Are those pistols yours jdun? I always thought it was ridiculous that the .45 has to be as big as a damn Desert Eagle. Now thread a supressor on it and you might as well use a rifle!

I don't think I've ever fired a .308 that didn't kick like a mule. Which is why I'm not such a big fan of this caliber in rifles intended for infantry (unlike some old-skoolers in the gun-owning community who argue we should have never ditched the M14 for the M16).

Very nice pics, BTW. The Mark 23 is definitely a huge weapon. I'm not so sure the whole "offensive handgun" concept was really one of the DoD's better ideas.

The M14 is HUGE. I couldn't imagine uising that thing at all anywhere except matches or something. Also, why is that Desert Eagle pink?

Let just said the G3 has more kick then an M14, FAL, or 12 gauge shotgun. The roller blow back system is horrible on recoil.

As far as I know no Special Force personnel use HK mk.23 or Desert Eagle.

The HK23 is approved, the Deag, well no. Unreliable and is basically like putting a brick in a holster. It's a video game noob gun. And everybody likes the 416, except people who notice it shoots like 4moa. HK responds by saying accuracy doesn't matter in a close quarters weapon.

The M14 and FAL are almost the same size. Of the three major battle rifles that was use in that era (M14, FAL, G3), the G3 was by far the worst. The AR10 which came a little later didn't take off until now.

I don't think any Special Force unit have the Mk.23 in their armory. I know that the standard MP5 are out. However, they do have the MP5SD but SEAL don't train with them from what SMGLee posted.

The mp5 is popular because integrally supressed subguns can easily be used effectively, silencing an m4 you need subsonic ammo that would make the 556 a popgun as it needs velocity for the tiny round to work.

That depends on who you talk to. I know of a guy who used to have all sorts of fun and games back in Northern Ireland. The Unit he was with Issued the MP-5K, the HK-53 and the G-3KA4 for various reasons. The weapons were liked because they were compact and very accurate. Now while I personally prefer the M-14E2 or a short barreled FN-FAL if I had to train and equip a unit for a fluid urban battlfield I would buy the H&K roller lock family of weapons. The reasoning is that it simplifies training and logistics.

Ah, that's good, hope he was laying the smackdown on those IRA bastards. :D

Anyway, H&Ks may be accurate, and it may be simpler to train your guys if you have a whole family of weapons that used basically the same operating system, but fact is that the roller-locking H&K rifles have pretty poor ergonomics.

It's funny, I always thought the MP5 was so popular because it was an excellent weapon. Like "The Number one SMG in the world" kind of excellent. Since the MP5 dominates the media so much, I assumed it was highly favored by Tactical teams and Special Forces people. Even on the news, when they show SWAT teams, most of the time they're carrying MP5s or M4s(then again, I haven't watched the news in awhile...). I'm sure it's still a fine weapon, just not the Godly SMG that Hollywood and Video games seems to make it be.

On the topic of H&K's other weapons, for a while I really did think the 416 was superior to the M4. And this wasn't based off videogames. I remeber reading an article about a year ago, which brought into question the M4's reliability. There were a few testimonys, from US soldiers stationed in Iraq, regarding jamming and weapon malfunctions. It was mentioned those problems could be solved by daily cleanings, but sometimes soldiers don't have time to maintain their weapons. Of course, the article's solution was the HK 416, which supposedly "had the M4's excellent handling, with the durability of an AK47".
There was also a mention of Special Forces teams trying the 416 and loving it. So I assumed that the 416 was a superior weapon. After all, Special Forces are some of the toughest guys on the planet, if they like it, it has to be good, right?
Thinking back on it, I can't help but wonder if that article may have just been propaganda from HK themselves...

That also brings up the Mk. 23. Once again, I assumed it was a great weapon because it was issued to... the NAVY SEALS! The SEALs are the toughest hombres on the planet, if they're using it, then it must be awsome! Right?

See, this is my problem, I never base my opinions on guns from games, because they're always altered to keep the gameplay balanced. But when you mention "Special Forces" in the same sentence as a gun brand, I immediatly assume it has to be a superior weapon.

I don't believe the 416 to be really very good. It does jam less. Definitely more reliable. But very few test models shot below 4, yes 4, MOA at 100 yards. It is definitely not an accurate system. But HK counters by saying since it's for room clearing it doesn't matter?

From what I've gotten from Former SAS members is that the reason they chose the MP-5 was that because of the closed bolt the first round fired was dead on target. in the type of work where they used the MP-5, HK-53 or G-3KA4 they could not afford to have bullets everywhere.

