Bundeswehr picks AR as new service rifle

[Aries144]

They found out the "problems" with the G36 were all due to confirmation bias and a bad batch of ammunition. Everyone acknowledged it. Why then is Germany trying to replace the G36?

The current G36 is a better system than anything proposed to replace it. It could use a STANAG mag adapter with an ergonomic mag release and maybe the Bundeswehr wants heavy barrels.

What a political train wreck.

[SteyrAUG]

They found out the "problems" with the G36 were all due to confirmation bias and a bad batch of ammunition. Everyone acknowledged it. Why then is Germany trying to replace the G36?

The current G36 is a better system than anything proposed to replace it. It could use a STANAG mag adapter with an ergonomic mag release and maybe the Bundeswehr wants heavy barrels.

What a political train wreck.

Good luck putting the shit back in that donkey.

The G36 is now tainted and I mean like the M-16 in Vietnam is getting everyone killed kind of way. Doesn't matter what actually happened or how it got fixed, there will be even experts who will embrace this narrative to the core.

But maybe Germany needs a new rifle because the G36 even in it's best form still probably isn't the answer for the next 50 years. Not that the Germans go to war a lot or anything lately. I don't hate the G36 but I don't think it would even make my top 10 "rifles I'd want to take to war" list. The Germans need some M4ish kind of platform.

[Aries144]

Good luck putting the shit back in that donkey.

Ha! Thanks, that gave me a laugh.

Yeah, not to mention leftist members of the German government have it in for HK for some reason.

I don't hate the G36 but I don't think it would even make my top 10 "rifles I'd want to take to war" list. The Germans need some M4ish kind of platform.

Why is that? I think there may be an advantage in some adverse conditions with a steel carrier running on polymer rails. What advantages do you see a German piston operated M4ish platform offering?

[BoringGuy45]

Ha! Thanks, that gave me a laugh.

Yeah, not to mention leftist members of the German government have it in for HK for some reason.



Why is that? I think there may be an advantage in some adverse conditions with a steel carrier running on polymer rails. What advantages do you see a German piston operated M4ish platform offering?

I guess the question is, other than the logistics of switching to a new platform, what advantages does the G36 have over an M4 platform, piston or DI? The M4 has better ergonomics and much better accuracy. With comparable durability and reliability to the G36, I think the ergos are a tipping point.

[SteyrAUG]

Ha! Thanks, that gave me a laugh.

Yeah, not to mention leftist members of the German government have it in for HK for some reason.



Why is that? I think there may be an advantage in some adverse conditions with a steel carrier running on polymer rails. What advantages do you see a German piston operated M4ish platform offering?

The original (still in heavy issue) Hendsolt single and dual optics setup were absolutely atrocious. Later versions with a lower rail still meant red dot was pretty high but now the charging handle became challenging, there really wasn't a good middle ground here because to make the charging handle free and clear you needed an incorporated optic system that really didn't work unless you were gonna jam a trijicon T1 in the back end and even then it's fixed placement and probably too close for most users eye relief.

There is no good way to have a flat top upper, RDS system and BUIS, the rifle existed in concept before those things were standard and they aren't easily incorporated.

For a 5.56 rifle it moves a LOT. I think I have AKs that are most stable when firing rapid doubles or strings.

The folding stock kinda sucks. I've worked with worse but with HK you have certain expectations and cheap and kinda flimsy aren't it.

Worse of all, accuracy is kinda dismal. Not as bad as an AK but closer to AK accuracy than M4 accuracy. The fact that is generally cannot outshoot an M4 or similar piston AR makes what is essentially an AR-18 system in a new candy plastic shell almost pointless.

Factor in additional reliability problems associated with heat and prolonged firing as compared to other first world 5.56 systems (including the HK 33/53) and it really doesn't do anything new except for serve as a poly / folder concept rifle for the rest of the world to copy with improvements. There were lots of revolutionary ideas in the G36 when it first debuted in the late 1990s but as with lots of things that got there first, it was the one that took the next step that actually became the practical example.

Kinda like how HK technically had the first striker fired, high capacity, poly frame 9mm with the VP70 but it was still a long way from being as successful as the Glock.

With the failure of the G11 to go into production and adoption HK had to produce something, and they did, it's just unfortunate that they didn't get the 416 / 417 first. But HK tends to gravitate towards the innovative rather than the practical in many cases.

[Aries144]

Steyr,

I don't doubt any of the points you made, but I think they can almost all be addressed, and with less effort and cost than replacing the G36. I also still think the G36 brings something to the table purely because of its polymer receiver and the unique advantage in low friction that adverse condition testing seems to suggest it has.

I think the optic rail/charging handle issue is fairly simple: 1. put a large enough gap in the rail to expose the charging handle while still allowing enough rail space for a red dot and NV device or 2. simply change the charging handles to a swappable fixed design, always locked in the left or right position.

There currently exist aftermarket replacement trigger packs that improve ergonomics, made from aluminum to skip the cost of a new mold. HK could manage something.

Setting aside the account that was later determined to have involved faulty ammunition, I don't believe that the stories about reliability problems and heat are any worse than our current AR15/M4s. Unless some account of failure can be verifiably attributed to the G36's plastic receiver/trunnion arrangement, the accounts seem to involve far exceeding the weapon's sustained rate of fire, exhibiting no worse result than the same with an AR15. Since it lacks the AR15's gas tube point of failure, this could likely be improved with a heavier barrel profile and better organizational awareness of rifle limitations.

Unless there is a verifiable issue with the polymer receiver/trunnion interface, and all I've seen so far are tests results that appear to debunk it, I'd put all accuracy issues down to the qualities of the cold hammer forged barrels and their thin profile. I strongly suspect HK could answer all accuracy and heat issues by increasing attention to internal barrel symmetry for smaller initial group sizes, making heavier profile barrels for smaller hot barrel group sizes and higher sustained rates of fire, and moving away from cold hammer forging to some process that allows better stress relief to eliminate 'group walking' as the barrels heat up.

