HK MR556 VS Colt 6920?


PDA






mopar92
June 29, 2011, 07:41 PM
What sets the MR "above and beyond" the Colt? I was thinking about plinking down some cash and selling an AR for one. does anybody here have one? How do you like it?

If you enjoyed reading about "HK MR556 VS Colt 6920?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
C-grunt
June 29, 2011, 07:46 PM
You kind of are comparing apples and oranges here.

The HK is a piston rifle and has a railed forend. It also has a non chrome lined "match grade barrel" instead of the Colt's standard chrome lined barrel.

Having held one I can tell you that it is a heavy rifle. The thing is almost 9 pounds bare. Also the thing cost literally 3 times as much as a 6920.

All that being said the MR556 is supposedly a really good rifle. I can attest that the fit and finish is superb and it appears to be a solid system.

mopar92
June 29, 2011, 07:52 PM
What makes it "better" other than it can fire from submersion of water?

Quiet
June 29, 2011, 09:16 PM
What makes it "better" other than it can fire from submersion of water?

It has H&K stamped on the side of it.


IMO...
If you are looking for a gas-piston AR type rifle, the LWRC M6A2 is far better and less expensive than the H&K MR556A1.

If I was in the market for a gas-piston 5.56x45mm rifle, I'd get a FN SCAR-16S than the H&K MR-556A1.

mopar92
June 29, 2011, 10:41 PM
I will check out those rifles..

C-grunt
June 29, 2011, 10:50 PM
What makes it "better" other than it can fire from submersion of water?
Please dont shoot your gun when it's full of water, no matter what the HK comercial shows. You have a very good chance of blowing your gun up that way.

Comparing the HK MR556/416 to a Colt 6920/M4 is like comparing a Mustang GT to a Mustang Cobra. They are very similar but there are many things different about each.

benzy2
June 29, 2011, 11:36 PM
mopar92, please don't feel that the HK could be fired under water where the Colt could not. If you look at that video again, you will see that the barrel tip of the HK was out of the water and then I believe pointed downward once out of the water to let any that got in drain. The Colt was fully submerged and not allowed to drain. Any barrel shot full of water is asking for trouble from any AR system out there.

FlyinBryan
June 29, 2011, 11:54 PM
isnt the hk also allowed exactly twice the drain time as the ar in that video?

time it

i would prefer the colt.

HorseSoldier
June 30, 2011, 12:06 AM
On the actual HK416s some of our ODAs ran while I was still active, the main difference between that and a Colt made M4A1 was that the 416 was significantly less accurate -- group sizes were double what an M4A1 would do at 100 meters. With green tip that translated into about 5 MOA.

Oh, and it has H-und-K stamped on it. After the chicks-dig-it factor wore off, a lot of those guys went back to stock M4A1s or shorter barreled direct-gas uppers from various sources.

Not unlike the response to the H-und-K wunder-magazines that most everyone tossed after some actual experience, and SOCOM eventually deselected for use.

Chindo18Z
June 30, 2011, 12:46 AM
What HorseSoldier said.



With regard to firing from the water...

The tiny bore diameter of any .22 caliber weapon causes enough water surface tension at the muzzle end to preclude rapid draining of a locked rifle barrel upon egress from the water.

A simple slight fractional pull of the bolt to the rear (opening the chamber just a hair) breaks that tension and has been SOP with ARs for about...oh...50+ years.

The "water trick" is contrived example of HK marketing department smoke and mirrors. I'll bet I can get an HK to blow up in the water. I'll bet I can get a Colt 6920 ( or S&W, Ruger, BC, DPMS, Noveske, etc.) to reliably fire coming out of the water.

If you are so high speed that you need to immediately fire when rising from the depths...there are several other weapon systems (including one from HK) designed specifically for that job (diver / sentry / crew removal).

Or you could just transition to a bone stock 1911 .45 or .357 revolver and fire that puppy from under water...with reliably lethal effect.

The 416 is a quality build but vastly over weight and not especially accurate. It provides a piston system of dubious advantage unless you happen to be running a 10.5" barrel or a can on a full-auto weapon. It commands the price it does (in the USA as the MR556A1) due to both HK marketing hype and a disadvantageous Dollar / Euro exchange rate.

The Teutons could over-engineer a toothpick.

I'd buy the Colt.

mopar92
June 30, 2011, 01:00 AM
Geeze guys, I'm not buying a gun to shoot it in water. I'm trying to learn what the biggest difference in performance is/isn't ...

Chindo18Z
June 30, 2011, 01:04 AM
Well...that's what were're trying to tell you.

Less performance for more money. You are quite simply paying for the HK brand name.

