# Firearms and Shooting > Shooting >  Some Steyrs coming up For Sale??

## sniper80

Defence seeks upgrade for 25-year-old rifles    Steyr Rifles: Ministry Of Defence Wants To Upgrade... | Stuff.co.nz


I wonder if they will put these up for sale......or just run them over with a bulldozer like the Aussies did   :36 1 5: 

Reading further through the article;

 " The ministry said operations in Afghanistan "have identified a need to be able to conduct precision engagements at ranges greater than can be achieved with the current in-service weapon".
It said the Steyrs were "not powerful enough to identify accurately adversaries and ineffective at ranges greater than 200m".
The ministry said a key requirement was that the new weapon, fitted with suitable sights, could be used to detect, identify and shoot adversaries at close quarters and at distances of up to 500m in daylight." 

That sounds fair enough, I would want at least 500m range.

Then;

"The Defence Force intends staying with the 5.56mm Nato standard cartridge used by the Steyr."   :Wtfsmilie: 

Don't get me wrong, I like the .223, I own one and it will shoot out to 500m....on a good day with no wind, and a accurate rangefinder. 

I would of thought they would of been at least going up to the 7.62.

----------


## veitnamcam

But its cheap and we are poor.

Sent from my GT-S5360T using Tapatalk 2

----------


## Neckshot

+1 the decision made will.be fuck up like most DF buys.

----------


## Spook

Maybe they should go back to .308 or 30-06 and use sabots to maintain their liking for the .223...either of them would do the distance.

----------


## R93

7.62 makes no tactical sense at all, especially the way we employ our troops. 
5.56 is ample and lethal.
NATO countries adopted the 5.56 for a number of reasons.
The SS109 through a 1:7 barrel is devastating on soft targets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

----------


## gimp

I'd buy one if they were


Wonder if they'll go with the updated F88 or something different. Or nothing.

----------


## R93

> I'd buy one if they were
> 
> 
> Wonder if they'll go with the updated F88 or something different. Or nothing.


Can't see them ever being for sale for the civilian market considering the requirements of replacing safety catches and complete trigger mechs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

----------


## gimp

And considering the shitfight over selling the ex AOS bolt guns a few years ago

----------


## Beavis

If they are gonna stay with 5.56 I don't really see the point replacing them. Load them up with Mk262 for longer range effectiveness, but then you lose out big time with barrier penetration etc.

----------


## Littledog

> And considering the shitfight over selling the ex AOS bolt guns a few years ago


Exactly! If we couldn't get a look in to buy some Rem Model 7s how the heck would we get a Steyr lol. The Police could have made a little fortune on the Mod 7s. I would have purchased one if it came up.

----------


## Eion

How many of you have actually had a play with a Steyr? R93 is right on the money with the 5.56. We aren't mounted infantry, so we're not going to go to 7.62. The 5.56 round is effective but the rifle needs an upgrade. We planned to buy the upgraded steyrs with to ones with rails etc but that was canceled. They just don't really hold up anymore. Anyway back to the main topic, I really doubt these will filter down to the public.

----------


## TeRei

Willie Apiata in his acclaimed foto in A Land did not tote a Steyr but a discredited yank M4.The bozos at our top brass have consistently purchased all the wrong equipment over the years.

----------


## Eion

When ever I've talked to a wobbly about the steyr they say that the m16 was winning but failed to fire after being dropped in a bog where as the steyr cycled. I spent last summer with m16 and they are just streaks ahead.

----------


## savageshooter

Thge sold the Lee enfields to the public, sold the LSR L1a1s to the public.....why not the Steyrs??
Its almost a Tui Ad.

I think the M16A1s went to the crusher??

----------


## Eion

There are only 6ish A1s in the armoury in Waiouru. A lot of the rest were sold off to other nations. I don't think you can make them semi only and because of that we won't get hands on.

----------


## gimp

Easy to make an M16 semi only with a new FCG but the third pinhole in the lower would still be there


More economical to spend $50 on new parts then sell the rifles than to scrap them.

----------


## gimp

Presumably possible with steyrs also.

