View Full Version : HK 416 v. Colt in OTB Test
This was just posted on the net about a week ago, and posted on my site today.
I had been trying to get this video out of HK, but they wouldn't release it.
I don't know if it's been posted here yet or not. I did a search and did not find it.
The tester is Robert Hirt, main weapon demonstrator for HKO.
I don't know how it got to youtube, but it is interesting to say the least.
Yeah, it's an HK test, but pretty impressive, even you DI guys will admit. We don't often shoot our guns underwater, etc., but the maritime boys should have healthy interest in this.
I am thirsty. Time to go hit the Kool-Aid.
:D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGwkHktkTxU
Wouldn't it be a more accurate comparison if the both firearms had the same length barrel. It's little differences like that which cause one to wonder how many takes they made to get it just right. They obviously had a longer barrel available, it was used in the second part of the vid.
He sure made it a point to fire quickly and keep the muzzle of the much longer AR15 up instead of down to let it drain. Who would raise it to that angle before firing?
That HK wasn't fired "under" water. It was fired with the tip of the barrel (FH) just barely submerged it appeared.
That funky German disco-porno music will always remind me to strap on a welding helmet when I take my Colt to the pool :p .
Gunfighter.45
05-13-08, 23:08
Impressive... Yea maybe,but lets ask all the Special forces guys who still to this day use the standard M4 or hell even the M16 in mud,dust storms,salt water,dirt,rocky terrain etc.. In all honesty I really don't forsee an under water battle anytime soon,looks like will be in a desert environment for very long time. I belive most the DI problems have been fixed with something called Pmags next best thing since sliced bread IMHO.
Yeah, it's an HK test, but pretty impressive, even you DI guys will admit. We don't often shoot our guns underwater, etc., but the maritime boys should have healthy interest in this.
Impressive... Yea maybe,but lets ask all the Special forces guys who still to this day use the standard M4 or hell even the M16 in mud,dust storms,salt water,dirt,rocky terrain etc.. In all honesty I really don't forsee an under water battle anytime soon,looks like will be in a desert environment for very long time. I belive most the DI problems have been fixed with something called Pmags next best thing since sliced bread IMHO.
Or better yet, why don't you ask the SF units who are currently fielding the 416 in place of the M4 or preparing to completely REPLACE the M4 with the FN SCAR what their thoughts are on the subject? PMAGs are not the solution to the M4's DI problems.
Tspeis
Don't DELTA and other high end SF types already field the 416?
Gunfighter.45
05-14-08, 00:07
Or better yet, why don't you ask the SF units who are currently fielding the 416 in place of the M4 or preparing to completely REPLACE the M4 with the FN SCAR what their thoughts are on the subject? PMAGs are not the solution to the M4's DI problems.
Tspeis
Tspeis your right boss... they will maybe and the word is maybe switch to FN SCAR only time will tell. And I know PMAGS are not the complete solution but it's a big start to one. It's kinda funny the US Military was supposedly going back to a .45ACP and had all these gun mfg going nuts for new sidearm to replace the 9mm Beretta, and who did they stay with? So lets not get to crazy on the notion of replacing the M4 just yet... like I said only time well tell.
Gunfighter.45
05-14-08, 00:17
Don't DELTA and other high end SF types already field the 416?
Please correct me if wrong. I belive it's just a handfull of SF maybe some SEAL Teams and I belive maybe Green Berets but I could be wrong.
I wouldn't get the panties in a wad too much guys, about this.
It's clearly not my HK is better than your M4, it's just an illustration that DI is bad juju if submerged or partially submerged. Barrel length doesn't matter, and who cares what angle the gun is at or whether one was allowed to drain for one second longer? Point is that the water can't clear out of a DI and that if you get a gun that wet, it's probably going tits up, if it doesn't hurt you. SEALs swim with their guns; most other folks don't.
That said, we're not going to put our guns into those conditions, but it is kinda cool to see what happens. I have to admit, HK does the mud, sand and dust tests for demos and they close the ejection port, etc. But when Robert Hirt is involved, they are seriously finding out what's what with stuff.
