Rare picture of SAR-21 with foregrip.
-
In terms of looks - the SAR21 is similar to the AUG.
In terms of concept - the SAR21 is similar to the TAV21.
Mechanically - I suspect the SAR21 could be similar to UK's SA80 and China's Norinco QBZ-97 bullpup assualt rifle. Both have similar user operations.
Then again, the South Africans have their Vector CR21 bullpup released at about the same time as the SAR21, TAV21 and QBZ-97.
I remembered one poster - who had the chance to use the FAMAS and AUG here in Singapore during trials before the SAR21. Perhaps he can share his opinions.
edit - the photos of the South African CR21, China's QBZ-97, AUG, TAV21 and SAR21 are found at - http://www.securityarms.com/index.htm -
That picture rare meh? Pioneer magazine leh.
-
U find mi another pic of that standard SAR-21 with foregrip lor.Originally posted by ditzy:That picture rare meh? Pioneer magazine leh.
-
Well you never mentioned rare in which aspect.Originally posted by foxtrout8:U find mi another pic of that standard SAR-21 with foregrip lor. -
Cant u read the main title of the thread to comprehend why the picture is rare?Originally posted by ditzy:Well you never mentioned rare in which aspect.
I seriously wonder why u dun understand wat pple understand....
Cheers
-
Coz I chose not too, It says rare picture, but it dun says rare in which aspect.Originally posted by foxtrout8:Cant u read the main title of the thread to comprehend why the picture is rare?
I seriously wonder why u dun understand wat pple understand....
Cheers -
A forward pistol grip is not necessarily tactically superior to a normal rifle foregrip. The normal rifle foregrip is easier to go prone with, while the forward pistol grip is better when you are firing from a standing or kneeling position, particularly in CQB. Which one is better depends on what situation you are using the rifle in. It makes sense that the standard issue SAR-21 has a standard grip, since SAF infantry tactics involve firing mostly from the prone position. This photo is of an Army marksman who shoots in competitions for the SAF, where they might have to fire from the standing position.
The mechanism of the SAR-21 is based on the Ultimax, which was designed with help from Eugene Stoner, designer of the M16. It was certainly designed in cooperation with the Israelis, who produced the TAR-21 at almost the same time. So the rifle has design input from American and Israeli sources, but it is definitely still a Singaporean design. There is no design that is not in some way based on others.
The SAR-21 still has some teething problems, which I hope ST resolves soon. ST never gets anything perfectly right on the first try, but usually the third try is the charm. Look at the Ultimax Mk 1 vs Mk 2 vs Mk 3 for example. -
coming back to the topic...
i've not handled the SAR21 b4 but i feel that a foregrip is good for standing/charging firing. this is especially when the firer needs more stability and control of the weapon.
i remembered we used to stabilise our m16 with sandbags or when firing behind the wall, putting it on top of the ledge and stabilising it with a down ward force (palm pressing down on the grip)...with the inclusion of the foregrip, it can effectively replace any of the above and especially in the case of firing behind the wall, the soldier/firer need not be overly exposed to open fire etc. -
That's true... but, hey, nobody ever gets weapons systems right the first time. I guess we're all gonna wait till AA2004 to see any new mods, perhaps?Originally posted by dkhoo:The SAR-21 still has some teething problems, which I hope ST resolves soon. ST never gets anything perfectly right on the first try, but usually the third try is the charm. Look at the Ultimax Mk 1 vs Mk 2 vs Mk 3 for example. -
X2....Originally posted by wuming78:i think we can keep our discussions within the scope of the weapon and not wander into politics and nationality here.
