View Full Version : What will your SIG 556 look like?
variablebinary
08-09-06, 17:15
I am very excited about this carbine. Who knows what SIG is going to unveil, but I will use aftermarket parts and services to make this
http://www.geocities.com/rebirth_5/556x.JPG
Always loved the SIG 55X series............. :cool:
I really hope that they are able to offer it with the more traditional stocks rather than the M4 style collapsable buttstock they were originally pushing.
VB your PS-fu is weak. The saw grip is too big. :D
variablebinary
08-09-06, 23:14
VB your PS-fu is weak. The saw grip is too big. :D
Cut me some slack. All I have is MS paint :D
I would really like the Sig 556 SWAT model, with the Sig folding stock. I would be more happy with an AR type grip, so I could mount a MIAD.
Then, I want to mount an Eotech 552.D1 directly to the top rail. Add some C-products SS mags, & I will be over-joyed.
olds442tyguy
08-10-06, 19:39
I would prefer a 551 set up with the original SG 550 folder and cheek piece, regular height top rail, but I would still use the B&T four rail handguards.
If it doesn't take standard furniture, I'll whittle my own side folding AR stock adapter out of billet aluminum if I have to. Why they would take advantage of the AR stock and still not have it fold is beyond me. I think a folding CTR stock would look right at home.
Honestly, it would be a novelty rifle though.
variablebinary
08-12-06, 03:53
All you need is this with AR15 mags and you are done...
http://www.civiliangunner.com/images/SIG551g.jpg
I thought this was supposed to start selling this month. Impact guns still doesn't have any and they say Fall 2006 now instead of August. Was its release pushed back? I have a friend who's interested and I'm just curious.
Thanks,
Sean
Robb Jensen
08-12-06, 08:55
I thought this was supposed to start selling this month. Impact guns still doesn't have any and they say Fall 2006 now instead of August. Was its release pushed back? I have a friend who's interested and I'm just curious.
Thanks,
Sean
SIG is now saying Dec06/Jan07.
variablebinary
08-12-06, 09:49
I thought this was supposed to start selling this month. Impact guns still doesn't have any and they say Fall 2006 now instead of August. Was its release pushed back? I have a friend who's interested and I'm just curious.
Thanks,
Sean
I was just at impact yesterday and according to them SIG is saying October - November for the 1st 1000 and Dec-Janurary for the big push of 3000 units.
The release date of any new product is whatever the manfacturer says + 12 months when it comes to guns. If SIG had just made a 551 with a forged lower with everything else being the same, I'm sure turn around would have been much faster
All you need is this with AR15 mags and you are done...
http://www.civiliangunner.com/images/SIG551g.jpg
SIR, NO SIR!
One of THESE with AR mags, please....
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y8/StainlessSteel/Sig551552ras.jpg
These are made in the USA, so I don't think a 551 would be any faster into production.
I handled one at SHOT and didn't like the top rail/charging handle setup too well. I went to pull the bolt back and raked my finger against the scope mount on the rail.
I think they did good with the handguard, it's not all rails so it lacks in the CDI factor but it has enough for a vert grip and a flashlight.
First FN and then Sig, good times for AW fans as manufactures are starting production in the USA. I hope more join in, Styer? H&K?
I was very disappointed in the Sig rifle at shot. I couldn't believe that they put that elevated rail and an AR type stock. They should have left it like the original series but using the AR mags would have been fine.
If they build them like the shot show models I am afraid that I won't be getting myself one like I had planned on.
olds442tyguy
08-12-06, 20:57
First FN and then Sig, good times for AW fans as manufactures are starting production in the USA. I hope more join in, Styer? H&K?
Supposedly Steyr recently submitted their TDP to the ATF and are awaiting approval. IIRC, the American AUG A3 is going to be called the AUR or something along those lines.
H&K is going to be reintroducing the SL8-1 and the USC to the American market. I haven't heard when they're expected to hit shelves though.
variablebinary
08-13-06, 01:23
Supposedly Steyr recently submitted their TDP to the ATF and are awaiting approval. IIRC, the American AUG A3 is going to be called the AUR or something along those lines.
H&K is going to be reintroducing the SL8-1 and the USC to the American market. I haven't heard when they're expected to hit shelves though.
