Jump to content


Photo

G36 - Too Broken To Fix?


  • Please log in to reply
520 replies to this topic

#41 MikeKiloPapa

MikeKiloPapa

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 69 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 April 2015 - 1350 PM

So how many rds did you fire from the G3 before your shoulder called quits?  The G3 was the rifle the 3rd world adopted after FN turned them down or they lacked $.   Pretty much every 7.62x51 "assault rifle" was marginal.  There's no acceptable method to mount decent optics to any of them, save modern iterations of the AR10, which is cheating.       

 

The Winchester(1886 and 1892)  rifles were far better than the Henry they evolved from, albeit maintenance intensive.  But you neglect the M1Garand, which was the world beater of WW2, and developed by a Canuckistani.  S/F....Ken M    

Several hundred ....and not once did i get a sore shoulder as a result. IMHO the "heavy" recoil of the g3 have been greatly exaggerated. The only ones in my unit who had any issues with it were a couple of 100 pound girls who were afraid to shoot anything. 

 

Also, when exactly did the UK, Norway,Sweden, Ireland, Denmark, Germany, Greece,Iceland, Chile, Estonia, Turkey, Portugal, Lithuania and Cyprus etc, become 3rd world countries ? 

And these socalled "marginal" 7,62 assult rifles like the G3 and FAL have been succesfully used across the globe, doing what they were designed to do, for more than 50 years, arguably seing more action than the 5,56.

 

I suppose that your point about scopes is right  by todays standard, but in the 60's and 70's and right up to the 90's the G3 was nontheless used as a very capable DMR featuring a 4x Hensoldt scope( and i know other scopes were available). But i will concede that the claw type scope mount is not exactly an optimum solution compared to picatinny/weaver rails. 


Edited by MikeKiloPapa, 16 April 2015 - 1449 PM.


#42 Blunt Eversmoke

Blunt Eversmoke

    despicable hypocrite with nothing to crow for

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 975 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sellin them conre durgs to kid,s in a school near YOU, sport! I culd go onand on!!
  • Interests:Trollin'. Get'n paided. No bonuses, tho.

Posted 16 April 2015 - 1431 PM

How much of a redesign would it be to somehow shoehorn a rigid metal connection between barrel trunnion block and optics mount into the G36?

#43 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,638 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 16 April 2015 - 1506 PM

Actually the biggest mistake is to have ONE company own the IP to your hardware. Anytime there is only one design authority, you get stagnation.

 

The private sector will chase down many dead ends in a way government cannot and will not.

Witness the plethora of tweaks, fixes, changes, mods, accessories for the AR-15/M-16/M4 platform vs the G36. 

Many of them are crap, most are good, some of them are utterly inspired. 



#44 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,131 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 16 April 2015 - 2235 PM

You would start with a clean sheet. You can recycle the gas tappet but everything else is just garbage.

#45 Blunt Eversmoke

Blunt Eversmoke

    despicable hypocrite with nothing to crow for

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 975 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sellin them conre durgs to kid,s in a school near YOU, sport! I culd go onand on!!
  • Interests:Trollin'. Get'n paided. No bonuses, tho.

Posted 17 April 2015 - 0005 AM

Well, that's harsh. One would expect of engineers of a renowned company such as HK that even when they engineer in such a weak point into their design to engineer in a quick way to fix it, as well (so HK can earn even more money when fixing the problem). But alas...

Edited by Blunt Eversmoke, 17 April 2015 - 0006 AM.


#46 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,131 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 17 April 2015 - 0026 AM

No. Carrier and charging handle arrangement is just wrong. When you throw that out....you might as well throw everything out.



#47 Blunt Eversmoke

Blunt Eversmoke

    despicable hypocrite with nothing to crow for

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 975 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sellin them conre durgs to kid,s in a school near YOU, sport! I culd go onand on!!
  • Interests:Trollin'. Get'n paided. No bonuses, tho.

Posted 17 April 2015 - 0608 AM

Well, then the only possibility is to create a picatinny rail to clamp onto the barrel itself and to fix by screws :P We all know how everyone, from the military to the journalists, would react to that :D


Edited by Blunt Eversmoke, 17 April 2015 - 0609 AM.


#48 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,131 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 17 April 2015 - 0721 AM

Installing P-rails is so very 2008.



#49 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,946 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Westphalia, Germany

Posted 17 April 2015 - 0951 AM

hm, you are right.

For H&K production costs are low definitely. The whole receiver is cast in one step. The guide rails and trunnion are placed in the machine, plastic injected. Done. Compare to the complicated forging and machining for AR-15 (though modern cnc simplified the production here). Or the many steps to bend a G3 receiver into shape. Takes very low time and thus work hours, which are at a premium in Germany. Also can be done by less trained cheaper workers. In conclusion it is inexpensive to make, But also cheap in the materials. Nylon is dirt cheap. And is easily melted and plastically reshaped. Not surprising that the gun suffers point of aim/impact shifts when hot.

