Whats the main differences between a HK G36 and an ar besides a different gas system and such.  And if you had a choice between em what would u rather have G36 or AR15.  Personally i like the looks of the G36 over the AR.  What do u guys think?  And whens H&K gonna have one out for the civvie market?  for about as much as an AR would cost?  Lets hear some feedback.

[The Dude]Obviously you are not a golfer.[/The Dude]

HK will never make a version of the G36 available to civilians.

I would take a AR becuse I can buy them.

Quoted: Whats the main differences between a HK G36 and an ar besides a different gas system and such.  And if you had a choice between em what would u rather have G36 or AR15.  Personally i like the looks of the G36 over the AR.  What do u guys think?  And whens H&K gonna have one out for the civvie market?  for about as much as an AR would cost?  Lets hear some feedback.

hk did make a civilian version the sl-8  usa  and the sl-4  for canada and other countries.
special weapons tactical-weapons  made stocks-pistol grip and mag well ( hi cap) ar15 mags
hk is no longer importing the gun.  I like there  hk416 ar15 platform sam gas system as the hkg36.
Some people where able to get uppers at$ 2300.00  but hk doesn't sell  them  to the to legal civil.  

This is kind of off topic, but are there other countries where civillians can own guns like ARs and G36s legally?  What I'm getting at is, does H&K and those other European manufactures only sell to governments and such?  I always considered Europe to be super liberal and it was almost impossible to own a gun, let alone a semiautomatic, detachable magazine rifle.  

If I could, I'd get a TRUE G36.  But you can't buy one.

An SL-8 is close, but is still FAR from a G36, especially in the US.  The locking lug system is different.  Also, there has been claims of cracked receivers in the US verson of the SL-8 that HK won't fix.

I though about buying an SL-8 and doing a G36 lower, mod the upper to look very close to a G36, but  the cracking lower receiver stops me from doing it.

I love my ArmaLite M4C though.

Hardwarz

HK's future is not the G36, it's the AR based HK416/417 and the HK45 handgun.

Quoted: And whens H&K gonna have one out for the civvie market?

Knowing HK, and considering how long they've already had to do just that, probably never. Which is a shame because I'd probably get one.

That said, I still much prefer the AR-15, for way too many reasons to even list.

Quoted: HK's future is not the G36, it's the AR based HK416/417 and the HK45 handgun.

HK45? Are you speaking of the USP or is HK working on some new handgun for the military?

Quoted: Quoted: HK's future is not the G36, it's the AR based HK416/417 and the HK45 handgun. HK45? Are you speaking of the USP or is HK working on some new handgun for the military?

HK has a prototype of a new USP based .45 caliber handgun.

Quoted: An SL-8 is close, but is still FAR from a G36, especially in the US.  The locking lug system is different.  Also, there has been claims of cracked receivers in the US verson of the SL-8 that HK won't fix. Hardwarz

Was it faulty lowers or where users tried to make it the G36 by modding the lower to accept the large cap mags?

I think the G-36 is in a higher class of weapons than the old AR-15. I would take one if i could. I got the chance to play with them though. The differences are that the G-36 is mainly plastics. Clear magazines are nice and can be clamped together like the Sig 550 magazines. I like the charging handle and forward assist better. I like the side folding stock better because it is more compact. I like the sights better. Wish it had a bolt catch like the AR-15 though. I think they are more reliable. Both weapons are very accurate, but i think the stock G-36 is better than the stock AR-15. The G-36 is German made which I think they have better quality. Oh and HK will never sell one to the civilain market. You can get a clone made from an SL-8, but you are better off with an AR-15.

nobody state side is getting a real g36 anytime soon. The only way I can think of that might be possible is to have a semi G36 imported for LE use only then somehow resold by the LE agency. The parts would then have to be used to build an SBR. SBR's dont have to follow all the parts count rules so every part could theoretically be used, the only thing that would need to be done is to shorten the barrel below 16" (after the tax stamp has come back of course).

I dont know for sure if this would work, but its the only method I can think of.

