PTR memes
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
So is the PTR any good? I see mixed reviews all around about it. I was planning on getting one, but lets have a thread to discourage that.
>>29331852
PTRs are fine. They had some issues several years ago when they tried using shallower flutes but they corrected that pretty quick. They're pretty great now and PTR's customer service is top tier.
Go for it.
>>29331864
so there quality control is respectable? How about accuracy? With proper loads and a optic, is it capable of 1 moa? or close
>>29331887
Every company has lemons but I haven't seen all that many issues with PTRs on here and other forums. The issues I have seen got fixed quickly and without much fuss.
I'd expect to get around 2-3 MOA but I've seen some people on hkpro get around 1 MOA with theirs.
>>29331887
>How about accuracy?
2-3 MOA with irons and cheap M80 ball.
If you want a new G3 pattern rifle then they are your best choice now. Multiple models both value and high end. All now come standard with paddle mag release. With the addition of the paddle mag release, a $200 gunsmith job, it is very hard to recommend another brand. They advertise 1.5 moa, Target models can do that and better. If you plan on putting on an optic, get it from Atlantic Firearms as theirs come with a rail already mounted.
>>29331852
no
how do the newer century arms g3's compare?
>>29332263
Shit.no mattter how many youtubers say its good its shit.one reviewer had it slam fire on him.
>>29332275
well fuck that blows. i wish 308 rifles weren't so expensive
>>29332333
I bought the PTR GI model from Atlantic, I'd say its a great rifle for the price
PTRs are fine. The problem stems from them being cheap (relative to other battle rifles), which means you have hordes poorfags who feel their honor is tied to the gun, so they will shamelessly whiteknight it on the internet, in spite of certain QC issues they had for a while. The same thing happened to nuggets, the guns are great but their customer base is cancer.
>>29332333
Yeah and there are too few of them.of the .308 semi autos i can only think of the ptr,the fal,the scar, and the .308 aks.oh and ar10s
Traded a cheap ass kit-bashed ar-15 for mine. I think with a comp a trigger job and a few other upgrades it will be much better.
> Best thing you can do is get a steel lower and get a better grip. the stock polymer one is junk
>>29332372
Dont forget about the .308 MAS
> Kel-Tec RFB
> m14
> cetme (they're not all aweful)
> Remington woodmaster
> Benellie R1
>>29332361
i dont own a ptr but being affordable isnt a bad thing. if hordes of poorfags are barely able to afford it and theyre all satisfied for what they paid, you can bet its a decent gun for the money. id rather that than hear richfags constantly shilling about guns they paid 2-3x as much for no other reason than because its exclusive and they want to believe its actually worth what they paid.
>>29331861
/Battle Rifle General/ sucks, only traps and whiny circlejerk. Never read or visit generals, they are just neet circlejerk.
Here is a good G3 vs FAL thread from yesterday, over 300 posts without any traps, anime or other shit.
>>29320083
>>29332275
Reposting from previous thread for entertainment purposes.
What is an HK 91, Alex?
>>29332696
3 PTRs vs 1 HK
>>29332722
Well, it's not hard to rip off a good design.
Quality> Quantity 100% of the time. Why not just Dave up for the real thing and not look like an airsofter?
>>29332735
Save* damn fucking hone keyboards are too tiny.
>>29331956
>come standard with paddle mag release.
oh jeez mang
>>29332696
>What is an HK 91, Alex?
The price of a SCAR-17S, without the equivalent utility or capability. Technology marches on; there's no reason to buy a real HK91 unless you're a collector or serious Krautaboo; as a rifle it is not worth that kind of money.
>inb4 Pookie
I got a GI in January, excellent gun. I added wood furniture, a steel lower, port buffer, bayonet adapter and an all steel cocking lever.
>>29333323
>missed out on 2016 paddle mag release
>>29333353
Eh, they have yet to make one with a paddle and without a top rail. I may have a paddle installed sometime. Hell, they are even shipping them with steel lowers now too.
