspec pins if you want (I did).

*Re: the barrel - the MR556A1 barrels are built with the same steel and same blanks that the HK416/M27 are. No, they’re not chrome lined. Yes, some people have claimed that HK uses some magic secret sauce on their “machine gun barrels.” No, nitriding is not the same thing as chrome lining.

You missed a couple, like the lack of an auto sear clearance cut on the upper (SP1-style) and the weird mag release and muzzle brake on the MR556A1 Competition, but that’s neither here nor there—again, in my opinion, negligible to the overall design and function of the weapon system.

The number one thing that makes the HK416’s barrel special is the steel. Yes, unlined, non-corrosion protection is not great for a fighting gun and a nearly 1” thick profile (heavier than the industry standard for HBAR) under the handguards is ridiculous. Get the MR556 barrel nitrided and reprofiled, and you’re 99% there—you’ve got the same steel, and you’ve got the a surface treatment that provides both corrosion protection and hardness for the unlined barrel. It’s literally the only thing you can’t fully “fix” without getting a 416 barrel, and it makes essentially no difference in terms of practical function. If you don’t change the gas block at the same time, you can’t mount a bayonet and lose the stupid sling loops that almost everyone cuts off these days anyways and that HK has deleted from most current production Legacy 416s—my BE (2014) upper had them removed from the factory.

Your “an MR556 will never be anything but an MR556, and it’ll never be an HK416” diatribe is pure grumpy HKPRO elitist crap that’s driven more by the desire to maintain the “exclusivity” and value of their “authentic” HK416 parts because they spent a lot of money on them and they want to feel special. It’s the same bullshit as guys who say “your AR15 will never be an M16/M4!” I mean, sure, in a semantic sense it’s true, but that’s not the point. Incidentally, you’ll find that PRO as an unusually high number of guys who don’t want to see the NFA repealed too, again, “to protect muh investments.” It has nothing to do with the function or practical performance of the weapon system in the field. We can quibble over the percentages, but I stand by my opinion that with some barrel work, the MR556 is for all intents and purposes an HK416 besides what it says on the receivers.

~Augee

So, another point that you’ve avoided in terms of logistics is the distinction between first adopting a system, and then later choosing to support it independently.

Again, it took me a few years (like five plus) to assemble everything that’s in that photograph. In that time, we’ve gotten a new president, several contracts have been awarded, I got a new job that actually kind of does give me “special access” to some things, and numerous companies have come and gone and changed hands.

When I got my first HK416 upper and MR556 lower, I had absolutely zero way of knowing that I would eventually be in the position I am in now.

What I knew is that thousands of HK416s and MR556s had already been produced, and were in the United States, and there was no real end in sight of HK continuing to build and produce the 416. And in the intervening years—that has only strengthened, with HK opening a domestic production (not import) facility, a GAO protest being defeated to allow the Marines to buy more M27s, the M38, the HK416F, the HK416A7, and on and on.

So the fact that I could continue to support the platform without having a stockpile of spare parts, jokes about squirrels and Adderall notwithstanding, was important to me back then, and could still be important to a new buyer looking to get into a piston system today.

Not every new buyer may want to commit to stockpiling the number of parts I have, but it may or may not still be important to them that they can get them.

Moreover, because of the HK416’s success, as I’ve already mentioned, HK is no longer the sole source of parts for the HK416, and if HK magically folded tomorrow (maybe the German government just decided to say “to hell mit you!”), the Marines (and others) would still want to keep their guns running, so someone would step up and start manufacturing components, probably under contract.

And there’s a decently robust aftermarket to support the HK416/MR556. As an example, what if you want a different handguard for your gun? Geissele, MI, Lancer, and Remington (I’m sure I’m missing some as I sip on my Budweiser) make aftermarket handguards that can be chosen from. What happens if you don’t like the LMT MRP upper? Or PWS handguard? Or Sig handguard? Or LWRCi handguard? Your options are much more limited.

