Sig 556 rifles?

[FunFordCobra]

I had a sig 5.56 m400. Got it for under 1k sold it 2 weeks after I bought it.
It was OK at best.

[YALE]

I had a sig 5.56 m400. Got it for under 1k sold it 2 weeks after I bought it.
It was OK at best.

That's a DI AR. If you paid Sig prices for that, you're crazy, and I love my Sig.

[FunFordCobra]

Yea it was DI. I got it for 800 out the door. I'm just so use to shooting 7.62/51 and .308 it just felt like a toy. I was hitting a paper plate sized target at 200 yards with stock iorn sights. I just wasn't impressed. I don't see how a piston setup would have made me enjoy it that much more.

[YALE]

Yea it was DI. I got it for 800 out the door. I'm just so use to shooting 7.62/51 and .308 it just felt like a toy. I was hitting a paper plate sized target at 200 yards with stock iorn sights. I just wasn't impressed. I don't see how a piston setup would have made me enjoy it that much more.

Man, if it's pig simple compared to what you're used to, and easier to handle, what's not to like? $800 is pretty reasonable for an M400. The cool thing about piston guns is everything in the receiver halves stays pretty clean, and the gun runs a little cooler. It's kind of like the old seat of the pants dyno thing with hod rods, though. If you don't notice the difference, is it really a difference?

[CJ]

What if I want my gun to appreciate in value quicker?

And I would wager that the accuracy difference is negligible at 100-300 yards between a 33/93 and a 16 inch carbine AR (the stamped receiver is the Achilles heal of the g3, but .223 obviously produces less receiver flex). Who knows, would make a good test IMO. But yes, the 93/33 series is heavy as fuck. No getting around that. It also is not that modular (was never really adopted or modified) but does have provisions for running optics not limited to a top welded picatinny rail.

That being said if the OP want a long-stroke piston gun I would suggest a .223 Arsenal AK. Atlantic has them for around $1000.

I would almost guarantee you an AR15 is more accurate than an HK93. With my experience with HK rifles, you'd need a miracle to out shoot an AR15. Roller lockup is much more crude than an AR15's locking bolt head. So much so they abandoned the technology in favor of the AR15's. The appreciation in value point is a little deceiving. You're spending 1/5th of the amount, and you're getting more gun in my opinion. There's value in that. As a collector's item the HK93 is awesome, and with an auto sear it's fucking awesome.



If you give me enough time I can solve all of the world's problems using an AR15 equation.

[KBScobravert]

^^^ nice

I have plenty of variants to test when it comes to AR15s from pistol to mid length gases DI and Gas Piston if you like.

[Moose242]

I would almost guarantee you an AR15 is more accurate than an HK93. With my experience with HK rifles, you'd need a miracle to out shoot an AR15. Roller lockup is much more crude than an AR15's locking bolt head. So much so they abandoned the technology in favor of the AR15's. The appreciation in value point is a little deceiving. You're spending 1/5th of the amount, and you're getting more gun in my opinion. There's value in that. As a collector's item the HK93 is awesome, and with an auto sear it's fucking awesome.

If you give me enough time I can solve all of the world's problems using an AR15 equation.

You can say that the AR15 is more accurate due to the infinite amount of configurations in which it is offered. You can have any caliber, any barrel length, etc. When you say "AR15" a different rifle pops into everyone's head as there is not one definitive configuration, albeit the correct answer would be this-



I present Stoner's first AR15. Sure has changed over the years.


