Well I've had both but currently only have the 93. I opted to keep it as it was the more rare of the two and it would be easy to replace a 91 at some point in the future. Other than that it comes down to purely what caliber you prefer to shoot.
I have to jump back in here to back up George, I agree the AR is a much superior gun to the 93 all around...everything from accessories to magazines are more plentiful and less costly. It's also far superior in terms of ergonomics and general handling qualities.
That's what I have been trying to tell everyone on the G36vsM16 thread. M4 is the best compromise in this politic climate you try to survive in. as far as the 91 vs 93, I take both, why choose, it just give you more grey hair.
If you really have to have one, then 93 would be my choice, you can turn it into a G33K, or G53. ammo is cheaper. only down side to it is the magazine, and parts, they tend to be more expensive the the 91. hummm, then again, 91 is pretty bitchen, since you can have a G3K, or a G21, yea, belt fed, baby. I can't decide, look what you started. [email protected]#k it, save you money and buy both.
[This message has been edited by SMGLee (edited 07-11-2001).]
my take on this is... if these were the only options you were considering of, then there are a number of vartiables that must be considered.
Ammo) what calibur do you really want to shoot? for the weight you can carry more 5.56 than you can 7.62. but 7.62 will punch thru a cinder block wall. 7.62 is, IMHO, more accurate at range.
Weapon weight) the 93 weighs considerably less than the 91, but that extra weight lends to the power behind a butt stroke if it comes down to that.
Length) the 93 is a bit shorter making it a bit easier to get around in some locales.
Personally I would take a 91, I'm not that big of a guy but the weight isn't that much of a problem for me while I know other guys bigger than I couldn't hack it. I shoot considerably better with a .308, no logical explination, I just do. I also dont see a problem with going into confined spaces with it... that's when I switch over to my SBR Reminton 870.
there are other factors and I'm far from being an expert, especially considering the majority of those on the board, so i know I haven't thought of them all. but the 91 would be my choice as it fits the bill best for the niche' I have in my mind ofr a long arm.
Look at this question from the muzzle end instead of the butt end. If you were under live fire, which rifle would you rather be opposing? While not a pleasant prospect in any case, I believe if I had to make such a choice I would stand a better chance if the other guy were using a 93 instead of a 91. That means *I* want the 91!
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 1: I have to jump back in here to back up George, I agree the AR is a much superior gun to the 93 all around...everything from accessories to magazines are more plentiful and less costly. It's also far superior in terms of ergonomics and general handling qualities.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>The reasons that you give for choosing an AR over an HK are the same reasons I have an HK not an AR. I've held but never shot a 93, and I've shot 91, AR-10, AR-15, MP-5, Olympic SMG, and Colt SMG. To me the HKs are much more ergonomic and better balanced. As far as accessories go, most of the AR's are pointless/redundant, and HK has plenty available. With mags and parts, you get what you pay for. This is an arguement for another topic, so I'll move on.
In the current political climate I'd take a 93, because they are harder to find. However the 91 is cheaper and a .308, so that's what I have. I would trade my 91 for a 93, but only since I know I can get another 91 later.
from a collector's standpoint the 93. from a shtf fan perspective - either one. from a 'combat' perspective the 91 - just. if it were g3 vs 33 - the 33 wins due to better contolability in f/a mode for getting out of ambushes and ability to carry more ammo and mags.
What does HK offer in the way of accessories compared to the AR that are not pointless and redundant?
Both guns can employ the RAS system and all it's add on accessories, of course you have to use a cantilever mount on the HK version as the RAS has one less picatinny rail (None on top) than the AR does. All the accessories for that will interchange between the two guns. But I'd still give the thumbs up to the AR in that situation given less cost on setting it all up.
The HK 93 is a fine weapon but various barrel lengths are available for the AR's and in fact you can switch barrel lengths and go from a flat top to a carry handle upper with the ease of two push pins, or for that matter with an M4 upper you have the option of a removable carry handle.
All this without even getting into the issue of magazine pricing and availability plus the cost of HK accessories vs. various cost of AR accessories.
Don't get me wrong, I highly respect your selection (I have both AR and HK) but I prefer the AR in .223 for serious work, the HK being left back as more of a collector piece/playtoy.
Poverty sticken that I am,I must jump in
here and say that my money bets on .308
every time.I don't care how many extra
rounds you can carry it's the ONE that
counts.That goes for any rifle,pistol,
sling shot etc.But nothing quite satisfies
like a 91.
After giving this further thought, I think I'd always take the 91 over the 93. 93s are rare so they get more of a collector status. However, the 91 is basicly a semi-auto G-3. That direct link to such a great military weapon means more than being the little cousin available in smaller numbers.
1: The pointless and redundant accessories I meant were the multitude of upper receiver and handguard choices. I mean, who really needs a .50BMG single shot upper for their AR-15?
I also respect your decision to take the AR-15. I think that would be my #3 choice in .223 after the 93/53/33 and SIG 550 series.
Hey speaking of those .50 BMG uppers A friend of mine bought one and I have had opportunity to examine the receiver...Because I had to fix the trigger pivot pin that broke after using the upper. The thing also isn't exactly a drop on as several of the rounds wouldn't fire. He had to purchase an extra power spring to go with the hammer, which also caused problems and I had to remove.
I'm with you on the .50 uppers man, I'd shy away from them.
I'd definately have to agree with 1 on this one. I know the AR's too well not to use them in .223. In a nasty situation, however, I would prefer the HK91. The fact that you can easily out range most .223 rifles with it would make it the first choice for me.
I own one HK93 and THREE HK91. That would tell you my preference.
If I can only take one riffle with me to live on, I will take a HK91 anyday. As a all around riffle, it only has the FAL to compete with.
The HK93 is a great gun to put in your collection. For practical purpose, I will take a post ban AR15 which is one quarter the price and will shoot just as well with a whole lot more accessories which are also cheap.
With the price of an HK91 around $1700 these day, it is a sin not to own one (I sold my left kidney to get the money). Since there were three times more HK91 imported than HK93, I bought 3 HK91 for each HK93.
It is my .02
[This message has been edited by Paven (edited 07-12-2001).]
A forum dedicated to and laser-focused on Heckler & Koch firearms, Heckler & Koch accessories and the owners and enthusiasts that love them! Come join the discussion regarding HK pistols, long arms, NFA arms, HK accessories, HK history and trivia and more.