SAR-21 vs G-36
-
Okay, its our home made assault rifle vs the German one. I checked through the available tech. specifications and got the following comparisons.
G-36 Cyclic rate is 750RPM, vs SAR-21's 650 RPM max.
In terms of Length, the Vanilla SAR-21 w/o stands about 805mm.
G-36 = 998mm
G-36k = 860mm
G-36C = 720mm
SAR-21 weight, w/o addons is 3.82kg.
Vs G-36 = 3.6kg, G-36k = 3.3kg, G-36C = 2.8kg.
The G-36 series seem much lighter, and equally ass capable as the SAR-21. Personally, I'd sure like to be running around with a 2.8kg weapon. =) A whole KG lighter than the SAR-21. -
Hmm...can't seem to find any pictures on it. Shotgun, mind posting some links on photos of this G-36??Originally posted by Shotgun:The G-36 series seem much lighter, and equally ass capable as the SAR-21. Personally, I'd sure like to be running around with a 2.8kg weapon. =) A whole KG lighter than the SAR-21.
Nah...personally for me, issue me a carbine instead of the M16, me will be very happy oredi. =) -
But then SAR21 overall length is 805mm (bullpup design) against G36 998mm? More cumbersome to carry a longer weapon especially in close up building warfare.
SAR21 does not need zeroing. So it's just pick up and shot. Quite handy.
Lastly make in s'pore means a whole lot cheaper... (I hope
) -
For info on G-36 go to :
http://world.guns.ru/assault/as14-e.htm
For info on SAR-21 go to:
http://www.janes.com/defence/land_forces/news/idr/idr000531_2_n.shtml
Maybe there are better site shotgun can recomend. -
Although I trust JDW's reports, I had yet to try myself. I would like to see for myself if it restains the "non-zeroing" after bashing, banging and droping during exercises. (waiting impatiently)Originally posted by seow_leow:But then SAR21 overall length is 805mm (bullpup design) against G36 998mm? More cumbersome to carry a longer weapon especially in close up building warfare.
SAR21 does not need zeroing. So it's just pick up and shot. Quite handy.
Lastly make in s'pore means a whole lot cheaper... (I hope )
Cheaper or not, we won't know. But is good to be self dependent in basic items like guns and ammo. One less thing to worry abt in times of conflicts.
Hmm...but guess got to make every bullet count. Cause I don't think we can go bayonet fighting with the SAR21. -
Okay, its our home made assault rifle vs the German one. I checked through the available tech. specifications and got the following comparisons.
Well, as far as I can recall, bad points about the G36 is that the buttstock is rather fragile. Also, though it may be longer than the SAR-21, the barrel length is probably shorter because it isn't of a bull-pup style design.
G-36 Cyclic rate is 750RPM, vs SAR-21's 650 RPM max.
In terms of Length, the Vanilla SAR-21 w/o stands about 805mm.
G-36 = 998mm
G-36k = 860mm
G-36C = 720mm
SAR-21 weight, w/o addons is 3.82kg.
Vs G-36 = 3.6kg, G-36k = 3.3kg, G-36C = 2.8kg.
The G-36 series seem much lighter, and equally ass capable as the SAR-21. Personally, I'd sure like to be running around with a 2.8kg weapon. =) A whole KG lighter than the SAR-21.
Also, you have to compare the standard SAR-21's weight of 3.82kg, to the standard G36's weight of 3.6 kg. You can't compared the standard SAR-21 to the G36c. Its like comparing big apples to small oranges.
From what I know about the SAR-21, only two things I don't like about it so far is that the backup iron sights are rather crude and will be probably quite useless should the optical sights go kaput, and the plastic magazines. I'm wondering how hardy the magazines are, and how they're inserted into the magazine well; as in are they slotted straight in like the M16, or are they put in one end first then the other, like in the AK47. Also, I would like to know if they can accept the standard M16 magazines if they need should arise. If not, I don't think it would be good if SAF should start getting more involved in UN peacking missions or other joint missions, as M16 magazines are the NATO standard. Does anyone here know such details?
Btw, the offical H&K site is http://www.heckler-koch.de/html/index.html and the official SAR-21 site is http://www.sar-21.com/
Should be able to find plenty of information on both weapons there.
Anyway, here's a pic of an SAR-21:
and here's a pic of an H&K G36:
-
I also forgot to mention the laser-sighting device of the SAR-21. Wouldn't it very fragile and pricey both to purchase and maintain?
