Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 4/10/2007 6:57:01 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/10/2007 6:57:51 AM EDT by RRA0211]
I've got a 91 Clone on the way and I picked it up just because the mags are so cheap and easy to find. But why do you guys like this rifle over the other common Battle Rifles?

Also can someone tell me the illegality of having a Full auto BCG in this? Or is there a difference
Link Posted: 4/10/2007 7:39:02 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/10/2007 9:30:53 AM EDT
Having FA bolt carriers in HK 9X guns is fine.

If I had my 'druthers in a real world, bad-bush, teeth,hair and, eyeballs kinda situation... I'd go with an FAL
Link Posted: 4/10/2007 4:58:52 PM EDT
I went from a M14 clone, to a PTR-91..Why? Accuracy is as good if not better than the M14 clone I had, Mags, as you already know are dirt cheap, and reliable,($2.00 apeice almost new,vs $20-40.00 apeice, you do the math) Parts...Available, and also very reasonably priced something M14parts of any kind anymore, are not. Optics are not hard to mount, and there are a few stock/handguard options also available. The only thing a PTR needs out of the box is a trigger job, I'm getting one done, this is also reasonable ($51 return shipping included) Ar-.308's are very accurate rifles. I briefly considered buying one before I bought the PTR, But the big drawback for me was the price of mags, and I'm not too sure what AR-15 parts interchange with the lower if any at all, Availabilty of spare parts is important to me, and that's another reason I passed. Armalite has gotten their Ar10 mags down to about $25 apeice, DPMS however, theirs are $40.00 or more apeice..not what I call a bargin.. The Egro's of the HK types is'nt for everybody, But I don't find them a problem, I'm real happy with my PTR.
Link Posted: 4/10/2007 5:12:40 PM EDT
I think they all have their plusses and minuses.

Some are better accuracy (M14, G3), some have milder recoil (M14 on SEMI), some are more user serviceable (G3, FAL), etc etc.

I've shot them all FA. My favorite is the G3. Slow ROF, better recoil impulse. M14 is brutal with the happy switch on. Some of the FAL's aren't too bad, some are.

Cheap mags make a difference (to me at least)- the Taiwan T57's are good M14 mags, G3 mags are a dime a dozen, so are FAL's.

One thing that makes me nervous about the M14 is the occasional OOB.... I haven't seen that with FAL's or G3's (yet). They are sweet semi shooters though.
Link Posted: 4/10/2007 6:10:38 PM EDT
I've got a Standard HK91, meaning that it is fully stock and no enhancements. It's a great shooting gun. I also have an AR-10TLW. That thing redefines accuracy. But it's an unfair comparison since it is a $2,000 rifle with an $800 Leupold LR scope. I'd like to get a M-4 style AR-10 but got a little sidetracked with the recent SW5 purchase and current SBR applications.

I think the recoil and controllability goes to the AR-10, with that big buffer spring and tube... and the HK, with the delayed roller blah blah blah. The M14 and FALs that I've shot both kicked like a mule. I've been meaning to shoot my FAL again but haven't gotten around to it recently.

Mags, as otheres have said, are dirt cheap on the HK. That is such a big plus. But I'm not sure I'd classify the parts as inexpensive. Although I haven't really priced them recently so I can't truly say one way or the other.

I think I'd lean toward the AR-10 or HK91. They both seem to be what I like.
Link Posted: 4/10/2007 7:32:04 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/10/2007 7:33:22 PM EDT by IhateLiberals]
I have owned the following: ar10 maxed out with every option you can think of, a ptr-91, and a FAL. Here is what I currently own: PTR-91.
The AR10 was the best group shooter out of all of them; however she was very picky about what she would shoot. It had to be high dollar rounds and no surplus .308. The FAL was decent shooter, I like the ability to adjust the gas system, had cheap mags as well, but was just God aweful heavy. The ptr-91, good groupings, cheap mags, lots of available accesories and configurations. Mine has the 16 inch barrel and does feel lighter than the other two.
The best advice, First: know what you want to use it for. If you want accuracy, a sniper set up bolt gun is the way too go. If you want a battle rifle, then FAL or 91 type is the way to go. Second handle them before you buy them. See if you like weight, hand controls, ergonomics of each. Third look at cost; including parts, mags, accesories that you may want to add later.

