I have owned and shot all three rifle types (FN, M1A and HK). I have shot all three in a ‘military' or 'training’ type environment. This differs greatly from ‘range shooting’ – and my thoughts/opinions are formed with that in mind.
Here are my thoughts and opinions.
Receivers: On the HK firearms (MP5/HK91/HK93) when the sheet metal receiver receives a blow (from a concrete corner, a metal door, a opened APC door, etc.) the weapon goes down HARD. The bolt will NOT retract, and if one fires the HK with a 'dimpled' receiver, the bolt will come back but then will NOT go forward. And this is NOT an isolated occurrence. If it was, then HK would not include a 'receiver dent remover' in the basic amourer kit!
The FN on the other hand has a machined steel receiver which won't dent from a blow, and even if the sheet metal top cover were bent, it could be removed and the weapon would still function. Which beats the heck out of an HK that just went TU. It then is as dangerous as a 2 x 4. Not bad if you are within 6 feet of your opponent, but NOT GOOD AT ALL if he is 10 feet or beyond.
The M1A receiver is forged or cast steel, so it will not ‘dent’ either. There are those that state the 'cast' recievers are not as good/strong as the forged recievers - and the current M1a has a cast receiver.
However, the FN and HK receiver both cover the ‘action’ very well, protecting the insides from in the ingress of foreign matter.
So receiver design/utility – the FN is the winner, the M1A in second place (robust receiver but open to the elements) with the HK third (enclosed but dent prone receiver).
The selector on the HK is too far forward and cannot be manipulated while in the firing position - unless one has an unusually long thumb. This is very poor human engineering.
The metric FAL shares this same downfall, but the 'inch' pattern comes with a great selector, that will also fit the metric version (an addition that I highly recommend).
The M1A safety is in the trigger guard. BAD IDEA. With gloves it goes from bad to worse.
So with ‘safety’ placement – FN first, HK second, and M1A third.
The 'button mag release' on the HK is an abortion. If you have a HK, get the flapper mod. Without it the HK gives truly substandard performance when it comes to mag changes. Mags do not need to be ‘rocked’ in, and they are ‘stout’.
The mag release on the FN is in a excellent location, and needs no alteration. Mags need to be slightly ‘rocked in’, and the mags are not as stout as the HK or M1A mags, but they are not fragile either.
M1A mag release is of ‘flapper’ type, mags need to be ‘rocked’ in, and the mags are sufficiently stout, but not as stout as the HK mags.
So as far as ‘changing mags’ the FN and M1A are tied for first, with the HK in second (unless one has the flapper on the HK – then it is a three way tie).
The charging handle on the HK91 is in an awful place. Try charging an HK91 while in the prone position, and you will see what I mean. POOR HUMAN ENGINEERING.
Also, I have seen the little plastic nub on the charging handle on West German G3's that have broken off, and I have seen the little plastic nub on the charging handles of the MP5 that have broken off. It leaves a sharp little metal rod, with equally sharp edges of plastic around it to grab onto. (The only reason I have not seen it on civilian HK91 is that they are not treated like combat weapons, but rather like range rifles. This is true with almost ALL weapons in private hands. They cost us a lot of dough, so we treat them as good as we can. However, in a 'hard use' setting - the rifles are treated like combat weapons, and these shortcomings of the HK arise. However, then it will be too late do anything about it.)
The charging handle on the FN is in an EXCELLENT location, and can be manipulated while in the prone with EASE. It is usually made of steel and aluminum and it very robust.
The charging handle on the M1A is on the right side, which is not as efficiently operated as the ‘side’ charger of the FN. However, it can still be manipulated while in the prone by merely ‘canting’ the rifle on its left side a little.
So, in this area the FN is first, the M1A is second, the HK a distant third.
The LACK OF A BOLT HOLD OPEN on the HK further illustrates the poor human engineering of ALL HK arms (with the exception of the USP series of handgun). And the old adage of 'loading some tracer for the first few rounds in the mag' doesn't always work. If one is doing what one 'OUGHT' to, and concentrating on the front sight to hit the target - one will often not SEE the tracer. So, the HK'er doesn't know he is empty until he hears CLICK, then he must pull out the old mag (which if there is only a button release won't be very fast cause he has to remove his firing hand for the pistol grip to push the button), insert a fresh mag, (and if he is in the prone) contort his body to get the charging handle to the rear and let it fly forward. NOW he can shoot.
