SAR-21 - Like or Don't like?
-
a)old school weaponOriginally posted by tvdog:MINDEF never asked your opinion when they adopted the SAR-21 as a replacement for the M-16. Assuming if they did ask your opinion, what would you say?
a) What do you like about the M-16?
b) What do you dislike about the M-16?
c) What do you like about the SAR-21?
d) What do you dislike about the SAR-21?
e) Do you guys think the SAR-21 is the best relacement for the M-16?
f) Or do you think there is anothher weapon that is a better replacement for the M-16?
g) Or do you think we should stick with the M-16?
Your opinions please...
b)long and old
c)light weight, easy to operate
d)its not for lefties
e)it is ok but need more improvement
f)the "saw down" barrel SAR 21
g)no. m16 is going to be out of commission -
This Peter Kokalis regualrly writes for Soldier Of Fortune and is quite an authority on firearms. But so far, he hasn't reviewed any Singapore-made weapons yet.Originally posted by John Ching:Check out an article on Bullpup design rifle by Peter Kokalis.
Its an interesting article to read before deciding on your views about such rifles.
Personally, I think its the man behind the trigger that makes the rifle lethal or cool, not the other way round.
Currently in Astan & Iraq, U.S soldiers have already voiced out their unhappiness with the M16A2 & M4s but they are still using it as they've got no other options unless they can get their hand on a dead-man's AK.
-
Yes, its true about Peter. Anyway no one from Singapore has sent him a rifle to evaluate the rifle so of course he hasn't reviewed any Singapore-made rifle.Originally posted by tvdog:This Peter Kokalis regualrly writes for Soldier Of Fortune and is quite an authority on firearms. But so far, he hasn't reviewed any Singapore-made weapons yet.
But with regards to my earlier thread in reference to Peter, was to ask members in general to read about his views on bullpup in general rather then the focus on the Singapore-made rifle.
So if I had confused you in anyway on the matter, my apologizes. -
I shoot better with my m-16 (could be due to the crappy lens my sar 21 had)
-
MINDEF never asked your opinion when they adopted the SAR-21 as a replacement for the M-16. Assuming if they did ask your opinion, what would you say?
a) What do you like about the M-16?
ANS: Its a stable weapon. Lighter than SAR 21. Aims accurately well.
b) What do you dislike about the M-16?
ANS: But like it is in Vietnam War, it crop ups when you really need it to work. Its long in length, not suitable for Asians and not good for chiong swah.
c) What do you like about the SAR-21?
ANS: Its shorter. Better to chiong swah by length. Quite stable. The laser is good bah.
d) What do you dislike about the SAR-21?
ANS: Perhaps I'm to used to M-16. Not quite use to the way SAR 21 works.
A bit bulky and heavier. Which is bad for chiong swah. Some stuff is still a bit fragile. Bad for chiong swah. Scope is a luxurious defect. Wat happen if mud got into the scope. Iever there a sight up, its not as accurate loh.
e) Do you guys think the SAR-21 is the best relacement for the M-16?
ANS: Not really. Just from good points to bad points. Bad points to good points.
f) Or do you think there is another weapon that is a better replacement for the M-16?
ANS: Anything light, short and stable.
g) Or do you think we should stick with the M-16?
ANS: Don't know. I only know Americans did not like using M-16 in Vietnam War (obviously f**ked up), they threw them away for AKs.
We don't have a choice do we. With the policy set, we lan lan have to use it. -
I usually get marksman award $200 with M-16. Only time I didn't was when the armourer found out that my weapon had a loose barrel.
And I wear glasses so eyesight quite teruk.
Of course, with scope will increase the number of marksmen which is ll good. But scope narrows your view down to "tunnel vision". And is slower at acquiring target.
Even if you haven't used a scope on a rifle, you can experience the same difficulties with a pair of binoculars. You spot something in the distace, bring up the bino to your eyes, and then have some difficulty locating the subject. -
Ritey then. Well commented.Originally posted by tvdog:I usually get marksman award $200 with M-16. Only time I didn't was when the armourer found out that my weapon had a loose barrel.
