• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Best Assault Rifle

Joshua C, are you just sounding like an opinionated 14 year old because you are? or are you just a biased weapon owner?

On the 416/417 If you read up on the changes, the only thing kept was the trigger mechanism(and perhaps one other part). And for your information, the AK-47 is a very unreliable weapon that nobody uses, the AK - 47M is the proper and correct name for the well known AK, the original variants of the AK were jam happy peices of ****.

In terms of an assault rifle, a few things matter, reliablity/accuracy/stopping power. The AK has two of these to about 300 Yards, the H&K has all three to a much further distance (depending on your weapon sights, be they open/aimpoint/ACOG). It depends what you need, if you only need a weapon out to 100Yards max, both will do and its up to opinionated twats to yell out which one is best, if its a matter of range, then H&K wins.

EDIT: Thought it necessary to throw in that the H&K inst necessary my most supported weapon here, there are many AR's that can engage up to 700-1000 Yards. Just making the point that the AK series suffers from the lack of very effective medium range accuracy.

When I say AK47 I mean the whole lot of them as just a general term. AK47,AK74,AKM47, AKM74 ect ect..

I've seen how the 416 works and news flash it's not revolutionary. It's a AR with a piston.. nothing more nothing less. Everything "good" about it is attributed to using a piston rather than direct impingement. I'd be willing to bet you put up a good quality piston AR up against the 416 and they'd match it easily.
 
Upvote 0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6BpI3xD6h0&feature=related

Good show of 7,62x39 vs 5.56x45 (or the soviet 5,45x39)

http://www.65grendel.com/gallery/65G_Drop_16.gif
http://www.loadammo.com/Topics/February02.htm

7,62 has worse ballistic coeffiecient hence loosing energy much faster and haveing even worse trajectory. Even at close range it shoot "over the target" by almost double that of the .223. Which could matter if Im trying to hit prone target behind a tree, only showing it's head.
Granted at close range 7,62 might penetrate that tree, which explains why anyone bothers to use that thing that and the fact that during it appearance it was easy to switch some of the equipment making full scale 7,62 rifle round to make the intermidiate cartriage.

RK95 basically made the barrel more heavy to compensate the "wobling" of the long stroke gaspiston, used in ak-type guns. Hence Im sure that coupled whit 7,62mm ammo, it is an accurate gun...on rifle range.
On field, from a less "perfect" fireing position whit it rear sight on the mechanism cover which causes it to sift, I'm not so sure.

That and its heavier than it's predesessors.


G36 is certainly a solid piece of engineering. Ampidexterous controls and "optics". 416 providing an option for those used to the grip of m4 and standard rails for mounting all shorts of gadgets you might allrady have in inventory. Short stroke gaspiston get's away from the fouling of direct impigment system of ar15 series is plagued whit. As well as the inaccuracy of long stroke mechanism.


Gun I have in sights is actually Tavor21. Being actually lighter than G36 dispite being bullpup offering longer barrel lenght whit same external dimensions sound like a good bargain.
Yes, many find magazine layout difficult, but that can be helped whit simple army drills low muzzle velocity due to too short barrels can not.

Given that different optical sights are most important developement of last decades when it comes to small arms..yuo really want to take advange of the increased pratical engagement range offered by them.
And in Tavor the are integradted into the barrel helping to stop them to get disaligned.

So, on paper Tavor get's my vote, both G36 and it are of comparable reliability as far as I have heard so only thing in question remains is the question of production costs. Since they pulled the blug on xm8.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
That video sucks.. At 200 yards I'd expect better accuracy from both rifles but then again I don't smack the living hell out of the trigger like the "shooters" do in this video.


The 416 doesn't need anything extra to be good because it's based on a good platform that performs even better with their gas-piston upgrade. (Yes you can get other gas-piston kits as well)

We're talking military use, unlike couch commandos such as yourself we don't exactly have time to be gentle. So ideally this would probably be a better example of it's intended purpose.

Does it make the video less 'legit' sure. This thread is retarded.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
We're talking military use, unlike couch commandos such as yourself we don't exactly have time to be gentle. So ideally this would probably be a better example of it's intended purpose.

Does it make the video less 'legit' sure. This thread is retarded.

Anyone who is anyone who has learned how to shoot a weapon properly and accuracy wouldn't smack the trigger like the 2 jackasses in the video did. I'd expect much more out of both of those rifles at that range with a decent shooter.
 
Upvote 0
Its discovery channel AKA america bias forever channel, ever watched them have a 'best tank' or 'best rifle' "documenterary", utter crap. There is even one clip where one of their "ex seals" (probably expelled for being retarded) picked up a .223 "this is the round the m16 fires ", next a .308 " this is the round the ak fires ", then a .50 cal "this is the round a .50 barett fires ". Most people probably caught the part halfway through where he said a 7.62mm Nato fits into an AK... (That was the final nail in the coffin of my never listening to discovery again)
 
Upvote 0
I wonder why nearly all the tier one units (who pretty much have freedom of choice) wanted the 416 and why whenever nowadays a country that isn't third world looks for a new assault rifle, they look at the 416 and usually take it. Oh right they don't know **** and are all about the HK kool aid. Thank god they didn't ask the couch commandos or else they would end up with super cool but obsolete AKMs.
 
Upvote 0
Sturmgewher 44 all the time man, it's the first and the best ^^, no STG44 no assault rifles would have been here today.

Wrong, both the Italians and the Russians where experimenting with Assault rifles circa 1910-1920, they where not adopted for military service due to conservative thinking at the time, but if anyone deserves credit for inventing the Assault rifle, it should be the first to do so, not the first to have their model adopted for service.

