BREAKING NEWS: G36 Cannot Hold Accuracy, Bundeswehr Report Confirms

funktioniert-jetzt-auch

German news media have been on fire over the past couple of days over a report that is expected to be released to the public soon. It is apparent that the audit report of the G36 rifle, conducted by the Ernst Mach Institute and Bundeswehr’s Technical Center for Weapons and Ammunition, is especially damning. A report summary from faz.net is replicated below, first in machine-translated English, then in native German:

After months of testing a group of experts appointed by the Ministry of Defence has the G36 assault rifle now officially certifies lack of accuracy.Both at high ambient temperatures and at a heating of the gun by duration Fires set the experts precision problems fixed. “The reason for the declining impact probability is not one of the components, such as ammunition or weapon, but the whole system,” says the report.

At the 372-page report of the Federal Court, the Ernst-Mach-Institute of the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft, a Technical Center of the Army and the Bundeswehr Research Institute for Plant and supplies have contributed. Set in the following problems:

  • Heating with continuous fire:By design, the G36 will significantly hotter than fire at continuous comparison weapons. “This leads to a decrease in the hit probability when G36 occurs even at low numbers of shots with all the studied types of ammunition and -losen.”

  • Outside temperatures:When changing the outside temperatures hit probability Decrease “in partially significant”. The precision problems are most pronounced in the range 15 to 45 degrees Celsius.

  • Humidity:“The change between dry and humid environment leads the G36 to such restrictions as a change in the ambient temperature.” The problem, however, presented a significantly slower.

  • Sunlight:For side solar radiation forgave the weapon housing and shift on the meeting point of the rifle.

  • Ammunition:The accuracy differs between the munitions from, although in some cases by 35 percentage points. The precision problem admit it but even with the best cartridges.”

Nach monatelanger Prüfung hat eine vom Verteidigungsministerium eingesetzte Expertengruppe dem Sturmgewehr G36 nun auch offiziell mangelnde Treffsicherheit bescheinigt. Sowohl bei hohen Außentemperaturen als auch bei einer Erhitzung der Waffe durch Dauerfeuer stellten die Fachleute Präzisionsprobleme fest. „Ursächlich für die sinkende Treffwahrscheinlichkeit ist nicht eine der Komponenten, z.B. Munition oder Waffe, sondern das Gesamtsystem“, heißt es in dem Bericht.

An dem 372 Seiten starken Gutachten haben der Bundesrechnungshof, das Ernst-Mach-Institut der Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft, eine Wehrtechnische Dienststelle der Bundeswehr und das Wehrwissenschaftliche Institut für Werks- und Betriebsstoffe mitgearbeitet. Sie stellen darin folgende Probleme fest:

  • Erhitzung bei Dauerfeuer: Konstruktionsbedingt werde das G36 bei Dauerfeuer deutlich heißer als Vergleichswaffen. „Dies führt dazu, dass eine Abnahme der Treffwahrscheinlichkeit beim G36 bereits bei geringen Schusszahlen mit allen untersuchten Munitionssorten und -losen auftritt.“

  • Außentemperaturen: Bei einer Veränderung der Außentemperaturen verringere sich die Treffwahrscheinlichkeit „in teilweise erheblichem Umfang“. Die Präzisionsprobleme seien im Bereich 15 bis 45 Grad Celsius am stärksten ausgeprägt.

  • Feuchtigkeit:„Der Wechsel zwischen trockener und feuchter Umgebung führt beim G36 zu vergleichbaren Einschränkungen wie eine Änderung der Umgebungstemperatur.“ Die Probleme stellten sich allerdings deutlich langsamer ein.

  • Sonneneinstrahlung: Bei seitlicher Sonneneinstrahlung verziehe sich das Waffengehäuse und verlagere sich der Treffpunkt des Gewehrs.

  • Munition:Die Treffgenauigkeit unterscheide sich zwischen den Munitionen zwar teilweise um 35 Prozentpunkte ab. Das Präzisionsproblem gebe es aber auch mit den besten Patronen.”

Earlier this week, we covered the weaknesses of the G36 rifle that have sparked the recent controversy. However, even knowing what I had about the rifle’s construction, I did not fully realize the problems were as bad as they appear to be.

The audit reportedly concluded that G36 rifle receivers were being made in whole or in part from polyethylene plastic (a very common, very cheap plastic of the kind used to make milk jugs and bags), rather than the polyamide plastic specified:

According to the Court of Auditors’ report and the Bundeswehr Research Institute of the Bundeswehr found evidence of oddities. In the plastic mixture of the housing of the series rifles, the additive polyethylene could be detected, which could promote the deformation of the hot weapon.

The delivered by the company’s flagship model, the so-called Abnahmedemonstrator of 1993, with the German army was convinced of the practicality of the weapon, on the other hand, no polyethylene contained.

 

Beyond the audit report, a former Federal Office of Technology and Procurement (BWB) engineer alleges that Heckler & Koch forged Bundeswehr acceptance marks on rifles:

In December 2006, reported an engineer of the BWB-range “Quality Assurance weapons” of the BWB-tip, Heckler & Koch Concerning operative in the work – against all the rules – through a laser software with the official seal of approval, with which the company could mark his weapons themselves tested as officially , The company therefore amounts “this ‘Sovereign measure’ with its own counterfeit seals” from.The permanent presence of a BWB employee was “according to the statements” of the Institute of certification Oberndorf “because of the trusting relationship” with Heckler & Koch “unnecessary”.

 

Heckler and Koch has reportedly called for a new investigation to be conducted:

The manufacturer calls for a new investigation

How to deal with von der Leyen, the tips is open. The ministry intends to examine consequences. “It is surely not proper to describe this rifle in the lump unfit,” mentioned von der Leyen speaker. Below typical conditions, the G36 behaving properly within the limits of “what one particular would count on from this kind of a rifle.” The rifle was created in the 90s not automatically scenarios for how extended fighting in Afghanistan, even if such situations should not be neglected.

The Greens have referred to as rapidly conclusions from the report. “Ursula von der Leyen need to now not much better than the fantastic enlightener stage,” explained defense analyst Tobias Lindner. “You missed it to respond promptly to comprehensively cover the troubles with the gun.” A much more stringent action would sooner can lead to the examination result.

In the past twenty years, the Bundeswehr has bought virtually 180,000 G36 assault rifles in the arms producer Heckler & Koch, in accordance to Defense Department are nonetheless 166,619 used. Heckler & Koch fears the globe since of the defects to his track record. Improved heating of the rifle does not disturb its function, it mentioned in a multi-webpage opinion of the firm.

The Group’s management also calls for a new, independent investigation of the “allegations and alleged skills obtainable via the Federal” as the members of the earlier Part of the Bundeswehr stood also close.

The company certainly has an uphill battle to fight, at this point.

UPDATE: Christian Thiels posted the executive summary of the EMI/WTD 91 audit report to his Twitter page; it is replicated below, in German:

2015-04-19 08_45_30-Christian Thiels on Twitter_ _Munition, Waffe, Wetter - kurze Zusammenfassung de 2015-04-19 08_45_48-Christian Thiels on Twitter_ _Munition, Waffe, Wetter - kurze Zusammenfassung de 2015-04-19 08_46_01-Christian Thiels on Twitter_ _Munition, Waffe, Wetter - kurze Zusammenfassung de 2015-04-19 08_46_18-Christian Thiels on Twitter_ _Munition, Waffe, Wetter - kurze Zusammenfassung de

 

UPDATE: Reader Manuel has graciously provided us with his translation of the above Executive Summary of the report. Many thanks to him for his hard work:

“Short report:
the results of the testing shows two basic factors which influence the accuracy:

Factor 1: temperature rise caused by shooting the gun and its influence on the weaponsystem (gun, optics, ammo)

Factor 2: changes of the ambient climatic cir‎cumstances (temperature, humidity) and their influence on the weaponsystem.

consindering factor 1 and 2, the results of the testing in relation to the requestet performance by the working group “G36 in use” (customer and user requested a weaponsystem, (gun, optics, ammo) that is capable of hitting a target under changing climatic enviroment, out to 300 meters with an accuracy of 90%) have to be evaluated as follows:

Factor 1: The current weaponsystem does NOT meet the requestet standards. Accuracy improvements are achievable by the use of different ammo. But the requested standards by the customer will still not be met, no matter what ammo is used. however other weaponsystems tested, prove that the requested standards can be met.

Factor 2:
The current weaponsystem does NOT meet the requested standards. Under changing climatic circumstances the influence by the type of ammo used is almost non existend. because of this, the requested standard is not achievable. other weaponsystems tested prove that the requested standards concerning ambient temperaturechanges can be met.

Project description:
during the research in the matter “rifle G36 german army” by the federal court of germany‎ (see report of 23. june 2014 according to paragraph 88/2 BHO), the federal court recommends further ‎research concerning this matter. The german department of defence followed this recommendation.

The workinggroup G36 in use (short: AG 36 iNu), was nominated as the leading authority of the research and testing. The technical part of the testing was outsourced to the Frauenhofer Ernst-Mach-Institut, located in Freiburg (short: EMI), the Wehrwissenschaftlichen Institut für Werk- und Betriebsstoffe, located in Erding (short WIWebB) and the Wehrtechnischen Dienststelle für Waffen und Munition, located in Meppen (short: WTD 91). The goal of the research was the clear, unequivocally and complete identification what is causing the accuracy problems. the first phase of this research programm is followed by a second one, focusing on the combination gun+ammo under factor 1 and factor 2. The results of this second phase will have direct influence on the further decision making process.

This report is based on the current results of the first phase. all results are evaluated based on the requested standards by the customer, mentioned earlier.

considered factors for the investigation:

In order to investigate the influence of temperaturerise on the weaponsystem during a defined course of fire, following factors were investigated:

– ‎ testing of 304 rifles G36 in following variants: A0, A1, A2, and A3 as well as the variant G36K A4, all tested with the standard german army ammo 5,56mm x 45, DM11 FMJ.

– the test showed significant differences in accuracy between single rifles WITHIN one variant. Therefore the testers choosed 3 rifles of each variant for their results: One with good accuracy, one with bad and one with average accuracy. Thats resulst in 25 G36 style rifles in total and an unknown nummber of rifles other manufactures and styles. All these rifles were tested for accuracy with 7 different kinds of ammo from different batches.

