HKPRO Forums banner

HK433 vs XM8 vs G36 Evolution

3K views 17 replies 7 participants last post by  Nzfly 
#1 ·
We do know that the G36 kinda kick started the whole AR-18 based modern modular rifle. We also know of the back and forth controversy about the G36's overheating/accuracy issues. It also seemed that the XM8 had similar issues when the US Army and USMC tested it. But I've seen some videos and photos and such on line, and it's obvious that the 433 is a modernized evolution of the XM8/G36 concept. The 433's upper and lower receiver interface seems similar to the XM8's, and mechanically, the 433 (based on patent illustrations) looks like a cross between a G36/XM8 and a FN SCAR.

The 433 has also taken things that have been added to the G36 and integrated them better, like an adjustable length of pull stock and 1913 rails. Not to mention that the 433's upper is either and aluminum extrusion or forging. That should go a long way to calming fears over the G36's overheating issues. I overall like the G36, but it is somewhat outdated compared to stuff like the FN SCAR and stuff that has been introduced following the start on the War on Terror. Even the SA80 A2 and A3 are a bit more up to date than the G36 is, which ironically the A2 and A3 versions of the SA80 were refurbished and updated by HK since 2000 to the present day.

Also, one advantage that the 433 seems to have over the XM8 and G36 as far as field stipping is the use of captive pins, something that HK didn't get into until the MG4 and HK416. That means less to lose as far as small parts when trying to work on the rifle. It also sucks that news on the 433 has been slow since this spring when HK and Concamo did a photoshoot with several 433s featured. Granted, it does seem that the German Army doesn't see the G36 replacement program as being insanely urgent, given that a selection was due to be made by early next year. However, that being said, it's mid September now.

So am I right or wrong in saying that this is how things have evolved with the 433 being a descendant of the G36?
 
See less See more
#3 ·
And I thought that the whole overheating/wandering zero issue was just an excuse by the German Government to either get discounted HK416s for the German Army or warranty claims from HK. The German Army seems to be satisfied enough that they didn't rush to replace the G36 with something else. Yes, the HK433 is better than the G36, but evolution should do that. Only things I don't like about the G36 are the separate mag well and trigger mechanism (which is integrated into one assembly on the XM8 and HK433), use of non captive pins to hold parts together, and it was introduced just before the whole 9/11 War on Terror thing showed that everyone's weapons are a bit of out date for modern professional armies.
 
#4 ·
We will likely never know the causes for why the overheating claim was perpetuated. It could have been a simple rumor, an uninformed claim, a government wanting new weapons, HK wanting a new contract, etc.

Better is subjective. It is better in what regard? Without looking it up, the 433 is likely heavier. So, does that make it better? They all are just a group of firearms made by the same company and designers. Pick your poison.
 
#5 ·
Well, the 433 is a newer design (granted, mechanically that's a loose term given that it's basically a AR-18 that uses a gas system that was designed not by David Williams, but by Ferdinand Mannlicher in the late 1800s) that better integrates stuff like Pic rails and other features that are used on the 416 and has been shoe-horned onto the G36. Yes, the 416 is a bit heavy for a AR-15, but I'd bet that a M4 carbine that has stuff like railed handguards and such on it weighs as much or more than a 416 with an equal barrel length. Same with the 433. Because it uses an all metal receiver and has rails built into it, it should weigh more than a standard G36 with the same or similar barrel length. However, add those rails ad-hoc on a G36, it'll weigh as much or maybe more than the 433.

And one thing that I've always held against HK rifles until the 416 was the use of non-captive pins. To me, it's just more stuff to fumble and lose when working on the rifle. Even the XM8 had non-captive pins. HK didn't start using captive pins on rifles or machine guns until the MG43/MG4 and the 416 series. At least the 433 has captive pins, unlike the G36. It's bad enough IMO that the AR-15 and AR-18 influenced rifles have cam pins and firing pin retaining pins that can get loose. That's one strength that the Steyr AUG has, that it's got a push button cam pin and a captive spring clip for the firing pin retainer.

Granted, this is probably just me being nit-picky, but the more you look at existing firearms, you start to see stuff you'd like to change on them, such as the FN SCAR's reciprocating charging handle.
 
#7 ·
I'd make that argument for the 416 to replace the G36 in the German Army, but the German Government and the German Army have said non. And I do think I understand why. One is cost, given that the 416 (like the FN SCAR) is relatively expensive for a GI service rifle. Also, I do think that the German Army itself favors a modernized G36 over the 416 for a couple of reasons. Namely the G36 has a folding stock and a paddle mag release, features that the German Army seems to favor in a G36 successor. Not to mention that the 433 has a quick change barrel system and a bewildering amount of options for barrel lengths and the like (some of which I think are redundant/overdoing it on HK's part). Also, I think another part of the appeal of the 433 is that it's designed to be multi-caliber, which the G36 isn't and probably won't be, even though I've heard that HK will probably design a different receiver optimized for rounds longer than 60mm in OA length (namely 7.62mm NATO/.308 Win.).
 
#11 ·
That's like saying the M16 was a flawed design.

It did/ does have flaws. It was a very revolutionary design. It had big teething problems and bean counter problems. The jungle was an extreme environment. Everyone missed the M14. But 60 years on here we are.

Until we get laser blasters....every weapon is a compromise. Cartridge, rate of fire, weight, reliabilty, accuracy, and above all, cost.

