Does anyone have any knowledge as to the quality and reliability of these rifles? I've thought about my .308 rifle under $500 post from a week or two ago and decided that if I want something in that caliber, I may as well spend the extra money and get something with quality. My local gun store has one for $1100. I don't really like the green color, but looks are a distant second to reliability in my eyes. Does anyone know what extra magazines for this gun cost? I'd appreciate anything anyone could tell me. I visited Springfield Armory's website, but the SAR-8 link did not work. Thanks for any replies.
SAR-8
- Thread starter GI Joe
- Start date
Destructo6
New member
Were you looking at the alumimium, stamped steel, or cast steel receiver?
The aluminium ones are ugly, but they seem to fuction okay.
The Hesse stamped receivers have, with few exceptions, some major and minor problems.
The cast steel receivers are pretty good, but the sight assemblies are often cocked to one side.
The new CETME's (similar to HK-91), using the cast stainless receiver, appear to be very good shooters. These often have the cocked sight assembly problem, so make sure you have an inspection period or a way to get it rectified. You might insist on having it bore sighted before you buy.
The aluminium ones are ugly, but they seem to fuction okay.
The Hesse stamped receivers have, with few exceptions, some major and minor problems.
The cast steel receivers are pretty good, but the sight assemblies are often cocked to one side.
The new CETME's (similar to HK-91), using the cast stainless receiver, appear to be very good shooters. These often have the cocked sight assembly problem, so make sure you have an inspection period or a way to get it rectified. You might insist on having it bore sighted before you buy.
Destructo6,
You mentioned that the Hesse recievers have some problems. Would you care to go into more detail about what those problems are? I recently bought an H&K G3 rifle that was rebuilt on a Hesse reciever, and it has some feeding problems. I thought it was a problem with the magazine, but perhaps you could shed some more light on the subject? Thanks.
ZoomieG
You mentioned that the Hesse recievers have some problems. Would you care to go into more detail about what those problems are? I recently bought an H&K G3 rifle that was rebuilt on a Hesse reciever, and it has some feeding problems. I thought it was a problem with the magazine, but perhaps you could shed some more light on the subject? Thanks.
ZoomieG
George Hill
Staff Alumnus
Whatever you do - dont spend your own money on a Hesse.
Dont let a friend spend his money on one either.
Hesse DOES have one interesting rifle...
Its an AR chambered for .50AE. Other than that - don't bother.
Dont let a friend spend his money on one either.
Hesse DOES have one interesting rifle...
Its an AR chambered for .50AE. Other than that - don't bother.
Destructo6
New member
Hesse rifles often don't locate the gripframe properly on the receiver ledge. The ejector doesn't come up far enough to hit the back of the cartridge case, failing to eject it. The fixes I've heard are building up weld on the ejector's tip and trimming to fit. One symptom of this is the gripframe being tight with the hammer down on an empty chamber and being loose when the hammer is cocked and the bolt closed.
I've seen a couple of Hesse G3 receivers, in the white, and a few complete rifles. The bare receivers had horrible looking welds, misaligned push-pin guides, misaligned gripframe ledge, and generally looked like an early prototype, not a finished product. The complete rifle invariably had unreasonably tight magazine wells, one requiring both hands to remove the mag. Some had canted sights and sticky/binding actions.
I've seen a couple of Hesse G3 receivers, in the white, and a few complete rifles. The bare receivers had horrible looking welds, misaligned push-pin guides, misaligned gripframe ledge, and generally looked like an early prototype, not a finished product. The complete rifle invariably had unreasonably tight magazine wells, one requiring both hands to remove the mag. Some had canted sights and sticky/binding actions.
ohen cepel
New member
I have an older pre-ban SAR-8. Love it.
The new one will take HK-91 mags (like the pre bans) and should take some of the HK accessories that aren't dependent on the receiver. It should come with FMP (HK type)mags.
The local shop here also has one and it seems to be good quality. Much better than many of the parts guns I've seen built with old HK parts. Also, it has the Springfield name on it so they should stand behind it.
Theirs is also priced around 1K.
It isn't cheap but today I think it is a good option. Also, it's new in the box.
Good Luck
------------------
He who dares wins.
NRA Life Memeber
The new one will take HK-91 mags (like the pre bans) and should take some of the HK accessories that aren't dependent on the receiver. It should come with FMP (HK type)mags.
The local shop here also has one and it seems to be good quality. Much better than many of the parts guns I've seen built with old HK parts. Also, it has the Springfield name on it so they should stand behind it.
Theirs is also priced around 1K.
It isn't cheap but today I think it is a good option. Also, it's new in the box.
Good Luck
------------------
He who dares wins.
NRA Life Memeber
Destructo6
New member
No, the CETME will accept either CETME or HK-91/G3 magazines only.
The G3 and CETME use a straight push-in system to secure the magazine in the well. It's similar to a M-16 in that the mag's latch point is a cutout on the left side of the magazine.
The FAL uses and entirely different system of securing the magazine in the well. It's similar to the M-14 and AK in that it hooks into the front of the magwell, then swing up and back into the latch. The mag's latch point is at the back-right of the magazine.
Here's an image of a 20-round magazine that has one side that goes into a FAL and the other goes into a G3. It's a weird setup that was proposed when Germany was trasitioning from the FAL (G1) to the HK (G3), but probably didn't get out of the prototype stage.
The G3 and CETME use a straight push-in system to secure the magazine in the well. It's similar to a M-16 in that the mag's latch point is a cutout on the left side of the magazine.
The FAL uses and entirely different system of securing the magazine in the well. It's similar to the M-14 and AK in that it hooks into the front of the magwell, then swing up and back into the latch. The mag's latch point is at the back-right of the magazine.
Here's an image of a 20-round magazine that has one side that goes into a FAL and the other goes into a G3. It's a weird setup that was proposed when Germany was trasitioning from the FAL (G1) to the HK (G3), but probably didn't get out of the prototype stage.
Destructo6
New member
GI Joe: No. The SAR-8 will not accept FAL magazines.
The SAR-8 will accept any magazine designed to fit and function in a G3/HK-91/CETME.
I'd love to have one of those magazines, just to shock people. I wonder, if you loaded 10 rounds into each side, could you shoot a FAL and a G3 from the same magazine at the same time?
[This message has been edited by Destructo6 (edited August 27, 2000).]
The SAR-8 will accept any magazine designed to fit and function in a G3/HK-91/CETME.
I'd love to have one of those magazines, just to shock people. I wonder, if you loaded 10 rounds into each side, could you shoot a FAL and a G3 from the same magazine at the same time?
[This message has been edited by Destructo6 (edited August 27, 2000).]