If you are still unable to decide, then follow the ARFCOM tradition and get them all!
feel free to IM me or email if I can add anymore insight or if you have questions.
Link Posted: 4/10/2007 7:49:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By osprey21:
Having FA bolt carriers in HK 9X guns is fine.

If I had my 'druthers in a real world, bad-bush, teeth,hair and, eyeballs kinda situation... I'd go with an FAL


+1

I'm going to agree with Osprey. I own all these weapons and if I had to choose a single go to .308 it would be my Para Congo. It is built like a tank and extremely reliable. Mind you I love my M1A, Hk, and AR10 but for me the FAL offers what I'm looking for in a go to weapon.
Link Posted: 4/10/2007 7:58:41 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/10/2007 7:59:21 PM EDT by grizzlyarms]
because the hk91 is just plain FUN!!! it throws brass about 30-50 feet straight out, it bounces you around during rapid fire without rattling your teeth, and it leaves fancy stripes on the spent brass.

also ergonomics are better than the FAL or m14. (for me anyway).
Link Posted: 4/11/2007 6:47:39 AM EDT
I have alway been vary fond of the H&k 91 since i bought my first preban model way back in 1983. The rifle was first class, stampings & cosmetic details and accurate shooting offered more for the dollar when compaired to the other 308 battle rifles of the same time period.

The M1A and never really tripped my trigger, just one more old GI design that failed and i hated wood stocks. The AR10 has always seemed a little overated and never really took off in the military until recently with Armalite and Stoner playing the retro updated models we see curently in the market arena.

The PTR-91 is sweet clone varient and in my humble opinion is right up there with the original Hk. Cheap price magazines have been a big selling point with German surplus or new mags under 5.00 each beats them all by ten seconds.

The original FN LAR is a close second. DSA has done a good job by making prices for this rifle accessible for everyone. The quality is top shelf and magazines can be aquired fairly cheap if you shop around, I keep grabbing my PTR-91K short profile carbine. Has all the advantages of 308 in a Hk93 size to keep it effective in the field and fun to shoot without all the damm weight.
Link Posted: 4/12/2007 7:51:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By grizzlyarms:
it leaves fancy stripes on the spent brass.



Those are racing stripes.
Link Posted: 4/13/2007 6:09:14 AM EDT
I like them all, each has its own pros and cons, also like the BM-59, Galil...etc

Bill
Link Posted: 4/13/2007 9:43:26 AM EDT
I chose a HK91 simply becasue I have a registered sear, and the HK91 is a nice host to have fun with.
Link Posted: 4/13/2007 3:02:25 PM EDT
Hmmm....

Why pick one over the other..................

HK.

Because I LIKE it more.
Link Posted: 4/14/2007 11:46:45 AM EDT
Have the HK91 and the SR-25. Have shot several M1As but only a couple of FALs (so I am not one to talk about them).
The 91: I like it for its utter reliability and (at this time) cheap mags.
As a reloader, I dislike that it trashs the brass, and throws them 25 yrds away
The charging system took some time to get used to, but it is "ok" now.
SR-25: Like that all the controls are in the AR15 position
Love the accurary
Dislike the mag prices
M1A: Like the charging system
Like the sighting system
Don't care for the conventional stock setup prefer a in-line bore setup

Just my $0.02
Link Posted: 4/16/2007 2:11:05 AM EDT
Its very much persional preference. All have thier strengths and weaknesses. All out accuracy goes to the AR10, due to the DI operating system. Equal too or slightly behind the AR10 would be the HK91. Both the HK and AR don't have gas pistons or operating mechanisms which impinge on the barrel, reducing accuracy.FAL's and M1A's can be made accurate, but by virture of thier operating system they are potentially less accurate.FAL's have a tendency to string with changes in magazine capacity and M1A's have both a piston and op rod impinging on the barrel which causes negative harmonics. M14's are the least accurate, but can be made MOA guns but not without compromising reliability.

