Note: When I finally get around to buying a 5.56 carbine, I'll probably buy an LWRC just because it's a better deal. With that out of the way so you know I'm not a complete fan boy, here's the rest:

1) Not all gas pistons are equal. To my knowledge, the only gas piston systems (AR15 pattern) that have been truly proven are HK's and LWRC's. Most lesser gas pistons are actually less reliable than a properly maintained DI AR15, not to mention parts wear/breakage can also be a concern with lesser systems.

2) Durability/longevity/quality. During testing an HK416 shot what...40,000 rounds....and it was still in accuracy specs? A 10" HK416 shot 15,000 rounds over the course of a couple days and still held a 1 MOA group, IIRC. The quality of HK's barrels can not be argued.

3) In dust testing conducted by the army, here's what happened:
Officials tested 10 each of the four carbine models, firing a total of 60,000 rounds per model. Here’s how they ranked, according to the total number of times each model stopped firing:

• XM8: 127 stoppages.

• MK16 SCAR Light: 226 stoppages.

• 416: 233 stoppages.

• M4: 882 stoppages.

That speaks for itself as to how much of an improvement the HK416 is over the M4. The mags of the HK416 are a huge improvement and play a big part in the better reliability. Also helping is the fact that the gun isn't pooping in its mouth, with reducing not only fouling (fouling is generally not a problem if the weapon is lubed), but heat in the BCG......and heat burns off that necessary lube. Heat can also change the tolerances between metal parts, creating even more heat. Eventually, heat can start to cause parts failure as well. When you go to 10" barrels or suppressors, the gas piston is an even bigger leap.

Whether the HK416 is a better value than the LWRC for a US citizen is up for debate, since a real HK416 is going to cost a pretty penny simply because it's rare and holds collector value. The MR556 is a somewhat bastardized version of the HK416. So, if it's my money I'll probably buy the LWRC....but if the real HK416 was available on the market at realistic prices relative to its practical worth and not collector prices, I'd 100% go with the HK416.

With regards to the USMC employing it, just keep in mind the role in which they're using it. They're not replacing the SAW with it, but instead filling the Automatic Rifleman role with a true automatic rifle instead of a LMG which was erroneously bought to fill the automatic rifleman spot. Remember, the USMC wanted the Ultimax 100 back in the 80's as a true automatic rifle, but was forced to buy the M249 due to the Army's decision. There's no doubt that the M27 isn't a bullet hose as the M249 is......it's not suppose to be, either. It's not suppose to fill the role of a LMG, which the M249 is the epitome of LMG. Anyone who isn't sure about this, you will probably really enjoy Gunner Eby's article. Click this to get the PDF of it, or google "CWO3 Small wars" and it should be the 1st or 2nd link.

ETA: You want Part II of Gunner Eby's article. Part I gives some background info, but Part II is the meat'n'potatoes.

 

Thnx for taking the time to post this -- good to know.

 

So, basically, you disagree with the points that a bunch of people and organizations who have a lot more experience than you fielding modern firearms make for selecting the weapon for their use.

Thanks for sharing your opinion and stating your disagreement. Perhaps if you can share any empirical evidence that led you to your opinion, there can be some valid discussion.

-W

 

He has 80 posts. I don't think he's a troll. I think he's trying to have a legit discussion.

 

My understanding of why the HK416 is so popular are the following:

*Longer Service Life: Army data lists the bolt life for the M4 carbine as 6-10K and bolts for the M16 family are generally rated for 5-6K. HK TTD lists the HK416's bolt life as 10-15K minimum and G3 kurz said that tests showed that the M27 have bolt life of NLT 15K and that the Marines are getting 20K on the bolts. HK TTD stated that barrel life for HK416's CHF barrel is 15K minimum and in testing HK barrels have lasted 20K or more. Standard M4 barrel life is 6-10K.

*In addition, in around 2005-6, HK said that if they were able to bid on a large contract, they would match the purchase price of the M4 ($1300 for M4 in 2006 for the army). M4s currently cost $1400 for the army. I think it was in 2006 (not exactly sure) G3 kurz said that the HK416 costed $1425. So for a large contract, the HK416 may have similar or same purchase price as the M4 carbine plus reduced lifecycle costs, which would save money for the people buying the gun.

