REAL HK 91 Questions

Shot all three and like a little about each one, ergonomics on HK suck IMO as does the no hold open and good luck on changing out a barrel. I love the roller system over the gas and think that is the strong point to the gun. If you strip dont lose the two pins, I think that is part of the small parts stuff, FAL Just has a lever to push and its open, hK has pins to pull out. I like the M14 Saftey best of the three. I also read in a recent issue of weapons for law enforcment about the Seals using the M14 Cause it is only one of two rifles that will fire immediately upon exiting water. Dont know if this is urban legend by the guy writing in the gun rag or has some truth but FWIW that is what it said, didnt mention the other rifle.

From what ive read the FAL reciever at least FN is nearly impossible to wear out, where the HK will get cracked eventually with a lot of FA fire [ yes not a problem for most of us unfortunatly] Not sure where a M14 Reciever fits in but original Hammer Forged would last longer than most people, not sure about the cast, re-weld or machined ones.

As to mags FAL most plentiful of all, same with the guns over 90 countries used them, most successful 308 ever made. Life would have been a lot easier if the Belgiums had let the germans have the FAL [after WWII] like they wanted before adopting the G3 and same with the US. We would have one bad ass FAL system by now with it the primary one [in 762] for all countries outside the soviet bloc. But the US had to be stubborn and the belgiums stingy but then again they're all nice guns.
 
sight comparision

the sights of the fal are more conventional. post up front protected by ears much like the m1 garrand. the rear is very nice, being a peek sight in a blade mounted on a ramp...blade slides up ramp to adjust for distance.

the top cover of the fal is sheet metal and not my first choice for mounting a scope (yes i knoww about the dsa cover, i'm talking about stock stuff) i've seen a picture of a bridge type mount made to attach to the frame

the 91 has an interchangable blade front mounted in a ring for protection. the rear is an inclined flat drum with three holes and a notch (point blank sight). you zero by adjusting the whole assembly and than change distance by rotating the drum (200m,300m,400m) very quick to adjust and use.

scope mounts are a quick release claw type that clamps onto pads built into the reciever. quick on and off w/return to zero
 
ergo comparision

the fal IMO has a better feeling pistol grip with a easily operated thrumb safety lever. the cocking lever/knob is mounted low on the receiver in the same area as the bolt release and mag release (ambi); all operatable with the left hand. the metal foreends can get very hot but have a nice folding bipod.

the 91 has a nice pistol grip and more accessable (bigger) thrumb safety. the mag release (civilian models) are placed like the ar-15 but can't be reached w/hand on grip. the cocking handle and bolt release are one and the same but mounted above the barrel, which makes it accessable for ambi operation. the civilian foreend is better for shooting off bags the military more comfortable to hold...both well shielded from heat. very nice bipod but recesses only on civilian models

the 91 is more easily (pop out two pins) converted to a retractable stock

both guns are designed (sighth height and heel drop)for "european stlye" head placement...head held erect rather than down on the stock for the american stlye cheek weld.

hope this helps
 
I'm talking about basic field stripping under adverse conditions, which real battle conditions invariably are, wet snow falling with semi-frozen fingers, sand blowing so hard you can barely see, in the dark etc. not in the comfort of your gun room or at the range. Drop those pushpins in the snow, or like where I am right now, in the blowing sand and you're SOL.
Fieldstripping the FAL just seems more straightforward and easier than the the HK, dismantling the rollerblock bolt assembly is a little awkward for me at least.

Don't get me wrong, I love the HK and think it's roller bearing system is genius, just think the FAL has the edge, actually the AK47 is the best in the worst conditions.
 
Am I to understand that the FAL has no small parts like firing pins or springs that could get lost during field strip? I thought all guns had such small parts.

The HK's pins at least have holes in the stock to store them. I can strip a 91 with mittens on. Of course, the weapon doesn't need cleaning as often as a gas rifle.

Unless we're talking about some rifle that has no components smaller than a bolt, this is a completely moot point. The HK has two stock pins and will work with only one.
 
9mmepiphany,

What is this "clip on recoil buffer"? where does it clip on?
I guess it´s not one that goes around the recoil sping?
I have heard rumours about device called "the swedish case
buffer".According to what I have heard it really clip on the
ejection port.
 
the "clip" slips over the top of the receiver and follows the contour of the "upper hump" (it extends dowm to just above the scope mount pads)

a hard contoured rubber buffer is attached to the right side of the clip. it has a thin lip which slips over/inside the rear of the ejection port. an extension extends forward and is cantilevered/beveled at approx. 30 degrees.

{awhile back, i remember seeing an aftermarket buffer which attached to the rear of the port without the clip over the receiver. i could never see how it survived the first ejection}

i had the factory model and never had a problem with ejecting cases or interference with the claw mount.
 
9mmepiphany,

Interesting indeed!
It would be an ideal cure for vanishing brass.
Ironically my G3 handles brass very gently
but throws it too far away.How many times You
reload Yours?I had some cases reloaded at least
five or six times before they were lost.Some people say
that buffer is a necessity if You are going to reload
brass fired with g3 rifle.I strongly disagree!!
 
knutkze -

i didn't reload at that time (not much now either because i'm shooting a lot of 7.62/5.45 x 39mm)

i had a friend reloading (i think it was surplus from taiwan) and he never mentioned a problem. he did complain about the fluting impressions on the cases but we never had any split...i'm sure he must have reloaded the same brass at least 4 or 5 times.

IMO the buffer is just to keep the ejection pattern within 5-6 feet. we took the buffer off once just to see how far it would throw brass, VERY IMPRESSIVE, but once we found how far they were dropping the pattern was very consistent.

the hk system is the ultimate justification for shooting berdan primed surplus :D
 
What is this "clip on recoil buffer"? -- knutzke

It is a port buffer not a recoil buffer. The recoil buffer lives in the stock, the port buffer snaps over the top of the receiver.
 
whoops - my error

you're right i was talking about the ejection port "case buffer"

the recoil buffer would go in the buttstock assembly on the recoil spring guide :(
 
The ejection port buffer upped my recovery rate for brass from an iffy 70% to a minimun of 95%. Not to mention it is a whole lot friendlier to be around at a public range....
My record is probably only 5 or 6 reloads off of virgin brass, eventually you can tell it isn't going to hold up. Try to buy my brass at least a couple of hundred pieces at a time so it isn't that big of an issue.
Latest fun load - 125 grain soft tip bullets. What a hoot. Must find more, must find more......
Currently parts and magazines aren't that expensive if you do some shopping around, just something else to accumulate to go with the original bits and pieces.
 
If I were fieldstripping a G3 in really bad conditions, I probably wouldn't remove the bolt head. Even if you were to do so, all you have is a large bolt head, locking piece, firing pin, and spring.

The firing pin retaining pin on a FAL would be easier lost than any of the bolt pieces from the G3. Of course, in really bad conditions I wouldn't remove that piece either.

Both weapons are very well thought out and are excellent. I'd advocate owning both the HK and FAL, as well as a M14 (M1A for us mere mortals). Battle rifles need company.
 
FAL is better-designed ergonomically.

The HK in my experience has been more reliable. I have never jammed a .308 one for any reason in thousands of rounds except with CAVIM ammo. The HK is harder to clean. The barrel extension thingamabob is a real pain in the ass, more inaccesible than an AR15's.

It's important to have both. It's like driving the Porsche one day, the Ferrari the next.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top