SIG 556 at the SHOT Show is HOT! - Page 2

AR-15 » AR Discussions

AR Sponsor:

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - SIG 556 at the SHOT Show is HOT! (Page 2 of 4)

Posted: 2/12/2006 1:53:35 PM EDT

[#1]

According to one of the sigforum threads, the 556 will come with, if not a quick change barrel, at least one that can be switched without the need for special tools or a lot of time. This should make up for part of the inconvenience of serialed uppers...

Posted: 2/12/2006 2:12:34 PM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
4. The 55x folder can not be directly mounted without an adaptor

Big mistake, as public reaction has very loudly made clear. At the very least, they should offer two versions of the lower; one with the standard 550 folder and one that accepts AR stocks.

12. The upper is the serialized weapon portion. It is unknown if it will fit the 55x lowers

HUGE, COLLOSSAL MISTAKE!!! The main reason for the AR's dominance is the ability to swap out whole upper receivers at will, changing the entire configuration of the rifle. Having to paperwork an upper means that this simply won't happen, thus dooming this rifle to relative obscurity.

SIG obviously did NOT do their homework.

-Troy

Posted: 2/12/2006 2:15:19 PM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Quoted:
4. The 55x folder can not be directly mounted without an adaptor

Big mistake, as public reaction has very loudly made clear. At the very least, they should offer two versions of the lower; one with the standard 550 folder and one that accepts AR stocks.

12. The upper is the serialized weapon portion. It is unknown if it will fit the 55x lowers

HUGE, COLLOSSAL MISTAKE!!! The main reason for the AR's dominance is the ability to swap out whole upper receivers at will, changing the entire configuration of the rifle. Having to paperwork an upper means that this simply won't happen, thus dooming this rifle to relative obscurity.

SIG obviously did NOT do their homework.

-Troy

+1, couldn't have said it better.

Posted: 2/12/2006 2:24:23 PM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
12. The upper is the serialized weapon portion. It is unknown if it will fit the 55x lowers

That's going to be a problem. You will need an FFL transaction (paper) every time you want a new configuration.

ARs can be built off paper so easily it's not even funny. And once you have a lower, uppers come in the mail direct to your house.

How so? Why couldnt you just build any configuration around a 556 upper, just as you could with a AR15 lower.

Example: Would there be any issue with me buying a non weapon-55x lower to mate with a serialized-556 upper. Why couldnt the 55x lower come to my house in the mail just like an AR15 upper?

Think about it. There's little one can do to customize a lower. Change stocks is about it. Uppers are a different story. Different barrel lengths, different forearms, different sights. With an AR, I can buy one or two lowers (off paper if I want to, since they are available everywhere from private citizens) and from there on, every new upper is a non-firearm purchase (unelss you get an SBR).

The SIG is the other way around. Got a 16", want a 20"? > FFL transfer. Want an 18"? > FFL transfer. Want two of the same length, with different forearms? > FFL transfer.

No thanks. They put the serial number on the wrong half of the gun.

Right right, I get what you're saying now. I have an upper for every lower in my AR15 collection which is why it didnt occur to me, but I can see why this would be an issue for someone that wanted one firearm with a series of attachments.

But this is the way the 55x series has always been. I dont expect my M1A to be an AR15, or my glock to be a 1911. Every weapon has its perks and downsides, but at least now people arent forced to choose an AR15 by default

Posted: 2/12/2006 2:37:10 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
12. The upper is the serialized weapon portion. It is unknown if it will fit the 55x lowers

That method is a Euro-thing

The upper receiver is serialized, where we do the lower

My guess is the prototype may have been built in Europe, hence the upper serialization

Once the US SIG plant begins production, serial numbers will be where they are supposed to be for guns sold in the USA

Posted: 2/12/2006 2:42:07 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Quoted:
12. The upper is the serialized weapon portion. It is unknown if it will fit the 55x lowers

That method is a Euro-thing

The upper receiver is serialized, where we do the lower

My guess is the prototype may have been built in Europe, hence the upper serialization

Once the US SIG plant begins production, serial numbers will be where they are supposed to be for guns sold in the USA

Wrong. The serial was on the upper receiver on the pre-89 550s.

Posted: 2/12/2006 3:00:48 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
12. The upper is the serialized weapon portion. It is unknown if it will fit the 55x lowers

That method is a Euro-thing

The upper receiver is serialized, where we do the lower

My guess is the prototype may have been built in Europe, hence the upper serialization

Once the US SIG plant begins production, serial numbers will be where they are supposed to be for guns sold in the USA

Wrong. The serial was on the upper receiver on the pre-89 550s.

