User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 4:07:28 AM EDT
[#1]
We forgive scarecrow, he can't help it, he is swiss and doesn't like hard facts, just BANKS! LOL
Hey is the Swiss Guard ever going to get cammo funny suits? LOL |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 4:10:50 AM EDT
[#2]
We forgive scarecrow, he can't help it, he is Swiss and doesn't like hard facts, just BANKS! LOL
Hey is the Swiss Guard ever going to get (cammo) funny suits? LOL |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 4:24:08 AM EDT
[#3]
The Swiss non combat? rifles are very attractive and present a very nice way to display flowers coming out of thier muzzles. LOL
Showing a well known pic taken of what it takes in over pressures to destroy an M16, is typical of the BS that the Swiss will go to to justify thier ineptness in making a real combat weapon that a Combatant country would use. The Swiss do love their neutrality so they can have thier banks safe from invading armys. LOL The facts of history are there, deny all you want. Jack |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 4:28:27 AM EDT
[#4]
Quoted: The Swiss non combat? rifles are very attractive and present a very nice way to display flowers coming out of thier muzzles. LOL Showing a well known pic taken of what it takes in over pressures to destroy an M16, is typical of the BS that the Swiss will go to to justify thier ineptness in making a real combat weapon that a Combatant country would use. The Swiss do love their neutrality so they can have thier banks safe from invading armys. LOL The facts of history are there, deny all you want. Jack I think the fact that most of the surrounding countries, that could invade, did their banking with them and the leadership of those same countries hid the money their money in Swiss banks has more to do with it than anything else. I had a couple of Swiss Artillery Officers in my Advance Course Class, they keep going on how historical sites couldn't be bombed and how us Americans were so barbaric for thinking winning out weighed those considerations. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 4:50:37 AM EDT
[#5]
Quoted: Colt-653: [url]http://www.quarterbore.com/images/kaboom012.jpg[/url] I am interested in the picture of an M16A2 blow-up. First, my condolences to the family. Secondly, it looks to be a commercial semi-auto (look at hammer nose and rear of bolt carrier). Is this correct? The cartridge case apparently failed and gas came back filling the carrier's void splitting it down the middle and then this energy split the upper receiver as well as it expanded. I have seem many GI weapons blow from having a projectile stuck in the bore and suffer catrastropic damage, but nothing like this. So I am going to assume that the upper receiver and bolt carrier were castings, not mil-spec forgings or tool steel turnings with proper heat treat like carriers are supposed to be. I think this because I have never seen a bolt carrier fail in this manner, even in rifles that blew and although the resultant upper receiver "greatly expanded", they did not split into two pieces. Any information concerning this event would be greatly appreciated. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 5:21:39 AM EDT
[#6]
Any information concerning this event would be greatly appreciated. Coldblue, I know that picture and story has been out there awhile and may be archived somewhere. I may be mixing up my "blowed up real good" stories; but I believe what happened in that case is the owner mistakenly loaded a .223 case with a faster burning pistol powder. If I've got that mixed up, hopefully someone can correct me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 5:51:50 AM EDT
[#7]
3rdtk, maybe your too stupid to notice the location under my post count, but its Canada, making me Canadian, not Swiss.
Its not like my signature gives that away either! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 5:57:13 AM EDT
[#8]
Though the picture I gave was of an AR with improperly made ammo, I submit this link to show that even M16's blow up:
http://www.quarterbore.com/ar15m16/ar15kaboom2.htm And here another AR15, this time stock ammo: http://www.quarterbore.com/ar15m16/ar15kaboom3.htm |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 11:58:52 AM EDT
[#9]
Scarecrow, your not the same teenager that was banned awhile back are you?
