M16 /M4 vs. G36

[FallenAngel]

I've heard alot of back and forth over which one of these two fine weapons is better. Any comments from you guys? And this pretains to the whole 'family' of weapons for each.

Also, I dont want to hear things like "Well, if the G36 is so good, why don't the Americans use them?" type comments. To answer that one...I don't think the US can use other countries' weapons. US military has always bought American- even if it's just an American copy (ex: Mauser and M1903 ;) )

Thanks in advance

[Great Dane]

I have asked myself that same question.

The Danish Army choose to replace their HK G3's with the Diemaco C7 and the SOFs changed from HK 53 and G3 to C8's.

They were evaluating it along with the G36 but Diemaco C7 proved superiour. Even the UK SAS have changed to Diemaco. Rumour is that the Diemaco are even better than the American version of the M16 / 14 family.

Another reason for choosing the M16 family is the compatability with the US.

Another issue is politics and trade. When a country (eg. Denmark) purchases weapons in another country (eg. Canada). Canada have to import goods for the same amount of money from Denmark. I guess this also plays a role

PS. As far as I know the US uses amoung others Swedish AT4 and Carl Gustavs as well as German HK MP5 and and Austrian Glock pistols.

[FallenAngel]

True, compatibility with the US is a good reason. But with the Picanny (spelling?) rail on the G36 handle being an option, it would have- theoretically- the same accesory options as an M16/M4. Also, the G36 is suppose to accept standard STANAG mags.

And, as far as I know MP5s have been phased out of all Military purposes (maybe some MPs still use them, I dont know) and I've never seen an American soldier with a Glock pistol. Standard issue is the M9 Beretta while some Spec Ops like SEALs may have SIGs or HK USPs- but those aren't standard issue. As for teh AT4 and Gustavs...I think (although, again I'm not sure) that they are built in the US, although the design specs I'm sure are pretty damn close to identical.

And this brings up a good point- politics and such. Then why did Spain choose the G36 as standard issue? And the Brits considered the G36 for a replacement to the troubled SA80 and did not even look at the M16/M4 hardly at all.Surely both of those countries were primarily concerned with the functionality and usefulness of the weapon primarily, and who was going to build them as a secondary concern.

[Chuck6d]

I don't know much about the G36. From what I heard it's good. As for the M4 I stand by it. Having been raised on the M16a2. I started using the M4 in 1999. It took a little getting used to...length wise. But
I got darn proficient with it. You can't go wrong with the picatiny rail system. It makes it such a versatile weapon. Giving you many options for gun lights, laser aiming devices and optics. If you notice many of the pics on this site a lot of spec ops from around the world went to it.

[Chris]

i think the uk changed to g36s instead of armalites, because they waited quite long before giving up the l85a2s and its time to buy something new for the future, not an rifle that may function properly, but is kind of old. In europe the UK has lost many friends because of this little usa they are now, and maybe they thought it would be better for the politics to buy an european rifle instead.

I dont know how good the m16 series work, but the first ones had a lot of problems from what i read. The g36 worked fine from the beginning, and is just a newer rifle, with more gadgets, like the sight or the see through magazine

[Mace]

The British Army havent given up the L85A2, that sounds like what you are saying Chris, if not then i misunderstood. The British Army considered both the G36 and the Diemaco C7, which is already in limited use in the forces. The advantage the G36 had was, as has been said, the fact that it is a newer rifle, and more likely to be in use in future ( 20 yrs+) than the C7 etc. In the end it was decided to keep the L85A2 as £92 million had just been spent on it, and (apparently) tests have provedit is a reliable weapon.

[k_o_g]

These two good rifle has been compared since the introduction of G36.

G36, the newest rifle from HK. HK give up the good but expensive delay roller lock system and use gas operation on this rifle. Actually, the gas operation system is copied from AR-18. Due to this, M16 family has some relationship with the G36. Being a new generation rifle, G36 is made of polymer and in modular weapons system(MWS) which means that u can interchange between a standard rifle, a carbint wersion or even smaller commando version.