BTW I heard from somewhere that Israel is suppose in cooperate with SG to produce some weapon but the cooperation failed in some ways..I think due to patent reasons......so Israel and SG went independant and there came the SAR-21 nad TAR-21....... that's why quite similar in design.... -
i guess ST or SAF figured tt the front stock of the rifle is sufficient for stability. in any case, the firer will need to hold the weapon there, so as to be able to activate the LAD where necessary.Originally posted by tiggersgd:coming back to the topic...
i've not handled the SAR21 b4 but i feel that a foregrip is good for standing/charging firing. this is especially when the firer needs more stability and control of the weapon.
i remembered we used to stabilise our m16 with sandbags or when firing behind the wall, putting it on top of the ledge and stabilising it with a down ward force (palm pressing down on the grip)...with the inclusion of the foregrip, it can effectively replace any of the above and especially in the case of firing behind the wall, the soldier/firer need not be overly exposed to open fire etc. -
I read again , ' rare picture of SAR-21 with foregrip '. Everyone who is familar with the model of the standard SAR-21 will understand.Originally posted by ditzy:Coz I chose not too, It says rare picture, but it dun says rare in which aspect.
Since u said the statement ' I chose not to ' , it clearly means that it is not that i am unclear with my words , but is it that u chose not to comprehend. So Ditzy , seriously u either go brush up ur english or change ur attitude. If possible , do both....
I dun see why u cant comprehend wat others can...
If u dun have any thing constructive to speak off which benefit the thread , kindly pls freak off.... -
Well I got good news for you, the SAR-21 has been improved quite a bit from the 1999 original. I'm not sure what the current production version is called but word is from my friends on the inside is that it is a very good weapon.
-
Originally posted by foxtrout8:
A 15yr old kid will always be a 15 yr old kid...
I read again , ' rare picture of [b]SAR-21 with foregrip '. Everyone who is familar with the model of the standard SAR-21 will understand.
Since u said the statement ' I chose not to ' , it clearly means that it is not that i am unclear with my words , but is it that u chose not to comprehend. So Ditzy , seriously u either go brush up ur english or change ur attitude. If possible , do both....
I dun see why u cant comprehend wat others can...
If u dun have any thing constructive to speak off which benefit the thread , kindly pls freak off....[/b] -
hm.. i guess it takes the test of time to show. m16 was tried and tested in battle. unfortunately (or luckily) we wont haf to do tt for the sar21.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Well I got good news for you, the SAR-21 has been improved quite a bit from the 1999 original. I'm not sure what the current production version is called but word is from my friends on the inside is that it is a very good weapon. -
Yes... the M16 was tried and tested in battle, and you know what was the result? It bombed, and bombed badly. So much so that it got soldiers killed.Originally posted by wuming78:hm.. i guess it takes the test of time to show. m16 was tried and tested in battle. unfortunately (or luckily) we wont haf to do tt for the sar21.
In the history of assualt rifles, the M16 is prehaps the most unreliable firearm ever, consequent versions had it improved... but not by much.
What I find amazing is how some troopers consider it a "good" weapon, apparently they haven't shot around much! -
tt is odd, considering how long it was in service and how many variants it inspired. perhaps they learnt from their mistakes and perfected it?Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Yes... the M16 was tried and tested in battle, and you know what was the result? It bombed, and bombed badly. So much so that it got soldiers killed.
In the history of assualt rifles, the M16 is prehaps the most unreliable firearm ever, consequent versions had it improved... but not by much.
What I find amazing is how some troopers consider it a "good" weapon, apparently they haven't shot around much! -
The M-16 as we know it today never really lived up to expectations, despite having being much improved. The current version used by the US. Just that it was common. When you get stuck with a pile of junk and have nothing better to work with, then sooner or later you'll think that it's the best rifle in the world. The truth is, we use them because of their precision compared to the AK-47 and other rifles, was relatively common, and that's about it. The rest of the M16 features are thumbs down. Especially it's reliability, which is prehaps one of the most important aspects of any firearm.
The SAR-21 is certainly a superior weapon to the M-16, no doubts about it. And far superior at that. -
in the end, the superiority or inferiority of the wpn depends on the end users, and not mere and empirical comparisons of the specs and performance in labs. so i guess time will tell.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:The M-16 as we know it today never really lived up to expectations, despite having being much improved. The current version used by the US. Just that it was common. When you get stuck with a pile of junk and have nothing better to work with, then sooner or later you'll think that it's the best rifle in the world. The truth is, we use them because of their precision compared to the AK-47 and other rifles, was relatively common, and that's about it. The rest of the M16 features are thumbs down. Especially it's reliability, which is prehaps one of the most important aspects of any firearm.