The HK93/33 came in one flavor. The receiver thickness is the same as a g3 as well, so the receiver flex is not as evident and hence it is more accurate than the stamped 7.62 guns. While roller lock is simple in its design, simplicity plays a role in its extreme reliability. You would be hard pressed to say that the H&K roller locked firearms are not some of the most reliable small arms to have ever been produced (so much so that they still make them-

http://www.hk-usa.com/military_products/mil_special.asp

http://www.hk-usa.com/military_produ...submachine.asp)
Also the AR15 was not revolutionary in its use of a rotating bolt. Hell, the Garand had a rotating bolt, as did guns before it. Even the AK had a rotating bolt a decade before. Nor was the AR15 revolutionary in its operating system; Direct Impingement was invented by the Swedish and used on their Ag m/42 rifles. It was also used by the French on their MAS-49s for years. The non reciprocating charging handle was also not a revolutionary idea, as the Uzi had one and I believe the CZ Model 25 did before it. The only things Stoner did that were unique was to utilize aluminum and raise the sight plane.

As far as investment value, in the 80's a new HK93 sold for $600. They now sell for $3,000 give or take a few hundred depending on condition. A colt SP1 purchased for the same amount of money in the 80's will sell for around $1,500 today.

Anyways, enough AR15 bashing for today.

[CJ]

You can say that the AR15 is more accurate due to the infinite amount of configurations in which it is offered. You can have any caliber, any barrel length, etc. When you say "AR15" a different rifle pops into everyone's head as there is not one definitive configuration, albeit the correct answer would be this-



I present Stoner's first AR15. Sure has changed over the years.


The HK93/33 came in one flavor. The receiver thickness is the same as a g3 as well, so the receiver flex is not as evident and hence it is more accurate than the stamped 7.62 guns. While roller lock is simple in its design, simplicity plays a role in its extreme reliability. You would be hard pressed to say that the H&K roller locked firearms are not some of the most reliable small arms to have ever been produced (so much so that they still make them-

http://www.hk-usa.com/military_products/mil_special.asp

http://www.hk-usa.com/military_produ...submachine.asp)
Also the AR15 was not revolutionary in its use of a rotating bolt. Hell, the Garand had a rotating bolt, as did guns before it. Even the AK had a rotating bolt a decade before. Nor was the AR15 revolutionary in its operating system; Direct Impingement was invented by the Swedish and used on their Ag m/42 rifles. It was also used by the French on their MAS-49s for years. The non reciprocating charging handle was also not a revolutionary idea, as the Uzi had one and I believe the CZ Model 25 did before it. The only things Stoner did that were unique was to utilize aluminum and raise the sight plane.

As far as investment value, in the 80's a new HK93 sold for $600. They now sell for $3,000 give or take a few hundred depending on condition. A colt SP1 purchased for the same amount of money in the 80's will sell for around $1,500 today.

Anyways, enough AR15 bashing for today.

LOL, I never said any of the things you're arguing about. I never said the AR15 lockup was revolutionary, I said it was a better design than roller lockup, because it is. I didn't say DI was revolutionary, hell I never even mentioned it. I'm not using "any" variant to make my point. I am certain my My M16A1, run of the mill first design of the rifle in use would out shoot your HK93 just based on the design and operation of the rifle. I've had enough trigger time with them to know what HK9X rifles are capable of. Like I said before roller locked rifles have a very crude lockup. The lockup takes place in a crudely cast trunion. The fluted chamber forces debris and gases into the trunion which is where the rollers lock up. The dirtier your gun gets, the more inaccurate it will be - more so than other designs. An AR15 does not suffer from this from a design standpoint, a rotating bolt lockup actually clears any debris on the contact face each time it locks and unlocks. Also roller lockup is a gigantic pain in the ass to suppress, the locking piece has to be changed to different angles to adjust the unlocking times with increased chamber pressures. A rotating bolt is just a better design, period. All of HK's rifles now use this same system. HK uses the roller lockup in their sub guns and their machineguns where accuracy is not that important. But their main issue rifles are rotating bolt.