It's not that it's a bad weapon...it's just over-hyped and over-priced in comparison to some better (and less costly) makes.

I would not consider it to be better than the Colt...just more expensive.

Sam Cade
June 30, 2011, 01:13 AM
Or you could just transition to a bone stock 1911 .45 or .357 revolver and fire that puppy from under water...with reliably lethal effect.
.


..or an AK

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99EZSd_8hIQ

muhahaha.

Rubber_Duck
June 30, 2011, 03:23 AM
I vote strongly against the HK. I have nothing personal against HK but I feel the standard AR-15 does everything the HK will do at a fraction of the price, and the Colt is a great rifle of known quality that meets all the minimum specs for quality control and testing. It is still the gold standard and the HK is simply an over-hyped and overweight porker of a gas piston gun with a grossly inflated price tag befitting of a pre-ban HK.

I feel LMT and LWRC offer the best piston ARs on the market right now, if you HAVE to have a piston in your AR. I would take a Knight's or Noveske any day over those, and any others in that price range of AR-pattern rifles. If I wanted a gas-piston I would look at non-AR platforms. The SCAR-16S is a successful platform and is reasonably affordable these days and would be my first choice.

mopar92
June 30, 2011, 07:40 AM
Looks like I'll just keep my 6920 running.....

boricua9mm
June 30, 2011, 09:00 AM
You'd be wise to stick with the Pony. Many things keep me away from the Mr. 556, and I'm even an HK fan!

- Heavy profile barrel with zero with no chrome lining and, according to HK, no barrel surface treatment that would be an appropriate substitute for chrome.

- From reports I've seen, as well as a shooter at my gun clob, accuracy is not on par with a Match rifle, which HK claims this is.

- Straight cut magwell limits magazine compatability

- Incompatable with HK416 bolt carrier

- Incompatible with normal AR15 trigger groups

- Firing pin safety...***?

- Silly takedown pins that require a tool

- Piston setup offers very few advantages over Direct Impingement for a semi-auto 16" carbine

- Silly plastic dust cover...***?

- Silly plastic changing handle latch...***?

- Billboard safety warning on the front of the magwell

- The $2500 price tag equates to a fully equipped, top of the line Direct Impingement carbine with optics, BUIS, rail system, light, and 1k rounds of ammo.

Sustainability of a rifle platform is important to me. HK has gone out of their way to make sure that this will NOT be even remotely close to the AR family in terms of cross-compatability, and therefore, sustainability.

JustinJ
June 30, 2011, 09:01 AM
Many people, myself included, believe the best thing about HK is they are the highest quality firearm out there. Rumor has it that the military version of the mr556, which is essentially the same gun except with a chrome line barrel and select fire, is a favorite of spec ops and was used in the Bin Laden raid. Their guns are expensive but they also put tons in reasearch and development as well as quality control. However, if i were going to spend that much i'd probably just do a HKG36 conversion. For a great mr556 review with parts pics check out the link below. There is a finish comparison pic with a colt:

http://www.hkpro.com/forum/hk416-hk417-hq/135941-any-new-mr556-owners-have-review-field-report-yet-dcdreamboat.html

HorseSoldier
June 30, 2011, 12:36 PM
Rumor has it that the military version of the mr556, which is essentially the same gun except with a chrome line barrel and select fire, is a favorite of spec ops and was used in the Bin Laden raid.

There are comments up thread from people who actually are in the SOF community. Basic upshot is that, marketing hype aside, the HK416 hasn't been a resounding success, and it's only caught on with a niche market within the special operations community. So it's not a "favorite of spec ops." It's a weapon used by certain end users who have requirements for a weapon that's marginal on accuracy but good to run with suppressors or very short barrels.

To be fair, it is more successful than HK's last SOF offering, the Mk 23, but that really isn't saying much.

Their guns are expensive but they also put tons in reasearch and development as well as quality control.

Which explains why they put the safety on the MP5 and other weapons of that generation where no one without orangutan hands can manipulate it without breaking their grip. Or why the USP series of pistols has such a remarkably high bore line. Or why they seem to have deliberately designed the HK416/MR556 lower to not be compatible with PMAGs but to allow better use of the "non firing hand grips front of magwell" shooting technique that no one with any training had used for a few decades. Or why they used such cheap steel in their "improved" AR magazines that when my unit got them we were literally having misfeeds due to bent feedlips the first day we took them out onto the flat range (to say nothing of how the "non binding follower" on them would, well, bind more frequently than USGI aluminum mags in good condition).

I will say that I used to be an HK true believer when I had zero experience with their weapons. Some time on the range with MP5s, HK53s, and HK416s pretty quickly illustrated to me that while their stuff isn't bad, it doesn't live up to the claims of the HK propaganda machine nor justify the price tag.

There is a finish comparison pic with a colt:

What does that have to do with anything relevant to a fighting rifle? If they spent more money on quality barrels and consequent accuracy rather than trying to make their product look polished and pretty externally maybe they'd do better with serious shooters.

JustinJ
June 30, 2011, 05:36 PM
"There are comments up thread from people who actually are in the SOF community. Basic upshot is that, marketing hype aside, the HK416 hasn't been a resounding success, and it's only caught on with a niche market within the special operations community. So it's not a "favorite of spec ops." It's a weapon used by certain end users who have requirements for a weapon that's marginal on accuracy but good to run with suppressors or very short barrels."

A few random people posting anonymously on message boards of their personal opinions is more credible than published articles that reference people actually in the SOF community? I'm not accusing anybody here of lying about their credentials but there is little question as to which source is more credible from the perspective of someone reading this board who has never met the people you refer to.

I'm not getting into a DI vs Piston debate but obviously enough believe the 416 has superior reliability.

"Which explains why they put the safety on the MP5 and other weapons of that generation where no one without orangutan hands can manipulate it without breaking their grip. Or why the USP series of pistols has such a remarkably high bore line."

Yet they still became a couple of the most commonly used military/LE weapons all over the world. Imperfect designs proves that HK doesn't invest heavily in R&D? Engineering is always a compromise in one thing or the other. HK has a long, undeniable history of innovation and quality.


"I will say that I used to be an HK true believer when I had zero experience with their weapons."

So then why were you a believer?

"Some time on the range with MP5s, HK53s, and HK416s pretty quickly illustrated to me that while their stuff isn't bad, it doesn't live up to the claims of the HK propaganda machine nor justify the price tag."

Again, their prevalance world wide says different.

"Quote:
There is a finish comparison pic with a colt:

What does that have to do with anything relevant to a fighting rifle? If they spent more money on quality barrels and consequent accuracy rather than trying to make their product look polished and pretty externally maybe they'd do better with serious shooters."

It's an indication of attention to detail which generally is an indication of quality. And what supposedly is wrong with HK barrels? A gas piston rifle's chrome lined barrel designed for a select fire weapon isn't meant for bench rest competition.

benzy2
June 30, 2011, 05:45 PM
If you've already got the 6290 stick with that and enjoy it. I see no reason to switch to anything else unless you are looking for a different setup. The 6290 is built very well with good parts. I short of changing handguards or moving to a different barrel length/gas system length, I don't see much I would touch.

Sam Cade
June 30, 2011, 05:54 PM
Yet they still became a couple of the most commonly used military/LE weapons all over the world.




Again, their prevalence world wide says different.


...and what first world nations use H&K rifles as their standard issue weapon?

Lets list them.

1.Germany
2.Spain
3.??

Rubber_Duck
June 30, 2011, 06:18 PM
...and what first world nations use H&K rifles as their standard issue weapon?

Lets list them.

1.Germany
2.Spain
3.??

If you're going to bring that into the discussion might as well include both parties, so what countries use the AR-15/M-16/M4 as their PRIMARY infantry rifle?

I know the United States, Canada, and Israel are using them. IIRC there are several Asian countires that field the M16/M4 variants as their primary fighting rifle.

12131
June 30, 2011, 09:47 PM
Originally posted by Quiet:

IMO...
If you are looking for a gas-piston AR type rifle, the LWRC M6A2 is far better and less expensive than the H&K MR556A1.

Based on?

Chindo18Z
June 30, 2011, 10:22 PM
...published articles that reference people actually in the SOF community?

Like who? I probably know them. If I don't know them, I'm pretty sure I know of them...or know their bosses. If they are currently on Active Duty...and in the community...they ain't talking to reporters. Most of the recent "sources" are Former Action Guys, Administration leakers, or military staff echelons speaking both speculatively and out of school. All of them looking for a warm and fuzzy belly rub from the press (or a paycheck).

In that respect, no more verifiable than the "anonymous" postings on this forum...nicht wahr? :rolleyes:

Most of the open source press since Abbottabad is simple civilian gushing over an old weapon, acting as if the 416 is something new under the sun. At this point, the 416 simply provides grist for some writers to get paid for articles.

In comparison to the tens of millions of AKs & ARs out there, the military world is not exactly awash with HK products. If you doubt that, head to the sound of the guns almost anywhere in the world.

If you aren't doing the HAF/GAF thing downrange, you'll probably not appreciate the 416's actual niche in the US SOF pantheon of weapons.

For purposes of the OP's question, I'll reiterate: A stock Colt is a better weapon and a better buy. That's my considered and anonymous opinion. ;)

YMMV.

Sam Cade
July 1, 2011, 12:08 AM
That's my considered and anonymous opinion. ;)

YMMV.


The venerable Sgt. has spoken, heed ye now his words lest ye rouse his ire.:cool:

JustinJ
July 1, 2011, 08:49 AM
"...and what first world nations use H&K rifles as their standard issue weapon?

Lets list them."

Standard issue is a different subject although the G3 was issue for many countries. The MP5 and USP are not standard issue weapons but rather than create the longest post in HR history i'll let others look them up on wiki to see how many countries use them. HKs are extremely popular for operators who actually get to choose their weapons instead of bureaucrats as in standard weapon selection.

"Like who? I probably know them. If I don't know them, I'm pretty sure I know of them...or know their bosses. If they are currently on Active Duty...and in the community...they ain't talking to reporters. Most of the recent "sources" are Former Action Guys, Administration leakers, or military staff echelons speaking both speculatively and out of school. All of them looking for a warm and fuzzy belly rub from the press (or a paycheck)."

It's generally accepted in our soceity that a published article from a reputable media outlet will verify the credentials of sources even if they are quoted anonymously. If one writes a book and then uses a message board quote by "Chindo18Z" as evidence for his position the author will have a hard time getting it published. No offense but there really is no way for someone reading your posts to know if you're Rambo incarnate or some pimple faced 15 year old who reads Soldier of Fortune. Thats not said as an insult but it is in fact the case. But i'll still give a name and quote. US Major Chaz Bowser said:

“One thing I valued about being the weapons developer for Special Operations is that I could go to Iraq or Afghanistan or anywhere with whatever weapons I wanted to carry. As soon as the H&K 416 was available, it got stuffed into my kit bag and, through test after test, it became my primary carry weapon as a long gun. I had already gotten the data from folks carrying it before me and had determined that it would be foolish to risk my life with a lesser system.”

Bartholomew Roberts
July 1, 2011, 04:01 PM
It's generally accepted in our soceity that a published article from a reputable media outlet will verify the credentials of sources even if they are quoted anonymously. If one writes a book and then uses a message board quote by "Chindo18Z" as evidence for his position the author will have a hard time getting it published. No offense but there really is no way for someone reading your posts to know if you're Rambo incarnate or some pimple faced 15 year old who reads Soldier of Fortune.

Actually, there is a way to know just by reading Chindo18Z's posts - you can compare what he states with what you know to be true from your own experience. I've been reading his posts for 11 years now - so I can at a very minimum guarantee that he is no pimply faced 15yr old - and I'd be comfortable betting my own money on the 18Z claims.

However, since you seem to prefer published sources:

"A December 2005 study conducted by the 10th Special Forces Group (Airborne), for example, which evaluated the HK416 and Colt's Close Quarters Battle-Receiver (CQB-R), concluded that CQB-R "out performed the HK416 in mechanical reliability." Source: MSGT Kevin M. O'Connor, USA, AAR HK 416 Operations Testing and Assessment (Memorandum for Record), Department of the Army, 10th Special Forces Group (Airborne), Fort Carson, CO, p. 4.

And then there is Larry Vickers, who played a key role in the development of the HK416 (http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?Itemid=5&catid=8:the-automatic-rifles&id=80:hk416&option=com_content&view=article). Here is what he is currently recommending: a direct impingement Daniel Defense (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RcrE4u4_9g).

There is also the LMT 308MWS which defeated the HK417 in the UK's Ministry of Defense weapon trials for a Designated Marksman rifle for British forces.

Rumor has it that the military version of the mr556, which is essentially the same gun except with a chrome line barrel and select fire, is a favorite of spec ops and was used in the Bin Laden raid.

Not the same. H&K had to make changes to the MR556 to get it imported. An MR556 upper will not fit on an AR15 lower or a 416 lower and vice versa due to different takedown pin location.

And used in the Bin Laden raid? You've got a Special Forces NCO with years of experience who is willing to take time out of his day to talk guns with you and you say you can't count him as a credible source because of the anonymous nature of the Internet; but the Military Times Gear Scout blog declares that an HK416 was used in the Bin Laden raid (relying on anonymous sources) and you accept that as fact?

JustinJ
July 1, 2011, 06:16 PM
"Actually, there is a way to know just by reading Chindo18Z's posts - you can compare what he states with what you know to be true from your own experience. I've been reading his posts for 11 years now - so I can at a very minimum guarantee that he is no pimply faced 15yr old - and I'd be comfortable betting my own money on the 18Z claims."

Okay, let me reiterate i am accusing nobody of misrepresenting themselves. But unless you know that person somewhere other than a msg board extensive knowledge could simply mean they like to read. And Chindoz has a very different opinion of the 416 than Larry Vickers based on the article you linked.

