New AR owner

[Bigum1969]

I can't argue the point since I don't really know. Maybe I mispoke, but I THOUGHT they were proven. Haven't they been around for a while or is this a newer design? I do know that every Sig pistol I've owned has performed flawlessly.

The 556 is based on the SIG 550/551/552 rifles that have been around for 30+ years. You might say that is proven.

Or, you can just throw out a one liner without any factual basis.

 

[Colt556]

Hey look I said I thought that they were proven and stated I wasn't sure. No need to get snippy about it. I didn't try to argue the point. Thanks for the education.
I'd like to try one. As I said every SIG I've ever owned has been completely dependable and accurate. We need to have a shoot sometime.

 

[Bigum1969]

I'd like to try one. As I said every SIG I've ever owned has been completely dependable and accurate. We need to have a shoot sometime.

I'm with you on the SIGS. Reliable as hell and great shooters all around.

 

[rmcrob]

For me, it came down to price. I LOVED the Sig. But it was pricey; even so, I thought hard about it.

The Sportical doesn't feel nearly as solid and nice. But it was less than half the price, allowing me to go home and order an EOTech and some other stuff and still come out ahead.

Your mileage may vary. I have no doubt I bought the inferior gun. I did it on purpose.

And I have never fired any AR-15 type rifle. I had one issued to me back in the day, but I received a medical discharge before the first range session and never got to use it. I have an AK. And I did get to shoot M-14s quite a bit, which gives away my age.

 

[Bigum1969]

Hey look I said I thought that they were proven and stated I wasn't sure. No need to get snippy about it. I didn't try to argue the point. Thanks for the education.
I'd like to try one. As I said every SIG I've ever owned has been completely dependable and accurate. We need to have a shoot sometime.

Sorry, I wasn't referring to anything that you said. I quoted the wrong post. My apologies.

 

[Bigum1969]

For me, it came down to price. I LOVED the Sig. But it was pricey; even so, I thought hard about it.

The Sportical doesn't feel nearly as solid and nice. But it was less than half the price, allowing me to go home and order an EOTech and some other stuff and still come out ahead.

Your mileage may vary. I have no doubt I bought the inferior gun. I did it on purpose.

And I have never fired any AR-15 type rifle. I had one issued to me back in the day, but I received a medical discharge before the first range session and never got to use it. I have an AK. And I did get to shoot M-14s quite a bit, which gives away my age.

I wouldn't say you bought an inferior rifle at all. In fact, you made a good choice because you could afford to properly equip it.

Have fun with it!

 

[rmcrob]

I wouldn't say you bought an inferior rifle at all. In fact, you made a good choice because you could afford to properly equip it.

Have fun with it!

I'm having fun just thinking about it when I'm supposed to be working.

 

[cox7215]

welcome to the family!.................B

 

[Stainer]

On thing I would suggest to you i to get familiar taking it apart and putting it back together. And get good at it. With practice you will be able to get that thing all the way apart and back together in less than 2 minutes. It is fairly simple. If you have questions there are some videos on youtube. Also get some iron sights and get familiar with them. I got out of the Marines and that was one of my first purchases. And I am very greatful I did. I Love mine and I know you will yours!

 

[JosephR]

The 556 is not the same rifle as the original 55x series. Sig (a DIFFERENT SIG than the original Swiss maker of the rifles you are thinking of) made these rifles NEW for the American market who just had to have a clone and would eat them up.

This is like saying the msar stg-556 is a Steyr Aug.

 

[Bigum1969]

The 556 is not the same rifle as the original 55x series. Sig (a DIFFERENT SIG than the original Swiss maker of the rifles you are thinking of) made these rifles NEW for the American market who just had to have a clone and would eat them up.

This is like saying the msar stg-556 is a Steyr Aug.

I didn't say it was the same rifle. Just provided its lineage and what it was based on.

I guess its really no different than all the AR manufacturers who are making clones for the American market who just had to have a clone and would eat them up. Though they are not the original, they are "based" on them.

 

[JosephR]

Yes, it is different. There is a TDP for the AR15 and it's variants. Some companies do NOT follow these strictly (or at all) and a lot do. That's why you buy lowers from Colt, LMT, Noveske, etc. and buy barrels from reputable companies like Colt, Bravo Company, Noveske, etc. to ensure you're getting quality steels.

You also buy lower parts kits and bolts and carriers from reputable companies who do not cut corners in materials and quality of manufacturing.

You're not going to win this argument.

