HKPRO Forums banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Ive been looking at getting a nice 762 setup to run mostly as a battle rifle. I will be putting a 1-8 optic on there once they are released and get the bugs worked out (USO looks like a winner). I am eyeing the PredatOBR, SR-25 ECC and the MR762. I am just concerned the MR762 will be too heavy for the job. Anyone else plan on running theirs as a battle rifle? Suppressed? What optics will you be using?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,289 Posts
Stay away from the SR-25. I carried a 7,000 dollar government model with suppressor in the Middle East for 4 years and I know a lot of people like them but they just are not worth the money. The OBR is a great rifle and you can buy 2 for the price of an SR-25.

Saving the Best for last: HK MR762, need we say more:)

I am going to be placing either a 1-6 or 1-8 on my MR762. Probably going to go with Schmidt and Bender but the new Leupold Mark 6 is a possibility.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
141 Posts
The MR762 is a MBR is the reason I would want one; of course I also want IRON sites. What is holding me back on the purchase is that I'm not sure that the MR762 offers any advantage over a FAL in that role.
 

·
Needs Therapy
Joined
·
694 Posts
Stay away from the SR-25. I carried a 7,000 dollar government model with suppressor in the Middle East for 4 years and I know a lot of people like them but they just are not worth the money. The OBR is a great rifle and you can buy 2 for the price of an SR-25.

Saving the Best for last: HK MR762, need we say more:)

I am going to be placing either a 1-6 or 1-8 on my MR762. Probably going to go with Schmidt and Bender but the new Leupold Mark 6 is a possibility.
If you were running the SR25 Mk11Mod0 with the 20 inch barrel, I don't know if that fits the battle rifle description.

The SR25 EMC 16" sans suppressor is the same cost as a MR762. In terms of weight, the MR762 is not that heavy. Comparing it to my EMC, it actually feels a little lighter.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,289 Posts
I was using the MK 11 Mod0 and it doesn't fit the bill as a battle rifle but the shorter 16 inch version is essentially the same rifle and from my experience with the knight series 308 it is not in the same league as the OBR or MR762.

If you were running the SR25 Mk11Mod0 with the 20 inch barrel, I don't know if that fits the battle rifle description.

The SR25 EMC 16" sans suppressor is the same cost as a MR762. In terms of weight, the MR762 is not that heavy. Comparing it to my EMC, it actually feels a little lighter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,262 Posts
I don't know about utilizing the MR308 as a battle rifle b/c I'm a Canadian civilian. But I do think the LMT 308 is another option since it was adopted by both the UK and New Zealand armies as a DMR.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,262 Posts
I think if the MR762 had a lighter forearm like the one Geissele made for the HK416, then that may bring the weight down a bit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,291 Posts
Ive been looking at getting a nice 762 setup to run mostly as a battle rifle. I will be putting a 1-8 optic on there once they are released and get the bugs worked out (USO looks like a winner). I am eyeing the PredatOBR, SR-25 ECC and the MR762. I am just concerned the MR762 will be too heavy for the job. Anyone else plan on running theirs as a battle rifle? Suppressed? What optics will you be using?

Unfortunately I think that if you want 7.62 you will have to deal with the weight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
322 Posts
I don't know about utilizing the MR308 as a battle rifle b/c I'm a Canadian civilian. But I do think the LMT 308 is another option since it was adopted by both the UK and New Zealand armies as a DMR.
(IIRC) yes but at the time, there wasn't an official version of the 417. From my understanding, while the LMT beat out the 417, the version of the 417 at the time wasn't complete. HK simply submitted it just cause. Apparently the newer, final versions of the 417 are miles ahead and could give the LMT a run for its money.

That being said, this is is all hearsay.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
765 Posts
IMO, there's a big difference between a Main Battle Rifle and a Designated Marksman's Rifle. A lot of people tend to blur those lines.

To the OP, I personally don't think the 417 is too heavy for MBR. Maybe a bit light for DMR, actually. I have an AR10 that I wouldn't hesitate to pack as MBR, but would need to modify for a DMR role. This is all opinion, though, and we all know what that means.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,262 Posts
(IIRC) yes but at the time, there wasn't an official version of the 417. From my understanding, while the LMT beat out the 417, the version of the 417 at the time wasn't complete. HK simply submitted it just cause. Apparently the newer, final versions of the 417 are miles ahead and could give the LMT a run for its money.

That being said, this is is all hearsay.
I don't know if the LMT beat the HK417 in performance since all what I heard were internet rumors and I don't believe rumors. I'm not saying that LMT didn't beat the 417 in performance just that I have no clue about that. Also, G3 kurz said there were teething pains with the AGR and isolated ammo problems during the HK417's development so maybe if the HK417 wasn't mature at the time of the UK trials, they may have passed on it (this is just a guess, please correct me if I'm wrong). In addition, there are over 20+ builds of the HK417 so it's hard to know which build standard was submitted to the UK trials.

But G3 kurz said at least one user group has the HK417 with great results and the bugs are probably worked out. Also, the HK417 is in use with several armies now so my guess is that those builds of the HK417 are mature.

