Quoted:Lawyers and courtrooms should not decide what weapons are armed forces can buy.

Property rights?  We don't need no stinkin' property rights.

Quoted: Why are they spending millions on XM8s?? Its called PORK.

Although I am not sold on the XM8, the Marines I sent out to MCWL for the distributed ops experiment all had nothing but good to say about the weapon.

Quoted: Quoted: Why are they spending millions on XM8s?? Its called PORK. Although I am not sold on the XM8, the Marines I sent out to MCWL for the distributed ops experiment all had nothing but good to say about the weapon.

Guys had nothing to say but rave reviews about the new packs we got, no one bothered to check if you could wear them over a flak........ So maybe those guys go backpacking in them, but I didnt use the pack once in iraq because basically it was unwearable with a flak on. We just took daypacks instead and filled our cargo pockets. I have no faith in the reviews that are done. I was really wishing I had a molle or even alice pack.

So I hope you sent some grunts to go through that thing, while I am not dissing the XM8 it might work alright, I dont really see it as an improvement enough to replace the M16 and the HK416 definetly doesnt look like it solves anything worth replacing the M16, and H&Ks hyperboly about the M16s woes just seems like they took popular tripe and blew it up. I might get a gas piston upper myself as I have a silincer, but yeah right I am sure the Marines are gonna get any of those soon.... (even the recon guys only had 2 knights ones in thier platoon)

RustedAce...
Here's a few advantages noted for another gas-piston type AR
No gas- no fouling. Runs much cleaner, minimal deposits even after 1000 rounds.
No gas- no heat. Longer bolt life, much better extractor spring life.
No gas- no blowback. No difference running SBRs, cans or both.
No gas- No variability. 750rpm  irrespective of barrel length, gas port erosion, ammo
Cycles everything - Cycles EBR Stealth match.  Needs much less gas. Self-regulating.
More Mv - 150-200fps as lest gas is lost in operating system.
Eliminate bolt bounce - piston will only deliver enough energy to reliably cycle the action and no more.
Same weight. Weight gained in the psiton is saved on the carrier.

Other gas psiton guns proabbly share some of these advantages.

Crank it up to 6.8SPC and larger and things become mroe prominent.

Quoted: It's simply amazing how far some people will go to troll an HK416 thread. Oddly enough they always seem to come from one little group. What "Facts" were posted in RustedAce's post? This is just his opinion. Personally, I'm glad he has never seen a problem. Apparently SOCOM and the rest of the Army have seen a problem. Why else would they spend millions on the XM8 and SCAR program? It seems some of America's best soldiers wanted something better. I just read the article. It seems pretty straightforward to me. What exactly is wrong with it and can any of you prove one piece of it is false? One big detail was released in the article. Like many have guesses, it was a lawsuit by Colt that kept the HK416 out of SCAR program. Luckily a few units are high enough up the food chain to buy anything they want. It's truly sad that company will resort to lawsuits instead of just inventing a better mousetrap than their competition. I would guess this is why the HK uppers that got released to the public caused such an uproar. Colt probably threatened to sue again. Lawyers and courtrooms should not decide what weapons are armed forces can buy.

Wow, I almost don’t know where to begin to address this.  First, it’s not the reader’s responsibility to disprove outragous claims, it’s the author’s obligation to provide supporting evidence to back up such claims, which was never done in this article.  You didn’t notice the bias?  Let me point out a few things that apparently escaped your notice.  

The writer never mentions the M4 with out some derogatory qualifier.  The only qualifier he uses for the 416 is to refer to it as “the Mercedes of M4’s”.  The AR is not perfect, but it’s hardly the piece of crap the author contends.  

The writer makes the claim that the 416 provides “dramatically superior reliability, controllability, accuracy, versatility and service life”.  Dramatically!  Where’s the proof of any of this?  The M16 has a forty plus year track record of reliable, controllable, accurate, versatile performance with a clearly adequate service life.  Is there room for improvement?  Of course, but show me where the 416 is so significantly better in any of these areas to warrant it’s adoption.  Making the claim and demonstrating it as a fact are two vastly different things and it’s incumbent on the individual making such claims to provide at least some evidence in support, which he does not.