----------


## kawhia

Fiji is currently using our old m16's.

----------


## Neckshot

my 2.60 cents
1,5.56 isn't just to kill but to wound thus taking more people out of action to tend to the wounded
2,even if you were allowed to buy the Styers they are thousands of rounds old!!!!!! some on here wouldn't touch something 200 rounds old :Grin: 
As good and reliable as they are remember one of the reasons The DF want to sell them is because there getting worn and when the defence sells something because of this reason that means they are really fucking worn to the point they should of been swapped 5 years ago worn!!!!!
Onward

----------


## lostlegend

the lee enfields and slrs weren't fully auto, a semi auto steyr has a different stock and trigger mech, the expense required to change them into civi config would be a waste of money, sell them to some other country to use.  Most of the Air force and Navy weapons would be basically like new, I should know I serviced enough of them.  I think NZ will follow Aussies lead and get what ever their replacement weapons are going to be, or move to the same weapon as the yanks for ease of part procurement in the field.

----------


## Neckshot

Bang on L legend we will follow the Aus Df.....we always do that's why we got styers in the First place. As long as the boys stay acurate
and efficent with whatever rifles they get I'm happy.

----------


## sako75

Don't they use 5.56 so they can carry more rounds yet still have knock down power.

As Neckshot said, a NZDF Styer would be in similar condition to a 19yo Hunters Plaza/Manchester Street working girl - rooted beyond repair.



Why can't there be a standard UN firearm. All parts inter-changable on the battlefield. "Excuse me Mr Netherlands, do you happen to have a spare Styer mag amongst all those M4 mags? I seem to be all out and would like to keep shooting back"

----------


## gimp

> 1,5.56 isn't just to kill but to wound thus taking more people out of action to tend to the wounded


[citation needed]

----------


## CastleRock

Because the UN dont fire guns !! Sorry couldnt help myself.
 I was under the impression the Steyrs werent to bad, screw on a new and longer barrel if required and stick a decent optic on top, sorted.

----------


## Tankd

They never wanted the Steyr ,what they recommended was the C9 (Canadian M16) but where told that they really wanted the Steyr (an "Aww yeah thats right, siily me ,I meant Steyr").
  As for the SLR they where the L1A1 with the automatic action and could be converted to Full Auto with a file (or grinder if in a hurry) .And as for selling off the Steyrs think End User certificates/UN Arms rules and good old fashioned politics.
    Then the change of calibre is not something which is going to happen soon because of Politics/Current Economic downturn .And the use of FMJ projectiles is so that a Soldier is wounded but not killed somehow making it a more "Humane"  alternative (that one is buried in the turn of the 19th century) to reduce the bloodshed.
   But as it has been said to fiqure out just what weapon they will get all you have to do is look to Australia!!!!.

----------


## Eion

> They never wanted the Steyr ,what they recommended was the C9 (Canadian M16) but where told that they really wanted the Steyr (an "Aww yeah thats right, siily me ,I meant Steyr").!!.


Might want to check this. The LSW C9 was a 5.56 machine gun similar to the m249. It was in use until last year where we replaced them with a 7.62 veriant.

----------


## Tankd

> Might want to check this. The LSW C9 was a 5.56 machine gun similar to the m240. It was in use until last year where we replaced them with a 7.62 veriant.


It was the Canadian version of the M16 which was a C??.

----------


## Ryan

C7 is the Canadian M16.

----------


## Eion

> It was the Canadian version of the M16 which was a C??.


C is the Canadian designation but the C9 is a light machine gun.
List of individual weapons of the New Zealand armed forces - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

----------


## Spanners

Sounds like an old article full of shit
The AF got longer barrels and higher mag scopes about 2 yrs ago and were quite happy with them

----------


## Happy

> [citation needed]


+ 1urban myth heaps of stories about that myth on the net. It was never the problem. More like pointing the thing in the right place .. 
Have a look there s heaps of chat about that topic ..

----------


## R93

> [citation needed]


Dont get it?

----------


## Happy

> Dont get it?