I wouldnt bother with an SL8 but if HK cranked out a G36, that might get my attention
TigerStripe
08-13-06, 01:40
If they make one like this available, I'd buy one:
http://www.geocities.com/rebirth_5/556x.JPG
You may have seen this pic before.... :D
TS
variablebinary
08-13-06, 13:31
If they make one like this available, I'd buy one:
http://www.geocities.com/rebirth_5/556x.JPG
You may have seen this pic before.... :D
TS
My Ideal 556 right there. I'd fork over quite a bit of cash if that is what SIG made
I bailed on my pre-order. All the internet rumors of pinned collapsible stocks and no flash hider made me think of the "good" old days when Slick Willie was in office.
I'll wait until the finished product is on the market before sinking any money into one.
Plus, I'm really digging FN's offerings for civvies.
Well, the raised rail is the only way you are going to mount say an EOTech on there and still be able to use the charging handle from what I can remember.
variablebinary
09-07-06, 01:58
Damn you SIG and your lack of updates :D
I'm itching like I've got a social disease for one of these things........:o
:D
I want one too. Hopefully they will be available at tax refund time.
Has anyone heard if they've changed anything on them?
The original stock would be great, but not a biggie. The twist rate could be 1n7. I would like to see the bottom rail about an inch and a half longer to allow for a light with NO vertical grip and tape switch.
What king of mounts are on the front of it? I hope it's something other than a separate attachment to the rail.
Mark
Like I was saying to Mark today......if they get these things out before the year, I'll be one of the idiots who'll buy it right out of the gate.....
I want one! :cool:
I don't understand why everyone is so caught up in the cosmetics of this rifle. I don't care if it looks like a turd on a stick, how it performs is all that people should be concerned with. That being said the gun looks fine the way it is. The Sig 5xx series has been out for sometime now you can't expect them not to redesign it for the new rifle here in the states :rolleyes:
I don't understand why everyone is so caught up in the cosmetics of this rifle. I don't care if it looks like a turd on a stick, how it performs is all that people should be concerned with. That being said the gun looks fine the way it is. The Sig 5xx series has been out for sometime now you can't expect them not to redesign it for the new rifle here in the states :rolleyes:
That's sort of a narrow unrealistic take on the sporting firearm market. Yeah, it has to go boom every time (or most every), but to say looks aren't important is crazy. Not everyone that buys these is buying it for vocational purposes, in fact, I'd venture that those using these firearms for a profession is a very small percentage. If SIG wants the rifle to sell then it better work AND look right. If you don't think looks are as important as function then ask Ford about the Edsel...........
old thread from the basement, but here is my progress on my 556...
http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/742/sig556duracoated1600xl0.jpg
Where did you get the folding stock?
variablebinary
12-15-07, 20:50
Wow, blast from the past.
If only SIG would have made what was in my concept pic instead.
Instead we got that tapco abortion with a canted rail. *Sigh*
This is an interesting thread. Clearly what Sigarms came out with is nothing like anyone who posted was looking for. :(
Gotta love those who are drinking the Sig Kool-aid and now claiming that the 556 is actually what they wanted. Why don't I see a description of what Sigarms actually produced as the 556 anywhere in this thread then?:D
Has someone from SIG actually indicated any intention to offer factory sights and furniture on these things?
Has someone from SIG actually indicated any intention to offer factory sights and furniture on these things?
I believe that they have finally designed an OEM rear sight. It looks nothing like what most people would want. In my opinion, people would like something along the lines of the original Swissarms diopter.
I saw an interesting quote in another forum, "I suspect that the 556 is currently the trendy rifle for the armchair commando to bash"
I think this guy has it all wrong. I suspect that the 556 is currently the trendy rifle for the armchair commando to buy. Certainly it hasn't caught on with real "commandos." If they've sold 8,000 of them, they've ALL gone to civilians. No LE organization has adopted it. No military organization uses it. The 556 doesn't have much in the way of long term testing to back up the claims of superior durability and reliability, unless of course you bootstrap onto the 551.
I think most who know better know that to take a rifle that's been built by a company that has never manufactured a rifle before, have some radical redesigns from the original, and bootstrap a, "its just as good, if not better, than the original" is pretty silly. The argument that the internals are the same and thus equals assumes a lot. A DPMS rifle has internals that would exchange with a Colt. Would anyone here argue that the DPMS is the Colt's equal?