In describing the 416 the writer goes on at length about its “features” to promote it as a necessary “fix” to the piece of crap M4.  One of the “features” claimed is the barrel.  “…cold hammer forged from the finest steel with hard chromed chambers and bores for greatly extended service life and immunity form obstructed bore disasters.”  Really?  Greatly extended service life and immunity form obstructed bore disasters?  He’s comparing this to the M4, so is H&K chrome better then Colt chrome or is it that German chrome in general is better then American chrome?  Or is it that Colt routinely makes their barrels from crappy steel?  Or is it, as I suspect, that he’s claiming chrome lining of the barrel and chamber is a desirable feature compared to not doing so, which is hardly an improvement (or feature) compared to the M4?  

The writer also touts the easily removable forend as a desirable feature.  The problem with this is that it’s not a feature, it’s a requirement, since the forend must be removed to perform routine maintenance.  When you do, you have the forend, the pusher rod assembly and the gas piston pulled out of the gun.  That’s three more parts laying about in the dirt when cleaning the gun in the field.  Desirable feature?  The forend NEVER needs to be removed on the M4 for maintenance.  And is this disassembly, cleaning and reassembly of the forend faster or easier then wiping out the accumulated crap blown back into the receiver by the direct gas system of the standard M4?  The writer is silent on this, so we’re left to wonder.

This discussion also brings up the issue of jamming and how (or more appropriately if) the direct gas system of the AR relates to it.  The guns reported failures in the desert environment are NOT related to the blowback design, but to the talcum powder like dust that permeates everything in the desert.  This is a common smoke and mirror distractive issue brought up by all proponents of any piston style upper.  The fact that the AR series “craps where it eats” may be an issue that should be addressed, but one is forced to wonder if the tight tolerances of the 416 upper would fair significantly better.  

The author also claims increased lethality.  It fires the standard military ball cartridge from the same length barrel, so could you please explain to me what makes it so much more lethal?  Because the author never did.

I could go on, since the article is loaded with such half truths, innuendo and unsupported claims, but I won’t bother.  The H&K 416 may be the best thing to happen to small arms since smokeless powder, but this article sure isn’t poof of that.

Quoted: RustedAce... Here's a few advantages noted for another gas-piston type AR No gas- no fouling. Runs much cleaner, minimal deposits even after 1000 rounds. No gas- no heat. Longer bolt life, much better extractor spring life. No gas- no blowback. No difference running SBRs, cans or both. No gas- No variability. 750rpm  irrespective of barrel length, gas port erosion, ammo Cycles everything - Cycles EBR Stealth match.  Needs much less gas. Self-regulating. More Mv - 150-200fps as lest gas is lost in operating system. Eliminate bolt bounce - piston will only deliver enough energy to reliably cycle the action and no more. Same weight. Weight gained in the psiton is saved on the carrier. Other gas psiton guns proabbly share some of these advantages. Crank it up to 6.8SPC and larger and things become mroe prominent.

See if you had been selling the HK I would have enjoyed your add. I have nothing against the HK I have a problem with an article telling service members not to trust thier rifles. I will probably end up buying a piston upper as I have a silincer, but I just cant stand their negative advertising.

edit - personal attacks

Quoted: Quoted: RustedAce... Here's a few advantages noted for another gas-piston type AR No gas- no fouling. Runs much cleaner, minimal deposits even after 1000 rounds. No gas- no heat. Longer bolt life, much better extractor spring life. No gas- no blowback. No difference running SBRs, cans or both. No gas- No variability. 750rpm  irrespective of barrel length, gas port erosion, ammo Cycles everything - Cycles EBR Stealth match.  Needs much less gas. Self-regulating. More Mv - 150-200fps as lest gas is lost in operating system. Eliminate bolt bounce - piston will only deliver enough energy to reliably cycle the action and no more. Same weight. Weight gained in the psiton is saved on the carrier. Other gas psiton guns proabbly share some of these advantages. Crank it up to 6.8SPC and larger and things become mroe prominent. See if you had been selling the HK I would have enjoyed your add. I have nothing against the HK I have a problem with an article telling service members not to trust thier rifles. I will probably end up buying a piston upper as I have a silincer, but I just cant stand their negative advertising.