Quoted: I think the G-36 is in a higher class of weapons than the old AR-15. I would take one if i could. I got the chance to play with them though. The differences are that the G-36 is mainly plastics. Clear magazines are nice and can be clamped together like the Sig 550 magazines. I like the charging handle and forward assist better. I like the side folding stock better because it is more compact. I like the sights better. Wish it had a bolt catch like the AR-15 though. I think they are more reliable. Both weapons are very accurate, but i think the stock G-36 is better than the stock AR-15. The G-36 is German made which I think they have better quality. Oh and HK will never sell one to the civilain market. You can get a clone made from an SL-8, but you are better off with an AR-15.

 As a rebuttal there is ample evidence to suggest that the G36 is one of H and K's worst products and is nothing more than an overpriced piece of shite designed by a nerd with a HALO fixation.

 I guarantee that  NO G36 would outlast some of things I have seen done to an M16.

Quoted: I think the G-36 is in a higher class of weapons than the old AR-15. I would take one if i could. I got the chance to play with them though. The differences are that the G-36 is mainly plastics. Clear magazines are nice and can be clamped together like the Sig 550 magazines. I like the charging handle and forward assist better. I like the side folding stock better because it is more compact. I like the sights better. Wish it had a bolt catch like the AR-15 though. I think they are more reliable. Both weapons are very accurate, but i think the stock G-36 is better than the stock AR-15. The G-36 is German made which I think they have better quality. Oh and HK will never sell one to the civilain market. You can get a clone made from an SL-8, but you are better off with an AR-15.

The G36 has some serious issues with continued full-auto fire, some parts actually melt, or at best, severely warp. It is no more reliable than the AR, despite the magic combination of "H&K" and "piston operated". It's been in the market (militarily speaking) for what? 15 years now? Only Spain and Germany have adopted it, and a handful of police agencies. Whenever it goes toe to toe with the M16/M4 in trials, the M16 wins.

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

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

That right their is the main reason I want one.

I have one SL8 in Germany and several AR15. I have been shooting very often with the G36 and the M16.

For reliability with dirt I consider the G36 and SL8 as the better guns. For everything else the AR15 or M16 wins. I like my AR15s and would never buy again a SL8!

If I could only have one?

No contest. I'd take the AR. I've never witnessed a weapon-specific malfunction other than operator error & or plain old wear and parts are easy to get.

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.

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

I have had alot of experience with the G36 and I have to say it would not be my first choice for a battle rifle, especially over an M16. IMO, the G36 has the best sights and ergonomics of any assault rifle. I really like the way it feels and the optical sights are amazing...provided they don't fail....the backup sights are completely useless and inspire false confidence. If I were going to war I would have an ACOG or Aimpoine with a good quality BUIS....even the best optic can fail or be handicapped by nature. While I like folding stocks, and the one on the G36 is excellent, ejected

cases can bounce off the stock and come back into the mechanism. You would think this would be one in a million, but its not...we were able to replicate it several times. Strangely, they were talking about how the G36 was the most advanced assault weapon on the planet on the Histroy channel when a case bounced off the stock and jammed the gun...Also, the gun seems not to be up to the challenge of continuous automatic fire. Parts melt and break with alarming regularity. IMO, with the exception of the sights and ergonomics this weapon is inferior to the HK33. How HK could screw up an AR180 so badly and screw it up worse with the XM8, I will never know. The UK

evaluated it and found that thier "notorious" L85's were better. DC Metro bought a bunch of G36's and was unsatisfied with them and returned/sold them and they were replaced with AR's. The HK G36 was touted as the best assault weapon on the planet, it surely is not. While it is used by Spain, Portugal and Germany I see it being replaced as soon as something better comes along. I see it as an iterim solution, like the Sig 540 in France. While they are cool and fun to shoot, they are inferior to the M16 and Sig 55x in almost every way. The only time a G36 or 55x trumps an

AR is in the suppressed/SBR role. M16's with short barrels can be unreliable, if they aren't tuned properly...some are just impossible and when suppressing the M16 it gets twice as filthy twice as fast....the operating system of the HK and Sig eliminate this problem and make for better suppressed platforms than the M16. Otherwise, forget the G36....your Bushmaster is better.