I think he meant that the lower will be serialized as it is common practice in the US. I don't think the ATF cares what is serialized as long as it is one of the two receivers.

Posted: 2/12/2006 3:14:03 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
Quoted:
12. The upper is the serialized weapon portion. It is unknown if it will fit the 55x lowers

That method is a Euro-thing

The upper receiver is serialized, where we do the lower

My guess is the prototype may have been built in Europe, hence the upper serialization

Once the US SIG plant begins production, serial numbers will be where they are supposed to be for guns sold in the USA

WRONG on another point: the Europeans DO NOT consider the receiver the be the critical, registered part of the gun. Rather, it is the barrel that they require to be serial numbered and registered.

In the USA, the original 550 series had the upper receiver numbered and that is what ATF accepted. So it is with the new gun (and others, such as the FN-FAL). Besides, the barrel is quick change. No disadvantage with the upper being serialized.

Posted: 2/12/2006 3:17:06 PM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
12. The upper is the serialized weapon portion. It is unknown if it will fit the 55x lowers

HUGE, COLLOSSAL MISTAKE!!! The main reason for the AR's dominance is the ability to swap out whole upper receivers at will, changing the entire configuration of the rifle. Having to paperwork an upper means that this simply won't happen, thus dooming this rifle to relative obscurity.

SIG obviously did NOT do their homework.

-Troy

Troy,

I think that Sig has no choice but to serialize the upper due to the fact that all 55x rifles and the repair/replacement receivers that CCF imported have the uppers designated as the regulated part and are marked with the serial number. CCF imported a number of 551 and 552 parts kits that have the lower included and were sold without restriction. CCf also imported orginal 551 receivers for "repair/replacement" use before ATF disallowed this as an acceptable reason for importation of receivers for rifles otherwise banned under 922r.

If the 556 upper is compatible with original 55x lowers, and ATF allowed the 556 lower to be the regulated part, this would potentially cause problems with the 551 and 552 parts kits and upper receivers that are floating around, especially given the fact that a factory fullauto 55x lower is an unregulated part. If the 556 upper is compatible with original 55x lowers and the lower is deemed the firearm, you would ex post facto made a bunch of post sample mg's out of the fullauto 55x lowers from those parts kits.

If Sig decides not to offer a 'classic' 556, I hope the 556 upper is compatible with the original 55x lower because this will allow owners to swap out the 556 lower for an original 55x version.

Posted: 2/12/2006 4:23:22 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
12. The upper is the serialized weapon portion. It is unknown if it will fit the 55x lowers

That method is a Euro-thing

The upper receiver is serialized, where we do the lower

My guess is the prototype may have been built in Europe, hence the upper serialization

Once the US SIG plant begins production, serial numbers will be where they are supposed to be for guns sold in the USA

WRONG on another point: the Europeans DO NOT consider the receiver the be the critical, registered part of the gun. Rather, it is the barrel that they require to be serial numbered and registered.

In the USA, the original 550 series had the upper receiver numbered and that is what ATF accepted. So it is with the new gun (and others, such as the FN-FAL). Besides, the barrel is quick change. No disadvantage with the upper being serialized.

OK. the euros serialize the barrel. But not the lower. Your point is they serial the upper?

and whats the other point?

jeez this place has gotten sharp lately

Posted: 2/12/2006 8:31:14 PM EDT

[#11]

They will HAVE to serialize the upper if it mates with original 55X rifle lowers. It's not a big deal to me, since barrel length is the BIG reason to switch uppers. The barrel on the Sig 556 will be easy enought to switch out on my own, so it negates the advantage.

However, to those who only want ONE lower, and a BUNCH of uppers (one scoped, one w/ Eotech, one w/ Aimpoint, etc...), no dice. Of course, all my ARs are COMPLETE rifles, so this isn't something I'm into.

EDIT- I wonder how the pre-89 rifles can get away with being interchangeable with full auto lowers that aren't serialized, and therefore not registered?

Posted: 2/13/2006 11:54:34 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
However, to those who only want ONE lower, and a BUNCH of uppers (one scoped, one w/ Eotech, one w/ Aimpoint, etc...), no dice. Of course, all my ARs are COMPLETE rifles, so this isn't something I'm into.

I'm not getting this. Assuming optics are quick detachable, what's to prevent someone from swapping stuff out as the need arises? And as long as someone is changing out barrels and the lengths are all greater than SBR, what's the problem?

