Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 3/7/2006 12:28:39 PM EDT
hkpro.websolv.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=334688&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=1&PHPSESSID=

back when I had (lots of) money I put out a buy for any legal transferable G41 with a 'any price accepted' attached. I got ZERO hits in over 4 months.
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 1:26:53 PM EDT
That is such a BS thread, seems like a fisher trying to get some dumbass to send him some Western Union funds...I can't believe anyone is taking it seriously.
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 1:47:42 PM EDT


Link Posted: 3/7/2006 2:41:28 PM EDT
No, there is no such thing as a transferable G41. The G41 came way too late in the game to for there to exist a transferable version. While I'm sure the foreign seller in the HKPro thread is legit, he certainly doesn't understand US gun laws. These are not legally ownable by civilians in the US, even if these were already IN the US.

The importation of machine guns for civilian ownership stopped in 1968. The domestic manufacture of machine guns for civilian ownership stopped in 1986. Any imported machine gun after 1968 but before the 1986 ban date became a "Pre-86 Dealer Sample." Any imported machine gun after that is a "Post-86 Dealer Sample." The G41 would be a Post Sample, available only to FFL SOTs.

There was never a semi-auto version of this in the US either.
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 3:48:09 PM EDT
Like I said in that thread... it should be locked, if not deleted.
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 4:15:54 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Homeinvader:

There was never a semi-auto version of this in the US either.



that's the important part. I'd give your left kidney for one though!!!! I don't understand how someone can go through the trouble of making a receiver that takes AK mags and not do a G41 clone too?
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 4:48:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By chapperjoe:

Originally Posted By Homeinvader:

There was never a semi-auto version of this in the US either.



that's the important part. I'd give your left kidney for one though!!!! I don't understand how someone can go through the trouble of making a receiver that takes AK mags and not do a G41 clone too?



What do you mean? The G41 was basically an HK33 that was more NATO friendly. It used M-16 mags instead of the proprietary design. Didn't have anything to do with an AK. Making a G41 clone wouldn't be that hard at all. Use a modified SR-9 forearm and a Navy trigger housing, install them on an HK93, you'd be pretty close.

The G41 never took off as a design (and why we never had a semi-auto version here in the states) because it cost almost $2000 per unit to LE and gov't. A semi-auto version would have been about $2400 at a time when an HK91, 93 or 94 cost about $700. They would not have sold at all.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 7:01:27 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Homeinvader:

Originally Posted By chapperjoe:

Originally Posted By Homeinvader:

There was never a semi-auto version of this in the US either.



that's the important part. I'd give your left kidney for one though!!!! I don't understand how someone can go through the trouble of making a receiver that takes AK mags and not do a G41 clone too?



What do you mean? The G41 was basically an HK33 that was more NATO friendly. It used M-16 mags instead of the proprietary design. Didn't have anything to do with an AK. Making a G41 clone wouldn't be that hard at all. Use a modified SR-9 forearm and a Navy trigger housing, install them on an HK93, you'd be pretty close.

The G41 never took off as a design (and why we never had a semi-auto version here in the states) because it cost almost $2000 per unit to LE and gov't. A semi-auto version would have been about $2400 at a time when an HK91, 93 or 94 cost about $700. They would not have sold at all.



What he's talking about is Special Weapons going through the trouble of making a HK rifle in 7.62 x 39 that took AK-47 magazines, yet never produced an HK33 or HK53 that took M-16 mags.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 7:22:31 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Hunterex:

Originally Posted By Homeinvader:

Originally Posted By chapperjoe:

Originally Posted By Homeinvader:

There was never a semi-auto version of this in the US either.



that's the important part. I'd give your left kidney for one though!!!! I don't understand how someone can go through the trouble of making a receiver that takes AK mags and not do a G41 clone too?



What do you mean? The G41 was basically an HK33 that was more NATO friendly. It used M-16 mags instead of the proprietary design. Didn't have anything to do with an AK. Making a G41 clone wouldn't be that hard at all. Use a modified SR-9 forearm and a Navy trigger housing, install them on an HK93, you'd be pretty close.

