New gun a cock-up ?
-
I probably only seen the early incarnation of the SAR21, and it is definitely not good as a first impression, i have no idea about the current SAR21, but i have a question here is that is there a prometium tip pardon the spelling, which is there on the tip of the M16 for night aiming, i know there is the laser sight, but if the battery run out? do we have any backups? and yah the iron sights i saw was totally useless.
And is the SAR21 easier to clean? I have dismantled it before but never had a chance to clean it so have no idea if it is easier to maintain. -
If anything, it appears that they only thing that is stealthy about stealthguy is his intelligence.
Talk about a case of trash talking and nit picking! The way it makes it sound, thousands of our troopers are running about with a bloated, unreliable overweight weapon that is a TAR-21 ripoff.
Of course, take one look at his points and you can see that instead of logic, he uses trashtalk.
I dunno why he is so captured about the weight issue, when any sane trooper would know that the real issue of an assualt rifle is not really the weight, but the balance/ egronomics of the weapon. ANd the SAR-21 is certainly a well balanced weapon. I dunno where his arbitary allegations of overweight/fat and hence requiring lighter magazines come from.
Here we have a joker who is too weak to carry a couple of hundred grams, and makes a big deal of it. Wow. Maybe he's a six year old, then the weight would matter to him.
Of course, I roll my eyes at allegations that the SAR-21 copied the TAR-21. More likely, there was a trading of notes under the table between out two arms industries if there was any, and the SAR-21, with 25 patents in its system, can hardly be considered a sheer copy.
Of course, what is more insane about stealthguy's allegations that the SAR-21 was a copy, is that the SAR-21 was already quite far in development when the TAR-21 was produced. So what he's trying to say is that ST, copied the TAR and produced the SAR in the one year difference between the two weapons being unveiled. More insanity.
What is more crazy and amusing is that we have a guy who has never handled the TAR-21 in real life (heck, most israeli soliders haven't even gotten a hold of it), and he's here trash talking as if he shot it every weekend. The perfect armchair rambo.
Let me use stealthguy logic and trash talk to compare his intelligence to normal people.
Normal people: Use logic and reason to make their case.
Stealthguy: Uses pseudologic and arbitary terms in an attempt to define his vauge case, inserting trash talk to add more omph to his vapid points.
Normal people: See the big picture and what's important.
Stealthguy: Harp on tiny issues like grams of weight and polymer magazines.
Normal people: Make conclusions from their observations and experience.
Stealthguy: Makes conclusions from his conclusions and by seeing what he wants to see why avoiding the real issues and keep harping, nit-picking and boostering his points with trash talk.
Conclusions: Stealthguy has a stealthy intelligence. If he was a malaysian forum crasher, it might explain a lot though
-
On the issue of SAR IAing seriously, according to my Guards friend, who experienced it on the range, it is not an issue of the weapon itself, but that the gas return valve had been set too low on the factory setting, causing a chance for the weapon not to cycle fully and jam. Once they opened it up to allow more gas to cycle, they had no more problems.
Which in the end brings me back to the point that it's no use hating the weapon, you must know how to really use it before you get to hating it. If you hate it right off the bat, then you are probablt not making a fair judgement and are probably missing out on a lot of the good things about it.
Yeah, SAF, in all its' wisdom, has not designed a new magazine pouch for the SAR yet. But then again, if you can't fit Ultimax drum magazines into your SBO, you don't blame the magazine design. -
personally,i felt that SAR21has a few probs(dun know whether fix alreadi cause no friend workin in ST or army blah blah blah)
the location of the fire selector. why in the world for all places they choose to put it in the butt??? the handguard a tat too thick. i quite big size also a bit buay tahan. hand cramp..
hopefully some of you kind souls out there who hav friends workin in ST or doing evaluatin of the SAR21, keep them updated.
although SAR21 made in singapore, cannot also blindly support like the rifle very tok kong like tat. mus accept views and suggestions then can improve.
-
I did mention in my first post on the thread, that SAR 21 is a nice concept. But until it's implementation is refined, it sucks right now. I'm just here to voice out my personal opinions about the SAR, not to enforce them onto people. Basically here to answer some questions about the SAR to the curious bros since I've handled it in many excercises/LF first hand. Have you?