It may not matter to you, but it may matter to some. Matters (mattered?) to me, if you’ll notice only one of those rifles has the factory handguard, and that’s temporary because I want to run the gun as “OG” for a while for fun—there’s another Geissele waiting in the wings for it, as well as a DD if I really wanted to (actually not my favorite handguard...). Probably the next time you see photographs of it, you’ll hardly be able to recognize it, because that one is the newest one, and it’s about to become my new “test mule” so that the tan gun can live out the rest of its days as a more stable “clone” gun.

Also—and serious question, who, if anyone at these companies and units are you talking to that you’re getting these predictions from? You don’t have to name names, but what makes you so certain besides these being the same general claims I see bandied about the internet and often roll my eyes at?

I’ve tried very hard not to “flex” the fact that I do this for a living, but it seems relevant at this point—where are you getting this information from? If you have better contacts than I, I’d honestly, not being sarcastic, love to meet them and talk to them and discuss this stuff ad nauseum. Who knows? Maybe they’ll change my mind?

Listen, I’ve talked to folks at HK, and man, the Germans may be a weird people, but for the most part, they’re not insane.

Why would they abandon their most successful weapon system since the MP5? Some sense of Teutonic pride? They’re still a business after all.

No one is saying any of those companies are definitely going away, but as I said earlier, none of us knows the future for sure. And bigger names have fallen.

But again, I did a joint marketing event with LMT (check the sig line) the photographs were all over SHOT this year, again, you’ve probably seen them. Obviously the piston gun gets submitted for requirements that ask for a piston gun, and obviously they’re happy when they win them. Doesn’t mean that it can’t get discontinued if it continues to do relatively poorly in comparison to their other offerings, or that they even really like it.

And I’m not even saying it’s a bad system, or that it’s definitely going to get discontinued. I’m just saying you and I and the OP, none of us have any say in it.

Meanwhile, you may have been following his posts, but I know coregon personally. I daresay I’d call him a friend. We text each other occasionally. He rubs his LVAW upper in my face to make me sad. Moreover, it wasn’t from coregon, but I just got another fun care package from a Special Weapons guy at Sig today. So I feel at least moderately read in on what’s going on over there. More than the average bear at least.

I won’t mention all the other people in other organizations that I have fairly regular contact with, but suffice to say—I feel at least, that my opinion on the long-term security of the HK416/MR556/HK piston AR over other similar platforms into the foreseeable future still stands, again, regardless of what internet or gun shop rumors and gossip that’s being kicked around out there in the public space. Much of which I too have seen, heard, and read, but realize that it fails to capture “the whole story.”

As for who made it personal first: go back and read my posts. I tried to keep it fairly light and fun until you called me “crazy.”

Your very first post in this thread said: “LMT is the way to go.” Which is your opinion, and it’s fine. Again, I like LMT and have said nothing bad about the design of their piston gun.

My very first post in this thread acknowledged that the MR556A1 wasn’t the best configuration for a fighting gun, but noted that it wasn’t hard to fix, and still worth considering—even for a duty gun, but nevertheless ended with: “The reality is that either will likely serve you well, and to a certain extent the real "meat" of the decision is honestly probably just which one you like better.”

And every single one of my posts have been similar until today.

You said (about the PWS, drawing direct comparison to the HK416 via the Sig 516) “Better gun.” Which is a fine opinion for you to take, I don’t care to argue it—in part because I acknowledge having limited direct experience with it.

I’ve continually acknowledged that what I find important and compelling may not be to others, and I joked with firedog51d that he was going to end up with both anyways.

I made a joke about spare parts kits and posted a picture of some guns.

You called me “crazy.” Sure, you said “it seems” instead of “you are,” and you did it with quotes, and somehow implying that I had called anyone else crazy for what they liked or wanted to do, and then you posted information of... seemingly limited veracity about the intentions and futures of companies and organizations with whom I have professional contact.

And I still tried to keep it light. Made jokes about ADHD (a serious affliction for some—my apologies for my insensitivity) and spare parts.

But you wanted to keep making your point that the OP could just buy three of any rifle he wanted instead of just the one he asked about, so here we are.

~Augee