And I wear glasses so eyesight quite teruk.
Of course, with scope will increase the number of marksmen which is ll good. But scope narrows your view down to "tunnel vision". And is slower at acquiring target.
Even if you haven't used a scope on a rifle, you can experience the same difficulties with a pair of binoculars. You spot something in the distace, bring up the bino to your eyes, and then have some difficulty locating the subject. -
The M16 may be long, but everything is located where they should be.
The selector switch is well within reach of you right hand thumb. The mag release well within reach of your trigger finger.
The Bolt release is easy to reach with your left hand.
Changing mags is fast and instinctive.
Aligning weapon with target is also fast and instinctive.
Can fix bayonet. Good also for just whacking someone.
For such a light weapon, the M16 is not as fragile as you would expect.
Very comfortable to carry except a little long. (The SAR-21 is short but bulky.)
Light.
But I definitely have to admit that a shorter weapon is a very good thing to have. For FIBUA, FOFO especially. And for me because I carry the old-fashioned signal set sometimes and need one free hand, and M16 is not balanced for one-handed use. -
The first 4 points are all the result of trainning with an M16 but does that mean a soldier is like a dog that cannot learn new trades?Originally posted by tvdog:The selector switch is well within reach of you right hand thumb. The mag release well within reach of your trigger finger.
The Bolt release is easy to reach with your left hand.
Changing mags is fast and instinctive.
Aligning weapon with target is also fast and instinctive.
Can fix bayonet. Good also for just whacking someone.
For such a light weapon, the M16 is not as fragile as you would expect.
Very comfortable to carry except a little long. (The SAR-21 is short but bulky.)
Light.
But I definitely have to admit that a shorter weapon is a very good thing to have. For FIBUA, FOFO especially. And for me because I carry the old-fashioned signal set sometimes and need one free hand, and M16 is not balanced for one-handed use.
Yes, the bayonet can be fixed onto the M16 but theres no garantee that the bayonet remains on the rifle after you stick it into a resistance of muscular-lard. However, at least its there in the 1st place.
Its really not advisable to use the M16 to whack anyone unless you're sure that you do not need the weapon later on. Unlike the AKs, M16 fibre butt isn't able to handle impact as claimed by its designers.
If you're referring to the older models of the M16s, they're indeed fragile. Weak barrel heats up easily resulting in barrel explosin, shakable parts causing line of sight to be shifter when firing in burst, unable to withstand sudden hard impact, almost useless after going through mud, sand or rivers, etc.
The good thing about its length is that it can be used like a bolt action rifle for single distance shot. As for comfort? I prefer using a G36, its bulky & not light. But at least it gets the job done & gives me a better chance of survivability in any enviroment.
Todays war field is no longer measured in distance of exceeding more then 150 yards. As seen in current wars after Vietnam, most military fights occur in tight close civilian areas. MP5s would be an ideal weapon but its 9mm rounds are not suitable for killing. H&K did produced MP5s that chamber .45s but being a bigger round means lesser amount of arounds it can carry. U.S military therefore stuck to using back M16 model design but modifying it to suit new combat fighting grounds. However, they've foreseen that there's a need for a bullpup assault rifle for the U.S military in the near future & have started testing a number of XMs, XM8 being the current winner. -
XM8 is not a bullpup.Originally posted by John Ching:U.S military therefore stuck to using back M16 model design but modifying it to suit new combat fighting grounds. However, they've foreseen that there's a need for a bullpup assault rifle for the U.S military in the near future & have started testing a number of XMs, XM8 being the current winner.
I've read the Peter Kokalis article about the Steyr. He was more talking about the Steyr in particular and not bullpups in general. In conclusion he said that he will trust his life on the Steyr AUG.