Therefore, my conclusion is that this is currently the trendy rifle to buy. And sure, most who buy them aren't really armchair commandos, but want to bet that a good number of them are. :) And I really don't think that anyone who is running around defending what Sigarms came out with today would have been wishing for it a year ago when this thread was going. The 556 is selling pretty well because its a good system and its sales are bolstered by a lot of guys who are buying the trendy rifle of the day. It would be off the charts if it was anything like what was suggested it be in threads like these.
Federale --
Are you posting of your contempt for the 556 here because you were not so subtly told that the next time you did it on the SIGforum that they's ban your ass? LOL!
BTW -- the internals aren't a question of interchangeable DPMS vs. Colt -- they are a reality of the same parts molds and same pieces. I'd bet a nut that they are actually SWISS pieces, or in the VERY least -- made in the US FROM swiss part molds. Zero doubt. If you own the Swiss parts and the 556 it is obvious enough for Helen Keller to see!
Federale --
Are you posting of your contempt for the 556 here because you were not so subtly told that the next time you did it on the SIGforum that they's ban your ass? LOL!
BTW -- the internals aren't a question of interchangeable DPMS vs. Colt -- they are a reality of the same parts molds and same pieces. I'd bet a nut that they are actually SWISS pieces, or in the VERY least -- made in the US FROM swiss part molds. Zero doubt. If you own the Swiss parts and the 556 it is obvious enough for Helen Keller to see!
I don't have contempt for the rifle. I've said all along that its probably a good rifle. I have contempt for some of the claims that people have about the rifle.
As for whether they are really Swiss made parts, then check your 922r parts count. Especially since you've clearly added more Swiss parts.
As for whether the US made parts are the equals in durability and reliability of the Swiss parts, only time will tell. If you can point me to reports of people with actual high rounds counts that might show that the 556 is actually a durable rifle and it is actually capable of running thousands of rounds between cleanings and lubrication, please do so. What I see are a bunch of reports by civilian shooters who take their rifle to the range and run a couple hundred rounds through their rifle and deem it reliable. That's not the same thing. As of right now, all of these claims by 556 owners about durability and reliability are supposition.
Whether the part "looks" like a Swiss part has ZERO to do with whether it functions, has the durability or the longetivity of the Swiss part. Since Sigarms clearly cut corners on outward fit and finish of this rifle, I don't think you're in the position to say that they didn't cut some corners on the internals as well. You know when that might become apparent? When you've put a few thousand rounds downrange with your 556.
Have you?
Has anyone?
You don't think Sigarms made a mistake by not selling the rifle that you spent a lot of money making your 556 into? I'm quite certain that many more people were looking for YOUR rifle, not the 556 that Sigarms is selling.
As for whether they are really Swiss made parts, then check your 922r parts count. Especially since you've clearly added more Swiss parts.
As long as the register part, in this case I believe that is the upper receiver is made in the US, there is no problem with 922r.
As long as the register part, in this case I believe that is the upper receiver is made in the US, there is no problem with 922r.
Is that your understanding? Because it isn't mine, nor is it the way I read 922r.
You cannot make a US made reciever and then toss as many foreign made parts on as you'd like.
Anyway, I don't believe there is a problem with the 556 because (contrary to the claims of some) it IS manufactured and produced in the US. It is not filled with Swiss-made parts. However, if it were, then anyone adding the Swiss stock, lower, handguards and pistol grip would have to be concerned about compliance.
Is that your understanding? Because it isn't mine, nor is it the way I read 922r.
You cannot make a US made reciever and then toss as many foreign made parts on as you'd like.
Subparagraph 1 of 922r basically exempts US manufactured receivers with foreign parts.
Subparagraph 1 of 922r basically exempts US manufactured receivers with foreign parts.
(r) It shall be unlawful for any person to assemble from imported
parts any semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun which is identical to any
rifle or shotgun prohibited from importation under section 925(d)(3) of
this chapter as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable
to sporting purposes except that this subsection shall not apply to--
(1) the assembly of any such rifle or shotgun for sale or
distribution by a licensed manufacturer to the United States or any
department or agency thereof or to any State or any department,
agency, or political subdivision thereof; or
Here? Where?
If so, that doesn't say "by a licensed manufacturer" it says "by a licensed manufacturer to the United States or any department of agency thereof...." That's exempting the US government from importing what they want (which is how the military and LE manage to get their hands on these restricted weapons), it isn't an exemption that applies to civilian sales.
This is why my agency would be able to import a 551.
