User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/14/2006 7:31:28 PM EDT
[#1]
Yes, But this will not stop the people who want as true to a 55X type as they can get, from performing a Sl8-G36 like-conversion. Existing LE replacement OEM 55X handguards(not an RAS;you can add side rails cheaply) and 55X pistol grips(already a half completed 55X4gery) can't be too much(under $200). Existing replacement OEM Folding stock/adapter and diopter sights(essentially the other 1/2 of a 55X forgery) can also be had. Ballpark estimate would be under a grand for those parts/fitting of the stock, minus minute details such as tritium, Grenade rings, bayo lugs, etc. It should just be made known that We are in NO ways stuck with the current 556 configuration. I for one will purchase one and follow through with the necessary modifications if Sig does not offer Us options. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2006 7:40:57 PM EDT
[#2]
You have got to send these pics to SIG. This is EXACTLY what "everyone" is looking for. Also add that "we" want a 1/7 chromed lined hammer forged barrel and that they should put out both a 20" and 16" versions! Good job! 0351 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2006 8:12:55 PM EDT
[#3]
Ironbalaclava- Great Photoshops! They look incredible.
I'm not a fan of the prototype 556 for one simple reason. It's not the model I want. I think most of the pics show the "rifle" version (similar to 550), whereas I want the "carbine"/SWAT version (similar to 551.) I want a shorter forearm. I'm REALLY excited to see Sig's SWAT model after they incorporate the feedback they received at SHOT, and online. One thing: I don't want them to simply make an adapter to fit the original stock. That will increase the LOP, and make it into the abomination my SL8/G36 was. The LOP was WAY too long, and it was useless to me. Make the Sig lower buttstock assembly JUST like the original, and make an adapter to fit the AR tube instead (ala the Gemtech adapter previously seen on an existing 552.) |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2006 9:28:55 PM EDT
[#4]
This is definetly the best version. If only they would produce it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2006 11:21:03 PM EDT
[#5]
*wipes away a tear* It is so beautiful... Sign me up... provided I can make it CT legal. - BG |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2006 11:49:52 PM EDT
[#6]
You'll have to change the name. It's still considered a "55X" series rifle. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2006 11:56:13 PM EDT
[#7]
Bingo... but with enough heads-up from a number of people in CT, I'd imagine that they'd do a special run. A boy can dream... aye?  - BG |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 1:50:07 AM EDT
[#8]
Oops looks nice, but that's actually a 14.29 in. SBR carbine config, that the LEO 551 comes in. Here is a Sig 556(1) type Carbine 14.29 rendition with extended permanent flash hider to reach 16 in.:  Sig 556(1) type Carbine w/16 in. + Bbl:  Sig 556(1) type Carbine Flattop w/16 in+ Bbl.: 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 2:25:13 AM EDT
[#9]
If they would have rolled this out, there would have been a growing crescendo of jeers proclaiming it void of rails, and unable to accept modern optics For crying out loud!! You could drag that puppy through the EE and never find a single accessory that would stick to it!!  Seriously, modern 5.56 war rifles/carbines will all be built with fore-end rails, or the possibility of them, and come standard with an upper rail for certain- for the optics |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 4:42:43 AM EDT
[#10]
+1 Optics, flashlight, vertical foregrip are almost standard anymore.... Old classics are great but not as functional as modern setups. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 5:22:40 AM EDT
[#11]
Despite my annoyance at all the pissing & moaning over the guns appearance, I have to confess that Iron Balaclava's photoshop creation would appear to be a gun I would buy. As long as they keep the weight the same as currently advertised & its got the accuracy its supposed to, then bring it on. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 5:30:50 AM EDT
[#12]
That is what I want with a B&T or similar domestically produced rail handguard in the front. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 6:38:41 AM EDT
[#13]
That entire portion in red should read "suffice it to say" i.e. Suffice it to say that is damn close to what most... Oh, and on your Photoshopped pictures, get rid of the TM after your name and put a circled "C" for Copyright before your name. The TM would protect your name and not the photo. Words and names are trademarked while photos and printed works are copyrighted. Suffice it to say that Sig is not looking to fire up the old plants that produced the old 55x models so they can sell them for nostalgia. They are looking to make a new rifle, not make a new rifle that looks like the old one so people with fond memories can buy them. They want to make a MODERN rifle that can be built now and still be modern in a few years. Were they to build the old ones again and reproduce them faithfully, they'd almost be outdated. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 7:03:06 AM EDT
[#14]
I don't think he is trying to protect his photo. . I take it he is putting TM after his name to be cute/funny.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 7:46:36 AM EDT
[#15]
Either of those versions would be perfect! I would slap some moolah down right now for any of those
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 7:51:08 AM EDT
[#16]
THAT'S EVEN BETTER! 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 8:22:51 AM EDT
[#17]
Theres gonna be a US civilian legal sig 550 series rifle?!?!?!?!