M16/M4, the good old rifle used be the Us army for almost 3 decades. The M4 with the KAC RIS/ RAS is a good choice for the spec ops.

for my personal view, i 'd choose the G36. it is lighter then the M16 family and more flexible. As a symbol of quality, the HK product is widely respected for its quality. it give cofidence to the user in the Live-or-death situation.

To say it true, both of them is really good and comparison between is difficult!!

[Chris]

i didnt mean that they throw the l85's away ;) , i meant that they wont spend more money on them (except for the tape and glue hehe).

In my opinion both rifles can do their job...killing, and isnt that what they are made for?

[Austin Pancamo]

I don't know about the other branches, however, the Marines phased out the MP5 due to some contract deal with HK. What I was told by the Chief Instructor at Small Arms Weapons Instructor School when I attended was if an MP5 goes down, which is rare, they had to send the entire weapon system back to HK. Now with the M4 CQBW, if one goes down the armorers at Precision Weapons Section in Quantico or at the individual unit, they can be fixed "in house".

[Minjin]

I also have read that the G36 is a great rifle. But then I was reading a book on the Uk armed forces and it said that if the L85 is properly taken care of, it is a great gun, but the fact is that it takes more maintenance than, say, an M4 or C8, so that alone makes it somewhat undesirable. Also, it would seem that many people don't want to take the extra time on the L85, and would rather have the comparatively easily maintained Diemaco or Colt.

[seventy6er]

the danish army tested different rifles when it was looking for a new standard assault-rifle. at these times, the G36 didn't exist, HK only offered an early version of the G36; it was called HK50 then. the danish army wanted to purchase the HK50 but wasn't allowed to, because then the danes would have had the new german HK50/G36 before its introduction to the german bundeswehr. so the danish army had to go for the M4/M16-family. they got the license-built versions from diemaco because the qualitiy seemed to be better than the american originals. (please don't kill me for that, i quoted theses statements from an official danish-army-site).

(...)

other non-US weapons in service (or soon in service) with us-forces include: HK MP7 (http://www.hkpro.com/pdw.htm) ,HK UMP (http://www.hkpro.com/ump.htm) , HK mark23 SOCOM (http://www.hkpro.com/socom.htm) and OICW (http://www.hkpro.com/oicw.htm)

cu 76er

[raid]

I might be mistaken, but the issued M9 is not strictly a US weapon. I believe that the US military just need the weapons they used to be produced in CONUS, no matter who's the owner of the brand. And I do think H&K has a plant in the US...

Now about the G36, I've heard many times its main advantage over the M4 is it's maintenance. It seems the G36 can fire a lot more rounds without needing any maintenance than the M4, thanks to its design...

[Chris]

i wonder why countries buy the licence to build a rifle instead of buying the rifles from its original country. Ok i know there are some points why this is a good idea, but in the case of the AUG (and maybe others) it was a stupid idea by the australians. I often read on the internet, and heared from soldiers i know, that the complain about problems. The funny thing is that these problems didnt occure in austria, because we use the proper materials, but the australians took cheaper ones hehe

[seventy6er]

as for the maintenance:

http://www.hkpro.com/mg43pile.jpg

title "102,000 round torture test at the Yuma Proving Grounds, Yuma, Arizona"

weapon shown is the MG43, a LSW from HK


The G36 is a reliable rifle, much more so than the M16 series. Though hard core M16 and AR-15 aficionados will have a difficult time accepting what they might describe derisively as 'Euro-Trash,' there is no denying the fact that the G36 rarely, if ever, jams. The most desirable departure from the M16 design is the fact that the gas used to operate the action is vented in the forearm, and not blown back into the action like the 'exhaust pipe' of the M16 gas tube. The G36 jams so rarely that HK has said that they have a G36K that has been fired more than 25,000 rounds without cleaning and no failures. I defy an M16 to duplicate that.

Though it would be doubtful that the G36 would ever replace the M16 for the U.S. military, it is taking off in the U.S. law enforcement community. Why not? Quality is in high demand.



cu 76er

[Matt]

well the M4 is my fav :bash:

[Chris]

wow what an argument ...
lol..