In order to investigate the influence of changing climate circumstances on the weaponsystem, following factors were investigated:

– the influence of changing ambient temerature on accuracy with standard issue ammo. the testing was done with the same 25 rifles and rifles of other manufactures and styles mentioned before.

– the influence on accuracy caused by storing the rifles in an eviroment with high temperature and high humidity. rifles used for this test: two rifles of each variant A0, ‎A2, A3.

– the influence of a single sided temperaturerise caused by an external heating source by eperimental and numerical methods.

Conclusion:

the investigation of effects and influences on the weaponsystem by temperaturrise through shooting the gun in a defined course of fire, lead to the following results:

– the average results of all long barreled G36 variants (A0, A1, A2, A3) tested with standard issue ammo did meet the required standards of the customer on the first shot group. accuracy increasinlgy drops from shotgroups two to four with every variant of the rifle and does not meet the required standards any longer. Even the most recent variant, the A3, does not shoot any more accurate than the previous variants, when the gun heats up by shooting it. the shotgroups of the tested shortbarrel variant, G36K A4 do not meet the standard at any time.

The decreasing accuracy is not caused by a single part of the weaponsystem e.g. the ammo, but is by the whole system itself. There ar four major factors within the weaponsystem, which are responsible:

– used ammo. the average shotgroup (average group of all four shotgroups) differ between different kinds and batches of ammo by 35%. but the G36 does not meet the required standars with any kind of ammo. according to this, switching to a different kind of ammo does not solve the accuracy problem.

-temerature of the system.
accuracy decreases with all tested weapons, as they heat up during a course of fire. The G36 gets, caused by its design, substantial hotter inside the upper receiver than other comparable rifles.This causes a accuracy drop even after low shotcounts no matter what ammo was used.

– different rifle designs and variants.
depending which styles and variants are compared, other rifle designs show increased performance up to 50% with the same ammo used. One of the other rifles designs tested does fully meet the standards of the customer, proving that the requested performance can be achieved.

– the tested rifle itself.
Theres a difference between rifles of the same variant. the differences go up to 30% between two identical G36 rifles under the use of the same ammo/batch. The production date however does not influence the performance of single rifles.

The investigations of effects and influences on the weaponssystems by changing ambient circumstances lead to following results:

– Accuracy drops significantly if the G36 used with standard issue ammo, is exposed to increasing ambient temperatures. The requested standards by the customer are not met in the required temperature range. The rifle is affected the most in the range from +15 degrees celsius to + 45 degrees celsius. Different kinds of ammo have no effect on these results. Other rifles designs used as comparison showed that the required standards can be met under the exact same circumstances.

– The change in humidity (dry air/high humidity) does affect the G36 the same way, as a change in ambient temperature does. ‎ But Increasing humidity does not affect the rifle as fast as increasing ambient temperature. These results were the same with every tested g36 rifle.

– A single sided warming of the G36 caused by an external source as sunrays for example causes a recoverable deformation of the upper reciever affecting the barrel and by that a shift of point of aim/point of impact.

 

The Firearm Blog has obtained a G36 rifle as a byproduct of a police request, and it is our intent to test the rifle. We will release our findings as soon as possible. 

Because I do not speak German, I have to rely on machine translation to understand the articles linked above. Although I make every attempt to cross-reference the translations with other articles, as well as perform corroborative searches using terms in the native language, this method cannot provide 100% accuracy. If our readers find any errors in this article, please comment to let me know, and I will fix them soon as I can.



Nathaniel F

Nathaniel is a history enthusiast and firearms hobbyist whose primary interest lies in military small arms technological developments beginning with the smokeless powder era. In addition to contributing to The Firearm Blog, he runs 196,800 Revolutions Per Minute, a blog devoted to modern small arms design and theory. He can be reached via email at nathaniel.f@staff.thefirearmblog.com.


Advertisement

  • Yohei556

    Im going to forward this to an H&K Fanboy and wait for the rage.

  • wetcorps

    Prepare for a massive influx of cheap, used airsoft G36 🙂

  • M.

    Wow H&K is about to get shafted

    • KestrelBike

      Karmmmaaaaa!!!

      • For what?

        • iksnilol

          Oh you know, the “You suck and we hate you” thing that people falsely believe about HK. Quite ironic considering HK were some of the first to sell assault rifles (real ones, before the NFA) to us mere civilians.

          • Joshua

            I like to think of it as trying to shove a POS gun down our throats with their stupid reskinned G36 which was called the XM8.

            Even today some of the lead H&K guys think we made a mistake not buying the XM8.

          • Uniform223

            Agreed. The M4 could do everything operationally that the any modern service rifle/carbine can at a more affordable level… including the XM8. Also what I find interesting was that back than picatinny rails (RIS) were starting to become a standard, why didn’t the XM8 have them?

          • XM8 actually did have them (and oh god do those variants look ugly as sin), but to answer your question anyway, graft and pork, and minor technical reasons. PCAP was a bit lighter and worked better with a polymer mounting unit (like modern MLOK), and of course if the Army switched to a new mounting standard, shame, they’d have to replace all the existing accessories, and buy new ones from someone else. Delicious pork.

            The big issues with the XM8 were that it was never going to meet its weight requirements. They should have scrapped everything but the optic (which was truly neat) and slapped that on the M4.

            Instead they scrapped everything. Oh well, at least we’re not using M8s.

          • Uniform223

            cool beans thanks for the answer.

          • The battery life on the Insight ISM-IR was painfully short, especially if the laser was in use. It was something like 500 hours for the red dot alone, and 7 hours when the IR laser was in use.

          • I wondered about that. TANSTAAFL.

          • The battery life of the current M68 CCO based on the Comp M4 is now measured in years.

        • KestrelBike

          For producing the rifle they did with inferior materials and an inherently doomed design, and continue to spin the story that there was nothing wrong with their rifle and not fix the issues in the meantime, over as others have said, a period of 5+ years that they might have known about it? At least that’s what I got from the story/German

  • Jonas Neumann

    This problem was known for a longer time, after Soldiers in action reported, that the g36 was inacurate when temperature rised. That was like 3-5 years ago and I wonder, why this is gettimg into media so late. I mean look at the material, it expands and gets softer, when heated. I hope, H&K finds a solution for that

    • Dracon1201

      It kept getting brought up in the media, but was denied and not formally tested.

  • Riot

    So someone has been substituting cheaper compounds in the polymer mixture.
    I wonder what the difference between the to spec and non spec examples that tests will show.
    Still bright side, the world may see cheap G36s soon!

    • jay

      Knowing this western Europe governments , i think the officials will have them burned. Our government here in Canada destroyed all the C1s after the army was done with them. 🙁

      • Riot

        They are going to expose guns with heat resisting problems to fire, how silly.

        Also: NNOOOOO!!!

  • Soon to be put through the ringer for you guys:
    Several months ago, before this was even really in the news I had a local police department and ask me to obtain a sample G36 for them to test. They wrote me a demonstration letter as required by the ATF, and I will perform a demonstration for them so that they can evaluate it (though with this in the news, I doubt that they will purchase my unit, or any from HK Defense so I am out some money). The good news though is that we can use this rifle to do some testing of our own!

  • Soon to be put through the ringer for you guys:
    Several months ago, before this was even really in the news I had a local police department and ask me to obtain a sample G36 for them to test. They wrote me a demonstration letter as required by the ATF, and I will perform a demonstration for them so that they can evaluate it (though with this in the news, I doubt that they will purchase my unit, or any from HK Defense so I am out some money). The good news though is that we can use this rifle to do some testing of our own!

    • mosinman

      probably one of the few things going for this weapon is it’s looks

      • hikerguy

        Well….one good thing for it is it always looks good for a sci fi . Was often seen on all three Stargate Series on TV.

        • LCON

          has killed more Jaffa, Lucian allience, Vampires and Wraith then real enemmies.

          • hikerguy

            True dat, LOL!

          • Uniform223

            Don’t forget about rogue Russian separatists and terrorists thanks to CoDMW and Rainbow 6.

    • Blue Centurion

      What’s the cost difference between the G36 vs. HK 416? You could certainly steer them in that direction.

      • Cost difference isnt the important part: acquiring thousands and thousands of new rifles is!

        • LCON

          New Rifles Suitable for combat operations that is.

        • Joshua

          When your rifle is a POS not fit for combat operations, you figure a way to acquire ones that are.

        • maybe they could sell them second hand to someone who lives in a cold country and desperately need updated arms. ahem ukraine, latvia, romania, slovakia to name a few.

          but then again germany is always a bit skiddish about selling arms so maybe thats a far shot

          • iksnilol

            You do realize that those countries you mentioned aren’t really cold? Sure, there’s a lot of snow during the winter but the summers get pretty hot. Like 40* Celsius hot.

      • T-zone

        I heard about 850€ for the G36 and 1400€ HK 416.

      • demonkoryu

        The G36 has been selected precisely for its low cost. Of course, the HK416 would have been better. However, “better” has never been the objective…

    • John

      Thank you for dong this test, guys.

      What are the parameters of your test? How much ammunition are you planning to fire through it, and what kind?

      • 1. Shoot a few rounds to test group size.
        2. Mag-dumps
        3. Shoot a few rounds to test group size.

        1.A lot of M855.

        • Yohei556

          When life hands you lemons you abuse the hell out of that lemon and put it on Youtube

        • Youarenotquallified

          So all you are doing is testing the integrity of the barrel?

          • Southpaw89

            Well it is important to know if the barrel does the right thing, even when no one’s looking.

          • MR

            And the integrity of the barrel/receiver interface, as well as the rifle’s action. Out of curiousity, what tests would you like to see added?

        • wetcorps

          Be sure to bring some other guns so we have something to compare.

          • iksnilol

            Wouldn’t be a bad idea that. A decent AK, AR and maybe a 416 to compare.

    • Uniform223

      I look forward to another great article!

    • Cornelius Carroll

      It’s a tough job but somebody has to do it, amiright? 😉

    • Dan

      If you nabbed it for under $1500, you aren’t out anything. You shouldn’t have a tough time selling to another dealer, or worst case destroy it and sell the parts kit for what you paid.

