AR Sponsor
Posted: 12/7/2005 6:01:45 PM EDT
I got this off of another board. Its pretty interesting and I think a professional comparison of the Sig v. M4 from the standpoint of the user. For all of you Sig lovers, read teh last paragraph. It will make your day.
|
| I would love to have a 551, especially if they will be marketed at under $1K - its conceivable due to stamped receivers. I hope they capitalize on the market - I would beg steal or borrow the $1K for it if introduced. Heck, if they actually do this I WILL BUY TWO OF THEM. But I will say this, the FNC is probably a more user-friendly piece. I've had a couple of them and found them great weapons (although the original 1-10 twist leaves a little to be desired with todays bullets). |
|
Here here on the SIG 551. It's already got a 14in barrel. Maybe we'll get lucky and SIG will throw 16's on there. If not.. Pin + Weld a Phantom 5C1... Wow. I think I just soiled myself. 06 will be a wild ass year for gunowners. FNC's, SCAR, F2000, P90, and the SIG550/551. Dear lord this is gonna rule.  My poor checkbook!
|
|
I've shot SIG carbines and I am a fan, but to be totally honest it just doesnt stack well against the AR15. Not bias or loyalty. Just really hold it and work the controls and it is clear the AR15 is more user friendly. I like the lack of fouling in the SIG, but that one benefit does not outweigh all the other benefits the AR15 has. I would buy one though, if the price wasnt insane. I doubt sig would sell a long gun in the USA for less than 1000 bucks when they have handguns that cost nearly that much |
+1 |
I'd get that thing refinished if I were you!  I'm really hoping the US 550/551 becomes a reality. Dream come true for me, since I can't afford a $10,000 Swiss 551. |
|
I have shot my AR15 and SIG551 about the same amount, I have no muscle-memory or training bias toward either. My assessment is as follows: Optics - both of mine are set up with mid-range (500yds) optics, not CQB. To bring AR irons to bear I have to remove the scope and flip-up irons. To bring SIG551 irons to bear I have to pull off the cheek piece and look through see-through scope mounts. SIG irons are vastly superior, can't imagine how they can afford them on a service rifle. Advantage to SIG. Magazines - Aluminium AR mags can dent and cause problems, SIG mags can break and cause big problems. AR mags are more compact and easier to store/carry. Advantage to AR. Magazine removal - ARs are dropped with the press of a button by the trigger finger, SIG mags are removed with the left hand and thumb. AR is faster. Advantage to AR. Selector - ARs are easy to flip with the thumb, It is faster to disengage the SIG with the thumb and re-engage with the index finger - no clear advantage to either effort. SIGs are ambidextrous. Small advantage to SIG. Stock - ARs can adjust LOP for body armour but can't fold properly for storage/packing/slinging. SIGs fold smaller but can't adjust LOP for body armour. IF I wore body armour I'd just shorten the SIG stock and still have it folding. Big advantage to SIG. Trigger - AR triggers suck, mine has a JP match trigger that needs re-adjusting occassionally. The SIG trigger is a 3-stage match trigger that is miles ahead of a standard AR. Advantage to SIG. Pistol grip - AR pistol grips are too short, many ARs wear custom grips. SIG pistol grips are great. Advantage to SIG. Modularity. AR development is driven by huge US civilian sales to descriminating shooters. SIG doesn't let anyone mess with their guns and build it so you can't. Advantage to AR. Reliability. Always a sticking point with the AR. My AR stops running occassionally, MY SIG never has. Advantage to SIG. Cocking lever. ARs can be cocked/cleared with either hand, SIGs require right hand. Advantage to AR. Accuracy. My AR wears a heavy barrel and will shoot 3/4" with factory ammo. The SIG barrel options are limited; mine is standard and will shoot about 1.5" with same ammo. Advantage to AR. Fit & Finish. Not terribly important in a service rifle, different but equal on both guns. No advantage to either. I shoot my AR alot more than my SIG in 9x19 and .22LR because it is fun and I like to play gunsmith and customise the gun. If I shot .223 exclusively and had to depend on a rifle I'd chose the SIG. It isn't perfect and I believe I could build a custom Valmet or Galil with all the best features of both except the AR mag release - that's my next project.   |
|