>>29333257
That's real edgy. They hold their value though. That's why I prefer my hk 91 over a PTR. It worth it for me because I have an HK 93 and an HK 94 with a F/A trigger pack that I can switch between all 3. Additionally I don't have to worry about slamfires. Everyone has their preference, I just would rather have 1 gun than three shitty copies.
>>29333376
PTR is a quality product you know. PTRs are getting better and better, only thing going for old HKs is meme status and inflated price made up by HKboos.
And no one buys 3 PTRs instead 1 HK, they get their PTR and save 2k for other things.
>>29333440
This reminds me, I've been meaning to order 50 more mags.
>>29333366
same
if PTR doesn't hurry up and make one without that stupid top rail, I will end up with an M1A/DSA Voyager
though judging by some of the reviews, Bud's may be selling them mixed in with their old stock
>>29333448
That would be 2.37 Sir.
>>29333323
That actually select fire or just for looks?
>>29331852
The PTR is a totally acceptable and capable firearm, the quality control is where it needs to be and PTR has good customer service. Any problems with the PTR are directly related to the design of the firearm, and are really not problems so much as the fact that it's just an obsolete design.
Expect, as other anons have said, 2-3 MOA but possibly better depending on your rifle and the ammo you're using. It's a batter rifle, not a marksman rifle.
The only other thing to keep in mind is Sakuyas shitposting about PTRs, but that's easy to solve with a filter.
Truth be told, while I think they're aesthetic as fuck and it will certainly do everything you likely need it to do, in your position I would seriously consider building an AR-10 instead. You can piece one together for about the same amount of money and you'll have a rifle with better options for future upgrade, better options for mounting optics, and better accuracy potential.
>>29331956
How do you like that SWFA?
>>29333606
Not him, but im scared shitless about building and ar10. There isnt any industry standard, right? You might end up buying shit that will never work.
>all these people salty that sa/k/uya made fun of their precious rifle
that's really the thing that makes you PTRfags such a nuisance. nothing against your rifle but you're all a bunch of thin-skinned faggots who can't handle the bantz.
>>29333716
Get fucked tranny.
>>29333729
>>29333755
I like how people keep posting that Federal Arms FA91 as if it has anything to do with Cetmes or PTRs.
>>29333729
>everyone who disagrees with me is a samefag
classy.
you boys should really move to that roller delayed blowback general you were talking about if you're going to continue to be sensitive sallies. you can circlejerk with all your friends and no mean FALfags will be there to bully you
They're about the same as a SCAR17s, for a fraction of the price.
>>29333729
ptr-91's aren't that great literally one of my buddies owns one and thinks its the greatest thing in the world. Then gets really triggered when i call it a shitty hk clone that shoots 3moa.
>>29331852
They're arguably the best semi-auto .308 rifle you could get for <$1000.
Memes?
>>29333604
Just for looks, the metal lower doesn't even have the fake full auto pin that a lot of people have.
You can see the full auto pin and lower extension here >>29333366. It appears that he is pointing at it with his trigger finger.
>>29333257
How is that Tac-Latch?
>>29332448
I hate animeposters, memelords and traps just as much as the next guy and I think that /arg/ really gives the other generals a bad name. In my experience, /akg/ is pretty much meme free, the milsurp threads are also fairly good, and /brg/ is mostly OK.
>>29333776
HK's shoot 3 MOA
>>29333798
>/brg/ is mostly OK when fag/k/uya isn't around
FTFY
>>29333801
they're both overrated and almost as meme as nuggets.
>>29333823
le maymay, everything is a maymay
>>29333707
>There isn't any industry standard.
There was a time when this was a valid concern, but's that's really not the case any more. For the vast majority of stuff on the market, DPMS profile has been adopted as standard. There are a ton of companies now making components to this spec, and it's getting to where it's almost as easy to build an AR-10 as it is an AR-15.
