Latest revision as of 01:10, 10 September 2022

Additional Images

Additional Variants

Heckler & Koch PDW (2nd prototype) with Hensoldt prototype RSA red dot sight - 4.6x30mm

Heckler & Koch PDW (3rd prototype) with iron sights installed and flash hider detached - 4.6x30mm

Heckler & Koch PDW (3rd prototype) with red dot sight and flash hider fitted and the front sight post detached - 4.6x30mm

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Heckler & Koch PDW (4th prototype) - 4.6x30mm

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Heckler & Koch MP7A1 with 30-round magazine, H&K SD MP7 sound suppressor, and Aimpoint T1 Micro red dot sight - 4.6x30mm

Airsoft Variants

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Airsoft WE SMG-8 with factory tan finish

Discussion

Subsonics

The suppressor there makes me wonder if there are subsonic loadings for this cartridge (since without them even a suppressed MP7A1 will still be fairly loud, just less likely to damage hearing when you have hearing protection on). Barring rare super-dense metals like Iridium or Osmium (or the problematic Depleted Uranium) you wouldn't get a sufficiently heavy bullet to retain energy at subsonic speeds. --Mazryonh 22:25, 5 January 2012 (CST)

There aren't subsonic loads for the 4.6x30mm but even with supersonic loadings a suppressor is still very useful. Firstly, it pretty much totally eliminates the muzzle flash meaning you are less visible at night. Secondly, it will be more comfortable to shoot without hearing protection. Thirdly, it contains the blast from the muzzle when you fire the gun, so will kick up less dust or whatever when you are firing from prone. Lastly, although the crack of the round passing still remains the "thump" at the muzzle is suppressed meaning that an enemy cannot use the difference between the crack and the thump to gauge the distance, and the sound of the crack will not come from the direction of the shooter but from the bullet as it passes meaning that it is harder for the target to work out the direction you are shooting from. --commando552 12:01, 15 February 2012 (CST)

Sure, but unlike subsonic rounds like the .45 ACP or the 9x39mm Russian round, a suppressed supersonic round will very much notify any witnesses who are not killed immediately of hostiles in the area more than a suppressed subsonic round will. Still, if I'd appreciate it if I'm ever without hearing protection in close proximity to "friendly" firing a gun shooting supersonic rounds indoors, that the "friendly" (perhaps a Counter-Terrorist operative?) be using a suppressor. Terrorist attacks come and go, but hearing loss of that kind is forever, and putting your hands over your ears isn't anywhere near as effective as having earplugs and earmuffs already in place (which is unlikely in a surprise terrorist attack). --Mazryonh 01:18, 16 February 2012 (CST)

According to No Easy Day, the MP7 is apparently quiet enough when suppressed that you can gun down a room full of bad guys without their buddies on the other side of the wall even knowing. Spartan198 (talk) 01:20, 25 January 2014 (EST)

Discussion

Do we really have to say it's a completly different "configuration" when the stock or grip is folded or unfolded? Seems a little unnecessary to me. That's One Angry Duck 01:46, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it's marketing nonsense, it's like saying my front door has "hole" and "wall" configurations. Evil Tim 10:21, 19 June 2011 (CDT)

What about the M16 page, there all different "configurations" for the AR-15 platform and on that page is around 60 "configurations" and about 55 of those are made by Colt. :/ - Mr. Wolf 14:04, 19 June 2011 (CDT)

There's a difference between that and the exact same weapon with the grip up or down and the stock extended or not extended. If we went like this, we'd need a seperate entry for all six positions of the M4's 6-position stock. :P Evil Tim 14:08, 19 June 2011 (CDT)

well then lets just keep the 1st and 3rd pics, they're the most used on this site and they're the most different from each other, I almost never see the 2nd/middle one used. - Mr. Wolf 14:19, 19 June 2011 (CDT)

Oh, I don't have a problem with the images, I just rewrote the intro to make it clear the "configurations" are marketing nonsense rather than actual other configurations of the weapon. After all, folding the stock and foregrip of an SMG doesn't magically turn it into a handgun. Evil Tim 14:28, 19 June 2011 (CDT)

Alright, danke. - Mr. Wolf 14:38, 19 June 2011 (CDT)

I love the design of the MP7. The ONLY, and I mean the only, thing I don't like about the MP7 is its possibly low "killing" power per bullet. :\ - Mr. Wolf 16:44, 23 June 2011 (CDT)

According to this study, the 4.6x30mm rounds the MP7 fires are less powerful against both armoured and unarmoured targets than FN's 5.7x28mm rounds. The study also says that the 5.7x28mm round is also easier to make as it is based on the 5.56mm NATO round, causes less barrel erosion, and is less temperature-sensitive.

On the other hand, the MP7's ergonomics win out over the FN P90 in some ways. For one, the MP7 has an actual foregrip rather than just a hole for your off-hand's thumb. You can carry the MP7 in a pistol-like holster due to its design, and its reloading scheme is quick and intuitive since your off-hand can easily find your trigger hand when it comes to insert the magazine into the pistol grip. Still, at such a short barrel length (7.1 inches, or 180 mm) the MP7 is even more of a short-ranged weapon than the FN P90 is, which could be a problem for its versatility, though its ergonomics are good to allow second-line personnel and the like who are less-qualified at marksmanship to use it easily.

A solution to the MP7's problems would be to adapt an APCR caliber like the Russian armour-piercing 9x19mm rounds, or even an APCR version of the 10x25mm rounds for better stopping power against both armoured and unarmoured targets. Lengthening the barrel would allow allow for better range as well as the mounting space necessary to mount something like HK's M320 grenade launcher--now that would be a feature that the FN P90 can't match. --Mazryonh 02:02, 10 July 2011 (CDT)

A M320 grenade launcher on a MP7, lolz. The MP7 was meant from the get go to be a compact Machine-pistol/Submachine gun for personal defense, not a assault rifle. :D P.S. the MP7 chambered in FN's 5.7x28mm might be a win. - Mr. Wolf 13:19, 10 July 2011 (CDT)

Well, some M203 launchers have been attached to MP5s before, so the distinction isn't quite as clear-cut. A longer-barrelled "offensive" version of the MP7 (maybe called the MP7A2?) with the ability to mount an M26 MASS or M320 would be a nice, more efficient alternative to a CQBR or G36C since the shorter round (compared to 5.56mm NATO) means less of the powder goes to waste as useless flash and blast when firing. You could carry this MP7A2 for offense as a primary arm, and an MP7A1 in a holster for a backup weapon, and use the exact same magazines and ammunition. With something like that, HK could hack into the market share long held by M4A1s meant for CQB.

HK actually does have an entry into this market. Look up the 416 Compact. Weird looking, but definitely real. --DeltaOne 04:18, 4 January 2012 (CST)

And the German delegation rejected the standardization proposal for the 5.7x28mm round, causing it be indefinitely postponed. Maybe HK is still more than a little miffed that FN won the SCAR competition (as if Belgium getting thoroughly trounced in both World Wars wasn't enough)? In any case, HK has a real winner here if they make the necessary changes. Hope they get better luck with this project than they did with the XM8 (which was also an underappreciated gun). --Mazryonh 20:27, 10 July 2011 (CDT)

I'm sorry but a compact Submachine gun with a under-barrel grenade launcher or shotgun just sounds kinda silly. :P Well FN didn't really have a true victory since the US Military barely use or issue the SCAR rifles. :\ The US Military actually likes the H&K HK416 better. :D - Mr. Wolf 20:59, 10 July 2011 (CDT)

Actually, given that image I dug up it seems that the MP7 was originally designed to be the bottom half of the XM29. So it was supposed to be attached to a grenade launcher, not have a grenade launcher attached to it. Evil Tim 03:03, 17 September 2011 (CDT)

In Soviet Russia, assault weapon mounts to grenade launcher! :D - Mr. Wolf 03:42, 17 September 2011 (CDT)

Well, it would be great to have an underbarrel weapon, but it is just too cumbersome and a hassle to carry, considering its primary role is CQB. Also, neither the P90 or the MP7 are the best in terms of opinion, statistics, and design. Both have distinctive advantages in certain places. The P90 is ambidextrous, meaning that a left-handed shooter would not expect hot brass to hit him in the face. Instead, the spent cartridges are ejected below the weapon. The P90 has a higher magazine capacity than the MP7, allowing prolonged firing. The P90's magazine is placed on top of the weapon so the shooter would not have severe limitations when crouching and going prone. The MP7's advantages over the P90 are its weight (two pounds lighter than the P90), the ability to fire with one hand (only applies if firing semi-automatically), and a grip to allow more effective recoil control and accuracy. Choosing the P90 or the MP7 is a matter of preference as both weapons are designed to be effective in CQB. In my opinion, I think that the TDI Vector is more advanced and effective than both the P90 and the MP7 in statistics, though I still like the MP7 and the P90. - Kenny99 22:22, 16 September 2011 (CDT)

Yup. - Mr. Wolf 02:58, 17 September 2011 (CDT)

One thing I also want to add is that the MP7 has a low chance of jamming in certain environments than the P90 due to the gas system (similar to that of the G36). The gas system can block out sand, mud, water, and dirt, allowing the weapon to remain perfectly functional in most environments. - Kenny99 10:35, 17 September 2011 (CDT)

What's wrong with the P90's system? Are you trying to spreading H&K propaganda? ;D (FYI, I am an H&K fan.) - Mr. Wolf 01:09, 18 September 2011 (CDT)

There is technically nothing wrong with the P90. I am just pointing out one major advantage the MP7 has I didn't add to the post above. Like I said, I still love both the P90 and the MP7. - Kenny99 23:46, 23 September 2011 (CDT)

I still believe that the MPX8 from Crysis is a good direction for H&K to take with a possible longer-barrelled MP7A2 variant. Something like that, with its very compact telescoping stock, the ability to mount an underslung shotgun like the M26 MASS, and the ease of reloading in the pistol grip (since your hand finds your other hand easily), would make for a great CQB military or law enforcement weapon. The underslung shotgun can be loaded with less-lethal ammunition for police work, or if you really are feeling undergunned, be used with the new Frag-12 High Explosive rounds! Enlarging the grip to accomodate a quad-stack casket magazine would be welcome too, since that would mean you could now carry 40+ rounds without sacrificing the ability for effective use while in a prone position. Anyone know what the minimum mounting space is necessary for the M26 MASS? --Mazryonh 22:12, 18 September 2011 (CDT)

Silly, so silly. :D - Mr. Wolf 22:19, 18 September 2011 (CDT)

Now, just let me find that jungle tape... Evil Tim 04:21, 24 September 2011 (CDT)

4.6x30mm ammunation

I don't know if anyone could even answer this but either way, does anyone know the effectiveness of the 4.6mm round? i get that its made as a PDW and its proven to slice through kevlar body armor/helmets but how effective is it against a unarmored target compared to say a 9mm round? to me it just seems like its made to go through but not really go any dammage like a 5.56 or 7.62mm round would, thoughts? scarecrow 00:07, 4 January 2012 (CST)

You can find a rather illuminating analysis of the problems with PDW cartridges here. In short, the small diameter and light weight of the projectiles, along with the fact that they do not fragment once inside a soft and squishy body as 5.56mm NATO does when fired from a sufficiently long barrel or when properly loaded (such as the Mk 262 round) means that while they travel far, have little recoil (even on full-auto) and penetrate Level IIIA armour and lower, they don't cause much trauma. I do not know if indeed they cause "even less crushed tissue than a 9x19mm FMJ does," as the link I provided claims, but this doesn't look very good for their chances as a reliable weapons platform.

Of course, numerous agencies have been using ultracompact 5.56mm NATO SBRs (which don't have a sufficiently long barrel to cause fragmentation) for a while now, even before the introduction of the Mk 262 round, so it's anyone's guess whether this problem will hold anyone back. --Mazryonh 19:50, 4 January 2012 (CST)

Also most PDW manufacturers cheat their range figures by using the absolute maximum effective range (distance past which the round cannot be considered lethal) rather than the maximum effective range on a point target (distance past which you cannot expect to land more than 50% of shots on a torso-sized target). Evil Tim 22:30, 4 January 2012 (CST)

I believe the 4.6x30mm tumbles as soon as it enters soft tissue due to the shape of the round rather than the 9x19mm FMJ which doesn't. This means that it creates a wider wound channel than the 9x19mm FMJ. Also, bear in mind that there are three different variants of the 4.6x30mm case for different purposes. There is the steel core armour penetrator for hard targets, the JHP for soft targets and the FMJ. I believe the FMJ has a longer effective range due to it being a heavier, denser bullet than the AP round. Compared to the similar FN 5.7×28mm there have been two studies: the first was done by HK which (unsurprisingly) decided the 4.6x30mm was superior, and the second was by NATO which decided the opposite. I think the 4.6mm AP has sligtly better performance against armoured targets, but the 5.7mm AP is much better against unprotected targets. With normal FMJ rounds I believe the 4.6mm would be superior to the 5.7mm. If anyone reads German there is some useful information in here. --commando552 07:44, 5 January 2012 (CST)

It'd be nice if one of our German users could translate that document into English, but it's obvious that it predates the NATO trials (it says that the now-cancelled HK UCP is a prototype, even). And yawing is common to all spitzer-type bullets; it's just that some are better at yawing sooner than others, and (according to the article I posted) it is still no substitute for sufficient initial bullet diameter or expansion capability (which forces beholden to the Hague Convention obviously can't use). Still, we've had ultracompact (meaning around a barrel length of 10 inches or less) 5.56mm NATO carbines ever since the Vietnam War (go see the M16 page on this), so apparently putting lots of .22 caliber or smaller holes (which 5.7x28mm and 4.6x30mm FMJ or AP ammunition will do on impact) in even unarmoured targets will yield results, however inefficient that may be. The article I posted does, however, warn against this inefficiency because it costs precious time during a CQB gunfight. And if you have to go to JHP version of the PDW rounds, there's still the question of what they can do that the ubiquitous 9x19mm round in JHP format can't, more cheaply.--Mazryonh 22:17, 5 January 2012 (CST)

MP7A2

It had to be available as far back as 2011, unless Mark Bissonnette's MP7 shown in No Easy Day (which would appear to be an A2 by its underbarrel rail) is an in-house custom job. Spartan198 (talk) 21:51, 23 June 2014 (EDT)

More likely to be a custom job really. Because I don't remember seeing H&K offering the A2 until very recently. The Wierd It (talk) 20:31, 26 August 2014 (EDT)

Plus apparently NSW units commissioned Wilcox to make an RIS for the MP7A1. The Wierd It (talk) 20:32, 26 August 2014 (EDT)

I don't see the improvement with the A2. What's wrong with the built in folding foregrip and two side rails? You're essentially paying more for getting less than with the A1 (no foregrip to start with). And don't even get me started on the garish RAL8000 finish. Mr. Wolf (talk) 16:55, 20 April 2016 (EDT)

Maintenance

I read on a blog that the MP7 requires servicing by an armorer with proprietary HK tools every 500 rounds. Anyone know anything about this? --Charon68 (talk) 21:08, 21 July 2015 (EDT)

Technically, yes that it true. The reason is that the recommended cleaning schedule for the MP7 is every 500 rounds, and that includes the gas piston. The thing is though that the gas piston is not intended to be user removable, technically requiring that an armourer does it which requires (I think) two special tools (don't know if they are proprietary or just odd non-tamper type tools). I think that it is actually pretty quick and not that hard to do though, it just requires the special tools.--commando552 (talk) 14:46, 22 July 2015 (EDT)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+__TOC__<br clear=all>
+=Additional Images=
+==Additional Variants==
+[[Image:H&K PDW.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Heckler & Koch PDW (2nd prototype) with Hensoldt prototype RSA red dot sight - 4.6x30mm]]
+[[File:HK PDW 3rd prototype.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Heckler & Koch PDW (3rd prototype) with iron sights installed and flash hider detached - 4.6x30mm]]
+[[File:HK PDW 3rd prototype 2.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Heckler & Koch PDW (3rd prototype) with red dot sight and flash hider fitted and the front sight post detached - 4.6x30mm]]
+[[File:MP7 4th prototype.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Heckler & Koch PDW (4th prototype) - 4.6x30mm]]
+[[Image:MP7A1-30.jpg‎|thumb|none|450px|Heckler & Koch MP7A1 with 30-round magazine, H&K SD MP7 sound suppressor, and Aimpoint T1 Micro red dot sight - 4.6x30mm]]
+==Airsoft Variants==
+[[File:WE SMG-8.jpg|thumb|none|400px|'''Airsoft''' WE SMG-8 with factory tan finish]]
+=Discussion=
+==Subsonics==
+The suppressor there makes me wonder if there are subsonic loadings for this cartridge (since without them even a suppressed MP7A1 will still be fairly loud, just less likely to damage hearing when you have hearing protection on). Barring rare super-dense metals like Iridium or Osmium (or the problematic Depleted Uranium) you wouldn't get a sufficiently heavy bullet to retain energy at subsonic speeds. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 22:25, 5 January 2012 (CST)
+:There aren't subsonic loads for the 4.6x30mm but even with supersonic loadings a suppressor is still very useful. Firstly, it pretty much totally eliminates the muzzle flash meaning you are less visible at night. Secondly, it will be more comfortable to shoot without hearing protection. Thirdly, it contains the blast from the muzzle when you fire the gun, so will kick up less dust or whatever when you are firing from prone. Lastly, although the crack of the round passing still remains the "thump" at the muzzle is suppressed meaning that an enemy cannot use the difference between the crack and the thump to gauge the distance, and the sound of the crack will not come from the direction of the shooter but from the bullet as it passes meaning that it is harder for the target to work out the direction you are shooting from.  --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 12:01, 15 February 2012 (CST)
+Sure, but unlike subsonic rounds like the .45 ACP or the 9x39mm Russian round, a suppressed supersonic round will very much notify any witnesses who are not killed immediately of hostiles in the area more than a suppressed subsonic round will. Still, if I'd appreciate it if I'm ever without hearing protection in close proximity to "friendly" firing a gun shooting supersonic rounds indoors, that the "friendly" (perhaps a Counter-Terrorist operative?) be using a suppressor. Terrorist attacks come and go, but hearing loss of that kind is forever, and putting your hands over your ears isn't anywhere near as effective as having earplugs and earmuffs already in place (which is unlikely in a surprise terrorist attack). --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 01:18, 16 February 2012 (CST)
+According to ''No Easy Day'', the MP7 is apparently quiet enough when suppressed that you can gun down a room full of bad guys without their buddies on the other side of the wall even knowing. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 01:20, 25 January 2014 (EST)
+==Discussion==
 Do we really have to say it's a completly different "configuration" when the stock or grip is folded or unfolded? Seems a little unnecessary to me. [[User:That&#39;s One Angry Duck|That&#39;s One Angry Duck]] 01:46, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 :Yeah, it's marketing nonsense, it's like saying my front door has "hole" and "wall" configurations. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 10:21, 19 June 2011 (CDT)
+::What about the M16 page, there all different "configurations" for the AR-15 platform and on that page is around 60 "configurations" and about 55 of those are made by Colt. :/ - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 14:04, 19 June 2011 (CDT)
+::There's a difference between that and the ''exact same weapon'' with the grip up or down and the stock extended or not extended. If we went like this, we'd need a seperate entry for all six positions of the M4's 6-position stock. :P [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 14:08, 19 June 2011 (CDT)
+:::well then lets just keep the 1st and 3rd pics, they're the most used on this site and they're the most different from each other, I almost never see the 2nd/middle one used. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 14:19, 19 June 2011 (CDT)
+::::Oh, I don't have a problem with the images, I just rewrote the intro to make it clear the "configurations" are marketing nonsense rather than actual other configurations of the weapon. After all, folding the stock and foregrip of an SMG doesn't magically turn it into a handgun. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 14:28, 19 June 2011 (CDT)