IMO the HK91 series is the best choice as its among the most reliable/accurate and parts/magazines are everywhere and affordible. The FAL is very much the Wests answer to the AK. Its ultra reliable but by no means a precision rifle. Typically, civilian versiosn of these rifles are more accurate than thier gvt counter parts. If you think an African FAL shoots 2 MOA, you are stoned. The average MOA for Anniston M14's is between 4-9 MOA. 4 is the norm for these battle rifles...

The biggest complaint about the HK is excessive recoil, especially with the collapsible stock....its almost as bad as shooting a 12 gauge. Accuracy varies depending on model but my PTR91A1 shoots around 1 MOA with 168grn TAP and shoots around 1.5 with Federal 150grn JSP's. The HK91 also has very usable sights, less so than the AR10 or M1A but more so than the non para FAL. I prefer battle sights with less adjustments as they are more "idiot" proof. Only target rifles need A2 or M1A style sights.

For all out reliability the operating system and adjustible gas regulator gives the FAL an advantage but the HK G3 is almost as popular as the FAL and is probably just as reliable most of the time. The HK represents the best compromise between reliablity and accuracy. I would love a DSA FAL but PTR 91's have all the accuracy with out the inflated price.

I new I wanted a .308 battle rifle and after all the research I did, the HK91 was the clear winner and thus I got a PTR91A1.
Link Posted: 4/16/2007 4:41:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Ryno_the_wyno:
Its very much persional preference. All have thier strengths and weaknesses. All out accuracy goes to the AR10, due to the DI operating system. Equal too or slightly behind the AR10 would be the HK91. Both the HK and AR don't have gas pistons or operating mechanisms which impinge on the barrel, reducing accuracy.FAL's and M1A's can be made accurate, but by virture of thier operating system they are potentially less accurate.FAL's have a tendency to string with changes in magazine capacity and M1A's have both a piston and op rod impinging on the barrel which causes negative harmonics. M14's are the least accurate, but can be made MOA guns but not without compromising reliability.

IMO the HK91 series is the best choice as its among the most reliable/accurate and parts/magazines are everywhere and affordible. The FAL is very much the Wests answer to the AK. Its ultra reliable but by no means a precision rifle. Typically, civilian versiosn of these rifles are more accurate than thier gvt counter parts. If you think an African FAL shoots 2 MOA, you are stoned. The average MOA for Anniston M14's is between 4-9 MOA. 4 is the norm for these battle rifles...

The biggest complaint about the HK is excessive recoil, especially with the collapsible stock....its almost as bad as shooting a 12 gauge. Accuracy varies depending on model but my PTR91A1 shoots around 1 MOA with 168grn TAP and shoots around 1.5 with Federal 150grn JSP's. The HK91 also has very usable sights, less so than the AR10 or M1A but more so than the non para FAL. I prefer battle sights with less adjustments as they are more "idiot" proof. Only target rifles need A2 or M1A style sights.

For all out reliability the operating system and adjustible gas regulator gives the FAL an advantage but the HK G3 is almost as popular as the FAL and is probably just as reliable most of the time. The HK represents the best compromise between reliablity and accuracy. I would love a DSA FAL but PTR 91's have all the accuracy with out the inflated price.

I new I wanted a .308 battle rifle and after all the research I did, the HK91 was the clear winner and thus I got a PTR91A1.


Hmm.. well, I think you are a bit off with regards to FAL accuracy vs M14 accuracy, in my experience most M14's are way more accurate than most FAL's. That being said most HK91 style rifles are comperable to M14's IMO. I think it fundamentally has to do with the sights on the FAL being shitty, as well as the trigger.

In any event, felt recoil is a more personal issue. I personally have little to no problem with HK recoil with either fixed or collapsible stocks (though its a bit worse with the collapsible). The FAL on the other hand beats the living shit out of my cheek with its recoil. And the softest recoiling rifle for me is the M14. So take that FWIW.
Link Posted: 4/18/2007 3:57:11 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/18/2007 3:57:30 AM EDT by myitinaw]
Boston's Gun Bible has an excellent
review of the above mentioned
battle rifles. A must read!