C4 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 1:10:36 PM EDT
[#10]
Quoted: No one fucks with the swiss because the last time someone did they found out how insane Swiss soldiers can be. The only people that don't fuck with the Swiss are chairborne military history dorks that like to babble about how much ass the Swiss kicked ages ago. The same goes for the Finns- I couldn't care less how many people a Finnish sniper killed 60 years ago. The reason the rest of us don't fuck with these countries is that we don't need to/can't find 'em on a map. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 1:15:04 PM EDT
[#11]
When I was a commander, I had an M16 blow up on one of my Marines, it again like normal was caused by faulty ammunition. About a month later that lot was code H, not allow it to be shot anymore.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 1:15:59 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted: Hey guys..I'd like to thank y'all for coming forward with facts and support. Special Thanx to: model927, 3rdtk, mikepenn33, Colt-653, Adam_White, Ahab and SMGLee. To the rest of you folks, I didn't post this info to be divisive. I understand that questioning the reliability of anyone's favorite firearm, can be heresy, and that was not the intent. I felt it was important information that I should share with folks of 'mutual interests'. My sources are reliable, or else they cease to be my sources. I'm not above 'retraction' if necessary. And to those of you....well, let's say , to those "hard-convincers": QCMGR: Man...next time be a little easier on me. Still a cool flag. And, oh, no crow eating necessary. Hoplite: Nice horn. UncleSAM: This will help my post count. Apology accepted, no offense taken. Thanx. Ridge: I think my source is correct and he appreciates your input. Swingset: Liked your input...Imaginary friend?, that's original. I'll be sure to ask him if he dreamt this all up. Absolut: See Swingset above. Oh, yea...HeavyMetal....you are correct! I forgot to mention. Credibility increases dramatically when statements are supported by AR15.com bigwigs (however controversial they may be [;)])! Despite the brouhaha stirred up regarding the Sig. This has proved to be a very educational and interesting thread. Thanks for sharing it with us. I for one,in the future, will sit up and take notice of Delta6's posts! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 1:25:41 PM EDT
[#13]
While not having chimed in before now, I too have enjoyed most of the info presented here. I would like to continue enjoying it so please refrain from personal attacks, profanity, name calling etc. Thats a sure way to get an otherwise very informative thread... LOCKED.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 2:49:59 PM EDT
[#14]
Scarecrow, everyone knows your in Cannada, but Swiss have immigrated there too. Since you want to deny historical Swiss facts, and attack me for pointing these things out, it's only fair to figure if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and diffinately sounds like a duck, it must be in this case, a Swiss. LOL
By the way, Chillian armed forces did not adopt the SG rifle, they bought a small quantity to guard the coffee beans. LOL Jack |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 3:47:52 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: While not having chimed in before now, I too have enjoyed most of the info presented here. I would like to continue enjoying it so please refrain from personal attacks, profanity, name calling etc. Thats a sure way to get an otherwise very informative thread... LOCKED. -------------- Thank you, Mr. Moderator! This started out as a very interesting thread of real value to just about everyone, whether they're in gummint, industry or just an avid firearms enthusiast. Now let's get back on topic! If you've got something constructive to add about the topic at hand, namely the purposted demise of the XM-8...sound off! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 5:26:50 PM EDT
[#16]
Please dont blame Scarscrow I think he's from Quebec - it's genetic...
Interesting thread - mirrors what I have heard from others testing. I must confess to being a AR/M groupie, and sold on the design. However I have had a few C series weapons go over 5k in one day - no problems. I guess the G36 and Sig might have some issues with that. SIG does not chrome line their barrels and the 551's and 552's can go to hell in a handbasket quick. Scarecrow, the MWS hanguards you deride, have accessories on them that keep us alive - the fact than any 'next gen' system does not have that ability are a testimony that they are not combat designed weapons. Oh and I can swap uppers in a heartbeat to go from precision to CQB... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 6:42:20 PM EDT
[#17]
THE XM8 IS NOT A SOLDIERS WEAPON, IT IS A POLITICAL WEAPON SINCE POLITIC'S AND $ ARE THE ONLY REAL THINGS BEHIND IT!
VERY BAD SHOOTIN, JACK |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 7:10:04 PM EDT
[#18]
3rdtk said
[b]"VERY BAD SHOOTIN, JACK"[/b] Hahahahahahahahahahahaha! I dont know if that was smart or cool to say, but that was funny as heck! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 7:19:53 PM EDT
[#19]
MODEL927
WTF DUDE????? Where did you get that SH*T that my 36C had TRUNION MOVEMENT when exposed to extreme heat???. (B.S.) The problem with the "C"'s were that the op-rod was braking at the weakest point on the rod do to extreme heat exposer, Called HK about it, they over-nighted the NEW PIP OP-ROD to me and she works great now, No problems. She's been rented out 4 times sense then, On the other hand, The "K" i had to send to HK, Not necessary do to the "minor melting" around the barrel nut, I COULD HAVE LIVED WITH THAT. But when i change out the barrel for a demo, (They wanted to test a 36 HBAR) the damn reciever cracked while changing barrels back. THE EXTREME HEAT THAT MELTED THAT PART OF THE RECIEVER ALSO MADE THE PLASIC BRITTLE, In-turn causing it to crack,(DAMN)!!!!! So they have her now. " I'M WAITING FOR THE WORD FROM HK NOW " More to come. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 8:23:40 PM EDT
[#20]
Thanks for clearing that up LarryG36.