Posted: 2/13/2006 12:04:39 PM EDT

[#13]

Just back from SHOT SHOW and the SIG was clearly the worst rifle there. A true disapointment. It is hidious.

I mean, beyond hidious.

Posted: 2/13/2006 12:08:53 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:

EDIT- I wonder how the pre-89 rifles can get away with being interchangeable with full auto lowers that aren't serialized, and therefore not registered?

The upper receivers differ between full and semi. In the semiauto uppers you can see the carriage block on the right inner side of the receiver.

This is welded to the upper and prevents a fullauto bolt from tripping the fullauto disconnector.

In a fullauto upper you'll notice that the carriage block is missing:

Photo from Capital City Firearms (Larry Gaglio)

A more in-depth description can be found here:
KB's Sig 55x receiver comparision

Edited to add: I am really surprised that ATF classified the Sigs upper as the receiver. Having that welded in carriage block as the only distinguishing characteristic between a fullauto and semiaut receiver seems too simple. I mean a careful few minutes with a mill or even a Dremel and you could have a functional (but not legal) full auto upper. Oh well...just goes to show that there is no such thing as common sense with ATF.

Posted: 2/13/2006 12:58:07 PM EDT

[#15]

Reposrts are that the bbl. swaps out via an allen bolt (or 2?), so it would seem that changing barrels should be a non-issue so long as bbl.-lengths >= 16" are used.

Check out SMGLee's thread on the SIG's.

Posted: 2/13/2006 1:21:15 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Its FRONT heavy and unbalanced. FACT. Did say over all weight. The mags are NOT made by SIG they are made in Isreal as told to me by the SIG rep. Asked about the getting a folding stock and he also stated its not going to happen because LEO like the AR type stock. Also that lower is no way close to the quality as the 550. Trigger seemed alright but would have to live fire it.

The Swiss stamp the upper receiver 14 times in production. Also have heard from a good source, that has worked with Swiss Arms on the 550 in the US, that SIG arms would like to have every 550/551 recalled so that we wont have the two to compare too.

I was looking forward to this rifle more then most. But after it was in my hands and in front of my eyes, did not like it. Looking for a 10 and came away with a 4.5. This thing could not carry the 550/551 or the SCAR's jock strap.

My thoughts exactly, I'll pass and wait for the SCAR.

Posted: 2/13/2006 2:02:16 PM EDT

[#17]

if we in the US like to number lower receivers, SIG might just make the new rifle upper and lower NOT interchangeable with the old versions. This would definitely keep any problems from arising.

the only reason any intelligent person would want a folder is if it were an extendable folder like the SCAR.

having a folder on it just because you think it would make it cool like the old SIG rifle is just pure gay in my opinion.

Posted: 2/13/2006 2:36:52 PM EDT

[#18]

I doubt you could serial the lower if you wanted to. Once you put the magazine and all of the operating components into the same receiver, a la HK, you need to serialize that one, because it can be fired that way.

Posted: 2/13/2006 3:06:52 PM EDT

[#19]

Add the lack of the original rear sight..........

Quoted:
Quoted:
4. The 55x folder can not be directly mounted without an adaptor

Big mistake, as public reaction has very loudly made clear. At the very least, they should offer two versions of the lower; one with the standard 550 folder and one that accepts AR stocks.

12. The upper is the serialized weapon portion. It is unknown if it will fit the 55x lowers

HUGE, COLLOSSAL MISTAKE!!! The main reason for the AR's dominance is the ability to swap out whole upper receivers at will, changing the entire configuration of the rifle. Having to paperwork an upper means that this simply won't happen, thus dooming this rifle to relative obscurity.

SIG obviously did NOT do their homework.

-Troy

Posted: 2/13/2006 8:54:04 PM EDT

[#20]

The sig rifle sucked. Maybe I was expecting too much from them. It is early, they can recover.

ergonomics are ass. it is front heavy. the stock sucks. the cocking handle is WAY high up on the right side so: 1) you can't reach under with your left hand to work the cocking lever (well, I can't) so you have to use your firing hand, 2) it is so high up that you are bumping into any optic you have mounted. If that is your thing, then fine but I've always trained to keep my weapon pointed down range and firing grip on the rifle and do manipulations with my off hand.

Posted: 2/13/2006 10:07:58 PM EDT

[#21]

OH my God it had been a long time since I have heard so many people on this board whine the way everyone has regarding the Sig 556.

