# HK 416 vs M16 & C7



## GAP (12 Apr 2007)

Army Won't Field Rifle Deemed Superior to M4
Military.com  |  By Christian Lowe  |  April 06, 2007
Article Link

It's a debate that's gone on for years - and now it's finally coming to a head. 
The compact M4 carbine - a shortened version of the M16 - that is now standard issue for most Army troops, some Marines and other specialized units is facing increased criticism because of its tendency to malfunction with even the minutest exposure to the elements. 

Some ground communities, including special operations forces, have begun to sideline the M4 in favor of newer, gas-piston operated variants such as the Heckler & Koch-manufactured 416 and the FNH-built Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle, or SCAR 

In a routine acquisition notice March 23, a U.S. Special Forces battalion based in Okinawa announced that it is buying 84 upper receiver assemblies for the HK416 to modify their M4 carbines. The M4 fires using a system that redirects gas from the expended round to eject it and reload another. The 416 and SCAR use a gas-operated piston that physically pushes the bolt back to eject the round and load another. 

Carbon buildup from the M4's gas system has plagued the rifle for years, resulting in some close calls with Soldiers in combat whose rifles jammed at critical moments. 

According to the solicitation for the new upper receiver assemblies, the 416 "allows Soldiers to replace the existing M4 upper receiver with an HK proprietary gas system that does not introduce propellant gases and the associated carbon fouling back into the weapon's interior. This reduces operator cleaning time, and increases the reliability of the M4 Carbine, particularly in an environment in which sand and dust are prevalent." 

The 416 is used by the Army's elite Delta Force, and a recent Army Times investigation showed the service's top equipment buyers ignored data from the spec ops community showing the M4 had fundamental flaws. Enamored by the development of futuristic weapons such as the XM29 and, later, XM8 - neither of which were ever fielded - the M4 stayed in the hands of Soldiers deploying to hot, dusty, austere environments like Iraq and Afghanistan. 
More on link


----------



## Colin Parkinson (13 Apr 2007)

Got this from Tanknet:

Norway has selected the HK 416 as the new assault rifle for the armed forces, replacing the AG-3 7.62 mm. 

Yesterday the Norwegian Armed Forces signed a contract with H&K in Oslo for the purchase of 8200 HK 416. The contract has a value of 100 million NOK. At the same time Aimpoint AB got a contract worth 50 million NOK for redpoint optical sights. The first rifles will be delivered to Norway in November 2007. 

http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/article1733557.ece

No words on the exact version, but photo shows the version with a 42 cm barrel (16.5 inch for Usians). Also expect the contract to include H&K 40mm GLs. The ammunition will be the Nammo 5.56 mm BNT 4 (or whatever they call it now).

Until recently, the 3 main contenders for the contract were the C8IUR, G36KV and SIG 5something. Some months ago rumours started to spread that the HK 417 was tested, with great results. And now the HK 416 has been selected, to much delight for great many personell in the armed forces.


----------



## medaid (13 Apr 2007)

mmmm that looks yummy.very nice design.


----------



## Sham (13 Apr 2007)

It is a very nice weapon. I seen it.


----------



## MikeM (13 Apr 2007)

An excellent choice, haven't got my hands on one, but all the reviews I have read indicate this is a great weapon, I'm jealous


----------



## medaid (13 Apr 2007)

Well apparently there's a hugre cry for HK to make the 416 uppers available for purchase  but currently they're still a little hesitant by the looks of it. I would love to be able to get a hold of one though. It would be a beautiful weapon to shoot.  ;D


----------



## 28402 engineers (14 Apr 2007)

And now the big question......
....what's it like compared to our C7A1? better? worse? kinda even?
I'll let you folks decide.


----------



## CALIFORNIA77 (16 Apr 2007)

Stridsvagn_122 said:
			
		

> And now the big question......
> ....what's it like compared to our C7A1? better? worse? kinda even?
> I'll let you folks decide.



Its a H*** of alot better than the C7A1,C7A2,and also the C8.


----------



## McG (16 Apr 2007)

Stridsvagn_122 said:
			
		

> And now the big question......
> ....what's it like compared to our C7A1? better? worse? kinda even?


