|
[QUOTE=The Reaper] I can get an M-4 the way I want it, a rail system, a spare parts kit, and a dozen mags for under a grand, from at least a half-dozen dealers here in this area.
TR:
Major advantage of the HK -- it is modular. Swap barrels and stocks with much less problems than an AR. The AR design is obsolete because it doesn't have modularity. It could have adapted but it didn't. I have seen a distinct need for the Army to obtain a small arms design that is totally modular in order to meet demands for specific purposes. Down to the rifleman level in fact -- not just 'snipers' and SDMs.
I never cared for HK products as IMHO they are made for guys shaped like a box instead of shaped like a human. Boxy stock and butt. Hard to consistently bring up and one has to fit the rifle instead of the rifle fitting them. Ergonomics are even worse than any issued M-16 or variant. Absurd is a kind statement for what the Army passes for small arms ergonomics as well as utility of design.
I went to some show at Aberdeen more than a few years ago and stopped by the Hk tables where they had a G-3 "Counter Sniper" rifle. Of course I had to fuck with the boys there as when ever someone touts a rifle as 'counter' this or 'for' that -- obviously they think the rifle knows the difference.
I will say that Hk thought that the rifle was intelligent enough to know what its purpose was as the cost was over four thousand dollars per copy.
Not a piece of shit but not worth more than five or six hundred dollars unless they were using gold in the innards of the thing.
I also know that once a guy has his eyes set on a particular firearm, he will buy it no matter what anyone else says.
Gene
|