[k_o_g]

for building rifle itself insetead of buying from other countries can make sure a sufficient supply of weapons, especially during war time.
it also have much flexibility to the countries as it can customizes the weapons according to the needs.
trading is also a problem......

[GazB]

Most countries buy weapons through government contracts. If a government can buy a lot of guns, but also create a lot of local jobs at the same time they will. Producing locally means local jobs, a reliable supply of weapons, either as wear and tear replacements or just parts as needed.
We got stuck with inferior guns here in NZ because we chose to buy from Australia in a bid to make their production more economically viable.
The rifles we go were cheaply made below specs and would have been rejected from an Austrian plant.

Regarding the UKs temporary interest in the G36, that was mainly because H&K now own Royal Ordinance and if they bought G36s to replace the SA80A2s then they could be made locally and this would probably result in the short term local jobs, plus it would require H&K to upgrade the equipment at the RO factory for the production, which in turn would mean they could make them for export after the British army's needs had been met.

Regarding the two rifles... it is funny,
"The G36 jams so rarely that HK has said that they have a G36K that has been fired more than 25,000 rounds without cleaning and no failures"

They said the same about the M16 when it was first introduced... and it was true... till the war came and in order to meet the increased needs an older powder was substituted. The older powder burned faster and didn't burn as cleanly. The result of some troops not cleaning their rifles properly lead to many unneccary deaths amongst the M16 users... the faster burning powder made the rifle fire at a much higher rate... leading to premature breakages. When it burned the powder left a sticky residue that hardened like a carbon based concrete. Prefessional soldiers that cleaned their rifles no matter what were OK except the breakages, but those who didn't clean their rifles at all found they couldn't open or close the bolt and soldiers who actually cleaned their rifles and had cleaning rods risked their lives running down the line of soldiers with their cleaning rods trying to open the bolts by ramming them down the barrels... often under fire,as that was when it was noticed that the guns were jammed.

Properly cleaned both will be very good rifles. Both fire the same little round, and if you are happy with that then that doesn't go against either rifle.

[96B]

IMHO unless you have personally fired the weapon yourself, talked to somebody about it in person who was an expert or maybe online, or know people in the military that have used it, then nobody would really be able to compare the two. I think alot of people think that just because its a newer weapon, or because HK made it, or because its just something differant and looks cool then it must be better. HK said this, they said that, of course they are gonna try to sell their product. Now dont doubt me for saying that yes HK is extremely good and reliable gun manufacturer and I love what they can do, but I wont go as far to say that its so much better than the Colts, especially the M4.

[seventy6er]

well, i wasn't able to shoot the M4, but in my hometown in germany, the 1st us infantry division is stationed. while i was in the german army i had the opportunity to shoot the standard-issue M16 (don't ask me which version, the one issued to regular inf units) and i shot a whole lotta rounds through my G36. the M16 was quite nice to shoot, but seemed to jam also quite regularly. we shot 2.000 rounds of surplus ammo (for each member of my group) on a training-day while in kosovo. not one single jam. take a look at the video on my homepage (click the link in my post --> go to the video on the bottom right).

don't know if i said it before, but i don't think one can compare the standard G36 to the M4; G36K or G36C vs. M4 would be a better comparison.

cu

[front]

Great page there "seventy6er". It says "access to the resource is forbidden' when I try to look at the file this morning (03.06.2003, 0842 EST).

cheers

front

[Minjin]

one thing about the Diemacos that I have not heard of at all (positive OR negative) about the HKs is their performance in the cold. I know the Canadians have improved performance under extreme cold weather. For example, they re-engineered the mounts for the M203, as the "traditional" American ones tended to break while on arctic excercises. The new ones work really well, as do the guns.

Anyone have any info on cold weather performance of the G36 series? I really have not heard ANYTHING.

[odh2507]

hey.......i just got one question really quick...........and i've seen it on alot of pictures but they always use a platic clip not metal.....wouldn't they break easy?......well if someone knows then plz tell me i would appreciate it...thanks

[fokket]

I believe G36 was taken to Alaska for the cold weather

U people underate G36 too much.

There is something M16 series is physically impossible to beat with
the gas system.

