US Army Testing of the G3 rifle

[davidsog]

It is a blast to shoot but a PITA to clean.

It sure can be a PITA to clean. I noticed a huge difference when shooting quality milsurp ammo such as Hirtenberger or Federal M80 there wasn't much difference between the PTR-91 and an M4.

With the Malaysian or Tula....the rifle gets filthy and is much harder to clean. Having the proper tools such as bore snake, toothbrush, q-tips, shaving brush, and a HK Chamber Brush as well as face brush really helps. Be careful of overcleaning your weapon anyway. More damage is done by frequent improper cleaning than just leaving the weapon dirty, LOL.

Every so often after shooting lots of the cheap, dirtier ammunition, I will give the rifle a thorough cleaning in two stages. The first cleaning knocks off the big chunks. I then bathe the weapon in BreakFree CLP, reassemble, and let it sit in the gun safe for a week or so. A second cleaning is performed that is not only much easier than the first, it leaves the weapon as clean as it ever needs. This time I oil it with LSA.

[agtman]

* * * "...the US Army M-14..." The U.S. adopted the M-14 for political reasons. The FN beat the M-14 in every test except accuracy during the mid 50's trials.

Dudes, focus. The M1 Garand was more accurate than both of those.

The only weapons-system to come along after WW2 that was provably as accurate, or perhaps slightly more accurate than the M1 for its anticipated combat range (a 'jungle max ' of 300-yds), was the M16.

McNamara was a huge proponent of accuracy in the field weapons handed to combat troops.

But he was also a self-promoting corporate 'efficiency expert,' and that trait got a lot of people killed.

[JJ45]

Originally Posted by davidsog

It sure can be a PITA to clean. I noticed a huge difference when shooting quality milsurp ammo such as Hirtenberger or Federal M80 there wasn't much difference between the PTR-91 and an M4.

With the Malaysian or Tula....the rifle gets filthy and is much harder to clean. Having the proper tools such as bore snake, toothbrush, q-tips, shaving brush, and a HK Chamber Brush as well as face brush really helps. Be careful of overcleaning your weapon anyway. More damage is done by frequent improper cleaning than just leaving the weapon dirty, LOL.

Every so often after shooting lots of the cheap, dirtier ammunition, I will give the rifle a thorough cleaning in two stages. The first cleaning knocks off the big chunks. I then bathe the weapon in BreakFree CLP, reassemble, and let it sit in the gun safe for a week or so. A second cleaning is performed that is not only much easier than the first, it leaves the weapon as clean as it ever needs. This time I oil it with LSA.

I have a lot of different tools for cleaning weapons including some I jury rigged myself. I use a flexible shotgun breech cleaning rod and some different sized brushes for cleaning the chamber flutes...Also use an extra long forceps (hemostat?) with patches to clean around the trunnion, and down in the receiver, etc. I strip the bolt every time I clean my PTR, it just seems a bit easier and thorough to clean that way.

I agree that more weapons a worn unnecessarily by over/improper cleaning but this weapon, as well as the AK system, seems to be pretty stout and except for improper technique when scrubbing the bore or using a jointed or steel rod, I think it's safe to scrub her up good. I use Bore Tech Carbon Remover for cleaning and Weapon Shield for lube but there are plenty others just as good.

One thing I found out though, was if you remove the hand guard and clean up the cocking tube inside you have to be very careful not to catch or hook the cocking handle elbow spring (not the long recoil spring) and move it out of whack. I don't do this after every time I shoot her though.

I shoot this PTR a bit and have used all manner of ammo. I have currently been shooting Winchester 7.62X51, 147 FMJBT, Service Grade. It doesn't seem to me to matter which ammo I shoot, she is always a pig but a whole lot of fun to shoot. The roller-lock impulse is a satisfying change of pace from the usual.

I think it was Rudyard Kipling who referred to his Martini-Henry as a "cross-eyed old bitch" Well my PTR can be described as a "filthy old bitch"...but I'll bet Kipling loved his Martini

[davidsog]

Dudes, focus. The M1 Garand was more accurate than both of those.