It is the same weapon except that it uses a short stroke piston instead of direct gas action.  The current Popular Mechanics mag will tell you that this is an exciting new technology that is rare in assault rifles.  In fact, it is the same mechanism that we had in the FN C1A1 but inside an M16.


----------



## KevinB (16 Apr 2007)

Well while the FN did have a piston, it was not the short stroke design nor self regulating...

I've shot the 416 and handled the 417 -- I think it is an excellent system -- however I disagree that the piston design is an improvement over the direct impingement system of the M16FOW.  For some units that require short barrelled suppressed uppers it does work better -- but unless your the 1% of 1% its not going to give you anything you needed.


----------



## LordOsborne (17 Apr 2007)

Kev, don't you think the improvements to the action (improved extractor, etc) as well as the elimination of carbon fouling is a worthwhile benefit for the rank-and-file? 

I'm all for a weapon that works cleaner than the current ones do. I'd think that, as an upper reciever replacement, the costs would be much lower than a complete replacement. Not only that but I think the re-training would be minimal since the action is still more or less the same as the M16/C7. 

Whether or not we could licence build it at Colt Canada, or finagle a similar system to create canadian interest is another story though...


----------



## McG (17 Apr 2007)

Keep in mind that with a piston you also have a heavier weapon, and a lot more moving mass following each shot.


----------



## KevinB (17 Apr 2007)

Pistons are cooler -- thus they dont burn off the lube and the bolt lasts longer.
  Chambers still get yucky -- they are not a magic solution to life small arms problems.


The C7/C8 series is an excellent weapon series.  I dont think the Hk416's rail system would last in the Army - as the Army tends to wear out parts by cleaning, improper maintenance, or stupidity.   Cleaning on the M16FOW is easy -- and the fact the Army makes you clean it to abuse is not a weapon requirement -- but a chain of command that does not know any better.  

As much as I like to slag the brass  ;D, the fact is the CF small arms fleet are as current as any other army out there (albiet the Pitchfork - TRIAD1, needs to go)

I dont see ANY increase for regular troops with the Hk416.


----------



## Farmboy (17 Apr 2007)

Yeah, Colt Canada won't be making it anytime soon, just ask them there thoughts on it, (unbiased of course  ;D)

 Some who worked on the 416 compliment Colt/Diemaco on have the best direct gas version.


----------



## Bob Terwilliger (17 Apr 2007)

Having transitioned from the C1A1 to the C7 in the mid eighties, one thing I noticed was this. After a day on the range or a day in BATUS, the C1 chamber and breach block were not nearly as fouled as the C7 bolt.  It was a lot easier to pop out the gas plug and piston, give them a quick scrub with CLP and good old green brillo pad, and you are back in business.


----------



## LordOsborne (18 Apr 2007)

Kev, as much as I value your opinion (and believe me, I really do), I disagree that there'd be no benefit to the troops. I just can't see how getting rid of a significant amount of fouling gives no benefit or offers no benefit one way or the other. From a personal perspective, I'd love to try a 416 if for no other reason than to compare the differences. 

As far as the ease of cleaning on a C7 is concerned, there will always be those hard-to-reach places around the breech and chamber, not to mention the gas return tube. I'm going to stand by my original statement which was basically "less carbon = good"  :blotto:


----------



## KevinB (18 Apr 2007)

Patrick -- roger -- the point I am trying to make is that the troops (IMHO) would be better served with more bullets than buying a new upper.

10-20 mags out of a C7/C8 is not going to make it fouled passed the point of use.  Do we really need a system that will go for 20k without cleaning?
 Would it be cool to get Hk416's and the Hk417 as a DM gun -- damn straight.  
Maybe SARPIII will find the Hk416 as the best option.

However my point is that DI works -- the cleaning issue about nooks and crannies is more of a garrision mentality.  The fact remains that MOST people in the CF dont understand that the system works well with a bit of carbon.  Run the gun really wet (CLP) and you wont have a problem.
  The gas tube does not need to be cleaned - due to the fact the hot gases are passing thru the carbon does not build up until it cools -- which is in the bolt and bolt carrier.
The barrel extension and chamber get fouled anyway in the piston guns due to the fact the gasses and carbon are also escaping around the extraction round -- piston or direct impingment.