Has anyone fired this rifle? Does anyone own one right now?

I will reserve my thoughts on this rifle until I can shoot it.

If it works well than I will buy one if not then I will not buy one.

It is nice to see something new come out for once from one of the major gun makers.

We all know that HK and Colt will not sell us anything but old crap.

I hope/trust this is not what everyone is wanting more of.

Posted: 2/13/2006 11:36:08 PM EDT

[#22]

I know it's the ARFCOM tradition to bitch and whine, but I think you might want to spend some time securing the parts you need to make the rifle you want, if you cant buy the one you are looking for. I know I am

Posted: 2/14/2006 4:43:01 AM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
The sig rifle sucked. Maybe I was expecting too much from them. It is early, they can recover.

ergonomics are ass. it is front heavy. the stock sucks. the cocking handle is WAY high up on the right side so: 1) you can't reach under with your left hand to work the cocking lever (well, I can't) so you have to use your firing hand, 2) it is so high up that you are bumping into any optic you have mounted. If that is your thing, then fine but I've always trained to keep my weapon pointed down range and firing grip on the rifle and do manipulations with my off hand.

This is no different than the old 550. When I had a Galil I cocked/rotated the gun to the left and used my left hand to work handle, and it worked. The AK, SKS, M1A, Garand, Mini-14, etc all have a cocking knob on the right side where I have to use the right hand to cock the gun. Once you get used to it, it works.

Posted: 2/14/2006 5:20:45 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
OH my God it had been a long time since I have heard so many people on this board whine the way everyone has regarding the Sig 556.

Has anyone fired this rifle? Does anyone own one right now?

I will reserve my thoughts on this rifle until I can shoot it.

If it works well than I will buy one if not then I will not buy one.

It is nice to see something new come out for once from one of the major gun makers.

We all know that HK and Colt will not sell us anything but old crap.

I hope/trust this is not what everyone is wanting more of.

Agree 100%. Anyone get to shoot a 556? No? I did not think so.

The 55X series owners here and in Europe tell me the gun is extremely accurate and reliable. I'm into guns for how they shoot, not for some kinda twisted fashion show.

Look on the bright side Bear, there will be that many MORE Sigs for us to buy. And won't the nay-sayers be humiliated at the late 2006 3gun/multigun shoots when they loose to all the Sigs?

Posted: 2/14/2006 5:28:31 AM EDT

[#25]

SigForums is that way... see ya.

Posted: 2/14/2006 6:18:55 AM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Quoted:
OH my God it had been a long time since I have heard so many people on this board whine the way everyone has regarding the Sig 556.

Has anyone fired this rifle? Does anyone own one right now?

I will reserve my thoughts on this rifle until I can shoot it.

If it works well than I will buy one if not then I will not buy one.

It is nice to see something new come out for once from one of the major gun makers.

We all know that HK and Colt will not sell us anything but old crap.

I hope/trust this is not what everyone is wanting more of.

Agree 100%. Anyone get to shoot a 556? No? I did not think so.

The 55X series owners here and in Europe tell me the gun is extremely accurate and reliable. I'm into guns for how they shoot, not for some kinda twisted fashion show.

Look on the bright side Bear, there will be that many MORE Sigs for us to buy. And won't the nay-sayers be humiliated at the late 2006 3gun/multigun shoots when they loose to all the Sigs?

Sorry. We can't make any comments until we fire the gun. You are right. We should all shut up now. We should ignore the looks of the gun and by looks I mean obvious visual differences we don't like and just buy one. Only then can we judge the looks of the gun

Ass

Posted: 2/14/2006 8:29:34 AM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
OH my God it had been a long time since I have heard so many people on this board whine the way everyone has regarding the Sig 556.

Has anyone fired this rifle? Does anyone own one right now?

I will reserve my thoughts on this rifle until I can shoot it.

If it works well than I will buy one if not then I will not buy one.

It is nice to see something new come out for once from one of the major gun makers.

We all know that HK and Colt will not sell us anything but old crap.

I hope/trust this is not what everyone is wanting more of.

Agree 100%. Anyone get to shoot a 556? No? I did not think so.

The 55X series owners here and in Europe tell me the gun is extremely accurate and reliable. I'm into guns for how they shoot, not for some kinda twisted fashion show.

Look on the bright side Bear, there will be that many MORE Sigs for us to buy. And won't the nay-sayers be humiliated at the late 2006 3gun/multigun shoots when they loose to all the Sigs?