RustedAce,

He ain't selling the H&K, he's selling the Leitner-Wise.

ETA:  Great pics.

Yes.
"Selling the Leitner Wise" was very correct terminology.
Some guys here seem to be making a career out of hijacking every thread on the board into a LW advertisement.

edit - personal attacks

Quoted: Yes. "Selling the Leitner Wise" was very correct terminology. Some guys here seem to be making a career out of hijacking every thread on the board into a LW advertisement.

DING, DING, DING.

WE HAVE A WINNER!

Quoted: Quoted: Leitner, I'll concede the the point because while I don't think an NSN has been issued they are claiming "production" units are being delivered. Exactly. The point is they ARE in service and any unit that can buy them IS buying them.

Actually, USASOC put out a letter this month telling units that while the 416 is being tested in the CENTCOM AOR, thye are not yet approved for purchase, and units were not allowed to purchase them...

I agree with you that advertisement doesnt need to hijack threads, This should be about HK and thier advertising/ weapon not any other gun.

Photo's posted with the permission of their owner.

HK416's in action:

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Leitner, I'll concede the the point because while I don't think an NSN has been issued they are claiming "production" units are being delivered. Exactly. The point is they ARE in service and any unit that can buy them IS buying them. Actually, USASOC put out a letter this month telling units that while the 416 is being tested in the CENTCOM AOR, thye are not yet approved for purchase, and units were not allowed to purchase them...

Maybe you should tell this to XXXX. He is "testing" his in a combat zone.

Quoted: HK416's in action: img.photobucket.com/albums/v74/va_dinger/416s.jpg img.photobucket.com/albums/v74/va_dinger/416.jpg Some of you should be ashamed of the moronic remarks you have posted in this thread.

because contractors are using them? I dont understand why I would be. Or are they not contractors?

Quoted: Quoted: Photo's posted with the permission of Lightfighter's -EDIT. HK416's in action: img.photobucket.com/albums/v74/va_dinger/416s.jpg img.photobucket.com/albums/v74/va_dinger/416.jpg Some of you should be ashamed of the moronic remarks you have posted in this thread. because contractors are using them? I dont understand why I would be. Or are they not contractors?

(1.) He is not a contractor.
(2.) I was not referring to you or your comments in the first place. I thought we had this worked out in our PM's?

I'm not the OPSEC! fairy and I know you got XXXX's permission to post those pics but...

and we will leave it at that. -KevinB

Edit on request.

What's funny is how the L-W comment didn't appear until after you stepped in...

Even more funny is how we were having a dsicussion about SAR's H&K 416 article until you step in with a personal attack directed at yours truly.

You produce a picture of 2-3 operators armed with H&K 416's and yet RustedAce had confirmed that the XXXX operators he interacted with were equipped with standard M4's.  I think I'll take RustedAce's word for it, considering he's actually in Iraq and you...well... you get the picture Mr. Keyboard Commando.

Why aren't the rest of the operators (namely the ones that RustedAce witnessed) armed with H&K 416's?  

And lastly, so the fuck what if XXXX is armed with H&K 416's?  The FBI's elite HRT (which regularly crosstrains with CAG and DevGRU) has chosen the BHP as their pistol of choice for years now.  Does that mean that it's superior to the GLCOK 17/19,  SIG P226/P229,  H&K USP-9, etc... simply because HRT uses it?

Justin

edit

Funny, it was doing great before you came along...

Looks like you're your own worst enemy.

Quoted: Whats really sad is you have single handily killed another HK416 thread.

Let me point out that the original author of this thread was commenting on the bias of an article written by HK.  It never was a thread glorifying the HK416.  The article was about that.  