"by a licensed manufacturer to the United States or any department of agency thereof...."
Thanks for the correction. Learn something new everyday.
variablebinary
12-16-07, 16:34
For the people who dont pay attention, SIGARMS (Now SIG SAUER) has gone on record and said the 556 is 100% domestic. A lot of people would be breaking federal law if 556 parts were imported
Nothing on the 556 is built by Swissarms or built to Swissarms standards.
At any rate, SIG seems to realize they dropped the ball. Here is a recent quote from SIG's President and CEO, Ron Cohen "It might very well be my fault. When we designed the 556, I thought that the American customer would want to use their AR mags in this rifle, so I enabled the rifle to do so"
That sure as hell sounds like regret to me.
For the people who dont pay attention, SIGARMS (Now SIG SAUER) has gone on record and said the 556 is 100% domestic. A lot of people would be breaking federal law if 556 parts were imported
Nothing on the 556 is built by Swissarms or built to Swissarms standards.
At any rate, SIG seems to realize they dropped the ball. Here is a recent quote from SIG's President and CEO, Ron Cohen "It might very well be my fault. When we designed the 556, I thought that the American customer would want to use their AR mags in this rifle, so I enabled the rifle to do so"
That sure as hell sounds like regret to me.
I'd like to take that CEO position away from him.
It might very well be my fault. When we designed the 556, I thought that the American customer would want to use their AR mags
He kind of missed the point, I'd argue most people did want to use STANAG mags, but they wanted a rifle that was a SIG as well.
If memory serves me, BMW released a 7-series a few years back that most people said looked like crud, they didn't wait several years to fix the ascetic problems. For all I know, the vehicle was mechanically sound and had all the bells and whistles any BMW owner could want. They did did a redesign mid production.
The 556 is a rifle that lacks both visual appeal and features that people want, features that original SIG's and virtually every other competitors rifle offers. SIG's marketing and distribution is lacking, with most large dealers (the only ones that can afford to get SIG rifles) pricing their stuff $200 above MSRP.
Internally the rifle is magnificent, otherwise people like myself would not even bother lamenting about the rifle.
I don't have contempt for the rifle. I've said all along that its probably a good rifle. I have contempt for some of the claims that people have about the rifle.
As for whether they are really Swiss made parts, then check your 922r parts count. Especially since you've clearly added more Swiss parts.
As for whether the US made parts are the equals in durability and reliability of the Swiss parts, only time will tell. If you can point me to reports of people with actual high rounds counts that might show that the 556 is actually a durable rifle and it is actually capable of running thousands of rounds between cleanings and lubrication, please do so. What I see are a bunch of reports by civilian shooters who take their rifle to the range and run a couple hundred rounds through their rifle and deem it reliable. That's not the same thing. As of right now, all of these claims by 556 owners about durability and reliability are supposition.
Whether the part "looks" like a Swiss part has ZERO to do with whether it functions, has the durability or the longetivity of the Swiss part. Since Sigarms clearly cut corners on outward fit and finish of this rifle, I don't think you're in the position to say that they didn't cut some corners on the internals as well. You know when that might become apparent? When you've put a few thousand rounds downrange with your 556.
Have you?
Has anyone?
You don't think Sigarms made a mistake by not selling the rifle that you spent a lot of money making your 556 into? I'm quite certain that many more people were looking for YOUR rifle, not the 556 that Sigarms is selling.
http://www.rethinkip.com/corso.jpg
"NOT SO FAST MY FRIEND...!!!"
First off, of course I think SIG made a hugh mistake with the 556 as it was released to the US public. It's very obvious that I, like most American shooters, wanted a US made 551 or 550. That said, what we got is very substantially equivelant with the exception of some rather hideous cosmetics.
You yourself make a great deal of assumptions concerning the quality of the 556 vs the 551 Swiss guns. Have I run a durability test that establishes it is the same workorse as the Swiss guns -- no. Have you run one that will prove it isn't? Has anyone? That's a double edged sword you whipped out. I'm taking the presumption based on the parts and components I own, comparing castings and QC and have determined in my opinion that the internal parts are equal. What have you been comparing -- web posts? What do you own, shoot, and have the ability to eyeball? You're not an owner, right?