----------



## TacticalW (18 Apr 2007)

For people interested in seeing the H&K416 in action you may see a demonstration here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ObWpWXrt9I  (yes I know, the host gets a tad dramatic at times x.x)


----------



## Colin Parkinson (18 Apr 2007)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> Patrick -- roger -- the point I am trying to make is that the troops (IMHO) would be better served with more bullets than buying a new upper.
> 
> 10-20 mags out of a C7/C8 is not going to make it fouled passed the point of use.  Do we really need a system that will go for 20k without cleaning?
> Would it be cool to get Hk416's and the Hk417 as a DM gun -- damn straight.
> ...



Is the chamber of the C7 fluted?


----------



## KevinB (18 Apr 2007)

Nope -- nor does it need to be.  The HK G3, G41 where fluted due to the blowback nature that primary extraction occurs while the round is still in the barrel and the pressures are very high -- the rim of the casing would be torn off if the chamber was not fluted (and the MP-5 chamber was fluted due to Teutonic adherence to previous design sucess).

Keep in mind those above are not piston nor impingment designs but "roller lock" delayed blowback guns.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (18 Apr 2007)

Thanks, I forgot that the dwell time of the bolt is is much shorter on blowback guns. Funny though, I saw a picture in a magazine with an AR rifle (M4 I think) with fluted chambers, and they detailed that they had to increase the fluting for some reson that escapes me right now, I will try to find the article tonight.


----------



## LordOsborne (20 Apr 2007)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> Patrick -- roger -- the point I am trying to make is that the troops (IMHO) would be better served with more bullets than buying a new upper.
> 
> 10-20 mags out of a C7/C8 is not going to make it fouled passed the point of use.  Do we really need a system that will go for 20k without cleaning?
> Would it be cool to get Hk416's and the Hk417 as a DM gun -- damn straight.
> ...




Kev- I see where you're coming from and I agree for the most part with what you're saying. Thanks for enlightening me about the gas tube - it was one of those things that nagged me in the back of my mind saying "why doesn't it get really gummy more often?". I've only recently learned the value in 'running the gun wet' on my phase 2 course. Prior to that i stuck to the BMQ inspection mentality that said that cleanliness was everything and that you'll only put a tiny amount of CLP on these specific spots - nowhere else!
From a purely "time-saved" perspective, I think that the average guy would definately appreciate having to do that much less cleaning on his weapon, although I acknowledge that some parts will always remain cleaning-intensive.


----------



## medaid (20 Apr 2007)

I'd love a weapon that doesnt need to be cleaned that often. Kev, can you tell the instructors at the schools that the rifles work better wet?  ;D


----------



## DirtyDog (21 Apr 2007)

The 416 is hailed as a revolutionary AR yet it goes backwards in tech in regards to the piston system.  I've "heard" from some people that it's not living up to the hype as far as reliability is concerned either.... but that's hard to confirm.



			
				PatrickO said:
			
		

> Whether or not we could licence build it at Colt Canada, or finagle a similar system to create canadian interest is another story though...



As far as that goes.... Bustmaster makes a Gas Piston System AR-15.  The GPS upper is made by a company in AZ (http://www.pof-usa.com/index.htm) and supposedly (from 2nd and 3rd hand knowledge) they are crap.


----------



## KevinB (25 Apr 2007)

Hk made a OTB version of the 416 to appease the NSW folk.
  The budweiser clan where the only guys I know that had issues during trials.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (25 Apr 2007)

DirtyDog said:
			
		

> The 416 is hailed as a revolutionary AR yet it goes backwards in tech in regards to the piston system.  I've "heard" from some people that it's not living up to the hype as far as reliability is concerned either.... but that's hard to confirm.
> 
> As far as that goes.... Bustmaster makes a Gas Piston System AR-15.  The GPS upper is made by a company in AZ (http://www.pof-usa.com/index.htm) and supposedly (from 2nd and 3rd hand knowledge) they are crap.



You mean like the revolutionary gas impingement system of the AG 42b??? ;D

There is not a hell of a lot that is “new” in the world of small arms, except for the materials used.


----------



## DirtyDog (25 Apr 2007)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> The budweiser clan where the only guys I know that had issues during trials.



As in American amatuer gun nuts?


----------



## mudgunner49 (26 Apr 2007)

DirtyDog said:
			
		

> As in American amatuer gun nuts?



I think that I-6 is referring to the NSW folk...


blake


----------

