HKPRO Forums banner

1 - 20 of 70 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I don't know if this really belongs here, but anyway here it is:





It is still not clear how much HK is in it, but it's obviously based on the G36 with some refinements such as a new charging handle that reminds me of the FN SCAR. The gun is not produced under license, so no money for HK, although I heard part of the machinery it is built on came directly from HK.

Official presentation is in about two weeks, then we shall know more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
... some refinements such as a new charging handle that reminds me of the FN SCAR.
I wouldn't call that a refinement. It's more of a simplified design. Sure, the G36 charging handle has it's disavantages, but at least it doesn't protrude when it's not used. And the SCAR isn't the first rifle to have such a handle.

I wonder whether you could interchange parts between this rifle and a G36. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Well let's call it a different approach. You gotta give them that with this assembly any sight mounted on the top rail will be somewhat closer to the bore-axis, which definetly is a plus in my eyes. But then, this rifle is no longer fully ambidextrous. A lefty had to reach over the gun to cock it if the charging pin is set up for a right hander (e.g. mounted on the left side)... and vice versa, of course.

I doubt there will be much interchangeability with the G36:
- it *seems* as if the magazine well was integrated with the receiver.
- the trigger unit is of different shape and wouldn't fit into a G36 receiver
- the handguard *might* fit to a G36, it connects via a push pin to the top of the receiver like a G36 handguard, yet I don't see how it is attached to the lower part of the receiver as the relevant part can't be seen. I also don't know if the "internal" shape is the same.
- the buttstock: well, no idea really, it's working on the same principal as the SCAR buttstock: folding at an angle. Interesting concept and looks more rugged than your standard G36 buttstock.

Time will tell.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
- the buttstock: well, no idea really, it's working on the same principal as the SCAR buttstock: folding at an angle. Interesting concept and looks more rugged than your standard G36 buttstock.

Time will tell.
Probably. Actually I doubt that these parts are interchangeable, because then it would be nothing more but a unlicensed copy of HK G36.

Besides, I'm a bit confused by this 'SCAR here and there' talk and almost everyone seems to celebrate it as some sort of wonderweapon, while it's actually nothing more but an ambidextrous FNC rifle with rails everywhere.

(And yes, the FNC has this kind of folding stock, too.) :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
230 Posts
Probably. Actually I doubt that these parts are interchangeable, because then it would be nothing more but a unlicensed copy of HK G36.

Besides, I'm a bit confused by this 'SCAR here and there' talk and almost everyone seems to celebrate it as some sort of wonderweapon, while it's actually nothing more but an ambidextrous FNC rifle with rails everywhere.

(And yes, the FNC has this kind of folding stock, too.) :)
The SCAR have quick-detachable barrel. Which is a BIG plus IMO

Anyway, I've read somewhere that, the FX-05 is "producing it under license"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter #7 (Edited)
Probably. Actually I doubt that these parts are interchangeable, because then it would be nothing more but a unlicensed copy of HK G36.

Besides, I'm a bit confused by this 'SCAR here and there' talk and almost everyone seems to celebrate it as some sort of wonderweapon, while it's actually nothing more but an ambidextrous FNC rifle with rails everywhere.

(And yes, the FNC has this kind of folding stock, too.) :)
I first thought so aswell. But the 3rd SCAR prototype has little to nothing in common with the FNC. The FNC uses a modified AK gas action, the SCARs gas system is new, somewhat similar to G36/AR18, with the piston not attached to the bolt carrier. And the FNC stock can't be adjusted for length like that of the SCAR. Plus there's the quick change barrel thing MP5_smg mentioned.
It also supposedly shoots like a charm: Very controllable due to a low rate of fire and good balancing. Almost as comfortable to shoot as the HK416 from what I've heard. But yes, all in all, it's just an amalgation of all the good things from various older assault rifles... I mean the Steyr AUG had quick change barrels like 20 years ago.