Variablebinary -- Sig Sauer USA can say whatever they want, but we all saw the 100% made in the USA SIG 556 with the Isreali made buttstock, right?!?! Again, I'll ask what Swiss components you have on hand to compare the parts too. If they are made in the US they are imported over as close to complete as possible and then finished here to be considered "domestic," or the Swiss gave SIG Sauer USA the machines and molds to make them. It's really that simple.
SIG Sauer USA says it's 100% domestic and the ATF says ok -- that's fine with me. Everybody is happy with it and I get to add the 551 parts I need without HAVING to SBR it to avoid 922(r) complications. I can turn a blind eye just like Uncle Sam!
http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/584/imgp0432vm9.jpg
The CEO did screw up (and he screwed up by not doing any test marketing or getting feedback from his employees, @ SHOT likely). Tons of people flat out stated they wanted a 550/551 replica rifle, I heard them and was one of them @ the first SHOT the rifle was displayed. The same went for most of the Internet forums, most wanted a US made 550/551 rifle.
The real screw up (by Sig's marketing department and CEO) is that they could have had a huge market, but decided to reduce the # of potential consumers.
The people who have bought the 556 were going to buy it pretty much no matter what, because it was a Sig rifle... They lost a segment that wanted a legacy rifle.
They should have made a 551 that took AR magazines, with iron sights, had an optics rail, and it would have been a winner.
Another thing is that Sig is a premium brand (well, commands a premium price) and the rifle looks like crap... If say, DPMS had come out with that thing for $600, okay... But, $1200 for that ugly POS for a company with a Swiss legacy, marketing failure.
The CEO did screw up (and he screwed up by not doing any test marketing or getting feedback from his employees, @ SHOT likely). Tons of people flat out stated they wanted a 550/551 replica rifle, I heard them and was one of them @ the first SHOT the rifle was displayed. The same went for most of the Internet forums, most wanted a US made 550/551 rifle.
The real screw up (by Sig's marketing department and CEO) is that they could have had a huge market, but decided to reduce the # of potential consumers.
The people who have bought the 556 were going to buy it pretty much no matter what, because it was a Sig rifle... They lost a segment that wanted a legacy rifle.
They should have made a 551 that took AR magazines, with iron sights, had an optics rail, and it would have been a winner.
Another thing is that Sig is a premium brand (well, commands a premium price) and the rifle looks like crap... If say, DPMS had come out with that thing for $600, okay... But, $1200 for that ugly POS for a company with a Swiss legacy, marketing failure.
Truer words have not been spoken.....
You yourself make a great deal of assumptions concerning the quality of the 556 vs the 551 Swiss guns. Have I run a durability test that establishes it is the same workorse as the Swiss guns -- no. Have you run one that will prove it isn't? Has anyone? That's a double edged sword you whipped out. I'm taking the presumption based on the parts and components I own, comparing castings and QC and have determined in my opinion that the internal parts are equal. What have you been comparing -- web posts? What do you own, shoot, and have the ability to eyeball? You're not an owner, right?
A double edged sword? You're not seriously suggesting that in the absence of data that we should just assume that it "just as good," right? Nor are you suggesting that you can tell a quality part just by how it looks, right?
A double edged sword? You're not seriously suggesting that in the absence of data that we should just assume that it "just as good," right? Nor are you suggesting that you can tell a quality part just by how it looks, right?
Does that "absence of data" apply to the XCR also? Just askin... Some people tend the think it is "proven".
Does that "absence of data" apply to the XCR also? Just askin... Some people tend the think it is "proven".
I'm pretty sure that's a topic for another thread....;)
But since you asked, IMHO, I find the XCR a more innovative and interesting rifle than the 556. I wouldn't run around calling an XCR proven though.
I'm pretty sure that's a topic for another thread....;)
But since you asked, IMHO, I find the XCR a more innovative and interesting rifle than the 556. I wouldn't run around calling an XCR proven though.
Just wanted to point out the irony, I already knew the anwser...
BTW seems as a few posters in this thread were banned from TOS for trolling 556 threads.
variablebinary
12-18-07, 19:29
I'm pretty sure that's a topic for another thread....;)
But since you asked, IMHO, I find the XCR a more innovative and interesting rifle than the 556. I wouldn't run around calling an XCR proven though.
I'd like to see that thread made, because as you know, talking about how proven the XCR, Masada, or SCAR is explains why SIG made a substandard product made of cheap parts, poor QC and not what the public wanted.
