What are these guns like? Any opinions?

I have a clone, one of the better ones, a JLD PTR-91KPF. It is one of my most fun guns to shoot, and only the worst ammo can make it choke. As a fan of the G3 system, I ask you to also consider FAL type rifles as not everyone can get used to the shortcomings of the G3 and it's clones. It has a receiver made of stamped and welded steel, there is no bolt hold open, working the bolt should be an Olympic event, and they fire an expensive round. But they are a hoot!

HK 91's are well made, fun rifles. They're probably not the most accurate of the battle rifles, but they have good enough accuracy to suit me.

There was a good post about accurazing them a couple months ago, that you can probably find with a search.

They do get fairly fouled after shooting, but nothing a good cleaning can't take of. They are pretty reliable rifles, but I've seen stoppages that I believe were due to fouling.

I haven't checked recently, but mags used to be fairly easy to find and cheap.

It used to be that there were only a couple of options for mounting scopes, but I believe there are at least a few more options available to low mount scopes now.

I have a PTR91KP, but I havent had a chance to shoot it yet. Mags are in the $3.00 range, but filling them cheaply is another story. Oh, they also have two buisness ends.

Is $700 a good price for one?

You will not have a real HK91 for $700, if there was a 1 in front of the 7 then you would have a good price. The best value you will find are JLD clones probably for as cheap as $800 from CDNN.

Oh yea... I LOVES me a good HK91!!!



I've long considered them one of the best .308s ever made. Yes, FALs are sweet too, but the 91 is my baby.

As Voshterkoff mentioned, their ergos are a little... unique but not unmanageable in the least. What they lack in user refinement, they more than make-up for in rugged simplicity.

A similar subject came up a while back and the subject of accuracy was mentioned. Horse chimed in with some very good points on the matter. A lot of people will take a 91 and do an ungodly amount of work and spend a LOT of money to accurize one.

The truth is, two relatively minor upgrades will yield a big improvement in accuracy. Get a PSG 1 trigger or get the trigger group fine tuned by either Williams Trigger Specialties or Bill Springfield. THEN... Upgrade the recoil buffer to one of the newer generation MSG-90 buffers. Those two things will really make a 91 a sweet shooter.

I've never had a malfunction with either of mine, and I find them to be more modular and thereby more flexible than a FAL. Yeah, can you believe a guy with my screen name said that?

Anyway, I think scope mounting options on the 91 are better too. The FAL really shines in the Para-Congo version IMO.

But yea, the 91 has personality as the bolt doesn't lock open after the last round, and you do have to reach forward to charge the action. It tends to chew up brass pretty good too unless you get the brass deflector.

But.. I have a simple plan to NEVER be without a 91 in my lifetime.

The only thing better than a 91... is Two of 'em!

The only 2 things Belgium Blue left off. The first is that they are not light weight rifles in any configuration. The second thing is that the mere sight of one of these weapons will cause neer-do-wells to go weak in the knees and can cause them to loose control of certain bodily functions. I've personally seen it happen on three occasions.

JohnV

The HK 91 and the HK family of weapons are my favorites, hence my screen name. Myne is very accurate for a battle rifle. I actually prefer the placement of the charging handle on the weak hand side as you dont have to remove your strong hand from the grip to reload. I also love the push pin modular design which was way ahead of its time see SCAR and Masada of today.
HK Ag

Belgium Blue,
What scope mount is that, and is that a 1 inch scope/rings? I like the setup. What kind of groups are you getting?

I have an original HK91 since 1984. It is very reliable and accurate for a battle rifle. I also have a DSA FN Congo, and Belgium FN Fal. The HK91 is heavy and doesn't have the best ergos, compared to the FN. In fact, I just hate the charging handle with a passion. BUT: it is the AK's of 308 battle rifles, and it will not let you down. And I have shot all sorts of mil surp, including S. African, and 150 JSPs by Winchester and Federal, and no problems ever.

I bought a new HK91 back in 1982. Out of the box it was wicked accurate, but as time went on the thing opened up and at best would only shoot 3 to 4 inch groups before I traded it off at a gun show for an FNC 15-years later.
My biggest complaint was the ergonomics of the rear stock and the cheek weld. The recoil would bumb my glasses every round fired. I added an HK21 butt plate that helped shoulder fit. Later on I saw some green Nigerian FAL style stocks for the HK91 that would have worked well for me. The other think I'm not crazy about is the cocking handle.

quote:

Originally posted by Modern Day Savage:
HK 91's are well made, fun rifles. They're probably not the most accurate of the battle rifles, but they have good enough accuracy to suit me.

There was a good post about accurazing them a couple months ago, that you can probably find with a search.

They do get fairly fouled after shooting, but nothing a good cleaning can't take of. They are pretty reliable rifles, but I've seen stoppages that I believe were due to fouling.

I haven't checked recently, but mags used to be fairly easy to find and cheap.

It used to be that there were only a couple of options for mounting scopes, but I believe there are at least a few more options available to low mount scopes now.

Probably more the shooter then the rifle. Also more then likely a clone and not a real HK.

A williams trigger job and stronger buffer will make the HK91 extremely accurate.

quote:

Originally posted by Alpine:
I bought a new HK91 back in 1982. Out of the box it was wicked accurate, but as time went on the thing opened up and at best would only shoot 3 to 4 inch groups before I traded it off at a gun show for an FNC 15-years later.
My biggest complaint was the ergonomics of the rear stock and the cheek weld. The recoil would bumb my glasses every round fired. I added an HK21 butt plate that helped shoulder fit. Later on I saw some green Nigerian FAL style stocks for the HK91 that would have worked well for me. The other think I'm not crazy about is the cocking handle.