    • Youarenotquallified

      “Asked me to obtain a test sample”
      Why didn’t you tell them that the G36 would be a terrible purchase and that they should call Colt and get some mil-grade guns? The heat/trunnion issues with the G36 have been known for years. The G36 is a terrible rifle that is pleagued with a plethora of issues. Why do you think HK will never offer a civilian version to the American public? We are super hard on our guns and would destroy them in short order. Why did we not adopt the XM8? It was a piece of garbage that had the same issues as the G36. For a police department, the Ar-15 would be better then some other platform. Parts availability, training, armorer’s, cost, logistics etc.

      What makes you quallified to advise law enforcement on weapons procurement? Are you an armorer? Engineer?

      • iksnilol

        IIRC he is a manufacturer and dealer. So, yes, he can obtain FA samples. And if the PD wants him to obtain a test sample (to obviously test) then who is he to force another gun on them?

        Also, if you read the article. You will see that it isn’t necessarily the design itself that is the problem, but that they manufactured them with the wrong type of polymer (best comparison is if somebody made a revolver with brass instead of steel). I just wonder how many were built with the wrong polymer?

        • I think no type of polymer receiver could solve this issue.

          • Weaver

            I think a ceramic heat shield would. The arx160 has one around the trunnion for this reason.

          • Tom

            You can direct the heat elsewhere but its still an issues, physics be a harsh mistress. Unless the sights are attached to the barrel or the receiver is made of metal there will still be distortion at the point which takes the heat.

      • 3gunmike

        Your so wrong on the XM8 procurement failure by the military!!!! Lawyers not weapons types killed the program. The XM8 was up graded and being designed around known G-36 failures

        • d_grey

          Exactly! It was superior to the 3 other weapons tested in the same conditions which were the hk416, fn scar and the m4a1. I believe it had around 127 stoppages in the dust test right?

          • DW

            But it’s the only gun to use a non-STANAG mag (G36 mag), and arguably that mag is much stronger than the STANAG

          • d_grey

            Indeed, but as Nathaniel put it, the tests being flawed mean that well, the rifle probably wasn’t up to the task or it’s an excuse to avoid getting a new rifle.

          • Uniform223

            I read somewhere (possibly here) that one of the reasons why the M4 had such a high “malfunction” rate over the competitors were the testers. Something about how they (the testers) didn’t know how to operate the 3 round burst.

          • Joshua

            The testers knew how the rifle worked, but since every other gun was S-1-F any break in the firing cycle was considered a stoppage. Since the M4 is S-1-3 when it failed to fire 3 rounds per trigger pull it was counted as a stoppage. The issue with that criteria is that due to the burst system on the M4 any break in the firing cycle means it just picks up where it left off, so you could either have 3, 2, or 1 depending on what you fired before.

          • d_grey

            This is news to me, I thought that the tests were solid.

          • I want to find more resources on the subject, but according to Daniel Watters, the tests were critically flawed and heavily biased. According to him, the other weapons in the test were procured brand-new, in contrast to the M4s which were taken off the rack (they were used, and approximately 6 months old, IIRC). Worse, the manufacturers were made aware that the rifles would be sent to Aberdeen Proving Grounds for testing, so they had every opportunity to massage the weapons to perform their best. Further, the other rifles in the test were subjected to different lubing procedures than the M4 (for what reason, other than to make the test come out a certain way, I cannot guess), and when the burst-fire mechanisms of the M4s tested “remembered” their last setting, these were counted as malfunctions.

            Given this, and the analysis by SMSgt Mac that I linked to above, I have to tentatively conclude that the tests were politically-driven to achieve a certain result that would discredit the M4 and open the door to procurement of a new rifle.

            It is unfortunate that this is the case, but the M4 is a very poor vehicle for pork and graft. It is inexpensive, works well, and is effective, adaptable, and lightweight. The XM8 was a legitimate effort to create a new rifle system, but it was also a major pork program, and by 2007 it was canceled. It’s all too conceivable to me that the order came down to “fix” the tests in favor of the XM8, in the hopes of salvaging that program (in military procurement, programs do not fully die when they are cancelled, and this may have been an attempt to resurrect the XM8). It’s also possible that the tests were intended to be fixed for one of the other rifles, or just fixed against the M4. It’s unclear, but the tests themselves smell heavily of corruption.

            The superlative performance of the XM8 could be due to the testers fixing the test in favor of it – this is the most parsimonious explanation, since the XM8 was already a military program – but it could have also been due to H&K’s experience “fixing” tests. Not to speak ill of the company, but it’s become very obvious to me that Heckler and Koch has a lot of experience in this area, as they conduct a lot of internal tests that produce superlative results for their products – superlative results that then cannot be replicated in controlled tests, or that even don’t make logical sense (the over-the-beach tests being an excellent example of this).

          • Mind you, I have only seen evidence of the weapon orders for the tests. All of the other allegations come from other sources.

          • d_grey

            Again, more new news, but still very informative. By the way, I’m curious as to why the US military suddenly decides to replace the rifle only to cancel all tests and continue with it, could you share information on this matter please?

          • Military programs get cancelled constantly. Sometimes they come back, and sometimes they don’t. I don’t know enough about the XM8 program itself to give more detail than that, unfortunately. I do know the XM8 was submitted to the SCAR trials, and was rejected, suggesting the rifle had some issues.

          • Uniform223

            I would also like to make a comment that changing major weapon systems like standard issue assault rifles during a conflict is a bad idea. Case and point… M16 (not that it is a bad rifle but whoa man what they did and how they did it was bad). If hypothetically speaking, the XM8 did fall through and become the standard issue rifle for the US Army (I don’t know if the Marines were going to pick it up) it would be smart to do a limited soft launch of the rifle. Gradually give it to units and troops that are CONUS during pre-deployment phases.

          • d_grey

            I heard of that as well, very peculiar.

          • M40

            All of this REEKS of somewhat underhanded price negotiation tactics… with both the military and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) playing roles.

            Let’s say you’re buying a product in huge volumes and the supplier isn’t willing to budge on the price. All you have to do is come up with “independent” testing that shows another product to be superior. You show the supplier these “results”, and then hint that you might be considering a change. Now you sit back and watch as your supplier drops his shorts and starts quoting new, lower price structures.

            It’s also kind of funny how this (and other) “testing” came to light when DHS was in the market to do some serious purchasing. DHS performs mass procurement for a few dozen agencies including Coast Guard, FBI, TSA, Treasury/Secret Service, DOE, FEMA, Immigration and Customs, and various Justice and security groups/departments.

            DHS was sitting on BILLIONS of dollars worth of purchase requisitions. They were willing to use whatever negotiating tactics they could to hit rock-bottom pricepoints. They have a virtual ABC list of departments, agencies, bureaus and other structures under their wing. How hard would it be for them to order testing from some “independent” agency?

            So it may well be that NONE of this “testing” was above board. I would also guess that all manner of government suppliers (clothing, vehicles, office supplies, software, ammunition, etc) were probably given similar “independent test results” purportedly showing various flaws in their products. It’s an underhanded, but effective tactic.

          • d_grey

            So effective that it virtually eliminates weapons that are otherwise better than what is being used. In Pakistan, it’s a completely different ball game altogether, here it’s not about one party, rather it’s about the party with the best kickback offerings.

        • Please tell me more about how we should have adopted this weapon that was half a pound heavier than the M4 (even with its fancy combined optic/laser), less capable, ballistically inferior, and thermally sensitive.

          • Tom

            Because fanboy and stuff…

      • MR

        Interesting username there. Hope that isn’t directed at anyone in this conversation, or maybe you should do a little research before you make ASSumptions like that.

      • Weaver

        I doubt you have actually fired the g36. Can you list this plethora of issue? It sounds like you believe everything you read on the Internet. I’ve actual shot the German army issue g36 and I have the certificate to prove it. The rifles I shot didn’t show any sign of issues and we put a lot of rounds down range on full auto with controlled bursts.

      • They asked several months ago (before December, maybe October or so?) when this was all kind of still rabble rousing stuff. The chief contacted me and asked for two guns, one of them a G36k. When your biggest customer asks for a G36k and sends you an official PD letterhead/demo letter, you go with “the customer is always right” and secure that product for them if it is feasible… so I did.
        Also, what other issues does your G36 have? They are incredibly reliable guns with plenty of unique features. They are modular, HK Defense supports them well with parts and armorers courses, and the PD wanted to install single fire trigger packs in them (a very easy swap with two pins, unlike the “just accept what you have” trigger system in an AR15. How much experience do you have with these guns? I am legitimately curious.
        As a PD or civilian carbine, that is, in the hands of people who aren’t in combat situations dumping magazines one after another, you would never notice the POI shift according to the data (which is in part why it took so long for this issue to be fully realized).
        And what makes me reasonably qualified is that I am a dealer/manufacturer and (07/02) with more experience behind machineguns than just about anyone I know. I am a certified dealer to law enforcement. I don’t get emotionally attached to certain guns like other people do for some reason and I tell it like it is. That said, I did not advise them on this gun, they asked for it!

        • I’m sure you realize, this guy is just a negative Nancy, Alex.

          • Sure, but when someone calls you out, you had best answer.

        • KestrelBike

          Can you say what the other gun was that the chief asked for?

      • Dan

        What makes you qualified to question his qualifications? Also I am guessing you have little to no experience with Government/agency procurement, it doens’t require a whole lot of qualifications.

    • Evan Ferguson

      This isn’t news at all. US Capitol police dumped their G36’s years ago for the same reason. Sustained fire on the plastic chassis caused accuracy problems, as well as permanent tolerance changes in some crucial areas.

    • Cali-Gun-Tard

      Does this affect video games, too? I have several games where I use a G36–or what looks like a G36–and I’d like to know if I should sell/avoid this until it gets fixed?

      Toodles!

      P.S. I do notice when my card gets a tad hot, this weapon doesn’t work so good.

      • Core

        We should petition for revisions at EA Sports to ensure the G36 is digitally demastered..

      • THULE_NORD

        I want my g36 to fire wildly inaccurate on COD from now on. Unless it’s a winter map of course

  • Edohiguma

    The first time I heard that the G36 had issues with its point of aim was in 2002. General consensus then was that the optics are far too sensitive. Bump it, drop it, nudge it too hard and your point of aim was all over the place.

