# New Zealand Defence Force to Replace Steyr AUG



## pardus (Jun 17, 2014)

http://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/new-rifles-nzdf

A good move. I thought it was a mistake when they adopted the Steyr, even though it's a good rifle.


----------



## Crusader74 (Jun 18, 2014)

I'd say the 416 or the M4 will be selected..


----------



## TLDR20 (Jun 18, 2014)

416 is expensive.


----------



## pardus (Jun 18, 2014)

They were tossing around the idea of bringing back a 7.62 rifle a while ago, that would be an interesting move if they went that way. I'm pretty sure they are using a LMT 7.62 as a DMR now.

@Mac_NZ  thoughts?



Crusader74 said:


> I'd say the 416 or the M4 will be selected..



The AR type platform does seem to be an obvious choice. I'm hoping they don't go for an M4 though, it's past it's prime and there are better options out there.


----------



## dmcgill (Jun 18, 2014)

I can tell you firsthand the ADF wishes they would follow suit. I recently got some shooting time with the Steyr Aug down here in Oz and interestingly enough, I didn't mind it. It was the first bullpup I'd ever shot, the only thing that I didn't really like was the magazine release, and the two-stage trigger was a little odd. The Aussies want the M4.


----------



## reed11b (Jun 18, 2014)

I'm a fan of the bullpup. Of course I'm short, so that's a factor....
Reed


----------



## Mac_NZ (Jun 19, 2014)

I talked to a former colleague about his a while back.  They went to Steyr with a massive list of changes and a new model has been developed that is outrageously reliable and accurate, it costs $5k each though.

Army then went to MOD and said "hey, you know how we were upgrading the rifle, well all the old ones are shot out, we need a new one, this one".  MOD said "well if you want a new rifle its going to tender then and at that price, well don't hold your breath".

So now a full trial will be conducted with a view to selecting a replacement.  I expect to see two make it in for final selection, HK416 or Steyr.  It wont be 7.62, that's from the horses mouth.  As long as we are are affiliated with AUSCANZUKUS we will be keeping the same caliber of small arm as the rest.


----------



## RackMaster (Jun 19, 2014)

Just saw an article on it from Janes.com.

http://www.janes.com/article/39552/new-zealand-govt-approves-steyr-replacement-programme


----------



## AWP (Jun 19, 2014)

7.62 for a rifleman sounds great, but the cost to implement it would be ridiculous. The weapons and ammo would cost more, you'd have to buy a ton of it for training and war stock, and then you'd have the rounds necessary to transition from a 5.56 to the 7.62. You wouldn't do a quick fam fire and then qualify.

One thing I'd hope other nations would consider is the SCAR-L vs M4 issue. Not a knock on the SCAR, the -H is clearly in use, but based on several comments on this board the -L didn't exactly outperform the M4 by a large margin...certainly not enough to justify the cost. The M4's basic design is about 50 years old and while not perfect acquisition officers will have to consider price per unit. One thing we can be sure of: the decision won't please everyone, it may well piss off a majority of soldiers, and money will be a prime factor in the decision. Right, wrong, or other, basic economics will factor heavily in the decision.


----------



## pardus (Jun 19, 2014)

RackMaster said:


> Just saw an article on it from Janes.com.
> 
> http://www.janes.com/article/39552/new-zealand-govt-approves-steyr-replacement-programme





> According to a 2011 Ministry of Defence report, operations in Afghanistan had shown it was difficult to accurately identify adversaries with the Steyr, which was ineffective at ranges greater than 200 metres.





> A request for information that closed in October 2013 said the Steyr replacement "will offer consistency in fire from close quarter situations to more deliberate fire at around 500 m by day and half this distance in low light conditions.



So the 5.56 in a 20" barrel was ineffective past 200m, they don't want a 7.62 but demand the new weapon be effective to 500m... 

I'd like to see the magic rabbit they pull out of the hat on this one!


----------



## Ranger Psych (Jun 19, 2014)

Way I'm reading it is that their optics sucked ass and couldn't see shit past 200m.


----------



## pardus (Jun 19, 2014)

Ranger Psych said:


> Way I'm reading it is that their optics sucked ass and couldn't see shit past 200m.



Hmm, yeah I wondered if that was the meaning. Seems weird when the Steyr has a rail that can take any scope, that's hardly the weapon's fault...


----------



## dmcgill (Jun 20, 2014)

Ranger Psych said:


> Way I'm reading it is that their optics sucked ass and couldn't see shit past 200m.



The standard optic (on the Aug I'm shooting in the pic) is a 1.5x with an incredibly small field of view. The infantry soldiers in the ADF get an ACOG.


----------



## Mac_NZ (Jun 20, 2014)

They were using Aug Paras (most without TA01s)  in Afghan on later deployments because they were sooooo much easier to maneuver in a vehicle.  They also had shit range and stopping power.  

DTA did some testing 4-5 years back, the results of which disappeared promptly from the NZDF intranet.  The results showed that even with Mk 262 the effect on target wasn't deemed consistently lethal at distances beyond 400m.  I don't know why they keep pulling this 600m range out.  I'm going to speculate that is the combat shooting team influence getting in there.  Not that they don't know their shit when it comes to shooting but there is a difference between putting a round in the 5.1 on a Fig 11 and putting down Abdul the goat fucker.