How many people know that arguments over M4 in
real battlefield is being supressed?

We shall see.

[nathan_w_l]

#1. Any country that wants to manufacture arms for the United States military must physically manufacture said arms in the United States in order to be awarded a military contract. All berreta pistols manunfactured for the US military are manufacture at their plant in the US. Same goes for FABRIQUE NATIONALE who manufactures the current M-16A2 and M-16A4 series rifle for the US military. kinda hard to call the g-36 eurotrash seeing as how the company that manufactures our M-16 is headquartered in Belgium isn't it.

#2. the G36 is an excellent weapon and I'm sure the the german army will be very happy with it in It's various forms but it does little to actually improve on the basic design concept of the m16/m4. in my experience it isn't more reliable seeing as how I have only had one m-16, jam on me and I have yet to see an M-4 jam. in it's deffense I have yet to see a G36 jam either. they are both very versatile, reliable, accurate, light weapons.
I do however preffer the M4/M16 simply because I feel more comfortable with it having used it much longer than the G36. At this moment I see absolutely no reason what so ever to replace the current m16/m4 system in the future with anything but an upgraded version of the same system.

#3. I have seen glock pistols being used in the United States military, however only in the hands of sf 18B weapons sergeants during phase II of the Qualification course.

4. the MP5 is far from Phased out in the US military. m4 don't suppress quite as well as the MP5SD. the MP5 and Its derivatives will probably see usage in the US military well into the next decade.

PS. Yes I have fired several thousand rounds through each of these weapons systems.

[Ratamacue]

Not only is the M16A2/A4 now developed by Fabrique Nationale, but so are the M240 (and variants), as well as the M249 and MK46 MOD 0.

[Apogee]

Nathan seems to think very highly of the M16/4 family. First off, I'm wondering where you fired these thousands of rounds. Second, you most not have fired them on the move, or in the dirt, b/c I've seen plenty of M16's, M4's and even M249's and M240B's jam. Ok, granted you expect a weapon or two to jam after a week or two in the field, but thats why they teach you SPORTS. And suppression with an MP5SD? Thats a silenced weapon, I'm not sure what sort of suppression you are getting out of that. We always use a machine gun to provide suppression, they're load, have good range and good penetrating power. None of which the 9mm round coming out of a silenced MP5 has.

[Chops]

Chris/Gaz/USMA

Chris- Heard any actual complaints from Australian soldiers? I'm Australian and beside the issue with M203 mounting brackets, I've not heard a thing. In fact about 40% of SASR chose the F88 (AUG) over the M4A5 and M16A2 in Timor. Care to elaborate?

Gaz- talked to any actual NZ grunts? Or are your comments based on newspaper reports...?

USMA- 'silenced' weapons dont actually exist, Nathan is referring to 'suppressed' weapons. Such noise reduced report weapons are generally known as 'suppressed' rather than 'silenced'.

Rgds

Chops

[David]

i could get a .22 rifle to be completely silenced. then will people shut up about the difference between suppressed and silenced weapons and saying theres no such thing as a silenced weapons. it's like me saying "you didn't specify what kind of weapon couldn't be silenced, what about a knife?" who gives a ****, get a life.

[Chops]

Hey David

Discovered some way of 'silencing' the action have we? Please inform me please wonderboy.

rgds

Chops

[FallenAngel]

Just thought I'd throw my $.02 in.

All guns are silent in space as sound can not travel in space. ;)

[Apogee]

Yeah, but there isn't any oxygen to fuel the explosion to fire the round. Yeah, it'll be silent, that and it won't be firing.

Chops - I realize that there are no truely 'silenced' fire arms. I used the wrong terminology, sorry. I was just trying to express that fact that the MP5SD is MUCH quieter then a medium machinegun.

Hope everyone is watching Bush's speech.

[David]

action noise is only a problem in self loading guns, so if i were to use a bolt action, i wouldn't really have that problem. would i?
-wonderboy

[GazB]

"Not only is the M16A2/A4 now developed by Fabrique Nationale, but so are the M240 (and variants), as well as the M249 and MK46 MOD 0."