Now we know the facts. I assume MODEL927 was trying to recall what was read on the HK forum, as was I. His account was pretty much how I understood it too, but It was awhile ago and when I tried to go back (to refresh my memory) and find the thread it must have been removed for some reason. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2003 9:46:17 PM EDT
[#21]
Scarecrow,
I've shot just about every smallarm that's out there, including the Sig 550 series as produced by Sig(At that time), if I remember it was in excess of 1500+rounds at a foreign weapons familiarization fire back in 1999/2000 sponsored by some guys that looked a lot like G Gordan Liddy . I'm relating the problems that were encountered by several test groups that include but are not limited to the following: NSW(aka US NAVY SEALS), CAG(aka Delta) Army SF units, as well as several foreign countries. Several LE agencies in the US and abroad have also had problems with the HK G36 and Sig 550 Don't think that certain groups don't test out new toys. Not only are items tested as part of familiarization fire courses, but also to see if the newest toy improves upon the toys we have in our armories. You never know when we may have to infiltrate Switzerland to steal the chocolate, need to make sure we can use the Sig 550 if we get caught behind the lines. Have fun with your Sig 550, at least I don't live in a Socialist state that tells me what I can and can't do. I have the freedom to select and use the best firearms system out there. If it was the Sig 550 series I'd save up and buy one of the prebans out there, but I don't have to, my Colt M4 copy does everything it's supposed to and with the push of two pins and some simple tools I can reconfigure it any way I want at any time. I'm kind of tired of the arm chair commandos and [red]"EXPERTS"[/red] out there that seem to know everything about everything. I know [red]"just a little"[/red] about firearms, kind of been my business for the last 10+ years. Enough said, enjoy this site for the entertainment and information it provides and stop making everything into a flame fest. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2003 7:40:55 AM EDT
[#22]
I don't understand. Why would the US test the SIG in the first place. The rifle has been around since 1983. After 20 years why would they just now get around to a rifle that offers no improvements to the current inventory of M16A2, A3, A4, and the SOPMOD, not to mention the .30 cal rifles still in use. It makes no sense to evaluate the SIG. If it were for comparison purposes then why compare the XM8 to the SIG and not the current M16/M4 series that it is being developed to replace. No sense...?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2003 9:51:42 AM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: The same goes for the Finns- I couldn't care less how many people a Finnish sniper killed 60 years ago. The reason the rest of us don't fuck with these countries is that we don't need to/can't find 'em on a map. Ahab, you don't want to go there... I show respect to your country and its history. I would apreciate if you could do the same. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2003 7:36:07 PM EDT
[#24]
Quoted: I don't understand. Why would the US test the SIG in the first place. The rifle has been around since 1983. After 20 years why would they just now get around to a rifle that offers no improvements to the current inventory of M16A2, A3, A4, and the SOPMOD, not to mention the .30 cal rifles still in use. It makes no sense to evaluate the SIG. If it were for comparison purposes then why compare the XM8 to the SIG and not the current M16/M4 series that it is being developed to replace. No sense...? IMHO, testing against other designs is for validation of the current design - in order to prove that the M4/M16 design is the pinnacle of current SA weapons. There are a huge number of detractors to the M4/M16 series so it makes sense to CYA in that respect. Not only the M16 platform has evolved from years of expeirience and it is a wise to move to consider a variety of curent models to gte a baseline for performance. IF the M4A1PIP/SCAR-L/whatever is shown to be more reliable, egonomic and accurate than the competing designs then it puts to rest to bandering (blathering?) howls of the wolves outside the M4/M16 camp. Not tryign to start a flame, but I fail to see what a C3 dealers experience with a range gun relates to operational guns? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2003 7:53:14 PM EDT