But even if that was not the case, the ergonimics leave some things desired. No continous top rail, no automatic bolt hold-open, only a lock back imitating the G3 behaviour, magazine release could he better as well as the stock. Which imho sums up to needing a redesign.


 

Found this report on the HK site:
Sturmgewehr G36: Untersuchung zum Streuungs- und
Treffpunktverhalten der Waffe im heißgeschossenen Zustand gemäß sog. Einsatznahem Beschusszyklus EBZ der Deutschen Bundeswehr
(PDF, 2 MiB)

published 2013/12/16 reporting in Tests with G36 andere other rifles with new "close to combat proof cycle" (Einsatznaher Beschusszyklus)

which shoots the rifles through several magazines to heat up and takes accuracy samples at the beginning middle and end. But have not read the whole thing. And its in German. Of course.

 

 

I took a quick look and nine out of ten G36 put 94-100% of the rounds into the standard NATO target at 300 meters with a hot barrel. Only one failed with 80%. The AKs they tested did worse.



#50 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,812 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, Canada
  • Interests:tanks, old and new AFV's, Landrovers, diving, hovercrafts

Posted 17 April 2015 - 1612 PM

I have only fondled it at Shot, it's certainly light and would be a good gun to carry a lot and shot a bit. Anyone with pictures of the "offending bits"?



#51 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,131 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 17 April 2015 - 2247 PM

It's the trunnion/upper receiver. I wonder what the control AK specs were.

#52 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,639 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests:Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Posted 18 April 2015 - 0711 AM

It's the trunnion/upper receiver. I wonder what the control AK specs were.

'70/80s production Romanian or '70s production Chinese?



#53 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,946 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Westphalia, Germany

Posted 18 April 2015 - 0758 AM


A surprisingly good article from the state TV of all places. In German but Google translate can take care of that. The key bit of information is that there was to be a light machine gun based on the G36, the MG36. But it fell victim to cost cutting and now the assault rifle has to be used as an "Ersatz" light machine gun.

www.tagesschau.de/inland/sturmgewehr-119.html

#54 Daan

Daan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,668 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Where both sea and skies are grey.

Posted 18 April 2015 - 0806 AM

It's the trunnion/upper receiver. I wonder what the control AK specs were.

See page 18 of the linked document. The testers had a single MPi-K (VEB Ernst Thälmann) and a single M70AB2 (Zastava). Both came from HK's study archive.



#55 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,767 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Berlin

Posted 18 April 2015 - 0823 AM

As I suspected, the new joint evaluation report by the Fraunhofer Ernst Mach Institute, WTD 91 and WIWeB announced for yesterday came out only after office hours when everybody in the business had gone home. Haven't seen it yet either, but the press is talking about some bits which obviously have to be treated with caution as they may have been cherry-picked from the reported 372 pages. Allegedly after firing two magazines (how fast?), only 53 percent of rounds hit (which?) target (at what range?); after three magazines it was just one in three. A quoted aim was 90 percent hits at 300 meters which may have been the range here, which the test rifle(s) failed at while another (type of?) rifle met it.

 

Quoted conclusions are that "precise engagement of the enemy" is not possible in "challenging fights", the rifle is only of "limited fitness for deployments", and there is "a considerable capability gap in the sense of survival and sustainance capabilities". The Bundeswehr Plans Office is reported to demand the immediate procurement of appropriate assault rifles and ammunition as an interim solution for current deployments, the G 36 only to be continued in use until an alternative to equip all soldiers has been found. The Federal Office for Equipment, Information Technology and Usage OTOH seems to suggest "regenerating" the G 36 for use beyond 2016, even including acquisition of additional rifles, since introduction of a successor might take up to ten years (this appears not the contradiction to me it's made out to be by the typically clueless media).

 

The question of who's fault it all is remains unresolved for now; yesterday it was reported that the MoD is investigating the possibilities of damage compensation from HK itself. Today another of the ubiquituous "internal reports" was cited in which the procurement office of the time stated in 2006 that HK were putting official proof marks on their guns by themselves; apparently the local proving authority was simply trusting the company with that, but the practice was ceased after the complaint. Of course the opposition in the Bundestag is already threatening another investigative panel and would like to nail Defense Minister von der Leyen's head to a wall next to those of several of her precessors; the claim is she should already have known things were wrong when she stated the opposite last May or so.

 

Meanwhile the blue-ribbon committee established by the minister to investigate any possible instances where soldiers might have been endangered by malfunctioning rifles is to start its work on 1 June. A separate group headed by current Commerzbank board chairman Klaus-Peter Müller (head of the German Corporate Governance Codex government commission until 2013) is to shine some light on the proceedings surrounding procurement, evaluation and use of the G 36.