----------



## pardus (Jun 20, 2014)

Mac_NZ said:


> *They were using Aug Paras (most without TA01s)  in Afghan on later deployments because they were sooooo much easier to maneuver in a vehicle. * They also had shit range and stopping power.
> 
> DTA did some testing 4-5 years back, the results of which disappeared promptly from the NZDF intranet.  The results showed that even with Mk 262 the effect on target wasn't deemed consistently lethal at distances beyond 400m.  I don't know why they keep pulling this 600m range out.  I'm going to speculate that is the combat shooting team influence getting in there.  Not that they don't know their shit when it comes to shooting but there is a difference between putting a *round in the 5.1 on a Fig 11 and putting down Abdul the goat fucker*.



I really don't get that argument/point of view, who gives a fuck if it's easier, whats more effective on the battlefield? Personally if given the choice I would take an SLR to A'stan, length be dammed. 

Exactly, I knew guys who were competitive shooters, target shooting .223s at 1000m, but I doubt the round would penetrate a Swani at that range.


----------



## Crusader74 (Jun 20, 2014)

TLDR20 said:


> 416 is expensive.



The price is comparative to the size of the NZDF may be a factor.. 

Our Styer are presently going through an upgrade.. New sights (ACOG) and picatinny rails ..new sling. Our 203 is also being waddied from a 
Dimacio in favor of the HK side loading 203.


----------



## Crusader74 (Jun 20, 2014)

pardus said:


> I really don't get that argument/point of view, who gives a fuck if it's easier, whats more effective on the battlefield? Personally if given the choice I would take an SLR to A'stan, length be dammed.
> 
> Exactly, I knew guys who were competitive shooters, target shooting .223s at 1000m, but I doubt the round would penetrate a Swani at that range.




We are using FN FAL's (SLR's only better  ) as DMR's.. We had stockpiles of FN's still in original grease and instead of selling them off to some despot country we retained them for DMR's.


----------



## pardus (Jun 20, 2014)

Crusader74 said:


> View attachment 11080
> 
> 
> We are using FN FAL's (SLR's only better  ) as DMR's.. We had stockpiles of FN's still in original grease and instead of selling them off to some despot country we retained them for DMR's.



That's right I remember that now. Smart move!

Did they accurize them in anyway?


----------



## Crusader74 (Jun 20, 2014)

pardus said:


> That's right I remember that now. Smart move!
> 
> Did they accurize them in anyway?




AFAIK, they rebore'd the barrels and have put Schmidt & Bender 12x 50 sights on them..


----------



## pardus (Jun 20, 2014)

Crusader74 said:


> AFAIK, they rebore'd the barrels and have put Schmidt & Bender 12x 50 sights on them..



Rebored? You mean new barrels?


----------



## Crusader74 (Jun 20, 2014)

pardus said:


> Rebored? You mean new barrels?



Nope, They sent them to the Ordnance Corp and they used some machine to rebore them..


----------



## pardus (Jun 20, 2014)

Crusader74 said:


> Nope, They sent them to the Ordnance Corp and they used some machine to rebore them..



Hmm, I wonder how the fuck that works? :-/


----------



## Crusader74 (Jun 20, 2014)

pardus said:


> Hmm, I wonder how the fuck that works? :-/



I've no idea.. I'm sure we have gunsmiths on the site to school us..


----------



## SpitfireV (Jun 20, 2014)

I found this but the site I found it on also says the barrel will also be of a larger caliber so fuck knows. 

"
Specialized tooling and equipment are used. The machine tools look similar to an engine lathe and the cutting tools themselves are attached to steel tubing. The first step is counter-boring. This is akin to a roughing cut on a lathe and removes the bulk of the material from the bore leaving it a few thousandths of an inch under size. A special cutting tool called a counter-bore which is attached to a steel tube is pulled through the barrel. Cutting oil is pumped through this tube under high pressure and the steel chips are carried out the rear of the barrel by the flowing oil. Finish reaming is next. Feed rates and cutting speeds are adjusted and a finish reamer is substituted for the counter-bore and the bore is brought to final size using the same technique. The smooth bore is hand lapped and then placed in the rifling machine. The barrel is rifled by cutting a series a helical grooves in the bore. This is done using a single-point hook cutter. Each pass removes about one ten thousandth of an inch of steel (.0001") from one groove and then the barrel is indexed and another pass made in the location of the next groove. A six groove barrel would require six of these cycles to create grooves only one ten thousand of an inch deep. A typical groove in a small arms caliber is four thousandths (.004") deep, meaning that forty passes down each groove are necessary to bring it to final depth. When the grooves are cut to the proper depth the barrel is removed from the machine and hand lapped again. The lapping processes assure a very uniform bore dimension and a surface finish that is smooth and free from radial tool marks."


----------



## pardus (Jun 20, 2014)

Maybe they bore the chrome out and re-chrome them...? 

Where are the bloody armorers/gunsmiths on this site?! lol


----------



## digrar (Jun 21, 2014)

Bet you end up with the EF90 that Thales are putting together for the ADF.


----------



## Mac_NZ (Jun 21, 2014)

If that happens I'm going to donkey punch an Australian hooker in the colon!


----------



## pardus (Jun 21, 2014)

It wouldn't fucking surprise me though...


----------



## 104TN (Jun 21, 2014)

Out of curiosity - what would you guys like to get?


----------



## pardus (Jun 21, 2014)

Obviously Ive been out of the game in New Zealand for a long time now, but ideally HK417, realistically HK416. I'll also add that Ive never used either weapon, my opinion is based on what Ive read. Also the SCAR H seems like a great choice. 
I finger fucked an LWRC IW at SHOT show one year and fell in love, it seems like an ideal M4 rifle, I'd make sure that was trialled too.  That is my dream AR BTW.


----------



## pardus (Jun 24, 2014)

Kind of related...


----------