The G36 melts under full auto fire, and that's why canted rails are a problem on the 556
I know, it makes perfect sense.
your hatred for the 556 is bordering on insanity....lol
I sent SIG an email, maybe they read email, since they obviously don't read internet chat boards, or have telepathic powers...
I'm having some problems ordering a SIG 556.
A) It has no sights.
B) The handguard and buttstock look like crap and feel worse.
C) I've seen the Swiss 55X rifles and they don't have either of those problems.
Kind of a shame, because it takes AR mags and I have plenty of those.
Here is mine all done except for the riveting of the dust cover, which SIG will be doing for me shortly. Who said the SIG 556 is ugly?!?
http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/7187/sig665evolutioncompleteij5.jpg
And with my HK93 just for shits n' giggles!
http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/303/eurogunssy0.jpg
IrishDevil
02-04-08, 14:20
Now, that is a SWEET rifle! I've done some research and haven't found anyone selling the mags, where do you find them? Also, where have you found the other parts for the build?
I got some from Clyde Armory and some from Aurora Industries. Both websites show no inventory.
The rail i had custom made, the other parts were scoured from Germany and Belgium through fellow collectors. Parts are hard to come by and expensive for these. Dang Swiss! LOL!
Hey bud long time no see! Nice SIG 556 you have there! PM me! :cool:
In stock form it is ugly, now when you add the original stuff that's a different story...:D
Finally have the project finished.........
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/2908/5561winterlogowallpapercu2.th.jpg (http://img402.imageshack.us/my.php?image=5561winterlogowallpapercu2.jpg)
Nice! Makes me want to go get one now! :D
I'd be happy to help you if you want to do one Rick. I have all the specs and part sources available. The only other conversion I've seen was the one by MarColMar Firearms and he got the rail specs from me.
I can do complete disassembly of the complete weapon, etc so LMK if you decide to do it. I'm also setup to do the Duracoat for you.
Finally have the project finished.........
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/2908/5561winterlogowallpapercu2.th.jpg (http://img402.imageshack.us/my.php?image=5561winterlogowallpapercu2.jpg)
Wow, you fixed it.
LOL! Pretty much the case, right! Nobody told SIG if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Too bad!
A SIG dealer was talking about how nearly every single call SIG customer service gets on the rifle is related to original (or original looking) parts & accessories, with most being about the sights.
So I called them again asking about original sights and furniture.
So what was there answer? I thnik they should of thought this out more!
I can say that when i was in the midst of trying to get original sight parts and called SIG they said they don't even stock them because the demand was so low. The LE side guy searched for me and was able to turn up nothing. Who knows what the future holds for different production models, but SIG Sauer (SIG USA) is NOT a source for the original parts at this time. Some pieces are available from Europe, but the hard part is getting the rear sight base and rear sight parts.
The sights are the absolute bear of getting a 556. There are only two sights that fit the FSB, one is AR height and fold down (ugh) and the other doesn't have a production rear sight to go with it.
Both options are a bit expensive (yeah I know the term expensive is a relative term in a hobby that comprises everything from romanian .22 training rifles to miniguns).
Here is mine all done except for the riveting of the dust cover, which SIG will be doing for me shortly. Who said the SIG 556 is ugly?!?
Very impressive.
How much time,effort, and money did it take for that project?
About ayear and a half to two years (I bought the rifle when they were first released and didn't get to shoot it for the first time until earlier this month because it was in pieces), most of the effort was in finding parts and gettting the custom pieces made, money -- like I said, pronbably need about $4500 to break even if I sold it.
LOL! Pretty much the case, right! Nobody told SIG if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Too bad!
The number of people who want a 551-looking rifle is infinitesimal compared to the number of folks who walk into a gun shop and buy an M4-looking black rifle based on some styling cues or brand name. Even though the operating system and ergonomics of the 556 are substantially different from a Colt-pattern M4, it had instant recognition factor in the market.
While there are certainly a small number of vocal forumites who want a genuine-looking 556, they clearly haven't been substantial enough to change SIG's direction.
As has been posted here previously, as well, there were some political/regulatory issues which edged the 556 design in favor of an M4 appearance vice a 551 appearance.
The number of people who want a 551-looking rifle is infinitesimal compared to the number of folks who walk into a gun shop and buy an M4-looking black rifle based on some styling cues or brand name. Even though the operating system and ergonomics of the 556 are substantially different from a Colt-pattern M4, it had instant recognition factor in the market.