The L-W / HK turf wars claim another thread..........

All is cool and so is that damn weapon..........F$&% the xm-8 we want these

Quoted: Quoted: The H&K 416 upper hasn’t proven itself to any “tip of the spear military unit”, it’s being tested by them, so I expect there’s still a thing or two to be said about it. Your just plain wrong. They are already in service. I don't know what else can be said.

Alot of things are 'in service', not all of them officially, and many of them in such a limited manner that to say they are 'in service' is a technicality...

The fact is, that what you have is a general downgrade of the Stoner/Armalite system to earlier technology (piston-op) borrowed from a less accurate system (G36)...

Think of it this way: Why is it that the SF units of so many european countries (who issue HK, SIG, or similar piston-op rifles) opt for the M4 or similar? Why do we have folks in the newly-trained Iraqi military asking that they get their (brand new, european made) AKs swapped out for M4s, and being quoted as such in the NY times?

The AR platform may not be the perfect rifle, but it's better than anything else invented to date, including anything from HK.

However, where there is a precieved problem (AR reliability) there will be a product developed just to try to make money off a percieved solution....

P.S. Less time to clean is not an 'improvement'. And in most cases where there is a M16 jamming problem, it is either (a) a mag failure, or (b) a situation where any other weapon of similar age, maintained & used by the same operator(s) for the same amount of time would have jammed as well (eg 507th Maintanance)...

OH, and HK is famous for marketing/claiming responsibility for things they did not invent....

When selling the XM8, they claimed responsibility for INTERCHANGABLE UPPER RECIEVERS

With the 416, they act like they (a) invented the piston-op AR upper, and (b) invented the rail system...

Heck, the roller-lock action isn't even HK's design, it was first used by Mauser in WWII - former Mauser employees formed HK & their designs were derived from their former employer's products...

HK makes a unique pistol (USP)... Apart from that, I have little use for them, as there is not one HK rifle or SMG product that does not have a superior counterpart based on the AR system. Now, I don't consider the HK21 a 'rifle', but if you bring that up, the MAG58 (M240 series, in US terms) is a better MG anyway, although that's not AR-based...

Quoted: RustedAce... Here's a few advantages noted for another gas-piston type AR No gas- no fouling. Runs much cleaner, minimal deposits even after 1000 rounds.No, you still get fouling, just from different places, and different sources. Besides, it's DEBRIS (eg sand)  that causes jams, not carbon)) No gas- no heat. Longer bolt life, much better extractor spring life.laughable... The weapon will still get hot regardless. But you will get a much more violent action, as the gas will not pop the bolt open prior to pulling it back, but instead the bolt will be dragged out by a cam-action No gas- no blowback. No difference running SBRs, cans or both.Wrong, you are still running a gas-op system, and you still have to deal with gas-tube & gas port issues, weather piston-op or not... The only op-system immune to this is pure blowback) No gas- No variability. 750rpm  irrespective of barrel length, gas port erosion, ammoWrong again Cycles everything - Cycles EBR Stealth match.  Needs much less gas. Self-regulating.No such thing More Mv - 150-200fps as lest gas is lost in operating system.Still happens Eliminate bolt bounce - piston will only deliver enough energy to reliably cycle the action and no more.More bolt bounce, actually, as the piston retains pressure much longer than the direct-gas system (which is under inertia as soon as the key clears the gas tube) Same weight. Weight gained in the psiton is saved on the carrier. Other gas psiton guns proabbly share some of these advantages.Then how come the M16 outshoots all those 'other gas piston guns'? Maybe because the limits of a 1930s-1940s technology have been reached, and the M16 (a 1950s-1960s design, not derived from any prior system) does a much better job in regards to accuracy because of this Crank it up to 6.8SPC and larger and things become mroe prominent. No, you just carry less rounds, and achieve no practical advantage over 80gr .223

P.S. For those who don't know, the XM8 and 6.8MM are both dead, insofar as the military is concerned... Either may be 'in service' in the sense that someone somewhere in the spec-ops community may use it, but that's the end of both... And with the SCAR program, that may be RIP for the XM8 there too...