"And then there is Larry Vickers, who played a key role in the development of the HK416. Here is what he is currently recommending: a direct impingement Daniel Defense."

Did you read the first link? Its pure praise for the 416. I was only able to watch a portion of the second link as i'm not supposed to stream where i am at the moment but it looks to me like a giant commercial he was paid to do by daniel defense that was geared towards civilians who can't buy a 416. On Vicker's website he clearly states he is paid by Daniel Defense. Its also where he calls the 416 "The preferred 5.56mm carbine for the most elite special operations soldiers in the world." "There is also the LMT 308MWS which defeated the HK417 in the UK's Ministry of Defense weapon trials for a Designated Marksman rifle for British forces."

I did not know the 417 was designed to be a Designated Marskman rifle?

"Rumor has it that the military version of the mr556, which is essentially the same gun except with a chrome line barrel and select fire, is a favorite of spec ops and was used in the Bin Laden raid.

Not the same. H&K had to make changes to the MR556 to get it imported. An MR556 upper will not fit on an AR15 lower or a 416 lower and vice versa due to different takedown pin location.

And used in the Bin Laden raid? You've got a Special Forces NCO with years of experience who is willing to take time out of his day to talk guns with you and you say you can't count him as a credible source because of the anonymous nature of the Internet; but the Military Times Gear Scout blog declares that an HK416 was used in the Bin Laden raid (relying on anonymous sources) and you accept that as fact?

"Rumor has it...." does not mean i accept something as fact. And there are more sources claiming this than Military Times Gear Scout.

The pin changes do suck but have nothing to do with the internal operations of the gun.

"However, since you seem to prefer published sources:

"A December 2005 study conducted by the 10th Special Forces Group (Airborne), for example, which evaluated the HK416 and Colt's Close Quarters Battle-Receiver (CQB-R), concluded that CQB-R "out performed the HK416 in mechanical reliability." Source: MSGT Kevin M. O'Connor, USA, AAR HK 416 Operations Testing and Assessment (Memorandum for Record), Department of the Army, 10th Special Forces Group (Airborne), Fort Carson, CO, p. 4."

And the 2007 Extremed Dust Test 3 showed the 416 to be more reliable. Either way i'd like to read the study you reference if you have a link.

Quiet
July 1, 2011, 06:46 PM
And the 2007 Extremed Dust Test 3 showed the 416 to be more reliable.
And from that same test, the FN SCAR-L was more reliable than the H&K HK-416. :evil:

HorseSoldier
July 1, 2011, 09:23 PM
And then there is Larry Vickers, who played a key role in the development of the HK416. Here is what he is currently recommending: a direct impingement Daniel Defense.


From some of his comments at his classes I've attended, he appears to have somewhat mixed feelings about how the production versions of the HK416 and HK45 turned out.

RX-178
July 1, 2011, 10:31 PM
Now, here's what I understand of the development of the HK416. I don't have any documentation or crap about it, so take it for what little this is really worth. I was never interested in the HK416 (despite being a huge G36 fan) to the point that I did my own independent research about it.

The first prototypes of what would become the HK416 were developed by Larry Vickers, and Aaron Davis (don't know what he's doing now but among his many notable jobs, was the very first certified armorer's course instructor for the FN SCAR) at... I think it was a Marine Corps camp somewhere. They built 3 prototypes of select fire AR-15 carbines utilizing a 'gas tappet system' (Aaron insists on correcting whenever someone calls it a 'piston system'. Don't ask me what the hell the difference is).

BUT... as it was told to me, both Larry Vickers and Aaron Davis abandoned the idea. Don't remember why, but some part of it just didn't work as well as they thought. It COULD have been the accuracy problem that other posters have mentioned, I don't know.

So, everyone involved in the project at the time abandoned it. And AFTER that happened, Larry Vickers supposedly took the idea to HK, sold it, made a huge ton of money all on his own, at the same time cutting Aaron out of the loop for the deal, and selling for big $$$ a design that he already knew was a pile, but knew HK could sell it.

How reliable is my source? I don't have the slightest clue. Aaron manages to be at the same time, the most mysterious, and most loud-mouthed individual I've ever known. I know he works really closely with Col. Rocky Green (USMC Ret.), who was an HK Rep for a long time, and I believe currently reps for L3 Eotech.

Aaron does have a habit of making statements that have absolutely no corroborating published data, but then turn out to be absolutely right about it. Mostly about night vision and rifle scopes though. Not sure that makes him a reliable source, but I'm just throwing that out there.

Chindo18Z
July 1, 2011, 10:36 PM
JustinJ: But i'll still give a name and quote. US Major Chaz Bowser said: ...