The G41 never took off as a design (and why we never had a semi-auto version here in the states) because it cost almost $2000 per unit to LE and gov't. A semi-auto version would have been about $2400 at a time when an HK91, 93 or 94 cost about $700. They would not have sold at all.



What he's talking about is Special Weapons going through the trouble of making a HK rifle in 7.62 x 39 that took AK-47 magazines, yet never produced an HK33 or HK53 that took M-16 mags.



exactly. doesn't make sense to me. G41 clones would sell faster than the pam anderson tape did.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 7:27:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Homeinvader:


The G41 never took off as a design (and why we never had a semi-auto version here in the states) because it cost almost $2000 per unit to LE and gov't. A semi-auto version would have been about $2400 at a time when an HK91, 93 or 94 cost about $700. They would not have sold at all.



G41 never took off not becuase of how much IT cost, but becuase of how much a G36 cost in comparison. G41 was a quick 33 redesign after fall of the wall cancelled the G11 program. G41 was produced and proposed. PRobably would've been the finest battle rifle out there, and WELL worth the cost. BUT in comparison to G36 cost and export potential (which they actually underestimated!) this was not a tough choice. I think it came down to export sales more than anything else. While Germany may have been willing to buy the G41, I doubt any other country would have. G36 has MORE than covered for the G11 financial failure though.

In terms of us, I don't think we were part of hte equation! In the 80's HK cared about us, but 90's.... halfhearted efforts. And now......
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 8:10:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By chapperjoe:
G41 was produced and proposed. PRobably would've been the finest battle rifle out there



Wow, that is a bold statement with no substance.

Link Posted: 3/9/2006 8:18:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By nugentgl:

Originally Posted By chapperjoe:
G41 was produced and proposed. PRobably would've been the finest battle rifle out there



Wow, that is a bold statement with no substance.




?
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 8:44:19 AM EDT
What I meant was why? Why would have it been the greatest? As much as people hate to say it, the M16 is the greatest 5.56 battle rifle due to our military's use. There is no way that the G41 could have replaced the M16.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 10:14:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By chapperjoe:

Originally Posted By Homeinvader:


The G41 never took off as a design (and why we never had a semi-auto version here in the states) because it cost almost $2000 per unit to LE and gov't. A semi-auto version would have been about $2400 at a time when an HK91, 93 or 94 cost about $700. They would not have sold at all.



G41 never took off not becuase of how much IT cost, but becuase of how much a G36 cost in comparison. G41 was a quick 33 redesign after fall of the wall cancelled the G11 program. G41 was produced and proposed. PRobably would've been the finest battle rifle out there, and WELL worth the cost. BUT in comparison to G36 cost and export potential (which they actually underestimated!) this was not a tough choice. I think it came down to export sales more than anything else. While Germany may have been willing to buy the G41, I doubt any other country would have. G36 has MORE than covered for the G11 financial failure though.

In terms of us, I don't think we were part of hte equation! In the 80's HK cared about us, but 90's.... halfhearted efforts. And now......



The G41 was HK's attempt to compete with the M-16 within NATO entire. It used the M-16 mags as part of that competition, make it more attractive because the mags are cheap, plentiful and not proprietary in design. Supplying it to the Bundeswehr was part of that larger marketing strategy. The Bundeswehr was not THE market strategy. The M-16's cost was about $400-$700 per unit depending on quantity ordered. HK's proposed price was just shy of $1800. The G41 was an improvement in some respects, but not attractive at almost 4 times the cost of the M-16. When the Bundeswehr wanted the HK50 (what would become the G36), it was because of price, sure. But the G41 would have survived elsewhere, even without a Bundeswehr order, if the price wasn't so far out of the market. The G41's manufacturing cost and consequent market cost globally are what killed it. The G36 as a direct cost comparison might have been a factor for the Bundeswehr, but not NATO. There is still a resistence to the G36 within NATO and North American and European law enforcement because it is completely alien in design. Nothing interchanges with your neighbor or your sister agencies. Canadians, Americans, Britons, Swedes, Danes and others can all use each others' magazines. Spain and Germany and a random smattering of LE agencies are alone in the G36.