In the end, it's interesting that we have a contract for a new service pistol right after the XM8 hit the rocks... Maybe someone's trying to quid-pro-quo HK some business for that factory they just built, to produce a rifle that isn't going to be made....

Also, every time you look at some euro-rifle & wish we used it, remember all of the stuff that the civillian community has invented for the AR15/M16/M4, and think about how much of that would NOT have been invented if Colt (original purchaser of the Armalite design rights, and 2nd perveyor of the system after ArmaLite sold it to them) had posessed the same attitude about selling to civillians that ALL of the sompanies maintain, vis-a-vis the way things are in their home countries...

Immagine how things would work if Bushmaster, DPMS, Oly, and crew had been trying to produce one of these monsters... The parent euro-corp would have sued them out of business....

It definately appears HK is going to get something out of this one way or another.

+1,000,000 to Dave_A!!!!

Quoted: Quoted: What "Facts" were posted in RustedAce's post? This is just his opinion. Personally, I'm glad he has never seen a problem. Apparently SOCOM and the rest of the Army have seen a problem. Why else would they spend millions on the XM8 and SCAR program? It seems some of America's best soldiers wanted something better. Dinger, come on.  They got you too? I guess only that "small group" will be left here when the HK crowd migrates to a board dedicated to them and their supremacy in firearms design

+1

Please tell me you haven't drunk that much of the HK Koolaid....

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: What "Facts" were posted in RustedAce's post? This is just his opinion. Personally, I'm glad he has never seen a problem. Apparently SOCOM and the rest of the Army have seen a problem. Why else would they spend millions on the XM8 and SCAR program? It seems some of America's best soldiers wanted something better. Dinger, come on.  They got you too? I guess only that "small group" will be left here when the HK crowd migrates to a board dedicated to them and their supremacy in firearms design +1 Please tell me you haven't drunk that much of the HK Koolaid....

I'm certainly no fan of the XM8, but the HK416 is a different matter. I have handled and shot one, as well as had it described in great detail by a man very closely related to the project. It is a suburb piece of hardware. I would buy one in a second. That being sad, I would not sell off my collection to buy one. It's too bad a lawsuit has kept them out of our hands and now a horrible ATF ruling.

I just got sick of seeing the usual BS that gets posted in every HK416 thread and decided enough was enough this time.

Quoted: 6.8MM are both dead, insofar as the military is concerned... Either may be 'in service' in the sense that someone somewhere in the spec-ops community may use it, but that's the end of both

Not exactly...

Quoted: Quoted: The USMC is soliciting a 6.8 carbine. Things going on with the Air Force too. Not exactly but at the industry briefing, USMC stated that they were looking at the 6.8 as combat round.  Can't say anymore than that.   Same for USAF.   Sorry,gag request.

I cannot speak for the Air Force, but to say the Marine Corps is looking at it as a combat round, is like saying the Marine Corps is looking at a directed energy weapon, the Marine Corps is looking at everything and anything however is not currently planning on replacing the 5.56

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: What "Facts" were posted in RustedAce's post? This is just his opinion. Personally, I'm glad he has never seen a problem. Apparently SOCOM and the rest of the Army have seen a problem. Why else would they spend millions on the XM8 and SCAR program? It seems some of America's best soldiers wanted something better. Dinger, come on.  They got you too? I guess only that "small group" will be left here when the HK crowd migrates to a board dedicated to them and their supremacy in firearms design +1 Please tell me you haven't drunk that much of the HK Koolaid.... I'm certainly no fan of the XM8, but the HK416 is a different matter. I have handled and shot one, as well as had it described in great detail by a man very closely related to the project. It is a suburb piece of hardware. I would buy one in a second. That being sad, I would not sell off my collection to buy one. It's too bad a lawsuit has kept them out of our hands and now a horrible ATF ruling. I just got sick of seeing the usual BS that gets posted in every HK416 thread and decided enough was enough this time. They can go peddle their basement-engineered version on the EE or their own threads.