Link Posted: 4/19/2007 10:48:58 PM EDT
I have a preban SA M1A and a HK-91 (factory rifle). I will own a FAL sooner or later. If I could only have one it would be the HK. The sights are awesome and once adjusted are foolproof. It's equally as accurate as my NM M1A that's glass bedded. It's reliable as all heck and the only rifle I own that has been truely 100%...as in no FTFeed's at all. Stone cold reliability. Cheap mags. If I was of age when the 91's were being imported and I knew the future I would have bought thousands of them....
Link Posted: 4/19/2007 10:58:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Ralph:
I went from a M14 clone, to a PTR-91..Why? Accuracy is as good if not better than the M14 clone I had.


Absolutely false.

The M-14 is far superior in accuracy than the FAL and G3.
Link Posted: 4/20/2007 10:55:04 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/20/2007 11:22:03 AM EDT by cms81586]

Originally Posted By Hemi-Cuda:

Originally Posted By Ralph:
I went from a M14 clone, to a PTR-91..Why? Accuracy is as good if not better than the M14 clone I had.


Absolutely false.

The M-14 is far superior in accuracy than the FAL and G3.


Do you even own either? ...or are you just talking out of your ass again like with the "7.62x39 is a POS round". Let's see..a glass bedded NM M1A shooting 1 1/2" groups and HK-91 shooting 1 1/2 -2" goups. Accuracy looks same to me. The poster you quoted says he gets equal accuracy out of his too yet you say that's "absolutely false". Where do you get your "far superior" bullshit? Armchair Commando Magazine...



Link Posted: 4/20/2007 2:39:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/20/2007 3:36:28 PM EDT by BB]

Originally Posted By RRA0211:
I've got a 91 Clone on the way and I picked it up just because the mags are so cheap and easy to find. But why do you guys like this rifle over the other common Battle Rifles?

It shoots 308, it's cheap, it's modular, and it's black. Whats not to like?


Originally Posted By Hemi-Cuda:

Originally Posted By Ralph:
I went from a M14 clone, to a PTR-91..Why? Accuracy is as good if not better than the M14 clone I had.


Absolutely false.

The M-14 is far superior in accuracy than the FAL and G3.

Nah, not at all. I've had several of each, I used an M14 in the service, M1As, FALs and G3 clones of all types as a civie; the G3 and the M14 and the FAL are all about the same. Now, the sights and triggers and ergos are a different story, but thats the shooters problem not the guns. Once you start getting into DMR setups the M14 and G3 pull away from the FAL. My SG/1 is every bit as accurate as my M1A/M21; maybe not at 1000YDS since the barrel is shorter, but inside 700 it is. The AR10 has them all beat in accuracy but reliability wise isn't even close.
Link Posted: 4/20/2007 4:04:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/20/2007 4:05:15 PM EDT by Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted By cms81586:

Originally Posted By Hemi-Cuda:

Originally Posted By Ralph:
I went from a M14 clone, to a PTR-91..Why? Accuracy is as good if not better than the M14 clone I had.


Absolutely false.

The M-14 is far superior in accuracy than the FAL and G3.


Do you even own either? ...or are you just talking out of your ass again like with the "7.62x39 is a POS round". Let's see..a glass bedded NM M1A shooting 1 1/2" groups and HK-91 shooting 1 1/2 -2" goups. Accuracy looks same to me. The poster you quoted says he gets equal accuracy out of his too yet you say that's "absolutely false". Where do you get your "far superior" bullshit? Armchair Commando Magazine...

i2.photobucket.com/albums/y7/cms81586/IMAG0002.jpg

i2.photobucket.com/albums/y7/cms81586/Collection2.jpg


I've shot all three and I've owned two of the three, and none of them are as accurate as the M-14 especially before scoping.

Personally I think all 3 are obsolete next to the AR-10, but none the less the M-14 is superior.

Second, 7.62x39 IS a POS round but GJ hijacking the thread.
Top Top