    • Paul Epstein

      It’s possible that the non-spec material used was a contributor to that- the optic might have been high enough quality to meet spec, but it’s not connected to the barrel or a metal receiver, it’s entirely supported and kept in place by the polymer receiver and forend, the very parts alleged to have been made of weaker plastic.

      Once the quality of the plastic decreased, the mounting solution might have created the problem you’re talking about, and if that’s the case then it couldn’t be fixed by replacing or refurbishing the optic.

  • myndbender

    The sad thing is I’d love to have a surplus g36 b/c I wouldn’t be doing enough sustained fire to knock the zero off too bad. But they will never make it to the US, even in semi auto form except maybe as demilled parts kits, which would make an sl8 to g36 conv. easier. Oh well…

    • iksnilol

      Unless you live in Alaska you are going to encounter temperatures between 15 and 45 degrees Celsius (20 degrees is about room temperature, human body is 37 degrees IIRC).

      • MR

        I can make room in the fridge (sarcasm).

        • iksnilol

          Didn’t think about that. If somebody breaks in (while you are away for instance) they won’t check the fridge or freezer for guns.

          Now I know where to hide the next gun safe.

  • Charlie Taylor

    Coworker of mine is german, I can try and have a translation for you guys

    • If he doesn’t mind, that would be great. Thanks.

  • Rich Guy

    Bring back ze G3!

    Makes more sense in the current combat locations anyways.

    • TB

      Yes, we should bring back the 7.62. Not only to get better long range performance in places like Afghanistan, if we’ll ever need to go up against a modern adversary, the increased power will also be useful against their body armor.

      • iksnilol

        Doubt it. Modern body armor is made to stop 30-06 AP.

        So unless you go for some extreme AP projectile (solid steel bullet with copper jacket for instance). I doubt it will work as well as you think.

        • Cal S.

          Looks like it’s going to be .300 Win mag across the board, eh?

          Miller Precision Arms is looking pretty good, no?

          • iksnilol

            First time I heard about them. Never been a fan of the 300 Win mag, that short neck doesn’t seem to be a good idea with heavy bullets if you are using a magazine.

            I like 6.5×55 for longer distances, if 6.5×55 doesn’t cut it, then .338 Lapua should.

        • Dracon1201

          Military armor only stops 1-2 of those. Same with .308. This is as opposed to many more 5.56s.

          • iksnilol

            I don’t know, I read about that marine or something that got clipped good. Got hit 27 times, i think 16 hit the plate. That was 7.62×39, which penetrates way more than 5.56.

            That is, if I understood your post correctly. You were saying the armor stops a 1-3 rounds like 308 while it doesn’t stop large amounts of rounds like 5.56. That was at least my interpretation, bear with me please, this is my 3rd language.

          • Joshua

            Modern ceramic plates can stop multiple .308 rounds.

            We tested some back in 2005 or so and it took 6-8 rounds of M855 from the M249 to damage the plate enough to allow follow up shots to penetrate at 25M.

            But this is why we have M995 which penetrates modern ceramics with every shot, or M855A1 which does enough damage to the plates to penetrate after just a couple of shots.

          • Uniform223

            Didn’t the first gen of IBA have a weaker ceramic plates before 06?
            I used to be a fan of dragonskin before I saw all the poopoo on it. One person said that the military rigged the test when they introduced it to harsh conditions. You know high and low temperatures. Exposure to motor oil and salt water. Drop tests. The actual things soldiers and marines do to their body armor.

          • Joshua

            I honestly can’t remember what plates we had then, our tests were also not scientific. We just had a few spares laying around and decided to see just what they could stop.

          • n0truscotsman

            They were less effective. ESAPI provided the next level of protection higher than 7.62×39 and 5.45. XSAPIs are even more protective but heavier iirc.
            The other issues with dragon skin was the weight. An equivalent “large” vest weighed nearly twice than the then-used equivalent size IBA. The media, hyped by the political shitstorm that was OIF, ran with the dragonskin marketing ploy as well.

          • toms

            7.62 r has far less armor penetration than 5.56. 7.62 penetrates barriers better like wood and brick. Armor is a whole different animal. Velocity, sec den (small bore long bullet), and material are more important than mass.

          • mosinman

            i’m pretty sure 7.62x54R could penetrate armor better than .556

          • kiljoy616

            Well maybe but that would be like saying we should now go to the 338 just to please you.

          • mosinman

            uh no. i didn’t say anything about a caliber change…..
            i was just pointing out that 7.62x54R would penetrate armor better than .556 can is all. toms thinks otherwise unless he meant 7.62×39

          • kiljoy616

            The problem with hearing something is that there is no proof. You know what I also heard that some Soldier shot one 5.56 and killed 8 rag heads. That must haver been a sight to see. LOL

          • iksnilol

            It was in the news for a while. Here is an article:

            http://www.mirror.co. uk/news/world-news/navy-seal-shot-27-times-5430909

            broken link to avoid delay in posting. 16 to the body and 11 to the armor.

          • Dracon1201

            I don’t know what armor he was using, but yes. That is essentially what I was saying about the ceramic armor our soldiers usually have.

        • Tom

          How often do we face enemies with body armour though? Not heard of any being used in Iraq or Afghanistan.

          • toms

            Quiet a few Hajis wore armor in Iraq. With China, India, and Russia mass producing rifle plates for very cheap it will be an increasing problem for troops on the battlefield.

          • Joshua

            That they did, but we have ammunition to combat armor.

          • Tom

            I think I like it better when they relied on Allah to protect them 🙂

          • barry504

            Sure, ISIS fighters have armor taken from the Iraqi amories but not enough to equip all their fighters. And I believe Chinese forces use ballistic steel plates for body armor–to keep costs down. At close range, 5.56 M193 penetrates some AR500 steel due to velocity and projectile shape. 7.63×39 doesn’t have the speed or projectile shape to get any penetration, though.

          • kiljoy616

            5.56 77gr will take care of those easily. As for armor actually plenty of those ISIL are wearing armor.

        • nobody

          Tungsten carbide core 7.62x51mm that will punch through ESAPI plates already exists (M993 AP). The US even has XSAPI plates that are made to stop it in the event that we ever go to war with a more modern military. Flechettes are the future if you want armor penetration without having to move to magnum rifle ammunition. Any complaints about the stopping power of a single flechette disregards how much less recoil a gun firing them will have and how much more ammunition could be carried when combined with modern research into polymer cased ammunition such as the LSAT program, which would allow soldiers to carry at about 3x as much ammunition if flechettes were used (assuming a 10 grain flechettes with a 4 grain sabot) vs 1.6x as much if they were to use the current design (the bullet is the heaviest part of the polymer cased ammunition), which would allow soldiers to use full auto to their hearts content.

      • mark

        With the constant hand wringing over the performance of the 5.56, the advancements in rifle weight reduction and recoil management you’d think it would be logical for 7.62×51 to get a second look.

        • kiljoy616

          Shows you know little about armor or how modern warfare is fought.

        • n0truscotsman

          They have received second looks, which is why FN produced the FN SCAR H and HK the 417. Those rifles have their own niche specific purposes that haven’t been dismissed.

      • Guy

        All the body armor I have used will stop that 7.62 in a jiffy. Not to mention that, A) we’re not fighting in Afghanistan forever and, B) could you IMAGINE the cost overruns and delays if the entire DoD went to 7.62? It would be a nightmare. As a wise woman once said, “Ain’t nobody got time fo dat”.

        • kiljoy616

          Sound like TB wants us to go to AK or something like it.

      • kiljoy616

        Each team has some long range rifle, as for the AK since that what most people spit out when they say 7.62 they are terrible long range shooters.

    • Cal S.

      As long as they upgrade it with a LRBHO, better magazine release, and other such modern conveniences, then yes. But if you’re fit enough to ruck the increased weight of a 7.62 NATO, then you have my envy, good sir. As it is, each full 30rnd mag of 5.56 weighs a whole pound. I’m rather fit, if I do say so myself, but it’s really difficult to run & gun with a fully loaded rifle, 5 back-up mags, and a pistol with several back up mags.

      • Rich Guy

        I can, and do as I compete in heavy metal 3 gun. While not a combat deployment, it is probably the closest any of us non mill guys are going to get. I will say it did kick my ass the first time I did it, bit I shaped up in response and put up pretty respectable times.

        People have this big thing about solders not being able/willing to carry a .30 cal battle load, yet they seem to forget that for decades G.I.s carried .30-06 battle loads with B.A.R.’s (the weight of two M4s duct taped together), M1 Garand’s, 10 lb Thompson’s, and all steel mags. While I do get the weight is a factor, people need to open up to the idea that the current logistical logic IS going to have to change soon, and it will probably require more weight. Now, this may very well be offset to some degree with advancements to casless or poly ammo, but we will have to see.

        • Guy

          Like Bal said, guys in prior wars had *much* lighter combat loads than we do now. My SAW gunners and RTO regularly exceeded 115 lbs on patrol, and all of our bodies are wrecked until we get carbon fiber spines lol.

          And no, a 3-gun is not really close to a deployment. Go walk around with a 100lb ruck for 6-10 hours before your 3-gun match, and then do the match in body armor. You’ll want to ditch your .30 cal ammo pretty quick. Not saying a 3-gun isn’t tough, just that it’s not really analogous, or even close, to combat.

          • Rich Guy

            Didn’t say it was combat, said it was as close as most non mill guys get.

            Some people get way to worked up over comments they willing mistake.

            I was quite clear in my comments, and still say that they have truth to them.

          • tts

            You’re conflating your 3-gun experience with what current military people have to lug around as a basis for your argument that soldiers will have to carry more weight in the future.

            People are calling you out on that. They’ve pointed out how current weight loads are crippling people as evidence. There is no misunderstanding, people understood you just fine.

          • kiljoy616

            His full of him self. I have heard this same BS from to many old timers who talk out of their aft section and did little real combat.

        • Cal S.

          You’re forgetting the added weight of heavier helmets, headset radios, and a full plate armor set.

          I’m not saying at all that your fitness level is inadequate, nor am I saying I’ve done the same thing, but I personally couldn’t imagine fighting a protracted days-long fight with all the weight of modern warriors adding a heavier weapons platform and heavier ammunition.