Understandable.

In some way I am kind of glad I can't get one.  I think my wallet will be better this way.  

VA Dinger....Let's keep it civil. First, each of the points I raised are applicable to gas pistons vs. direct impingement as a whole. I have no direct experience of the 416 and can only base my observations on my own which happens to be with another flavour. We can enjoy different flavours of Kool-Aid, right? Let's just accept that we have partisan views on the matter and be done with it.
D'accord on gas-piston vs. direct impingement though, non?

Dave A.....
I shall try to be less dismissive in my replies to your own.....
Fouling & Heat ...The gas piston upper receivers are no different from standard AR-15 for purposes of foreign matter ingestion. They do however eliminate hot propellant gasses from the bolt carrier group. The gas deposits carbon and other particles onto the bearing surfaces. Any foreign matter present is then bound up pretty nicely by high temperature and pressure.  This accumulation eventually will have a detrimental effect on the function of the weapon.
If you are of the opinion that only foreign matter impacts function, kindly explain.

The heat from propellant gasses is confined to the area of the piston cup/block. This occurs with the direct impingement system and is not considered an issue. There is no heat in the upper receiver at all which reduces the  heat stress on the bearing surfaces and eliminates the denaturing effects on springs.

I disagree that the unlocking action is any more violent than with direct gas since the impulse is controlled by a spring which delivers only as much as is needed to reliably operate the action. The impulse is neither more severe nor sudden than with direct impingement. On the contrary, we can see that shorter gas systems overgas the operation resulting in higher cyclics than with the original rifle-length actions. I would suggest this to be evidence of much more violent unlocking.

There cannot be blowback issues becuase there is no gas tube and no gas going into the upper receiver at all.  With ANY of th gas piston actions. This suggest to me that you're not at all familliar with these systems since none of them has a gas tube and none of them route any gas back into the upper receiver. The HK 'spits' the gas out the front, the other brand vents it to 1.0 and 10.30 ports on the piston cup.

The operating impulse is controlled by a spring. The spring determines the cyclic and will work to it as long as there is enough gas to work the piston. The pistons themsleves are self-regulating to bleed of any excess pressure  beyond what is needed to work the piston. As ports erode, which they do, any additional pressure is vented.

The volume of gas needed to work the short-stroke piston is much lower than for direct impingement because it just displaces the piston just behind the gas block. There is no gas tube and nothing venting into the action.  I suggest you still do not really grasp what the gas-pistons are. Because they draw off so little gas to work the action, they will cycle rounds that wouyld be underpressured for direct impingement and they produce higher Mvs than impingement guns as there is more gas to push the bullet. Once again, you imagine that a gas tube sends gas back to a piston in the upper receiver . Doesn't work that way. You can come and chrono the gas-piston and reict gas side by side with the same barrel lengths and ammo as has been done.

Again your flawed understanding of the gas piston is evidenced by your insistence that the gas piston retains pressure at all. It doesn't. It is not a closed system. Nor is there any gas beyond the piston cup/ gas block area. Bolt bounce is compeltely eliminated as the force on the bolt is a constant determined by the springing rate.

The HK416 et al shoots as good as direct impingement guns. There is no reduction in mechanical accuracy since they enjoy all the benefits of the AR arrangement (in line stock, superior tolerances etc.) You might have heard of the Ljungmann? If not I respectfully suggest that you look it up. Actually I find it hilarious that we are still using 150 year old cartrige tech.......

6.8 vs. 5.56 is another issue and we can duke it out in the relevant threads. Suffice to say that all the issues here are magnified by more powerful cartridges

Simon

edit - no relevance to topic.

WTF

edit

Rusted Ace, people asked for my opinion about the 416 and so I posted it.

I can't help if I'm not familiar nor enjoy the gas blowback of a stock AR.  I'm used to shooting HK roller lock long guns as well as the gas piston long guns like the G36.  The delayed blowback USC/UMP doeesnt blow gas in the face as the AR does.