Some kind of proof that it. Was  desired as a wounder  rather than lethal round ?? I think may be wrong but anyhow. 

www.thebangswitch.com/the-poodle-killer-myth/. 

Having a chat with some friends not long after buying a 223. I got interested when one told a tale that was it was an intentional wounder

----------


## R93

Yeah, no idea if that was the intention when the round was designed but the effects of wounding a soldier is not. 
It was doctrine. We were taught that wounding the enemy was just as effective as killing them, maybe more so because of logistics. The intention to wound is not a myth.

----------


## Happy

> Yeah, no idea if that was the intention when the round was designed but the effects of wounding a soldier is not. 
> It was doctrine. We were taught that wounding the enemy was just as effective as killing them, maybe more so because of logistics. The intention to wound is not a myth.


I think you are onto it there. Not design but acceptable result intended or not would explain it well .

----------


## gimp

He's making an assertion, I'm asking for any shred of proof from an official source

----------


## R93

His assertion is founded but I doubt it will ever be official.

----------


## gimp

It doesn't make a lot of logical sense when you stop and think about it but the myth will never die and I can't be fucked arguing on the internet so I'm gonna go read a book instead

----------


## R93

Eh?

----------


## Druid

The thing is any bullet which hits living tissue creates a wound, it is the size and the immediate effect that counts ,  Way back in 1899 at the Hague Convention  when the powers that be were discussing military projectiles they banned hollow pointed ammo , thinking it would upset the British who were using hollow point projectiles, made in the Dum Dum arsenal in India, in their 303's . the Brits had already found that a spitzer projectile with a light cone of alloy or cardboard or even air in the tip was inherently unstable in tissue and would tumble, creating a bigger wound than the hollow point so they happily went along with the idea because it was within the word of the convention if not the spirit .
This is a copy of the declaration: 

*Declaration on the Use of Bullets Which Expand or Flatten Easily in the Human Body; July 29, 1899

The Undersigned, Plenipotentiaries of the Powers represented at the International Peace Conference at The Hague, duly authorized to that effect by their Governments, 

Inspired by the sentiments which found expression in the Declaration of St. Petersburg of the 29th November (11th December), 1868, 

Declare as follows: 

The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core, or is pierced with incisions. 

The present Declaration is only binding for the Contracting Powers in the case of a war between two or more of them. 

It shall cease to be binding from the time when, in a war between the Contracting Parties, one of the belligerents is joined by a non-Contracting Power. 

The present Declaration shall be ratified as soon as possible. 

The ratification shall be deposited at The Hague. 

A proces-verbal shall be drawn up on the receipt of each ratification, a copy of which, duly certified, shall be sent through the diplomatic channel to all the Contracting Powers. 

The non-Signatory Powers may adhere to the present Declaration. For this purpose they must make their adhesion known to the Contracting Powers by means of a written notification addressed to the Netherlands Government, and by it communicated to all the other Contracting Powers. 

In the event of one of the High Contracting Parties denouncing the present Declaration, such denunciation shall not take effect until a year after the notification made in writing to the Netherlands Government, and forthwith communicated by it to all the other Contracting Powers. 

This denunciation shall only affect the notifying Power. 

In faith of which the Plenipotentiaries have signed the present Declaration, and have affixed their seals thereto. 

Done at The Hague the 29th July, 1899, in a single copy, which shall be kept in the archives of the Netherlands Government, and of which copies, duly certified, shall be sent through the diplomatic channel to the Contracting Powers.
*

----------


## Rushy

> Yeah, no idea if that was the intention when the round was designed but the effects of wounding a soldier is not. 
> It was doctrine. We were taught that wounding the enemy was just as effective as killing them, maybe more so because of logistics. The intention to wound is not a myth.


The intention to wound was in training back in my day. The rationale was akill = 1 out wher a would = 3 or 5 out (depending on evacuation distance for stretcher bearers)

----------


## lostlegend

through my 17 years of service we were always taught to shoot for centre of mass but told the 5.56mm projectile while it may well be lethal would more than likely wound and it's unstable movement characteristics within a body would create a large wound channel.  the wounding of the enemy was thought to be more effective than killing them as it took more people off the battle field, the one that's wounded, two to carry them and one to tend to the wounds.  while this may not always be the case, as far as I am aware it is still the methodology used within the NZ forces today.  the forces were in the process of changing projectile weights when I left mid last year, not sure if that was completed as as they were intended to be for the new intermediate length barrels on the upgraded steyr's.