Also, when exactly is the SAR-21 going to become standard issue and completely phase out the M16?
If anyone here is in the SAF feel free to comment on the above issues -
Originally posted by chamenos:I also forgot to mention the laser-sighting device of the SAR-21. Wouldn't it very fragile and pricey both to purchase and maintain?
As an ex-wit team member, i suggest installing an adaptar on the rifle so that it can mount those lecturing laser pointer where we can buy at mama shop at nothing more then $9.99.
Also, when exactly is the SAR-21 going to become standard issue and completely phase out the M16?
Think they had being talking about it for quite a while. Maybe to be carry out in phases. Not to forget familiarisation courses for ORD personnel as well. Have a nice sunday morning.
If anyone here is in the SAF feel free to comment on the above issues -
Well, I've touched the SAR-21 rifle b4 and here are some points I wanna make:Originally posted by chamenos:I also forgot to mention the laser-sighting device of the SAR-21. Wouldn't it very fragile and pricey both to purchase and maintain?
Also, when exactly is the SAR-21 going to become standard issue and completely phase out the M16?
If anyone here is in the SAF feel free to comment on the above issues
-Eh, personally I'm a left-hander and left master eye, I heard they say SAR-21's only for right handers and the cartridge ejecter's too near to my cheek if I carry with my left hand. Bummer!!
-The charging hander is a "flip-out and pull" type. I felt it's rather flumsy. cocking a rifle needs some force and it's might give problems and inconvience during the heat of combat.
-butt's pretty heavy, but I guess most bullpup's are like that.
-Wonder it have "quick load" mechanism like the M-16's "empty mag, take out mag, insert new mag, ease-spring, fire". I dunwant to cock the rifle again everytime I load a mag.
-I wouldn't worry about the laser sight, the optical sight looks more fragile than the laser sight, but it's good to know that there are rubber covers to protect the lens (like camera). I heard things get messy if it rains or fogs, bummer!
-Though the rifle's heavier than the M16, it's feels just as light, probably due the the lower center of gravity and the length. it's like you'll feel that the carbine is light than the M16, but the actually fact is both weights the same.
-The mag fits into the rifle like the m16, you'll need to slot it in till it "clicks". the mags are not M16 compatible, Bummer! Although, they are plastic, they're tougher than you think. They are like some sort of "industry plastic", like those they use in car bummers. The bottom of the mag can be open to clear dust I think.
-Heard 7SIR's using it now. Some other NS unit might be too, I dunno. but BMTC will be the last to convert.... -
Agreed, a better comparison is between the SAR-21 and standard G-36, since the carbine and compact versions are used for different missions than the standard version.Originally posted by chamenos:Well, as far as I can recall, bad points about the G36 is that the buttstock is rather fragile. Also, though it may be longer than the SAR-21, the barrel length is probably shorter because it isn't of a bull-pup style design.
Also, you have to compare the standard SAR-21's weight of 3.82kg, to the standard G36's weight of 3.6 kg. You can't compared the standard SAR-21 to the G36c. Its like comparing big apples to small oranges.
From what I know about the SAR-21, only two things I don't like about it so far is that the backup iron sights are rather crude and will be probably quite useless should the optical sights go kaput, and the plastic magazines. I'm wondering how hardy the magazines are, and how they're inserted into the magazine well; as in are they slotted straight in like the M16, or are they put in one end first then the other, like in the AK47. Also, I would like to know if they can accept the standard M16 magazines if they need should arise. If not, I don't think it would be good if SAF should start getting more involved in UN peacking missions or other joint missions, as M16 magazines are the NATO standard. Does anyone here know such details?
To your questions, I've fiddled with the SAR-21 extensively during AA2000 and 2002, the magazines are standard M-16 type, inserted the same way. Fully interchangeable.
As someone who has fired the M-16 and SAR-80, and handled the SAR-21, I would say the difference in weight is quite obvious, though its not necessarily a bad thing. It does feel "beefier" than the other 2 weapons, and looks to me like its a sturdier firing platform than the M-16 or SAR-80, though I've never actually fired it.(Don't ask me why I didn't take up CIS offer for a free trip to Mandai to test-fire the SAR-21 in AA2000, I still wondering why too)
I've read a web article of a US SWAT test for the SAR-21, apparently it scored very high marks, and its lack of zeroing requirement is rated very highly, even after dropping the weapon and having it passed round to various shooters. So maybe this might answer your question.
