How Do You Like Your SIG Sauer 516???


PDA






Motorman2061
November 5, 2012, 01:39 PM
Hi All,
Am considering a SIG Sauer 516 as my first AR style .556 weapon. For those of you who own, or have owned one what was your experience?
The only negative I am aware of is a defective roller pin that can easily replaced with an over-the-counter pin.

What are your thoughts???

Thanks a bunch.

If you enjoyed reading about "How Do You Like Your SIG Sauer 516???" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
G.barnes
November 5, 2012, 05:46 PM
I don't personally own one but from what I've read everyone who owns one loves them. remember since it's your first ar that bolt carriers and some other pieces are proprietary. so if you need any parts your basically at sigs mercy where on a standard mil spec ar the pieces are all interchangable

Motorman2061
November 6, 2012, 08:36 AM
Good point G.barnes. Will have to keep that in mind. Thanks.

Averageman
November 6, 2012, 10:16 AM
I've owned two Sig rifles the 556 and 556R.
Both were very substandard and I returned one to Sig and traded the other after about 200 rounds.
Both came from the factory with issues like barrel to receiver fit so poorly done the rifle wouldn't zero(556), nonstaked or locktited screws that fell out while trying to zero (both), reciever shaved by mil spec Russian magazines (556R).
I could go on and on, but really use the search function here and you can find it all.
BTW I waited 4 months for Sig to figure it all out and get my rifle replaced.
Go buy a nice AR and be happy, in the end you'll be far ahead.

Motorman2061
November 17, 2012, 06:06 PM
For those of you who own or have owned AKs, how would you compare your AKs to the SIG 556R?

Thanks

Cal-gun Fan
November 17, 2012, 06:58 PM
Well think of it this way. For more money, what real advantages does a Sig 556r give you over an Arsenal SGL 21?

AK:
Better optic mounting system. Plenty of good return to zero side mounts that center your optic above the bore, and you can easily swap a red dot and a magnified optic back and forth.
Non-negotiable track record of ruggedness and reliablity.
About all the accuracy you'll get from x39 in semi auto rifles (2-3MOA, typically).

I think an AK is also lighter than the Sig. Plus there are far more aftermarket accessories for the AK.

stubbicatt
November 18, 2012, 07:09 PM
Until I bought a 556, I would agree with you Cal-gun fan. I have owned and shot many AK's, including select fire rifles, and they are really great rifles, but there are some shortcomings to the 1940s Kalashnikov design, as I see it, which have been addressed or made current, in the SIG design. And I disagree that optics mounting is easier on the AK.

The 556 shares a similar operating system with the AK, but the remainder of the rifle is actually different enough to warrant discussion on whether the differences are improvements or not. To my way of seeing it, the trigger mechanisms on both the automatic as well as the self loading 556 rifles seem to me unnecessarily complicated, and closely resemble the HK roller lockers or the FAL. The disconnector is sort of on an eccentric sharing the same shaft as the trigger, and I think I prefer the Kalashnikov system as it is simpler to my view. MTK borrowed extensively from Mr. Garand's trigger system, and it is a good design to copy.

The magazine release is pretty much the same on the Kalashnikov as it is on the SIG.

The split receiver a la M16 is superior to my way of seeing things, as one can clean the rifle from the breach, rather than from the muzzle. The AK is a front stuffer as far as cleaning rods go. While I haven't come to a definitive conclusion on the gas tubes, the methods of mounting up the gas tube on the AK is nearly an interference fit, and it is my belief that the SIG gas tube being semi floated would in theory at least tend to allow the barrel fewer static forces to affect the harmonics, and thus render it more accurate, all other things being equal.

The SIG handguards are longer and seem to control heat a lot better than does that of the AK. If you don't grip the AK just right after a couple of magazines, it will scorch you. If you are using the old wood handguards on the AK, I have on more than one occasion smelled them burning or smoking in rapid fire situations.

The SIG sight is more conducive to an accurate iron sight setup due to a longer sight radius, and while the folks in Exeter have deigned to not share the excellent rotary diopter that comes on the 556 Classic with the 556R, these sights are an improvement in my view over those of the AK. Longer sight radius, rotary diopter with CQB "notch" a la HK roller locker, and what's not to like? Good setup. --One of the features of the SIG rotary sight is that it will not allow one to rotate from CQB notch to 300 meter aperture. I can understand the philosophy of requiring the rifleman to ratchet thru 100, and 200, to arrive at 300, but I'm not so sure it is always a good idea.

Integral pic rail on the SIG receiver facilitates the installation of good US or "western" optics while not requiring the rifleman to raise his head off the stock for a "chin weld" as one must on the side rail AK mounted optics. This favors the SIG.