edit: wow that thing looks like it sucks compared to the real 550 series 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 8:29:12 AM EDT
[#18]
I like the flattop. Sign me up.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 8:31:03 AM EDT
[#19]
The lower has the rear stock "knuckle" machined into it.........NO FOLDER WILL FIT!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 1:35:12 PM EDT
[#20]
Well said. It would be as if Colt products couldnt be had for 15 years and then when they finally release something it is a sporter A2 instead of a 6920 Proven concepts and tactics demand that the 55x be updated and SIG has made the right moves in making the 556 a truly modular weapon that can modified to fit a variety of combat conditions. The standard 551 is nice, but it really isnt as versatile as the newer weapon system in development (SCAR, XCR, M1A SOCOM, Colt LE1020) I'm still baffled by this obsession with folders. It open and closes. WOW!! So Useful. That would get old in ten minutes after you figure out the LOP didnt fit your frame |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 1:59:05 PM EDT
[#21]
why didnt they just make a semi auto only version of the original? why did they bastardize it?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 2:06:07 PM EDT
[#22]
You know I've had a hard on for the 551 for a looong time.... but this 556 just doesn't have the look I want. It's so AR-15 like that I can't justify purchasing it over a modular, less expensive AR. If the weapon was actually, I don't know... DISTINCITVE, I'd totally buy myself one.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 2:21:27 PM EDT
[#23]
I emailed SIG and told them exactly that... I love the 556 revisions that people have photoshopped here. I WOULD buy one of those. Unless SIG can make the 556 more like the 550 ( folding stock, sights, handguards ) it looks like FN SCAR will get my money... LB |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 2:22:49 PM EDT
[#24]
Why not a collapsing and folding stock? Its not hard! Sig could walk over to the FN booth to figure out how that works.
I see absolutely NO advantages of the 556 over an AR. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 2:31:13 PM EDT
[#25]
Why no bayonet lug?
I like the rifle, I know they'll probably release a flat top version and folding stock but why no bayonet lug?? Sure you can get away with that on your AR for range use but a combat rifle always has a bayonet lug! Just in case the kids get out of hand. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 3:59:28 PM EDT
[#26]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 4:04:21 PM EDT
[#27]
Something like this? 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 4:08:50 PM EDT
[#28]
Hell Yes Rich!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 4:09:48 PM EDT
[#29]
Rich,
Has Magpul given any thought to making a modern fully synthetic magazine? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 4:10:05 PM EDT
[#30]
I'll take one like that, of course, I would love to see one with the sopmod stock if anyone can photoshop that :)
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 4:11:35 PM EDT
[#31]
Rich,
Use those industry contacts and stop SIG from making a huge mistake. Put youself on as OEM and not after-market |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 4:15:07 PM EDT
[#32]
Damn! That would be sweet!!!! I would definitely buy something like that!