----------


## R93

> The intention to wound was in training back in my day. The rationale was akill = 1 out wher a would = 3 or 5 out (depending on evacuation distance for stretcher bearers)


It still is Rushy. That is all I was trying to point out.

----------


## Towely

7.62 wounds as well. Youre trained to hit what you aim at. If it kills or wounds who gives a fuck as long as you hit it first. COD fanboys may think you fly around the battlefield making headshot kills at whim but that is fantasy not real world.

----------


## Rushy

> It still is Rushy. That is all I was trying to point out.


Just read what I typed.  Fuck I should slow down with this one finger I use.

----------


## ChrisF

What a load of crap , what they will replace the AUGs ( 20 inche , 1-7 twist ) with is a short M4 variant  ( 14.5 inche barrel ) , YEAp that will solve all your long range problems , every one knows you GET more range & power from a short barrel rifle .

RE the 30cal Minimis , thats not what I would have brought , Opps , as its to lite and will not handle the abuse of a L7/MAG58 EVER , and thats about correct weight & design to last tens of thousandes of rounds .

The C9 Minimi , is not with out its faults either , a couple of mods would do wonders , but at least it was not going to loosen yours fillings .

Probably the best very lite GPMG in a full cal , is the Russian PKM , better than a NEW 7.62 Minimi , in my opinion  .

So in the current vain , lets also chop the C9 barrels to 13 inches ( Para Minimi ) and thats just for long range in mountains , makes prefect sense .

Later  Chris

----------


## Beavis

6-5 Grendel

----------


## R93

Until Nato changes caliber we are stuck with the 5.56 and 7.62 for service weapons. Pretty stupid running around a battlefield with a unique caliber when you have run out of first line ammo.

----------


## Beavis

That's what they should change too

----------


## R93

> That's what they should change too


Oh. Ok.

----------


## Tahr

I prefer the Ugo SX 52 14" in the new 6.5 Groan. Its rate of fire far exceeds the M27 that the Australians are currently introducing. And theSX 52 is problem free and uses the groan which is the most accurate military calibre ever commissioned.
Of course, we will follow the yanks like we always do and end up with the M26 which is miles behind the M27 let alone the SX 52, and we all know about the jamming troubles the M26 had in Iraq. 

Defence is led by a bunch of wombles anyway, and I have no confidence that they will make the right decision. Look at the complete waste of time the minime RP 5.27 was, they can't even source ammo for them now.

And gimp, if you want references, go find them yourself. I know that all of this is correct.

----------


## Savage1

What we need is fricken laser beams  :Thumbsup: 

5.56 is great as a military round, same with the 7.62x51, 338LM and 50bmg. They all have their places. 

You can't have your cake and eat it to, 5.56 may lack range in some situations but then you can carry 2-3(?) times the ammo than you could with a 7.62x51, great in a firefight having all that extra ammo.

I see the importance of sticking with the NATO ammo and hope the next rifle takes STANAG mags. I also see the merit in sticking with the same weapon as Australia or USA or GB, conventional wars (if there is ever another one) are won with logistics. In fact I don't even know why they bother wasting money on testing weapons, they should just get whatever Australia, USA or GB does and use the money saved on live fire training.

I like the steyr, I find it far more ergonomic than a M4.

----------


## R93

This is getting a bit out there. People that are not military in any sense, suggesting what they should do and buy. I thought that sort of advice only come out of the beehive :Grin: 
There is a military term that used to be used: "Troops to task" Same goes for equipment. The role of our army has to be fully understood before anything like weapons can be decided upon. How many people on here know what that is? :Wink: 
We follow the Yanks, Canucks, Aussies and Brits because they are our allies and within reason there is a need to be totally modular throughout Nato as far as troops and training goes.