*Increased user safety:
-Higher Cook off rate: M4 is 180-210 rounds and HK416 is 240-270.
-HK416 barrel failure rate is over 900 rounds while for a standard M4 it's around 540 and for the M4A1 it's a bit higher than 800 rounds (not sure of the exact figure). Thus, HK416s are better if you need extensive use of FA fire (ie IAR). A G36 fired 9 Beta mags in under 3 minutes (900 rounds) without stoppages so a HK416 would not suffer a bent gas tube and less damage on FA fire b/c of the CHF barrel and pusher rod system.
-HK416s with OTB features have zero drain time.

*Improved Reliability for short barrels: Mk18's average MRBS was listed at 738 rounds and US army listed M4 MRBS at 3600 (Close Quarters Battle Receiver - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, go to the Powerpoint presentation by Crane on the bottom) and Crane changes bolts for the Mk18s around 2500 rounds. HK416s have been tested to NLT 15K MRBS.

*In addition, G3 kurz said there were Recce variants of the HK416 that could match the accuracy of the DI DMR rifles like Mk12 SPR. So you can have weapons standardization if you want which will simplify logistics and weapons repair (since the 10" 416 can replace the Mk18, the 14.5" guns can replace the M4A1, the 16.5" version is the M27 IAR and the 16.5" Recce guns can replace the Mk12).

 

Excellent synthesis of information, M995.

 

Thanks TGS. Anyways, you should thank G3 kurz b/c without him sharing this kind of info with us on HKpro, I would not know all this.

 

Hm, interesting. Would the op rod being attached to the carrier group be a weak point? According to the comments the design was sold to Para so I guess it never really took off wether due to funds or performance.

Seems very similar to the SCAR internals, except in a more AR style.

As for the 416/556, it may not be the perfect gun but its pretty close imo(HK markings included). It's not going to make you a better shooter but as for serving its design purpose I believe has been exceeded. It gets very blurry when trying to justify the price of a 416 upper or the MR556 for civillan purposes but quality doesnt come cheap. Can a BCM/Noveske/Colt/KAC/etc serve my range/class/showing off needs, yes. But its not gonna give me that HK buzz.

 

But its not gonna give me that HK buzz.

I guess that's what it all boils down to

It's a real shame the design didn't take off. I still see real potential in it.

I also appreciate the info on the HK416's. While I may not have chosen it myself, I'm sure that receiving a service rifle that lasts twice as long for the same price sounds pretty tempting for people out there.

 

I personally like the original DI set-up. I sold my 10" 416 upper to a buddy as I had a good amount of spares for the DI system, and didn't want to buy more expensive spares for the 416. No to mention he really wanted it, and I just wanted something else. It's definitely a great platform though. I've gotten to shoot quite a few buddies 416's here and they've all been 100% reliable.

The LR300 is a poor comparison. AZ was a Harley guy who started off making these in his garage. Try and compare the dimensions from two seperate BCG's and tell me what you find. They probably improved a bit when Para bought the design out, but where has it gone recently?

I'd definitely say the LWRC is a better comparison to the HK.

 

I don't mean to be a total douchebag, but these kinds of noob questions get real old, real quick.

Yea, I get it that you're trying to educate yourself, but your "tone", as my mom would say, sucks balls. Pretty confrontational from the start.

Add to that the vast amount of information avalible already without having to ask people to re-hash **** just for you. Don't expect people to do your homework for you when you get tired of googling **** and don't be suprised when you walk into a forum like this with a question like that asked in the manner that you did, when folks treat you like you just walked into the room with your **** in your hand.

Had you used the search function on HKPRO already you would have already read this already, but here is just one example of how this question has already been beat to death.

http://www.hkpro.com/forum/hk416-hk417-hq/156217-what-sets-hk416-apart.html

Regarding my opinion on the matter, I do believe Starsnuffer pretty much nailed that one for me already.

 

The ZM LR 300 does not provide the reliability, durability or the proven record of the M4 much less the HK416.

 

And the LR300 is also not even close to being the first piston designed AR15/M16 model either.

Colt did prototypes waaaaaay back in the day and then in the early 80's a guy came out with a version he called the "Rhino" that had so many issues that it was a huge flop. The guy was ahead of his time for sure, but his execution of design fell short. Parts of the Rhino system were and still are very viable though.