It could be a killer if they'd really manage to have that 90 per cent parts interchangeability between ALL SCAR versions in the final version. Supposedly in the future there will be ONE rifle for the calibres 5.56x45mm, 7.62x39mm and 7.62x51 NATO... with the only parts that need to be changed being the bolt head, the extraction port and another thing I forgot. But all using the same bolt, bolt-carrier and gas system. I wonder how they want to do that.

But we've gone waaay off topic ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
It could be a killer if they'd really manage to have that 90 per cent parts interchangeability between ALL SCAR versions in the final version. Supposedly in the future there will be ONE rifle for the calibres 5.56x45mm, 7.62x39mm and 7.62x51 NATO... with the only parts that need to be changed being the bolt head, the extraction port and another thing I forgot. But all using the same bolt, bolt-carrier and gas system. I wonder how they want to do that.
That would be one thing, the other would be whether there's really the need for a multi-caliber rifle. For certain special units that might be something to be put under consideration, but as standard rifle for the entire armed forces? Logistics and training would be two reasons that come immediately to my mind here.

MP5_smg said:
Anyway, I've read somewhere that, the FX-05 is "producing it under license"
Makes you wonder if the Mexicans designed that one on their own or whether HK was involved in the design process.


Maybe it's just me, but the carrying handle design looks almost like that of the MG4.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter #9 (Edited)
Yeah, put a rail on top of the MG4 carrying handle and that thing up there is what you should get. I have heard mixed statements about the licensing, but the dominant one was "no license". It's odd because afaik Mexico has been producing various other HK arms under license...

As for the SCAR again: It is being developed specifically for the SOCOM and it's still only a possibility that it will get adopted by the rest of the armed forces. A likely one, but there are no official statements on that. It's all speculation so far. But it might very well repeat the history of the M4.

The M16s and M4s currently in service have to be replaced sooner or later anyway due to the parts wearing out. Some of those M16A2s in service are pretty old and worn already. After the XM8 got dropped, I think the SCAR is a good alternative. Better than buying yet another generation of direct gas M16s. I think the US can handle the logistics of the transition phase, they've got enough funds.

The HK416 would have been the logical alternative, but HK is too late (again).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
As for the SCAR again: It is being developed specifically for the SOCOM and it's still only a possibility that it will get adopted by the rest of the armed forces. A likely one, but there are no official statements on that. It's all speculation so far. But it might very well repeat the history of the M4.

The HK416 would have been the logical alternative, but HK is too late (again).
Few things..

SCAR is intersting but only SOCOM, Navy and Marine are on board, the big Army is still uncertain. the 3rd gen SCAR is one of the best rifle around, it recoils like nothing, controllable in a slower fire rate almost like an AK.

the interchangeable caliber would be a SOCOM item, if Marine Corps pick it up, the grunts would be on 5.56 and some 7.62 will be the DMR. this effectively take out the M14 which have served with pride. this kind of leavet he newly purchased Mk11Mod1 in limbo.

As far as the HK 416 is concern, the upper conversion is the best way to get the military to fix the M16 problem, but i think instead of fixing a old workhorse, they are looking to move ahead with a new platform. hence the XM8 and now the SCAR. besides the cost of the conversion is almost mabout the same as a complete SCAR.. which would you take?

this Mexican FX05 is an interesting hybrid, I hear it is a combination of G36, FAL and AK.. I am not sure which is which except it has a lot of G36 external design and G36 mags, maybe it has an AK gas system or something...

never the less, it is interesting looking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Who was sleeping at the wheel on this project.

Why you would copy a rifle with well known over heating issues when you live in the desert is beyond me. :confused: It looks like it was heavily G36 and SCAR influenced.


The SCAR and FNC don't have one interchangeable part, and trying to talk down the SCAR is an illogical feat. The testing SOCOM put the SCAR rifles through is enough to make an AK shiver, yet it will hang with some of the most accurate bolt guns around.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter #12 (Edited)
Who was sleeping at the wheel on this project.

Why you would copy a rifle with well known over heating issues when you live in the desert is beyond me. :confused: It looks like it was heavily G36 and SCAR influenced.
Because maybe, just maybe, the heating problems have been largely exaggregated through internet propaganda? Take it from a user of that rifle.