While there are certainly a small number of vocal forumites who want a genuine-looking 556, they clearly haven't been substantial enough to change SIG's direction.
As has been posted here previously, as well, there were some political/regulatory issues which edged the 556 design in favor of an M4 appearance vice a 551 appearance.
I don't agree at all. SiGARMS (now Sig Sauer) released the 556 in its factory form for two reasons, 1) cost; producing a true 551/550 is substantially more expensive then the $1250 guns being sold here in the US as the 556, 2) brand dilution, SANS did not want a US 551/550 to infringe upon their sales or marketing of their rifles in the world wide market. What you have in the US is a compromise on price by eliminating costly features and allowing the addition of plentiful AR parts. It was a marketing move to be sure, but I bet if there was a pure 551 on the market to sell against a 556 that there is little doubt which would be the bigger seller at the same price point (assuming comp. priced mags were available).
I guess you and I were just at different meetings up at SIG during the development of the rifle. ;)
The price of a genuine Swiss 550-series rifle had more to do with internal corporate silliness, exchange rates, and low demand than production costs. It's instructive to note that a 551 or 552 cost less than a 416, yet the 416 went into immediate use with many units and agencies ... some of whom had either used or rejected the 550-series previously.
I've actually sat around with agency FTU people and discussed why they chose a Colt or HK or RRA or whatever over the 550-series. It wasn't always price. Often, ergonomics, familiarity, and non-standard magazines were as big or bigger factors than dollars.
There aren't enough people who even know what a 551 is in the first place to generate enough demand for the original rifles. Outside of little online cliques, the number of people who want Swiss-style furniture and egos for their rifle is small unto the point of nonexistence.
There is some truth to what you say about ergonics, etc., but you're failing to make an important distinction between LEO/Military users and civilian shooters. You're comparing a design that is 20+ years old and saying that it has less bells and whistles then a new design or a product that has undergone substantial modifications and product improvements. It's more fair to compare a SIG 550/551 type rifle to an HK93 or M16A2 then to a current M4 design.
Back in the day I jumped out of airplanes and cleared rooms with an M4, now I sit my big ass on a concrete bench and shoot paper. That's the role the majority of American sport shooters fill. There are of course agency rifle needs that a SIG 551 might not fill as it's more of an infantry rifle than a SWAT/CQB rifle. The 550/551 is a superb rifle for its intended purpose.
The fact that you say you were in Sig's meetings and still don't get my point just goes to show me how much SIGARMS really missed the boat on this rifle; not to prove to me I'm wrong
You may find of interest that current SIG 552/551 rifles have picatinny rail receivers and SIG makes a folder that attaches to the standard SIG lower (and is going to be sold here on the 556)
http://swissarms2.ath.cx/uploads/pics/startillu_03.jpg
There aren't enough people who even know what a 551 is in the first place to generate enough demand for the original rifles. Outside of little online cliques, the number of people who want Swiss-style furniture and egos for their rifle is small unto the point of nonexistence.
Thats strange, I participate in a bit of competitive shooting and every time the 556 is brought up the typical response is...too bad its not like the real SIG rifle.
You said it yourself, the 550/551 isn't being adopted (in large scale) so what is the point of producing a rifle for domestic civilian sales that is not what the domestic civilian market wants? The 556 isn't exactly a hot seller so the worst thing SIG could probably do is continue the dismal sales.
I disagree with your assessment of the market. People who buy $1500 Colt 6920s know what a 550 is...they also know what a 556 isn't. Maybe a few years ago you could blow off an "Internet Clique" but that probably describes most of SIG's domestic civilian target demographic (which coincidentally is the only group buying the 556, or not buying it depending on how you look at it).
Thats strange, I participate in a bit of competitive shooting and every time the 556 is brought up the typical response is...too bad its not like the real SIG rifle.
And you think competitive shooters are a good random cross-section of the gun buying public? S&W would stop building j-frames if that were the case.
It wouldn't have cost SIG USA a fortune to provide original-ish front/rear sights (at least something up to the level of the AR-15's, or HK's) and original looking US furniture. In fact it might not have cost them anything more to provide that stuff on day one. Heck, if I were SIG, I would have contracted with magpul to make amber tinted clear AR mags and would have finished the rifles a bit more like the 550/551's. Nothing wrong with teasing the unaware with a rifle that looks like a 551 from 20 paces.