Yeah, I'm familiar with the good Major and his all-over-the-internet "buy" HK quote. He is a fine American whose words were scooped up and misappropriated by HK fan-boys everywhere. It was further shamelessly spread everywhere by the "Oh No...The Sky is Falling...We Need to Buy HK" Capital Hill/Gannett Publishing/HK mafia.

Oft repeated HK shill sales article from one of the trade rags (quotes Bowser):

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-usas-m4-carbine-controversy-03289/

The original quote from a 2007 editorial article he wrote into Army Times:

http://www.armytimes.com/community/opinion/army_opinion_bowser070319/

What you seem to miss is context. Bowser was only indirectly referencing the 416 in a discussion of the need for even acquiring a new long gun for the force. The fact that he had access to grab a 416 when going out the door on downrange TDY business trips was a function of where he worked...not whether the gun worked. It was available. He was exercising simple personal preference. We all do that from time to time. I routinely carry an issue 1911A1 on downrange deployments because I can. I do so in preference to other available pistols and calibers.

For purposes of that article, Bowser was actually advocating the SCAR (a better weapon than the 416 BTW). I have 416s in my unit and can carry one if I so choose. I don't. I won't give up the distance fight and I don't feel like carrying the extra weapon weight when I'm already running a quad-rail, vertical grip, offset Surefire, ATPIAL-15, and an Elcan Specter DR. I'm also not one of those who chugs the piston Kool-aid. I've had years of practical experience to figure it out...and I have...long before DI vs. Gas Piston was a discussion point on internet forums.

Those who have worked military procurement & programs of record under a Service or Unified Combatant Command Headquarters can appreciate where a transient O-4 falls in the food chain. With all due respect to MAJ Bowser...who is a competent guy...that place is not very high. As I recall, he came to us as an ARDEC guy from Picatinney. I also recall that he worked at USASOC, not SOCOM. And I seem to recall that he is a Logistician...not a long tab guy. Not an Operator. Not a Gunfighter. And yes...I knew his (then) boss...as well as the (then) Small Arms Program Director at NSWC Crane. If you understand how USSOCOM procures weaponry, you will realize that Crane is our belly button for weapons not already provided to the entire conventional Army. SOF unique items come out of Crane.

Not to knock MAJ Bowser (who I believe is a competent cat), but if you met some of the other folks assigned weapon program managerial duties, you'd be shocked at their lack of subject matter expertise. The last time the Ft Benning Infantry Center was playing the "Let's Evaluate a New Rifle Game", I spent an interesting couple of hours on the phone with their rifle program manager, amplifying some e-mail feedback I had previously sent them. The breadth of his ignorance concerning 5.56 ballistics and combat rifles was breathtaking. It was like talking to a novice shooter on this board. And that guy was charged with putting together a proposed rifle equip program for the entire conventional Army! He was a great Soldier and a fine young officer, but didn't know poop about rifles.

That is typical of staffing for large military organizations. We assign branch qualified personnel to brand new staff jobs despite their having no hands-on experience. It is simply expected that they are teachable and will pick up expertise (via OJT) about a given topic, produce Staff Studies & Decision Briefs, and then brief those deliverables to the decision making bosses.

MAJ Bowser's quote was nothing more than a personal opinion from someone who was working a staff directorate position for a year or so until his next logistics assignment or eventual promotion to O-5. I don't regard his opinion as to what constitutes a proper combat weapon as authoritative in the least.

The 416 achieved a certain cachet due to SFOD-D bringing it on board well over a decade ago. White SOF also adopted it in limited numbers and we continue to use them today. What we got was an overweight and not-so-accurate CQB weapon with crappy overweight (and over sized) magazines. AWG wanted to be cool kids too, and while they were casting about for an actual reason to exist, they used their shekels to buy 416s (look...me too! Just like CAG!). They later cried crocodile tears when the funding stream & support mechanism for future maintenance didn't carry over to their eventual Big Army charter... and they had to give the rifles up.

In any event, today there are BETTER piston guns than HK's offering and we buy those instead.


HKs are extremely popular for operators who actually get to choose their weapons instead of bureaucrats as in standard weapon selection.

Actually...not so much. And in actuality, not that many organizations get to choose their weapons in the way you are thinking. It's not Neo and the virtual arms room of the Matrix in the real world of Special Operations. Not even for Delta, SAS, GROM, KSK, FBI HRT, etc. Money & politics always influence weapon choices for government funded organizations.