        • 3 Gun is as close to combat as you can get?

          I hope your health insurance is very, very good, then.

          • Rich Guy

            Now we are getting into politics. I would suggest you actually read what I wrote, instead of getting riled up.

            I never claimed I was G.I. Badass, I merely used the only available first hand info I have to weigh in on the 7.62/5.56 debate.

            Excuse me for starting a friendly and respectful conversation.

          • You’re getting defensive. I am talking about my friends who are 100% disabled from humping their kit all over Iraq and Afghanistan.

        • n0truscotsman

          It makes no sense to because you are forfeiting 300 rounds of 5.56 in order to carry an equivalent weight of 100 rounds in 7.62. That would be 1/3 of the ammunition and the same 150-200 meter practical accuracy from the average rifleman. Not good.

          Ill add that the weight of individual weapons during WW2 may have been heavier, although, soldiers’ combat loads have steadily increased since then, far surpassing WW2 weights. See the graph from Holmes’, “Acts of War”.

      • Azril @ Alex Vostox

        Turkish MPT-76 Did that upgrade..

        • Tom

          The MPT-76 owes far more to the AR15 than the G3. The only thing it shares with the later is the ammunition.

      • latvianemile

        are there any statistics on how much ammo everybpody needs on patrol?

        if we stipulate that the soldiers would carry the same weight but in 7,62, how often would they run out of ammo? does running out of 556 even happen?
        oh and isn’t carrying ammo on patrol what thast robot dog is for? 😛

        • Cal S.

          Nobody ever wants LESS ammo. Just figure you’ll be dealing with about half the ammo if you go by weight. And I personally don’t want to have to crawl from cover to cover just to get to a mechanical mule and my ammo…

    • d_grey

      Still used in my home country to a good effect! 😀

    • Except for the extra weight, I agree 100%!

    • John

      The G3A3 with a rail system and an adjustable, straight stock ought to work very well for modern combat. In fact, I’m amazed HK hasn’t already released such a revision.

      • Guy

        The G3 is HEAVY. I would not want to hump that badboy around. Clearly, though, anything is better than the G36 at this point lol.

        • M

          I think lugging the ammo is worse than the gun itself.

        • LCON

          HK Executive: Well We messed up but We will happily sell you the HK G38 (HK416A5)

          • Uniform223

            HK G36 end user: For this extreme technical cluster-F I want that G38 to be cheaper than the G36 and I want brats and sourkraut to go with that!!!

          • Joshua

            I know the cost of the HK416 to the US, but I have no idea the cost of the G36.

            The 416 is not a cheap gun.

          • The g36 is cheap. Cant say how much, but cheaper than a scar or ACR.

          • The G36-derived XM8 was quoted to US Army procurement as costing less than $600. I suspect the G36 is very cheap.

          • Kris Moore

            price is also a function of volume, the prices paid for the hk416 reflected smaller orders for small contracts, I expect the XM8 quote was for serious volume. Nonetheless the 416 would still cost more to make.

          • HSR47

            HK Executives: NEIN! It will cost twice as much, and you will have to fly us out and buy us dinner.

            You suck, and we hate you,
            HK

          • Uniform223

            HK G36 end user: Fine. When you deliver us our crate of brand new G38s we’re going to get burritos and you’re getting the bill and we want to be reimbursed for that flight ticket! Also can you please take back this box of Mk.23s? Its just collecting dust in our Armory.

  • Joshua

    If only we had adopted the XM8.

    • Azril @ Alex Vostox

      Malaysia Armed Forces adopted that XM8

      • Joshua

        Good for them? If they actually use those they will just run into the same issues as the G36.

        It was literally a G36 with different shapes polymer.

        • Yeah, but look at how adorbs that XM8 PDW is!

          • Hokum

            Not entirely. XM8 has the quick barrel change feature, hence different trunnion and mounting inside the body. So who knows how would XM8 behave in such conditions.
            (I’m not the G36/XM8 fan anyway)

          • The optics are still mounted directly to the polymer receiver though. That is plainly visible in images of the rifle.

          • If I am not mistaken, the barrel change procedure for the XM8 was the same as the G36. You still need a vice, support rod, and wrench. You’ll note that there were no sales videos showing people swapping barrels on the fly.

          • I believe the XM8 used the same barrel-change mechanism as the G36. Daniel Watter corroborates this, as well.

        • LCON

          maybe, maybe not.

          The heart of the issue is the materials. If this is to be believed then the G36 Receivers were made with Polyethylene. Polyethylene is Soda bottles, Trash bags, Shopping bags, Solo cups and other cheap packing materials.

          G36 Receivers were specified for Polyamide a higher grade of polymers.

          XM8 was the G36 operating system and barrels packed in a new Receiver shell. So the Question is…

          Did HK make the Xm8 Receivers using the cheaper plastics or did they follow the order as spec’d by PEO soldier systems and the US Army and use Higher Grade Polymers?
          If HK Followed the Specs Through all manufactured XM8’s Then XM8 would be immune to this issue as written. and questions would arise as to why in 2004 they could produce to spec but not in 1996 and if They made all G36 from said cheap plastics?
          If they used the Cheap materials in Xm8 then XM8 would suffer the same as G36 and The US Army might want to look in house as to how HK pulled that off.
          now there are those rumors of XM8 hand guards melting could those be Sub par Polyethylene XM8s or just haters hating?

          • Joshua

            I have no idea what polymers were used, but the XM8 did have heat problems.

          • Promotional material says “fiber-reinforced polymer”.

            I’m guessing fiber-reinforced Nylon 6/6. Which I’m also betting is what the G36 is supposed to be made of, too.

    • Esh325

      I detect sarcasm.

      • Joshua

        Oozing sarcasm.

    • n0truscotsman

      2007 dust test!!!!>!?!#$!

  • MPWS

    Fanatical Plastic Purveyors.
    After twenty years in service and much of hushing up they finally admit they received POS. What a WOW factor! This will hurt on many fronts….. HK being only one of them.

  • cahillm2

    So should they have just adopted the HK33 way when?

    • Maybe the g41, but the 33 lacks many desireable features.

      • cahillm2

        Sturmgewehr 45 FTW? Haha

        • In my opinion, if they could simply resolve the accuracy issue then they should stick with the G36. It really is a spectacular firearm that has a lot to offer, but it needs to get this sorted out to be taken seriously.

          Most rifles have problems when they are fielded that are only discovered after a trial by fire. Lord knows that our beloved M-16 faced many trials and tribulations, but issus were resolved and now the platform is solid. Hopefully people can do the same with the G36.

          • Dracon1201

            The G36 would need a redesign to stay in service. There is no retrofit. That is the problem.

          • Look up the hk 243/293. They seem to have come up with a new interface that may resolve the issue.

          • HK243 still interfaces with the barrel through the polymer. Same problem.

          • Interesting, I thought it interfaced with some sort of weird exoskeleton type situation onto the barrel.

          • Dracon1201

            Sorry, in a quick search I came up with nothing that I could see where they solved that. Could you point me in the right direction?

          • iksnilol

            There is one possible retrofit I mentioned earlier:

            Make an optics rail that attaches to the barrel.

          • M

            You mean like the Tavor or AUG right?
            The problem I see is that it’s not a bullpup, and since mounting to plastic is out of the question, the options are limited to a long eye relief scope or a RDS. Either that or have a long rail like a giant diving board

          • iksnilol

            I was thinking the latter option. The diving board rail one. Of course that would require removal of the old top rail.

          • Dracon1201

            The optics rail isn’t the only problem. The barrel is embedded in polymer, the differences in expansion are part of the issue, too.

          • iksnilol

            I know, but if the sights move around with the barrel then you are okay (as long as the headsspace isn’t messed up).

          • Dracon1201

            I see, however, it does put strain on the barrel. This would also create eye relief problems among non red dot optics. Good idea, though.

          • iksnilol

            Well, in regards to eye relief you can make the rail long. Think cantilever. Then to reduce strain you make an anchoring/”resting” point in the rear of the receiver (where the standard rail/optic is already mounted).

            NOTE: I am not an engineer or anything, so that idea might be really stupid or something.

          • Dracon1201

            It’s not a dumb idea at all. I see what you mean. My only concern would be if the rear of the rail still interfaced with the polymer. I’m sure if I got an actual G36 in my hands I could machine a metal buffer of some sort to fix that and make it work.

          • Joshua

            You can’t really compare the M16. The G36 has been fielded since 1995, it didn’t take us 20 years to identify issues with the M16.

            On top of that the AR-15 did fine in Vietnam in the hands of SEALs and ARVN. It wasn’t until the adoption by the Army where chrome lining, cleaning kits, and training were tossed to the side to get them issued faster did the M16 see issues, and those issues were not nearly as wide spread as the internet would have you believe.

          • Tom

            Also the problems of the M16 were created by the Army switching powder and going the cheap route with no chrome bore.

          • Uniform223

            At my bar we have an old LRRP guy there. He liked the M16 cause it was light and you can carry all that ammo in his bandolier. He’d still go out with an AK cause that what the enemy used.

          • Commonsense23

            People seem to forget that the AR15/M16 was heavily praised by the SOF community in Vietnam. And even during the M16s initial fielding problems,the M16 did fine in Vietnam with the units that trained with it stateside and had actual maintenance programs. The vast majority of the issues came from units that were given a M16 with little to no training.

          • Tom

            Also soldiers from Britain, Australia, and New Zeland and others were using the AR15 and M16A1 without any issues whats so ever.

          • BrandonAKsALot

            I’m not sure there is a simple way to save this thing. The only real option I see to fix the issue for sure is replacing the entire receiver/barrel group. Even if you took a route of using a steel or aluminum trunnion and having the optic mount secured to it, you still have a plastic receiver where the rear of the optic rail would mount. You’d more than likely need to have a piece of metal running all the way to the rear mounting point as well from the trunnion. Although, I suppose it could work as a cantilever style mount. The AUG, F(S)2000, and P(S)90 all have well thought out designs to prevent this issue and are largely polymer.

          • I don’t think there is; the G36 mounts to plastic in two places, so even if you cut up the front of the receiver and put a sight mounting block directly on the barrel, your sight mount is still moving around in the back.