I shot the AR both in 223 and with a 9mm subgun upper on it.  They both left an acrid odor.  Now you may like it, but I do  not.  I prefer a "clean" shooting platform, it's just my preference.  If you don't agree with it, that's fine, you are certainly entitled to your opinion.

Regarding the rest of the stuff going on in this thread, it is true that the 416 does not have an NSN number (which consequently makes it harder for HK to "recall" them).  However, I do not believe you need an NSN number to be used in the field.  Whether they are being used or not, time will tell.

As a sidenote, if this article was about any other gas system upper, I doubt people would be bashing that particular company.  For example, if LW's upper was written about in this fashion, would the majority of detractors call it an "advertising BJ"?  I doubt it.

HK makes great weapons and they generally manufacture and engineer better than most companies.  It's an undisputable fact, look at the entire HK weapon platform.  Everything from the P11 underwater flechette gun to the Grenade Machinegun.  Some of you may hate HK, and that's fine.  But it seems to me to be more of the "i can't get it so I'm going to bash it" thing is going on.

I'm sure the LW upper is very nice and a quality product, so this is in no way a slam against them.

M

Quoted: Rusted Ace, people asked for my opinion about the 416 and so I posted it. I can't help if I'm not familiar nor enjoy the gas blowback of a stock AR.  I'm used to shooting HK roller lock long guns as well as the gas piston long guns like the G36.  The delayed blowback USC/UMP doeesnt blow gas in the face as the AR does. I shot the AR both in 223 and with a 9mm subgun upper on it.  They both left an acrid odor.  Now you may like it, but I do  not.  I prefer a "clean" shooting platform, it's just my preference.  If you don't agree with it, that's fine, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. Regarding the rest of the stuff going on in this thread, it is true that the 416 does not have an NSN number (which consequently makes it harder for HK to "recall" them).  However, I do not believe you need an NSN number to be used in the field.  Whether they are being used or not, time will tell. As a sidenote, if this article was about any other gas system upper, I doubt people would be bashing that particular company.  For example, if LW's upper was written about in this fashion, would the majority of detractors call it an "advertising BJ"?  I doubt it. HK makes great weapons and they generally manufacture and engineer better than most companies.  It's an undisputable fact, look at the entire HK weapon platform.  Everything from the P11 underwater flechette gun to the Grenade Machinegun.  Some of you may hate HK, and that's fine.  But it seems to me to be more of the "i can't get it so I'm going to bash it" thing is going on. I'm sure the LW upper is very nice and a quality product, so this is in no way a slam against them. M

Since I’m the one that used the term literary blowjob I assume you are grouping me in with the H&K detractors.  I can promise you, you can substitute any manufacturer you like for H&K in that article and my opinion would have been the same.  My problem is less about the 416 upper and more about expecting better from SAR.   I respect your opinion about the upper because you apparently have one.  I respect your opinion about the AR platform, even though I strongly disagree with it, because platform preference is just that, a preference, and to each his own.  But if you think the only thing people have a problem with about that article is that it was written about an H&K product you are sorely mistaken.

Quoted: Since I’m the one that used the term literary blowjob I assume you are grouping me in with the H&K detractors.  I can promise you, you can substitute any manufacturer you like for H&K in that article and my opinion would have been the same.  My problem is less about the 416 upper and more about expecting better from SAR.   I respect your opinion about the upper because you apparently have one.  I respect your opinion about the AR platform, even though I strongly disagree with it, because platform preference is just that, a preference, and to each his own.  But if you think the only thing people have a problem with about that article is that it was written about an H&K product you are sorely mistaken.

Do you have any experience with the HK416 yourself?

Beowulf, it was not directed to you in specifically, I apologize if it seemed that way.

Actually, my opinion is formed not by this thread specifically, but by the general attitude here on the AR15 forum.  Every forum has it's own attitude, at HKPRO, we're pro HK, SIG forum is pro SIG, here is pro AR15, etc.  I'm not trying to flame anyone by my comments, it's just my observation.  