... seems that the SAR is always measured by the M-16 yardstick, rather then the universal yardstick for all assualt firearms. Which basically states that if the rifle does not give you the old feel of the M-16, it must be judged a drawback ... ... their whiny complains about how the SAR supposedly sucks seems more of a case of whining about why this amazing piece of firearm does not feel like the M-16.
M16 and SAR are the old/new versions of the SAF basic infantry assualt weapons, seems logical to me to compare one to the other. I've never handled other assualt rifles, so I don't compare them. M-16 and SAR both have their own "feel", but I never said the SAR didn't feel enough like our ol' M16. Although I only mentioned SAR's faults in my previous posts, I measured them individualy on their merits/faults, and found that the M16 has an edge over SAR right now in terms of quick fire reaction, vital in combat survival.With their kind of logic in why the age old M-16 is supposedly a better weapon in this era, I guess I could pretty much build up a case on why muzzle loading muskets are better then an M-1 Garand with tons of obsqure reasons ...
That's an outright exaggeration. While we're at it, let's compare a crossbow too. It shoots projectiles too you know ...... I suspect all the supposed "advantages" of the M-16 over the SAR is more of a case of a old-bird trooper having adapted to the M-16's feel over the years ... Having spent far more time with the M-16 then the SAR, they are less inclined to view the SAR objectively ... newer troops, who have spent about equal amount of time with the M-16 and SAR, like my Guards friend, and hence in a position to make a far more objective statement as they had no time to end up emotionally attached to either weapon ...
That's me. I'm not some 30 yr old bird lao chiao. I just ORDed last year from an infantry battalion (not some bde or div fellar that hardly goes outfield). That qualifies me to comment on the M16 vs SAR issue. During my NSF stint, I used the M16 for approx 1 year (training and unit), and the SAR for about 1.5 years (unit). So you see, I've actually used the SAR more than the M16. I'm about as objective as you can get (barring left handed issues). Also, the general consensus in our unit was that SAR sucks. I don't care what some designers sitting at a planning table think, but if we're gonna use the SAR, he better start listening to us.By |-|05| : I believe he is using the 2nd or 3rd update of the weapon since the 1st version did not come with an iron sight. But the problem with the scope is still there since my friend who is currently using a SAR21 complains about it ...
I rest the scope, and rifle version case. To each his own but please, SingaporeTyrannosaur, refrain from indirectly insulting me through your comments (like in the next quote).The issue of ribbed mags here is so ridiculus that the very fact it could even be brought up shows that those who slime the SAR apparently know virtually nothing about what they are talking about, but feel in a position to nit pick.
I've used the SAR extensively in exercises. I didn't just test-fire the SAR with 30 live rounds and run out proclaiming it's a revolutionary weapon. I was a combat spec, a sec-com, and the SAR was my primary weapon.
About the mags, I do STILL stand by my comments. Maintaining and regulating fire towards the enemy is key to gaining ground or retreating. It also keeps you alive. ANYTHING that hampers with that I deem negative as it will cost lives in actual war. In the case of SAR, I really don't see why we couldn't have stayed with metal mags. The new plastic mags are a real pain. It's the same case with the positions of the mag ejection lever and the fire-mode selector, they're all in the wrong places and need to be fixed. This is about the lives of us combatants, and we reserve the right to complain about anything that affects us in combat because we fight the damn battle. Battles that can be won or lost because of the most trival things, and this could be one of them. Ridiculous (that word really irked me)? Hardly.
Morals of the story : Innovation is fine, but if it aint broke, don't fix it. If everyone has the same minor problem, it's a major problem.
PS : Sorry bout the agressive tone, but as sombody in a combat vocation, I'm tired of allegations that we whine/complain too much. We do not only endure physical duress, but non-combantants will never understand the mental stress (esp cmdrs) that we went through also. Still, we hung on with pride when all choice, dignity and respect were stripped away from us, all to hold the frontlines when the time comes. Respect that, if nothing else.