Love the Garand but this a baited hook, LOL.

I think it was Rudyard Kipling who referred to his Martini-Henry as a "cross-eyed old bitch" Well my PTR can be described as a "filthy old bitch"...but I'll bet Kipling loved his Martini

I can see why the troops I encountered that carried the G3 loved it.

[Destructo6]

Love the Garand but this a baited hook, LOL.

I'll nibble just a bit.

Dudes, focus. The M1 Garand was more accurate than both of those.

In match prepared form, perhaps, but not as-issued. The two examples I have, an arsenal refinished and original have plenty of movement in the front sight block/gas block that precision isn't much of a thought.

[davidsog]

The HK G3 was tested to be within an 8cm at 100 meters or 3 MOA tolerance.

https://youtu.be/XEFALN8D8t0?t=332

[ROCK6]

Originally Posted by davidsog

The G3 is still in service with the Bundeswehr and in still in service with many Armies in the world. It is still being produced for Military Contracts.

The G3 is being liquidated from the German forces reserves; no longer issued, but many are getting sold to some smaller, friendly nations. Ironically, some of the Germans I was working with last year in Afghanistan were issued the new HK417's in 7.62x51. These weren't precision setups, just regular battle rifles (the Turkish military is doing something similar).

ROCK6

[44 AMP]

In combat, an automatic BHO makes absolutely no difference. When it malfunctions or when you have a stoppage instead of an empty weapon, it tends to add complexity and time for most soldiers. It adds complexity in training as well as manufacturing.

I suppose it is as much a difference in design philosophies as anything. I disagree with the statement that it makes no difference in combat. It may not ALWAYS make a difference, it may not make a difference in what you (or I) have personally experienced, but I think stating that it never makes a difference is over reach.

One thing the bolt locking open on an empty magazine does is provide the shooter with both a visible and tactile indication, saying "hey, I'm EMPTY!! FEED ME!"

When the action is locked open and the shooter recognizes that, there is no thinking the gun is loaded and malfunctioning. Is this important? Opinions vary.

Look at the weapons (and their designers) that do, and don't lock open on an empty magazine. Virtually all the Mauser bolt gun and their copies (Springfield, pattern 14 & 17 Enfields, Arisakas, etc) all do. SMLE's don't.

The M1 Garand, the M14, and the M16 do. The M1 Carbine (not designed to be the main combat weapon) doesn't. The German G41 and G43 do. The Soviet SVT and SKS do, the AK, doesn't.

I don't think added complexity of training or manufacture as the result of only an automatic hold open are significant. You're free to disagree.

[Rob228]

610 rounds of fire represents an average year of use for service rifle testing.

Back in my younger days when I had a cool job I would have scoffed at that number, as I would have put that many rounds down on an average day for six weeks straight. Now that I've commissioned and gone full POG...... I get it.

[davidsog]

Virtually all the Mauser bolt gun and their copies (Springfield, pattern 14 & 17 Enfields, Arisakas, etc) all do. SMLE's don't.

Yes and a BHO is a MUST for a clip fed rifle. Not having one is an impediment.

We are not talking clip fed weapons but rather magazine fed so the analogy breaks down.

One thing the bolt locking open on an empty magazine does is provide the shooter with both a visible and tactile indication, saying "hey, I'm EMPTY!! FEED ME!"

Which leads to increased reaction times when...

1. It does not lock

2. You are not empty but have a malfunction.

3. What makes you think soldiers do not adapt knowing their weapon status and require a BHO? Facts are that they do adapt and with the advantage of "He opens the action and removes the source of feed, each time, everytime, all the time." They do not have to deal with points 1 and 2.

In practical terms it cancels out any advantage of a BHO.

[davidsog]

I don't think added complexity of training or manufacture as the result of only an automatic hold open are significant.

BTW...

Much of Europe, both Eastern and Western as well as all of the Commonwealth would disagree.

[AK103K]

Originally Posted by Geezerbiker

I suppose the ruined brass isn't a problem for the military but it is for me...