Besides who knows? They might aswell have strengthened the trunnion, used a different polymer...

this Mexican FX05 is an interesting hybrid, I hear it is a combination of G36, FAL and AK.. I am not sure which is which except it has a lot of G36 external design and G36 mags, maybe it has an AK gas system or something...
The layout of the rifle and the "building groups" (don't know what Baugruppen means in English, but I mean the parts the rifle strips down to) look very similar to the G36.

That basically leaves the gas system and bolt assembly open for speculation. I doubt it will have a tilting bolt like the FAL so maybe the gas-system is FALish? I wouldn't wonder if the bolt was AK style, seeing as how the SCAR (where the FX05 already borrowed the cocking handle from) made 2-lug-bolts en vogue again. Anyway we'll have to wait and see..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
Why you would copy a rifle with well known over heating issues when you live in the desert is beyond me. :confused: It looks like it was heavily G36 and SCAR influenced.

Because they don't really do a lot of fighting?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Because maybe, just maybe, the heating problems have been largely exaggregated through internet propaganda? Take it from a user of that rifle.
More and more agencies that actually use their guns in gunfights are dropping the G36. HK knows the platform had issues, which is why some agencies that were using the G36 were top priority on the 416 list. If I had to guess, I'd imagine the issues with the G36 are also the reason HK pulled it from the US market.

Yes the internet does typically exaggerate, but the real life experiences of law enforcement agencies and G36 owners is not an exaggeration.

Because they don't really do a lot of fighting?
I can't disagree with that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
For what I know most law enforcement agencies had other issues witht the G36 than overheating.

And don't give me that "they actually use them in gunfights" stuff:
Unless all of a sudden the situation in the USA is similar to Chechnya or Palestine I highly doubt there will ever be any "real" situation where a G36 could be brought to the point of melting by a law enforcement agency.

I for one place the opinion of the KSK, the Spanish and German regular forces above that of any law enforcment unit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
The undisputable facts are that the G36 softens up and loses zero, due to heat and heat alone. This matches perfectly with the failures that LarryG36 experienced with the system as well.

LEO's may not be in harsh battles, but the G36's battle field experience isn't exactly something to write home about either. Your comparison of agencies to military alone is another strike against the G36 in my opinion, as agencies don't put anywhere near the strain on a firearm that a military force does in true combat.

I assure you I'm not trying to be rude, but the G36 does have proven problems. All firearms do, but a critical loss of zero and the possibility of a catastrophic complete weapon failure is not something you can logically defend.

Just my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,983 Posts
He's right.

The internal G36 design needs revision. Beautiful guns, and probably hold up very well in most circumstances, but these issues are well documented and need to be corrected. I believe they had issues with the early XM8s melting the handguards during sustained fire tests, and they use the same gas system as the G36.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter #18 (Edited)
The handguard problem has long been corrected by installing heatshields into them. It's just that noone really bought those new handguards so far, apart from civvies that is.

I doubt an internal revision would be that easy, though. It's very questionable if it's possible at all and if it is we might see it in a future generation of the G36, but probably not too soon.

But like I said I have yet to experience these issues with my G36. I also doubt the people who designed this FX05 are dumb. They would not have gun for a polymer receiver if they thought it was too risky. There are and will always be trade-offs, of course.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
817 Posts
The handguard problem has long been corrected by installing heatshields into them. It's just that noone really bought those new handguards so far, apart from civvies that is.
If had long been corrected, then why did HK repeat the problem with the XM8?
The reason the G36 is not used by more US LE agencies has more do do with cost, marketing, availability of replacement parts, and it in general not being as competent a platform as the proven design of the AR variants.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
I doubt they could've met the strict weight requirements with any more metal on the XM8, that may have been a reason. Or maybe they would've exceeded the targeted unit costs? Many possible reasons, only HK knows. But I have seen handguards with heat shield installed.
 
1 - 20 of 70 Posts
Top