Peace, out
~meander~ -
true also. i've undergone SAR conversion in reservist, although durin my NS days in 3SIB alreadi had sort of training and range.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Which in the end brings me back to the point that it's no use hating the weapon, you must know how to really use it before you get to hating it. If you hate it right off the bat, then you are probablt not making a fair judgement and are probably missing out on a lot of the good things about it.
still the design quite teruk. dun get mi wrong , i dun hate the SAR21, i jus... dun really trust it/like it enough to carry into battle. not unless some serious design modifications.but til then give mi my M203!
lets giv those who really used it before a chance o voice their views cause atthe end of the day, it relaly boil down to individual trooper who wil carri it into battle. -
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
Talk about a case of trash talking and nit picking! The way it makes it sound, thousands of our troopers are running about with a bloated, unreliable overweight weapon that is a TAR-21 ripoff.
hey when 99.9% of my reservist unit compain, the SAR21 got major prob!
Here we have a joker who is too weak to carry a couple of hundred grams, and makes a big deal of it. Wow. Maybe he's a six year old, then the weight would matter to him.
jus curious, have u serve NS yet?
What is more crazy and amusing is that we have a guy who has never handled the TAR-21 in real life (heck, most israeli soliders haven't even gotten a hold of it), and he's here trash talking as if he shot it every weekend. The perfect armchair rambo.
well, if some peps here claims to have friends or relative workin in ST design the SAR21 or in army doing evaluation of SAR21 blah blah blah...then the guy who clams to had used TAR 21 doesn't sound half as bad...
Let me use stealthguy logic and trash talk to compare his intelligence to normal people.
Normal people: Use logic and reason to make their case.
Stealthguy: Uses pseudologic and arbitary terms in an attempt to define his vauge case, inserting trash talk to add more omph to his vapid points.
Normal people: See the big picture and what's important.
Stealthguy: Harp on tiny issues like grams of weight and polymer magazines.
Normal people: Make conclusions from their observations and experience.
Stealthguy: Makes conclusions from his conclusions and by seeing what he wants to see why avoiding the real issues and keep harping, nit-picking and boostering his points with trash talk.
Conclusions: Stealthguy has a stealthy intelligence. If he was a malaysian forum crasher, it might explain a lot though
Normal people: See the big picture and what's important.
Stealthguy: Harp on tiny issues like grams of weight and polymer magazines.
both sama sama. -
I probably only seen the early incarnation of the SAR21, and it is definitely not good as a first impression, i have no idea about the current SAR21, but i have a question here is that is there a prometium tip pardon the spelling, which is there on the tip of the M16 for night aiming, i know there is the laser sight, but if the battery run out? do we have any backups? and yah the iron sights i saw was totally useless.
There's no erm ... whatever tip. The luminous dot isn't there anymore. Designer's reasoning probably this : In the day use the scope, at night use the LAD. So there's no more point for a pro-watever tip.
And is the SAR21 easier to clean? I have dismantled it before but never had a chance to clean it so have no idea if it is easier to maintain.
LAD is pretty battery efficient. Uses 1 (or 2 i can't remember) batteries and lasts for up to a month. No there's no backup LAD is that's what you mean. We only carry backup batteries.
SAR is pretty easy to clean. There's no "cauliflower" unlike the M16. If there's no rust anyway, for some reason the entire lower receiver seems to rust pretty quickly. And yeah SAR can be dismantled by 1st timers in about 30s (i did anyway on my first try
).... any sane trooper would know that the real issue of an assualt rifle is not really the weight, but the balance/ egronomics of the weapon. ANd the SAR-21 is certainly a well balanced weapon.
SAR is well balanced I agree. But SAR aint heavier than the M16 by only a couple hundred grams. I can't remember the exact weight, but I'm not gonna dig it up. Take my word for it, It's more than a bit of difference. On extended missions it's a real damn pain it the neck. Got so bad, I chucked the rifle sling and hand-carried the thing all the way. Keep in mind that the average Singaporean size and build isn't that big.
And please, SingaporeTyrannosaur please stop dissing people publicly in forums (Or is it I'm new here, and this is the norm?) Also, with all due respect to you and your friend, I don't think you've ever handled the SAR; from what I see, all the information you have on the SAR is 2nd hand from your Guards friend. Get him to post here then, and stop your extreme anti-anti-SAR stance.