In Oman and Yemen they prefered anything that could reach out the sometimes Vast distances that you can clearly see someone. heck one member once commented to me that for distance work in the Middle East he prefered a WW2 era Mauser.

Actually, if you watch the news nowadays, you won't see too many SWAT teams using the MP5 anymore. Most SWAT teams have been going back to .223-caliber rifles in the past 5 years, and phasing out subguns as their primary weapons. The reason being that a number of studies have found that in CQB, .223 doesn't really tend to over-penetrate any more than 9mm against soft targets. But it does perform vastly better against body armor. So nowadays, most SWAT teams carry the M4, or other derivatives. The G36 series is probably the 2nd most popular .223 carbine amongst SWAT teams after the M4, but if so, then it's a pretty distant second.

"Durability" and "reliability" are two different things.

Anyway, I don't think there's much dispute that the 416 is an improvement over the M4. It's just a question of whether it's enough of an improvement to justify the cost. And H&K has never shown a willingness to be flexible, even when it means losing DoD contracts. That's why nearly every weapon H&K has ever submitted to the DoD for testing winds up losing out to someone else...usually FN, nowadays.

Larry Correia mentions this, but the truth is that almost all of the SF units that were issued Mark 23s never actually carry them. The Mark 23 was designed specifically for SOCOM, but SF guys hate it. Most of our SF operators carry either 1911 derivatives or SIG-Sauers.

As I've said, very few American SF units use H&Ks anymore. The MP5 used to be popular in the days where 9mm was considered the only acceptable cartridge for CQB, but those days are long past.

Also, if you check out the inventories of SFs of almost any country in the world that is friendly to the U.S., you will find that nearly all of them use M16s and M4s as their primary long guns. H&K's .223s, including the G36 series and 416, are not nearly as popular as the American M16 family of weapons.

One reason being, I think, is because HKs are horrendously expensive. Last I heard, retail on a 416 was something like $4,000 USD, compared to an MRP, for example, which ranges in the $1,400 area.

That was my error, I meant so say reliability. Sorry bout that.


Heh, that's funny because I remember another article about the M4, where it mentions that Special Forces teams around the world LOVE the M4.

When I am talking about the M14, G3, and FAL, I am talking about the original configuration. There is of course a lot of different variations, so it is pointless to discuss it other then the original between each design.

The HK416 is really a bad rifle. It's a jam-o-matic. The entire article was a stab at HK marketing department. It was an attack on HK hype machine and their ability to get away with anything including but not limited to complete ultra lies.

Here is a HK416 video without the HK marketing department behind it. Keep in mind the people were testing suppressors and not the HK416.

http://rpginn.com/index.php?option=c...=443&Itemid=39

The M16 DI family are use by the majority of Western SF. The Norwegian military adopted the HK416 yet their SF use Canadian's build M4 DI.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...-with-hk416-2/

The civilian version of the HK416 cost around $4,000 and does not use the standard pivotal pins layout. In other words you can't switch HK upper and lower with standard AR15 upper and lower.

Why are companies even trying to update the AR-15 platform instead of just making a newer better platform? I think FN got the idea someone else should too.

Because it's more expensive to make a completely new weapon system than to take an existing design and just giving it a makeover. I mean, the Army spent how much on the XM8 project and it went down the drain. It is much more practical to stick to what soldiers are already used to than to retrain them in something completely new and less expensive than to replace the exisiting weapons the military is already using. Magazine types, ammo type. That's all important.

The m16 has seen it's time and is being surpassed by more modern weapons. But there is the pointy stick syndrome:


Train a guy to use a pointy stick, he likes it. That pointy stck may save hs life, and he loves it. Over time he believes it to be the ultimate combat weapon. Up to the day he is butchered by iron spears.



The militiary has this syndrome with m4s.

What I think is pathetic is that the XM8 is a G36 in a new plastic shell, so basically they where "improving" on a current design. But it failed. The almighty HK failed, what a shocker. But to all the piss ant gamers who think the XM8 or the HK416 pwns all other guns, it is shocking.

Well, technically, the XM8 was literally just an effort to salvage something from the failure of the XM29/OICW/SABR project. But the OICW...that program cost a bundle and went nowhere.