[#25]
From what I've read on countless sources, the G36 is one of the most reliable assault rifles available, that never needs cleaning or anything. I also don't believe that the plastic is not durable enough...if any stock is going to break on an HK gun, it is going to be the retracting stock on the A5 or similar HK stock, the G36 stock seems really solid to me. The polymers used on the G36 are really solid shit, probably less likely to break than metal is likely to crack. And about the charging handle breaking on the G36....I dont know how the heck that would happen, first of all that part is steel, second of all it's shrouded by the carry handle so the only force that's going to be applied to it is the force of your hand pulling it back and the spring going forward, which really isn't enough force to break anything. Now, I'm not saying the G36/G36E is perfect, because the optics suck...it would be way better to have a modular RIS rail on top like the UMP.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2003 2:15:01 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: The polymers used on the G36 are really solid shit, probably less likely to break than metal is likely to crack. Is this a joke or are you serious? How many cracked recievers have you seen on M4s? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2003 3:24:01 AM EDT
[#27]
If the gov't put a solicitation out for interested companies to submit to a gov't test program that meet certain criteria, the gov't ar obliged to put it in the program. Each weapon are put thru a pre designated series hurdles of evaluations that they must pass. When a weapon fails a particular hurdle, but can keep operating it can be left in the competition, if the weapon can not be repaired by the shooter/average soldier, in the field, the weapon is out. The manufacturer is fully aware of any problems and reported results. If someone wants to know what happened, ask the manufacturer, the gov't testers are not usually allowed to get specific. Therefore if you get some info, consider yourself lucky, don't shoot the messanger, go to the manufacturer, and maby they will tell you how bad their stuff performed. Yea shure.
The G-36 is not rugged and has had many reported failures in the German military. PLASTIC REAR SIGHT. PLASTIC, UNDERSIZE DOVETAIL RAIL ACROSS THE TOP THAT ACCEPTS NOTHING AND WILL NOT HOLD OR REPEAT ZERO. Add those to the other many serious reported problems. The G-36 works great full of water, so what, most soldiers are not fighting under water. What should we do, set up under water shooting ranges? Jack |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2003 5:06:33 AM EDT
[#28]
Quoted: I don't understand. Why would the US test the SIG in the first place. The rifle has been around since 1983. After 20 years why would they just now get around to a rifle that offers no improvements to the current inventory of M16A2, A3, A4, and the SOPMOD, not to mention the .30 cal rifles still in use. It makes no sense to evaluate the SIG. If it were for comparison purposes then why compare the XM8 to the SIG and not the current M16/M4 series that it is being developed to replace. No sense...? There is a longstanding need for a weapon that the operator can reduce in overall length (O.L.)in some situations. And I don't mean the 3" or so that an m4 stock slides closed, but a real folding stock that reduces O.L. by about a third. So when an option presents itself with a 1/3 folder combined with a short barrel, then you have a package the M4 can't compete with (for size anyway). Also the option presents it self (do the math) to combine a 1/3 folder, with a longer barrel. For example, the 3" or so you can't "reduce" off the m4 can be added to barrel length of a true folder and still be the same O.L. as a "colasped" M4. Problem is, |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2003 5:14:49 AM EDT
[#29]
Plastics and polymers derive their strength from flexibility. Though a polymer may be stronger than steel, its melting point is much lower than the steel's. Polymer is also easy to substantively damage if it hits the wrong type of surface.