Really, you take nationalism to a new level when you don't seem to have even fired from a SAR yet. -
It is apparent that being left handed has seriously coloured your opinion of the firearm, but then again, it's not your fault you were born that way. Maybe you are better of with the '16.
There appears to be a mix of opinions on the SAR. No, the general opinion is greatly divided between two camps, namely those who love it and those who do not. From what I gathered, the higher up the SAF foodchain, the more positive the opinion of the weapon becomes. All in all, I seriously doubt considering the SAR a quote: "sucky" weapon is hardly justified.
I would wager it's more "sucky" attitude on the part of the unit which is using it, but I don't buy that for I prefer to be objective. But a poor attitude and bias towards a local weapon certainly does happen. I suspect if we were using Styer Augs, the negative feedback here would certainly be far lower. In fact, it seems that some people would be for once, actually objective.
The Americans suffer from the "Made in USA syndrome" where any weapon that is not made in the US of A is biased against. In Singapore, there is no denying that we have a serious syndrome of "Made in Singapore syndrome", in which inverse that which the yanks suffer.
I have no idea why some of us are this self-debasing towards local arms, but my idea is, the nationality of the weapon hardly matters. As long as it makes me shoot better and is far more reliable. I would take it any time. even if it was made in Afganistan.
And it's hardly the same, nit picking on issues like weight and polymer magazines cannot be confused with getting the big picture. Stealthguy's points are exactly the kind of logic you might want to follow if you want to go into a Black Hawk Down incident without body armour because your trusty BDU is lighter and cooler. There is a big difference between the two.
For one thing, I am not supporting the SAR because it is made in Singapore or ST for that matter. But because I have used both weapons before and saw instantly, that it was far better then the old workhorse.
There's no stopping it, it's a matter of progress. The SAR is not a step backwards, it is a step forwards. And I for one prefer to develop a skillset that allows me to maximize its potential, which is far above what an M-16 can give me in killing the target. And learn to live with the weapon, rather then whine about every single little detail that gets in my way.
What matters is that this weapon allows me to develop my potential as a trooper in projecting tatical firepower is the most effective and reliable way. That's what matters. Not tiny details like SBO pouches, cocking handle resistence and the like. If the SAR allows me to shoot better and is tough in the field, that's a weapon I can trust and I'll learn to live with those quirks, rather then play the expert in prop aircraft which looks at a jet and goes "It has no propeller"
At the end of the day, when two equally skilled units, one equipped with the SAR, the other with the M-16, face off. Who do you think has the edge? Who has more tatical flexibility? Who has more options? Who is more combat effective?
Of course, this is because I am right handed, for left handers... -
Originally posted by meander:
when i was safety spec for my coy's ATP, i experienced a similar IA on an M16 as well... there was a double feeding in the mag AND the third round in the chamber had failed to eject properly, and lodged itself at the TOP of the bolt... and the bolt carrier was jammed halfway in that position.
It was a SAR familiarization live range when this unique IA popped up. The first time we shot live rounds with our brand new SAR. I was safety spec for another spec shooting in burst mode, and the weapon IA-ed. The bolt carrier was stuck half foward for no apparent reason, and SAR could not be cocked. We took out the buttstock, and found an empty cartridge lodged inside the rifle. It was stuck so bad we had to use a pair of pliers (and used considerable force) to full the cartridge out.
It took 2 people 10 minutes to clear 1 bloody IA. With a pair of pliers.
When this IA is encountered with plastic blanks it is in fact easier to clear. They aren't hot and can be torn, unlike metal cartridges.
we could remove the mag to clear the dbl feeding, but that weapon was essentially out of action for the rest of the day cos we couldn't detach the receiver groups from each other (cos the bolt was jammed halfway), we couldn't cock the weapon (cos the bolt was jammed), we couldn't get that offending round out, cos the pliers couldn't reach it...
its a freak accident... if it had happened in the field, nobody could've cleared that IA... the soldier would've been unarmed and in great danger. does that make the m16 a bad weapon? well... no... it just meant that u met with a freak accident!Before that, I shall reiterate the fact that I am a biased left handed SAR hater
exactly... that'll be the day... ultil that day, just keep hoping...