I am told this test was repeated at least "two dozen" times, and that the 416 never failed once. It has special drain holes in the base of the bolt carrier and rear of the lower receiver to allow water to escape for 100 percent function.
I can't for the life of me figure out why HK isn't pushing this stuff harder. They have all kinds of torture testing video out there, tons from their Yuma days.
In fairness, and I don't know that it matters, this may have been a Diemaco C8, as the Germans didn't have any Colt's in Oberndorf during the time these tests were conducted.
Now, if I could only get my hands on the G36 video where Robert fires nine full Beta mags continuously, and the forend catches fire at round 800, but the gun fully functions through to the end.
Robert (albeit without eye protection) shields his face with his arm from the heat.
Similar test on M4 (or C8) and 30 round magazines launches bullet out of the side of the barrel at about round 570.
That Oberndorf barrel steel. Tuff stuff. :)
The SCAR is a MAYBE, huh? Someone forgot to tell SOCOM that it wasn't a done deal. Gunfighter, you better get the CG on the phone and tell him you think it's up in the air at this point, he didn't get the memo.
FNH was awarded the SCAR contract on November 5, 2004 by USSOCOM to be developed further and fielded through NSW Crane. LRIP and IOT&E have already been performed and $25M is slated for FY08 and $6m in FY09 to field the guns to USSOCOM forces...thats $25M before October of this year to buy the guns. Still think it's a big maybe?
Tell me how PMAGs keep the M4 from dumping fouling back onto it's own bolt. That must have been the 07/07 revision you could turn them in for. All mine are older so I don't have the bolt/carbon separation device on them.
Stretz Tactical Inc
05-14-08, 06:35
It looked to me like he didnt let the M4 drain for the full 2 seconds like he did the 416 - I dont know if that has anything to do with it or not.
Gunfighter.45
05-14-08, 07:37
The SCAR is a MAYBE, huh? Someone forgot to tell SOCOM that it wasn't a done deal. Gunfighter, you better get the CG on the phone and tell him you think it's up in the air at this point, he didn't get the memo.
FNH was awarded the SCAR contract on November 5, 2004 by USSOCOM to be developed further and fielded through NSW Crane. LRIP and IOT&E have already been performed and $25M is slated for FY08 and $6m in FY09 to field the guns to USSOCOM forces...thats $25M before October of this year to buy the guns. Still think it's a big maybe?
Tell me how PMAGs keep the M4 from dumping fouling back onto it's own bolt. That must have been the 07/07 revision you could turn them in for. All mine are older so I don't have the bolt/carbon separation device on them.
Easy there big guy..Once again I did not say all the M4 problems were fixed just only by PMAGs,but yes they are a big help in some aspects,and as far as the FN SCAR goes... ok my bad for talking out my ass.
Wow, I gotta get rid of my Colts. Obviously they are not good for bathtub defense.
Point is that the water can't clear out of a DI and that if you get a gun that wet, it's probably going tits up
I bet water can clear out of a DI gun. Maybe not in 1.5 seconds. But if you rolled it over port down and racked it, I'd have to guess you'd get enough water out of it to fire.
In any case, if someone is looking for a weapon with the ability to fire immediately upon exiting the water, the 5.56 probably isn't the choice anyway.
As I understand it, the M14 is one of only a few centerfire rifles that can do that. (maybe the AK too? I never did get the answer to what the other weapon was)
I just thought I'd let everyone know: As a service to the fine members of this board, I am currently offering 1/4 market value to anyone with a Colt, LMT, Noveske or other higher end AR-15. I don't want anyone getting hurt defending their hot tub...You're welcome. :)
Robb Jensen
05-14-08, 09:51
I find it interesting that the guy in the video wears a protective helmet when he fired the Colt but not the HK.........................as if they planned on the Colt blowing up.
It's no surprise, water in bbl, gun explodes. Pretty much across the board.
Same with the 416, if it were "special" , he would have not allowed it to drain, and subjected it to the same, retarded, abuse he did the M4.
Then how do you explain it firing submerged, except for the very tip of the barrel?