If you want to do it on a $1000 budget, you buy a matched upper / lower from Aero Precision and just start sourcing components from well regarded companies lots of parts are still shared with the AR-15 too, so the only things you need to make sure are compatible are your bolt carrier group, barrel, and barrel nut. As long as you don't buy anything from no-name companies, you're fine.
>>29333776
Seems that you are the one who is triggered.
>>29333831
Nice "everything is a meme" meme, friend. 10/10 would meme your meme memes again.
FALfags are just butthurt that they lost the memestatus just like in the end FAL lost to the G3.
It's ok to admit that FAL is obsolete.
>>29333778
For under a grand? its the third in line.
No, no, fourth.
>>29331956
where to get paddle release that doesnt req gunsmithing?
HK parts never has it in stock.
>>29334129
What are the first 3?
>>29334193
prolly some veper and AK varients.
>>29334193
FAL
AR-10/LR-308
FNAR
>>29334201
slavshit is always inferior
>>29333353
h-hey fuck you. I happen to p-p-prefer the button...
>>29334239
>FAL
Maybe if you consider Century and Bubba built guns to be good.
>AR-10
I'll give you that one but it's much more difficult to come by when PSA never has shit in stock. You can find the lower end DPMS builds though.
>FNAR
No.
>>29334294
DSA voyager is under a grand
Armalite DEF-10 is too
and the FNAR is fine, its not a battle rifle, but if you want a high cap .308 semi, it fits the bill, and is pretty accurate
>>29334459
DSA is pretty good but I wouldn't consider the voyager to be better than a PTR. I'll still give you the AR10 but I'm not sold on the FNAR. That's not to say it's a bad gun but it doesn't even come with sights and the after market is pretty limited compared to anything else listed.
>>29334534
Its not a battle rifle
Like most hunting and competition rifles, sights are added on by the end user.
>>29334560
Then unless you get some supremely shitty/cheap sights or an optic then it will cost more than $1K. If you cheap out then I'd say it wouldn't really perform any better than a PTR.
Again, not a bad rifle, I just don't think it would meet the criteria.
>>29331852
Rifle Is fine. I'll post new pics of my Zeiss night scope on mine this evening, just for you OP.
>>29334600
$840 for an FNAR, another 160 gets you a poorfag red dot
>>29332745
Suck less
>>29334626
>poorfag red dot
That was my point. You can get a PA advanced microdot for that price but you're not going to be doing much better than the PTR with it.
>>29333628
It's fucking rad. Super clear especially in 1× and solid as hell. With the FFP and the changing reticle it goes from almost an Eotech at 1X to a precision mil dot reticle in the throw of a switch. Very smooth controls especially with the throw lever. Construction wise this thing feels as.... "hard" as a VCOG. I have no fear of dropping this thing, durable as fuck. Turrets are both covered or open should you take the covers off exposing the large knobs seen on precision scopes.
HD line price aside I would recommend it to everyone looking for a 1-6×. I was about to buy an ACOG but realized that I hate fixed mag optics. This fit my needs better.
>>29331852
It's big and heavy.
If you want a battle rifle, I'd go for a SCAR 17 or even a SOCOM 16.
>>29334669
Glad to hear this, I've been dancing on getting one of those to go with their 10x42M I bought from them too. Seriously digging their reticles.
>Construction wise this thing feels as.... "hard" as a VCOG
Great shit, I had the same feeling when I held one at their table at Wanenmacher.
>>29334665
>Not much better
Your right. The FNAR would shine with magnified optics. For a few hundred more, you could start to get into them. Even still, with just a red dot, youll have a more accurate rifle.
>>29332439
Fnar
>>29334726
I bought mine on SWFA sample list btw. Was a package deal that came with the Bobro QD and the quick throw. The scope was in used "A" condition but literally looks brand new. Total of all three components was about $900 or so. Highly recommend checking SWFA sample list and save yourself a couple hundred buckaroos. Hope you enjoy yours!
>>29334733
And then we're outside of the $1K limit. More accurate isn't the only factor to determine if a gun is "better" though. We may just have to disagree on this one.