            If this were just a high temperature (couple of mag dumps) issue, that might fix it, as the rear of the receiver is not thermally loaded, but the POI is shifting even after just sitting in the sun.

            I am really pessimistic about this rifle’s chances.

          • BrandonAKsALot

            I agree. Like I had a mentioned a free-floating cantilever type mount could possibly work, but then you have increase risk of the breaking and you’d be completely ditching the way the sights work now. Plus, anyway you do it, you’ve redesigned and added significant cost to the receiver.

          • A cantilever mount going all the way back to the original position would be tricky to make robust enough for military service.

            The quickest solution may be to add a front sight mount to existing guns, and just live with forward-mounted Aimpoints.

            I doubt the Bundeswehr would like that very much, though.

          • The G36’s issues are more endemic, Alex. We’re talking a total architectural overhaul of the rifle. With the M16, the solution was to chrome-line the barrel, fix the ammunition spec, teach the guys to use it properly, and issue chamber brushes. Big deal.

            To fix the G36’s issues, you’d have to replace all the receivers in existence, which is substantially similar to just adopting a new firearm.

          • cahillm2

            Agreed. Perhaps molding in some sort of metal chassis to increase the rigidity of where the barrel is mounted.

    • I always thought, and even said in a prior article, that the G36 was a rifle that was never meant to be.

      If it was all up to me? They should have adopted the G11. Kraut space magic beats kraut space plastic.

      • On what experience are you basing this opinion? Because Jim Schatz himself (20 year hk employee during the g11 era) admits that the rifle was not ready for military service. Here is a write up he did on the pitfalls of caseless ammo:
        http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2012armaments/Wednesday13614JimSchatz.pdf

      • cahillm2

        G11 was definitely a cool rifle and a concept ahead of its time, but with the reunification way too expensive.

  • MPWS

    Now, you might ask: how this “new” finding will affect Beretta? Were they any smarter designing their own plastic wunder?

    • Not if you read my review!

    • Blue Centurion

      I was wondering the same thing

  • iksnilol

    There is a way to “salvage” the rifles. Just mount optics directly on the barrel.

  • PacNW_Texas

    lesson: polymer makes for a bad heat sink. Whoever thought of embedding a steel trunnion directly into polymer made a bad decision. Yes – it’s cheap. But that’s about it….

    • Phil Hsueh

      No, not necessarily. If you read the article you’ll see that the issue was that H&K ended up using a different, cheaper polymer than what was originally called for. I don’t know for certain that the actual polymer specified would have been more heat resistant/tolerant but that certainly is the implication and the polymer used was definitely a cheap one. Remember, the polymer they used is, according to the article, the same type of polymer used in plastic milk jugs and water bottles, hardly the best material out there. I’m inclined to believe that if they had used the correct polymer then there wouldn’t have been any issues, or at least fewer issues, just think about how much plastic/polymer goes into a modern car inside the engine compartment and how hot that gets yet you don’t have all that plastic melting do you? So this suggests that you can indeed make a polymer with a high heat tolerance.

  • Sam Deeley-Crane

    its quite sad to see the death of a rifle

  • Spencer

    Fraud or incompetence?

    • Dan

      Looking like it is both

  • Steve Truffer

    Would it really have been so hard to simply add an aluminum skeleton? Have a collar or trunnion for the barrel to sit in, have a length of aluminum run along the 1:30, 4:30, 7:30, and 10:30 positions, and reconnect at the rear of the receiver in a rectangular arrangement. Thus, a rail can be affixed to a common metallic point, and mitigate the rifle’s wandering zero.

    • Tom

      Cost wise you might as well of just gone for an aluminium receiver to begin with. As I understand it the cost advantage of polymer is not material but in the manufacture as it’s injection molded rather than machined or stamped etc.

      • dave

        This is basically it. The machine tools to forge, cast, stamp, mill, lathe, or extrude metal parts are extremely expensive. Injection molding machinery is relatively cheap. Also, the molds themselves are relatively cheap for something small like a rifle.

        Probably around $150,000 for the injection molding machine and about another $30,000 for the mold. That’s considerably cheaper than 300k+ for a decent 5 axis CNC machine. Plus injection molding can pop out a part in a matter of a minute or less. There’s also little to no finish work required, whereas with metal parts, there usually needs to be finishing, either by hand or by CNC.

        Injection molding can make high quality polymer parts really inexpensively and quickly.

        • LT Rusty

          Yeah, you can get an injection molding press for cheap-ish, but You left at least one – and probably two, maybe three – zeroes off your mold cost.

  • mosinman

    Arnold(Bundeswehr Technical Center) to HK

  • Fun fact, in other polymer guns, like the Tavor, there is zero polymer connection between the barrel and the optics to prevent this kind of issue.

  • Azril @ Alex Vostox

    Will Heckler & Koch bankrupt by this revelations?

    • BjornTheBrave

      I wouldn’t mind at all given their piss poor attitude towards the commercial market. H&K hardly listens to anybody but tier one, and even then always claims they know best. H&K can go piss up a rope for all I care. Their rucksack is in the hall.

  • Seburo

    It seems HK used a different plastic for their export models. How they could have not this discrepancy known this for years is strange.

    • Chase Buchanan

      As far as I can tell from photos, pretty much every country uses thinner barrels than the United States.

  • Esh325

    It seems fairly definitive now that the G36 has problems. The result will be either H&K will have to swallow their pride and admit there was a problem and modify the design for the army, or the German army will buy HK416’s, or get rifles from a different manufacturer.

    • My original guess was that the Bundeswehr would compromise with H&K and buy 416s…

      I don’t think H&K has that much political leverage anymore. I suspect they’ve been dropped like a hot potato.

      • Colin

        Have heard that hk have been making new L85 uppers, so there’s a third option for you 😉

        • LCON

          Form a Debatable disaster to a absolute Disaster!! HK G38

          • Uniform223

            Its looking to me its going down the same route the M16 went. Great on paper wasn’t thoroughly tested, when in combat couldn’t do it. Proper modifications were made and it got back on top again. I bet 30 years from this stigma will follow the G36 around much like how it follows the M16/M4 despite its service record.

          • In 30 years, the G36 will be an unhappy footnote.

            The problems of the M16 could be solved by not using garbage ammunition and by chrome-lining the barrel, and by giving proper in-theater instruction on the rifle to soldiers and Marines.

            The problems of the G36 cannot be solved except by replacing them with new rifles, or overhauling them to the degree that you have essentially replaced them with new rifles.

          • iksnilol

            I doubt it. I mean, their problem was that somewhere in production somebody changed the type of polymer used. These issues weren’t there when the correct polymer was used. Though replacing thousands of rifles is no small task that either.

          • At no point have I seen any evidence that the issues weren’t there when the correct polyamide polymer was used. As far as I know, initial acceptance testing did not involve regimens that would have exposed these issues – that has been said many times.

          • iksnilol

            How wouldn’t they have picked up on it? 15-45 degrees Celsius is pretty much anywhere (room temp is 20).

            That’s what indicates to me that there was a switch in production somewhere.

          • I’m not sure, honestly. I assume by polyamide they mean nylon, but that covers materials with a wide range of thermal properties. For example, regular Nylon 6 doesn’t improve much over HDPE in the coefficient of thermal expansion department, but fiber-reinforced Nylon 6/6 is almost an order of magnitude better, and comparable to aluminum or steel.

            Being that I’m not a polymer engineer, I don’t know if that’s the whole story, either. There may be other factors that make FR Nylon 6/6 subject to this issue, as well.

          • Dave

            Fiber reinforced polyimide (glass, graphite, carbon, etc) has really good tensile strength and heat tolerance. Very high temperature thermo-set polyimides can maintain their strength up to fairly high temperatures for short periods of time. Most quality polyimides are fine up to 500 degrees F and can take short stints into the 800 degrees F before the material is compromised permanently.

            On paper, at least, the heat shouldn’t be an issue unless the firearms are abused. 1200 degrees F is typically the point where barrels and barrel linings start to get damaged. I’ve got this nagging feeling that if a low quality polymer were substituted for manufacturing the rifle, then this would account for a lot of the problem. Also, the optics/sights not having hard contact with the barrel in any metal-to-metal way is also causing some of the problems.

            Like I said, with the correct polymer, the rifle shouldn’t be experiencing this kind of problem to this degree….on paper… unless it were abused.

            Interesting. I’m really keen to see what’s at the bottom of all of this. Especially from the plastics side of things.

          • Yeah, the silly issues like “leave it out in the sun, POI shifts” might well be due to doping the polymer, but I doubt even FR Nylon 6/6 would make the G36 as heat resistant as is currently fashionable (see M4A1).

      • Sianmink

        German politics have been openly hostile to their arms industry lately. I wouldn’t be surprised of half of them pick up and move to Belgium or Switzerland.

      • Joshua

        Cost of the 416 will be an issue. They are not cheap, but I also do not know the cost of a G36.

        • To make? The G36 is very inexpensive.

          • HobgoblinTruth

            I guess it’s hard to get good quality with cheap price. You get what you pay for.

  • Lance

    Either the Germans will adopt the HK 416 and replace the G-36 or like they did before they will ingnore the report and still use them. Either way HK wins.

    • At this point, I don’t think the Bundeswehr is very happy with H&K at all.

      Initially, I thought this might lead to an HK416 sale, but I suspect that will not happen, now.

      • Esh325

        If they won’t buy from H&K then I imagine they’ll have to buy from outside of Germany as there aren’t really any other manufacturers in Germany that could provide a suitable rifle.

        • Rich Guy

          Styer. That’s German, right?

          I keed…I keed…

          • Ironically, the Steyr AUG was supposedly the only other rifle that the Bundeswehr considered back when the HK G36 was adopted.

        • Well, SIG-Sauer is partially German…

    • Tierlieb

      If Germany wants to buy domestic, they are very limited:

      Alternatives to the HK416 would be the Sig 516 and the CR223/CAR 816 by Hähnel if you are going for a short-stroke piston AR-15 style rifle. SIG is partially German (sorta complicated with all the different companies included) and Hänel is completely German but since the rifle is also sold by Caracal, I have no idea who builds it. Also the Caracal pistol did not seem to look too good when they played with it at the Bundeswehr University in HH.