Meh, enough crooning over how "great" this German masterpiece is for being able to "fire underwater". If you want something that fires under water, look no further than what the Soviet Union cooked up. It worked under water with a lethal range of around 100' and above land as well. And you could fire it "fully submerged". So if you have an olympic size pool and feel the need...there ya go.
I love the quality of H&K (sometimes, most of the time it is no better than anything else). But I am a fan of DGI.
We'll I saw a cut in the film as he submerged it. I can't trust it at that point.
As for water in a DI gun, think about the gas tube- that will NOT drain on it's own I don't believe. Water will find it's way into that tiny gas port quicker than it will find it's way out . Water pressure will help it go in and it's own viacosity will help keep it from wanting to just flow back out.
I don't believe it will flow back out of the rear of the gas tune either- mainly because of the gas key and also because of the vacuum in the tube. Not enough air can get through a wet has port to allow water to exit the other end.
The barrel's larger diameter allows it to actually drain.
The piston does not have a large cavity of water to compress. Just gas to force out through water which is simple.
30 cal slut
05-14-08, 11:51
Das Boot theme music.
LOL.
Tom - I'll remember to sling one on the beach next time I'm out fishing. If HK ever gets around to selling the uppers to civilians.
could someone email this vid to HK?
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=5807872
maybe they'll start to do some serious tests without BSing other rifles....
And I suppose you think the LWRC propaganda bullshit is credible? Hardly. The test shown in the video was done in preparation for the tests the 416 would have to pass at Crane prior to fielding. What you don't see on video is the 416 being tested more than two dozen more times. It should go without saying that the 416 passed the tests at Crane and is currently fielded with the special operations units for whom it was tested.
HK and Wilcox will be manufacturing select fire and civilian variations of the 416 here in the US, so your comment regarding there being "US alternatives" is a mute point.
Tspeis
Without getting this thread too far of topic, my beef is not with LWRC. Rather, the way they go about marketing their product by taking shots at other manufacturer's products. For example, the quote below is from information posted by an LWRC employee on the LWRC boards about their gas piston system. They didn't blow up any M4's, but note the comparison the HK416 in an effort to make it seem inferior.
The end of the operating rod is fully supported by the receiver bushing where it enters the open space of the receiver. We designed this operating rod to be fully supported as it impacts the bolt carrier key (anvil). In other words, we found it counter to good design to have an inch of the operating rod hanging out inside the receiver un-supported. It is more likely to bend and disable the rifle. An example of this is the HK 416. The operating rod of the 416 is unsupported inside the receiver. To do this requires a much thicker operating rod for strength which HK has incorporated, but this also required they raise the height of the receiver to accommodate it. This results in a system that has a nonstandard picatinny height over bore axis requiring special mounts to keep the height of the optics on the same height over bore axis as the M4.
Let's be honest, when has a 416 EVER been disabled because the op rod bent? HK knew what they were doing when they engineered this weapon and they did it that way for a reason.
Did HK's video/test ever state WHO manufactured the competing carbine? Come to think of it, I don't believe HK has ever publicly stated that the 416 was superior to anything other than the DI AR platform. On the other hand, LWRC seems to make it a point to compare their product to the HK416 as often as possible. There are certainly alternatives to making one's product seem inferior to market your product. LWRC could have worded the above quote to say something along the lines of:
"while some other manufacturer's leave the op rod unsupported inside the receiver, ours is fully supported as it impacts the carrier key".
Now tell me the quote above is not BS propaganda?
It is definitely not bashing when you describe real tangible differences beteen two items and give valid reasons one is more useful than the other.
It sounds like their observations are measurable in real life and not just theory or fantasy land. It's real info and therefore not bashing. Bashing usually involves coming up with theoretical BS that matters not to any human only to discredit what your competition recently did or came up with.
It sounds like the made a real improvement and are explaining it. To understand it, there needs to be an example. No big deal.
The comment regarding the 416's op rod being more likely to bend and disable the rifle IS theoretical BS. When has this ever been an issue? :rolleyes: I will eat my words if you can point me in the direction of any incident in which the 416's op rod bent and rendered the rifle inoperable.
Tspeis
this is a very cool video, but I have to ask what is up with the back ground music?