Biggest issue was that he used a solid carrier key that was held on at first, by the same two bolts that a standard DI key is held on with. They sheared of course. Then he tried adding a solid pin. Eventually they started shearing too. He never went the extra step of machining product specific bolt carriers with built in keys/op-rod impact points.

Fluff piece on the Rhino in a contemporary gun rag of the time:

Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4


And finally, the rare 1960's Colt piston prototype, the rare Colt R703. Made by colt and offered to the govt. who promptly turned it down. Colt claims they made it at the govt.s request, but you'd think that if that were the case, they would have made more then 2 or 3 maybe/possibly/idunno verified examples. Normally when the Mil asks for something, they want a bunch to beat up in testing. 2 to 3 tool shop prototypes don't exactly count as that.

If you'll notice, it looks an aweful lot like the Korean K series (which was originally designed in the early 80's, well after Colts gun). Both the Colt R703 and the Korean K1/K2 are essentially AR15's with AK gas systems, not the current short stroke variety that's so popular in the market.

The real funny thing is that if you go to Colts website and view their tech specs on the 6940, they claim that they were the first in the game with a piston system, better then everyone else kind of thing. I find it hilarious that a company that couldn't justify a russian piston design wearing an AR platform to the US govt. over 40 years ago is trying to tout that as their "experience" in the market and proof that their new short stroke piston design (which was brought late to the market, well after other designs) is superior to other competing designs.......sigh. Marketing spin at its best.

In their defense though, I will say that it is very possible that regardless of how well the system might have workd, it's very possible that the Govt. turned the idea down on principle alone. Being in the middle of the cold war like that, i'm sure the mere mention of adopting the other sides technology like that would have been a PR nightmare, hence when Colt approached the govt. with the design, they were told to pound sand.

 

Sorry, but I don't fully understand the part of the mr556 being bastardized? Vs LWRc. The mr556 shares a lot of part numbers with the 416 From what I can gather up looking at hk parts.net, the mr has a different bolt because it's a semi bolt, obviously. Also the barrel is different. Is the chrome lining all the difference? The g3,s aren't chrome lined and I'm sure they've shot well over the 20,000+ rounds. The mr556 is the semiauto version, how many of us can have a full auto 416 and be legal? If you own a 416 and you're shooting it semiauto, to me that just doesn't seem all that different because other than it saying 416 on the upper or complete rifle it may as well be bastardized also using it in the semi auto.
Explain the differences in a lwrc m6a2 vs the mr556, chrome lined barrel seems to be the only stand out.

 

This. What parts are "bastardized"? That's a pretty strong assertion. Because my MR556A1 rifle the last I checked has the same gas piston system, the same grenade launcher mount, Over-The-Beach parts, and even a few parts that I would consider upgrades over a stock 416, like the captive firing pin retainer pin and rock solid detent takedown pins.

Please, if you really are being honest about your intentions here, just DAFS. I swear I have seen this exact post at least FIVE times in the last four years.

I call troll. There is no other conclusion I can come up with.

 

Here's an article on Jason Falla's blog on AR-15s: Jason Falla: Carbine's for Duty Carry, Which One and Why?

Carbine's for Duty Carry, Which One and Why?
The United States is the center of gravity for all things tactical. The U.S market represents 90% of the world market and because of this the world's premier weapons manufacturers have set up shop here in continental United States to sell their wears to the military, law enforcement agencies and private citizens.

However, after world events such as 911 there has been a huge demand for weapons in the U.S. This placed massive strain on quality control systems of weapons companies as demand overtook supply. As a result, manufacturers produced what could only be seen by the end user as lower quality products that failed to meet the expectation of the consumer.

Another issue to compound the existing problems was the injection of new companies looking to capitalize on the buyers market. This has become the biggest issue for end users as one weapon looks much the same as another, yet one is priced to meet the budget of most civilian shooters and law enforcement agencies struggling with budgetary constraints and the other priced for high end private users and military units. To the layman, both weapons meet the specifications of the end user and price then becomes the deciding factor.

I would like to focus this writing towards the law enforcement officer looking to purchase a weapon for duty carry or an LE department looking to outfit the department with a patrol rifle for general patrol use or for tactical SWAT applications.

Here is a list of considerations when selecting a weapon for duty carry/use.

