Sig 556 Production Model Pictures


PDA






Eightball
December 7, 2006, 02:14 AM
http://sigforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc...35/m/371103567

Mods, please don't eat my soul for this, but I thought that it wouldn't get instantly swamped the way everything does in general if posted here.

It is what it is, folks.

EDIT: Quicker link: http://sigforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/630601935/m/371103567

If you enjoyed reading about "Sig 556 Production Model Pictures" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Manedwolf
December 7, 2006, 02:28 AM
Handguard...

http://lnt.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pG01-1078462reg.jpg

Eightball
December 7, 2006, 03:03 AM
That would provide a new, fun, and horridly inefficient way of cutting the cheese.

Evil Monkey
December 7, 2006, 03:19 AM
I'd rather have the XCR. XCR gives ambi bolt catch and left side charging handle.

Jack19
December 7, 2006, 07:19 AM
Ahhh......the new AR-556. :(

TexasRifleman
December 7, 2006, 09:50 AM
Sig says you can buy the old 552 style handguard and it will fit, but why not give the option? More money spent to fix something done wrong to begin with.


So far, just to have a rifle you'd like to shoot out of the box you still have to buy:

1) Forearm that doesn't look like a medievel torture device and
2) SIGHTS - Yeah, it doesn't even come with sights :rolleyes:

And I am way past unhappy personally because I put money down for one close to a year ago, and I am having to cancel my order at this late date since it's not even close to what was talked about a year ago at SHOT by SIG themselves.

El Tejon
December 7, 2006, 09:56 AM
Bait and Switch by a gun company? A gun company? I . . am . . . shocked.

TexasRifleman
December 7, 2006, 09:59 AM
Bait and Switch by a gun company?

Heh heh, no kidding. A gun show lie at SHOT? Would never happen.

Outlaws
December 7, 2006, 10:57 AM
I think it does come with sights. Look at the old pic VS new pic. Its on the underside. You just have to pull a pin and put it up top by the looks of it.

El Tejon
December 7, 2006, 11:01 AM
Yeah, but if people don't see it, they don't think the BUIS are there.

There was the same talk when the Steyr Scout rifle came out.

"It doesn't have sights."
"Yes, it does, you have to flip them up."
"I don't see sights. It doesn't have sights.":banghead:

Master Blaster
December 7, 2006, 11:13 AM
The thingie on the underside is called a bayonette Lug. The gun has no iron sights. while this is fine for a varmint gun its a problem on the battle rifle. Also the cheese grater requires a cover or a verticle fore grip be added.

If you feel that 2lbs extra weight and a gas piston is needed on an AR-15 this is the gun for you.

And irregardless of what anyone says this is an untested design, other than by SIGs development folks.

El Tejon
December 7, 2006, 11:38 AM
If I do not see sights, the gun has no sights. This may become another one of Kirk's Laws of the Internet.

Master, the iron sights on the alleged ZIG556 have been posted before here on THR. Check out Number 6's post (post #34) with a pic of the sights: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=229012&page=2

Unless they have taken them off again. Imagine a gun company changing things on us!:D

carterbeauford
December 7, 2006, 11:41 AM
(crosses the Sig 556 off his want list)

ny32182
December 7, 2006, 03:18 PM
This thing is much improved over the prototypes. I'll be all over this as soon as the supply settles out and all the factory options are known. This new version has:

-More comfortable looking grip
-Accepts the 551 forend if that is your thing/rail systems
-Doesn't have the raised rail
-Lighter barrel
-1/7" barrel

They took care of all my objections. :)

TexasRifleman
December 7, 2006, 03:38 PM
I think it does come with sights. Look at the old pic VS new pic. Its on the underside. You just have to pull a pin and put it up top by the looks of it.

I'm sorry, but I have to laugh at that.... The thingie is a bayonet lug, and I just spewed Dr Pepper all over my office :evil:

You might want to go back and edit that post rather than have that there for posterity. :neener:

The original rifle did not have a bayo lug, the one that was shown at SHOT.
There is no way that "thingie" can rotate since it's the gas block. What they did was machine a rail into the top of the gas block so you can put whatever you want on there. The height is supposed to match all the AR sights on the market. That really isn't a bad idea at all. That's all the original sight was, they just don't install the post now.

The rifle flat out has no sights. Sig says they believe most people will end up doing custom sights and optics regardless, and that is probably true.

Problem is they did not lower the price accordingly ($75-100 IMHO) to offset leaving them off, so all they did was increase their margins.

THAT is my problem with no sights, I most likely would have bought Troy BUIS and some optic anyway, so it's the money that ticks me off.

