The Sig 516 and the HK 416

[TCBA_Joe]

Now, I read this somewhere, but I was talking to some of the guys at the Sig Academy this week. One of the guys, one of their senior instructors, I was talking to told me the guy who designed the 416 designed the 516. He also told me that the units who were initially issued the 416 had a lot of issues with them.

My question is what is the relationship between the 2 systems. What makes one better than the other, if anyones gotten to handle both and knows the technical differences.

It seems the Sig has a more traditional carrier group, but what's different about the pistons?

[G3Kurz]

Now, I read this somewhere, but I was talking to some of the guys at the Sig Academy this week. One of the guys, one of their senior instructors, I was talking to told me the guy who designed the 416 designed the 516. He also told me that the units who were initially issued the 416 had a lot of issues with them.

My question is what is the relationship between the 2 systems. What makes one better than the other, if anyones gotten to handle both and knows the technical differences.

It seems the Sig has a more traditional carrier group, but what's different about the pistons?

Your account above is only partially accurate.

There is no one single designer of the HK416 first off. ANYONE who takes credit for that is either smoking dope or rewriting history. An entire team was involved in its development to include user reps, developers, sales staff, actual designers - a lead and his assistants, prototype makers and testers etc. One of the key folks involved now works at SIG Sauer in NH and is the lead on the development of the SIG516. For that reason it will likely be a VERY GOOD rifle and SIG has some surprises for it that I think give it an important leg up on the current known HK416 designs IF SIG can make it work as intended - All I can say on that.

As with ANY new weapon there will be issues, especially with those run hard like the HK416 has been since it was first fielded in 2004. The units that use them show them no mercy. A few isolated problems have occured but those are in guns with over 60,000 rounds thru them, most of it suppressed and using special ammo. HK has provided fixes to address these rare (< 2) issues out of 1000's fielded. Mostly you are hearing about rehashed internet rumor and comments from the competition wishing their rifle was serving where the HK416 is. They are not. The SIG516 is not. Even the M4 is mostly gone from these units having been replaced by HK416's.

The SIG516 will have a hard time replacing the HK416 but that will depend on many factors. Its AGR is well designed and SIG empoys a good CHF barrel, but it takes more than that. It takes a total package well executed and VERY WELL tested.

The US Army will test all avalable 5.56mm carbines beginning next year. I am sure the SIG and HK guns will be included. It will put up or shut up time and HK416 will be the gun all others are competing against because the very best are using it and they can choose what they want and have chosen the HK416. That makes it the high water mark.

G3Kurz

[M995]

Now, I read this somewhere, but I was talking to some of the guys at the Sig Academy this week. One of the guys, one of their senior instructors, I was talking to told me the guy who designed the 416 designed the 516. He also told me that the units who were initially issued the 416 had a lot of issues with them.

My question is what is the relationship between the 2 systems. What makes one better than the other, if anyones gotten to handle both and knows the technical differences.

It seems the Sig has a more traditional carrier group, but what's different about the pistons?

I think the difference between the Sig 516 piston and HK416 piston is that HK's piston is self regulating and the Sig's piston is adjustable. I like the 416's piston better because the sig's adjustable piston has too many settings. You don't need an off setting (to cut off all the gases) in an assault rifle and I see that as a liability.

Now in response to the HK416 problems. I remember someone posted on this forum that HK's President said that contrary to rumors, the HK416s has not run into major problems in USSOCOM use. Most of the problems with the HK416 was on very high round counts with suppressors (which is harmful to any gun). I think most of the problems you hear about the 416 are exaggerated by die hard Direct Impingement AR fan boys on the internet.

Any new system will have some issues that will eventually be worked out later. For example, the IWI Tavor had problems with sand getting into the ejection port but IWI has fixed the problem and the Tavor is doing very well in Israeli service and is the standard future infantry weapon of the IDF. There were some people who used this incident to bash the Tavor and say that it is a horrible weapon, which is not true. I guess those kinds of people also bash the HK416 when they hear of some issues and try to exaggerate them. AS G3kurz said, HK has fixed the rare problems which the 416s suffered on high round counts with suppressed fire.

