Huge. Two different beasts. Also 416c use different bolt carrier. AFAIU it is squeezing buffer/carrier/recoil spring combo into AR15 receiver with ultra short buffer tube that is source of reliability problems. In designs like G36C you only make barrel shorter and reposition gas hole (plus necessary changes to piston system working on higher pressure and shorter dwell time), but all internals and recoil system remains same.What is the difference between the buffer system between the 416 vs the 416c?
It is much the same as why HK dropped the UCP (4.6mm) pistol or would not make the P7M10 w/o the massive slide. Like the HK41C these prototype HK's worked fine and were safe but over the long haul they did not have the new weapon performance or safety margins. Like it or not HK usually won't produce the gun if it does not make this standard. Folks over the decades have come to expect HK's can take all sorts of abuse and will push them to the limit over and over again. The HK416C's buffer system was not up to the task for such use so HK dropped it.Thanks Montrala and starsnuffer. I have also considered the g36c but its like finding a needle in a haystack from this side of the world. I'm searching all possible leads on this reported problem with hk416c... But can't seem to find what issues actually do happen. Is it buffer failure that breaks the spring or bolt? What is the difference between the buffer system between the 416 vs the 416c?