The gun that beat H&K at their own game: The Haenel Mr223/556 tabletop review

If I remember correctly from some translated articles, one of the concerns brought up with Haenel’s entrant was regarding their “90% domestic” capability. It was alleged that Haenel’s T&E entrants were not up to that 90% and possibly/probably largely Caracal made. According to this allegation, the only way Haenel could meet the 90% for contract rifles was to use the contract as capital to build the necessary infrastructure in Germany. AKA (allegedly) the company as it existed at the time of contract award was physically incapable of meeting the domestic production requirements as their tinder was a “if you buy the rifles, we’ll build the factory” sort of thing. I’m not in industry, but that sounds hinky to my uncultured ears.

None of the above has anything to do with the qualitative merits of the rifles or validity of the patent claims. I have no info on either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg Bell

I mentioned the patent infringement. They principally revolved around the "Over the beach" (holes) in the gun. It is interesting that HK didn't care about this until they lost.

---

Not really that interesting. Hanael likely didn’t represent a large enough threat to their market share to spend the money to go after them. It is also possible and likely that HK didn’t not have full details of Hanael’s submission before it was made. Even if they did, they had no obligation to point it out at the time knowing that it would creat problems for Hanael should they win. You don’t have to announce to the table when you have an UNO draw four card. Caracal and by extension Hanael hired people that were intimately involved in the development of the 416. To suggest it was anyone but Caracal’s fault that they infringed on patents that they knew existed is crazy.

I'm neither lawyer nor engineer but the Haenel looks like they laid an HK416 on a photocopy machine and pressed COPY. I haven't field stripped them next to each other but I can scarcely tell 'em apart. It's probably easier to hit a given price point when you don't have to do any R&D beyond copying a competitor.;)

Apropos of nothing Mlok sucks Kong Dong.

"Not really that interesting. Hanael likely didn’t represent a large enough threat to their market share to spend the money to go after them. It is also possible and likely that HK didn’t not have full details of Hanael’s submission before it was made. Even if they did, they had no obligation to point it out at the time knowing that it would creat problems for Hanael should they win. You don’t have to announce to the table when you have an UNO draw four card. Caracal and by extension Hanael hired people that were intimately involved in the development of the 416. To suggest it was anyone but Caracal’s fault that they infringed on patents that they knew existed is crazy."

I guess it is always a possibility. But Haenel and caracal (and Sig really) had been selling these rifles for years. I guess they were waiting until they lost a really big contract before they played their big card?

It is also interesting that H&K attacked the testing performed. Apparently the Hanelacal outperformed the 416 in shooting results and H&K basically called BS pointing out the guns were so similar there is no way they could have differed so much. That being said, the HK bid was 179 million Euros and Haenel was 152million for 18700 rifles.

Quote:

---

I'm neither lawyer nor engineer but the Haenel looks like they laid an HK416 on a photocopy machine and pressed COPY. I haven't field stripped them next to each other but I can scarcely tell 'em apart. It's probably easier to hit a given price point when you don't have to do any R&D beyond copying a competitor.;)

---

I agree. But H&K basically just copied the AR-18 and stuck it in a plastic frame with the G36, and then later grafted it on top of an M4 (which Colt did decades before).

Attachment 75833

I guess because I have been looking at them so long I see a fair amount of difference (especially compared to the difference between the average AR). But honestly, they both look like m4s and Haenel certainly didn't do much to hide the fact that they were related. The most interesting similarity is apparently a 416 bolt will actually fit in the Haenel. But on the flip side, the Haenel manages to squeeze the Ar-18 gas system into a lower profile.

Attachment 75834

https://strikehold.net/wp-content/up...-finalists.jpg

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...mr223-v-cr223/

Quote:

---

Apropos of nothing Mlok sucks Kong Dong.

---

And I really don't care about the rail attachment wars. I have watched people get rid of entire rails, spending hundreds of dollars just so they could attach a flashlight with a cooler attachment point.

Function will dictate form to a large degree and I suppose there's only so many ways to design a short-stroke piston and make the gun still look like an M4 and use STANAG mags, etc. It's just that Haenel seems to have cribbed every line and even the trade dress. For all the world it looks like they're just building their own 416s and knocking a few bucks off. But I suppose sharper legal minds than mine are hashing it out in court. I don't much care what anyone else uses for rails but I loath mlok, it's just really finicky and hard to mount stuff IMO. Ultimately it's not that big a deal since most things get mounted once and then stay there. For my own use keymod is easier to use. If it looks like dicks, well, I'm not 14 so that's not all that relevant IMO.:o

For no real technical reason, I was hoping the 433 would prevail. I find the extrusion receiver guns (433, B&T, Bren 2) aesthetically pleasing. They also make me feel slightly better that they're natively piston guns that don't have vestigial receiver extensions/buffer assemblies and should (in theory) be less prone to carrier tilt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DpdG

For no real technical reason, I was hoping the 433 would prevail. I find the extrusion receiver guns (433, B&T, Bren 2) aesthetically pleasing. They also make me feel slightly better that they're natively piston guns that don't have vestigial receiver extensions/buffer assemblies and should (in theory) be less prone to carrier tilt.

---

Carrier tilt is not an issue in any of those 'modern' systems because they all have rectangular carriers that cannot tilt on the rails they ride on and, more importantly, don't have a receiver extension where the tilt would ever cause any noticeable issues such as wear or abrasion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by javemtr

Carrier tilt is not an issue in any of those 'modern' systems because they all have rectangular carriers that cannot tilt on the rails they ride on and, more importantly, don't have a receiver extension where the tilt would ever cause any noticeable issues such as wear or abrasion.

---

Exactly what I was trying to say- they are natively designed as piston guns and shouldn’t suffer the problems of ARs retrofitted with pistons.

Quote:

---

for rails but I loath mlok, it's just really finicky and hard to mount stuff IMO

---

Agreed. I honestly think it caught on because it was more pleasing to the eye. I know crane did some tests that said it was strongest but I suspect keyed was plenty strong to hold on flashlights and pressure pads. That being said, anytime I buy something I try to get Mlock because I know the older stuff is dying.