bullpups are objectively superior to conventional rifle and the VHS-2 is the best on the market. only nogunz, foids, weaklings whine about bullpup triggers
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)00:45:51
>>65226638(OP) Colt M4 is unironically better. It only gets squirrelly with a short barrel and can but the DI system as advanced to where thats not a big deal anymore either. Especially in 11.5" which the 416 migrates to as well.
10.3" was a dumb decision that soured the systems reputation for no reason.
>>65226884 >Go through the autism of redesigning a G36 without a polymer receiver. >Biggest potential customer you tailor made it for buys your old shit instead LMAO it's deader than dead now.
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)02:48:38
>>65226958 I like G36 too, but the HK433 is straight up better G36.
>>65227193 >asserting the G36 was ever even sufficient
>>65226998 No it just got bulldozed away like every other rifle design post-1980s by the Toyota Camry Kleenex standard of M16ism that rules western militaries and has for forty straight years. the 416 is vastly overweight + overengineered slop, rube goldberg redundant waste of money and resources
>>65227236 The gun industry is the epitome of "Everything must evolve into crab".
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)14:45:42
>>65227869 >"Everything must evolve into crab" Today, it seems that way. (Particularly since the 2010s) There was a time when it was not.
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)18:07:24
>>65226638(OP) I suspect the SAKO ARG is superior in all regards. Possibly the LMT MARS as well, given that it has a standard receiver height, quick change barrels, and can easily convert between DI and piston.
But I think we're finding out that the AR, in either DI or short stroke varieties, are clearly the best assault rifle in the world and that's that.
The number of people seething about it and inventing headcanon about why it's winning not being because it's good speaks for itself. Have them post hands. You know the drill.
>>65226638(OP) It's not even the best assault rifle from HK. >>65226998 Polymer is shit, aluminium is just better. And the G36 shows its age in other ways as well. There's a reason multiple nations have developed and adopted similar rifles. >But no success Because the german MoD is stupid and would rather ape frogs and muhreens than adopt the superior rifle. Doesn't mean the 433 won't ever find success in other ways. Some police departments in germany already use it.
>>65227869 >The gun industry is the epitome of "Everything must evolve into crab"
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)18:29:55
>>65228671 >433 Its day will come. I really want a factory select fire one. Probably two. Or three. >16.5 inch barrel >14.5 inch barrel >300 BLK 'Sneaker' HK 437 / G39
>>65228682 The main differentiating factors here (and the main reasons AR15 are inferior) are >Buffer tube This prevents the use of folding stocks. Yeah yeah you don't need it anyway, well guess what some people like them. >Charging handle AR15 have it in the back, which is ambidextrous but also unergonomical. Everyone else has it in the front. Note that the sig m7 has solved both problems, with a dual charging handle even. The 416 on the other hand is an intermediate design which was meant to work with stock AR lowers, so it's basically more reliable but not more ergonomical than any old AR15. >>65228625 Well, the 416 is 20 years old. I think HK would much rather sell the 433, but they're stuck with their success now so maybe they will update the 416 somewhat.
>>65228708 >Charging handle I want AR-15s to revert to Stoner-correct. And permanent integral top receiver carry handle Rear mount is not only cumbersome and unergonomic but ejects gas rearward. https://smallarmsreview.com/the-complete-guide-to-colt-m-16-models-part-i/
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)19:08:21
>>65228708 >is 20 years old Think about ^this fact. (And further, <--that design itself is based on a 60 year old original design) Never mind that HK themselves have a newer subsequent rifle design. None of this is, at all, about 'technology' or "what is the best rifle for the job."
