I have heard some great things about the HK 91, and I was wondering what you people would feel is Just as good better or 2nd place to it.
[img]http://www.hkpro.com/image/hk91swamp.jpg[/img]

Damn.  Talk about a trip in the 'way-back' machine.

I remember that pic from the HK ads in SOF from way back when an HK91 was about $700.  Imay even have the old mag somewhere.

As to whats next best to the HK, thats really a personal preference - no one can answer that for you.  The question as to what is better -HKG3/91, FAL/L1A1, M1A, etc. - has been absolutely beat to death here.  They all have their merits and they all have their problems.  Personally, I love the HK design and I'd take a well built FAL/L1A1 next.  YMMV.

I have always wanted a HK91, but a ban passed before I ever got my license making it impossible for me to ever buy one of these or a FAL. I'm stuck with AR-10's (which you can no longer hunt with here), M1A's for battle rifles, and not being able to hunt with my AR-10 is a big minus it makes then gun almost useless to me.

This is another ongoing (9mm vs. .45 type) arguement.

My views--I owned an HK 91, several FAL's (DSA Standard, Carbine and SAR-48), an M1A (sold it unfired, but have shot another one) and some AK-47's.

Skipping the AK vs. AR arguement (since the 91 is a .308 battle rifle vs. a .223 or 7.62 x 39mm assault rifle), I see it this way (ranked in order):

Accuracy:
M1A, HK, FAL.

Durability:
FAL, HK, M1A.

Ergonomics:
FAL, HK, M1A (personal preference plays a large part in this one).

Reliability:
HK, FAL, M1A

Recoil:
FAL, M1A, HK.

I may be wrong on one or two orders, but it should be close to that.

I personally prefer the FAL--mags are cheaper, parts are cheaper, and I like the way it feels.  The HK has better sights and is easier to scope (the FAL dust cover, even at it's best, can slip).  The M1A is more conducive to accuracy and accurization.

It is definitely a personal preference thing.

I was young when I saw my first HK91, but it was love at first sight.


[img]http://www.hkpro.com/mem7.jpg[/img]

I've had a HK91 for seven years...lots of emotional attachment, but I gotta say I like the FAL more. More handy and ergonomic.

I can't believe it.
I have old SOF Magazines from 1984 and I'm
looking at a similar ad.
I thought I was the only one who subscribed to that mag back in the 80's.
RK Brown was/is some character. I haven't read  SOF in years. I'll have to check it out next time at B&N.

I think very would argue against the HK91 being very reliable.In my opinion it is the most reliable battle rifle out there,the Galil is very close.Some don't like the controls and smoe say recoil is harsh.These complaints have never been an issue with me.I'd shoot one first before shelling out $1800 plus and find out the rifle doe'snt suit you.I think if you are a fairly big person and have large hands(to reach the controls) the 91 would be a fine choice.
...just my two

BigZ - No, you're not the only one.


Remember this one?

[img]wsphotofews.excite.com/035/q0/aI/bE/zZ82488.jpg[/img]


Yes kids, that's $766 MSRP for a package consisting of a brand-spankin new HK91, three 20rd German HK mags, HK light bipod, HK sling, HK patch, cleaning kit, sight adjustment tool, and muzzle cap.

I will take it Shaggy(this is your ad, right?)