I agree with this assessment, pretty much. I sold my pre-89 rifle several years back because i just didn't shoot it that much.

Pros: very reliable and certainly badass; mags are (or were, at any rate) dirt cheap

Cons: heavy; accessories were (and are, i bet) super freakin' expensive; rifle recoils more than any other 7.62x51 semi i've ever shot; proper cheekweld does cause you to hit your glasses/cheek on the receiver every time; it's even heavier with a telestock (and it's called a meat tenderizer for a reason); extremely heavy trigger, and i didn't personally like the feel of it (it's too wide and too round).

The rifle is (was) accurate enough, but less so than an M1A or AR.

I regret selling mine sometimes, and would love to have it sitting in the safe as "insurance", despite never shooting it, but there are a lot of other guns i'd rather have than an HK 91. Now an HK 93 on the other hand, i'd love to have, even if it has most of the failings of the 91.

Oat

Over all I like the 91 platform. Most of the comments are true. The cocking handle is odd and can be a bear to work. The placement of it out on the front portion of the rifle takes a little getting used to. Mag changes are different too. The side button is further from the grip than most of us are used to and can be stiff. Even the paddle mag release doesn't help much, mag changes are still not a drop free deal most of the time. The mags are sort of a half rock in, half push in affair. The rifle is heavy compaired to most other battle rifles but IMO not excessivly so, my SIG AMT is pretty hefty also. It will foul more than an M14 but it's due to the fluted chamber, any rifle that uses roller blocks will have flutes and thus passes a fair amount of gas back into the chamber. My AMT does the same thing although not as much as the 91. Ejection of the 91 will beat up cases pretty badly unless you have a port buffer on it. Accuracy is very good. It won't out shoot a bolt gun built for accuracy, read: the 91 is not a sniper rifle, even with a scope, but it is very accurate compaired to other battle rifles. Lack of a bolt hold open is just classic Euopean design, few of the Euro battle rifles have a bolt hold open.

I don't own an original HK 91, I have a PTR and am very happy with it. I really don't see the complaints that somehow the PTR is not a 91. Built on HK machinery using original HK blueprints. I do own an original pre-ban HK93 and one thing I can say in compairing the PTR to the original HK is the PTR finish is light years ahead of the original. My 93 basically has dark grey paint over park. The finish will chip off very easily. The PTR has a finish more like a Dura-Coat and is very tough, it makes my originals finish look like someone spray painted it.

With the difference in price I would look hard at a PTR. Same rifle and IMO just as well built for half the price of a pre-ban. Any of the original HK parts fit it also so spares are not an issue.

Husky, the scope mounts I've got are both German mfg. The one with the 6X scope has the HK factory 1pc. claw mount, and the other one is a German surplus Hensoldt Z24 mounted on a factory STANAG mount.

randyw, I think the PTRs are fine rifles for the money. I've handled a number of them, but where they come up short IMO, is the US mfg. furniture. Also, while they do have good barrels by US standards, they're not cold hammer forged like the HKs. Finally, as good as PTRs are, they'll never have the same collector's value that the originals do. As far as the finish goes, I've looked at numerous PTRs, and I think they look nice, but I frankly don't think they look "better" than the factory HK finish.

Like I said, they look like good rifles, but dispite the fact they are mfg'd on HK tooling, they are independant of HK and don't have any facory affiliation like some of the Greek and Turkish G3 manufacturers used to. For the money, they are probably a solid choice, but I'd never trade one of my 91s for a PTR.

HK 91's rock. I've never had a dirt issue - ever.

Heavy but so what

Cheapest mags going...

I agree with you Belgian Blue for the most part, especially if you are looking at collector value. A PTR will never have "collector" status. But I look at them from a shooters standpoint, not as a collectable. I own several "collectors" rifles and pistols but I shoot them all on a regular basis. My AMT is my favorite shooter and I would have to venture it's thinner on the ground than an original HK.

Hammer forged barrel over the PTR barrel is true, but again from a shooters standpoint I can't tell the difference.

Furniture is a non issue for me. The PTR will take original furniture with no problem. I have an original HK folder and will probably go with one of the adjustable Magpuls for scoped use, but swapping them is a matter of pushing out the two take down pins. You can even buy original or POF furniture for around $10.

Factory affiliation also means nothing to me as long as the parts are interchangeable and build quality is up to par. That's the reason I bought an original 93, I saw too many of the 93 clones that were out of specs. But I do have to say that my 93 has a factory match barrel and set trigger along with the .22LR kit so I paid the collectors price. Bought the PTR as it's a shooter and in original specs.

I wouldn't say the finish is "better", however in my experience compaired to the 93 it is more durable, but I would expect that, the HK finish is 20+ years old, the PTR is a more modern finish. Being that I look at all my rifles as shooters I like durability.

Like you say I wouldn't trade an original for a PTR, but for something to shoot on a regular basis and looking at price I would still look hard at a PTR. If collectability is important in the decision then the HK is the choice.

Like I said I don't disagree with you, I just look at it from a slightly different take.

We like our JLD:

I have the Portuguese copy of the HK91, which I believe is made by FMP. At any rate, it's great and always functions. I'm planning on getting a PTR to keep it company after I get my SIG 556 pistol. Back in 1989, on the same day that moron went on a shooting rampage in Californicate and killed some kids at a school, I bought an HK93 in 223 for $750 new. That rifle could drive tacks! But like a retard I sold it for $200 more in 1991 and bought a Colt HBAR for $700 and still had money left over. Stupid me!