I really can't remember the URL of the article, or if was from a book, I'm sorry to say
-
my unit is not even using M-16 or SAR-21...we are using SAR-80!!! wonder anyone here has seen this big n bulky rifle before?? the stripping of this rifle is tedious enough....i would be glad if i am issued with an AR-15 or M-16Originally posted by chamenos:I also forgot to mention the laser-sighting device of the SAR-21. Wouldn't it very fragile and pricey both to purchase and maintain?
Also, when exactly is the SAR-21 going to become standard issue and completely phase out the M16?
If anyone here is in the SAF feel free to comment on the above issues -
U mean u r still using SAR 80 ?
During my NSF days, SAR 80 was the standard issue for logistic units but the last I heard it was gradually phased out. Reason unknown.
Right now, in my NS unit (a log unit) we are using the standard M16S1. -
U mean u r still using SAR 80 ?
During my NSF days, SAR 80 was the standard issue for logistic units but the last I heard it was gradually phased out. Reason unknown.
Right now, in my NS unit (a log unit) we are using the standard M16S1. -
SAR 80 is not phased out yet...not from all log units anywayOriginally posted by hunter:U mean u r still using SAR 80 ?
During my NSF days, SAR 80 was the standard issue for logistic units but the last I heard it was gradually phased out. Reason unknown.
Right now, in my NS unit (a log unit) we are using the standard M16S1.
My log unit still used the SAR80 when I was in there from 97-99, my cousin is in that same unit now(coincidence???) and hes still using it... -
Does anyone know if SAF bought any SAR-88? I haven't seen one around or in any pictures of any SAF guys carrying one.Originally posted by Viper52:SAR 80 is not phased out yet...not from all log units anyway
My log unit still used the SAR80 when I was in there from 97-99, my cousin is in that same unit now(coincidence???) and hes still using it...
As for the SAR-21, I read that there is 1 american company trying to sell SAR-21 in the States. -
Silenthunter:
They at first were thinking of making parts interchangible for left-handed shooters if I remember correctly but apparently, they did some research and found out the learning curve for shooting in the other hand wasn't too steep so they did away with it. I have to agree with it to a certain extent cos it isn't that hard for me to fire from my left hand (I'm right handed).
I agree to the charging hander looks and feels rather flimsy. I think it would have been better if they had simply made it like the FA-MAS kind of charging handle. The FA-MAS one certainly looks much more sturdy.
I don't think it has a bolt hold open device though.....which means that the bolt will have to be cycled manually each time the magazine is emptied, much like an AK47/AKM.
About the optical sight, I think they intentionally put it rather far into the carrying handle so it would be quite hard to damage it physically. As for the fogging, I think most new optical scopes have some gas inside which prevents it or something. I'm not sure though, so correct me if I'm wrong.
Viper52:
Regarding the magazines, how exactly does the magazine catch on the SAR-21 hold onto the M16 magazines? If I recall correctly, the magazine release for the SAR-21 is at the back of the magazine well, so I would assume that it would catch onto something on the back of the magazine, whereas the M16 magazine catch holds onto the groove on the side of the M16 magazines.
About the SAR80, I've been trying find out stuff about it over the internet but info about it as hard to come by and is usually very sketchy. All I know about the two locally produced rifles, the SR88 and SAR80, is that they are derived from the AR18/AR180 design and they were meant as a replacement for the M16, due to licensing issues from Colt. Since they already had a working design (two in fact), why didn't they totally replace the M16s with them and instead only did a half-job? Was it the cost, or flaws in the design, etc? And will the introduction of the SAR21 result in just another rifle that is issued only to some units, which would probably create a logistics problem? And yes, I'm wondering why you didn't take up the offer to test fire the SAR-21
Apparently, almost everyone who has reviewed the SAR-21 thinks rather highly of it and to be honest, its quite a well thought out design. (AK style gas system, bullpup layout, etc) I still think they should have designed a select-fire lever that was as easy to operate as the M16's one though...in a combat situation being able to switch from semi-auto to full-auto should be something that is done in the blink of an eye and normally not require removing either the firing or supporting hand from the gun. (the H&K style fire-select lever comes to mind...its better than the M16 one IMO)
Laksa:
I agree with you....I think would rather be issued an M16 over the SAR80 anytime, since the M16 has been proven to be rather reliable. The SAR80, Ultimax100, SR88, and all other Singapore-designed weapons are supposed to be on the whole, well-designed and reliable though. If I recall correctly, the SAR80 has been adopted by at least one country (either European or Middle Eastern) as its standard issue rifle. I can't remember the exact country and can't find the website I got this info from though...sorry about it.
hunter:
Why was the SAR80 only issued to logistics unit? Why not the basic M16? Just curious...
