jerkface11
Member
How many rounds does a direct impingment AR go without cleaning before it jams? And how many rounds does a soldier carry with him?
the new(ish) H&K 416-what makes it so reliable?
- Thread starter Skillet
- Start date
- Status
Somebody wants a repeatable accelerated life test accurately reflects the "real world"?
Just come up with an accelerated life test that everyone agrees with.
When you do, you will get the Nobel prize. Or something even bigger. Like a free extra topping on your pizza!
Maverick223
Member
I would say that the SF that have tested and used the 416 (as well as the M4) would be a pretty good test. They chose the HK design almost exclusively...You Fail.
Not more reliable according to who?
Lets see, a whole different world cleaner all of the time, alot cooler temps, doesnt cook the oil off of its moving parts, barrel and chamber last longer, to mention a few.
Dont get me wrong. I like DI rifles, I served in combat with one. I know from experience that when kept serviced properly and not so properly that they can fire without issues, but there is room for improvement.
After firing, maintaining, a piston AR I do have to say that the difference with maintance, temperatures after firing, and the amount of oil left on the moving parts is a night to day.
On the negative side there is a minute amount of increased percieved recoil (because of the piston moving and the gases venting differently), they are louder, but they are fun to shoot.
I think the average foot soldier could benefit from a gas piston upper on their M-4, but there would be needed training on the weapon, just like any change in weapons.
I think there would be a slight decrease in the number of first time qualifications, the percieved recoil can make a difference when your not used to it, DI rifles are easier to shoot accurately.
Lets see, a whole different world cleaner all of the time, alot cooler temps, doesnt cook the oil off of its moving parts, barrel and chamber last longer, to mention a few.
Dont get me wrong. I like DI rifles, I served in combat with one. I know from experience that when kept serviced properly and not so properly that they can fire without issues, but there is room for improvement.
After firing, maintaining, a piston AR I do have to say that the difference with maintance, temperatures after firing, and the amount of oil left on the moving parts is a night to day.
On the negative side there is a minute amount of increased percieved recoil (because of the piston moving and the gases venting differently), they are louder, but they are fun to shoot.
I think the average foot soldier could benefit from a gas piston upper on their M-4, but there would be needed training on the weapon, just like any change in weapons.
I think there would be a slight decrease in the number of first time qualifications, the percieved recoil can make a difference when your not used to it, DI rifles are easier to shoot accurately.
starkadder
Member
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2009
- Messages
- 111
Badger Arms, when did this become the AR/AK debate. The entire last list of issues you posted have nothing to do with the origional post, many of the "problems" that you listed are will still apply to the 416 because of the use of the same basic blueprint other than the gas system, mags, extraction, ect.
And by the way if you fire enough rounds through AR or M16 to heat the bolt parts to a point that you change the temper, you will be firing through what is left of a molten barrel. Other than the origional HK and other blow back systems I can't think of any action that does not in some way "violenly rip" the case from the chamber, thats all part of extraction.
I am not knocking the piston system, because I do not own one. All of the piston fans can continue to bash the AR platform and say that it never should have been adopted, but the fact is that regardless of the origional issues with the system, 40+ years later it is still in service all over the world and is only surpassed in longevity by the AK-47 which I also own three of and am a huge fan.
This is this! It's not something else, it's this!
ALWAYS REMEMBER OUR MEN AND WOMEN OVER THERE.
And by the way if you fire enough rounds through AR or M16 to heat the bolt parts to a point that you change the temper, you will be firing through what is left of a molten barrel. Other than the origional HK and other blow back systems I can't think of any action that does not in some way "violenly rip" the case from the chamber, thats all part of extraction.
I am not knocking the piston system, because I do not own one. All of the piston fans can continue to bash the AR platform and say that it never should have been adopted, but the fact is that regardless of the origional issues with the system, 40+ years later it is still in service all over the world and is only surpassed in longevity by the AK-47 which I also own three of and am a huge fan.
This is this! It's not something else, it's this!
ALWAYS REMEMBER OUR MEN AND WOMEN OVER THERE.
Maverick223
Member
HK vs. Colt...
Maverick223
Member
Has that come up again?...possibly because I am not an AR snob...but that seemed like the most pointless debate ever. :banghead:
Lets come up with a chart that compares a $1500 colt to a $800 CMMG to a AK-47 to a M198 howitzer to a Boeing 767...:banghead:
Maverick223
Member
I realize that...just saying that it was one of the worst topics ever IMO.
mljdeckard
Member
The Army Times is NOT a publication that actually speaks for the army.
I have personally cranked off 500 straight rounds from a Bushmaster M-4gery. No failures. I just spent two weeks on the range with a Marine company as a translator, where they cranked off over 10,000 rounds from M-16 A4s. They had one primer blow out of a cartridge and get jammed in the lower. The result was a bent sear that had to be replaced. I asked just about all of them if they had had any stoppages during fire. I couldn't find a single instance. I asked why, and they said that it's just a matter of running the gun like they were trained. Keep the dust cover shut, keep the bolt wet, clean it when you can. Some of them were enthusiasts who owned piston rifles, and they said they were nicer because they don't get hot as fast, but they don't change anything. You STILL have to keep the dist cover shut, keep the bolt wet, and clean it when you can.
Pistons don't change anything as to how the rifle is deployed, issued, or maintained. I don't plan on seeing anything other than direct-impingement M-4s and M-16s as long as I'm in the military.