Didn't know about the M16/M4 or the Mk-46 manufacture, but dont' you think it is rather normal to have Fabrique Nationale developing the M240 and the M249. M240 and M249 are the US designations for the FN MAG and FN Minimi. Do you know what FN stands for?
The M240 and M249 were both designed by FN in the first place. One of FN's most famous, and possibly one of the best arms designers in the world was a certain John Browning. So add the 50 HMG to FNs potential list too.

Gaz- talked to any actual NZ grunts? Or are your comments based on newspaper reports...?

A friend of mine was in the army and my brother still it. My brother quite likes the Steyr as he converted to it from a Sterling SMG which was not very accurate or particularly powerful. My friend converted from an SLR (L1A1 or FN FAL) and thinks the Steyr is a good rabbit gun but not much more.


A silencer and a suppressor are different things though they can be the same. A silencer is designed for use with subsonic ammo and is intended to be unrecognisable at 50m range or so. Even with total silencing there is always the loud whack of the impact of the bullet. A suppressor on the other hand is used for indoor ops where silence is not important but you want to be able to hear commands and things around you and not be deafend by your own weapon. It is also often used for long range weapons like .308 sniper rifles. Using subsonic ammo reduces the effective range dramatically, but having a suppressor to hide the muzzle flash and muzzle blast/noise the target can hear the crack of the bullet, but without the bang of the gun firing will have difficulty locating the snipers position.

"Yeah, but there isn't any oxygen to fuel the explosion to fire the round. Yeah, it'll be silent, that and it won't be firing. "

With a closed breech and a sealed bullet case where do you think the oxygen gunpowder uses to burn on Earth comes from?
Gunpowder, like HE generates its own oxygen as it burns, and both would work just fine in space. The only problem would be that in the vaccuum of space the half of the gun in sunlight will be several hundred degrees hotter than the half of the gun in shadow, so it might not fire for very long.

[Chops]

Gaz

Yep loved the SLR- a truly great weapon- and compared to the F88 it's a bloody cannon! :D

7.62 does the business! Ever seen imagery of some of the scout SLRs used by SASR in RVN? Awesome looking beasts- barrels chopped right back, no flash suppressor, 30 rd mags, full auto sears and occasionally an XM148 or later 203s jury rigged under the forestock. They must have sounded like the end of the world when they were fired! :P

The F88 all round is probably a better choice for a lot of people though. Lighter, easy to handle (although the close proximity of the muzzle and ejection port is scary the first few times- makes you jump!) and an excellent push through safety which I like a lot more than the selector type.

Best rgds

Chops

[STGN]

I have only tryed firing a C7 but after looking on some info of the G36 I think I would chose C7/M16A3/4/M4A1/C8.
I am not strong but I could almost not feel the C7 firing on full auto and I was even abel to control it, on 100m i would only have misset a man whit 5-8 meters i think.
STGN

[seventy6er]

Great page there "seventy6er". It says "access to the resource is forbidden' when I try to look at the file this morning (03.06.2003, 0842 EST).

cheers

front

sorry front, i blocked this page due to massive amount of traffic. the video is now UP again and can be downloaded and watched. have fun!

[96B]

Im not sure when the M4 was introduced, but with regards to the M16 family, does the fact that the G36 is so much a newer design and is a newer built weapon with better machining and quality take into account how reliable it is and why its such a good alternative? If so, should the M16/M4 be replaced by something else? Ive seen OICW stuff but it really seems too bulky for SOF folks...

[David]

the oicw is good for losers on ghost recon that can't shoot straight so they just spray grenades everywhere. as for real life, i don't know if i'd trust a bunch of reg infantry guys with a semi auto grenade launcher, but what do i know.

[GazB]

Chops

Yes, the SLR is a nice weapon. My one has a Redfield 3-9 power scope on it and it has the wooden stocks.

Regarding the chopped down ones, yes I saw a few pics of them with the Aussie troops in Vietnam. I think the Kiwi troops did the same. Glad I didn't have to fire one... :D . If you need to shoot through bushes 308 is much better than a small calibre like 5.56 (NATO) or 5.45 (RUSSIAN).
Even in Chechnia the Russians are using .308 short AKs and the preferred round seems to be a new 153 grain heavy bullet. (Not the subsonic 193 grain used with silencers).