>>29333755
>>29333716
Weeaboo faggot samefagging detected
>>29334794
Like I said, with the red dot, its still more accurate. Has a great trigger. Reliable enough.
It wont take the abuse that the ptr will, no.
>>29334830
You sure about that?
>>29332745
Too late.
>I'm gonna Dave the fuck up.
>>29334836
>its still more accurate. Has a great trigger
I'll gladly give you those 2 factors in it's favor. I
>Reliable enough
That's a very nebulous phrase. This one definitely goes to the PTR unless you can point me in the direction of some extensive reliability tests on the FNAR.
Just about everything else goes to the PTR as well. Again, I'm not saying the FNAR is a bad rifle I just think we're trying to fulfill two different standards of "better" here. I'd be happy to admit that the FNAR could make a better range/target rifle but I wouldn't necessarily say it's better in other situations.
>>29334937
I already said the PTR is more reliable. What im saying about the FNAR is that for what anyone an /k/ is going to do with it, its fine. Sure, we all have our SHTF fantasies. But those aside, on the range or at a competition, the FNAR is plenty reliable.
Asides from trigger, accuracy, and reliability, im sure what "just about everything else" is.
>>29334985
Just about everything else:
>Weight
Probably actually about the same depending on the model I guess.
>Durability
PTR
>Mag prices/commoness
PTR
>Aftermarket
PTR
>Aesthetics
PTR
>History
PTR
>>29334669
You should be a salesman. I just blight my rifle and now I need to drop another grand on this scope.
>>29335063
Bought*
Looks like I'm going to have to Dave up for it.
>>29335043
PTR GI 9.5lbs
FNAR 8.125lbs
We already covered durability
Aftermarket on both is pretty shitty.
Yeah, FNAR mags are silly expensive.
Aesthetics are subjective.
History is fairy tales for manchildren
>>29335303
>PTR GI 9.5lbs
>FNAR 8.125lbs
Again, this can go either way depending on the model.
Sorry forgot that we had already mentioned that.
The aftermarket is much shittier for the FNAR than it is for the PTR.
>Aesthetics are subjective.
Not in this case.
>History is fairy tales for manchildren
Whatever helps you sleep at night.
How does the G3 compare to the SCAR-17S?
>>29335392
Definitely not as good. That's what happens with 60+ years of materials improvement and design advancement though.
>>29335303
the FNAR is objectively an ugly hunk of shit
G3 after market if fuck huge compared to FNAR
>>29335403
>SCAR-17
>improvements
it's literally an 50 era tech with a platic body and 5 different shades of tan.
>>29333755
Reliever markings are clearly not PTR.
Does PTR even have a metal lower option?
>>29335379
Where is the PTR going too shed a pound and a half? better yet, show me a model that weighs 8lbs.
Aesthetics are subjective. The PTR, especially when you start bolting on clamp mounts, scopes from the sixties, and african furniture looks more and more terrible.
>>29335441
Your going to need better bait
>>29335303
>tfw EU and getting a FNAR becouse its one of the only semi auto rifles i can have with a 20round box magazine
Going to spend
>2650 and 1 FNAR with a 20inch barrel and 3mags
>>29335507
All that would be a thousand euros stateside
>>29335441
lol
>>29335443
Yes PTR does, but that webm is one of the glorified parts kits that federal arms called the FA91.
>>29335444
There's a heavier version of the FNAR that weight more than 9 lbs and there are versions of the PTR that weight less than 9. A good bit can change with the barrel and furniture. You're still incorrect about the aesthetics too.
>>29335507
>2650$ on 1FNAR and 3mags
could get something really nice if i lived in another country...
>>29335528
Sure the heavy version weighs a good deal more.
Is there a version of the PTR that weighs in at less than the light version of the FNAR? That would be 8lbs 2oz.
If your trying to argue that beauty is not in the eye of the beholder, your objectively incorrect.