Outlaws
December 7, 2006, 03:48 PM
Well its not a close picture lol. Besides, who is going to use a bayonet? This isn't the 1940's. ...and they obviously don't think it will ever see CQB otherwise it would have iron sights. :banghead:

TexasRifleman
December 7, 2006, 03:52 PM
Besides, who is going to use a bayonet? This isn't the 1940's.

Last time I looked every standard AR made was shipping with a bayonet lug (except to those states that seceded already.)

There are light mounts (although crappy ones) and other accessories that use the bayo mount, so no harm in leaving one there.

No one in their right mind would want a sight that doesn't just flip up or down quickly and easily.

If you have a sight that you have to fiddle with the business end of the rifle to bring into play you won't last long in a gunfight when your optics fail.

and they obviously don't think it will ever see CQB otherwise it would have iron sights.

No no, you are missing the point. Everyone has their own preference for BUIS so they don't include them. That's a very good idea.
And there will be a certainly number of people that just go with optics only because they won't ever be in a place where they need a backup.

It's just that they didn't lower the price when they left that item off, like they should have.

MatthewVanitas
December 7, 2006, 03:52 PM
Well its not a close picture lol. Besides, who is going to use a bayonet? This isn't the 1940's.


Because if it didn't have a bayo lug, people would be whining that SiG had "caved in to the PC crowd", and roundly insisting that they will never so much a touch a SiG product again.


I hope SiGs marketing folks _don't_ read these boards; no matter what they do, folks whine up a storm. I'd hate for the poor kids to get ulcers trying to please everybody simultaneously.

I'm not sure if a rifle designed with the collective input of SigForum/GlockTalk/ARF/THR/TFL would be a wonder of modern ingenuity, or the most wretched mechanical bastard ever devised.

-MV

Outlaws
December 7, 2006, 03:54 PM
I never said it was (if it was a sight to start with lol) a good idea to put it under there. But now that I look at it, it does look like a bayonet lug.

Outlaws
December 7, 2006, 03:56 PM
Because if it didn't have a bayo lug, people would be whining that SiG had "caved in to the PC crowd"

Okay that I can understand. Cheers to the "evil" feature. :D I didn't think of it like that. Besides, I dont' need no stinkin' sights. Spray and pray baby...Spray and pray.

TexasRifleman
December 7, 2006, 04:00 PM
Well the rumor mill is alive today for sure.

Story has changed again, big shock.

Sig says orders they have already accepted from dealers will ship by Dec. 17, and the original iron sights shown at SHOT show are back on again, along with a bayonet lug.

Also they claim the original Swiss Arms forearm will fit, so the cheese grater can go.

http://thefiringline.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=21539&d=1165497523

Here is a photo of a 551 so you can see the gas block/sights/bayonet lug. Looks like they took the easy road and just copied what already existed.

http://swissarms2.ath.cx/uploads/pics/SG-551_rechts_03.jpg

Master Blaster
December 7, 2006, 05:07 PM
Now I am not in the army and have never been to Iraq.

But apparently some of our soldiers over there are required to do urban house to house searches, so a bayonette might come in handy.

I was watching the show shootout on the History Channel, and they were talking with a soldier who had come upon two insurgents in a dark room in a house, and he was talking about how he had to struggle with them hand to hand and could barely get his knife out of its sheath, He mentioned that he wished he had a mounted Bayonette so maybe they are still useful in some situations.

One of the things I like about my RRA midlength upper is that it has the right spacing to mount that Made in Germany Colt bayonette I have.

Correia
December 7, 2006, 05:37 PM
El T, actually the first rule of the interweb is that no matter what the product is, somebody will whine about it. If somebody made a 1 pound rifle, that was indestructible, more reliable than an AK, shot .308 but recoiled like a .22, was 1/8 MOA out of the box, and cost $199.95, somebody would gripe because the checkering on was too rough or they wanted it in blue.

For years and years and years people have been begging for new rifles. Sig makes one.

People whine. Endlessly. It has an AR stock! Well people would whine if it didn't. They can't win.

Who here has shot the original 551 with the folding stock?

Anybody here who has shot the 551 with the original handguards raise your hand.

(crickets chirp)

I have. It was a handguard. Big whoop. It didn't sway me one way or the other. The folder was a decent plastic folder, but the collapsible will be more versitile. Folders are good for storage and that is about it.

Who here handled the prototypes of the 556 last year at SHOT? Raise your hand.

(okay, a couple of us)

I didn't think it was a cheese grater at all. Those of you complaining about it being a cheese grater, have you actually TOUCHED the gun? Oh man, how dare I let actual reality intrude upon a good internet rant.

The things that we complained about the most at SHOT have been addressed. My primary complaint was the height of the sight rail. It is lower now. Good. That's what I, and about 5,000 other people told the Sig reps.