Weapon accuracy in assault weapons and LMG's is not really that important. Winning the intial fire fight in any engagement is most important. Things generally fall into place after that. Caliber of a weapon has little to do with it at the end of the day.
5.56 and 7.62 are as good as anything in order to achieve those goals, end of story. Not to mention the needless financial cost throughout Nato if there was a change of caliber.

----------


## Dundee

If the defence force rang me up and said "We got a rifle here you owned,do you want it?" Yes please but like that's gona happen. :Have A Nice Day:

----------


## R93

> If the defence force rang me up and said "We got a rifle here you owned,do you want it?" Yes please but like that's gona happen.


Bro! You were in first battalion. How can they possibly know which spoon was yours? :Grin: 

I would love my issue 226 and rifle to be given to me.

----------


## Tahr

> This is getting a bit out there. People that are not military in any sense, suggesting what they should do and buy. I thought that sort of advice only come out of the beehive
> There is a military term that used to be used: "Troops to task" Same goes for equipment. The role of our army has to be fully understood before anything like weapons can be decided upon. How many people on here know what that is?
> We follow the Yanks, Canucks, Aussies and Brits because they are our allies and within reason there is a need to be totally modular throughout Nato as far as troops and training goes.
> 
> Weapon accuracy in assault weapons and LMG's is not really that important. Winning the intial fire fight in any engagement is most important. Things generally fall into place after that. Caliber of a weapon has little to do with it at the end of the day.
> 5.56 and 7.62 are as good as anything in order to achieve those goals, end of story. Not to mention the needless financial cost throughout Nato if there was a change of caliber.


You shouldn't really dis me. I read many war comics when I was a young man, and I would have been conscripted into the army if I had been born on another date.
And I have noticed that Blaser have added the the 6.5 Groan to their latest range of calibres. Kiwi Greg is building an improved version of the cartridge almost as we speak (sorry, type).

----------


## lostlegend

by now your 226 is probably completely fucked and your steyr is only your steyr in serial number alone. I want the m60's I used as a door gunner in Timor I think they would look awesome mounted on my series 1 landrover.

----------


## R93

> You shouldn't really dis me. I read many war comics when I was a young man, and I would have been conscripted into the army if I had been born on another date.
> And I have noticed that Blaser have added the the 6.5 Groan to their latest range of calibres. Kiwi Greg is building an improved version of the cartridge almost as we speak (sorry, type).


I know better to diss you. Depending on what war comics you have read it could have meant an elite soldier posting. I was just a grunt so, know better not to mess with the SAS (Saturday and Sunday) soldiers :Thumbsup:   No disrespect intended to anyone else either. I just find it interesting.

----------


## R93

> by now your 226 is probably completely fucked and your steyr is only your steyr in serial number alone. I want the m60's I used as a door gunner in Timor I think they would look awesome mounted on my series 1 landrover.


My P226 had 20,000 thru it, and still blitzed the accuracy test. 

Unfair. I bet Rushy got to keep his Martini-enfield from the Boer war :Have A Nice Day:

----------


## Dundee

It certainly makes you wonder how many rounds have gone through the weopons we used till the present date. :36 1 5:

----------


## Maca49

Talking of wounding didn't the yanks put heaps of research in to developing a hi velocity, tumbling projectile for military use, mainly to wound, probably 30-40 yrs ago. Shit should have talked to me, I have trouble with oblongs thru the target, still I have more chance of getting the bull?

----------


## Maca49

> My P226 had 20,000 thru it, and still blitzed the accuracy test. 
> 
> Unfair. I bet Rushy got to keep his Martini-enfield from the Boer war


He sold it to me!

----------


## lostlegend

we used to count all rounds fired through aircraft weapons including the helicopter machine guns, they would have fired stuff all compared to the weapons you grunts would have used.

----------


## R93

> we used to count all rounds fired through aircraft weapons including the helicopter machine guns, they would have fired stuff all compared to the weapons you grunts would have used.


I can remember chewing thru 15-16 tins of link during an SF shoot once. Close to around 13000 rnds for one shoot. That included balancing, marking and recording. :Wink:

----------


## lostlegend

bullets cost money, the bean counters wouldn't let you fire off that much these days. they take all the fun out of things.