If anything the first true Assault rifle is at Avtomat Fedorova prototype of.. i forget the date (he made a whole bunch of prototypes in thease years), but it was sometime between 1910 and 1916, it was select fire, used a shortened rifle cartridge and fed from a detatchable magazine, it was by all definitions an Assault Rifle.

The prototype was just not adopted, instead the Red Army chose another Prototype that fired the full size Arisaka round.

the AK-47M is the proper and correct name for the well known AK

Wrong, it's called the AKM (Автомат Калашникова Модернизированный - Kalashnikov's Assaultrifle Modernized), or sometimes the AK-59 (Автомат Калашникова образца 1959 года - Kalashnikov's Assaultrifle Sample of 1959), only the origional AK-47 is called anything with "47" because only the origional AK-47 was designed in the year 1947, all later models where obviously designed (or re-designed) at later dates, and are named after thouse later dates.

And yes, i know that American gun dealers call them dumb things like "Stamped AK-47" and "AK-47M", but that doesen't mean it is correct, it is a Russian weapon and should be called what the Russians named it, AKM.

-----

As for the H&K-416, it's not all that, seriously, it is by all means just an M4 with a G-36 style gas piston, the only big improvement here is that it nolonger blasts dirty exhaust gasses directly into the gun, which means it wont foul itself like the M16/M4 designs do (IE: under ideal conditions it will keep shooting whereas the M16/M4 wont), but the Reciver still has all the other problems that the M16/M4 has allways suffered from, namely that the tollerences between moving parts leaves no room for error, if any sand/dirt gets in there it will jam just like an M4, and thus, it must be kept just as squeaky clean and well oiled as a normal M4, at all times.
It is an improvement, definately, but it is no revolution, and still requires running maintenance, and it will still jam if it gets dirt in the gears.

There are much more impressive guns, like the SIG-550, FN-FNC, Giat FaMas G2 and H&K G-36 (just to name a few), that will match the H&K-416's accuracy, and leave it in the dust when it comes to reliabillity, and needing less upkeep.
 
Upvote 0
Except our French friends in Afghanistan complained how much the Famas jams, because it's dirty after two magazines and collects sand like no other. And the HK416 scored well ahead of the M4 in the and Army's own extreme dust test. Comparable to the SCAR, which does not have any M16 connection. And if it wasn't for one bad example in the sample they used, it would've been second only to the XM8 in that test.

Oh and calling the Fedorov an assault rifle is opinion not fact. It fires a round much more powerful than any assault rifle round past or present. The 6.5 Arisaka is a full fledged rifle round, even if it's comparably a small one.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Except our French friends in Afghanistan complained how much the Famas jams, because it's dirty after two magazines and collects sand like no other. And the HK416 scored well ahead of the M4 in the and Army's own extreme dust test. Comparable to the SCAR, which does not have any M16 connection. And if it wasn't for one bad example in the sample they used, it would've been second only to the XM8 in that test.

Ohh please, try again with the SIG-550 and the G-36, the FaMas is admittedly the weakest link in my lineup (which is obviously why you attacked it and neglected mentioning the others), but my point stands, show me how special the 416 is compared to the SIG-550, a gun that has been around for quite a while now..

Oh and calling the Fedorov an assault rifle is opinion not fact. It fires a round much more powerful than any assault rifle round past or present. The 6.5 Arisaka is a full fledged rifle round, even if it's comparably a small one.

Read please, i specified a particular prototype of the Fedorova, not the final production model, which i carefully pointed out was not an AR, and not the gun i was talking about.

In Prototype stages, the Fedorova was tested with several different calibers, one of which was an experimental short rifle round made by Fedorov himself, quite a bit shorter than the Arisaka round, and that prototype meets all definitions of an AR.
 
Upvote 0
As a former user of the G36 i will just say it has its share of problems. Given a little familiarization I could see myself taking an HK416 over it and I am pretty confident the majority of active G36 users, of whom i know quite a few, would agree. Sig i have no idea. I bet you have years of experience with all of them right?

Concerning the Fedorov: the prototype cartridge was even stronger at over 3000 joules (compared to 2500 of the Arisaka), or in other words 7.62 NATO level. So there.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
People who say the AK-47 is the best assault weapon ever do not know anything other than what movies and poorly informed documentaries tell them. The AK-47 is a well built reliable rifle, Mikhail Kalashnikov was a genius and it might be considered the best weapon for a large country like Russia because production is easy and training is minimum. But the AK-47 is far from the best infantry assault weapon.

It is also hard to determine what past or current assault weapon is the "best". Currently all have some strengths and some weaknesses and a lot of people have personal preferences.

I've fired both a AK-47 and a full auto M16. By personal preference and after using both I think the M16 is a better weapon. Especially now with the Stoner design at its pinnacle. The 5.56x45 round although small will leave one hell of a nasty mark.
 
Upvote 0
As for the H&K-416, it's not all that, seriously, it is by all means just an M4 with a G-36 style gas piston, the only big improvement here is that it nolonger blasts dirty exhaust gasses directly into the gun, which means it wont foul itself like the M16/M4 designs do (IE: under ideal conditions it will keep shooting whereas the M16/M4 wont), but the Reciver still has all the other problems that the M16/M4 has allways suffered from, namely that the tollerences between moving parts leaves no room for error, if any sand/dirt gets in there it will jam just like an M4, and thus, it must be kept just as squeaky clean and well oiled as a normal M4, at all times.
It is an improvement, definately, but it is no revolution, and still requires running maintenance, and it will still jam if it gets dirt in the gears.

There are much more impressive guns, like the SIG-550, FN-FNC, Giat FaMas G2 and H&K G-36 (just to name a few), that will match the H&K-416's accuracy, and leave it in the dust when it comes to reliabillity, and needing less upkeep.

Thank you.
 
Upvote 0