The SAR-21 is certainly a superior weapon to the M-16, no doubts about it. And far superior at that.
-
Yes, so it would help for those M-16 whiners to stop complianing about their SAR-21, learn how to be good at shooting that thing, and make full use of it's inherently superior qualities.Originally posted by wuming78:in the end, the superiority or inferiority of the wpn depends on the end users, and not mere and empirical comparisons of the specs and performance in labs. so i guess time will tell. -
Perhaps if u are younger than 15 year old , i will always understand ur level of intellect . If u are older than 15 years , oh gosh , im sorry for you. If u aint 15 year old , i dunno who is as young here...Originally posted by ditzy:A 15yr old kid will always be a 15 yr old kid...
Who are u to look down on 15 year olds? I have seen 15 year olds in other forum having more intellect than u ( of course ) and gaining my full respect.
Im still right , till now ( the second page of this thread ) , u havent contribute anything that is constructive to the thread . Dun worry kid , u are new in the block , i shall give u time to get use to our way of life here. Dun worry , i will mark u always...
-
I read in an article that the SAR-21 is made with synergy of both the AK and the M-16. Similar to the AK series , the gun work on a gas returning principal. The automatic principal is also similar to the AK as in , the reloading handle is over the barrel and is stable while firing. It is noticible that eventhough the SAR-21 is shorter than the M-16 , it have the same barrel length of it ( attain similar accuracy ? ). Thus it is clear that the company want both reliability of the AK and accuracy of the M-16 in the SAR-21.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Yes... the M16 was tried and tested in battle, and you know what was the result? It bombed, and bombed badly. So much so that it got soldiers killed.
In the history of assualt rifles, the M16 is prehaps the most unreliable firearm ever, consequent versions had it improved... but not by much.
What I find amazing is how some troopers consider it a "good" weapon, apparently they haven't shot around much!
It is also said that the SAR-21's reliability is superb. It can still be use after immersing into mud and water , unlike the delicate M-16.
U can check up more info from this web :
http://arms.ashst.com/firearms/sar21.htm -
Basically the ST Kenetics tried to combine the best of the worlds of firearms into the SAR-21... namely:Originally posted by foxtrout8:I read in an article that the SAR-21 is made with synergy of both the AK and the M-16. Similar to the AK series , the gun work on a gas returning principal. The automatic principal is also similar to the AK as in , the reloading handle is over the barrel and is stable while firing. It is noticible that eventhough the SAR-21 is shorter than the M-16 , it have the same barrel length of it. Thus it is clear that the company want both reliability of the AK and accuracy of the M-16 into the SAR-21. It is said that the SAR-21's reliability is superb. It can still be use after immersing into mud and water , unlike the delicate M-16.
U can check up more info from this web :
http://arms.ashst.com/firearms/sar21.htm
The accuracy of the M1-16
Realiability of the AK-47
The egronomics and ease of use of the Aug and assorted bullpups.
Along with several other patented concieve,designed, and made in Singapore technologies to round off a uniquely Singaporean firearm that tends to denude a paper tiger of logic as his gasps for a response to it's overwhelming superiority. -
Well I've indicated clearly where you can find that rare picture. Its in Pioneer magazine.Originally posted by foxtrout8:Perhaps if u are younger than 15 year old , i will always understand ur level of intellect . If u are older than 15 years , oh gosh , im sorry for you. If u aint 15 year old , i dunno who is as young here...
Who are u to look down on 15 year olds? I have seen 15 year olds in other forum having more intellect than u ( of course ) and gaining my full respect.
Im still right , till now ( the second page of this thread ) , u havent contribute anything that is constructive to the thread . Dun worry kid , u are new in the block , i shall give u time to get use to our way of life here. Dun worry , i will mark u always... -
U understand the meaning rare? I doubt u dun.Originally posted by ditzy:Well I've indicated clearly where you can find that rare picture. Its in Pioneer magazine.
U can find that picture from pioneer , but perhaps u cant find it anywhere else....thus it is rare. U understand?
So wat to argue abt?