Thus you must guard against using too much polymer in your designs. Polymers can also deform over time. Holes can elongate and become misshapen, parts can bend out of spec, and over time they can become brittle when exposed to the elements. Steel and aluminum alloys generally have much higher melting points than any weapon can even come close to. (Ever seen a melted AR barrel? Not often, because Chrome-Moly steel melts at some ungodly hot temperature that is nigh unto impossible to attain without a commercial furnace...) The alloys can also be heat treated to improve their strength and long term durability, allowing lighter and lighter alloys to be used all the time. Polymers can be a great help to making parts of the weapon lighter and more durable, but I really don't think that the weapon can have more than a 20% polymer content. (This is about what the Glock has, 20% plastic, 80% steel) I think the G36 is an attempt to use way too much plastic. Polymers do not bear the stresses unique to firing a weapon well. The firing process is unique because the pressures go from none to 50-60,000 PSI almost instantly, and then drop right back to zero. This is a mighty difficult pressure curve to deal with for any material..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2003 7:16:29 AM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: Quoted: I don't understand. Why would the US test the SIG in the first place. The rifle has been around since 1983. After 20 years why would they just now get around to a rifle that offers no improvements to the current inventory of M16A2, A3, A4, and the SOPMOD, not to mention the .30 cal rifles still in use. It makes no sense to evaluate the SIG. If it were for comparison purposes then why compare the XM8 to the SIG and not the current M16/M4 series that it is being developed to replace. No sense...? There is a longstanding need for a weapon that the operator can reduce in overall length (O.L.)in some situations. And I don't mean the 3" or so that an m4 stock slides closed, but a real folding stock that reduces O.L. by about a third. So when an option presents itself with a 1/3 folder combined with a short barrel, then you have a package the M4 can't compete with (for size anyway). Also the option presents it self (do the math) to combine a 1/3 folder, with a longer barrel. For example, the 3" or so you can't "reduce" off the m4 can be added to barrel length of a true folder and still be the same O.L. as a "colasped" M4. Problem is, bcw, I'm not buying that...if the military liked the M4, and all they wanted was a gun that had a folding stock, why not just install one of those folding/retractable stocks on the M4? The LR300 demonstrates this well. They would not switch to an entirely different design of gun unless they had other reasons. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2003 9:09:26 AM EDT
[#31]
Quoted: Not trying to start a flame, but I fail to see what a C3 dealers experience with a range gun relates to operational guns? It's probably true that no operatinal guns will see the same use as a C3 rental, but it does establish a weakness that a polymer rifle has compared to aluminum. It also says something about the longevity of this rifle. I used 25yr old M16A1s in basic. Considering the weakening and heat effects on the G36, I doubt they would last 25 years. In addition (and this is total conjecture), the testing process for fielding these rifles, I would assume would be very stringent. Much more stringent than it would be in operation. So my guess was possibly some of the failures that were experienced were similar to those seen with the C3 range guns. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2003 12:09:07 PM EDT
[#32]
BTW, I wasn't claiming to be an expert on the subject...I have never fired a G36 and I don't have a lot of experience firing an AR either, I have only read things. But I do own some real G36K parts, including the carry handle/optical sight and forearm, which seem solid to me.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2003 12:22:36 PM EDT
[#33]
Ridge,
Actually I had never thought of it that way. I was just hypothesizing that the rental likely do not get dirty (mud/snow/sand etc.) get jumped, rappelled etc. The range gun might give a round count indicator but they will be babied... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2003 1:40:18 PM EDT
[#34]
[:D] KevinB, I was thinking the opposite (as far as shooting goes, lots of rounds in a short period of time)!
I now see your original point! True, they probably don't see the nonfiring side of rifle durablility as you mentioned (So that adds another dimension). From what I hear/read LarryG36 doesn't baby his guns and they see ALOT of full auto use. He could clarify my statements (only based on what I've read and not first-hand experience). |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2003 2:13:44 PM EDT
[#35]
Back to the original discussion of XM8, isn't it supporsed to be the intermediate step between the present and OICW. If you read this presentation [url]http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2003smallarms/smith.ppt[/url] and the ARMY times article, XM8 and XM25 is the intermediate step until OICW is ready. It looks like someone trying to convert a not so successful program (OICW) into two not so sucessful programs (XM8 and XM29).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2003 3:31:25 PM EDT
[#36]
Quoted: Back to the original discussion of XM8, isn't it supporsed to be the intermediate step between the present and OICW. If you read this presentation [url]http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2003smallarms/smith.ppt[/url] and the ARMY times article, XM8 and XM25 is the intermediate step until OICW is ready. It looks like someone trying to convert a not so successful program (OICW) into two not so sucessful programs (XM8 and XM29). ------------ I believe your assessment is the correct one. Remember too, we are dealing with government bureaucrats and senior officers who have hitched their stars so to speak, to these programs. Success (e.g. fielding or recouping some OICW $$ already spent) = promotion. By fielding the kinetic energy component of the OICW program in the form of the XM-8 acomplishes this bureaucratic imperative. Then, out of the blue they'll have a requirement for the area weapon component, at which time some bright bulb will suggest integrating the two systems. In the end, we're still stuck with OICW. That's the plan. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2003 5:09:34 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted: BTW, I wasn't claiming to be an expert on the subject...I have never fired a G36 and I don't have a lot of experience firing an AR either, I have only read things. But I do own some real G36K parts, including the carry handle/optical sight and forearm, which seem solid to me. You own some real honest-to-god gee-whiz Heckler und Koch G36K parts??? Holy shit! You didn't mention that in your original post. Somebody get this guy a gov't job in procurement because he's the man to talk to about the future of combat firearms. Sorry I'm being harsh, but I get tired of all the "Some guy told me..." and "I read..." BS that gets spread around the web. Everyone's a friggen' keyboard armorer these days. But at least you had the honesty to admit your lack of experience in the matter... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2003 5:37:08 PM EDT
[#38]
As an Engineer I can tell you.....Plastics are the way of the future.