Tony

Bass isnt an issue if you use a port buffer. I reloaded for my HK91's like anything else. The only isuue I saw, was brass life was about half that of my M1's, M1A's. and FAL's.

Originally Posted by precision_shooter

With plenty of milsurp ammo available, I didn’t care too much about the brass. It’s not a precision rifle, but a battle rifle. I no longer own any other .308 rifles so don’t intend to load .308/7.62x51

It may not be a precision rifle, but it is a shooter, and on par with, the M1A's/M14's.

Originally Posted by agtman

Dudes, focus. The M1 Garand was more accurate than both of those.

Mmmm, possibly, but then again, not really. I had two HK91's, and a number of M1's and M1A's, and they all shot pretty much the same, accuracy wise. I also had 3 FAL's, and they were not as accurate of any of the above, and really didnt shoot "groups", more like vertical strings, especially when they warmed up.


As far as the BHO thing goes, thats more a matter of training than anything else. Yea, they are nice, but if youre accustomed to not having one, they really arent missed. The gun stops running, you reload it. No big deal.

One advantage to not having one is, the gun is ALWAYS loaded after any reload, empty or tactical. The bolt is always cycled after the magazine is swapped. ALWAYS!

BHO's are not infallible either. More than a few times, Ive had the bolts go home on empty with both AR's and M1A's. Generally a cause for confusion and stopping and looking, instead of reloading.

Its also emphasizes why working the bolt after a reload is a good thing, and also not a bad idea with the AR type guns either. Whos to say the bolt didnt go home on empty, and you decide to do a tactical reload right then?

All in all though, its more about knowing what youre shooting and working that gun as its meant to be worked, and not trying to work it like something else. Its not the guns fault if you cant make it work or shoot.

[44 AMP]

What makes you think soldiers do not adapt knowing their weapon status and require a BHO?

What makes you think that I think soldiers require a bolt hold open??

I remarked on different schools of design philosophy. Some guns have them, some don't. The clip fed SMLE doesn't have one, the clip fed Mauser, does.

Just examples of different schools of thought. Some military arms have safeties that can be operated with the shooting hand, in the firing grip. Some have safeties that cannot be operated with the shooting hand in the firing grip.

Is one superior to the other? Opinions vary.

And as to increased reaction time, when you have a malfunction you get increased reaction time from the user, with ANY system. There may be a difference in the degree, but that can also be the fault of the user as well.

Malfunctions are not planned, expected events. When something goes wrong, no matter the system, tis an "off normal" and normal reaction and response times are out the window.

Personally, I favor actions that lock open on an empty magazine. IF I get click instead of bang, and can see (or feel) the action locked open, I know its not a misfire, and a waste of time to work the action to chamber a fresh round. A rifle that doesn't lock open empty doesn't tell me that.

is it important? again, opinions vary.

[davidsog]

The clip fed SMLE doesn't have one

Because it was designed for the single shot tactics of the 1890's and was England's first foray into smokeless powder. Read up on the Boer War and all the issues England had adapting...the SMLE is a product of that rough transition.

To paraphrase one historian...England tried to control the largest empire on earth with the arms of a third world nation.

Personally, I favor actions that lock open on an empty magazine. IF I get click instead of bang, and can see (or feel) the action locked open, I know its not a misfire, and a waste of time to work the action to chamber a fresh round. A rifle that doesn't lock open empty doesn't tell me that.

Yeah you said that the first time and you are entitled to your opinion.

That does not change the fact that most of Europe, both western and eastern as well as all of the Commonwealth disagrees.

One advantage to not having one is, the gun is ALWAYS loaded after any reload, empty or tactical. The bolt is always cycled after the magazine is swapped. ALWAYS!

Right.

It is the third time in this thread these points have been repeated. I am sure any reader gets it.

[davidsog]

I don't think added complexity of training or manufacture as the result of only an automatic hold open are significant.

M4 Stoppage and Malfunctions:

[davidsog]

G3 Malfunctions: