• WTB / WTS / WTT ADS
    All Advertisements, including Want to Buy, Want to Sell, Want to Trade, Belong in the MARKETPLACE ONLY. Any new threads posted offering an item for sale, looking to trade or buy an item which are posted outside of Marketplace will be deleted without notice or warning. Existing threads will be moved to marketplace.
  • Marketplace Feedback Ratings
    The Marketplace feedback ratings system is now back. You can now leave feedback for your Buy / Sell / Trade transactions. Instructions on how to leave feedback ratings can be found HERE

Switzerland's SIG 510 in Detail - The Other Roller Lock

raexcct2

Gimp Ex-CCT
FALaholic #
2784
Joined
Mar 2, 2001
Posts
4,575
Location
UTAH
Feedback: 265 / 0 / 0
A while back, I took the SIG out to the range for the first time in its life. I didn't have a scope mount at the time so I just used the iron sights. I didn't bother to report then because I frankly had very little to report. It was already sighted in and required no adjustment. Recoil is extremely mild because of the rifle's geometry and design. As I had already read in the past, the sights are adequate for combat but terrible for precise target shooting because the front sight post is so wide. I'm sure that plenty of rounds down the pipe would engender you with the necessary experience to shoot it extremely well though. As expected, the safety lever exhibits dreadful ergonomics but the wonderful trigger pull is a thing to behold. Ejection is nothing like the brass rocket launches we seen with an HK (I really do think that there is brass in orbit thanks to our German friends in Oberndorf). Instead, the brass lands within about five feet out to the side. Some of it even ended up on the shooting bench. Well, as seen in the above post, I finally got myself a scope mount a little while back. My first range trip with a scope was used to zero it and I was impressed. However, I was using various different NATO surplus ammo mixed in with some South African stuff so there was some variation in groups and POI. My second range trip with the scope (but my third time at the range with the rifle) gave me the results that I suspected this rifle is capable of. I was Using some 1985 Radway Green which has always given me excellent service in both My HK and my Cetme and I did even better in the SIG. The scope I was using was a surplus 4x Hensoldt Z24 and I was shooting at 100 yards. Here is my target:



Now, I'm a pretty poor shot and I'm usually just happy to hit the target. Also, if I were to use a smaller red circle, I would probably shoot a little better. My first group of 5 was so small (I should have marked them but I forgot) that I got over excited and ended up with three fliers in my second group of 5. In the hands of someone who knows what they are doing, I'm sure that an even better group is possible. I think this rifle would be well served with a higher magnification scope. I'm really liking that Zeiss Conquest......

Anywho, for me, the above is excellent results. Here is an assortment of how the brass looks once the SIG is done with it:



Some of them get a little misshapen but nothing like the mess I am accustomed to seeing coming out of a roller lock:



Let's look at some propellant art. On the right is a casing from the SIG and on the left is a steel case that was shot in either my Cetme of my HK (I forget which):



And a comparison of case necks. Again, SIG on the right and Cetme or HK on the left. Notice that the SIG has more flutes. Probably not necessary but we ARE talking about the Swiss here:



Lastly, a comparison shot of the SIG compared to an FG42. While the '42 is of comparable build quality to the SIG, there is absolutely no comparison in target results. But that's a story for another post.

I take it the Sig is more accurate than the FG42.
 

Combloc

Well-known member
FALaholic #
55596
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Posts
1,588
Location
United States
Feedback: 26 / 0 / 0
It is but it is also an unfair comparison. The only real reason I have both pictured is because both were out with me and it was convenient. The SIG is......well.....Swiss. It's hard for anybody to match that in the precision department. The Swiss had the luxury of peacetime production and the hindsight of everything that had gone before it. It was designed from the outset as a precision all purpose weapon. The FG42 was designed as an all purpose weapon too but the Germans were concerned with cost and ease of manufacture whereas the Swiss really didn't care about such things. Their primary concern was Quality. Having said that, the SMG FG42 is built with an eye for Quality as well. In my opinion, the main reason that the FG42 cannot match the SIG in accuracy is the overall design (especially the ignition design)of the rifle. In short, Quality is not the problem, design is.
 

Combloc

Well-known member
FALaholic #
55596
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Posts
1,588
Location
United States
Feedback: 26 / 0 / 0
With regards to field stripping, yes. As for components which differ, I cannot say. If I had a PE57 in hand, I would absolutely be comparing and contrasting the two. However, I don't need yet another caliber to feed so, unless someone lends me one, that's not likely to happen anytime soon.
 

12v71

Well-known member
Silver Contributor
FALaholic #
71127
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Posts
11,520
Location
I'l know when I get there.
Feedback: 82 / 0 / 0
With regards to field stripping, yes. As for components which differ, I cannot say. If I had a PE57 in hand, I would absolutely be comparing and contrasting the two. However, I don't need yet another caliber to feed so, unless someone lends me one, that's not likely to happen anytime soon.
I was just curious. I have PE57 kit being turned into something useful.:whistling:
 

Jarhead504

Well-known member
FALaholic #
65022
Joined
Jan 8, 2012
Posts
6,899
Location
New Orleans Area,LA
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Thank you Brother COMBLOC for a fantastic thread. The SIG 510 was always one of my favorite military rifles. Did SIG stop making them because they were too expensive to produce? 33 years is a long production run. Do the Swiss still get to own them after they get out of the service? Are all men considered in the reserve and get to keep them?

Thanks,
Jarhead
 

Combloc

Well-known member
FALaholic #
55596
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Posts
1,588
Location
United States
Feedback: 26 / 0 / 0
I think the main reason they quit making them is partly because the design was showing its age and partly because they felt they needed a 5.56 rifle because NATO was switching. I've never gotten the feeling that the Swiss have ever been concerned about the cost of their equipment.

As far as I know, yes.

I don't think military service is universal anymore, which is unfortunate. But, if you do join, you do still get to take your rifle home upon mustering out. That hasn't changed as far as I know.

Again, thank you guys for taking the time to read my essay! It makes me quite happy that someone is getting use out of it.
 

schmuzzy

Member
FALaholic #
66635
Joined
Jun 26, 2012
Posts
6
Location
Naples, FL
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
i find it really interesting that in one of your (gorgeous, btw) photos at the very beginning- you show the AMT's relative size toward other rifles of the same lineage/timeline/caliber... and it looks positively small by comparison.

i just received a finished receiver from MagArms, and the rifle is surprisingly large when assembled.

is it simply barrel length?

here are some pics taken side by side with an FN variant...
[/URL]

[/URL]

[/URL]

[/URL]

[/URL]

admittedly, the ipad pictures are horrible- especially in light of the quality pics which are the meat of this... documentary. but they can at least reflect proportion and size.


parts-wise, they are the same rifle. just interesting how in one guise it looks almost diminutive... and in another looks like some overbuilt giant.
 

12v71

Well-known member
Silver Contributor
FALaholic #
71127
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Posts
11,520
Location
I'l know when I get there.
Feedback: 82 / 0 / 0
Oh,my... I did not realize the 57 was such monstrous rifle. I bought my kit sight unseen from a very reliable source, and had it shipped off for my build, I can just see the crowd when I show up at my FFL to pick it up. They call me the FAL Guy down there. :biggrin:
 

schmuzzy

Member
FALaholic #
66635
Joined
Jun 26, 2012
Posts
6
Location
Naples, FL
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Oh,my... I did not realize the 57 was such monstrous rifle. I bought my kit sight unseen from a very reliable source, and had it shipped off for my build, I can just see the crowd when I show up at my FFL to pick it up. They call me the FAL Guy down there. :biggrin:
Ha! that's pretty much what happened when I picked mine up. Guys had NO IDEA what the hell it was. Thought it was a machine gun. Completely turned the shop upside down.

good luck with your build. Who's doing it?
 

12v71

Well-known member
Silver Contributor
FALaholic #
71127
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Posts
11,520
Location
I'l know when I get there.
Feedback: 82 / 0 / 0
Ha! that's pretty much what happened when I picked mine up. Guys had NO IDEA what the hell it was. Thought it was a machine gun. Completely turned the shop upside down.

good luck with your build. Who's doing it?
Honey Creek Industries. There's a review somewhere here in the last years worth of threads. If I could drag you a link...:facepalm:
 

schmuzzy

Member
FALaholic #
66635
Joined
Jun 26, 2012
Posts
6
Location
Naples, FL
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
Question For the 57 Owners and Users, how comfortable is that near vertical pistol grip?
From my limited use, it hasn't been an issue to even think about. if you look at the height of the rear sight peep hole, compared to the fn, and the distance the grip extends... I think the hand grip, trigger, etc. sets lower, and thus the wrist is more parallel/perpendicular to the forearm. Whereas the fn, everything sits higher/closer to the cheek, and thus the wrist has to bend to accommodate.

did I explain that clearly? cuz it sure doesn't seem so...
 
Last edited:

schmuzzy

Member
FALaholic #
66635
Joined
Jun 26, 2012
Posts
6
Location
Naples, FL
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
schmuzzy, It has to be the barrel length. Both rifles use the same receiver.

As for the pistol grip, it grows on you really fast.

from a pixel count, using the FN FAL in both pics for calibration... it looks like the stock is a smidge shorter too. barrel difference looks to be about 18% difference... a little over 4" shorter.

making it an 1" shorter than the Chilean PE57-4 version.

interesting.
 
Top