Besides, the Bundeswehr would never look outside of Germany for a new rifle. If the G41 were simply cheaper, it would have caught on. That's all.

Link Posted: 3/9/2006 11:19:33 AM EDT
I'm no big HK fan. not even close. don't see what's so special about their pistols and there's nothing a G36 can do that any other AR18 type gun can't too. but, price aside, G41 is one of the finest firearms ever built.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 12:14:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By chapperjoe:
I'm no big HK fan. not even close. don't see what's so special about their pistols and there's nothing a G36 can do that any other AR18 type gun can't too. but, price aside, G41 is one of the finest firearms ever built.



I guess I just don't see it and I will leave it at that.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 3:00:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/9/2006 3:00:51 PM EDT by Hunterex]

Originally Posted By nugentgl:

Originally Posted By chapperjoe:
I'm no big HK fan. not even close. don't see what's so special about their pistols and there's nothing a G36 can do that any other AR18 type gun can't too. but, price aside, G41 is one of the finest firearms ever built.



I guess I just don't see it and I will leave it at that.



I'll never in a million years call the M-16 the greatest battle rifle. I like it.... hell, at times I even love it. But it falls short , in my eyes at least , of earning the "greatest battle rifle" title.

Link Posted: 3/9/2006 3:24:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By chapperjoe:
I'm no big HK fan. not even close. don't see what's so special about their pistols



Have you any experience with the P7 or P9 series? I'll agree that the USP is nothing earth shattering, but tghe P7 and P9S are both incredible pistols.
Link Posted: 3/9/2006 5:48:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CZ-75Jeff:

Originally Posted By chapperjoe:
I'm no big HK fan. not even close. don't see what's so special about their pistols



Have you any experience with the P7 or P9 series? I'll agree that the USP is nothing earth shattering, but tghe P7 and P9S are both incredible pistols.



Just sold my P7M8 great great pistol. A book I read said it best - it was the first real innovation in pistol-dom since john browning's 1911. Sold it cause it wasn't a 45. Needless to say if they reissued teh P7M7 in numbers, they'd sell regardless of price. But we are DEFEINITELY agreed. I should make it clear - I'm not a fan of the recent HK conglomerate. Prior to the 89-92 period, they were TEH company.
Link Posted: 3/10/2006 2:53:27 AM EDT
Yeah... back when HK was on the leading edge. Now they seem to be on the bleeding edge, huh?
Link Posted: 3/10/2006 5:50:50 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Hunterex:

Originally Posted By nugentgl:

Originally Posted By chapperjoe:
I'm no big HK fan. not even close. don't see what's so special about their pistols and there's nothing a G36 can do that any other AR18 type gun can't too. but, price aside, G41 is one of the finest firearms ever built.



I guess I just don't see it and I will leave it at that.



I'll never in a million years call the M-16 the greatest battle rifle. I like it.... hell, at times I even love it. But it falls short , in my eyes at least , of earning the "greatest battle rifle" title.




It is the greatest battle rifle ONLY b/c the US military made it that way. There are a ton of flaws with the design, but in the last 10 years ALOT has been done to make it very reliable (eg. piston conversions, hydraulic buffers, M4 feed ramps, etc.).
Link Posted: 3/12/2006 10:46:05 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Hunterex:

Originally Posted By nugentgl:

Originally Posted By chapperjoe:
I'm no big HK fan. not even close. don't see what's so special about their pistols and there's nothing a G36 can do that any other AR18 type gun can't too. but, price aside, G41 is one of the finest firearms ever built.



I guess I just don't see it and I will leave it at that.



I'll never in a million years call the M-16 the greatest battle rifle. I like it.... hell, at times I even love it. But it falls short , in my eyes at least , of earning the "greatest battle rifle" title.


he said "5.56mm" battle rifleI wouldn't call it the greatest battle rifle period. I'm sorry but that designation goes to the AK47 and at least 3/4 of the world would agree
Top Top