Things are being designed out of plastic (polymer is the buzz word) and are performing well might I add today, that were out of the question only 15 or less years ago! The Glock's and the USP’s are just two examples of this. The problem now seems to be HEAT associated with full-auto fire (handguns do not see this type of abuse). Rest assured that these problems will in time be worked out (if not already). In the late 50's, Stoners use of Aluminum and Fiberglass for a battle rifle seemed as “out there” as Plastic does right now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2003 8:00:33 PM EDT
[#39]
I am reading the posts here. I found it very interesting many people are directly quoting "factory" materials in support of their favourite rifles.
Look around and think about it. Where did you hear about that the G36 is the "most reliable" rifles? Where is the source of the information?? I vaguely remember all the testings published in gun rags or verious internet sites are done by HK itself. That is hardly objective. To me, lots of comments going around are just regurgitation of commericals by the factory, or impression of playing around with the SA civilian versions., or "feelings" based on pictures. And guys, why are people willing to pay for band name fashion, brand new coffee, brand new furniture. Well becasue, commericals and advertising brainwash people into believing brand names are better! Paid propaganda is used for one purpuse; to reshape your perception. Sit back and think about why you think certain things in certain ways. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/17/2003 10:34:02 PM EDT
[#40]
Quoted: Quoted: BTW, I wasn't claiming to be an expert on the subject...I have never fired a G36 and I don't have a lot of experience firing an AR either, I have only read things. But I do own some real G36K parts, including the carry handle/optical sight and forearm, which seem solid to me. You own some real honest-to-god gee-whiz Heckler und Koch G36K parts??? Holy shit! You didn't mention that in your original post. Somebody get this guy a gov't job in procurement because he's the man to talk to about the future of combat firearms. Sorry I'm being harsh, but I get tired of all the "Some guy told me..." and "I read..." BS that gets spread around the web. Everyone's a friggen' keyboard armorer these days. But at least you had the honesty to admit your lack of experience in the matter... I make a post explaining my lack of expertise, and you bash me for claiming to be an expert. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2003 1:06:33 AM EDT
[#41]
Quoted: Austria currently fields the 550 Nope- it is Steyr AUG all the way here. Here is every weapon currently fielded: http://www.bmlv.gv.at/waffen/waf_stg77.shtml Regards Cato |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2003 5:14:20 AM EDT
[#42]
Quoted: Quoted: Austria currently fields the 550 Nope- it is Steyr AUG all the way here. Here is every weapon currently fielded: [url]http://www.bmlv.gv.at/waffen/waf_stg77.shtml[/url] Regards Cato |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/22/2003 1:07:13 AM EDT
[#43]
Quoted: Please dont blame Scarscrow I think he's from Quebec - it's genetic... Yah, the result of not being a inbred. Interesting thread - mirrors what I have heard from others testing. I must confess to being a AR/M groupie, and sold on the design. However I have had a few C series weapons go over 5k in one day - no problems. I guess the G36 and Sig might have some issues with that. SIG does not chrome line their barrels and the 551's and 552's can go to hell in a handbasket quick. Yah 30,000 rds per barrel. How many AR companies have chrome lined hammer forged chromoly barrels? The only company I can think of is Diemaco & FN. Scarecrow, the MWS hanguards you deride, have accessories on them that keep us alive - the fact than any 'next gen' system does not have that ability are a testimony that they are not combat designed weapons. The AR/m16 was not combat designed. If it was the original M16 wouldnt have been such a flop. Oh and I can swap uppers in a heartbeat to go from precision to CQB... Since every soldier walks around with extra upper receivers. BTW the upper receiver on a sig is as easy to take off as that of an AR. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/22/2003 1:16:33 AM EDT
[#44]
Quoted: Scarecrow, snip (we all read that stupidity eneugh times) How does the swiss making chocolate have to do with anything? What does the political system in Canada have to do with the quality or capability of a swiss rifle? Are you too stupid to make a valid point so you need to try for idiotic off topic insults? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/22/2003 2:17:04 AM EDT
[#45]
Personally, I've never had any complaints about the M16 family of weapons. I can't fault the DoD for experimenting with new stuff, but I think that the money it would take to get the XM8 fielded and up to par with its predecessor would be better spent on improving the SAW or adopting a replacement firearm. I wasn't terribly impressed with the thing, but I only fired one once.