Everybody has different opinions on BUIS anyway. And the original flip ups were cheap and unimpressive. I would rather leave them off and stick on the ones that I personally like. (ARMS 40L rear, PRI front). People who drop this kind of cash on a rifle are going to tweak it anyway.

And it isn't an AR? It is different? GASP! I can only own one kind of gun! :scrutiny:

I have access to about 30 different rifles. Yes, a couple of them even weigh more than my ARs. :rolleyes: Jeez people, give me a break. If you don't want one, don't buy one.

hartzpad
December 7, 2006, 05:54 PM
Amen Larry! I did handle the Sig rifles at the last SHOT Show and I was thoroughly impressed. I handled the LE versions of the Sig rifles last month at SWAT Roundup 2006 in Orlando and was very impressed with them as well.

I'm not complaining at all, at least they are not following HK's example of pissing on the civilian population!

TexasRifleman
December 7, 2006, 08:08 PM
Who here has shot the original 551 with the folding stock?

Yes I have fired one, played with one etc.
Yes the side folders suck. But from an aesthetics point of view they look "right".

Not all of us that have handled the "real thing" are in some door kicking tactical line of work. Some are just collectors and admirers.
At the range, and hanging on my wall, I don't care if the side folder is flimsy.

As a collector and admirer (who doesn't want to spend his money getting the real thing, I spent enough on "real things" abackin the 80's thank goodness) then a side folder, old style handguard etc allows me to build as close to the original as possible, and that's what I want sitting in in the rack.

Same reason I had Fulton Armory build me an M14 instead of geting an SA. It's as close to the real deal as normal people can get these days.
Same reason I went to all the trouble to SBR an AR just to put a 14.5" barrel on it. It looks right and lets my inner Walter Mitty peek out.
If we are all REALLY honest that's the reason we buy all this crap anyway, most people just won't admit it :)

So for me whether or not the 556 is an excellent rifle doesn't really matter, I want a 551 and my dot gov says I can't have one. So, I will try to get as close as I can.

I suspect that's why a lot of folks want the side folder.

So. I'll get one when the side folders come out, and I'll put the old forearm on it, and I'll tell my dumb friends that don't know better all about my 551 :D

Sig was right not to build one initially, they really aren't that great in the real world but my real world consists of the shooting range and occasional coyote hunt :evil:


I would rather leave them off and stick on the ones that I personally like. (ARMS 40L rear, PRI front).

I really wanted them to leave the sight off too, but I wanted them to adjust the price accordingly rather than use it as a ploy to increase their margins.
Look, they are not paying much for those sights in quantity I know that so it wouldn't have made much difference, but there is some perceived value in being able to shoot a rifle straight out of the box I guess so that was the best path for Sig.

I'm not complaining at all, at least they are not following HK's example of pissing on the civilian population!

And that is the main reason I didn't cancel my order with Wild West, and if things go according to the story being told I'll have a 556 before 12/17.

I'll maybe order the side folder when they make up their minds to do it. I don't know that some aftermarket folks won't come out with an adapter in the meantime anyway and solve the problem. I'd be surprised if someone didn't.

If not, the Magpul UBR will be good for when I go tactical on the racoons.

mmike87
December 7, 2006, 10:55 PM
I never minded the AR stock. I like the AR mags. What I didn't like was the butt-arse ugly AR stock and it's matching partner in crime on the front of the gun. :barf:

Maybe I can tell them to keep the stock and forearm in exchange for free shipping.

I'm a big fan of ACE stocks, so my 556, when I get it will likely be blessed with some flavor of ACE stock. I'll have to cough up the cash for the B&T rail which cost almost as much as an AR, but hell it will last a lifetime.

SIG did a lot right right the 556, assuming it shoots well. Which makes a couple things, like the front and rear cheese graters, really, really puzzling. What were they thinking in that regard? :confused:

El Tejon
December 7, 2006, 10:55 PM
Larry, the Errornet is populated by a lot of kids who were not around in the late '80s to play with the ZIG90 clones that came in. Thus, they want all the goofy "Iwannacoolgun virus" stuff on the G90. They think with the coolness part of their mind, not the practicality part of it.:D

Regardless of what it looks like (initially) put it in our hands.

Wes Janson
December 8, 2006, 12:57 AM
I want a 550. Handguard, bipod, folder, and not-the-standard-AR-mag. But I suppose that isn't going to happen.
And it isn't an AR? It is different? GASP! I can only own one kind of gun!

It's too much like an AR.

Eightball
December 8, 2006, 04:24 AM
It's too much like an AR.Except not finiky about everything from weather conditions to ammo choice to the color of your hat, and doesn't have the horrid direct-gas impingement system.

Just kidding. I just don't like the AR operating system, and have always wanted a 550; what a coincidence that this was released! When I win the lottery, count me in for one of these.

If you enjoyed reading about "Sig 556 Production Model Pictures" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!