Joe Black:
I don't think I've actually seen the SR88 anywhere else other than in one of the exhibits in the Singapore Discovery Centre.
About the American company trying to sell the SAR-21, I would be too surprised. One fact that few people seem to know is that Singapore is one of the largest exporters of weapons in South-East Asia, if I'm not wrong.
Anyway, for everyone's viewing pleasure, here's a picture of an SAR80:
& here's a picture of an SR88A:
By the way, sorry about the lousy quality of the pictures. Information and pictures of both weapons are really hard to find and that's the best I could do. Also, does anyone know what the hole in the buttstock of the SR88A is for? -
I forgot to add one more thing; Does anyone know anymore details about the SAR80 and SR88? For example, the production runs, current inventory of it, the history, R&D process, etc. Any information regarding both weapons would be appreciated
Also, why was the SAR80 chosen over the SR88 to be issued to logistics units? -
Oh, and one last thing before I go sleep. Does anyone know if the SAR-21 uses the older M193 5.56mm round, or will the SAF be gradually upgrading to the M855/SS109 5.56mm round, which is now the NATO standard? (I'm guessing Viper52 would know )
Lastly, which types of small arms ammunition do we manufacture locally, and which types do we purchase from other countries? I'm just wondering how self-sufficient we can be in times of war. -
this is what i feel about the SAR 80: its much more sturdier during firing to the m-16 and it is rumoured to be 'more' accurate than the m-16 according to those who had used the rifle for their marksmanship range. the major flaw is at its foresight tip---> doesn't glow at night! so its practically useless once the sky turns dark, not forgetting its weight!
-
Hi ppl..i've read with some interest on this discussion on SAR80..
This is because i was an armourer with one of the few logistics units to have SAR80..
The SAR80 is indeed more accurate than the m16 due to it being heavier, it is also easier to clean as the exhaust gas only fouls its gas regulator system..
Since it does not have a tritium foresight tip(glowing type)..thus no night ranges for us(yippee)
However, i would say that the m16 is a better rifle as it is not only lighter, but also more reliable in the long run service life..
The SAR88 is meant more for export purposes, especially to countries with desert as its gas system is better in reducing fouling...
My few humble opinions... -
wah..all Arm expert here...well..i believe M16 to be a much reliable weapon..i haven try out with a SAR21 yet..but i handle it before..i feel very uncomfortable wif it...bulky..the placement of the grip is weird...so i prefer M16 n AR15
-
The good thing about the SAR21 is that now left and right handed shooters would feel at ease cocking the rifle as well as releasing the magazine catch. Not sure if the casing ejection port has a deflector to prevent hot casings from flying into the face of left handed shooters like the M-16A2/A3 but I would think so.Originally posted by chamenos:Silenthunter:
They at first were thinking of making parts interchangible for left-handed shooters if I remember correctly but apparently, they did some research and found out the learning curve for shooting in the other hand wasn't too steep so they did away with it. I have to agree with it to a certain extent cos it isn't that hard for me to fire from my left hand (I'm right handed).
I agree to the charging hander looks and feels rather flimsy. I think it would have been better if they had simply made it like the FA-MAS kind of charging handle. The FA-MAS one certainly looks much more sturdy.
I don't think it has a bolt hold open device though.....which means that the bolt will have to be cycled manually each time the magazine is emptied, much like an AK47/AKM.
About the optical sight, I think they intentionally put it rather far into the carrying handle so it would be quite hard to damage it physically. As for the fogging, I think most new optical scopes have some gas inside which prevents it or something. I'm not sure though, so correct me if I'm wrong.
Regarding the magazines, how exactly does the magazine catch on the SAR-21 hold onto the M16 magazines? If I recall correctly, the magazine release for the SAR-21 is at the back of the magazine well, so I would assume that it would catch onto something on the back of the magazine, whereas the M16 magazine catch holds onto the groove on the side of the M16 magazines.
Apparently, almost everyone who has reviewed the SAR-21 thinks rather highly of it and to be honest, its quite a well thought out design. (AK style gas system, bullpup layout, etc) I still think they should have designed a select-fire lever that was as easy to operate as the M16's one though...in a combat situation being able to switch from semi-auto to full-auto should be something that is done in the blink of an eye and normally not require removing either the firing or supporting hand from the gun. (the H&K style fire-select lever comes to mind...its better than the M16 one IMO)
Why was the SAR80 only issued to logistics unit? Why not the basic M16? Just curious...