As I mentioned, I have not read the article.  I'm sure it's very pro-HK from what has been said here.  If any of you remember the Popular Mechanics issue where they had the XM8 and other HK weapons in it, they were also very pro-HK.  The M4 SOPMOD was in it was well and some other nifty things USSOCOM has.  

I like SAR and Dan was nothing but a gentleman when he hosted us for MP5 school.  He is pro HK so that might also play a part in it.  Can't say for sure.

I guess it's like any other "review".  Read it for what it's worth, as a guide, then go use the product yourself and see if it lives up to the hype.  To be quite honest, I've shot Glocks where in reviews they say what a great trigger it has.  I have yet to feel that.  The same for 1911's, I have no idea what the big deal is, honestly.

Mike....you're welcome to come try the LW anytime. All I ask is you bring your _________ so that  we can have a taste of the HK flavour kool-aid.   Just come on down and shoot some of our Blue Box......

Quoted: Mike....you're welcome to come try the LW anytime. All I ask is you bring your _________ so that  we can have a taste of the HK flavour kool-aid.   Just come on down and shoot some of our Blue Box......

I'm truly amazed that you would even attempt another highjack after all the trouble it has caused in the past. This is not a LW thread. You guys have your own forum and your own threads in the tech forums.

Leave these threads alone and let us discuss the HK416 in peace.

VA...I;m sorry but this is not the HK forum. It is the AR forum. Get a grip man.... You might have noticed my earlier post trying to dicuss the whole gas piston vs, direct impingement thing to which I must add you have added nothing of substance to.

If you feel the need for a HK group hug...there;'s an HK place too. I've been there and talked about the HK33.

Courtesy would be for you to not indulge in unwarranted attacks. Now, if you would kindly add to our general enlightenment about the HK416. Cogent to the whole discussion is the argunment put forward in the piece concerning the shortcomings of the direct impingement system and the substantial advantage of the 416's gas piston operating system. There are other cliams of course but the basic claim to fame of the 416 IS is the GAS PISTON.

Do you obejct to me partaking in this thread? If you do, I'm sorry but I don't feel obliged to excuse myself from any thread upon your insistence.

Did anyone notice the DBALs in the Rusted's pics?

Simon

Edited as I can't spell for toffee.

edit - personal attack

Quoted: Quoted: Since I’m the one that used the term literary blowjob I assume you are grouping me in with the H&K detractors.  I can promise you, you can substitute any manufacturer you like for H&K in that article and my opinion would have been the same.  My problem is less about the 416 upper and more about expecting better from SAR.   I respect your opinion about the upper because you apparently have one.  I respect your opinion about the AR platform, even though I strongly disagree with it, because platform preference is just that, a preference, and to each his own.  But if you think the only thing people have a problem with about that article is that it was written about an H&K product you are sorely mistaken. Do you have any experience with the HK416 yourself?

None what so ever and I don’t believe anything I’ve written implies otherwise.  Like a lot of folks, I’m interested in anything to do with the AR, including uppers built by H&K.  When I saw the cover of SAR I couldn’t wait to open it and read the article.  It sucked.  I’ve come to expect better from them and to say this article was a disappointment would be an understatement.  This thread was supposed to be about the article, not the upper, which is why I participated and all of my comments were to it.  I wasn’t the one that twisted this into a thread about the upper.  You stated you saw no problem with the way the article was written, which I found remarkable.  I responded to your comment with specifics, which you have yet to respond to.  That’s fine, since you apparently see no bias and I’m not likely to change your mind.  So be it.  

What's yours to HK? What has it got to do with this discussion? If you must know.....I changed cofent to cogent. You seem ot have caught it nicely. Now...would you like to dsicuss the 416 and the SAR article or are you just looking to feud with me?

At least I have the manners of a street thug. You don't even seem to have that much. 416...gas piston...discuss.

Apologies for the inability to type accurately but I thought I would avoid editing my previous post in case someone felt I was being nefarious.
Let's get back to the article. Did it adequately explain the advantages of the gas piston over direct impingement? Your opinions.....

Simon