Just not that many credible 1st World forces carry HKs. I don't count local and regional LEOs as "Operators". National SOF/CT Forces only. The Germans use them (for obvious financial reasons) and they equip most of the military and police in that country. UK SOF is another exception and that primarily because BAE owns HK; if you don't think bureaucracy was at play in their choice of pistols, you are dreaming. In any event, the SAS uses an M4 variant for primaries. In fact, among Tier One Units across the planet, AR platforms & Glock pistols generally rule. Everyone loves a winner. ;)

On the other hand, lots of 2nd & 3rd world units (Arab forces in particular) continue to have a love affair with the 9mm MP-5 (and its Turkish clones) 'cause they've seen them in the movies (they look cool) and the MP-5 doesn't require actual rifle marksmanship skills to employ effectively. They are mostly used as a short range PSD status item, delivering negligible recoil. No one has to lose face demonstrating misses with a rifle round at distance...it's a crowd pleasing recipe among certain cultures. :scrutiny:

Nevertheless, the MP-5 is still just about the best choice out there for an accurate, proven , and suppressed SMG. Of course, this is partially due to its having better than average rifle-type sights for an SMG, but primarily because it fires from a closed bolt. However, most pros have discarded the SMG concept like yesteryear's bell-bottoms.

Anyway, that concludes my hate-on for the HK 416 Uber-Myth. Lest you think that I detest HK products, I've owned several over the years and consider the USP series to be superb weapons. That is why I own a USP/C today. The 416 IS a very good weapon within the limitations of its envelope. And I'd love to own an MP-5SD 'cause it's so amazingly quiet on full auto and gives good hits at distance. That's probably never in the cards, so I'll just use the issue ones at my unit.

It's generally accepted in our soceity that a published article from a reputable media outlet will verify the credentials of sources even if they are quoted anonymously. If one writes a book and then uses a message board quote by "Chindo18Z" as evidence for his position the author will have a hard time getting it published.

Regarding journalistic ethics and ‘round the cracker barrel internet posting: The writing and news media game is removed a far cry from back when I was sitting in college Journalism Courses. Today's major news networks can't even maintain correct spelling or syntax on their 24-hour bottom-of-the-screen news tickers. Today's publishing/reporting world is awash with shoddy journalism and shoddier "anonymous" sources. Of course nobody uses internet handles for inclusion in a bibliography or a serious position paper. I certainly wouldn't use an anonymous quote from a message board as a source... except as anecdotal icing to an otherwise well-supported and documented position. Unlike the HK shill article linked above, which uses multiple and unsubstantiated anecdotal quotes to create a desired perception ("HK Goood...Everything Else Baaad").

On the other hand, I have been recently approached to contribute to a book concerning current SOF military history. When that one is published, I'm sure my name will be credited. It's all about venues. This is the internet, and while I enjoy the free-wheeling discussion, I'm not posting my personal life in detail. When I'm retired, I'll probably stop posting at all. At that point, I'll charge folks for the expertise I give away for free today.

After all, we're ALL just Bozos on this bus... :) For all I know, YOU are an underage air-softer masquerading as a responsible adult firearms owner. Now understand, I'm not trying to be insulting... (You see how that works? :) )

I am not a gun god. I am not a firearms guru. I have about 40+ years of broad firearms experience, and possess what some might consider to be considerable expertise concerning certain aspects of weapons and their employment. I’m fairly knowledgeable when it comes to military small arms, especially those used by SOF. I’m fairly encyclopedic when it comes to handguns. I’m a good hand with a shotgun, but I don’t hunt birds or shoot clays, so the finer nuances of those activities are not my forte. Although I’ve been an on-again off-again deer hunter, I know little about what makes for a good scope, gun, load combo for elk. I don’t hunt elk.

What I DO know is how to train American Army Green Berets to use their weapons in harms way. That’s one of the things I do for a living. I don’t post a lot because I lead a busy life and quite frankly don’t care about most of what I skim over when reading the forums. When I do feel that I’ve something to contribute or that I can flesh out a discussion with some useful background...I jump right in. And when I see posts proclaiming what I professionally know to be B.S., I am not above jumping in with both feet. I’m not bashful...and I can certainly handle myself in a simple internet discussion.

I choose to maintain a degree of anonymity because it's a real dark world out there and I've been swimming in that world for decades of active SF service. Sounds melodramatic, huh? But that's the simple truth. My limited posts across years on this board speak to my actual experience (for those who can read between the lines). My bona fides are known to certain folks on this forum (including the mods). For the rest... Sorry 'bout that. Alternatively, you might be right, and I really just live in my mom's basement... ;)

For all the above discussion, realize that I appreciate your opinions and point of view. If I didn't find them interesting, I'd not respond. I'm here to learn as much as I can from the next poster and wouldn't pretend to claim that I know it all. I enjoy the occasional verbal tussle, so don't get the feeling that I'm just busting your chops for the sake of argument.