In all the Kalashnikov is an excellent weapon, and I like it a lot. But I do think that the SIG package is a "product improved" AK, at least as far as are the ones that I as a lowly Prole can buy here in the US.

This is my view.

nwilliams
November 18, 2012, 08:46 PM
I love my Sig 516!

Extremely accurate and reliable and very well built. I would love to add a Sig 517 to my collection at some point as well.

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb264/nwilliams27/Sig%20516/Sig516-new1.jpg

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb264/nwilliams27/Sig%20516/Sig516-new4.jpg

Cal-gun Fan
November 18, 2012, 09:37 PM
Until I bought a 556, I would agree with you Cal-gun fan. I have owned and shot many AK's, including select fire rifles, and they are really great rifles, but there are some shortcomings to the 1940s Kalashnikov design, as I see it, which have been addressed or made current, in the SIG design. And I disagree that optics mounting is easier on the AK.

The 556 shares a similar operating system with the AK, but the remainder of the rifle is actually different enough to warrant discussion on whether the differences are improvements or not. To my way of seeing it, the trigger mechanisms on both the automatic as well as the self loading 556 rifles seem to me unnecessarily complicated, and closely resemble the HK roller lockers or the FAL. The disconnector is sort of on an eccentric sharing the same shaft as the trigger, and I think I prefer the Kalashnikov system as it is simpler to my view. MTK borrowed extensively from Mr. Garand's trigger system, and it is a good design to copy.

The magazine release is pretty much the same on the Kalashnikov as it is on the SIG.

The split receiver a la M16 is superior to my way of seeing things, as one can clean the rifle from the breach, rather than from the muzzle. The AK is a front stuffer as far as cleaning rods go. While I haven't come to a definitive conclusion on the gas tubes, the methods of mounting up the gas tube on the AK is nearly an interference fit, and it is my belief that the SIG gas tube being semi floated would in theory at least tend to allow the barrel fewer static forces to affect the harmonics, and thus render it more accurate, all other things being equal.

The SIG handguards are longer and seem to control heat a lot better than does that of the AK. If you don't grip the AK just right after a couple of magazines, it will scorch you. If you are using the old wood handguards on the AK, I have on more than one occasion smelled them burning or smoking in rapid fire situations.

The SIG sight is more conducive to an accurate iron sight setup due to a longer sight radius, and while the folks in Exeter have deigned to not share the excellent rotary diopter that comes on the 556 Classic with the 556R, these sights are an improvement in my view over those of the AK. Longer sight radius, rotary diopter with CQB "notch" a la HK roller locker, and what's not to like? Good setup. --One of the features of the SIG rotary sight is that it will not allow one to rotate from CQB notch to 300 meter aperture. I can understand the philosophy of requiring the rifleman to ratchet thru 100, and 200, to arrive at 300, but I'm not so sure it is always a good idea.

Integral pic rail on the SIG receiver facilitates the installation of good US or "western" optics while not requiring the rifleman to raise his head off the stock for a "chin weld" as one must on the side rail AK mounted optics. This favors the SIG.

In all the Kalashnikov is an excellent weapon, and I like it a lot. But I do think that the SIG package is a "product improved" AK, at least as far as are the ones that I as a lowly Prole can buy here in the US.

This is my view.

Here's the thing-I didn't say that mounting an optic on the AK was easier-I said that I thought it was a better way of doing it. Sure, you have the pic rail on the Sig, but with an AK you have the capability to switch between optics and still remain zeroed on all of them. And with the new Midwest Industries AKSM side rail mount, you can get a very decent cheek-weld with magnified optics.

I'm not too familiar with the Sig 55x rifles. I'm sure they've made some improvements over the AK-I just don't think that it really needs improving. I've never heard anyone complain about cleaning an AK. They're probably the most simple semi-automatic rifle to fully take down, and the big parts make for easy cleaning. I agree with you that the SIG rifles have better sights, but I use optics anyway, so it isn't as big of a problem for me.

The one area in which the AK could improve would be accuracy, and I just haven't heard anything spectacular about the 556r series of SIG rifles to make me believe that they are a Great Leap Forward for semi-automatic rifles in the 7.62x39 round-which isn't amazing to begin with. Even if they shot 1MOA all day long, I just don't see the need for it in a 300 yard cartridge where 2-3 MOA will do just fine. Thats just my opinion though. They are awesome looking rifles, though if I was going to get a SIG semi-auto I think I'd go for their new 516 or 716.

If you enjoyed reading about "How Do You Like Your SIG Sauer 516???" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!