I was just saying that the LMT may be a lighter option as a battle rifle and should be reliable since the Brits adopted it (I know they are the same guys who adopted the POS L85A1 but apart from that mistake, the UK generally has a good small arms procurement). I wasn't trying to say the LMT 308 MWS was superior to the HK417 b/c I haven't seen any test data. But the LMT has been adopted by both the Brits and New Zealand and does seem like a good gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,262 Posts
In addition, the MR762 does not require a stepped up bolt face and fluted chamber to run reliably with commercial and mil spec ammo so I don't think the MR762 has isolated ammo issues some HK417 variants had during development.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
737 Posts
I have a sneaking suspicion that none of the AR-platform rifles would be as durable as an FAL or G3 when used as a MBR. However, the AR offers superior ergonomics, handling and practical accuracy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,262 Posts
I have a sneaking suspicion that none of the AR-platform rifles would be as durable as an FAL or G3 when used as a MBR. However, the AR offers superior ergonomics, handling and practical accuracy.
I don't have experience with the FAL and G3. But I have a friend who was an officer in the Canadian Army who used both the FAL and C7. From what he said, while the FAL does have some advantages, for the most part there were a lot less stoppages with the C7 compared to the FAL. No idea whether the C7 or FAL has higher MRBF but MAYBE the C7 has higher MRBS (just a guess). They said the FALs were reliable in the Arctic as long as you used graphite rather than a grease lube (he said FALs freeze in the arctic if you use grease lube) and he said C7s froze in the Arctic if you used grease lube (not sure what lube they use for the C7 in the arctic). The Canadian soldiers I talked to hated the FAL's adjustable regulator and the gas system (got dirty very easily) but that may be a training issue with the FAL. Those guys I know in the CF still think the FAL is a good rifle just that in their experience C7s had less stoppages. This is only the opinions of a few Canadian soldiers and not that of the Canadian army so take it FWIW.

From what G3 kurz has said before about roller delayed blowback, gas operated guns have beaten them in side by side testing.

But I do agree that the FAL and G3 are more mature compared to the AR-10/SR-25 style guns.

On M4carbine.net Jason Falla said FALs are durable. http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=96529
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,262 Posts
British Soldier Magazine had an article before where a British soldier said the LMT L129A1 was more reliable than the L1A1 (FAL). I can't find the article anymore.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,289 Posts
As a main battle rifle it definitely could be. Remember one reason to going to a smaller cartridge on the battlefield was weight,223 vs 308. I have humped an SR-25 with full kit, battle gear to also include an M-4, and it can be an ass kicker especially in 130+ degree weather.

I agree the lines are blurred when it comes to DMR rifles. I have seen everything from a heavy barreled and scoped M-4 to scoped M-14 to a heavy barreled M-16A2 used.

I think the 417 scoped could be a great DMR rifle. I am no expert but do have over 20 years experience as a sniper and I would definitely use it as one. I would have preferred to have had a 417 over my Knight SR-25 any day.

Absolutely agree on there being a big difference on MBR's and DMR's. MBR's usually are mass produced with less quality control and normally only shoot average groups.




IMO, there's a big difference between a Main Battle Rifle and a Designated Marksman's Rifle. A lot of people tend to blur those lines.

To the OP, I personally don't think the 417 is too heavy for MBR. Maybe a bit light for DMR, actually. I have an AR10 that I wouldn't hesitate to pack as MBR, but would need to modify for a DMR role. This is all opinion, though, and we all know what that means.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,262 Posts
Does anyone have experience with the SR-25 EMC? From what SDduc996 said about his colleagues' experiences older models of the SR-25s, they were not really reliable. Also, on M4carbine.net Larry Vickers did not think the older models of the SR-25s were reliable. I heard some of the KAC staff say the EMC is significantly improved and can go for high round counts. Does anyone know if the EMC is as good as the hype?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
I have extensive experience with the G3A3 and G3A4 (and the updated norwegian version with handguard rail, optic rail, two position collapsible stock and Comp M4), as well as having shot the HK417 quite a bit (we have the 20" version).

If the choice was between those two models as a battle rifle I would choose the G3 every day of the week and twice on sunday. Upgraded version of course. I just find the HK417 version we have to be clumsy and unwieldly compared to the G3. If I tried a shorter 16" version of the HK417 I might change my mind though....but for now, the G3 is the winner. And what is supposedly wrong with the roller-delayed blowback system? During my 7 years of daily use, including a 1 year deployment, I found it to be extremely reliable and a good shooter. Only drawback is that it was a hassle to clean the barrel extension area. Now don't get me wrong, I love my HK416, but wouldn't hesitate to bring a G3 in to combat.

One other aspect of the HK417/MR762 is the accuracy capability. I do not know what the factory accuracy is on the MR762, but our HK417s are 1 MOA guaranteed. We have seen weapons and shooters accomplishing sub MOA groups at various distances. If you were to run your MR762 as a battle rifle, with long sequences of fire with a significant amount of ammo, and subsequent heating of the barrel, that kind of accuracy will degrade rapidly.

We use our HK417's for our snipers (not DM's), and only guys who graduate our level 3 course get issued one as a personal rifle. However, one guy who was not a sniper got hold of one, and started using it as a battle rifle and running reaction to contact drills, australian peels etc. Suffice it to say, the head sniper instructor for the Norwegian Defence Forces was less than impressed.

As far as issues go, we had a minor ammo problem, with rims being torn off during extraction, with the remains of the casings being stuck in the chamber. One particularly hairy incident in Afghanistan, but no one got hurt. Not going to go into specifics about the ammo type, suffice it to say that the issue is fixed with the ammo we are using now. We have had no issues with the AGR's on our weapons. The biggest issue has been with the first batch of sights, S&B PMII 3-12, with the filament freezing or something to that effect, and not moving when making windage and elevation adjustments in cold weather. We have new scopes now, same type, but upgraded.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
I hauled a G3 for four years while in service with the german army. When comparing the G3 vs. the HK417/MR308 (which i happen to own) i would choose the HK417.

Reason:

- much cleaner action after firing

- much better ergonomics, including multi-position Stock

- much lesser felt recoil

- easy to reload due to straight vs. rotary insert magazines and open bolt after last round

- lighter and more robust magazine construction

- easy to mount a optic on flat top picatinny rail

AGR416, i do not say your point is invalid, i just say my taste is different.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top