It's also a munchkin decision.
It's also the real reason. A few of these were used by SEAL Team 2 in 1968 and the users cited the larger magazine capacity as their reason for choosing the T223 over an M16 despite the weight penalty.
Edited to add pictures to make what I was saying clearer.
H&R T223 on finished figure:
Edited to add pictures to make what I was saying clearer.
H&R T223 on finished figure:
The making of an H&R T223 from an H&K G3A4, H&K MP5 and Walther Mkb.42(W):
First I needed a stock: which the MP5 provided.
Then I needed a rifle body. The G3A4 is actually a tad too long and the handguard here is the later type instead of the more squared style that would be correct. I am not talented enough to take 2.1mm off the length of the gun and change the contour of the handguard. However, when you see it in person, the illusion is convincing.
Finally I needed a magazine: provided by a smashed up Maschinenkarabine that was in my parts bin.
Then I assembled.
Pictured below?
ReplyDeleteIn the previous post, which is below.
ReplyDeleteOk, I am confused because in that post you call it "a clone of an XM177E2", while in this one you call it "The H&R T223".
ReplyDeleteOr am I even more confused than that?
I don't see any post with a picture labeled "H&R T223".