Sig looked at the older Sig Company's rifle, redesigned all of the parts and rebuilt the gun. They didn't take bins of old parts and reuse them or follow the old shop drawings etc.

They knew what they were doing and they did it well- they knew people like you would buy it based on some sort of "history" or fascination with the rifles and that would be all that mattered to you.

 

[Bigum1969]

Yes, it is different. There is a TDP for the AR15 and it's variants. Some companies do NOT follow these strictly (or at all) and a lot do. That's why you buy lowers from Colt, LMT, Noveske, etc. and buy barrels from reputable companies like Colt, Bravo Company, Noveske, etc. to ensure you're getting quality steels.

You also buy lower parts kits and bolts and carriers from reputable companies who do not cut corners in materials and quality of manufacturing.

You're not going to win this argument.

Sig looked at the older Sig Company's rifle, redesigned all of the parts and rebuilt the gun. They didn't take bins of old parts and reuse them or follow the old shop drawings etc.

They knew what they were doing and they did it well- they knew people like you would buy it based on some sort of "history" or fascination with the rifles and that would be all that mattered to you.

Wasn't trying to win any argument. But I'll agree to lose.

Thanks for determining that "people like (me) would buy it based on some sort of history or fascination with the rifles and that would be all that mattered to (me)".

I'm so damn shallow. Maybe someday I can become more self-realized like you. And then I could buy guns for only the good reasons that must guide your purchasing decisions.

You remind me of some of the folks you run into gunshops occasionally that make our hobby difficult for newbies to jump into. Like when I went into buy my Glock 20 and was told that I really didn't want one of those. The 10mm rounds sucks, yada, yada, yada. It's not helpful advice, it's self-righteous bull$hit from the enlightened few.

In your infinite deepness of thought, you've decided to criticize the SIG 556 though you've never even fired one. At least I own an AR as well. I can compare the platforms based on using them, not just from holding it at a shop.

You win. My SIG sucks. I only bought it because I wanted to be a poser. Thanks for setting me straight.

 

[JosephR]

It's this simple- I don't have to eat dog $h!t to know it tastes like $h!t and don't need to fire a Sig 556 to know it's not an AR15.

I don't really care if you enjoy shooting it, that's your prerogative. Spend your $1500 how you see fit.

Whenever I have that kind of money to spend on a single firearm, I buy a quality firearm that I can bet my life on, not something fun that looks cool because it's modeled after an older mysterious foreign rifle.

You're a poser? If you want to infer that from what I said, that's fine by me.

 

[Colt556]

Sorry, I wasn't referring to anything that you said. I quoted the wrong post. My apologies.

NP, we're all here to learn. I've learned a lot about Sigs today. I love my ARs but I'd like to see a Sig and maybe shoot one sometime. I had a Beretta AR 70 a million years ago and wish I would have kept. It was the most solid feeling 5.56 rifle I've ever owned. I might make a trip out to Bobs tomorrow, if I don't go to Bloomington.

 

[Bigum1969]

NP, we're all here to learn. I've learned a lot about Sigs today. I love my ARs but I'd like to see a Sig and maybe shoot one sometime. I had a Beretta AR 70 a million years ago and wish I would have kept. It was the most solid feeling 5.56 rifle I've ever owned. I might make a trip out to Bobs tomorrow, if I don't go to Bloomington.

I think you'll like the 556 if you have the chance to shoot it. IMHO, the SIGs have a nice trigger right out of the box. Breakdown and cleaning are not as easy as as AR, but not really too bad.

 

[Walt_Jabsco]

That Sig 556 is not a proven weapon by any means...

Virtually every European military, most federal agencies, Delta Force and innumerable other sources would beg to differ. The Sig 550 base design has proven itself as one of the most versatile, combat ready assault rifles ever designed. If nothing else, it uses a standard gas-piston system to eliminate receiver fouling, which immediately makes it superior to a standard AR style rifle.

 

[JosephR]

You forget it's NOT the same ****ing rifle. Jesus Christ...

 

[Walt_Jabsco]

You forget it's NOT the same f****** rifle. Jesus Christ...

In the same way that an AR-15 isn't the same rifle as an M-16 or M-4. The Sig 556 is the current, civilian equivalent of the Sig 550 or 551. The primary differences between the original and the 556 are, aside from the aesthetics; no longer select fire, slightly different barrel, now accepts standard AR mags instead of proprietary Sig mags. Functionally, the rifles are the same.

 

[JosephR]

ok whatever you say...