Quoted: I have had alot of experience with the G36 and I have to say it would not be my first choice for a battle rifle, especially over an M16. IMO, the G36 has the best sights and ergonomics of any assault rifle. I really like the way it feels and the optical sights are amazing...provided they don't fail....the backup sights are completely useless and inspire false confidence. If I were going to war I would have an ACOG or Aimpoine with a good quality BUIS....even the best optic can fail or be handicapped by nature. While I like folding stocks, and the one on the G36 is excellent, ejected cases can bounce off the stock and come back into the mechanism. You would think this would be one in a million, but its not...we were able to replicate it several times. Strangely, they were talking about how the G36 was the most advanced assault weapon on the planet on the Histroy channel when a case bounced off the stock and jammed the gun...Also, the gun seems not to be up to the challenge of continuous automatic fire. Parts melt and break with alarming regularity. IMO, with the exception of the sights and ergonomics this weapon is inferior to the HK33. How HK could screw up an AR180 so badly and screw it up worse with the XM8, I will never know. The UK evaluated it and found that thier "notorious" L85's were better. DC Metro bought a bunch of G36's and was unsatisfied with them and returned/sold them and they were replaced with AR's. The HK G36 was touted as the best assault weapon on the planet, it surely is not. While it is used by Spain, Portugal and Germany I see it being replaced as soon as something better comes along. I see it as an iterim solution, like the Sig 540 in France. While they are cool and fun to shoot, they are inferior to the M16 and Sig 55x in almost every way. The only time a G36 or 55x trumps an AR is in the suppressed/SBR role. M16's with short barrels can be unreliable, if they aren't tuned properly...some are just impossible and when suppressing the M16 it gets twice as filthy twice as fast....the operating system of the HK and Sig eliminate this problem and make for better suppressed platforms than the M16. Otherwise, forget the G36....your Bushmaster is better.

Thanks for the info.  When the police officer was killed in London a couple of weeks ago, I saw plenty of G36s deployed.  Lumpy posted quite a few pics in the GD forum.  Are these being used by DC Metro?

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

Quoted: Quoted: An SL-8 is close, but is still FAR from a G36, especially in the US.  The locking lug system is different.  Also, there has been claims of cracked receivers in the US verson of the SL-8 that HK won't fix. Hardwarz Was it faulty lowers or where users tried to make it the G36 by modding the lower to accept the large cap mags?

No, even lowers without modification cracked...

I got mine fixed and sold it right away...

The only thing the G36 offers over the AR15/M16 to me is the fact it needs less maintenance. However, I have always considered cleaning to be basic firearms care, so it presents no threat to me. Reguardless of operation system, I will always clean a rifle that has gotten a good round count.

With that said, if the G36 conversions weren't so expensive, I'd love to have one. It would start with a SL8, so I'd have no happy switch to melt the trunions.

Let me think......... AK47!!!

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.

I have one question here. If the G36 is considered to be so inferior to so many weapons including the AR-15, then why has it been the basis for the XM29 and XM8 for so long?

Granted the M29 and M8 has since been suspended, but for other reasons than reliability.

Oh, one more thing. Somebody had said AK-47. As for reliability I know it beats out an AR-15, I havent tried a G36 or an SL-8. In long range battle the AR and probably the G36 would blow the doors off of an AK, but at usual ranges (under 50 yards) and CQB, I would take an AK anyday over an AR.

Quoted: I have one question here. If the G36 is considered to be so inferior to so many weapons including the AR-15, then why has it been the basis for the XM29 and XM8 for so long? Granted the M29 and M8 has since been suspended, but for other reasons than reliability.

Because HK produces the G36, and came up with the concept for both programs. The M29 program was dropped for a reason. I didn't know M8 had been dropped as well? Las I heard it was headed for open competition or something.

BTW, have any of you guys that are touting the G36's superiority ever fired one? If not, try it... You might just change your mind.