Sorry. We can't make any comments until we fire the gun. You are right. We should all shut up now. We should ignore the looks of the gun and by looks I mean obvious visual differences we don't like and just buy one. Only then can we judge the looks of the gun

Ass

Hmmm - name calling contest. How to respond: err - fashionista maybe? I guess some people just like to spend their money on a "safe queen" & not shoot their stuff. Guess we will not be seeing you at the range?

Seriously though, to each his own. Its all good. Please continue with comments regarding the looks of the 556. There is value in this discussion as Sig has made clear that the prototypes shown at the show are subject to change prior to release later this year. And, Sig is seeking input based solely on the show guns (i.e. - non-firing impressions). Post on.

Regards, CBR

Posted: 2/14/2006 8:30:28 AM EDT

[#28]

Here is a pic that should finally shut people up about the raised rail. And I'll explain it again for those that werent paying attention and keep saying "The raised rail sucks"

The 556 is very modular. The upper has a highly interchangeable rail system. The reason for this is the presence of the M4 stock and 55x folder. If a person chooses the inline M4 stock they need a higher rail for proper cheek weld and sight alignment. Think of how high the carry handle is on an M4

If a person uses a 55x folder they need a lower rail akin to the current 552.

So SIG has a rail system that can be mounted high or low. It's mounted with screws and anyone that doesnt believe it, here is a photo of the screws. How you config your gun will determine what rail system you use. Though I would think all the AR15 risers in production can raise the rail more attractively for those who dont like the look of the SIG rail

Posted: 2/14/2006 8:36:30 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
Here is a pic that should finally shut people up about the raised rail. And I'll explain it again for those that werent paying attention and keep saying "The raised rail sucks"

The 556 is very modular. The upper has a highly interchangeable rail system. The reason for this is the presence of the M4 stock and 55x folder. If a person chooses the inline M4 stock they need a higher rail for proper cheek weld and sight alignment. Think of how high the carry handle is on an M4

If a person uses a 55x folder they need a lower rail akin to the current 552.

So SIG has a rail system that can be mounted high or low. It's mounted with screws and anyone that doesnt believe it, here is a photo of the screws. How you config your gun will determine what rail system you use. Though I would think all the AR15 risers in production can raise the rail more attractively for those who dont like the look of the SIG rail

sigforum.com/movedimages/lbj/railattach.jpg

[Jan Brady]Ooooh, gross![/Jan Brady]

Posted: 2/14/2006 8:50:18 AM EDT

[#30]

You aren't getting what I was saying or trying to point out CBR- I've seen a lot of people criticize the people criticizing the looks by saying "don't knock it 'til you try it." or other mumbo jumbo like that.

Unfortunately, at this stage, all we can do is comment on it's looks. That's what we are doing.

For you to say that if we haven't fired one yet then we shouldn't comment is silly. Everyone is commenting on how it looks and what parts it does or doesn't have.

Noone is saying it won't function or be accurate so when you agree with arcticbear and say we should "reserve our comments until [we] shoot it." is ridiculous.

I don't know where you get off saying anything about my rifle being a safe queen.

I guess some people just like to spend their money on a "safe queen" & not shoot their stuff. Guess we will not be seeing you at the range?

making that statement in your response to my attempt at explaining to you what we are discussing here is assinine, hence me saying you are being an ass.

Posted: 2/14/2006 1:03:31 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
Quoted:
The sig rifle sucked. Maybe I was expecting too much from them. It is early, they can recover.

ergonomics are ass. it is front heavy. the stock sucks. the cocking handle is WAY high up on the right side so: 1) you can't reach under with your left hand to work the cocking lever (well, I can't) so you have to use your firing hand, 2) it is so high up that you are bumping into any optic you have mounted. If that is your thing, then fine but I've always trained to keep my weapon pointed down range and firing grip on the rifle and do manipulations with my off hand.

This is no different than the old 550. When I had a Galil I cocked/rotated the gun to the left and used my left hand to work handle, and it worked. The AK, SKS, M1A, Garand, Mini-14, etc all have a cocking knob on the right side where I have to use the right hand to cock the gun. Once you get used to it, it works.

with and AK, M1 carbine, or M14 I can reach it and operate it with no problem. Although I do favor the 20 round AMD-65 style mags for an AK. But with the Sig 556 the height of the rifle + magazine seems to be too much. Also, the cocking handle on the 556 seems to be canted up at the 2:00 position making it harder to grab with your off hand and easier to rotate your knuckles into the receiver/rail even using the right hand. Maybe a larger handle would help with this.