Semperfi2003
Newer stuff is always better when it comes to computers, but with guns every new one is the "best". After it has seen a bit of real combat in jungles, deserts, and artic regions then you know whether it really is or not.
The M16 had a lot of problems when it first came out, but they were solved. It went from the best gun in the world (marketing) to the worst (opinion of the users for a while) to one of the best (now that the bugs have been worked out).
The SA-80 was supposed to be the best rifle in the world when it came out, and it was marvellous on the ranges... low recoil, and a x4 scope for accuracy against paper targets. In action its faults started to appear. From what I have heard they haven't been corrected yet.
One of the greatest weaknesses of the M16 and the SA-80 has been crap magazine design and manufacture. The Magazine is one area where reliability is far more important than lightness.

Also the OICW is intended to replace the M16A2/M203 only. The rest of the unit will continue to carry M16A2s till a replacement can be found.

[martinexsquaddie]

7.62 Nato is probably a bit too powerful for full auto use in a battle rifle something like the 7mm round enfield built for the en7 in the forties that got scrapped in favour of the SLR is the ideal round.
Pity the SA80 can't be sold to overseas civi shooters its a great range weapon just not soldier proof. Now take the accuracy international L96 sniper rifle will shoot as well or better than most things on the planet and its completly soldier proof a very rare thing in sniper rifles. Now the britsh army is planning to issue it in .338magnum as the dedicated platoon sharpshooter rifle beats an M16 with a scope. So someones going to have a rifle that shoots and shoots accuractly from an awfully long way away :o

[rafaelcb]

As you probably know, Spain chossed the G36 after a hard, extensive and long contest and trials period. The three finalists were:

* Steyr Aug
* SIG SG
* H&K G36

The final decision between the three in favour of the H&K was probably due to much cheaper manufacturing costs (which is a perfectly good reason when you have to buy several 1000's rifles!), but clearly other classic rifles were not up to the reliability levels of these 3 modern ones. The M16 was particularly ****e to jamming. Quite good accuracy, though.

Just my 2 cents.

[Sand Man]

7.62 Nato is probably a bit too powerful for full auto use in a battle rifle something like the 7mm round enfield built for the en7 in the forties that got scrapped in favour of the SLR is the ideal round.
Pity the SA80 can't be sold to overseas civi shooters its a great range weapon just not soldier proof. Now take the accuracy international L96 sniper rifle will shoot as well or better than most things on the planet and its completly soldier proof a very rare thing in sniper rifles. Now the britsh army is planning to issue it in .338magnum as the dedicated platoon sharpshooter rifle beats an M16 with a scope. So someones going to have a rifle that shoots and shoots accuractly from an awfully long way away :o

I've a question (and forgive me if this sems a stupid one):

Can an M4 be reinforced in such a way as to be able to handle 7.62 NATO round whether in sustained full-auto or burst-fire mode?

[He219]

You just revived a thread that has been dormant for Four years.

All questions have been answered by the development of the 5,56mm HK416 and 7,62mm HK417.

[Sand Man]

Sorry 'bout that He ... just didn't find the answer from all the reading I did about M4s here in MP.Net.

[Robbee]

Almost 4 years to the day this thread finished! Brought back to life like a sea monkey-just add water.
To answer your question, the M16 (AR10 at the time) was originally designed for 7.62x51

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-10

[playtym]

Just thought I'd throw my $.02 in.

All guns are silent in space as sound can not travel in space.


Yeah, but there isn't any oxygen to fuel the explosion to fire the round. Yeah, it'll be silent, that and it won't be firing.

I'm no NASA rocket scientist, but if you can discharge a firearm underwater why do you think you wouldn't you be able to fire it in space? It's not as if the firearm draws oxygen from outside to fuel the combustion of the powder when you fire it.