.
I have a left master eye too, so I can't effectively operate the MG, 84, M203, LAW ... the list goes on.
Weapons aren't like your traditional can opener, we can't just switch to using them with our right hand. True ambidextrous weapons are impossible, or rather impractical to make. So designers usually choose to make em all right handed weapons.
Solution : Pull left handers outta combat vocation? Us lefties are said to be creative. I would work well at a desk with a pen.
Or they could just make some elite left hander bn that operates left handed weapons bwahahaha that'll be the day
and since u're essentially a freak, being left eyed and left handed, i really think that while your point on the ribs on the mag is probably valid, your views on the weapon itself is overly skewed.
its not perfect, but its not THAT bad... -
ive got to side ST on this issue...
to me all the problem stated in all the previous post..i believe can be remedy...it all depend on STK now..
well..ive never fire a SAR-21 before...but have handle it for awhile..
i like the feel of it..true enough that it is heavy..but when i do standing shoulder i dun feel tired easily..
im not consider a combatant..nor a non combatant...my unit main job is security in a airbase..n at the same time a ground force for the RSAF..
my unit stracture are the same as the infantry..
weapon use the same also...but i believe ours are much acient then any Infantry unit...
our main assault rifle are the AR-15(M-16 without forward assist)
heh..tok abt unreliability...u definitely cant compare with AR-15..
but its still a ok weapon...
n looking thru our armory..none of our arms are new..from SAW to GPMG...so imagine how much trouble we have with our weapon..
all our stuff are not just 2nd hand..5th hand till 10..n we believe some of our AR-15 are blooded(cant confirm)..
so to my unit..if there is ever a war..we yearn for new weapon..n certainly we dun mind having a prototype SAR-21..
btw..in case someone doubt whether i know wat im toking abt..
im a MG Gunner...ive done Platoon, Section, SAW, LAW, MG, M203, 84 n P226 Live Firing... -
And what's this nonsense with "trusty" weapons anyway? What on earth is a "trusty" weapon? How on earth can an M-16, of which IAing is a common affair and to be expected in combat, cranky in foul conditions, handled with care and constantly kept clean, of which shooting is a rather involved procedure by modern standards be considered a "trusty" weapon?
You want a trusty weapon? Try an AK-47 of which can be buried in mud for three weeks and still be expected to work, I don't see any takers here or anybody for that matter crying out that SAF was dumb to use the M-16 instead of the AK-47.
What matters to me is not nit picking isolated incidents and obsessing over tiny details, but having a weapon that is a solid piece of engineering and gives me something to work with doing my job as a trooper. That is what matters.
Why would I take the SAR anyday? Because while its quirks takes getting used to, I can shoot far better with it then I ever could with the M-16, and it's added plus points are the points that matter. Durability, ease of use, reliability and far, far less mainteince and crankiness then the M-16 in field conditions. That's what will help me live in war, not how strange it is to hold or if it looks too much like the Aug.
What we need is a rifle that will allow us to project firepower and do so putting as little strain in unnecessary nontatical costs like cleaning it constantly and reliability issues. The real job of a soldier is not to sit around cleaning his rifle of rust or clearing common jams in battle, it is to kill the enemy. In that respect does the SAR allow us to do that job better with less of those side issues? Of course. That is by any measure, the true "trusty" rifle. -
-
"It if ain't broke, don't fix it?"
Unfortunately if you haven't noticed, using the M-16 has long provided us with a long string of pressing issues that needed to be adressed. Considering how much technology has advanced that allows has allowed us to fix such problems.
Fixing the problem of WOWO shooters which scored far better on the SAR then the M-16 seems to me as a case of fixing something that is broke. -
guys
check this out on TAR-21--->
http://www.isayeret.com/weapons/assault/tavor/status.htm
read carefully on the weapon problem..sound familier? -
I rest my case. A lot of the whoo-ha here would be saved if some of us here had bothered to be even slightly objective and done their homework.
