Re: HK 91 vs LMT 308 which to buy
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BDOG</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm looking at a real HK 91 . Not a clone. The HK is hell on brass. I'm interested in an accurate autoloader that's dependable. Now that you mention collector value and drool factor,I'm still not sure. Thanks for the replys.</div></div>
Not sure how you are going to accomplish that if you live in Kalifornia. Originals are Verboten.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: rezman762</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sounds like you have a serious HK itch. Might need to get it out of your system. My .02 cents;
If you can get the HK for a decent price, you could always recoup your purchase price if you decide to sell later, they seem to hold resale value insanely well.
HK's are hard to scope, have crappy triggers, are 2-3 moa with milsurp, deadnuts reliable, heavy, no bolt hold open. Look badass with a collapsible stock. Cheap mags, eat most any 7.62. I've had two over the years, excellent for what it is as a battlerifle, but no way in hell would I pay the 2k or so they go for now.
I've taken care of my HK itch, you may need too also, but I would still recommend the LMT.
.</div></div> Using the HK quick detachable mount works very well. It is rock solid and holds a zero. It does however set the scope up a bit high. I sent my trigger in to Williams and had a set trigger installed in the late 80's. It friggin' rocks. I would compare that trigger to any high end AR trigger out today in either regular or the set position. I think the poor accuracy is due to the 11 ton "factory" trigger. I do hate the lack of a last round bolt hold open device. I also have the original collapsible stock as well and is nearly unshootable with it. You will be heavily bruised and you have no cheek rest at all.