G-36 scandal

[Netpackrat]

They've probably got some folks from the eastern half of the country who still know how to build a damn fine AK....

[Kommander]

They've probably got some folks from the eastern half of the country who still know how to build a damn fine AK....

While I am sure they do we both know that it would be politically unacceptable for them to issue a "terrorist" rifle, never mind that the Poles still use the AK in a vastly upgraded form.

[slowpoke]

They've probably got some folks from the eastern half of the country who still know how to build a damn fine AK....

Hello, SIG stg90. Its the swiss take one an ak...

[Netpackrat]

They've probably got some folks from the eastern half of the country who still know how to build a damn fine AK....

Hello, SIG stg90. Its the swiss take one an ak...

Those probably have more consistent QC than the rifles SIG makes over here, too.

[Aesop]

It appears that they're not holding their zeros, predictably [strike]in part[/strike] due to being made of [strike]the wrong type of[/strike] plastic[/url].

More better now, ja?.

[D5CAV]

German HEER guys I know yearn for their G3s.

[Vonz90]

I stand to be corrected, but I don't thing the Bundeswehr ever really wanted the G36 per say. It was adopted in the mid 90's and I think the only thing it really had going for it was that it was a hell of a lot cheaper than the G3 to buy and the political decision had been made to go to the 5.56 round. My guess is that the politicians involved assumed there would never be any reason to actually use them.

The original choice was supposed to be the G41 (basically a G33 with updated ergonomics and features), but that was canned due to cost concerns. They should probably just go back to that.

http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=c ... s&Itemid=5

[D5CAV]

I can't imagine the G36 being cheaper than the G3, but the current fashion is 5.56 NATO.

The G41/G33 suffers the same problem vis-à-vis the G3 that the M16 suffered vis-à-vis the Stoner AR10. There is only a fraction of the impulse force to work the action with 5.56 NATO as with 7.62 NATO.

As much as Gene Stoner is criticized for his design of the M16, remember that he originally designed it for 7.62NATO as the AR10. A reliable action powered by 7.62 NATO became less reliable when powered by 5.56 NATO. Same for the ultra-reliable G3. When powered by 5.56 NATO, it becomes the less reliable G33.

I've not had any experience with the G36, but IMHO, the most reliable 5.56 NATO launchers are the StGw 90 and Steyr AUG.

[Kommander]

I don't think that any of the modern 5.56 rifles have what could be considered reliability issues. The issue in this case, is accuracy. What this case does make me question the use of polymers in high temperature environments. Its one thing to have the "lower" in the case of an AR or the frame of a handgun made of plastic. its quite another to have plastic right up against the barrel of a rifle, or to have molded in metal that is up against the barrel of a rifle.

[Vonz90]

I can't imagine the G36 being cheaper than the G3, but the current fashion is 5.56 NATO.

The G41/G33 suffers the same problem vis-à-vis the G3 that the M16 suffered vis-à-vis the Stoner AR10. There is only a fraction of the impulse force to work the action with 5.56 NATO as with 7.62 NATO.

As much as Gene Stoner is criticized for his design of the M16, remember that he originally designed it for 7.62NATO as the AR10. A reliable action powered by 7.62 NATO became less reliable when powered by 5.56 NATO. Same for the ultra-reliable G3. When powered by 5.56 NATO, it becomes the less reliable G33.

I've not had any experience with the G36, but IMHO, the most reliable 5.56 NATO launchers are the StGw 90 and Steyr AUG.

The G36 was designed around a price tag and yes it is a lot cheaper than the G3/G33. The basic action is actually a copy of the AR180, add in an alll plastic receiver and you have yourself about as cheap an assault rifle as you are likely to get. As was mentioned before, the issue is accuracy not reliability.