-
n btw guys..saying that TAR-21 is much lighter then SAR-21 is wrong..its only 0.2kg difference..Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:I rest my case. A lot of the whoo-ha here would be saved if some of us here had bothered to be even slightly objective and done their homework.
http://www.isayeret.com/weapons/assault/tavor/models.htm
pls read -
Bull-pup configuration guns owns standard guns anyday of the week.
therefore: SAR21 > M16 -
That's not a fair comparison. How did SAR21 fixed the problem with WOWO shooters? By providing it with a scope. Would these WOWO shooters fare as well if they were to used the irons sights, just like M16 shooters?Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Fixing the problem of WOWO shooters which scored far better on the SAR then the M-16 seems to me as a case of fixing something that is broke.
From the perspective of M16 shooters, wouldn't they shoot better with a scope attached? -
An armchair Rambo will focus primarily on rifle accuracy. But firing from a foxhole position at 300m stationary targets is just one combat scenario. I have no doubt that the SAR-21 is very accurate at that.
Typical Combat Mission
For those of us in combat vocation, a typical mission is over 6 hours of manoevres, followed by 1 hour of assault, in which 20 mins is actually firing the weapon.
Does Weapon Weight Matters?
•Tropical heat & humidity saps energy fast, making every gram count
•A small weapon can fire around cover without exposing the firer. A narrow weapon will be ideal.
•A lighter weapon can be brought to aim quickly, which determine who fires first.
•A weapon that can be reloaded quickly also determine who fires first.
•Sights that allow the firer to aim quickly with both eyes open without the cheek on the buttweld saves lives.
Doing Wrong things Right
Sure, the fitness training as suggested by some helps. But they missed the point if they know what is "Do things right, do the right things".
Getting fit for a heavy weapon is doing the wrong things right. Because in the first place, why the SAR-21 needs to be heavier than its competitor?
Even with so much intense debate, I'm sure forumers from STK will take criticizms objectively and give the soldiers a better rifle. -
Lighter weapon can be brought to aim more quickly? Its not just the weight, but the balance. The M-16 is just too front heavy to be brought to aim quickly as u really NEED ur left hand to stabilise ur aim. The SAR-21 being more balance. (you can actually shoot with 1 hand, easily), brings to bear much faster.
About the fire selector. How often do you guys use it? I hardly remember switching to Auto when I was using my M-16. I mean, if u guys are like commandos or some swat team, perhaps switching to AUTO in really close combat enviroments would really be helpful if the fire selector was located where the M-16's used to be.
Okay, this isn't really CS or some game u know. The fire selector isn't used like the way its used in CS. Nobody alternates semi- and auto every 4 shots. (Famas/Clairon) in CS. -
for your info...your rifle is your own protection against ur enemies, if u cannot 'fix' it when it jammed, cannot look after it....i think u are in deep trouble. ask a Guards or CDO sniper....they even have their own massive cleaning kits to ensure their rifles are tip top... all rifles have to be maintained else accuracy will decrease and jams will occur more often as time goes by.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:And what's this nonsense with "trusty" weapons anyway? What on earth is a "trusty" weapon? How on earth can an M-16, of which IAing is a common affair and to be expected in combat, cranky in foul conditions, handled with care and constantly kept clean, of which shooting is a rather involved procedure by modern standards be considered a "trusty" weapon?
You want a trusty weapon? Try an AK-47 of which can be buried in mud for three weeks and still be expected to work, I don't see any takers here or anybody for that matter crying out that SAF was dumb to use the M-16 instead of the AK-47.
What matters to me is not nit picking isolated incidents and obsessing over tiny details, but having a weapon that is a solid piece of engineering and gives me something to work with doing my job as a trooper. That is what matters.
Why would I take the SAR anyday? Because while its quirks takes getting used to, I can shoot far better with it then I ever could with the M-16, and it's added plus points are the points that matter. Durability, ease of use, reliability and far, far less mainteince and crankiness then the M-16 in field conditions. That's what will help me live in war, not how strange it is to hold or if it looks too much like the Aug.