 

ETA: Found the executive summary online. 25 rifles of variants G 36 A0, 1, 2, 3 and K A4 were selected from 304 and tested against "a range of comparison weapons of different makes" with seven different ammunition sorts including service DM11. All long-barrel G 36s met the targets in cold condition with standard ammunition, but accuracy subsequently dropped continuously and significantly; even the latest A3 variant didn't fare better. The K A4 met none of the requirements at all. Four factors were determined to influence results:

 

- Ammunition; accuracy differed by over 35 percent with some sorts.

 

- System temperature; G 36 becomes hotter than all comparison rifles and loses accuracy even at low shot counts.

 

- Type and variant; accuracy differed over 50 percent with same ammunition. One of the comparison weapons met all requirements, showing that they could be reached.

 

- Individual weapon; G 36 showed up to 30 percent difference in accuracy, regardless of time of production.

 

Even changes in ambient temperature affected accuracy considerably. Changes were most pronounced at a change from 15 to 45 degrees Celsius regardless of ammunition, but the G 36 did not meet requirements across the complete temperature band while comparison rifles did. Changes in humidity led to similar restrictions, just more slowly. Asymmetric warming through sunshine led to a reversible warping of the receiver and thus the barrel centerline. All in all, pretty damning.


Edited by BansheeOne, 18 April 2015 - 1150 AM.


#56 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 9,586 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hertfordshire, England

Posted 18 April 2015 - 1135 AM

I wonder if the LA85A2 was one of the comparison rifles :D



#57 CaptLuke

CaptLuke

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,095 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco, CA, USA

Posted 18 April 2015 - 1140 AM

 

But yes, lack of real combat experience kept the G3 in service. 

 

I thought the Portuguese had considerable combat experience with the G3, including being able to compare it head to head with both the FAL and the AR10.

 

I haven't seen anything saying the G-3 came up short compared to those weapons, though my knowledge of those colonial wars is extremely limited.  



#58 Archie Pellagio

Archie Pellagio

    Now flouridating a water source near YOU!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,224 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Montpelier, Vermont
  • Interests:Vermonter global conquest rampages!

Posted 18 April 2015 - 1328 PM



 



 

But yes, lack of real combat experience kept the G3 in service. 

 

I thought the Portuguese had considerable combat experience with the G3, including being able to compare it head to head with both the FAL and the AR10.

 

And the Rhodesians.

Clearly all Euro surrender monkeys who dropped them and ran at the first shot... :rolleyes:

 

Other nations that spring to mind are the Iranians, Burmese, Pakistani's and Turks; real peaceful garden spots the lot of them... <_<

 

I don't think the, err, economical quality of manufacture of the G3 is really up for debate (HK fanboys aside), especially in comparison with something like a FAL, but the idea they were never in combat?

Yeah, nah...


Edited by Archie Pellagio, 18 April 2015 - 1337 PM.


#59 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,131 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 18 April 2015 - 1359 PM

I wonder what the round count on those AKs are. Like the G36 they are press fit into the trunnion. They are generally regarded as decent AKs though I hope HK gets some Izhmash and Arsenal AKs since these are the benchmark.
The G36 becomes hotter because it cannot distribute the heat to receiver or handguard.
I imagine the K has an even worse time because the shorter barrel has even less thermal mass.
Is there a better material than Nylon 66? Yes. DuPont makes it and it is currently used to produce extra thin rail covers.
Can the low weight of polymer be matched with alloys? Yes.
Again..I urge the Minister to consider the TN technical assistance offer. US manufacturers do not proof their guns. They inspect using ultrasound. Proofing takes 20-25% life off an AR bolt.

Incidentally the Paks, Iranians and Tatmadaw all prefer anything else to the G3. Usually AKs but in Myanmar...M16s.

#60 JW Collins

JW Collins

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,208 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Connecticut

Posted 18 April 2015 - 1410 PM

Speaking of "economical" quality of manufacture how likely is it that H&K cut corners with some of the G36 lots for domestic use? If the problems are this bad with all of them I don't see how any nation would have bought any for military use despite however skilled the H&K sales team is.

They were definitely quite confident about trying to selling it for many years, at least until the HK416 became their focus. Despite the woes of US military procurement I don't see how something *that* bad could have survived for as long as it did in the OICW program (and later the standalone XM8).

As far as I know the XM8 didn't have any major flaws, at the end of the day it just didn't offer anything that upgrades to the M4/M16 family couldn't do at a lower price tag.

Regarding the G3, despite its somewhat crude manufacture the basic design was turned into everything from SMGs to DMRs with a lot of success. In some regards I think it was the West's AK/AKM.

Edited by JW Collins, 18 April 2015 - 1413 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users