      There are also some companies doing DI AR-15s: Schmeisser might be able to get in there, they flaunt their military and LEO sales, but to my knowledge never sold big capacities.

      Oberland Arms has been making excellent rifles for years, but is very dedicated to making civilian rifles. They lack the capacity for sure.

      Same with DAR, who have quite an ego, but even smaller capacities and way less experience.

  • Guest

    I wonder how the MP7 and UMP45 hold up

    • Tom

      Considering the calibre, short range use and likely limited volume of fire probable fine.

  • BjornTheBrave

    The Bundeswehr wants to switch to the HK416A5 altogether, as it’s KSK’s standard rifle and they’re very happy with it. the G36 will be ditched sooner or later.

  • Weaver

    I like this idea but will throw this in there:
    use the dual optic that we usually see on typical German military rifles. Then us b&t rail for another test. I would like to see if there is a difference in performance between the two.

    • Buy me the parts and I’ll do it!

  • tts

    Can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic. I certainly hope you are.

    Poe’s Law in full effect here.

    Lots more veteran’s getting early knee and hip replacements + having major back issues with current weight loads. We definitely need less and not more weight.

  • New Man

    There are several factors here that need to be examined…

    Optics/sights: what kind of optic/sight did they use during this testing, and what kind did the German army use in Afgan? It’s common knowledge that the standard/original carrying handle sight is crap and have the tendency to move around either due to recoil or heat. That’s why most users repalced it with a flat top carrying handle and mount third party optics.

    Barrel: It’s been said many times before that the G36 version use by the Bundeswehr has VERY thin pencil barrel, and we all know pencil barrels don’t fare well with high rate of fire and quickly lose accuracy when heat up.

    Is the G36 use by the Bundeswehr isn’t exactly the same as the the Export version use by other users.

    Politics and foul play: Could it be possible that there are some foul play involved within various level of the German government and the German army itself?

    Take those factors into consideration, I think they (or we) need to conduct a test with various version of the G36s in various configurations and sights/optics, to get a much more concrete data. Did they even bother to test the “export” version of the G36, for example? From what I’ve learned, the Export version has heavier barrel and several improvements that the Bundeswehr’s version doesn’t.

    • TJbrena

      True, there is some bad blood between H&K and the Bundeswehr. H&K treated the Bundeswehr more and more like a captive market as the Cold War went on, and designed things they didn’t really want, like the G11. Then post-reunification H&K was nearly broke, got bought out by the Brits who made them fix the SA80. H&K went back to being German-owned later, maybe felt betrayed by the German gov’t.

      Plus, the export variant is different. That may offer an alternative in the short-term. The Latvian variant of the G36KV is neat.

    • The issue is that there is a polymer interface between the sights and the barrel, and polymer has a high coefficient of thermal expansion (especially if H&K was cheaping out on the polymer as it seems they were).

      I know of no variant of G36 or XM8 that solves this problem.

  • TJbrena

    How does the G36A4 stack up in all this? I’d imagine with ventilated aluminum hanguards it’d deal with heat somewhat better. If they flat-out switched the handguard to one of those G36-specialized Picatinny rail systems with loadsa ventilation that’d be even better. But the problem with the contact between the sights, polymer and barrel has to be fixed.

    Not sure if the XM8 had that problem, since it was designed to change barrels fast. Probably a different trunnion system. Plus, the later iterations of the prototype resolved the melting problem.

    • The A4 has the same polymer receiver and the same polymer connection between the barrel and sight.

      The problem isn’t the trunnion, it’s the polymer receiver being the only connection between the barrel and the sights. So far as I know, all G36 models and all XM8s share this architecture.

  • MR

    What does General Scales have to say about all this?

    • mosinman

      i’m sure he’d conclude that the Bundswher was infiltrated by Ar-15 lobbyists

  • Burst

    So, relevant question: Did the Bundeswehr subject all the variants consecutively, or just the baseline G36? From what I recall reading, most of the Army rifles haven’t had the trunnion upgrade, and are still using the integral optic.

    I am not suggesting that a modernized G36 wouldn’t have issues, but maybe not to the same extent. Also:

    >The precision problems are most pronounced in the range 15 to 45 degrees Celsius.
    That’s pretty bad.

    • I am not under the impression that the trunnion upgrade helps. In no variant of the G36 or XM8 of which I am aware does the optic interface with the barrel through a solid metal connection.

      • Burst

        > In no variant of the G36 or XM8 of which I am aware does the optic interface with the barrel through a solid metal connection.
        Agreed, but that’s perhaps not the only issue.

        A softer trunnion could induce barrel wobble. The picatinny mount is visibly much beefier and better supported than the default optic.

        Both of those could affect the data, although perhaps not the overall conclusion.

        • The trunnion/barrel extension is made of steel. It’s the polymer receiver that is the issue, and the Picatinny rail is still attached to the barrel via polymer, not steel.

  • gunsandrockets

    This is really bad. Bad for Germany and really bad for HK.

  • moonstar

    New design rifles are always risky investment. Because only by time you can refine it. Think about AR- 15 series rifles, it cost money, time even life of some soldiers during its maturing process.

    Because of these facts, an army must choose weapons well tested or proved ones in real conditions.

  • Squirreltakular

    You forgot day/night optics, radios, GPS, extra batteries for everything, sickle sticks or grappling hooks, etc, etc, etc…

    I think the Army has the right idea in trying to equip all their squads with 7.62 DM support. Between them and your 240s, that’s a decent amount of longer-range hitting power, although the critics’ point about then having the majority of your force effectively out of the fight does hold water.

    • Uniform223

      “although the critics’ point about then having the majority of your force effectively out of the fight does hold water.”

      Not much water though, maybe like half a 1qt canteen. Most if not all engagements still are within the effective range (depends how you judge effective. Generally for the military its, “can you still hit that target”). of the M16/M4 and SAW.
      Really from my understanding in parts of Trashghanistan was that some engagements were from taliban/al qaeda with RPGs, Heavy MGs, and other small arms (AKs and such) firing from a much elevated position using “plunging fire” or ridge-line to ridge-line.

  • Buy me the rail and I’ll do it.

    • Kratisto

      Heh, maybe I would if I could, but it’s a bit difficult since I’m not from the US! Anyways, it’s only a hundred bucks, and that’s nothing compared to the gun itself, ammo for the test…etc.

      I believe a proper alu upper rail (not the KAC split one) should be critical to the results of the test, since the lack of rigidity of the dual optics and G36C plastic rail have been reported many times as factors causing POI shifts.

      It’s telling when all the SF organizations that use the G36 beyond police or plain army grunts, use them with an aluminum upper rail: German, Spanish, Lithuanian, Latvian, and Sweden seem to agree in that. The first three have been using the G36 in hot countries without complains of lack of accuracy, despite many ones about the ergonomics and poor durability of the stock/integrated optics.

  • USMC03Vet

    So one of two possibilities to explain this.
    1. HK changed the manufacturing process of the rifle for a cheaper quality material having to known it would result in disaster without notifying anyone.
    2. NOBODY in their military could tell that there were accuracy issues from basic use of the rifles which would be pretty damning.

    This is going to get good!

    Either way this is disaster.

  • ghost

    Seems to me this article is about one specific rifle, not a would have, could have, should have but didn’t. HK says there are no problems, they build it to be crap? All of them or just recent ones? I don’t understand German even in English. Test the rifle as is, warts and all.

  • kiljoy616

    I think I will stick with a quality mid price AR with teflon bolt carrier. Useless weight and bulk.

  • kiljoy616

    You have no idea what your talking about. We can’t all be you little girl.

    • Dan

      I think he was being sarcastic

  • James in Australia

    It would be interesting to find out where they sourced the plastic or if they subcontracted the molding. Back in the 90’s in Australia a company I was working for was manufacturing large plastic bus bar separators for a German company. The reason was the recycling laws in Germany, if they made them locally they had to be able to recycle them at end of life.
    Material substitution or adulation is not unknown in the plastics industry.

    • MR

      Maybe some production engineer changed the polymer used, to comply with those statutes, and failed to get authorization through proper channels? Or some level management O.K.’ed the change without going high enough or having proper testing done. Such lapses in communication aren’t unheard of, either.

  • With all the bad blood H&K just earned? I doubt it, not without heads rolling first.

    Or perhaps German arms procurement is even more mind-bogglingly corrupt than I have assumed.

    • Tom

      Problem is the German Government will be under pressure to use a domestic manufacturer. Which leaves only one option unless Mauser can gear up to quickly.

      Unless they want Greece to provide them to pay off the debt :).

      • I think H&K and Rheinmetall’s gentleman’s agreement has expired (see the HK121), so it would be funny to see the latter jump into rifle design as a result of this.

    • BjornTheBrave

      Like Tom said: they won’t have a viable alternative. Maybe they’ll look at SwissArms (most likely) or SIG Sauer GmbH (not very likely as SIG is a pistol and not a rifle manufacturer). Merkel is effectively dismantling Germany’s arms industry. H&K are already in dire straits, this may be the final neck in the coffin. German politics is not going to bail them out, even with the Bundeswehr being dependent on H&K. This is what socialism, gov regulation and lack of competition does to the evonomy, gentlemen.

  • Guest

    She looks rather cross with this

  • HKmaster

    She looks rather cross with her g36….

    And check out that trigger finger!

  • Don Ward

    Time to start breaking out the surplus Mauser 98Ks…

  • Mazryonh

    Does this mean the XM8 would have “inherited” these problems as well?

  • El Duderino

    HK once built one of the simplest, strongest rifles in the world, the G3. Seems like every design gets more complex and weak. Maybe they should go back to sewing machine parts.

  • Colin

    If they decided to go with a replacement aluminium upper, what issues would that bring bring? Would weight go up automatically or what about material thickness – aluminium can be thinner than polymers right?

    • Manufacturing it would be the biggest challenge. The easiest, but most expensive method and worst method would be to mill the new uppers. Forging would allow you to make the lightest upper and keep your current architecture, but requires the most capital outlay.

      Extruding would be the cheapest to get started, and very cheap to produce, but it’s incompatible with the G36 as currently designed, and can be heavy if the designer is not careful.