I've never used a galil, but I notice that the cocking handle on the R4's drops down a little making it easier to grab... South African improvement?

Posted: 2/14/2006 1:08:29 PM EDT

[#32]

The advantage to a CH on the left side is a right handed shooter can work it easily with the ejection port facing down. This aids greatly during malfunction clearing because it allows gravity to assist the process.

Posted: 2/14/2006 1:23:34 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
The advantage to a CH on the left side is a right handed shooter can work it easily with the ejection port facing down. This aids greatly during malfunction clearing because it allows gravity to assist the process.

Like I said before, I find the left side chargers awkward. Never gave this angle a thought though, the bit about clearing a malfunction, but then again never had to clear a malfunction on my AK's.

Still don't get this thing about wanting your hand on the pistol grip on a unloaded weapon with the bolt locked back. What is the point?

Oh, and I heard once that guys are being trained to load and charge the M1 Garand with the weak hand, would love to see pictures or a video of that!

Posted: 2/14/2006 1:26:57 PM EDT

[#34]

Ekie, it's nice to be able to perform literally ALL of your manipulations and almost all of your IADs (Type 3/Doublefeed is the exception) while maintaining a firing grip on the weapon. Faster and more secure.

Posted: 2/14/2006 1:35:43 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:
The advantage to a CH on the left side is a right handed shooter can work it easily with the ejection port facing down. This aids greatly during malfunction clearing because it allows gravity to assist the process.

hmmm... that is a new method for me. I'll have to practice that.

slap, tug, rack, ready. never taking the rifle off the shoulder, never releasing a firing grip, never looking away from the threat area.

If immediate action doesn't fix it, drop the mag and there is a big ass hole under there for stuff to fall out of without twisting the rifle around. I'm having a hard time envisioning "step 2, rotate ejection port toward ground and try immediate action again" or drop the mag and point the largest opening in the weapon anywhere but straight up and down...

I'm going to have to play with that idea. Good food for thought... but 15 years of using an M16 (or some such varient) and I'm probably not learning any new habits anytime soon.

Posted: 2/14/2006 1:35:53 PM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:
Ekie, it's nice to be able to perform literally ALL of your manipulations and almost all of your IADs (Type 3/Doublefeed is the exception) while maintaining a firing grip on the weapon. Faster and more secure.

How is doing a "reach around" on say a AK "faster" or more "secure" then not?

Posted: 2/14/2006 2:54:03 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:

This is no different than the old 550. When I had a Galil I cocked/rotated the gun to the left and used my left hand to work handle, and it worked. The AK, SKS, M1A, Garand, Mini-14, etc all have a cocking knob on the right side where I have to use the right hand to cock the gun. Once you get used to it, it works.

Here's the thing. If I would get an EOTech or Aimpoint for the 556 (not getting the 556, I'm using a for instance) I would mount the optic right there on top of the receiver and, from the looks of it, it would be awefully hard to reach over the EOThingy or the Aimpointer to get to the charging handle.

Just my opinion.

WIZZO

Posted: 2/14/2006 3:21:01 PM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:
Quoted:

This is no different than the old 550. When I had a Galil I cocked/rotated the gun to the left and used my left hand to work handle, and it worked. The AK, SKS, M1A, Garand, Mini-14, etc all have a cocking knob on the right side where I have to use the right hand to cock the gun. Once you get used to it, it works.

Here's the thing. If I would get an EOTech or Aimpoint for the 556 (not getting the 556, I'm using a for instance) I would mount the optic right there on top of the receiver and, from the looks of it, it would be awefully hard to reach over the EOThingy or the Aimpointer to get to the charging handle.

Just my opinion.

WIZZO

May well be: have to try it when I get the gun...

As a user of an M60, and a 1919a4, I have had to use the right hand to charge the gun for years, having previously gotten used to the AR system where I used the left. You get used to the weapon and the system you work with often enough.

Face it, most of these will be bought and used in this country by collectors, or casual US Chairforce "officers" like me, just for fun. This is a hobby. So we can say, "I have here a SIG rifle the likes of which I have wanted for many years, and for a reasonable cost." I cannot quibble about some of the features they have chosen, which are a combination of trying to modularize/modernise the gun as well as appease some of those who might buy the gun in LE and cost saving measures.

Thus such a feature as the high placement of the right charging knob is a minor issue to me, and I will guess, most of those interested in owning a SIG rifle of any kind.