1. Mil-Spec: I am a firm believer in buying a carbine that meets Mil-Spec standards. The military operates in the harshest environments on the planet and if it's good enough for them, it's definitely good enough for domestic use. All of my AR15's/M4's are fully Mil-Spec, as are the parts kits and accessories. I will not have anything on or in my weapons that do not meet these requirements.

2. Manufacturer: (This is a contentious issue as the industry is full of 'experts' looking to capitalize on promoting themselves by promoting a weapon manufacturer. Bottom line is, business is business, but don't fall foul of believing the hype! Remember, the U.S market is 90% of the world market. Everyone is out to make a buck!)

Stick with high end manufacturers that build guns for the military. Colt has been supplying quality M4's to the military for a long time. I used one while serving and it ran like a charm. I now have two H&K 416's. I have had nothing but success from both of these guns and don't believe the hype that's out there about the problems with this weapon. I have LMT guns all are Mil-Spec and all run like a charm. My latest project is a collaboration with Monty from Centurion Arms to produce a fully Mil-Spec carbine for Redback One. Centurion Arms is a small and up coming company that produces excellent quality Mil-Spec carbines. Monty has put together rifles and carbines that closely resemble those currently being used by Special Operations personnel. An example of this is his Mk 12 SPR.

3. Direct Gas Impingement or Piston: I have used all of the quality DGI and piston guns on the market today. I like both operating systems. My advise is this. Stay away from piston driven guns that are not currently in wide spread use by U.S Special Operations. I have seen all of the issues such as heat transfer to the hand-guards, reliability issues, excess recoil, accuracy problems, vibrations causing accessories to rattle loose and so on.

The fact is, good piston guns are more reliable than DGI guns because they will run without much lubricant and gas and carbon is not being deposited back into the bolt, bolt-carrier and body of the weapon which contributes to weapon malfunctions. FACT: piston guns need to be lubricated. Don't think that you will get away without lubing your weapon. Piston guns run better after a good cleaning and a light oil. This will not only enhance performance under normal conditions but it will prevent excess wear and tear on all parts, saving the bottom line of the department.

All piston guns recoil harder that a standard DGI gun. When I began shooting my HK416's I wasn't sure that I was going to like them due to the excess recoil. But, after only a short time I was able to manage recoil using our recoil management system just as effectively as any DGI gun.

4. Barrel Length: I believe that a 14.5" barrel is the best barrel length to issue patrol officers for duty. This length is perfectly suited for all conditions from rural to urban operations. Muzzle velocities are high enough to stabilize the projectile out to 200 meters, the lethal range of the weapon system. It's not too long so patrol officers can deploy the weapon quickly and effectively for active shooter response.

For tactical SWAT applications, I would encourage the decision to purchase a 10.5" barreled carbine. This will allow the officers to maneuver the weapon efficiently when conducting missions involving room clearing and CQB. Although terminal performance is compromised due to the much lower muzzle velocities. The 5.56 round can still be just as effective but relies more on shot placement that the terminal performance of the round selected. (The previous statement is true across the board, however training is the biggest factor effecting the lethality of the patrol officer.)

5. Round Selection: For law enforcement use I strongly advocate using the Hornady 75 grain TAP round as the preferred round for patrol and SWAT applications. This round has been tested and approved for use in U.S SOCOM and gives terminal performance similar to BH 77 grain OTM LR ammunition.

6. Accessories: I am a big believer in aiding the abilities of the shooter by equipping him with accessories that enhance his capability and lethality.

A. Having a quality weapon mounted flashlight is of paramount importance and should be seen as a standard accessory permanently mounted to the carbine. My preferred manufacturer is Surefire. No other flashlight compares, or comes close to them. I use scout lights on all of my carbine in various configurations from 3V, 6V, IR V series, low profile mounts to standard mounts. This is the best carbine flashlight on the market!

B. I believe that all tactical SWAT personnel should be issued with an NVG and Laser for there weapons. This force multiplier enhances the teams capability and enhances lethality by being able to target individuals without the need for visible light which can lead to mission compromise, potentially effecting a successful outcome.

C. Having a quality red-dot sight on the weapon is an obvious enhancement to the targeting capability of the officer during daylight or low light operations. I choose Aimpoint as my preferred combat optic and the T1 micro and the preferred model. You can't beat the battery life and how robust they are.

D. Keep a quality pair of iron sights on the weapon just in case the optic fails!

E. A sound suppressor can be an effective tool to enhance command and control at the tactical level. It also provides a silent entry capability for the assault team with the right set up and training. This is a desirable feature not an essential one. Go with a reputable brand such as Surefire or AAC.

F. You will need a sling for the weapon. Slings can be used for tactical use and for administrative purposes. Choose a sling that will best serve your purpose. The sling must NOT prohibit the maneuverability of the weapon or restrict the user from accessing the control features of the weapon. There is way too much industry hype on sling choice. Don't believe the hype! A two point sling will allow you to sling the weapon on your back to climb, go hands on, conduct admin, attend to a casualty etc. It will also allow you to operate the weapon tactically and transition to your secondary weapon as required. A single point sling is purpose built for CQB only and you will not be able to perform the functions mentioned of the two point sling. I have designed a two point sling that is low profile, only 1" wide, is adjustable for tactical use and administrative use. It will be available soon through RB1 and SORD USA.

My final thoughts are this. Buy quality and buy once! Don't believe the hype! Seek advise from unbiased people that know what they are talking about.

Please feel free to contact me or Redback One at any time for any advise on training, tactics or equipment.

Stay Safe.

 

So you should have said, "the MR556 is a more robust version of the HK416" instead.

-W

 

Why does the barrel thickness make the MR more robust than the HK416? It makes it heavier, gives it increased accuracy potential but it still lacks the chrome lining. The HK416 already has a pretty thick barrel, so I don't know excactly what the difference in barrel life between the two would be.

 

Our HK416's have the captive firing pin retainer pin, so that feature is not a "stock" feature.

The biggest difference between an HK416 and the MR series is the bolt carrier track and barrel extension nub, and the barrel profile, along with SA carrier and no auto sear in the lower. In addition the HK416 (except the 20" gun) usually comes with a single stage trigger without the bridge covering the disconnector. The 2-stage trigger assembly with disconnector brigde is standard on the MR.

For me, parts life, MRBS etc etc is not really interesting as an end user. It does of course speak of the quality, but is more important for acquisitions people. If my gun can run through maybe twice my basic combat load without a hiccup, when I need it to, that is all that matters. There are no magic guns that does not need maintenance, lube or skill to employ properly.

The HK416 is a good weapon on its own merit, and I have full confidence in the system as far as taking it on operations. Would I have that confidence with other weapon systems, like the C8, as well? Yes. That is because I, as an end user, know how to make the weapon work, and how to keep it running under adverse conditions. Inadequatly trained people can mess up even quality weapons.

 

From 2008 but still applicable and accurate save the unit costs and HK416-style op rod copies - now over 35 easily at last count if you include complete guns, uppers, and kits. Still not one of those guns has had the success of the HK416 and in hard use by hard men.
G3Kurz

----
Why the HK416 is the Best 5.56mm Carbine in the World

This is all fact and not conjecture or opinion. I was the U.S. PM and developer at HK for the HKM4 (the early HK416 project name) and HK416 development from Day 1 thru May 2006. I assigned Larry Vickers and later Tom Kivlehan the temporary duties of HK416 PM while they were with HK. I sat alone with Ernst Mauch, Managing Director at HK in Germany when the first idea of starting a “Mid-Life Improvement Program” for the US M16/M4 was envisioned by Ernst in 2001, this coming on the heels of the very successful SA80A2 Mid-Life Improvement Program conducted for the Brits. While many at H&K were involved with SA80A2 and HKM4/HK416 efforts and contributed to their eventual success, Ernst was the one who got these two programs started and fed each to successful completion and user fielding. He is the true and only “father” of HK416. This being said it is not just one person but a team of dedicated and capable men and women who made HK416 and other great weapons happen.

Background
HK first created and briefed the concept of an improved M4 as far back as 2001. The choice of the gas system was a no brainer based on the success of other piston operated weapons, like the HK G36. The first HKM4’s were US M4A1 carbines loaned to HK which then had the first versions of the HK piston rod gas system installed in “Uncle Sam’s COLT’s” (not to be confused with Samuel Colt). The joint industry and user development of the HKM4, and then HK416, is considered by those in the know as they most successful rifle development program of its kind in recent history.

HK approached the user unit/our US Government partner on this effort with the idea for HKM4 after most every other US Government ordnance organization passed on it. After a legal review of the concept was conducted from the user side the program began basically on a hand shake and later a No Cost (0 dollar) contract for the development. HK developed the HKM4 for free in exchange for user involvement and prototype testing. In the end the users received a vastly improved 21st century AR-based rifle in less than 2 years from start to finish, including time wasted with the Colt law suit against the HKM4, with not a single US Government R&D dollar spent!

Those who know the current elite users of the HK416 will realize why they selected the HK416 over ALL other carbines available, to include the M4’s they replaced with the HK416, and that these organizations only buy and use the very best available. They selected the HK416 after detailed comparative testing against other weapons, to include in some cases the M4A1 and even SCAR L.

Proven Better
What makes the HK416 better than most if not all other M4-style weapons? You can decide for yourself based on the list of proven capabilities provided below. All these statements are documented in actual testing. Can your M4-style weapon approach this degree of performance? Does it have these features? Since the debut of the HKM4 at the 2004 SHOT Show, the concept of the piston operated M4-style weapon has been included in a rash of more than 12 (to date) similar AR-based weapons. While not the first company to offer a “pusher rod” M4-style weapon, NO ONE but H&K can yet claim the success of a piston operated M4-style weapon in the elite user community that the HK416 has achieved in a very short period of time.

HK416 Advantages – Upper Receiver

●Piston Rod Gas System
*70% less fouling and cleaning time (< 4 minutes for an HK416, > 12 for an M4)
An almost total lack of carbon fouling is present within the weapon during even extended operation. 95% of all carbon fouling, debris and heat leaves the muzzle of the HK416 upon firing.
*Little or no heat transfer to the bolt parts which results in 3-4 times increased service parts life and little to no requirement to reapply lubricant
*Ability to fire the weapon w/o lubricant. A lack of lubricant attracts less sand and grit in harsh environments thus improving reliability.
*Weapon operation not effected by the presence of water in the gas system
*User removable without tools
*Same gas system components and gas port location for all barrel lengths (10.4-20”)

●Cold Hammer Forged Barrel with Unique HK Tapered Bore Profile
*Improved Accuracy
*Long Barrel Service Life with less than 5% loss in muzzle velocity and accuracy in more than 20K rounds fired!
*Easily resists damage and/or reduces operator injury from an obstructed bore firing in the event of an obstructed bore (100% obstructed) occurrence (lodged projectile, water, mud, etc.) or excessive firing rates over 500-700 rounds (melt down)
*Bore and chamber chrome plated for improved corrosion resistance and reduced wear

●Improved Accuracy
10.4" barreled HK416's regularly out shoot 14.5" barreled M4's for accuracy - some HK416’s with 10.4” barrels shoot @ 1 MOA with match ammo! A randomly selected HK416 with 10.4” barrel from a production lot of more than 300 guns fired multiple 1 inch groups at 100 meters from a rest with match ammo (IMI 55 grain BTHP) during USG acceptance testing.

●Increased Parts Service Life
*HK416’s selected at random in USG testing have fired 15K rounds and more without a single stoppage or parts failure. In fact one gun was then tested to 30K rounds with no parts failures or stoppages recorded. M4 parts and barrel are expected to last only 6000 rounds or less as per the Army’s MIL SPEC for the weapon. (These relatively low numbers are accurate as per numerous reports from M4 users and armorers).
*ALL HK416 parts are guaranteed for a minimum of 15K rounds.
*Increased service life helps eliminate failures in combat, time and costs for repeated parts replacement and weapon repair.
*HK416’s have fired 30K rounds in testing without the replacement of a single part whereas an M4 to reach that round count will have replaced barrels and bolts at least 2 – 4 times, as well as various small parts (extractors, extractor springs).

●Increased Reliability
*HK416’s have fired more than 20K rounds without stoppages or parts failures, with NO cleaning or lubrication applied during those 20K rounds

●Bolt Carrier “Bell” Design for increased function and reliability

●Bolt
*Does not require extractor removal for cleaning
*Has support lug on extractor (and barrel extension) to limit excess compression of extractor spring
*Bolt head supports the cartridge case head
*No gas rings required

●One-piece Piston Rod “Carrier Key”
*Improved reliability and component service life

●Firing Pin Safety
*Prevents slam or drop fires and primer indents during chambering

●Higher Cook Off Rate (> 250 rounds versus < 210 for an M4)

●Free-floating User Removable 4-Quadrant Rail System
*100% return-to-zero/bore sight retention
*Allows user attachment w/o tools of US Army/HK 40x46 mm XM320 Grenade Launcher Module (GLM)

●Barrel Exchange by Armorer in less than 4 minutes
*Headspace automatically fixed with install

●Longer (10mm) Barrel Threads on Upper Receiver
*Improved Barrel Retention
*Improved Accuracy

HK416 Advantages – Lower Receiver

●Flared Magazine Well
*Assists in the ease and speed of reloading

●Improved HK-style Buffer Retainer
*Improved buffer retention for increased reliability

●HK Tungsten Granulate Buffer and Buffer Spring
*Improves feeding and locking reliability and reduces bolt “bounce back” to eliminate “light strikes”. One HK buffer and buffer spring is delivered with every HK416 and HK416 upper receiver.

●Improved HK High-Reliability Steel Magazine – up to 30% improvement in feed reliability over that with the standard aluminum USGI magazine. One HK magazine is delivered with every HK416 and HK416 upper receiver.

HK416 Advantages – Miscellaneous

●Special Order “Over the Beach” (OTB) Variant/Capability
*Allows the HK416 to be safely fired and reliably, if need be, from the surf with it completely full of water. This can be done repeatedly without ill effect to the shooter or weapon (an M4 blows the top of the receiver off).



●Unique HK Safety Blank Firing Adapter
*Will “catch” up to 3 live projectiles if accidentally mixed with blank ammunition during blank firing training

●Unit Price
The HK416 price includes a user removable free floating rail system with insured/proven return-to-zero, HK buffer and spring, sling, manual and 30-rd steel "high-reliability" magazine – US DoD cost $1425 (qty of one). Current 2007 US DoD pricing for the US M4 with non-free floating rail system and USGI magazine is $1300 (qty of 400K).

●System Lifecycle Cost
The M4 is a good gun and has served and continues to serve its users well. The HK416 is simply better, packed with the many features and capabilities described above and thus it does cost slightly more. If you have not experienced an HK416 for yourself you simply don't have it as a high water mark point of reference (a horse drawn carriage looks fine until you experience your first model T!)

The US military price, from the large quantity (10K+) US Government contract for an M4 w/o rail system is/was @ $967. A KAC free-floating rail is $200-$400 and requires armorer installation and barrel removal to mount it. So that’s @ $1200-$1400 for a comparably equipped M4 with free-floating rail system.

An HK416 with rail system costs @ $1425. More money yes but A LOT more gun. Why do you think the M4's maker is improving (new op rod gas system, rail system, etc.) the M4 now (Colt’s “M5”) after so many years?

If you add up the cost and time to replace M4 bolt heads, extractors and springs and barrels to get to the service life of the HK416 parts (>20K rounds) you've already easily covered any price difference between the two weapons AND with the HK416 you have superior weapon performance and operator safety for the entire life cycle of the system.

That means a whole lot to the current users who are the most elite of the elite. They can also use the shorter 10” barreled HK416 in places where the 14.5” barreled M4 is simply too long, like from vehicles, and still not lose accuracy down range.

You can also get all these upgrades, except the flared mag well and HK buffer retainer, by simply adding a drop-on HK416 upper receiver "upgrade" kit to an M16 or M4 lower for just over $1000. Oh, and don’t forget the 7.62x51mm HK417. You can’t get that from the M4’s maker, and there is a 6.8mm SPC HK416 available as well.

 

Dude, I'm the first to admit that I hate it when people ask stupid questions before searching. I get called an ******* all the time on this forum for doing things like "Let me google that for you" with simple questions (what is LEM? dur hur hur).

I honestly didn't think your question was that out there. If it was, believe me, I would be in ******* mode. There's nothing better than trolling some retard who can't use the search bar of their browser. If you look at the answers that were given, you can see it was a bunch of information synthesized from multiple sources. Legit thread/question, IMO.

 

Sorry to bother you again G3 kurz,

Since the German exchange rates are different now compared to 2005-6, do you know if HK would currently bid the HK416 IC variant at the same purchase price as the M4 for the IC competition(which was $1300 a few years ago, $1400 now)? IIRC, a few years ago you said it was very likely that manufacturers would bid at that price for IC candidates?