      • DetroitMan

        My understanding is that forging becomes pretty cheap once you produce enough to pay for the tooling. That is one reason why forging has been specified for US service rifles at least as far back as the M1. If they are going to make a few million of them, forging could be the way to go. But I don’t know what the projected demand is for the (updated) G36.

        • Right, as I said, it requires the most capital outlay for tooling. The product itself is very cheap, once you do.

          Heckler and Koch already has forging machines, for the HK416. So they could conceivably use them to make new G36 receivers, though whether that would actually be cheaper than just buying new 416s, who knows?

          • DetroitMan

            Agreed. A forged G36 upper could prove to be more complex to make and more expensive than the HK416 forgings. Two more points in favor of the HK416 is that it’s available right now and it’s a proven design. Presumably a replacement G36 receiver would have to be designed and tested, which would take time. If the German Army moves quickly to replace the faulty G36, it’s unlikely an updated G36 will be around to compete. Maybe the HK33 will finally get a shot at stardom… Just kidding. My bet is on the HK416, a SIG 550 series, or a new design that will emerge to compete for the G36 replacement.

  • Ted

    What isnt clear to me is how it’s taken twenty years or so to discover this. An accuracy differential like this shouldn’t be very difficult to stumble upon. Is the claim that this issue with all production G36 rifles or was there is run-change at some point where a different plastic formula was introduced at manufacture?

    • HobgoblinTruth

      The explanation you are looking is “corruption”.

    • Tierlieb

      We used to joke that the German Bundeswehr was meant to stop the Soviet attacker until real military shows up. Joking aside, the rifle was built twenty years ago (Kosovo started in 1998, first time Germany starting taking this war fighting thing seriously) for a conscript army whose name translates to “defense force”. So the expected usage was different from now.

      This weekend, I trained with two infantry grunts who had done 2 and 7 tours in Afghanistan – in 1995 a situation that would produce such veterans was not thought of.

      That’s one other reason (besides corruption) why no one cared to specify a proper test, as H&K is happy to point out in their press releases.

      Another might be that the German government actually treated H&K’s big research effort of the G11 very badly after the unification, so no one was looking too closely at their alternative bid. Which is sad, because the East Germans were treated similarly and the Wieger Stg 94x series of AK clones, while not high tech, would have been a reliable gun.

  • Core

    This sounds like politics to me. They want something newer, and better and they are starting a propaganda campaign to get money for a new project. Sounds like familiar tactics. Nothing but good can come of this.

    • I reckon they want a rifle that doesn’t experience a 20 inch POI shift when you leave it out in the sunlight, yes.

  • Several times in the comments I have mentioned that the XM8 would have suffered this same issue because it has the same receiver construction.

    Over the course of talking to another reader about this, it came to light that the XM8’s receiver architecture may have been different than the G36 – in otherwords, I might be wrong about that.

    There’s a quote below from Jim Schatz, who worked for H&K during the XM8’s development, and whom I would consider a subject matter expert on the XM8, regarding its construction:

    “The PCAP’s mount was fully retained and quick attaching (spring actuated throw lever), locking in place via specially designed and tapered “studs” into a specially design female “holes” with the same pressure each time to insure return to zero under any circumstances. PCAP’s are molded into the polymer at various places and in any number desired to allow for a range of adjustment front and rear. When attached to the metal receiver inserts they are 100% bore sight retentive. When in polymer they are fine for light and fore grips and bipods. (The XM8 had all bore sight required devices [laser aimer and reflex sight] mounted on PCAP’s that were integral with the receiver inserts).”

    This isn’t totally convincing that the XM8 wouldn’t have solved the G36’s sighting issue, but it’s enough to get me to look at the issue further, and retract my statement that the XM8 would have also suffered from the POI shift issue. That may not be the case, in fact.

  • hkguns

    So it took 20 years to uncover this design flaw? (Scratching head) I suspect there is more to this than is obvious on the surface.

    • HobgoblinTruth

      It’s called “corruption”. I wonder how much HK paid to earlier generals and other people to keep their mouths shut…

  • Graham2

    J-B Weld, that’ll fix it!

  • 6.5x55Swedish

    This is why you make guns out of metal. The gun is the worst place to start cutting grams. Instead the armies should buy lighter body armour, that way they can cut weight without cutting performance.

  • Chase Buchanan

    “carrying 5.56 is for women.”

    Of whom there are plenty in the U.S. Army and Marines.

  • mosinman

    i wonder if using a ceramic insulator between the barrel lug and receiver could help…. or just use lightweight metals in your rifle next time 🙂

    • Phil Hsueh

      The issue is not that it’s polymer but it’s the wrong kind of polymer, if they actually use/used the correct polymer then this might be a non-issue and would negate the need for any sort of liner or insulator.

      • mosinman

        or using an aluminum or magnesium receiver

  • john

    To me, skimping on gun parts is the equivalent of skimping on automobile brakes, eventually, someone is going to be killed because you wanted to save a few pennies. I hope they get BURIED for doing this.

  • C.

    Regardless of what will replace the G36, HK will be involved. With an election in Germany coming up in 2017, no politician is going to advocate purchasing firearms from foreign countries without them being produced in Germany. Would the U.S. military have awarded the contract to FN if there weren’t a U.S. subsidiary and all FN M16s were to be manufactured in Belgium?

    • Phil Hsueh

      The US does it that way is because it’s mandated by law, anything the US military uses/is issued has to be made in the US.

  • Vitsaus

    I’d love to see the descent into madness happening on the HK forums right now.

  • john

    This makes me sad because I really like their pistols. I know they were already hurting financially and I hope this doesn’t prove catastrophic.

  • Brian M

    This is old news. G36 melting problems, including the sunlight thing, have been known about for years; it’s only just recently that Ha und Ka are getting actually taken to task for making a piece of junk that melts if you happen to say, have it while it is on a planet orbiting a standard sized yellow main sequence star within the habitable range in conditions wherein liquid water exists at a temperature range from between 473 and 573 degrees Kelvin. Blimey, I live on such a planet!

  • supergun

    Sounds like a BMW.

  • MichaelZWilliamson

    So which HK is better? The overpriced knockoff of the AR18, or the overpriced knockoff of the CETME?

  • parabellum

    Who did the English translation? Painful reading.

    • MR

      I’m thinking Google, or maybe Babble-fish. Some translation program that needs more time in beta.

  • MissAnthropy

    If it is proven that H&K did in fact use non-spec plastics (polyethylene vs. polyamide) and did in fact forge Bundeswehr acceptance marks, this could be the ruin of that company.

  • robocop33

    Really troubling as H&K has always had a great reputation. This changing of materials and the resulting lost of accuracy and usability is going to hurt H&K.

  • Core

    I think this comment is ever so mildly out of place since he didn’t specify the details to his grand plan on how he would reduce troop loadout weight to compensate for the heavier ammunition and rifle platforms. But good on you for tearing into the Rich Guy, who shoots three gun.. Hahaaa xX)

  • Jamie Clemons

    Very difficult to read the poor translation. It sounds like the rifle is not reliable above 60 degrees F unless it is the one without the polystyrene.

  • John Daniels

    TL;DR Version- The rifle is flawed from it’s core design principles, is disgustingly inaccurate, and anything/everything will cause some kind of problem. If you look at it funny, it’ll have accuracy problems.

  • Anthony “stalker6recon”

    I have handled the G36 while stationed in Germany with the 1st ID. I thought the integrated optics were nice, and thr look was impressive. Once in hand, I felt like I was holding a toy, it just didn’t feel right.

    I am a huge H&K fan, having owned a few of their USP’s, which were of superior quality (in my opinion), too similar pistols near the same price point. I also liked the feel and handling of Sig in similar sizes. (I prefer full sized weapons, over the compacts, for both the ammo amounts, and the control offered by the full size versions)

    I am also disappointed with this report, since H&K can do better, and should. They have held the top of the SMG world in special ops/law enforcement for decades, with the beloved MP5 and it’s variants. There are new contenders in this area, but I suspect that many in LE and the military, will still reach for the MP5 in many instance, depending on the mission.

    The 416 upper was very popular, when I was on active duty, and out performed the Colt issued M4 in endurance. I still loved my Colt issued M4, and found that most malfunctions were caused by magazines, or deformed rounds, rather than the M4 itself. I just discarded the offending magazines, until I had 7 working magazines, that never caused a malfunction. There was always the “round displacement” double feed, but was easy to clear when you practiced it.

    I only hope that H&K does the right thing to restore their reputation. They should create a weapon system that exceeds the requirements, and replace all the G36’s currently in service. They have the money, hollywood alone must make them a pretty penny, since their weapons are invariably used in action films.

    H&K, do the right thing, restore confidence and reputation, before you are overtaken by another manufacturer, there is already a huge amount of competitors, and your name has given you the sales you desire, for a long, long time. Time you earn the support, so many governments and individuals have given you for so long.

    Note, I never used the 416,but always heard great things about the weapon. Very clean, even after heavy use at the range, with little fouling due to the piston cycle. If I had a choice of civilian AR’s, I would choose the 416 over any other , but price is a huge factor. I think you pay a lot, just for the name. So I would look for another piston AR, at a lower price point.

    Finally, come on H&K, you are better than this……….. Fix it.

  • bmartin79

    Well at least I know not to ever even think about one of those .

  • petru sova

    I hear the FN Plasticky Scar rifle is also cracking plasticky frames and wearing out plasticky magazine latches. You can only go so cheap when building a machine before the design comes back to haunt you.

  • André Philipps

    And yet no actual big complaints have been forwarded by the troops on deployment or any other users worldwide – the only complaint I ever heard out of Afghanistan was that it was unable to penetrate the various mud walls. But that’s not suprising, some of those freakin’ mini-fortresses the Afghans call houses can no-sell bloody 20mm shells.

    Sounds like the MoD just wants to make an example out of HK.

  • Mazryonh

    Let’s suppose that, due to this news, the G36 is thrown out as the Standard-Issue weapon of the Bundeswehr. Would H&K end up saving any money if they switched to the XM8, since that weapon can use G36 magazines and some other parts from that rifle?

  • Some guy in Rio

    And the G36s(E, KE and CE variants) used by Spain armed forces? Any complaints or feedback regarding this matter?