Actually, the Steyr is in many ways still a very revolutionary design 20 years later. It still looks very futuristic. But the most revolutionary feature is the fact that there isn't a selector switch. You simply squeeze less hard for single shot, harder for bursts and squeeze all the way on the trigger for full-auto.
Maybe that's why SAF didn't adopt this weapon. Otherwise you'll have hokkien peng going full-auto all over the range. -
Possibly....plus the AUG heats up quickly.Originally posted by tvdog:XM8 is not a bullpup.
I've read the Peter Kokalis article about the Steyr. He was more talking about the Steyr in particular and not bullpups in general. In conclusion he said that he will trust his life on the Steyr AUG.
Actually, the Steyr is in many ways still a very revolutionary design 20 years later. It still looks very futuristic. But the most revolutionary feature is the fact that there isn't a selector switch. You simply squeeze less hard for single shot, harder for bursts and squeeze all the way on the trigger for full-auto.
Maybe that's why SAF didn't adopt this weapon. Otherwise you'll have hokkien peng going full-auto all over the range.
Southpark
The DUde -
Well I'll trust my life to the SAR21 anytime. Sure it's heavier, sure it'll over heat sometimes. But it's other qualities sure out weight the rest. I have the pleasure of carrying it around for 6months. The first time I tried the SAR21, I know we are really advance. I can actually shoot a 1 litre bottle 100 meters away and to tell the truth, I'm not a very accuarate sjooter. The rifle scope makes everything so easy. If you sling the SAR21 on your back, you won't feel anything poking you behind when you run like the M16. Oh...also lower I.A. rate lah.... I never clean my rifle for 3 months and it still shoot so accurately... eehhh.... later my OIC see these sure flipped....hahah
-
That's really interesting. Soon, we'l have a generation of soldiers who wouldn't know what an M16 is much less train with both weapons.Originally posted by Cosmic_Rain:Well I'll trust my life to the SAR21 anytime. Sure it's heavier, sure it'll over heat sometimes. But it's other qualities sure out weight the rest. I have the pleasure of carrying it around for 6months. The first time I tried the SAR21, I know we are really advance. I can actually shoot a 1 litre bottle 100 meters away and to tell the truth, I'm not a very accuarate sjooter. The rifle scope makes everything so easy. If you sling the SAR21 on your back, you won't feel anything poking you behind when you run like the M16. Oh...also lower I.A. rate lah.... I never clean my rifle for 3 months and it still shoot so accurately... eehhh.... later my OIC see these sure flipped....hahah
I have never even held a SAR-21 but I have examined a Steyr AUG before. I found that magazine changing to be awkward and slow even under relaxed circumstances. And it is not just a matter of training. No matter how well-trained you are it is still going to be slow to reach behind the pistol grip to change magazines. -
The reason why the magazine was placed infront is to let the user see how much rounds he had left. At least he will be well prepared to expect depleting ammo and be faster to change his mag? Anyway, one thing for certain... the SAR21 sucks in arms drill..... the M16 looks much more better doing the hormat!
-
The reason why the magazine is in front of the trigger is because the trigger assembly drives the hammer, which hits the firing pin to strike the bullet to fire it. All of these need to be behind the bullet / magazine.Originally posted by Cosmic_Rain:The reason why the magazine was placed infront is to let the user see how much rounds he had left. At least he will be well prepared to expect depleting ammo and be faster to change his mag? Anyway, one thing for certain... the SAR21 sucks in arms drill..... the M16 looks much more better doing the hormat!
SAR-21 and all bullpups solve this via a rod linking the trigger to the hammer and firing pin behind....