 

I know some of these threads get repeated often, along with many, many others. Though I'm not in the market for a carbine at this moment, I did find this thread informative and a great read. I don't read every single thread, every single day so I do miss a lot of topics and discussions. That being said, I've missed many conversations regarding the Hk 416 but glad I took the time to read this one.

 

+1

HKPRO isn't a data archive where people ONLY come to search for info. Its a forum and is about the exchange of ideas. So in that format things will inevitably be re-hashed. I say no harm no foul but others will vehemently disagree and aspire to have a somewhat boring approach to threads etc.

Just me .01 cents...

 

Anyone want to buy my LR-300/TTR? I need the money for a 416 upper... :8:

Seriously though, as someone who has a MR556 and a Para TTR, HK wins on this one. I really like the folding stock on the TTR, but the DIGS system is tough to work with and a pain in the a$$ to clean. The HK on the other hand is about as perfect as it can get, though it is a little on the heavy side.

 

I've seen Para LR-300/TTR in training classes. They are not reliable and durrable. Just because someone puts a video of something on youtube doesn't mean that it is any good.

 

Not trying to start stuff, but if you are going to bring up the dust test you should bring up all the information.

did you know that the HK416 suffered more case head seperations than the M4. HK416(3), M4(1).
Did you also know that at the end of the test every rifle needed a new barrel and or bolt because maximum head space limit was exceeded?
we can also see that dispersion is about the same as far as accuracy with the XM8 being the worse.

See when you look at the whole dust test .ppt you see that while the HK416 did have less stoppages, it had more case head failures and the exact same parts life as the M4, of course no one ever points that out.

 

@sinlessorrow:

So what?

Only acquisitions people care about these kinds of numbers. Who shoots 6000 rounds in a sand storm? These are extremely adverse conditions.

 

The dust test was the very first reasons quoted in this thread about why the HK416 is special. I was just making a statement about how no one ever mentions the entire .PPT on the dust test and instead just pick the stoppage numbers. I just feel if you are going to use the dust test as your reasoning you need to include the bad with the good.

You also say only acquisitions people care about these numbers, yet every single time the HK416 gets mentioned its the very first thing always brought up, so apparently alot of people care about these numbers.

From TGS

2) Durability/longevity/quality. During testing an HK416 shot what...40,000 rounds....and it was still in accuracy specs? A 10" HK416 shot 15,000 rounds over the course of a couple days and still held a 1 MOA group, IIRC. The quality of HK's barrels can not be argued.

3) In dust testing conducted by the army, here's what happened:
Officials tested 10 each of the four carbine models, firing a total of 60,000 rounds per model. Here’s how they ranked, according to the total number of times each model stopped firing:

• XM8: 127 stoppages.

• MK16 SCAR Light: 226 stoppages.

• 416: 233 stoppages.

• M4: 882 stoppages.

That speaks for itself as to how much of an improvement the HK416 is over the M4. The mags of the HK416 are a huge improvement and play a big part in the better reliability. Also helping is the fact that the gun isn't pooping in its mouth, with reducing not only fouling (fouling is generally not a problem if the weapon is lubed), but heat in the BCG......and heat burns off that necessary lube. Heat can also change the tolerances between metal parts, creating even more heat. Eventually, heat can start to cause parts failure as well. When you go to 10" barrels or suppressors, the gas piston is an even bigger leap.

 

I also posted about bolts breaking early due to HK's switch of steel supplier, and that particular contractors issues with their alloy.

 

Even HK's QC is not infallible. Any extra information on that particular batch? Just wondering if some are still in circulation as parts.

 

I think the QC issues with the steel hardening process happened around 2007. Not 100% sure though.

 

Whatever, most of the people have commenting have never shot one or carried one for duty. And it is, really, pointless minutiae.

Like this thread, POINTLESS
My head hurts!

 

And your comment was even more helpful.

 

Awesome.

Start a redundant thread due to laziness, about the utility/value added aspects of a product and then ignore the input of one of the few people here who have actualy, working knowledge of the product (AGR416).

A few people with no real world knowledge base discussing the merits (or lack thereof in some peoples opinion) without actually understanding the issue in question.

Mental masturbation at its finest.



I think i'm going to go "earn" myself some combat time on Modern Warfare 3. 'Cause, ya'know, it's just like the real thing, right?

 

Having a cranky Sunday, are we?

 

Quit feeding the sinless troll guys.