I have personally cranked off 500 straight rounds from a Bushmaster M-4gery. No failures. I just spent two weeks on the range with a Marine company as a translator, where they cranked off over 10,000 rounds from M-16 A4s. They had one primer blow out of a cartridge and get jammed in the lower. The result was a bent sear that had to be replaced. I asked just about all of them if they had had any stoppages during fire. I couldn't find a single instance. I asked why, and they said that it's just a matter of running the gun like they were trained. Keep the dust cover shut, keep the bolt wet, clean it when you can. Some of them were enthusiasts who owned piston rifles, and they said they were nicer because they don't get hot as fast, but they don't change anything. You STILL have to keep the dist cover shut, keep the bolt wet, and clean it when you can.
Pistons don't change anything as to how the rifle is deployed, issued, or maintained. I don't plan on seeing anything other than direct-impingement M-4s and M-16s as long as I'm in the military.
ClickClickD'oh
Member
The only thing that video sums up for me is that HK faked the test.M1A National Match said:
Watch the reciever rupture.
Which side ruptured? The right side correct?
Well, that's physically impossible unless the reciever was specifically altered to fail. The right side of the reciever has a gigantic pressure vent in it commonly called the ejection port.
If you look at real world (read not HK tests) examples of M16 and M4 rifles that have had recievers fail it is always the left side that fails. Always.
I don't want to get into this fanboy dance but nothing is impossible when metal parts catastrophically fail. You don't know there may have been a small imperfection in the metal grain structure there or the heat treat could have been off a hair. Just saying in my years on this planet I have learned not to trust people who say things are physically impossible unless we are talking about things that are physically impossible, like an M14 failing
That video may be a salesman's pitch but I do believe a piston design are more suited to shooting in/under water if that is your bag. Water does not compress so you should definitely let it drain from the gas tube and barrel before you fire.
Maverick223
Member
It has...It was given to Moses with the 10 Commandments...J.M. Browning referred to it to have something to aspire to.
It makes since to me that, in a test using an incompressible fluid (water), the pressure exerted on the bolt would cause the bolt/carrier to "have a strong desire to leave the receiver" and take the path of least resistance in doing so...the ejection port is the weak area in the design of the receiver, and therefore is where the fracture propagates from. I would think the tests that you are referring to are not immersion tests.
I am not saying that certain "coincidences" were not apparent, and in favor of HK...but I don't believe they engineered the rifle (Colt?) to fail.
Last edited:
Badger Arms
Member
Who said it did? I just offered points of comparrison. I, personally, speak out against the AK every chance I get and Kalashnikov was a hack. Stoner was a genius... just look at the excellent Stoner 63!
mljdeckard said:
OOOOhhhhh... got me on that one... but where did the Army Times get their data from? The Army. So, although they don't SPEAK for the Army, they are reporting the results of the Army tests. Sorry, you lost that point.
My anecdotes are better than yours!!!
mljdeckard
Member
Ask the army if the AT speaks for them.
Badger Arms
Member
mljdeckard said:
If you read nothing else, read this:
I DID NOT SAY NOR DID I IMPLY THAT THE ARMY TIMES SPOKE FOR THE ARMY. The Army times merely reported the NUMBERS that the ARMY gave to them. READ THE NUMBERS!
Was I unclear the first two times I said it?
Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow
member
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2007
- Messages
- 13,146
I didn't know Batman used guns.
Also, it's interesting that the H&K can somehow magically not be affected by bore obstructions. In fact, after watching that video, I'll now be getting an HK 416 and plugging the barrel with modeling clay while I hunt, in order to keep moisture out of my barrel. Just fire when ready! Those crazy magical crazy Germans!
In fact, why would the actor wear a full protective metal visor with the first test with the M4, and yet only some cheap goggles with the H&K? Is he really THAT confident that the H&K won't suffer catastrophic failure with a bore obstruction? Or is there perhaps some other reason that he didn't take full protective measure, such as the test being rigged? I ask; you decide.
In fact that video is obviously a fraud, if you look at 3:22 - 3:23 where they purport to fire underwater; right before the clearly-visible "cut" and resumption of action, they lowered the rifle into the water; then after the "cut" (clearly a video break), the barrel of the rifle is OUT of the water (just barely mind you), just immediately before an almost-instant firing after the cut - the barrel never went under the water - water blasts everywhere of course because of the flash hider, but it was never under until AFTER firing. Then of course it was cycled before firing a 2nd time (why?), which cleared the bore obstruction. Any defenders of that video, I'd like to have explained to me WHY they would need a video break to avoid showing us something after lowering the rifle into the water with the muzzle submerged?
FRAUD is exactly what that is. In my opinion.
There are also video breaks for some odd reason when firing the 416 on test A as well - why? 2 video breaks to be exact actually (one at :52 and one at :55/56). One right before firing (new gun with prophylactic on the muzzle?), and another immediately after firing but before proudly displaying the supposedly unharmed gun to the camera. Really, how stupid do they think we are?
I just acheived a newfound disrespect for HK and they just reached a new low of desperation. Shame because they have good products. So at this point it makes no difference to me which is more reliable; do you really want to buy from a company which will use fraud to sell their products?
I really REALLY cannot wait until someone takes their new $3K 416 and tries to duplicate the firing underwater test from this video and post the results on youtube; it will be comedy of the highest order!
"But H&K, you said this was ok!" as they send in the pieces for warranty repair. Just hoped they're not harmed by the fraudulent advertising of HK. There ain't no gun immune from damage from bore obstructions, unless the bolt doesn't lock up, and if it doesn't, you've got bigger problems than sand or water in your gun.
Last edited:
Badger Arms
Member
Translation: Black Helicopters, blah, blah, blah, Kennedy killed by the MOB, blah, blah, blah, aluminum foil helmets, blah blah blah.
When a barrel ruptures due to being filled with water, where do you think the rupturing barrel will split the receiver? Case closed.
mljdeckard
Member
You are the one posting an AT article as if it reflects the views of the army.
- Status