Thread: At least it's a nice colour green - NZDF choose AR to replace Steyrs

Originally Posted by Daggers_187

I was referring to compatibility of ammunition and magazines with other nations.

Wasn't what I was referring to though eh. 😆

I was trained to pick up any available weapon on the fight through if I needed one, and continue killing bad guys until the re-org.
If you done your job right, the bad guys position would have a lot of small arms lying around with full mags attached.😊




Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by jakesae101

from what im told they wont the govt will pay to destroy them like some others that were destroyed recently

UN policy (which NZ follows loyally) is that military surplus arms should be destroyed rather than sold to the public so all that good stuff ended with the 303 era.

Even if they did by some miracle sell them then they would all be E cat. The sad reality is that if you want to own a military surplus rifle you have to buy a chinese copy for most models.

Originally Posted by R93

A cocking handle or worse was broken just about every jump we did.

It wasn't grunt proof. It suited the Fibua role, not the green role imo.
Accurate, functioned well in the right environment and apart from the first few years of it inception it served it's time.
But at the end of the day it was a political buy.
Some recent weapon purchases the military has made have been end user buys, and it is good to see.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Well the cocking handle would be the least of your worries these days, given the multitude of accessories that are attached to the weapon. The term "Grunt proof" in my opinion is a cop out, it comes down to correct "equipment husbandry" as a weapon will only operate as good as the soldier behind it. As for only been suited to FIBUA, are you referring to the caliber or the weapon?

Weapon. Caliber is irrelevant.

Accessories? We are talking Nz Army yeah? Name one accessory employed by a private infantryman besides specialty optics or 40 mm in the light infantry role. There are none.


As for grunt proof the Army does not buy seperate weapons for a parade ground drill, weapons drill and the like. They get hammered everyday of service. Any soldier would find that obvious.

Over cleaning, highly repetitious TOET testing and the like, required by teeth arms, fuck a weapon more than any operational service.






Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by R93

Weapon. Caliber is irrelevant.

Accessories? We are talking Nz Army yeah? Name one accessory employed by a private infantryman besides specialty optics or 40 mm in the light infantry role. There are none.


As for grunt proof the Army does not buy seperate weapons for a parade ground drill, weapons drill and the like. They get hammered everyday of service. Any soldier would find that obvious.

Over cleaning, highly repetitious TOET testing and the like, required by teeth arms, fuck a weapon more than any operational service.






Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Well as you are referring to weapon, then you are indeed very misguided. They Steyr moves through the close country a tad better then your standard AR primarily due to overall length, the center of gravity due the bulpup design enables the non-master hand to move from the weapon to move foliage and the like without loosing stability of the weapon.

As for "grunt proof" 29 years and counting is a bloody good innings for a modern weapon systems that's for sure, if they were as bad as you remember then we would not have many left in service. But I still have a problem with the term as insinuates that a "grunt" does not take care of his gear. Milspec is just that, it is not bomb proof as with any weapon system.

Accessories... Acog, J-dot, Pec-15, PRR remote switch, Torch, UNS sight or T2 for a start. Things have progressed a shit load since you got out in 2001. Contrary to popular belief the New Zealand soldier is one of the best personally equipped soldiers in the world.

Meh, things went downhill after these were upgraded.

Misguided? OK.
I was on the trial that selected the AUG/C9
I have 20 yrs of being trained and training infantry soldiers.
I carried an AUG for the majority of that time.
I could buy a Styer tomorrow but I would never own one based on my experience carrying one all over the world.
Take it for what you will. The defence force has made a good decision replacing them. Obviously others have the same opinion.


Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by R93

Misguided? OK.
I was on the trial that selected the AUG/C9
I have 20 yrs of being trained and training infantry soldiers.
I carried an AUG for the majority of that time.
I could buy a Styer tomorrow but I would never own one based on my experience carrying one all over the world.
Take it for what you will. The defence force has made a good decision replacing them. Obviously others have the same opinion.


Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

I'm not saying your full of shit and don't know what your talking about... But given that when you joined in 84 you were part of an era that had emotive ties to the previous weapon I can see why you are not a believer in the weapon, much like those who are in the same boat you were moving on to the LMT fully from the Steyr. Oh and by my maths 1984-2001 is not 20 years...

You assume a lot. We were emotive over a weapon system? 😆😆


I work in the same capacity now. So over 20 yrs in that type of training environment.

But this has been getting off topic for to long now. Something I tend to do.
As I said the defence force has seen fit to replace it so it's no longer an issue at the end of the day.
The new platform no doubt will have its own limitations.


Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

why is it our SAS get issued better kit and weapons as in the Ar15 than our regulars? who have over the decades always had to either swap or steal better equipment from our allies in conflicts. Surely there wouldn't be that much difference in price?

Everyone has their opinion

PRIOR to joining the army in the 1990s I came with no particular prior opinion of the Steyer or emotional attachment. Yes they worked and had some good and some bad. They are shorter than a AR and have longer range than a AK (well the Trajectory is flatter nothing more). But a lot of Grunts didn't like them, especially those who have used other systems.

Regarding the coking handles, one of my mates had one break on patrol with the plastic coming off and the metal mount. Opened his hand up something nasty. He bled like a stuck pig.

At least we aren't in the sorry state the Germans are at the moment.

Originally Posted by Beavis

At least we aren't in the sorry state the Germans are at the moment.

I guess the silver lining is that they found about the G36's shortcomings now rather than in large scale conflict.

Isn't a civilian Steyer quite abit different from a Mil-spec one? Op rod and bolt in particular are different I think. So the now mil-surps couldn't be bought on E (if 'they' allow that to happen), would be classed as C because of the select fire.

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

Isn't a civilian Steyer quite abit different from a Mil-spec one? Op rod and bolt in particular are different I think. So the now mil-surps couldn't be bought on E (if 'they' allow that to happen), would be classed as C because of the select fire.

I'm up for correction here but my understanding is that select-fire weapons that are imported have to be rendered as semi-auto prior to their arrival in NZ in order to be registered as E category? Have no idea what the rationale would be re local Steyrs.