I don't think the "pointy stick syndrome" explains the continued use of the M4. I'm not the biggest M16/M4 fan by any means, but I have always asked the question: If it's really such a bad design, why is it that so many SF units outside of the U.S. use it? If you take a look at the list of countries whose SF use M4s, you'll see a bunch whose countries adopted a newer design as their standard service rifle, and yet the SF still uses M4s instead. The SAS are the best example - even after the huge overhaul that the L85 received from H&K, they still stick to the M4. And likewise, Aussie SF uses M4s even though the rest of the military is issued Steyr AUGs. And while the L85 has a controversial history, isn't there pretty much a universal consensus on the excellence of the AUG?

The same applies to most American SWAT teams. How many SWAT teams in this country use either M4s or some similar derivative nowadays? How many use the G36, or the AUG, or the SCAR, or any other design from Western Europe? Is it really just the fact that Americans are so hung up on ARs? Or do these guys know something that the M4's critics don't?

There may be another explanation for all of this, but the "pointy stick syndrome" idea just doesn't seem to be that explanation.

Thanks for the vids. I've heard from a couple of sources (online) now that the forearm has overheating issues. Which makes perfect sense, because the G36 has had the exact same problem for years now, and the piston used in the 416 is almost identical to that of the G36.

Interesting what you've said about Norwegian SF.

As I've said before, H&K has never landed a major DoD contract. Ever. Back in the early-80s, the HK23 was submitted for the M249 SAW trials (and it lost to the FN Minimi). In the mid-70s, they also made a version of the HK53 that was meant to fit in armored vehicles' firing ports for the XM231 competition, and it lost to a modified version of the M16A1. The P7M13 was cut from the XM9 pistol trials very early on.

Not that I think most of H&K's products would really have a good chance even if they came to America.

Well what do you expect? Not a lot of gamers know anything about firearms and the ones that try are greatly influenced in what weapons they used in games. Games "balanced" firearms for the sake of play, they tone down damage when it should be greated, mistake firepower, brass, and other technical details, so anyone who came directly from pure gaming and into firearms interest are just tainted by how games portray any firearm, even ones that are supposed to be "realistic" not to mention any other form of media like movies, tv shows, etc.

Then there are the ones who flat out refuse to believe anything negative about them and respond by calling you a fanboy and an outright liar.

As my signature says, I'm a gamer and I apologize for all the morons who think playing Metal Gear Solid gives them actual combat savvy. ;)

Gamers think the "DEAGLE" is the ultmate combat handgun where t is a massive unwieldy jammomatic piece of crap. As for SWAT using m4s, they're allowed hollowpoints, don't need to rely on FMJ. And in a police role, it is easy to do maintenance and keep it running reliably, policemen don't crawl through swamps and walk in sandstorms.

The XM8 is a repackage G36. 40 millions for a new stock and a new name.

New guns are repackaged of old designs that was invented a long time ago.

Saw a SL-8 at cabelas for 2400, used. Seriously, it is so neutered it's not worth half that.

I know, and all for the sake of making a Civilian G36 importable to the US, but it still isnt worth it?

HK has U.S. factories they can make them in, all evil and assultish or whatever the libs banned from inport, but no, civilians don't deserve a quality weapon.....

HK started a factory early this year in the States. Prior to that they never had one. However, all rifles the factory makes for civilians will be gimped. That's the HK way.

If they even offer them. But then again if you want a g3 why not go with the excellent PTR-91, PTR-91 corp is also supposed to have great customer service.

Any HK product for the civilian market is just too expensive.

Actually, their LEO/military products tend to be too expensive as well. :D

Maybe, but the PTR-91 has issues of its own. The build quality is definitely not as good as H&K's, at least not on the one I fired (I have no idea what improvements they've made since).

Personally, I'm a bit skeptical of American clone AW makers. Their AK, H&K, Uzi, etc. knockoffs are often hit-or-miss.

PTR 91s are actually made on HK equipment and can share many parts. Some say it is actually superior to HK. Only complaints i've heard are the trigger can be heavy and it launches brass far enough to be lethal in 2 directions.

The one I handled had a lot of creep in the mag release, even with H&K-made mags. The welding is also noticeably poorer. The fit and finish doesn't feel quite as good as the HK91s I've handled. Not sure who thinks it's better than H&K.

But then, they may have made improvements, just as Taurus has done with many of their clones. But I still find the idea of U.S. gun makers building foreign-designed weapons suspect. Even if the tooling is the same, it's usually hard to top the years of experience that the original manufacturer has in perfecting the overall build quality.

Cabelas has a used HK91 at well over 4,000, while another local store has a ptr for 895. Better value?

And USPs are far inferior to my preffered sig.