The only reason AR15 may out shoot an AK47 outside of 50 yards is the use of optical sights. If you fit AK47 with the same sights, AK beats the hell out of AR15 in both power and reliability from sandy Iraq to muddy Vietnam.

On the subject, AR15 is much cleaner design than G36 which looks way too complicated and bulky. I would take an AR any day over G36

Quoted: The only reason AR15 may out shoot an AK47 outside of 50 yards is the use of optical sights. If you fit AK47 with the same sights, AK beats the hell out of AR15 in both power and reliability from sandy Iraq to muddy Vietnam.

I see you earned your name a whole lot more than I ever did.

Quoted: The only reason AR15 may out shoot an AK47 outside of 50 yards is the use of optical sights. If you fit AK47 with the same sights, AK beats the hell out of AR15 in both power and reliability from sandy Iraq to muddy Vietnam.

is that why i use my AR for 600 yard competitions using iron sights?  I have 3 ARs and 1 AK and know that your statement is not true whatsoever.

That was my stupid opinion, what is yours? I understand my opinion is stupid, but I don't block myself out and I sincerely want to hear others'.

Quoted: Quoted: The only reason AR15 may out shoot an AK47 outside of 50 yards is the use of optical sights. If you fit AK47 with the same sights, AK beats the hell out of AR15 in both power and reliability from sandy Iraq to muddy Vietnam. is that why i use my AR for 600 yard competitions using iron sights?  I have 3 ARs and 1 AK and know that your statement is not true whatsoever.

Quoted: The only reason AR15 may out shoot an AK47 outside of 50 yards is the use of optical sights. If you fit AK47 with the same sights, AK beats the hell out of AR15 in both power and reliability from sandy Iraq to muddy Vietnam.

Have you fired either firearm? The AR beats the hell out of the AK in every way.

The AR is more accurate than the AK. Ask anyone except Video Game players who haven't fired with in real life.

As for more power, The AK has it. OK, I agree with you there. However, the M16 is still able to kill people so it can't be that useless. It's all about shot placement. (So I'm told, I've never shot another person)

And before you play the reliability card: ask some of our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan how reliable their M16s are.

Rusted Ace posted these pics from Iraq:




He said it worked fine.

Quoted: The only reason AR15 may out shoot an AK47 outside of 50 yards is the use of optical sights. If you fit AK47 with the same sights, AK beats the hell out of AR15 in both power and reliability from sandy Iraq to muddy Vietnam.

Apparently you havent shot both, I own and shoot both. I have a DPMS AR, and a preban Polytech AK. I dont need to put optical sights on my AK to know its accuracy, it is for crap. But for the record, adding a sight onto any gun doesnt make it any more accurate, just easier to aim. I have tried it with a sight, and it is still crap past 50 yds. But that is what the AK is designed to be, extremely reliable, but at the expense of accuracy.

I can manage about a 3" group with my AK at 50 yds. My AR does sub 1" at 50 yds. At 200 yds Im lucky the AK even shoots on the paper, Ive gotten sub 2" groups with the AR at 200 yds.

Both excellent weapons, but best in completely different circumstances.

Quoted: Quoted: The only reason AR15 may out shoot an AK47 outside of 50 yards is the use of optical sights. If you fit AK47 with the same sights, AK beats the hell out of AR15 in both power and reliability from sandy Iraq to muddy Vietnam. Have you fired either firearm? The AR beats the hell out of the AK in every way. The AR is more accurate than the AK. Ask anyone except Video Game players who haven't fired with in real life. As for more power, The AK has it. OK, I agree with you there. However, the M16 is still able to kill people so it can't be that useless. It's all about shot placement. (So I'm told, I've never shot another person) And before you play the reliability card: ask some of our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan how reliable their M16s are.

Ive fired both, own both, and known people who have used both in combat.

The AR destroys the AK in accuracy, not even in the same ballpark. As accuracy goes on an Assault Rifle the AR is tough to beat. AR wins hands down on this one.

The AK-47 will beat out an AR in knockdown power, but the AK-74 will not, those two are fairly equal in knockdown. However, in a life or death situation I will take the rifle with the better knockdown anyday. AK-47 is the winner here.