Posted: 2/14/2006 3:35:58 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
Still don't get this thing about wanting your hand on the pistol grip on a unloaded weapon with the bolt locked back. What is the point?

You will eventually have to go back to that position to resume firing.

If you can load/re-load and clear malfunctions without changing your body position that is less motion and manipulation and more bang-bang.

Sorry to continue the hijack - anyway, that was my impression of the rifle. yes it is a sig, but I dont' think it is any better than what we have available now.

Posted: 2/14/2006 4:19:39 PM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Still don't get this thing about wanting your hand on the pistol grip on a unloaded weapon with the bolt locked back. What is the point?

You will eventually have to go back to that position to resume firing.

And the sooner the better (but worthless until there is a round in the chamber).

Quoted:
If you can load/re-load and clear malfunctions without changing your body position that is less motion and manipulation and more bang-bang.

Exactly my point, less manipulation, motion, and body position change not doing a reach around.

Posted: 2/14/2006 4:30:10 PM EDT

[#41]

What the general consensus wants
In no particular order:
1.)Original(or close)55X folding stock
2.)Original(or close)55X pistol grip
3.)Original(or close)55X Diopter sights
5.)Original(or close)55X handguards/Optional rail system
6.)Optional low profile Picatinny Rail

-New AR type lower receiver being a compromise.

The following is examples are a VERY workable concept and compromise
just needs a little pushing-Folks at Sig ARE listening to what the consumer has to say:

Posted: 2/14/2006 4:36:43 PM EDT

[#42]

Ironbalaclava.
Damn nice work!
S.

Posted: 2/14/2006 4:36:45 PM EDT

[#43]

I handled the 556 at SHOT. It has abysmal build quality and coesn't even compare to a well made AR let alone the bank vault 550 series.

The rail and sight arrangements sucked big time and the polymer handguards were loose and nasty. First Samco has competition. The rail when mounted high looked like it was airsoft (nay...i saw airsoft stuff there of higher quality).

Unless they seriously improve the build quality...this gun will be fighting it out with the AR-180B.

Simon

Posted: 2/14/2006 4:58:54 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
Hmm, lots of misinformation and misunderstanding about the 556, what it is and what SIG intended.

1. The raised rail can be removed. It's held by four screws and can be mounted high or low depending on if you use an inline M4 stock or Folder. It can take the 55x folder with an adaptor. Cheek weld will change if you use an inline M4 stock (higher rail) or folder (lower rail) so a moduler rail system was needed.

2. The handguard can be swapped for the classic 55x handguard. They are compatible, no adaptor is needed. The current handguard, grip and stock are provided by FAB Defense and isnt finalized. They were added for illustrative purposes only

3. You can swap out front sight for the 55x frontsight with tritium

4. The 55x folder can not be directly mounted without an adaptor

5. SIG hasnt decided if they want to use 55x barrels with integrated flash hiders or 556 barrels that accept ar15 muzzle devices

6. You can use 55x FAL style grips, no adaptor needed

7. The lower is anodized aluminum, not plastic

8. SIG is designing and doing the R&D for the 556 mags in Exeter, NH. They are not made in Israel

9. No plans for a 55x 1913 drum sight for the 556 is planned yet

10. The only elements that are near finalized are the steel upper, anodized aluminum lower with M16 mags (mag release fence and safety markings not added yet), modular upper rail system, and action

11. The 556 is legal for sale in the USA and is made in Exeter, NH, and is stamped accordingly.

12. The upper is the serialized weapon portion. It is unknown if it will fit the 55x lowers

Ahh,What I had suspected.
And if Sig doesn't upgrade the 556 accordingly to what consumers want, This is what I planned to do exactly anyways.
Just a matter of finding and preordering the relevent parts.

As for the 55X folder not fitting the 556 lower rec. without an adapter; retrofitting shouldn't
be a problem if the dimensions of the the 556 lower are similar to that of the 55X lowers.
Apply spacers, cut and weld where needed:
Sig 550 lower

Sig556 lower

Sig 550 schematics

Posted: 2/14/2006 5:07:47 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
I handled the 556 at SHOT. It has abysmal build quality and coesn't even compare to a well made AR let alone the bank vault 550 series.

The rail and sight arrangements sucked big time and the polymer handguards were loose and nasty. First Samco has competition. The rail when mounted high looked like it was airsoft (nay...i saw airsoft stuff there of higher quality).

Unless they seriously improve the build quality...this gun will be fighting it out with the AR-180B.