Having a receiver mounted picatinny rail and AR mag compatibility greatly enhanced the original design, IMHO. The junk furniture and unavailable sights were poor decisions on SIG's part, about as well received as the original photographs of the riser rail and upside down flash suppressor.
People who run high speed AR's are pretty used to laying down $300 for a functional upgrade like sights, free float handguards, etc. I'd be willing to bet the most common AR's sold are still the very basic old military carry handle versions, and flat top M4 styles.
How many people know about the originals? Not too many. Less know about the 556, but the vast majority of them know about the 550/551 also. I don't think there was ever a large market for a $3,000+ 100% cookie cutter 550/551. That certainly doesn't excuse the ugly, no-sight, no-furniture SIG 556 as-is. I'd imagine a well set up tactical 556 would tip the scales at about $2,500-3,000, just like a well thought out AR.
You'll notice very few people keep it looking factory-original. A lot of owners seem willing to take the risk of importing 551 handguards, rather than stick with factory, that says a lot.
I actually didn't give two thoughts about the 556 until I got to play around with it. Diamond in the rough, no doubt the heart of that thing is pure swiss.
And you think competitive shooters are a good random cross-section of the gun buying public? S&W would stop building j-frames if that were the case.
They're a better cross section than you are giving them credit for. For example, the guys I routinely compete against don't compete with J-Frames but most probably own one. Coincidentally, most know what a 556 is and those that don't wouldn't suddenly buy one because it has a cheap AR15 stock on it.
SIG missed the boat with the 556 and it is painfully obvious.
variablebinary
02-20-08, 03:58
Finally have the project finished.........
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/2908/5561winterlogowallpapercu2.th.jpg (http://img402.imageshack.us/my.php?image=5561winterlogowallpapercu2.jpg)
All that could have been...
Agreed 100% on the lack of sights. I refused to accept a sales sample until they provided iron sights because I was unwilling to embarrass myself trying to show "real deal" guys a rifle with no sights.
I also agree that the furniture that came on the gun was poor. This is what happens when a company tries to be "just different enough" to stand out but does so with no basis for their decision making. At SHOT 2006 I brought in some pretty well known and well respected AR/M4 experts to get their read on the rifle, and compiled all their comments for upper management. Of course, my report was circular filed upon receipt. :p
On the other hand, I have to disagree with the suggestion that the company should have used furniture from Magpul, etc. Part of the rifle's goal was to come in at a street price under $1,000. Even small incremental changes in cost cause substantial increases in price. Would the rifle be better with Magpul furniture? Sure. But the current thought process at SIG is based on price and margins, not "better."
But this is moving afield of the original discussion. I'm the last guy to argue that the 556 came out of the oven perfect. But the direction SIG took to make a M4gery rather than a 551-look-alike made a lot of sense.
Could they have made it a better M4? Absolutely. There's no reason the stock shouldn't have both folded and collapsed right from the start. It's crazy they used standard 550-series safety levers instead of the more ergonomic extended levers (developed, btw, by LAV and incorporated into Swiss-made 550 rifles for various units around the world). Iron sights should not be considered a premium-level addition. Etc., etc.
It's a kick-ass rifle, all be it more of a stripped down barreled action at this point. Honestly they could have made it look very 550/551 from the factory. People who wanted a more tactical AR15-ish SIG would have had to make the same upgrades they're making now.
The street price is really odd, I've seen them going for (or at least sitting) $200-300 above MSRP in gunshops. Their distributing/dealer network messed up to say the least, they basically cut out the two or three small gunshops I frequent. Davidsons doesn't deal with them anymore either.
As a few people have mentioned, SIG's are an older design, they're not a streamlined monolithic, modular, picatinny lego gun. The AR's aren't SCAR type guns either and it takes some money to outfit them, same with the SIG. AK owners usually pine for as much high speed functionality as an flat top AR with a fixed LMT A2 style BUIS offers (I know, I'm one of them).
Would very many have cried foul at the 556 if it was functional, and more or less original looking in the base configuration? Probably not. I'd start wheeling and dealing tomorrow to get a 556 if they made it more than a barreled action for $1,300.
A 100% original SIG would have been cool, but not $3,000+ cool. Likewise, I'm just not too hot on a $1,300 SIG that needs another $1K worth of parts to approximate the functionality you get from a good AR at the 556's purchase price.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.