>>29335303
PTRfag, but the FNAR is an attractive rifle. I hate it when people become so invested in their own gun that they lose to ability to appreciate the form and function of other firearms.
>>29335583
>Again, this can go either way depending on the model.
>Is there a version of the PTR that weighs in at less than the light version of the FNAR?
Sure is.
>>29335623
>If your trying to argue that beauty is not in the eye of the beholder, your objectively incorrect.
>but the FNAR is an attractive rifle
99% of the time I'd agree that I was fighting a losing battle here too but this is one of the few times where it's not.
As I said a while ago, I think we just may have to agree to disagree on this whole thing.
>>29335640
different guy
>>29335655
I realize that if you were: >>29335623
I was just including you in the aesthetics part.
>>29335640
So you have to chop off half the barrel and loose the stock to be 4-5 ounces lighter than the FNAR?
nice
Im not asking you to say the FNAR is a better looking rifle. Im asking you to agree that its possible that someone else could think that way, legitimately. Your fellow PTRfag thinks is pretty.>>29335623
>TFW i have a FNAR in EU for 1400$ with 5 mags.
>TFW it was on sale and barely used in a fudd store where noone wanted in
>TFW no face
>>29335682
I hope you're ready to surrender it, citizen; it's for the greater good that we get these dangerous military weapons out of the hands of criminals.
BTW, pick up that can.
>>29335711
my gobbiment repealed the ban with threats to leave the EU, so im bucking down and hoping for the best
If not, there will be a tragic meatball and boating accident
>>29335671
>So you have to chop off half the barrel and loose the stock to be 4-5 ounces lighter than the FNAR?
You asked. Like I said, It depends on the version. Not a perfect comparison, but it didn't need to be.
>Im asking you to agree that its possible that someone else could think that way, legitimately.
Sure, some people can have shit taste and like the way it looks but the fact that this is the hill you've decided to stand on over any of the other factors I've mentioned just shows that they were losing battles for you too.
>>29335729
Thats just it, if you need to resort to a pistol version to get lighter, your stretching beyond sanity to try to make a case that "it depends on the version".
Is it a terrible thing that the FNAR is lighter? I mean the G3 is a heavier semi auto .308 to begin with.
>losing battles
By looking at everything as conflict, your destined to lose.
>>29335793
There are lighter versions of the PTR just as there are heavier versions of the FNAR. You specifically discounted the heavier version to try to improve your position. I'll give you that the light version of the FNAR is lighter than the regular PTR but that is not always the case when you consider that there are multiple models of each gun. That was my point from the first time I had mentioned weight. You cannot count the things that prove your point while just discounting the valid things that don't.
>By looking at everything as conflict, your destined to lose.
We're having an argument here. I think this is a perfectly valid time to consider it a conflict.
>>29335913
An argument would mean we would each be making points. At first we were. But now? no. Your going on about appearance, and how anyone feels differently than you is wrong.
Discounting a pistol variant is valid. Were talking about rifles, not chopped down models. Its more than a stretch to try to count a pistol model.
The AR-10 and FAL are both better than both the PTR and FNAR, and still fall in under the $1k price tag.
>>29336013
>Were talking about rifles, not chopped down models.
Hence why I brought up the FNAR-H. That's a perfectly valid example that is in my favor.
>The AR-10 and FAL are both better than both the PTR and FNAR.
I still disagree on the FAL unless you manage to find a great deal on something besides century, a voyager, or a shitty home build (not to say that there aren't great home builds too, but they aren't going to cost under 1K for the most part).
>>29335528
>You're still incorrect about the aesthetics too.
PTR fag here.
Asthetics are indeed subjective to the person.
Some people like futuristic space guns that look like fish or rectangles.
Some people like sleek & thin guns.
Others like them as big and bulky as they could get.
While othetrs still, like to slap on 10 pounds and $5000 worth of accessories on them.
to each their own on the aesthetics. its not really a viable thing to put it as better than another rifle.