The G36 is what HK built to get a Bundeswehr contract. It was rated higher than the other entrants. I'm sure they had a very rigorous and thorough testing procedure that included sustained full auto firing with accuracy being measured. Alot of things have been said about the issues, who fault it was, etc. But the fact is they got what they asked for for the price they wanted to pay and it didn't work as planned in EVERY conceivable situation. From what non-German Defense Ministry info I've read the G36s fired in full auto dont warp or melt and don't require major parts until a bazillion rounds. It really is a testament to HK innovation and quality (remember design began 1990). Many light barreled rifles are much less accurate when extremely hot this is not a groundbreaking or new discovery.

The German army is not in great shape I'd be surprised if the G36 is actually phased out next year. I'm sure the paid for G36s I'm the rack are looking pretty sweet to the Ministry of Finance.

The reason for 433 is I'm sure cost. I'm guessing its cheaper than a 416. It does multi cal change thing going for it I suppose but not sure in NATO countries that matters much. I also don't think HK is so worried about a Bundeswehr contract as much as they were in 1990.


Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk
 
#12 ·
Well, if the G36 is so great, why design the 433 as basically a metal receiver version of it? I personally think that reports of the G36's overheating issues are probably exaggerated in an attempt to get 416s or something else into the hands of the German Army. We have to remember that the Beretta ARX-160 has about as much metal to polymer in it's receiver as the G36 and the Italian Army and others have had no complaints about it's performance, and it's more accurate than a lot of off the shelf M4s.

Both Ian McCollum and Larry Vickers have made references to these issues in regards to the G36 and the XM8, and Ian especially has said that it does go both ways in that debate and he considers the G36 and XM8 to be good rifles.

Fact is that HK do seem to be wanting to favor stuff like the 433 and 416 as they're seemingly a bit more modern than the G36, though they still produce and market the G36. So I'm guessing that reports about the G36's issues are probably exaggerated. Also, when used as doctrine until recent years recommends (mostly in semi auto), the G36 doesn't seem to have problems. That being said, the G36, at least in my opinion on the outside looking in, has some redundant features and some things that can be better integrated into a fresher design. Also, not every wants the AR-15 on steroids that the 416 is.

I do wonder, though, how much of the issue surrounding the G36 is fact, and how much of it is conspiracy.
 
#14 · (Edited)
And yet the likes of FN and Colt are still selling M4s to anyone who wants them. The same M4 that aside from a shorter barrel and 1913 rails is the same basic design as the AR-15 was the designed back in the 1950s. Yes, I know that the AR-15 of today has evolved over the AR-15 of then, but it's still a 60+year old basic design. Also, the British are still using the SA80, a rifle designed back in the 1970s and was plagued with problems until HK took over the R&D helm on it, and are still improving it to keep it somewhat up to date.

I also wonder how much of the 433's design is HK trying (albeit somewhat belatedly) to jump on the SCAR/ACR band wagon? This is in reply to the comment above about no matter how good something is, if it doesn't evolve at least to a point, it'll eventually get left behind. Which, ironically, is the point I'm trying to make. Obviously, HK designed the 433 because they feel it offers some at least advantages over the 416 and the G36. What they are and by how much is probably up for debate, though.

Same with the MG5 GPMG. It obviously offers advantages over the MG3, or else I don't think HK would've designed it, let alone the German Army adopt it to largely replace the MG3.
 
#15 ·
Colt is not "selling" alot of M4s to anyone except the DOD. If the M4 goes away, I think Colt will finally die.
Last non-US contract I saw was for " essential diplomatic tools" to our Middle Eastern and Asian partners by whatever office in the Pentagon decides who we sell and/ or give arms to. $57,000,000 for 10,0000 M4s and parts.

I don't think the G36 is "great" but the Germans no longer wanted the G3 and the 33 and 41 were rejected. The closest competitor to the G36 in trails was the AUG . Also the fall of the Soviet Union and the G11 cancellation so I'm sure R&D funds were tight so once again I think they did pretty good. Colt made....the M4.

30 years makes things easier to see now. And of course they will still sell them if countries are still buying them.

There are only so many ways to build a rifle. I think alot of governments feel there surely has to be something drastically better coming along. Maybe the NGSW/ CT ammo thing, maybe a something more advanced, I don't know.

Sent from my moto e5 play using Tapatalk
 
#16 ·
Then one can say why spend money and time developing a new rifle if you're HK (or anyone else right now, for that matter) knowing that it's only god knows what NATO will do and when if the US Army adopts a new round, be it something like SIG's 6.8mm round (a high powered intermediate round based broadly on the .308 Winchester/7.62mm NATO casing with a .270/6.8mm bullet) or the caseless or telescope cased round developed for the LSAT rifle and LMG program. Of course, who know if any of this will even go anywhere. Every attempt to replace the M16/M4 has largely failed, at least on the US end. Mind you, that's because even though stuff like the SCAR and the XM8 and such do have advantages over the M16/M4, it wasn't massive enough to warrant spending a lot of time, money and energy to replace them as general issue.

Only thing I can think of with the 433 being designed by HK and being offered to the German Army is that the German Army basically wants a rifle with HK416 performance, but less expensive and with some of the better features of the G36 (folding stock, paddle mag release, forward mounted charging handle, etc). And they probably want the rifle to be an evolutionary step ahead of the now nearly 25 year old G36. I can also see HK wanting to also throw their hat into the SCAR/ACR ring with a new rifle, too.

We also have to remember that the Russians are still upgrading and modernizing the AK-system rifles rather than getting something completely new, though I think that the AM-17 (mass produced version of the Dragonov MA) in the form of a full sized rifle probably has more of a future than AK in theory does. However, I'm not the Russian bean counters. Hell, if it wasn't for the German Gov't's and the German Army's bean counters, they G36 probably would've been replaced with the 416 a long time ago.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top