The comment regarding the 416's op rod being more likely to bend and disable the rifle IS theoretical BS. When has this ever been an issue? :rolleyes: I will eat my words if you can point me in the direction of any incident in which the 416's op rod bent and rendered the rifle inoperable.
Tspeis
"An example of this is the HK 416. The operating rod of the 416 is unsupported inside the receiver. To do this requires a much thicker operating rod for strength which HK has incorporated, but this also required they raise the height of the receiver to accommodate it."
It doesn't appear to me they said it would bend, but that it could unless increased in diameter which they credit HK with doing.
"An example of this is the HK 416. The operating rod of the 416 is unsupported inside the receiver. To do this requires a much thicker operating rod for strength which HK has incorporated, but this also required they raise the height of the receiver to accommodate it."
It doesn't appear to me they said it would bend, but that it could unless increased in diameter which they credit HK with doing.
It is more likely to bend and disable the rifle. An example of this is the HK 416.
Sounds like they said it would bend to me.
They,
There's no battle to fight here my friend. :p I have not contacted LWRC nor do I plan to. There's nothing more to research. The company's VP made a comment that was clearly directed toward the HK416 in an effort to discredit it. There are a million different ways he could have worded it and he chose to throw the 416 into the mix. It should be noted that the posted video was never intended to be portrayed as a legitimate test. It was for demonstration purposes and what you don't see is the 416 being tested more than two dozen times off camera in preparation for the tests it would have to pass at Crane prior to being fielded. Needless to say, it passed those tests and is currently fielded with the units for whom it was tested in the first place.
Again, no beef with LWRC, but since you brought them up because of HK's "BS propaganda" as you call it, I felt I should point out that LWRC certainly spews their share of nonsense on the internet as well. There's plenty more than the minor quote I posted, but I'll leave it at this.
Maybe we should agree to disagree and get the thread back on topic?
Tspeis
Sounds like they said it would bend to me.
Again, no beef with LWRC, but since you brought them up because of HK's "BS propaganda" as you call it, I felt I should point out that LWRC certainly spews their share of nonsense on the internet as well. There's plenty more than the minor quote I posted, but I'll leave it at this.
Tspeis
I agree, god forbid someone should post the characteristics of their pet firearm in such a manner that is discredits, by choice of words and/or omission of the existence of identical/comparable features, another manufacturer's methods, designs, or construction materials :rolleyes:
I'm sure you'd never do anything like that.
When you venture over to HKPro's forum, why is it that I see Tspeis and HKPro winking at each other about how they managed to rile up the guys on other forums with this? :rolleyes:
I don't care too much about whether I can fire my rifle after jumping out of my pool, and frankly, I doubt either of you really do either. But you sure seem to be looking to irritate some people with a video that (to 99.9% of us) really is no more than just interesting trivia.
When you venture over to HKPro's forum, why is it that I see Tspeis and HKPro winking at each other about how they managed to rile up the guys on other forums with this? :rolleyes:
I don't care too much about whether I can fire my rifle after jumping out of my pool, and frankly, I doubt either of you really do either. But you sure seem to be looking to irritate some people with a video that (to 99.9% of us) really is no more than just interesting trivia.
Neither myself or HKPRO "winked at each other about how we managed to rile people up" with this so I'm not sure where you came up with that.
It's was certainly not my intention to irritate anyone with the video. It was posted for entertainment. People point and call BS. That's fine. I point and call BS when someone brings another manufacturer into the mix, now everyone's crying. :rolleyes:
Tspeis
They have a good bakery in Oberndorf and just outside of town is a great butcher with a killer leberwurst. Well, that was well over 15 years ago, maybe they bit the dust by now, breakfast was good back then.
The Dumb Gun Collector
05-14-08, 23:32
Hey Tspeis...
;)
Well Federale, that still doesn't fall into the "winking at HKPRO" category you previously described.
In regards to your question, I've owned a 416 upper. Surprisingly, the people who do the most whining about it have not been within 100 feet of a 416. :rolleyes: As for the title, I simply copied and pasted what was given on youtube. Look it up. :)
Tspeis
Let's just take it easy now.
Will do.
Tspeis
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.