It's official: HK416 and 417 on civilian market in late 2009

[ToddG]

In other words get ready for more comedy on gun broker for at least a year until the market is flooding with product, in which case there will be only the HK tax to deal with

FWIW, when I told him what the expected price tag was going to be for civvie SCARs and AUGs and such, he was surprised. I wouldn't expect the MR556 to be outside that price range.

And anyone that says the relocated pin isnt a big deal better not have a 416 upper on a brand X lower in a safe somewhere.

The pin issue is a big deal for folks who think they're entitled to an upper-only solution. No one is bitching that the SCAR needs its own lower, or the Masada/ACR, etc. Would it have been even better if HK (1) could make the upper compatible with standard AR lowers and (2) would sell the uppers as separate items? Better for us, sure. Better for HK, though? Probably not.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to call Glock. I'm suddenly very pissed that I can't drop one of their slides onto my M&P9 ...

[lw8]

IMO, the reason American gun owners in general will shy away from this product is that they will generally feel insulted by a neutered product that is not neutered by law but by choice.

That will be the real issue...the Pin location is not a deal breaker in theory but it will be in practice IMO because American gun owners hate to be treated like second class citizens. They want the real deal...not a watered down version. That is why the SL-8 wasn't so hot and didn't sell in great numbers...people wanted a semi auto G-36, not an SL-8.

The same thing will happen with the MR whatever...people want a real deal 416 upper, not a MR.

YMMV.

[armakraut]

It's to be expected. Since the original ban, HK is pretty notorious for inventing their own regulations that go above and beyond any regulations that exist in real life. This being one of those cases.

At least the US lawyer said to just move the pin location this time and not paint the whole rifle light grey.

[Dave L.]

I wouldn't mind the lower if the safety only took around 45 degrees to disengage.

Todd, do you know if the safety will be a standard AR type?

[ToddG]

Todd, do you know if the safety will be a standard AR type?

Getting out of my lane when we talk about guns that are supposed to fit into your shoulder when you shoot them. As best I recall from SHOT, though, the lower seemed pretty conventional and I'm fairly certain it uses a standard 90-degree selector movement.

FWIW, one of the most common complaints we got at SIG about the 551/552 was that the selector would be in burst mode when someone pushed it to what they assumed (based on AR/M4 experience) was semi. Different strokes for different folks, I suppose.

[ToddG]

They want the real deal...not a watered down version.

Can you explain to me how the MR556 is "watered down" compared to a complete 416? In what way won't the gun function the same?

The only difference I'm aware of is that you can't swap uppers. So the gun works fine, it just won't let you play LEGOs with your other ARs. If you think that is going to have a serious impact on demand, you're wrong. HK will pre-sell every single MR556 they can promise to deliver for years as long as they don't get outlawed.

[Failure2Stop]

My personal grief over the MR556 in relation to the other "better than the AR" options is that though the lower has a shifted pin position causing it to only be compatible with an MR556 upper is that the "new" whole rifles bring something better to the table when compared to a standard AR- be it ambidexterity, control location, and/or control design.

All I see is an AR lower that isn't an AR lower- not that the lower is what anyone cares about- but it is the primary determinimg factor of ergonomics, which to me means more than operating system.

By releasing the rifle as a non-compatible system they have effectively removed themselves from the piston AR market (LMT/LWRC/Ares/POF/PWS/etc), which can be plug and play with existing sytems with a broad support base, and entered into the SCAR/ACR/XCR market, at least as far as I am concerned.

I would have preferred that HK actually made improvements to the ergonomics of it's proprietary lower over the M4, or just released the 416 upper alone. I am sure that they will sell loads of them though, just not to me- and I know that they couldn't care less.

Then again, if someone could show me that the HK lower is superior than a comparitive AR I might change my opinion.

I am a bit more interested in the MR762, as it would make a nice compliment to my existing AR inventory. I know that this sounds contradictory given my above whining about the lack of innovation with the MR556 beyond the op sys- but it will not require any distinctly different manipulations from what I have and intend to keep until I get issued a new system.

[ToddG]

I agree that they're intending to compete in the SCAR/ACR/XCR/SIG556 realm and not against LMT/LWRC/POF which are much more focused on hobbyists (often high-end hobbyists, at least as far as LMT is concerned) than large LE/mil contracts and the follow-on commercial sales.

I can't speak to the reported legal/export issues between HK Germany and HK US. Strictly from a business standpoint, though, it certainly makes more sense to sell complete guns (which cost more and thus bring in more profit dollars) than to sell kits and parts. If HK had more production capacity than market demand, sure, they'd need to figure out how to increase sales. But since market demand is far greater than production capacity, it makes more sense for them to sell their limited supply in the most profitable configuration.

So it really comes down to who is complaining about the pin? It seems to be guys who already have plenty of ARs and want to improve them with a new upper rather than spending the money to get a whole new gun. For them, the MR556 won't be an answer. For someone who is planning to go out and buy a brand new complete rifle, though, it's a definitely an option.

Now, if there is something about the MR556 lower other than its pin hole location that makes it worse than other AR15/M4 lowers, I'm ignorant of it and will gladly shift my opinion once better educated.

[LOKNLOD]

I would have preferred that HK actually made improvements to the ergonomics of it's proprietary lower over the M4, or just released the 416 upper alone. .

Exactly - well said. Making the lower different for the sake of being different only hurts HK in the long run. People accept the SCAR/ACR/XCR/Whatever being non-AR compatible because they all attemp to make a marked improvement on the entire rifle, not just the operating system. Regardless of HK's reasoning, I think the market's view will be that HK is trying to move a pin to justify calling an upgrade a "new rifle platform" or something.

I think the pricing, marketing, and HK label make the MR556 a competitor with the non-M4 wundercarbine market regardless of the lower receiver, but moving the pin prevents it from also competing in the high-end AR market as well.

Now, if there is something about the MR556 lower other than its pin hole location that makes it worse than other AR15/M4 lowers, I'm ignorant of it and will gladly shift my opinion once better educated.

I bite my tongue as I type this, as I want to neither contribute to, nor admit to having fallen for, interweb misinfo -- but is/was there an issue with the lowers not accepting Pmags due to a slightly different taper on their magwell? If I'm completely off base I'll delete this to not contribute to the rumor mill....

[Failure2Stop]

Now, if there is something about the MR556 lower other than its pin hole location that makes it worse than other AR15/M4 lowers, I'm ignorant of it and will gladly shift my opinion once better educated.

Is the MR556 compatible with standard "mil-spec-ish" LPKs?
This is not rhetorical, I really have no idea. Should the LPK not be compatible then I would say that to me this would be the only thing that would make it "worse" than a standard AR lower provided that aftermarket stocks, grips and mags are also compatible.

I think the pricing, marketing, and HK label make the MR556 a competitor with the non-M4 wundercarbine market regardless of the lower receiver, but moving the pin prevents it from also competing in the high-end AR market as well.

This gave me a little sparkle of glee and disappointment all at once.
Just imagine if HK had redesigned the lower to truly be a step forward, but had ALSO retained the pin location. I would have the exact opposite feeling about them than I do right now. A step forward for the platform as a whole, as well as the ability to use it on existing lowers. Damn it.

Such a wonderful opportinity lost. Then again we can't really be surprised, HK has yet to demonstrate an understanding of ergonomics .