Simon

Aren't the Shot Show 556 guns prototypes, not yet finalized? I saw some machining marks which would normally be polished out in the pics at certain angles. They have to add the mag release protectors, and there are some differences in some of the receivers. I would not judge the final product based on prototypes, as their production pistol quality (I had 2 of them) and their other rifles I have seen, is excellent.

Has anyone ever seen a production SIGARMS product of inferior quality?

Posted: 2/14/2006 5:21:16 PM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:
What the general consensus wants
In no particular order:
1.)Original(or close)55X folding stock
2.)Original(or close)55X pistol grip
3.)Original(or close)55X Diopter sights
5.)Original(or close)55X handguards/Optional rail system
6.)Optional low profile Picatinny Rail

-New AR type lower receiver being a compromise.

The following is examples are a VERY workable concept and compromise
just needs a little pushing-Folks at Sig ARE listening to what the consumer has to say:

.......

.....

You nailed it, that's exactly what I personally am wanting from SIG, no extra frills or rails, just classic SIG 55x only using AR mags. Nice photochop

I also like the original grey color of the receivers, but oh well, can live without that.

Posted: 2/14/2006 5:46:55 PM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:
Quoted:
What the general consensus wants
In no particular order:
1.)Original(or close)55X folding stock
2.)Original(or close)55X pistol grip
3.)Original(or close)55X Diopter sights
5.)Original(or close)55X handguards/Optional rail system
6.)Optional low profile Picatinny Rail

-New AR type lower receiver being a compromise.

The following is examples are a VERY workable concept and compromise
just needs a little pushing-Folks at Sig ARE listening to what the consumer has to say:

.......

www.hunt101.com/img/377265-big.gif

.....

You nailed it, that's exactly what I personally am wanting from SIG, no extra frills or rails, just classic SIG 55x only using AR mags. Nice photochop

I also like the original grey color of the receivers, but oh well, can live without that.

I think it's safe to suffice that that's damn close to what most of us had in mind,
minus the original 55X stamped lowers.

On a positive note:
1.)The current 556 IS a prototype to garner feedback and Sig is listening to what We really want.
2.)New models are to follow-have yet to unveil a carbine variant
3.)Worse come to worse, Us traditionalists go the HK SL-8 to G36 type retrofit/conversion route
and We still have our cake and eat it too.

Couldn't have it any other way.

Posted: 2/14/2006 6:07:27 PM EDT

[#48]

Just build the damned 550 series. Have someone build the mag body and floorplate in the US by shipping over the tooling..........what is the big deal?

You will notice that the 556 was not shown alongside the 552 and 551 at the SIG stand. Wonder why? Other people also showed protoypes but they didn't look like garbage.

On a related note of bad news, the P210 is being discontinued. Waaaaaaaaaahhhhhh.......

Simon

Posted: 2/14/2006 6:42:13 PM EDT

[#49]

I hate to admit it, but that damn 556 is growing on me the more I look at it. The reason is that everytime I see a picture of it I replace the buttstock, grip, etc with something else. And it also helps that I like the SWAT version, not the version with the raised optical rail.

But then again, IronBalaclava, your Photoshop is even better from a purist's point of view.

Posted: 2/14/2006 7:08:00 PM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
Quoted:
What the general consensus wants
In no particular order:
1.)Original(or close)55X folding stock
2.)Original(or close)55X pistol grip
3.)Original(or close)55X Diopter sights
5.)Original(or close)55X handguards/Optional rail system
6.)Optional low profile Picatinny Rail

-New AR type lower receiver being a compromise.

The following is examples are a VERY workable concept and compromise
just needs a little pushing-Folks at Sig ARE listening to what the consumer has to say:

.......

www.hunt101.com/img/377265-big.gif

.....

You nailed it, that's exactly what I personally am wanting from SIG, no extra frills or rails, just classic SIG 55x only using AR mags. Nice photochop

I also like the original grey color of the receivers, but oh well, can live without that.

Too expensive to make it this way, it will not happen, at least not at first without a big package markup. Just adding the quad rail and better sights added $500 to the MRSP= $1800. Add $200 for folder stock, $200 for better tritium sights, brings cost to $2200. Add $200 for bipod and you are at $2400. Clearly SIG has to consider the price in order to sell in volume. Without volume they will suffer the same fate as the 550 series in the 80s.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - SIG 556 at the SHOT Show is HOT! (Page 2 of 4)

AR-15 » AR Discussions

AR Sponsor:

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us