Flogger23m
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2009
- Messages
- 14,373
Cool tech but it isn't practical. Doesn't mean it shouldn't be looked into, but nowhere near a formidable weapon.
The HK416 is just as AR-15 with a different gas piston design. It has a lot of problems that traditional ARs don't have. It doesn't like the new standard issue M855A1 ammo and has reliability problems with it. It is over gassed. It is heavier. It has more recoil. The handguard is thicker. Suppressors make the cyclic rate of fire in full auto too fast. The Norwegian versions had all kinds of issues such as the dust cover freezing shut to the point their special forces started using Colt Canada C8 carbines (traditional ARs). The only advantage it has is that it requires less time to clean.
The AR has gone through a lot of improvements over the years. The Army refuses to upgrade the M4 and continues to shelve upgrade programs. The standard issue M4A1 is circa ~2000. They refuse to move to CHF barrels, a better barrel profile, lighter free floating rails, and whatnot. There are new BCGs out there that will also increase reliability.
The USAF is now obtaining an M4 upgrade superior to the Army's M4 and the USMC's M27 (HK416) because they're the only one with their head on straight. It is the same rifle SOCOM will be getting more or less.
CHF barrels, better profile (though my understanding still not ideal), rail, ect. Sounds like they may start issuing the new BCGs with the new coatings sometime down the road.
The main draw of the HK 416 is that is it made in the Eurozone. So if you make your acquisition program exclusive to the Eurozone (like France) you can get an AR-15. The countries that have more leeway seem to go with Colt Canada, such as the British. They didn't seem to care for the 416 after testing and bought new Colt Canada rifles instead.
Yep, this gun is likely only promising from a theoretical and design stand point.
Well the current guns we predominantly use in NATO are Vietnam Era shit. the M14 and M16 and their variants, even the newer M4 is just a cut down M16. The reality is there is already a superior replacement to those guns, the HK416 which is far superior to the M series in every way.
The HK416 is just as AR-15 with a different gas piston design. It has a lot of problems that traditional ARs don't have. It doesn't like the new standard issue M855A1 ammo and has reliability problems with it. It is over gassed. It is heavier. It has more recoil. The handguard is thicker. Suppressors make the cyclic rate of fire in full auto too fast. The Norwegian versions had all kinds of issues such as the dust cover freezing shut to the point their special forces started using Colt Canada C8 carbines (traditional ARs). The only advantage it has is that it requires less time to clean.
The AR has gone through a lot of improvements over the years. The Army refuses to upgrade the M4 and continues to shelve upgrade programs. The standard issue M4A1 is circa ~2000. They refuse to move to CHF barrels, a better barrel profile, lighter free floating rails, and whatnot. There are new BCGs out there that will also increase reliability.
The USAF is now obtaining an M4 upgrade superior to the Army's M4 and the USMC's M27 (HK416) because they're the only one with their head on straight. It is the same rifle SOCOM will be getting more or less.
CHF barrels, better profile (though my understanding still not ideal), rail, ect. Sounds like they may start issuing the new BCGs with the new coatings sometime down the road.
The main draw of the HK 416 is that is it made in the Eurozone. So if you make your acquisition program exclusive to the Eurozone (like France) you can get an AR-15. The countries that have more leeway seem to go with Colt Canada, such as the British. They didn't seem to care for the 416 after testing and bought new Colt Canada rifles instead.