ETA: I do seem to remember an additional accuracy problem with the G36 that had something to do with the Hensoldt optic not holding zero or flexing in its plastic mount... Does that ring a bell with anyone?

[BoringGuy45]

Yes, but if there are better options to be found in a M4-style platform, then why adopt it? Replacing the G36 isn't necessarily an indictment that it is unacceptable; it simply means that a better option for long term issue was potentially found.

Germany isn't at war, so if they're going to switch out their rifles, now is the time.

[JoshNC]

Steyr,

I don't doubt any of the points you made, but I think they can almost all be addressed, and with less effort and cost than replacing the G36. I also still think the G36 brings something to the table purely because of its polymer receiver and the unique advantage in low friction that adverse condition testing seems to suggest it has.

I think the optic rail/charging handle issue is fairly simple: 1. put a large enough gap in the rail to expose the charging handle while still allowing enough rail space for a red dot and NV device or 2. simply change the charging handles to a swappable fixed design, always locked in the left or right position.

There currently exist aftermarket replacement trigger packs that improve ergonomics, made from aluminum to skip the cost of a new mold. HK could manage something.

Setting aside the account that was later determined to have involved faulty ammunition, I don't believe that the stories about reliability problems and heat are any worse than our current AR15/M4s. Unless some account of failure can be verifiably attributed to the G36's plastic receiver/trunnion arrangement, the accounts seem to involve far exceeding the weapon's sustained rate of fire, exhibiting no worse result than the same with an AR15. Since it lacks the AR15's gas tube point of failure, this could likely be improved with a heavier barrel profile and better soldier awareness of rifle limitations.

Unless there is a verifiable issue with the polymer receiver/trunnion interface, and all I've seen so far are tests results that appear to debunk it, I'd put all accuracy issues down to the qualities of the cold hammer forged barrels and their thin profile. I strongly suspect HK could answer all accuracy and heat issues by increasing attention to internal barrel symmetry for smaller initial group sizes, making heavier profile barrels for smaller hot barrel group sizes and higher sustained rates of fire, and moving away from cold hammer forging to some process that allows better stress relief to eliminate 'group walking' as the barrels heat up.

Hk developed a PIP g36 that had the optics rails attached to the trunion, thereby obviating any wandering accuracy issues. I had a pdf of this updated rifle at some point, but can’t find it. Frankly, an aluminum receiver g36 with redesigned bolt carrier and cocking handle, better stock, among other things would have been the natural next step. Essentially the 433. I just wish the 433 didn’t have so much odd over styling. It almost looks like an IWI product.

[SteyrAUG]

Setting aside the account that was later determined to have involved faulty ammunition, I don't believe that the stories about reliability problems and heat are any worse than our current AR15/M4s. Unless some account of failure can be verifiably attributed to the G36's plastic receiver/trunnion arrangement, the accounts seem to involve far exceeding the weapon's sustained rate of fire, exhibiting no worse result than the same with an AR15. Since it lacks the AR15's gas tube point of failure, this could likely be improved with a heavier barrel profile and better organizational awareness of rifle limitations.

I have somewhat limited time on G36s but here is what I remember. They seemed to smoke a lot sooner than the M4 / ARs with similar length barrels and once hot lost repeatable accuracy when the AR/M4s did not.

Please remember I'm the resident HK junkie and wanted to love the new poly space rifle.

[Aries144]

I have somewhat limited time on G36s but here is what I remember. They seemed to smoke a lot sooner than the M4 / ARs with similar length barrels and once hot lost repeatable accuracy when the AR/M4s did not.

Please remember I'm the resident HK junkie and wanted to love the new poly space rifle.

Thanks for taking the time to go back and forth with me. I've picked up over the years that you have a great interest in and knowledge of all things HK, which is why I was enthused to engage with you on this subject.

There could certainly be factors I'm not taking into account. The real test is in use, after all. I'm having difficulty parsing out what incidents may or may not be attributable to the polymer receiver. Like that one where they thought it had zero retention issues, but it turned out to be bad ammo. Or another test done by the InRange guy, where he noted that the Hensoldt optic wasn't retaining zero. If you're confident in your memory and evaluation of the various reports, I don't think I have the strength of evidence to argue.

You know, that reminds me of something about the G11 that might be tangentially related. It might have been in an interview with Jim Sullivan, where he expressed his opinion that caseless ammo would never work. The key point was that the lack of a brass case to act as a heat sink resulted in the barrel absorbing all the heat and heating up much faster. It was apparently a much larger factor than the engineers anticipated. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that the lack of a metal receiver to absorb and dissipate heat could have a similar effect on the G36's barrel.

The G36 is certainly cool, but I'm interested in seeing what other rifles can do that an AR15 can't. Not to belabor the point, but one thing I've been lazily gathering evidence on is the low friction benefit of polymer/metal interaction in firearms. Both the ARX100 and the G36 seem to have excellent resistance to stoppages caused by deeply ingressed grit, as seen when rifles are immersed in silty water. That condition is one the AR15 does not tolerate well at all. Another point is that polymer/metal or polymer/polymer helps avoid problems with moving parts like magazine release buttons seizing up when frozen. The polymer seems to contribute much less to friction related failures in both of those circumstances.

I still think at this point that Germany might be better off solving the G36's issues than adopting any of the the proposed replacements. That might be more a reflection of my dislike of the available options than of like for the G36. I really don't think any of those proposed options were optimal. Too heavy, not enough improvement in ergonomics, unknown or at least partially worse adverse condition performance (416), etc.