About the American company trying to sell the SAR-21, I would be too surprised. One fact that few people seem to know is that Singapore is one of the largest exporters of weapons in South-East Asia, if I'm not wrong.
The charging handle looks deceptively flimsy, but let me assure you, I repeatedly yanked that thing pretty hard when I checked it out, it seemed sturdy enough
You're right about cycling manually after the magazine is emptied. Unlike the M-16/AR-15 the SAR21 has no ease spring feature, after the mag is emptied, the bolt remains locked at the open position, a new mag is inserted, charging handle pulled again to return the bolt. Again, while I would think it would slow down *slightly* the shooter compared to the ease spring, it would make it easier for lefties. (FYI I'm a leftie by day but a rightie at the range, whatever that means...). Ergonomics wins out.
I can't remember how the mag catches, my memory's a little fuzzy in that score.
My other gripe on the SAR21 fire selector is the retention on the full auto function, I would have thought a 3-round burst function would be more useful. As for fire selector, I don't recall any problems using it with my right hand.
Strange that no one has mentioned the ability of the SAR21 shooter to fire with both eyes open. I tried that out when fiddling with the SAR21, and it took me all of half a minute to learn how to focus my eyes to use that function. To those who haven't tried it, let me tell you, I can really see how having both eyes open while shooting could make a difference when using the weapon
I don't have the SAR80 specs on the top of my head, I do have a couple of small arms books in Singapore which cover both the SAR80 and U100.
As to why SAR80 over SR88, I don't think there was a competition. They were designed in different time frames, I think the issuing of SAR80s to log units could have been a trial which wasn't satisfactory in terms of performance, so it wasn't issued on a wide scale. The SR88 came at a time when there was a rethinking on assault rifle design, so that could have been the limiting factor there.
Chamenos: I've read as early as the mid-1980s that the U100 was chambered for M193 AS WELL as the SS109, so it would be surprising if the SAR21 was not so chambered. While we'r on new ammo, if anyone has read Blackhawk Down, you might have noticed some comments by the Rangers and Delta about the inability of the new ammo(SS109?) to "drop" the enemy. Reason was that the ammo was designed to go through body armour and kill the wearer, and when facing the "unarmoured" Sammies, the rounds simply went through without doing much initial damage, and often the hit Somali would be able to pick himself up and run off even after being hit. To quote one of the Delta in the book after seeing the umpteen Sammy he hit pick himself up, dust himself off and run off, "When he hit an enemy, he wanted him(enemy) to stay down." Food for thought?
The SAR80 is indeed a more sturdy firing platform due to its weight. But the way its designed, I couldn't hold it my BMT OC taught me to hold it like the M-16 we used in BMT(which was unusual but REALLY made the M-16 a much more accurate weapon), which to me negated the extra stability of the SAR80. And while the weight is an advantage at the foxhole part of range, it was a DEFINITE disadvantage at the rundown
The most "famous" export customer of our small arms is Croatia, they took delivery of significant stocks of SAR80s and U100s in 1991 when they fought the Serbs/Yugoslav army from '91-'95. I've also seen Filipino soldiers with U100s.
Nathan: SAR21 is not too bad, you just have to get used to it due to its different layout. Once used to it, I think you'll like it. Think outside the square you live in
[This message has been edited by Viper52 (edited 20 May 2002).] -
[This message has been edited by Viper52 (edited 20 May 2002).] -
If i'm not wrong the standard rifle for the British armed forces is the SAR-80 or izzit the SA-80??? Its definately not the one pictured above though...
-
Its charging handel can be switched to accomodate both left n right hander.Originally posted by Silenthunter:Well, I've touched the SAR-21 rifle b4 and here are some points I wanna make:
-Eh, personally I'm a left-hander and left master eye, I heard they say SAR-21's only for right handers and the cartridge ejecter's too near to my cheek if I carry with my left hand. Bummer!!
-I wouldn't worry about the laser sight, the optical sight looks more fragile than the laser sight, but it's good to know that there are rubber covers to protect the lens (like camera). I heard things get messy if it rains or fogs, bummer!
-Heard 7SIR's using it now. Some other NS unit might be too, I dunno. but BMTC will be the last to convert....
Since when is there a 7SIR in the SAF???
6SIR is the first infantry unit tt used them n the batch have ORDed last yr.ADF 1st coy is also using them.Both of them had pretty good feedback.