The FN on the other hand has a bolt hold open, and it is in an excellent location for fast manipulation. The FAL'er can tell when the bolt locks back and is on his way to changing mags BEFORE the HK'er knows he is empty. The FAL'er releases the mag, inserts a fresh one, pulls down on the bolt hold open that is right there by his thumb and is back in the fight. (All with the firing hand still on the pistol grip where it should be.)
The M1A also has a bolt hold open, however the ‘button’ is not quite as fast as the FN to operate, as it is located on the top of the receiver, but it is not by any means slow – just not as ‘easy’ or ‘user friendly’ as the M1A.
So here, the FN has a slight edge on the M1A – but the HK is FAR BEHIND.
The HK trigger is atrocious. And I personally would not have ANY aftermarket set trigger mod done on a fighting weapon that I would have to stake my life on. I have seen TOO MANY aftermarket triggers go TU at the worst possible time. If you have a HK, just get used to the horrible trigger.
The FN trigger is better, but still not perfect. But, leave it alone. It will work as is - it may not work if you mess with it!
The M1A has a better trigger than either of the above, so in this round, the M1A is first, the FN second and the HK third.
The sights on the HK are unnecessarily complex, and require a ‘special tool’ to adjust. I like to 'keep it simple, stupid (that’s me), and the HK does not allow that.
The sights on the FN are ‘OK’ – not spectacular, but not bad either. There are also some EXCELLENT aftermarket rear sights for the FN that REALLY enhance the robustness of it, and make it the equal of the M1A.
Which brings us to the M1A, it definitely has the best ‘issue’ sights of the three. So in this round, the M1A wins, the FN is second and the HK is third. (Notice a trend with regards to third place here?)
Field stripping/maintenance/cleaning/spare parts/mag prices with the FN and HK are all sixes. Here the FN and HK are tied for first place with the much more expensive mags of the M1A coming in second.
Reliability is sixes with all three weapons. The FN and the HK have been used literally around the world in every possible climate. From desert sands to icy snow with good results. The M1A comes from a very proven performer, the venerable M1 Garand, and it is also a very reliable rifle. The bottom line with reliability of any of these three rifles is - if you fail to maintain them, they WILL go down on you. If you maintain any of these three rifles, they will WORK for you.
So with regards to reliability, it is a three way tie.
Accuracy is sixes also (with ‘rack grade/mil issue rifles’. The M1A can be made into a ‘tack driver’ but then it is no longer an MBR but rather a Designated Marksman Rifle with a resulting loss of functional reliability in adverse conditions). Those that claim that any one of the three is more accurate than the others have a totally different experience than I have. I find them all to be acceptably accurate. All will shoot 3 MOA or under all day long using mil spec ammo, and one can find specimens of any of the three that will shoot considerably better than that.
So with accuracy (esp. ‘combat accuracy’) it is another three way tie.
Take all of them (FN, M1A and HK) to the range, and do some quick reaction firing drills. In other words, treat them like 'combat weapons' for a short while. Include mag changes in every position possible. Shoot them until they are dry, and ‘recharge’ them in every possible position. (I don't know of ANYONE that can count rifle rounds.) Use a timer and keep score. You will quickly see how important human engineering is in a firearm. In my experience, the FN will win. The M1A will be a not too distant second, but both of them it will flat blow the HK away.
At the start of this post, I mentioned that I owned all three rifles. However, after repeating the above drill time after time, I found that soon my M1A and HK were gathering dust - so I sold them and have not regretted it! (OK - I DO regret that I do not still have them - but only as INVESTMENTS - not as my personal MBR.)
Don't get me wrong, if the 'balloon went up' tomorrow, and all I had was an M1A or a HK, I would not feel one bit bad (I would feel better about having an M1A if I couldn’t have my FN though. For me the HK would be my third choice for an MBR). I know their weaknesses and can overcome them. I just find fewer weaknesses on the FN and it has much better handling characteristics.
cheers
tire iron
The Germans had the G3 (HK91) when I was in the Army and your comments confirm exactly what I suspected about the superior H und K rifles. An expensive boat anchor, imho.