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 4:15:22 PM EDT
[#33]
I admit, that stock does look so much better, and I'm looking forward to handling. Your concept also needs the Magpul trigger guard though 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 4:15:37 PM EDT
[#34]
Hmmm: looks like he's thinking about it, eh? How about with the other stock? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 4:23:09 PM EDT
[#35]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 4:23:47 PM EDT
[#36]
why the AR collapsible? on an AR its functional and needs to be there (buffer tube). the folding stock is better.
why the different lower? I understand the point of it accepting AR mags... but why not just make the original Sig mags too? or just import them? why the different furniture? in short, why make a new design that looks like their inspiration was the tapco catalog, instead of just making an actual 550 and 551 in the US? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 4:31:31 PM EDT
[#37]
I used to think the way you did untill I fully grasped the concept of "Adjustable Length of Pull". Then I realized the collapsible stock isn't just better, it is far better. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 4:37:26 PM EDT
[#38]
Some of this has been answered earlier in the thread. One reason for a collapsible over a folding is for use with body armor. Granted that is not a consideration for some if not all of the civilians targeted for this rifle. Making it only in the collapsible for the benefit of LEOs, etc., is bold thinking that LEOs will gravitate to this platform and forsake all the other ones available to them, AR,HK, etc. , even if they are allowed to carry their choice, and not the department/units choice. I think two platforms might be better and since it is mostly cosmetic, perhaps SIG will listen. Sounds like the majority are interested in a folder, but they could provide the collapsible for those who need that mission specific (very few I would think). But to get to your last question, and since we are asking why?, why doesn't HK make the 9x series in the states, still a top seller for lesser quality makes. I won't even start with the G36 or UMP. Why doesn't Beretta make 30 round mags for the Storm. Same answer........I don't know. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 5:10:36 PM EDT
[#39]
Several possible answers: cost, political correctness, questionable long term market due to ambivalence towards "assault weapons" (even amongst gun owners) and possible future restrictive gun laws making risk unacceptable. The market for HK clones is so so at best: even at the relatively "low" price of $1200 to $1500, HK clones are really not top sellers. Vector sells some V53 guns, and I like what Vector is doing, but I don't think they are in the same league as HK or SIG. They are able to sell them profitably by using a lot of parts from kits. They outsource production of many if not all the parts, and primarily do the final assembly. Yet their guns are in the same price ballpark as the new SIG 556. I think a SIG with a few compromises is better than any clone. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 5:27:05 PM EDT
[#40]
With the CTR on....the SIG 556 would at least have 1 quality part.....
.They will NOT sell the 556 to .mil. They will never compete with Bushmaster/RRA/DPMS for that entry level AR market. So why in god's name not build on the attributes they are known for...... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 5:35:05 PM EDT
[#41]
THAT is EXACTLY what I want out of a US made 556! Very nice Photoshopping, Rich. I think you need to lobby hard with Sig to get Magpull grips and stocks offered as standard on the 556. I can't believe Sig even put the 556 out in public viewing with those crappy-ass TDI stocks. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 7:54:04 PM EDT
[#42]
That is awesome. When I first saw photos of that stock I thought it would be a natural for the 556 once I heard it was taking M4 stocks. As it turns out, I was right  I know it's kinda early to say, but any plans for 556 specific toys thus. As for the concept, I think I would prefer the longer sight radius. Here is my hack revision in MS paint 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 7:57:43 PM EDT
[#43]
yes - I agree that is a HUGE improvement
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 8:04:44 PM EDT
[#44]
Can someone photoshop the new Universal Battle Rifle Magpul stock onto the swat version? Thanks...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 8:14:27 PM EDT
[#45]
Looks better then Sigs prototype but it still looks like ass. Can they just produce a SIG 550/551 with a 556 lower?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 8:48:14 PM EDT
[#46]
Amen ! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 8:55:57 PM EDT
[#47]
That section between the end of the receiver and the start of the stock tube looks like it was made on Monster Garage.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 9:14:00 PM EDT
[#48]
Ok, I haven't seen that picture with the carbine length [partly] railed forearm and diopter sight/rail on the receiver. Did that forearm already exist, or is it just a photoshop creation? Even without the MagPul stock and grip, THAT RIFLE ROCKS! |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 9:17:09 PM EDT
[#49]
That's why some manufacturers incorporate "adjustable length of pull" into the stock design, but that doesn't necessarily mean it has to collapse. I'd like a folding stock with adjustable length of pull (spacers in the back, etc...) |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2006 9:55:43 PM EDT
[#50]
Here is one with a PRS and longer bull barrel.
 If the Sig turns out popular we plan to sell a lower receiver with a folding UBR stock. |
|
|
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