.....and way b4 the time when you can see the no. of rounds left (aka plastics, see thru mags), no one could see how much rounds one has through a steel / aluminum mag.... -
no offence...but u got x-ray eyes?Originally posted by Cosmic_Rain:The reason why the magazine was placed infront is to let the user see how much rounds he had left. At least he will be well prepared to expect depleting ammo and be faster to change his mag? Anyway, one thing for certain... the SAR21 sucks in arms drill..... the M16 looks much more better doing the hormat! -
Well i wished i got x - ray eyes...haha then can see gals mah... Well the SAR21 has a plastic clear magazine... so can see lor.. M16 no clear plastic mag so cannot see ma. Anyway, the SAR21s magazines you saw carried by patrol personnel in the airport are all taped up with black tape... so cannot see through them...
-
oh..cos u said placed in front..M16 placed in front wat...sar21 is placed behind....depending on ure definition of 'front'Originally posted by Cosmic_Rain:Well i wished i got x - ray eyes...haha then can see gals mah... Well the SAR21 has a plastic clear magazine... so can see lor.. M16 no clear plastic mag so cannot see ma. Anyway, the SAR21s magazines you saw carried by patrol personnel in the airport are all taped up with black tape... so cannot see through them... -
then doesn't that defeats the purpose of having clear mags?? but i heard that the army guys patrolling the airport have blanks in them? it's only the SOC guy who actually carries live rounds?Originally posted by Cosmic_Rain:Well i wished i got x - ray eyes...haha then can see gals mah... Well the SAR21 has a plastic clear magazine... so can see lor.. M16 no clear plastic mag so cannot see ma. Anyway, the SAR21s magazines you saw carried by patrol personnel in the airport are all taped up with black tape... so cannot see through them... -
m16 is still nice, light, can throw around oso wont spoil. good firing rate.. IA easily clear compare to the design of sar21.. troublesome
sar21 throw/drop around, handguard crack.. =.= heavy by a bit, but that doesnt matter to me as im a saw gunner. scope gets dirt wen cheong sua in outfeild scope blur.. humit weather.. it too depend on scope liao.. the top sight onli 10m.. useless.. scope break useless.. fire too much lad get loose.. -
The patrols at the airport carry live rounds. The reason why they tape their magazines is because members of the public were alarmed by the rounds. It's easier to pretend they're just friendly guys walking about if you don't see real bullets in their weapons.
-
Yes, XM8 is not a bullpup. It beat the other XMs, which included bullpup designs, to win the contract. But it does not mean that the U.S military has given up on bullpup design, its just that they'ven't come across a design that they like.Originally posted by tvdog:XM8 is not a bullpup.
I've read the Peter Kokalis article about the Steyr. He was more talking about the Steyr in particular and not bullpups in general. In conclusion he said that he will trust his life on the Steyr AUG.
Actually, the Steyr is in many ways still a very revolutionary design 20 years later. It still looks very futuristic. But the most revolutionary feature is the fact that there isn't a selector switch. You simply squeeze less hard for single shot, harder for bursts and squeeze all the way on the trigger for full-auto.
Maybe that's why SAF didn't adopt this weapon. Otherwise you'll have hokkien peng going full-auto all over the range.
So you've finally read P.K's article. Yes, he was using Steyr as his bases for the subject on bullpup design, unless of course, if anyone is able to send him a Singapore made bullpup rifle then he'll probably use it as his bases for the subject on bullpup.
By the way, the location of the XM8's charging handle is the same as a bullpup design. Below the carry-handle. -
Argh... let's us all use pistols. Each person carry 4 pistols at one time. Or 2 SMGs.
-
Chow Yun Fattish???Originally posted by Eiizumi:Argh... let's us all use pistols. Each person carry 4 pistols at one time. Or 2 SMGs. -
so each man carries a live weapon.. but i don't see how the men can 'pretend they're just friendly guys walking about' especially if they're decked out in full combat gear and a full sized assault weapon.. i mean, doesn't 'gun' speak 'danger' ?Originally posted by dkhoo:The patrols at the airport carry live rounds. The reason why they tape their magazines is because members of the public were alarmed by the rounds. It's easier to pretend they're just friendly guys walking about if you don't see real bullets in their weapons.