>>29336085
At their lightest. PTR rifles come in at something like 9.5lbs
At their lightest FNAR rifles come in at 8lbs 2 oz
The heavy FNAR isnt even produced today. And the FNH website doesnt list a weight. You citied wikipedia, which cited guns.ru
>>29336235
>At their lightest. PTR rifles come in at something like 9.5lbs
There are 9 lbs full rifle versions.
>The heavy FNAR isnt even produced today. And the FNH website doesnt list a weight.
I actually didn't know that. The reason I used wiki is because FN neglected to mention the weight on their site.
If it would put an end to both of our collective autism, I'll give FNAR the weight advantage then.
>>29331935
>>29336318
>>29336235
but FNARs are uggo
>>29336745
is there any battle rifle you do like?
I went to my LGS and found a NIB PTR, but the front handguard had a LOT of play and was really wobbly. Is this normal?
It was fun doing the HK slap over and over though.
>>29332275
It also had a broken firing pin.
>>29335444
>>29335303
Reminder that pic related is what the FN browning BAR is meant to look like
Also reminder that the FNAR has to be sent back to the factory for cleaning/maintenance
>>29331852
Is that an FAL stock modified to fit on a PTR?
Even if it isn't, that might be the sexiest furniture I've seen on a PTR yet.
>>29334098
It might be obsolete, but it's sexy as fuck, and it's only as obsolete as any other battle rifle.
As a rifle design it's excellent.
>>29338192
South African-made "Namibian" stock.
>>29338192
It's one of the Namibian stocks. See: >>29335379
>>29338294
Reproduction when?
>>29338302
Probably never. You juat have to be lucky. I managed to get one of the handguards. I'm on the lookout for a stock now. Shit is expensive though.
>>29338358
Are you the guy that bought it from the eBay listing I linked on a /brg/ thread?
>>29338609
Yep.
>>29338673
shit dude, you still haven't bought your PTR yet?
>>29338681
Nah, my local store is being weird about ordering it straight from the manufacturer. It's also just been on kind of a backburner for a while.
>>29338732
at this point, are you going to just wait for the model with the paddle mag release and no top rail like everyone else?
>>29339502
Yeah, that's the one I was talking about.
>>29339590
I feel like I'm the only one that really doesn't mind the welded top rail at all.
>>29339641
You're not alone. All these puristfags are autistic as fuck.
>>29339966
I will say that I do like the steel SEF lower better than the navy lower though.
>>29332333
Have you seen what it costs to shoot one?
>>29341861
This holy fuck. My PTR is cool and all but hardly gets any use because poorfag college student.
As soon as the cheap surplus dried up, shooting battle rifles became a whole lot more meager.
>>29333772
> this is what ptrfags actually believe
Laughinggirls.jpeg
>>29334294
Lower end dpms builds. Since time immemorial dpms has been regarded as the company who makes nothing good but ar10's. They are now becoming the standard as another anon also stated.
>>29335043
Aesthetics
Aftermarket
History
Bitch please get the fuck out, while it may make it a more emotional purchase it does not make it a more finctional rifle. Plus besides cheap beat up mags your aftetmarket is a bunch of sold out super duper expensive surplus shit with the go to being a stock that'll ruin your cheekweld.
>>29335729
As someone who owns hk clones and loves them I hate the collapsible stocks. Fucking yuck.
>>29336085
He did it's the dsa voyager which you said "another example besides that one for reasons I can't make up yet". As a fal lover the only negative on that rifle is that the vast majority don't have a carry handle wth mate.
>>29337187
FNAR has to be sent back to the factory for cleaning/maintenance
Go on...
>>29335444
>>29335379
>>29335303
My PTR weighs about 8 1/2 pounds (3854 grams) but bare in mind, that's unloaded and with the trigger taken out.
>>29343478
Mine weighs 10.6# with loaded aluminum mag, wide forearm, polymer lower, sling and welded optic rail.
>>29343501
>>29343478
wood forarm, no sling or optic rail and wood stock
>>29343513
also, polymer lower as well