I can speak with a little knowledge. I attended a Swiss Mountaineering/Border Control Course last year in Switzerland. I was sent by my unit. Anyway we carried the SIG 550/ or the version their army uses for the course. We also did day and night fire with the rifle. After reading and seeing photos of the rifle and drooling for years it was a bit of a disappointment. While I would buy one if available/affordable in the States I would still stick with my M4 which I am issued. The rifle is front heavy, the bipod legs are annoying, they get caught on things especially web gear. The front site post is to thick, rear sight was nice but nothing which really outclassed the M4, it is 'cooler' but functionally don't see much improvement. While the stock can be folded, it is basically useless folded so besides being compact for storing etc no large improvement. I don't see how you can get any more smaller or handier than the M4. The mags were nice, the mag changes slower and mounting optics is definitly not nearly as easy or convient. As for reliability, of course it will win over the M4 but as long as I kept my M4 relatively clean it functioned fine and I talk from deployment experience from Afghanistan. The SIG is already front heavy by the time one would add a PEQ2/4, flashlight, grip, bipod it will be much more front heavy than a M4. So my two cents, its definitly a nice rifle but I would take the battle proven M4 over the SIG. |
MC, the SIG rear sights are a rotating drum like an HK with a welded base. The different positions of the drum have peeps of 3 sizes and a square notch similar to a pistol with tritium inserts on both sides. The entire mechanism is adjustable for windage and elevation and is built like a swiss watch but with tank-sized parts. The front sight is a simple post with a flip-up tritium post to cover it. The shroud is perfectly circular and functions like a 'ring within a ghost ring' when used with the rear peep. Out past 100yds you wouldn't even need the post, the double ring could put you on a man-sized target much quicker. Very well though out and very effective. I have a rack full of 100 years of military rifles, the AR sights haven't evolved much from the old No4Mk1, Garand or M14 peep sights, the SIG would be difficult to improve.  
|
MP, with all due respect to your battle experience (of which I have none), your comparison is apples and oranges. The 551 (in my pics above) is the length/weight/task equivalent to your M4, the 550 is the longer/heavier one like the M16A2. As I hinted, over 50 different types of battle rifles in my safe spanning a century and none is perfect (although I do believe a near-perfect one could be built). The reliability of the SIG is its most important feature I think, maybe the piston ARs solve that problem but I have no experience. I'm an HK LE regional dealer and I still can't get hold of one of those uppers. |
|
I have to admit that my two favorite rifles are the AR-15 (M4) and the Sig 550s and 540s. Here's a picture of me shooting a 550 in Switzerland. The SIG 550 incorporates some of the best design features from the best rifles. It uses the long-stroke gas piston and carrier of the AK-47 for reliability, the adjustable gas system of the FN FAL, the clamshell design of the AR-15 for ease of maintenance, and the sights from the HK G3 (only better). It has an ergonomic side-folding stock, ambi controls, an excellent trigger, it's accurate and it's got great looks to boot. The Sig 550's only drawbacks are its weight, the charging handle on the wrong side of the receiver, the AK-47 style magazine release, and its cost. It is a heavy rifle and an expensive rifle. Even in Europe the civilian versions sell for nearly 3000 Euro. I actually prefer the 551 version or the older 543, as I am partial to carbines. I've had a chance to shoot the Chilean made SIG 543 with the Rangers in Portugal. It's a good weapon and very similar to the 550s, only it uses a tubular steel folding buttstock like the Congo FAL, and it uses steel magazines instead of the translucent plastic ones of the 550 series. The front sights are also slightly different and there might be some minor internal differences. I would love to see SIG produce the 550s in the States for civilian use. I'd be first in line to buy one. However, I've very skeptical of the "under $1000" price tag. My gut tells me that if it comes out, it'll be three times that much. I hope I'm wrong. 
|
We will know if they are for real or not when Shot 2006 rolls around. If they plan to release them, I'm sure they will say so at Shot Show. |
However, I would like to have a .308 SIG 550 or B&T rifle before a .223 model.
AR Sponsor