The only HK worth owning is the G3/HK91

[fnfalman]

The title sez it all. It was an original piece. The G36 is no more than an AK/FAL wannabe with its gas piston action.

[live-free-r-die]

OK I wont flame, but are you really saying that you wouldnt want an MP5, USP or HK's new M4 with a gas piston?

[Chris G Thomas]

I found the G3 to kick the snot out of the shooter. I gained a ton of respect for the folks who used this gun in military service!

As to the 36, if there is a better .223 out there I am not aware of it. I shot one recently and loved everything about it. It is too bad there are no transferrable 36's out there!

Still, if I could only have one HK. My vote is for an SD!

[TED]

I like ALL the roller delayed blowback guns. Also the P7 series and the HK M4. I do not care for the G36 or the UMP or the newer pistols.

TED

[fnfalman]

Oops, I should have said long guns. I have a USP.

And no, I don't want the peashooters MP5 and HKM4.

[MrMurphy]

The new Rhineland R22 is a 10/22-mag-accepting rifle in .22 LR that looks just like a G-3. :)

[FLIPPER 348]

Originally posted by fnfalman
The title sez it all. It was an original piece. The G36 is no more than an AK/FAL wannabe with its gas piston action.



...............or the SL7 for those of us who want a classy version of the G3

[USMC03Grunt]

Actually, I'm not a big fan of the HK-91. It's accurate enough and reliable as well but that's about it's only saving graces. The forend gets too hot after extended firing (especially the thin version) the charging handle is awkward to use, it lacks a bolt hold open feature, the magazine release as well as the safety lever are too far forward, the trigger is too heavy, the stock is too short for American style shooting positions, the sights need a special tool to be adjusted, the recoil is sharper than other 7.62 NATO battle rifles, and while taking them apart is easy getting the bolt head back on is a cast iron ***** and they WILL be dirty in there believe me! I have both an HK-91, several FALs and several M-14 rifles so I know of what I speak. The biggest thing the HK has going for it is their cool looks but when it comes to what's important, the M-14 will match the HK-91 in the accuracy department any day and both the M-14 and FAL are just as reliable as the HK-91 as well. However, both the FAL and M-14 are way ahead of the HK when it comes to being user friendly.

[FLIPPER 348]

Yea, you are correcct. The G3 is much more like the AK in terms of reliability when compared to the 'other' 7.62X51 battle rifles. Not as pretty or refined but combat ready & uber-relaible under the worst conditions. BTW the short stock is for ease of use w/heavy winter clothing.

[MrMurphy]

That's why the FAL was in service with more countries than the G-3.. same performance, better ergonomics, weighs less (or at least feels like it). Both work, the FAL is just easier to use.

[FLIPPER 348]

The M-16 is also in service with more countries than the G3

[MTMilitiaman]

Except that it is lighter than either, arguably more reliable than the FAL, esp on automatic, is more modular than the FAL. It is actually closer in design to an AR-18. Comparing the G36 to either the G3 or the FAL really isn't fair to either since the former is an assault rifle and the latter two are battle rifles, and thus intended for different purposes. Given a choice of the three for an urban environment, I would choose the G36. Of the two battle rifles, I would rather have the FAL. About the only roller locks I would care to have is an MP5A5 with a Navy trigger group and an MSG90. I'd rather have a G36K than just about anything else that they, or anyone else, makes.

[FLIPPER 348]

I'll take a G3 anytime, urban, long range, whatever

[Backfire]

Back around 1983 I bought a new HK-91 and shot hundreds of my handloads from it over the years. I found it to by very accurate, but also punishing to use...it beat the crap out of me, more than any other firearm I own, and accessories were way overpriced (scope mount - $325 -, sight adjustment tool, etc. H&K wanted $85 for the damn factory bayonet!!)

A few years ago, "Gun Tests" compared the HK 91 with an M-14 and an FAL and strongly preferred the M-14 and also liked the FAL. They rejected the Model 91 due to it's many human design flaws already mentioned in this thread, even though they thought that it was made extremely well.

A member of my gun club who served in the German army with the G-3 told me that the military's expectation was that the troops and their heavy, hard-kicking G-3's would be transported to the battle front in trucks and start blazing away even before disembarking from the vehicles. There was no expectation of having to walk any distance and the troops would most likely be very heavily dressed against freezing weather, so their shoulders would not be pounded into hamburger with the recoil from this beast.

I recently and somewhat reluctantly sold my excellent condition Model 91 and now enjoy shooting the AR and AK types of rifles now.

[MarcDW]

HK has plenty of good rifles:

http://www.mdwguns.com/Beta534%20copy.jpg

Depending what you need it for, a .223 is nicer!

[ilikeglocks]

I'll take a PSG-1 or a MSG-90 just to have it. Now if only I sold my car...........;a ;f

[RenegadeGlocker]

Originally posted by MarcDW


http://www.mdwguns.com/Beta534%20copy.jpg

Depending what you need it for, a .223 is nicer!

I will take this in 7.62x51, AKA G3KA4.

[MarcDW]

Originally posted by RenegadeGlocker
I will take this in 7.62x51, AKA G3KA4.

The G3KA4 has a 12.4 inch barrel, what you are thinking about is a G51.

[RenegadeGlocker]

Originally posted by MarcDW
The G3KA4 has a 12.4 inch barrel, what you are thinking about is a G51.

No, I want the original, G3KA4.

http://www.hkpro.com/g3.htm

Scroll to bottom.

[MarcDW]

The 51 is the orginal, just even shorter. It's somewhere around the 9 inch barrel.