I have a question for you /k/.
I am looking at getting my first rifle and I'm leaning towards the Sig 716 chambered in 7.62 NATO. Im just wondering if anyone has any experience with it and what they think. Im also looking at their 5.56 models. Is there really much difference (other than the obvious) in choosing a 7.62 over 5.56?
>>29336408
The Sig 716 is good. Heavy, but good. I'd still recommend a 5.56 for a first rifle, not an AR-10. AR-15s are more easily modified, easier to find mags, ammo is cheaper, etc.
I'd consider firing a buddy's rifles so you can so which you prefer but to be honest you'll likely end up with firearms in both cartridges eventually so don't sweat it
>>29336470
Holy fuck your picture
>>29336408
If you're set on 762 go for a scar 17. Fuck Sig
Go for either bro
>>29336408
>The 7 in the 716 is meant for trigger weight.
>>29336554
umm...webm source? For...science reasons
>>29336470
Holy hell that picture hurts to read
>>29336428
I mean i have fired both 7.62 and 5.56 before so I'm used to the handling of both. do you have any recommendations for toys to put onto it? Id like to eventually get a suppressor for it.
>>29336470
The guy sure has autism, but the girl's behavior is making me rage.
>>29336408
The Sig rifles are very well made, but pass on a piston operated AR type rifle. Get a good DI rifle instead. There are no meaningful advantages to the piston regardless of what anybody else tells you, and they just make the gun heavy.
Source: I own a Sig 516
Also, unless you're planning on shooting >600 yards or you plan on hunting large game with the rifle, buy something in 5.56 instead of 7.62. Lighter, more compact firearms. Lighter, smaller ammo. Less recoil. Much less expensive to shoot. Just as effective on two legged game as .308.
Have you considered the Ruger SR-762?
it's considerably less expensive and from the tests I've seen it shows just as high of barrel quality.
All the rifles herein suggested would need a trigger replacement so the major downfall of the ruger is nil.
Just putting it on your radar.
>>29337268
Only upside to piston guns is that they mitigate suppressor gas blowback (not something OP has to worry about) and they generally are easier to find with adjustable gas systems.
Now, "piston pop" is a thing which exists, and maybe these are all things which don't particularly matter to OP but they are well defined and demonstrable advantages.
caveat: all my ARs are DI, so generally I think DI is superior, but the Ruger mentioned above seems like an excellent companion rifle to the R.P.R. so it's on my radar for future projects.
>>29337499
Sure, the suppressor thing is a fair point but that's why I qualified "meaningful". I made the assumption that given OP was asking about his first rifle, he wasn't planning on firing a ton of rounds through a can.
Don't get me wrong, I do like my Sig 516, but it's heavy as hell, limited on hand guard options, and basically worse in every way than my DI Daniel Defense.
>>29336470
>4chan, The Conversation
Ok, so clearly from your comments 5.56 is the way to go. So what weapons can you suggest that work well with a suppressor, have enough space for me to attach all sorts of fun toys to and what sort of optic would you suggest. I was originally looking at the VCOG due to its versatility but would it really be useful on a 5.56?
I have one, its bretty cool, i originally was going to go for the sr762, but this was available and 200$ cheaper. I would suggest going with a 2 stage trigger. Makes it super nice. Got any questions?
>>29336408
DO NOT FUCKING BUY ONE.
I DID AND OWNED IT FOR A YEAR
IT SUCKED DICK.
OTHERS HAVE SHARED MY EXPERIENCE.
I SOLD IT FOR $1200 BACK TO MY LGS
DO NOT BUY
Build an M5E1 instead, it won't suck as much.