>>65228625 Idk the newer 416 updates have been really nice rifles, to the point where even the weight difference is within a pound
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)20:49:17
>>65226749 >whine about bullpup triggers I mean, most of that is people whining about bullpup triggers on rifles they own as a civilian, that's a valid concern on a rifle you own for recreation. It's not really the same context as a mass-issued service rifle, where the concerns about triggers start and end at "does the gun go bang when I pull the trigger, and does it not go bang when I don't"
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)20:51:44
>>65229017 That’s valid, but also idk I feel like with modern ammo really pushing out the effectiveness of short barreled carbines, bullpups don’t really have many advantages anymore. Or at least the advantages aren’t as big as before
>>65226998 >>65228671 Honestly kind of baffling why they didn't adopt the 433. 7.16 lb rifle with a 11 in barrel just sounds like a no-brainer. >>65229025 I mostly fence-sit on the bullpup vs conventional argument. I agree modern ammo is allowing way better performance out of shorter barrels, but at the same time looking at the design compromises made to achieve that performance, I think there's still a valid argument to be made about bullpups. I think institutional inertia and not wanting to retrain troops, as well as not needing to modify the rifle to allow for left/right handed use will mean conventional rifles remain dominant, simply because small arms aren't really that relevant in the grand scheme of things.
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)21:08:06
>>65229036 I mean idk, the compromises have mostly been ironed out by the 11.5” being the minmaxed barrel length for ARs. But besides that I just don’t find bullpups very appealing. In my experience they’re way less comfortable, always have an awful manual of arms comparably, bad balance, and no rail estate so you can either have doohickeys or a good grip, but not both usually. I really don’t like them and now that shorties are performing to the level of full on rifles, I don’t see a reason for them anymore >>65229062 See above, I don’t find their advantages all that appealing anymore
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)21:09:11
>>65229074 Could be. Any way you look at it there's leveraging (external to what the actual technically suitable field rifle for the armed services ought be) of several varieties going on. With Germany the amount of constraints placed on contractors such as Heckler & Koch (or others) in their business dealings must be considered.
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)21:11:03
>>65229079 >above Whatever. Everyone has different rifles for different purposes/jobs. (for me the AR-15 recoil-buffer collapsible stocks are not preferable; as to AUG triggers, you get over it)
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)21:12:51
>>65229077 >99.8% of users here won't even touch /hg/ /arg/ Correct. Those are redditBoomercom wastes of bandwidth
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)21:14:34
>>65229087 You can get over it but if I had the option between an aug and a 416 I’d go 416 every time. It’s just so handy and nice to use
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)21:23:08
>>65229105 Well that’s a little extreme. It’s true that drones extend a rifle squads range drastically and offers a precision explosive at distance. But you still need those rifles to suppress and do just about everything with. Really what makes longer barrels kind of pointless now are the newer rounds becoming less velocity dependent for expansion. >>65229108 Idk the weight thing is kind of a non issue nowadays. Like the MR556A4 11” is 6.7 pounds, very competitive with DI ARs. Though I still liked the M27 desu
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)21:24:09
>>65229125 (never mind the 416) Most M4s are far too heavy, and many are unbalanced.
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)21:26:41
>>65229129 I’ve really never had that weight or unbalanced issue with them, even with the lame waffle stock. Maybe the ACOG helped with balance? Idk I always found them very light handy rifles, never had an issue using them, except they’d get gunked up quick from use. That I do appreciate about the 416/M27, you really don’t need to clean them as often as they don’t get as dirty
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)21:29:22
>>65229140 As you say, it depends on how they're built / fitted out and what's hung on them. The lowest profile forearm is preferable along with lightest possible weight optic etc.
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)21:32:38
>>65229147 I mean idk, I’ve used mostly actual M4s with quad rails and even then I didn’t find them that heavy at all, never mind those with mlok or especially plastic. The 416 doesn’t feel that bad due to the big ass stock, though the M27 does. However that weight is also part of its flexibility
00
Anonymous06/11/26(Thu)21:41:14
>>65229125 >drones extend a rifle squads range drastically Funny way to look at it. Drones are not a weapon of the rifle squad, they are its own thing, a new layer of combat similar to the way air combat was a new layer. They don't extend the rifle squads range, they make the rifle squad unnecessary beyond close range.