----------


## Rushy

> I can remember chewing thru 15-16 tins of link during an SF shoot once. Close to around 13000 rnds for one shoot. That included balancing, marking and recording.


I don't know that we ever counted the number of rounds but I can remember a heavy barrel on a GPMG glowing red on sustained fire

----------


## R93

> I don't know that we ever counted the number of rounds but I can remember a heavy barrel on a GPMG glowing red on sustained fire


Yup. Almost white Rushy. Got/had 5 barrels per gun when I last had a play. Changed on a belt or 500 each I cant remember exactly.

----------


## veitnamcam

Was this Rushys or Daves one?



Sorry guys its had a bit of wood taken off it. 

Sent from my GT-S5360T using Tapatalk 2

----------


## R93

Cant be Rushy's. It is missing its ram-rod and wick. :Thumbsup: 

I served where and when we only used 'Column of Route' for drill. 

It was Rushy's main battle formation. :Grin:

----------


## Rushy

> Cant be Rushy's. It is missing its ram-rod and wick.
> 
> I served where and when we only used 'Column of Route' for drill. 
> 
> It was Rushy's main battle formation.


Aaah but you have to agree the box formation was a bloody good defence strategy against the fuzzy wuzzies

----------


## ishoot10s

As Private Rushy, serving in the Sudan with General Kitchener, once said "The Fuzzy Wuzzies do not like the cold steel, oh no sir, they do not like it up 'em...!"

----------


## Rushy

The Fuzzy Wuzzies are coming.  Fix bayonets!  They don'y like it up 'em sar.  Box formation! Front row kneeling!

----------


## Tankd

> we used to count all rounds fired through aircraft weapons including the helicopter machine guns, they would have fired stuff all compared to the weapons you grunts would have used.


You'd be supprized at what we put through the 20mils ,they were serviced every 3000 (muzzle blast deflector changed ect) and at 12000 a barrel change.With a 75 rnd can,and that is each side, (later 50's) sometimes 4 times a day (and then the sods gave us 100 rnds ,and told us afterwards 2 people should have lifted it not 1) with hardly a week without gunnery.
   And then from memory the Blunty's used 100rnds each side and it all adds up.

----------


## 300winmag

Bolt action Tikka's, thats the way to go I reckon, save the tax payer heaps on ammo cost, bloody accurate out of the box, layoff a few amourers will mean more $$$ saved and when they wear out just throw them away and buy a new one.

Lets face it they are not a fighting force anymore, apparently they are a re-construction team, chippies, plumbers, sparkies and blockies.
 :Thumbsup:  :Thumbsup:

----------


## Dead is better

Not if you do the DFSW course. You shoot off ammo till you're bored az - then you clean guns for 4 days.

----------


## Eion

> Not if you do the DFSW course. You shoot off ammo till you're bored az - then you clean guns for 4 days.


Easily the best place to be in an assault.

----------


## Dead is better

> Bolt action Tikka's, thats the way to go I reckon, save the tax payer heaps on ammo cost, bloody accurate out of the box, layoff a few amourers will mean more $$$ saved and when they wear out just throw them away and buy a new one.
> 
> Lets face it they are not a fighting force anymore, apparently they are a re-construction team, chippies, plumbers, sparkies and blockies.


I like my T3 but against an AK its just outclassed. Sending our Infantry up against anyone armed with bolt action rifles is basically setting them up for slaughter. They'd keep your head down till his buddies get close enough to hit you with the multitude of lead that auto's send downrange. We'd be better using 7.62 if they were expecting to deploy in farmland like Afghanistan.

----------


## Dead is better

> Easily the best place to be in an assault.


Haha you'd think that - that's why they invented artillery and mortars!

----------


## Scouser

[QUOTE=veitnamcam;160213]Was this Rushys or Daves one?

Attachment 14232

Sorry guys its had a bit of wood taken off it. 



Nar VC, Rushies was a 'black bess'......they didnt called him 'ramrod' for nothing!

----------