I also want you to understand that the caliber of a man decides the gunfight, not the chosen weapon. SOF is a younger man's game (and I'm rapidly becoming a broke old fart), but you should know that the men who got Bin Laden represent a special breed of guys that populate ALL of our Component & Joint SOF units today. And today's force is truly Joint, with SEALs commanding Green Beret ODAs, NSW Task Units OPCON to Army Special Forces, Rangers undertaking hazardous Task Force raids, USAF STS (CCTs & PJs) running and gunning with everyone's teams, SOWs & SOAR supporting everyone, JSOC taking HVs, and MARSOC doing outstanding work wherever they plant boots. We are blessed with the best kind of men.

These units get the job done regardless of the small arms at hand. The kind of guys we field will come at the enemy, out of the dark, and with single-minded purpose... even if they are physically lit on fire... and kill or capture the target. Even if they have to do the job with a wooden spoon.

Of course, if they were actually reduced to using wooden spoons, some wag would probably emboss "HK" on his with a wood burner.... :)

Regards.

12131
July 2, 2011, 02:18 AM
Originally posted by Bartholomew Roberts:

An MR556 upper will not fit on an AR15 lower or a 416 lower and vice versa due to different takedown pin location.
I have no dogs in this fight, and personally don't care what's "better", but I just like to correct this statement. It's false, unless my MR556 is a unintended mistake from HK factory. There were zero modifications made in swapping between the 2 rifles.:)
http://s7.photobucket.com/albums/y281/qavsiv/ERG/hkmr556a1//swaphkno05.jpg

Don't ask me how the HK shoots. Unfortunately, I haven't had a chance to do it, yet. :o

Zerodefect
July 2, 2011, 12:24 PM
To make this a fair fight you'd have to chop the Colt 6920's front sight off and add a FF rail and Flip-up sights. Then compare the two.

At that point, Yes I would take the Colt over the HK anyday. A Colt 6920 with a few minor changes is an excellent fighting carbine. And in stock form it's no slouch either.

Quiet
July 2, 2011, 10:22 PM
An MR556 upper will not fit on an AR15 lower or a 416 lower and vice versa due to different takedown pin location.
I have no dogs in this fight, and personally don't care what's "better", but I just like to correct this statement. It's false, unless my MR556 is a unintended mistake from HK factory. There were zero modifications made in swapping between the 2 rifles.

Here's the deal.

The H&K MR223 was released several years before the MR556.
The H&K MR223 is the semi-auto only version of the HK416 for the EU and Canadian civilian market.
Due to German laws, the MR223 recievers are not compatible with standard AR15/M16 recievers due to different takedown pin locations.

The MR556 is the semi-auto only version of the HK416 for the USA civilian market.
H&K was initially going to produce the MR556 with the MR223 receivers (the first prototypes were made this way).
But prior to going into production, H&K USA convinced H&K to go with a standard AR15 type recievers for the MR556 due to more market appeal for the USA market. This switch is one of the reasons why the H&K MR556 took so long to be released.
So, the H&K MR556 receivers are compatible with the standard AR15/M16 recievers.

Bartholomew Roberts
July 3, 2011, 12:06 PM
Thanks for the correction and backstory on the MR223/MR556. I was under the mistaken impression that the MR556 had the 6mm change in the rear takedown pin.

JustinJ
July 6, 2011, 11:55 AM
"After all, we're ALL just Bozos on this bus... For all I know, YOU are an underage air-softer masquerading as a responsible adult firearms owner. Now understand, I'm not trying to be insulting... (You see how that works? )"

That is absolutely correct and i don't take it as such. Except i never claim to be an "adult" in any way other than years accrued.
I am glad my comments weren't taken as insult as my point was not meant as a knock or even at you specifically, just about message board posts in relation to published articles in general.

"For all the above discussion, realize that I appreciate your opinions and point of view. If I didn't find them interesting, I'd not respond. I'm here to learn as much as I can from the next poster and wouldn't pretend to claim that I know it all. I enjoy the occasional verbal tussle, so don't get the feeling that I'm just busting your chops for the sake of argument."

Very well put as i feel the same way.

I have no doubt that views of people in the special forces community are just like those of any community - diverse and varied.

While i do believe that a quality piston AR, such as the 416, is inherently more reliable than DI my original comments were primarily about the quality of the 416 given that it's from HK. I do agree the SCAR is a better design for a variety of reasons but i'd say the same of the G36 as well.

Cal-gun Fan
July 6, 2011, 12:07 PM
Does this really need to be brought up again? Thought we could just let this thread lie :P

If you enjoyed reading about "HK MR556 VS Colt 6920?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!