[SDduc996]

The guys I know using them here absolutely love them. I've never heard them say a bad thing about them.

[45C]

Regardless of of how good a design the SIG is, SIG USA will probably manage to screw it up.

[paul123]

Regardless of of how good a design the SIG is, SIG USA will probably manage to screw it up.

What valid contribution does this comment provide to the OP's questions / statements ??? making a bold short statement like that provides nothing to this forum but make it look more like Ar15.com

please enlighten us, what in your experience with SIGUSA's products has led you to believe that they will screw up the SIG 516??? is it how they changed the 550 into the 556 ??? is there some quality issues you've run into?? customer service problems???

did a 556 blow up in your face??

or maby its the fact that they're products are ACTUALLY avail. for people to purchase, unlike HK or that they actually listen to civi customer input. what about their part availability??

dont get me wrong, im a HK man through and through but you have to admit that SigUSA has done things about 95% more correctly then HK usa.

sorry to be a dick but if your going to contribute an opinion to this forum, please by all means put an opinion in your posts here.

[45C]

Back in the 90's I had a Sig 220 and 228, German built, quality fit, finish, and function just as good as HK. Shortly after the election, I got a 556 pistol and a 556 Classic off of Gunbroker. They both came with the hooded front sight, "popsicle" stick rear sight and "Sig red dot" sight, oh and "Sig plastic AR mags". I also purchased a "Sig rotary diopter rear sight" seperately. Front sight on the pistol was loose, dove tail was milled out of spec. The fit between the upper and lower was kinda of loose. The rail was way under spec no matter how hard you tightened the diopter or red dot, they would loosen up after a few rounds. On the rifle the fit and finish was much better, the rail was still a little under spec but not as bad as the one on the pistol. The Chinese made "Sig red dot" ate a couple of batteries and then gave out completely. The Chinese made "Sig" rotary diopter rear sight had a loose fit to it and felt cheap {except for the price} pretty sure the front sights are Chinese also. Furniture is Chinese. The rails probably are too and no telling what else. On the good side I put several hundered rounds through each and they functioned fine, accuracy was about average. I initialy had hi hopes of eventually sbr-ing the pistol but the old Sig quality was just not there and I wonder how they would have held up in the long run. I sold-traded them off for a SCAR 16 and havent looked back.

[xamoel]

As far as the HK416s self-adjusting piston is going: self adjusting in what way? When using a suppressor?

If so, does the MR556 feature the same system?

[M995]

As far as the HK416s self-adjusting piston is going: self adjusting in what way? When using a suppressor?

If so, does the MR556 feature the same system?

No, the HK416 is not self adjusting when using a suppressor. It is self regulating for different types of ammo.

[paul123]

Back in the 90's I had a Sig 220 and 228, German built, quality fit, finish, and function just as good as HK. Shortly after the election, I got a 556 pistol and a 556 Classic off of Gunbroker. They both came with the hooded front sight, "popsicle" stick rear sight and "Sig red dot" sight, oh and "Sig plastic AR mags". I also purchased a "Sig rotary diopter rear sight" seperately. Front sight on the pistol was loose, dove tail was milled out of spec. The fit between the upper and lower was kinda of loose. The rail was way under spec no matter how hard you tightened the diopter or red dot, they would loosen up after a few rounds. On the rifle the fit and finish was much better, the rail was still a little under spec but not as bad as the one on the pistol. The Chinese made "Sig red dot" ate a couple of batteries and then gave out completely. The Chinese made "Sig" rotary diopter rear sight had a loose fit to it and felt cheap {except for the price} pretty sure the front sights are Chinese also. Furniture is Chinese. The rails probably are too and no telling what else. On the good side I put several hundered rounds through each and they functioned fine, accuracy was about average. I initialy had hi hopes of eventually sbr-ing the pistol but the old Sig quality was just not there and I wonder how they would have held up in the long run. I sold-traded them off for a SCAR 16 and havent looked back.

Sir i stand corrected,

i apologize for flying off the handle but all to often on this forum as well as others, it gets filled with about 10% usefull posts and 90% extremely unhelpfull ones. i like HK pro and do not want to see it turn into some of those other ones.