I agree the HK9X rifle platform is very reliable - in 7.62x51. The reliability of a gun is highly reliant and proportionate to it's action spring pressure. The harder the gun chambers, the less likely it is to be effected by debris. The HK91 chambers like a motherfucker. It will literally bend a 7.62x51 round in half if something goes awry. The 93 doesn't have anywhere near the chamber force. I never got my 93 dirty enough to do any reliability testing. The reason I say this is because although they are extremely reliable, they are not AK reliable. They are not a gun you can throw in the mud and force them to cycle, they will jam. They do not run clean like a piston gun, they run very fucking dirty. More dirty than a AR-15 in my opinion. So on reliability, I really don't know, the HK93 and the AR15 are more than likely very similar in reliability, I can't apply the reliability of an HK91 to a 93.

[Big A]

Nobody is arguing that the AR is a revolutionary design, the fact that it uses tried and true technologies that have been around a while, is part of what makes it an accurate and reliable weapon. Your post isn't bashing, you're pointing out alot of what makes the AR a good rifle.

[KBScobravert]

You guys need to e-hug it out, or range day in the pit is in order. You upset and confuse us when you fight like this.

I would own H&K if I was not burried in AR15's and parts.

[Moose242]

Lol @ people thinking this is anything more than a friendly discussion between friends. CJ and I often have this discussion; Debating the pros and cons of various firearms/cars/etc in a friendly manner. This one just happens to be public. I have never said the AR15/M16 is a bad rifle at all, in fact I believe it is a cost effective carbine that is just fine if you are looking for a versatile .223 semi-automatic rifle. I do also however believe that it is obsolete, as does the US Military as the Individual Carbine Competition is now ongoing to find a replacement rifle for the M4/M16. Weapons submitted included the XCR by Robinson Armament Co., an off-the-shelf or derivative of the M6A4 by LWRC, the ACR by Remington, the SR-16 by Knight's Armament Company, the FN SCAR by FN Herstal, the CM901 by Colt's Manufacturing Company, and the HK416 by Heckler & Koch. The Colt CM901 is now out of the competition, as is the LWRC, and the SR-16. The only AR pattern guns left are the 416 and the BEAR (the current enhanced M4 is in the competition as a control). Remaining entrants include the FN SCAR, HK416A5, Remington ACR, the Adcor Defense BEAR Elite, and the Beretta ARX-160. It will be interesting to see how this plays out, but short stroke pistons are the way of the future.

[David]

As long as we're using bullets were outdated.

[aggie97]

So, can you two explain how you would judge the 556 less accurate? Was it seat of the pants feel or did you bolt it down and bench it? Is the accuracy difference based on a recoil system that isn't as efficient and "rocks" the gun more than the AR or is the barrel inconsistant?

Also, CJ, explain how a piston driven AR can be cheaper than the $1100. I get "build one" but the adams arms kits with the parts I want start at $700....what am I missing or am I looking in the wrong places?

<---never built an AR or really looked into it beyond swapping a complete upper onto my existing lower.

Gracias.

[Moose242]

So, can you two explain how you would judge the 556 less accurate? Was it seat of the pants feel or did you bolt it down and bench it? Is the accuracy difference based on a recoil system that isn't as efficient and "rocks" the gun more than the AR or is the barrel inconsistant?

Also, CJ, explain how a piston driven AR can be cheaper than the $1100. I get "build one" but the adams arms kits with the parts I want start at $700....what am I missing or am I looking in the wrong places?

<---never built an AR or really looked into it beyond swapping a complete upper onto my existing lower.

Gracias.

CJ and I spent the better part of a day at the range trying to sight the damn thing in with Troy iron sights properly mounted and loctited on. Groups at 50 yards were 3-4 inches in diameter regardless of who was shooting from a benchrest.

The "Sig" 556 rifles are made here in the USA in Exeter, New Hampshire. The receivers are not as strong as the Swiss made ones, and the lowers are aluminum and not steel. The rifles lack the Swiss craftsmanship of their European cousins and I have yet to meet someone who is genuinely happy with theirs. Long story short, if you want a Sig rifle then buy a pre-ban 550 series.

[FunFordCobra]

I didn't say I hated it! I just like my ar in .308 much better! I just didn't see the logic in having the .223. I'm not ballin like some of you!