Nothing new, apparently, but wouldn’t a heavier profile barrel go a long way toward solving this issue?:
The German government is claiming that they’re concerned that the soldiers they wish they didn’t have aren’t as well equipped as they could be, because of a weapon they wish they didn’t have made by a manufacturer they wish they weren’t home to?
A heavier barrel might help. A little. For a while. But then that would increase the weight of the rifle… and now the soldiers are overburdened by a rifle that’s too heavy and still has accuracy “issues” when used heavily.
As it has been reported in other threads, this isn’t anything new, and no matter what H&K does, they’re still going to be wrong. All because somebody has it in for H&K.
The G36 has been a known dog for years.
Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
Kinda like the L85 was in the UK?
I remember an episode of Tales of the Gun on the History Channel awhile ago had an episode about assault rifles, and they declared the G36 to possibly be the “perfect rifle”. For years, that thing was touted as by far the best piece of weaponry ever devised, not even up for debate. Funny now how the feeling on it is pretty lukewarm at best. I guess things on paper don’t always predict how they are in real life.
I seem to remember LAV talking about the barrel trunnion shifting around as it got hot from high rates of fire, causing a wandering zero.
Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk
Capitol police dumped them back in 05 or 06 due to zero shift. They were not the first or last to notice it.
Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
That seems to be a massive design flaw in my mind. No running changes to address the issue?
Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk
Not that I know of.
It’s too bad, there are some very good attributes.
Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
ghjkl
416s seem to be working.
I don’t know what happened between the XM-8 and the G-36 but I’ve heard nothing but good things about the XM-8 and almost from the start many concerns and criticisms of the G-36. Of course the G-36 went into production and military issue and the XM-8 did not so we could have seen the same thing with a production XM-8.
Over the decades HK has had a lot of great ideas that didn’t quite come out as well as hoped. The VP-70 was revolutionary for it’s polymer frame and 18 round capacity magazine a full decade before Glock made anything. But it wasn’t exactly a hot seller one the civilian market with it’s heavy trigger and heel magazine release. The select fire version had a little more to offer but would never be what the MP5k-PDW was.
The awkward looking HK P7 with it’s 8 round magazine and gas delayed system seemed like something designed to fail from the start but actually turned out to be a rather impressive handgun, even being adopted by the GSG9 and a favorite of many in the American CCW community even today.
It’s probably a good thing the G11 never really went anywhere. That one had some serious obstacles to overcome.
My guess is by the time HK discovered the zero shift issues they were already in deep with the current receiver design and the cost of redesigning the receiver to fix the problem was a non starter. It’s been the deep dark not so secret of the G36 for years.
It is too bad as the G36 has some great features and it is very reliable but has been haunted by this issue for a long time. FYI -when I worked for HK I went out with the Capitol police to see this ‘zero shift’ issue and it was a clown show- their ‘proof’ was weak sauce bigtime. They basically complained long enough to get 416’s to replace the G36’s
LAV, in your opinion, is there any way to rectify the issue without a compete redesign? Maybe some metal parts molded into the polymer at crucial areas?
Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk
Interesting, glad to hear your perspective.
Am I correct in the understanding that they were technically right, but not to the degree implied by their methods?
Jack
Yes they were correct but honestly they were passing guns around between shooters with no one changing or rezeroing the weapons ( in addition to not demonstrating the skill level required to detect a ‘zero shift’) - then when the rifle didn’t shoot the same place as the last guy they claimed that proved a wandering zero
It was extremely weak to say the least and I came away unimpressed - HK jumped thru hoops to make them happy because they didn’t want the LE agency guarding the Capital to ditch HK for any reason
As far as I am aware they later got 416’s and are happy with them
I always felt - admittedly without knowing all the details - that a metal insert that locked the barrel trunnion and optic mounting surfaces together would answer the mail - my gut is HK looked at what it would take to do something along those lines and the costs involved were rude
Therefore the issue remains largely unresolved
Thank you for weighing in on that.
Also, your “Larry turns it off” videos on your channel are STRAIGHT WIN. 
Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk
Larry,
It almost sounds like the best fix would be to go to an extruded alloy upper and just say to hell with the hybrid design as an unnecessary complication. One nice thing about the alloy upper on an AR is it does make an awesome heat sink, Al is a great material for conduction of heat .
Maybe it was assembled by Para, while they were waiting to screw up the R51!
I think the heat sinking properties of aluminum get overlooked on the AR. Especially when we start talking a rail attached directly to the barrel nut.
Sent from my SPH-L720T using Tapatalk
Sectioned G36 recevier around the barrel trunnion