What we need is a rifle that will allow us to project firepower and do so putting as little strain in unnecessary nontatical costs like cleaning it constantly and reliability issues. The real job of a soldier is not to sit around cleaning his rifle of rust or clearing common jams in battle, it is to kill the enemy. In that respect does the SAR allow us to do that job better with less of those side issues? Of course. That is by any measure, the true "trusty" rifle.
jams do and will occur....it jams often might be due to wear and tear, not the M-16 design fault. M-16s are decades old....SAR hasn't even reach a decade....take a brand new M-16 and compare i think IAs won't occur dat much as u think. -
Originally posted by Shotgun:
Lighter weapon can be brought to aim more quickly? Its not just the weight, but the balance. The M-16 is just too front heavy to be brought to aim quickly as u really NEED ur left hand to stabilise ur aim. The SAR-21 being more balance. (you can actually shoot with 1 hand, easily), brings to bear much faster.
You are correct. But I am comparing weapons of similar balance.About the fire selector. How often do you guys use it? I hardly remember switching to Auto when I was using my M-16. I mean, if u guys are like commandos or some swat team, perhaps switching to AUTO in really close combat enviroments would really be helpful if the fire selector was located where the M-16's used to be.
Always. Safe/Single/Auto. There will be situations where you put to safe, only to discover that a target pops up. If you take too long to select fire mode, you are either dead or lose the target.Okay, this isn't really CS or some game u know. The fire selector isn't used like the way its used in CS. Nobody alternates semi- and auto every 4 shots. (Famas/Clairon) in CS.
It is extremely rare for soldiers to keep changing their mode of fire. But imagine a scenario where you are at "semi" to conserve ammo, then suddenly faced with a charging assault. Soldiers with the SAR-21 better pray that they not get shot while putting to "auto". Squeezing semi-shots rapidly may be their only survival chance. -
either way, there are jams, and there are jams...Originally posted by chunyong:for your info...your rifle is your own protection against ur enemies, if u cannot 'fix' it when it jammed, cannot look after it....i think u are in deep trouble. ask a Guards or CDO sniper....they even have their own massive cleaning kits to ensure their rifles are tip top... all rifles have to be maintained else accuracy will decrease and jams will occur more often as time goes by.
jams do and will occur....it jams often might be due to wear and tear, not the M-16 design fault. M-16s are decades old....SAR hasn't even reach a decade....take a brand new M-16 and compare i think IAs won't occur dat much as u think.
even with an m16, there are basic jams and stoppages that can be resolved rather easily, and very complex ones that comes about once in awhile that requires a lot more effort and a paif of pliers...
the issue is not how often it IA, but does the mechanism and operation cause IA that cannot be easily resolved with standard drills. -
Originally posted by stealthguy:
if are objective..u will have read the other post objectively..but obviously...u didnt..
An armchair Rambo will focus primarily on rifle accuracy. But firing from a foxhole position at 300m stationary targets is just one combat scenario. I have no doubt that the SAR-21 is very accurate at that.
[b]Typical Combat Mission
For those of us in combat vocation, a typical mission is over 6 hours of manoevres, followed by 1 hour of assault, in which 20 mins is actually firing the weapon.
Does Weapon Weight Matters?
•Tropical heat & humidity saps energy fast, making every gram count
•A small weapon can fire around cover without exposing the firer. A narrow weapon will be ideal.
•A lighter weapon can be brought to aim quickly, which determine who fires first.
•A weapon that can be reloaded quickly also determine who fires first.
•Sights that allow the firer to aim quickly with both eyes open without the cheek on the buttweld saves lives.
Doing Wrong things Right
Sure, the fitness training as suggested by some helps. But they missed the point if they know what is "Do things right, do the right things".
Getting fit for a heavy weapon is doing the wrong things right. Because in the first place, why the SAR-21 needs to be heavier than its competitor?
Even with so much intense debate, I'm sure forumers from STK will take criticizms objectively and give the soldiers a better rifle.[/b]
SAR-21 is only 0.2 kg heavier then TAR-21...
n once again u didnt read my post...the TAR-21 have the same problem abt magazine change...
btw...we are not doing a OK Coral during gun battle...when u are contacted...so your say on who fire 1st is redundant...becos u are suppose to take cover or prone 1st...we are not Rambo..seriously..i doubt wat u are saying now..
pls read the other post before replying to any of the post..it basic forum etiquette..thanx u