[Sand Man]

Almost 4 years to the day this thread finished! Brought back to life like a sea monkey-just add water.
To answer your question, the M16 (AR10 at the time) was originally designed for 7.62x51

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-10

I was thinking along the lines of the M4 ... The shorter version of the M16/AR-10.

[oldsoak]

Theorectically its possible - I think it has been done but dont quote me. You would probalby end up with something thats got very little of the original gun left.

M16/M4 vs G36 - all are good. If you clean and oil the rifle properly, use quality ammunition, have good quality mags in good condition and if the rifle is in good serviceable condition, they will serve you well. They are both designed to give reliable service.

[Robbee]

I was thinking along the lines of the M4 ... The shorter version of the M16/AR-10.

I can't see how it could be done without changing the lower receiver. The 6.8mm conversion, on the other hand is just an upper/mag kit.
If you haven't found it already... http://www.hkpro.com/hk417.htm

[Hollis]

Theorectically its possible - I think it has been done but dont quote me. You would probalby end up with something thats got very little of the original gun left.

M16/M4 vs G36 - all are good. If you clean and oil the rifle properly, use quality ammunition, have good quality mags in good condition and if the rifle is in good serviceable condition, they will serve you well. They are both designed to give reliable service.


That is 150% spot on, there is NO REASON to have a dirty rifle. This Dirty m4 talk is all BS, that those that never used one keeps whining about as if they actually know any thing. If a person has a dirty rifle they are not doing their job, and their Gunny is not do his job by kicking that boot in the rear and making sure is troops are doing their job.

The most important part of the rifle is the person who is holding it.

[Sand Man]

I can't see how it could be done without changing the lower receiver. The 6.8mm conversion, on the other hand is just an upper/mag kit.
If you haven't found it already... http://www.hkpro.com/hk417.htm

I guess this is it then. Need to repalce the grip with a MIAD me thinks...

http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/5053/dsc00010vk3.jpg

[DaDaddy(Fin)(UK)]

hey.......i just got one question really quick...........and i've seen it on alot of pictures but they always use a platic clip not metal.....wouldn't they break easy?......well if someone knows then plz tell me i would appreciate it...thanks

The reason of use for plastic clips is that they are relatively light duraple and do not bend or distort like cheap metal ones. (and of course cheap)


-Tr.

[Hollis]

The reason of use for plastic clips is that they are relatively light duraple and do not bend or distort like cheap metal ones. (and of course cheap)


-Tr.

I think, weight, as a has been mule, weight is a big factor for grunts. Or should I make it clearer, weight is a VERY big factor.

There are even rounds that are like shot gun hulls, the base is brass and the rest of the case is polymer, designed to save weight.

[nagant_m44]

action noise is only a problem in self loading guns, so if i were to use a bolt action, i wouldn't really have that problem. would i?
-wonderboy

yes, it would. The firing pin will still make noise when it hits the primer. Manipulating the bolt will also make some sound.

[playtym]

yes, it would. The firing pin will still make noise when it hits the primer. Manipulating the bolt will also make some sound.

Yup, even the De Lisle carbine makes some noise when the firing pin strikes and you cycle the action - and they're about as quiet as you'll get.

[Hollis]

About noise of the receiver functioning and the firing pin striking the primer, The noise I tend to remember is the LOUD boom, after the firing pin strikes the primer. OR, the crack as the bullet wized by my ear. You guys must have much better hearing than me.

[playtym]

About noise of the receiver functioning and the firing pin striking the primer, The noise I tend to remember is the LOUD boom, after the firing pin strikes the primer. OR, the crack as the bullet wized by my ear. You guys must have much better hearing than me.

I was referring to the noise when I fire my De Lisle - I've never let anyone fire it at me so couldn't tell you what it sounds like from the front end. ;)

[Hollis]

I was referring to the noise when I fire my De Lisle - I've never let anyone fire it at me so couldn't tell you what it sounds like from the front end. ;)

I was with a friend in group, who had a silenced/supressed UZI, impressive, funny the things you do hear, when the Loud boom is not there.

When there is no noise, even a little noise seems big.

[DeltaWhisky58]

Do not re-open ancient threads to ask a simple question which ought to be posted in Gear & Equipment.