However, the two infantry bubbas that I know both said--and I shit you not--the *exact* same thing about it: "You've gotta dunk it in CLP for it to work." On top of that, a recent report cited it as the most problematic weapon in the Iraqi Freedom theater of operations. And none of its shortcomings are, shall we say, "news" to me. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/22/2003 4:10:14 AM EDT
[#46]
Quoted: I am reading the posts here. I found it very interesting many people are directly quoting "factory" materials in support of their favourite rifles. Look around and think about it. Where did you hear about that the G36 is the "most reliable" rifles? Where is the source of the information?? I vaguely remember all the testings published in gun rags or verious internet sites are done by HK itself. That is hardly objective. To me, lots of comments going around are just regurgitation of commericals by the factory, or impression of playing around with the SA civilian versions., or "feelings" based on pictures. And guys, why are people willing to pay for band name fashion, brand new coffee, brand new furniture. Well becasue, commericals and advertising brainwash people into believing brand names are better! Paid propaganda is used for one purpuse; to reshape your perception. Sit back and think about why you think certain things in certain ways. This is the only reply in this thread worth reading. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/22/2003 6:08:54 AM EDT
[#47]
Scarecrow - I have seen shot out 552's and 551's...
As far as Diemaco and FN go it is not chromoly - it is a chrome lining the barrel itself is 4150 steel. The chrome lining is much harder than the chromoly that SIG uses. A LE friend saw a G36K do 3000rds w/o cleaning and he was very impressed. Big deal I have seen AR's do that no problem. I will put up a SPR type M16 agaibst the SIG 550 Sniper and guess what... One can be a 1/4MOA gun one is not. A certain LE unti I knwo returned the 3 550 Snipers it bough in the first 2 months for serious problems... I never said the M16 was perfect, however it is out in the dirt with the guys kicking ass and taking names (to be so droll) - the refinements that several manufacturers like KAC, LMT and ARMS amongst others have doen with it have taken it to a new level - a level that the others while they may be able to rival will not exceed. I have shot all three systems and I am still in the M16 camp... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/22/2003 11:55:56 AM EDT
[#48]
I think the thing that got lost in this topic is that the chance of either the G36 or the SG550 being submitted for test when the XM8 is already being designed for the job.
And its funny how someone would compare a [b]RIFLE[/b] like the G36 and 550 to a [b]CARBINE[/b] like the M4. This entire topic is BULLSHIT. Anyways, Its great to have personal annecdotes and having a friend of a friend type story but I prefer actual endurance test and competitions that I can see with my own eyes. So far no one has set forth any articles or test involving a AR or M16. I submit the following: http://www.valmet-weapons.com/Torture_Test_Page1.html |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/22/2003 12:01:51 PM EDT
[#49]
Quoted: So far no one has set forth any articles or test involving a AR or M16. I submit the following: [url]http://www.valmet-weapons.com/Torture_Test_Page1.html[/url] Linky made hot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/22/2003 12:24:27 PM EDT
[#50]
Scarecrow if it so much BS why keep chimming in?
Secondly I have shot all three systems I was speaking about - the G36K, Sig 550/551/552, and the M16 in 4" - 20" barrels. I had a chance to see a OICW model in Ft Benning :( - whipped fricking do - you think I am going to carry that POS? Some Pointy Head is going to have to start steriod injections at birth for troops if they think that is an INDIVIDUAL weapon. I offered my opinion based on my observations from shooting the above - and the annecdotal info on two LE depts I have contacts with. 'Sadly' I don't write for a gun rag so I guess my experiences mean nothing... |
|
|
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.