I do agree the M16A2, A3, A4, and M4 are reliable weapons, but not nearly as reliable as an AK. I spoke to a Vietnam Vet who had one in his base camp. They used to leave it out in the rain for weeks. Once after a two week mission they came back and the bolt carrier was rusted shut. After banging the charging handle on a table and knocking it loose they took it out and shot 60 rounds through it. Worked fine. You try leaving an M16 in the rain with no oiling in Vietnam for 2 weeks, then take it out and shoot it. Let me know how it goes.

As a whole for general combat work I would take an AR over the AK. But if I was in Urban combat and CQB (which is most of Iraq combat) then I would prefer an AK. For home defense I would use the AK over the AR anyday.

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.

Quoted: i3.photobucket.com/albums/y65/Beefypeanut/alasad1343wc.jpg He said it worked fine.

That pic makes me Nauseous  

glad it worked though.

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.

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.

+1  

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

They were intoxicated--too much Colt Kool-Aid.

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.

The only time an AK-47 has an edge over the M16 is in the anti-material role. The larger, slower 7.62x39 is a better choice for defeating "stuff" compared to conventional 5.56 rounds. The wound profile caused by the 7.62x39 is comperable to that of a .38 Special....not exactly the epitomy of lethality. Bigger bullet doesn't always mean bigger lethality. Terminal ballistics is a much more complex subject than this. I know you may like your WASR, but it and every other AK is inferior in every way when comared to an M16....except when shooting at a car, where the caliber, not the weapon gives it a slight edge. Granted this is ARFCOM and there is udoubtibly some bias, but I have had experience with just about every 5.56 assault weapon on the planet and I can say with no equivications that the M16 is superior to all of them....thats not bias, thats fact. Don't take my word...just ask the SAS who selected a carbine variant made by Diemaco over all competition.
The M16 is the choice of professionals the world over. The AK is the prefered weapon of third world peasants.....You aren't a peasant are you?

Wasn't this supposed to be an M-16 vs. G-36 thread?  Enough about AK's, I want to hear more HK bashing!  

Quoted: AR = poor for CQB and close combat.

Done much CQB?

Quoted:I do agree the M16A2, A3, A4, and M4 are reliable weapons, but not nearly as reliable as an AK. I spoke to a Vietnam Vet who had one in his base camp. They used to leave it out in the rain for weeks. Once after a two week mission they came back and the bolt carrier was rusted shut. After banging the charging handle on a table and knocking it loose they took it out and shot 60 rounds through it. Worked fine. You try leaving an M16 in the rain with no oiling in Vietnam for 2 weeks, then take it out and shoot it. Let me know how it goes. As a whole for general combat work I would take an AR over the AK. But if I was in Urban combat and CQB (which is most of Iraq combat) then I would prefer an AK. For home defense I would use the AK over the AR anyday. 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.

It's no doubt that the AK is rock solid reliable, but that is due to the fact Kalashnikov designed it to be a maintenance free weapon for those that have little or no knowledge of firearms. People who know what they're doing maintain their weapon, reguardless of what it can or can't do.

As for CQB work, the AK is heavy and slow in comparison. It also lacks the ergonomics which are heavily beneficial, and it lacks the modularity which has become a standard for CQB work. The drop free mags and last shot hold open are also a very large benefit for the close range work.

The only thing I see being beneficial to CQB with an AK is that little bit of extra knock down power, and most of them come with the gimpy midget stock that probably goes better with body armor, assuming you don't have a collapsible stock on your AR carbine.

I love the AK, but I feel it's a classic now, and lacks the modern requirements as everything else continually evolves. Fighting tactics have changed too much, and the AK has become out dated for that reason.

Quoted: The only reason AR15 may out shoot an AK47 outside of 50 yards is the use of optical sights. If you fit AK47 with the same sights, AK beats the hell out of AR15 in both power and reliability from sandy Iraq to muddy Vietnam.

Riiight.  You find that out on your Xbox?

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.