+:::::Alright, danke. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 14:38, 19 June 2011 (CDT)
+I love the design of the MP7. The ONLY, and I mean the only, thing I don't like about the MP7 is its possibly low "killing" power per bullet. :\ - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 16:44, 23 June 2011 (CDT)
+:According to [http://web.archive.org/web/20061016074936/www.global-defence.com/2006/Utilities/article.php?id=40 this study], the 4.6x30mm rounds the MP7 fires are less powerful against both armoured and unarmoured targets than FN's 5.7x28mm rounds. The study also says that the 5.7x28mm round is also easier to make as it is based on the 5.56mm NATO round, causes less barrel erosion, and is less temperature-sensitive.
+:On the other hand, the MP7's ergonomics win out over the FN P90 in some ways. For one, the MP7 has an actual foregrip rather than just a hole for your off-hand's thumb. You can carry the MP7 in a pistol-like holster due to its design, and its reloading scheme is quick and intuitive since your off-hand can easily find your trigger hand when it comes to insert the magazine into the pistol grip. Still, at such a short barrel length (7.1 inches, or 180 mm) the MP7 is even more of a short-ranged weapon than the FN P90 is, which could be a problem for its versatility, though its ergonomics are good to allow second-line personnel and the like who are less-qualified at marksmanship to use it easily.
+:A solution to the MP7's problems would be to adapt an APCR caliber like the Russian armour-piercing 9x19mm rounds, or even an APCR version of the 10x25mm rounds for better stopping power against both armoured and unarmoured targets. Lengthening the barrel would allow allow for better range as well as the mounting space necessary to mount something like HK's M320 grenade launcher--now that would be a feature that the FN P90 can't match. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 02:02, 10 July 2011 (CDT)
+::A M320 grenade launcher on a MP7, lolz. The MP7 was meant from the get go to be a compact Machine-pistol/Submachine gun for personal defense, not a assault rifle. :D P.S. the MP7 chambered in FN's 5.7x28mm might be a win. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 13:19, 10 July 2011 (CDT)
+:Well, some M203 launchers have been attached to MP5s before, so the distinction isn't quite as clear-cut. A longer-barrelled "offensive" version of the MP7 (maybe called the MP7A2?) with the ability to mount an M26 MASS or M320 would be a nice, more efficient alternative to a CQBR or G36C since the shorter round (compared to 5.56mm NATO) means less of the powder goes to waste as useless flash and blast when firing. You could carry this MP7A2 for offense as a primary arm, and an MP7A1 in a holster for a backup weapon, and use the exact same magazines and ammunition. With something like that, HK could hack into the market share long held by M4A1s meant for CQB.
+:HK actually does have an entry into this market. Look up the 416 Compact. Weird looking, but definitely real. --[[User:DeltaOne|DeltaOne]] 04:18, 4 January 2012 (CST)
+:And the German delegation rejected the standardization proposal for the 5.7x28mm round, causing it be indefinitely postponed. Maybe HK is still more than a little miffed that FN won the SCAR competition (as if Belgium getting thoroughly trounced in both World Wars wasn't enough)? In any case, HK has a real winner here if they make the necessary changes. Hope they get better luck with this project than they did with the XM8 (which was also an underappreciated gun). --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 20:27, 10 July 2011 (CDT)
+::I'm sorry but a compact Submachine gun with a under-barrel grenade launcher or shotgun just sounds kinda silly. :P Well FN didn't really have a true victory since the US Military barely use or issue the SCAR rifles. :\ The US Military actually likes the H&K HK416 better. :D - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 20:59, 10 July 2011 (CDT)
+:::Actually, given that image I dug up it seems that the MP7 was originally designed to be the bottom half of the XM29. So it was supposed to be attached to a grenade launcher, not have a grenade launcher attached to it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 03:03, 17 September 2011 (CDT)
+::::In Soviet Russia, assault weapon mounts to grenade launcher! :D - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 03:42, 17 September 2011 (CDT)
+Well, it would be great to have an underbarrel weapon, but it is just too cumbersome and a hassle to carry, considering its primary role is CQB. Also, neither the P90 or the MP7 are the best in terms of opinion, statistics, and design. Both have distinctive advantages in certain places. The P90 is ambidextrous, meaning that a left-handed shooter would not expect hot brass to hit him in the face. Instead, the spent cartridges are ejected below the weapon. The P90 has a higher magazine capacity than the MP7, allowing prolonged firing. The P90's magazine is placed on top of the weapon so the shooter would not have severe limitations when crouching and going prone. The MP7's advantages over the P90 are its weight (two pounds lighter than the P90), the ability to fire with one hand (only applies if firing semi-automatically), and a grip to allow more effective recoil control and accuracy. Choosing the P90 or the MP7 is a matter of preference as both weapons are designed to be effective in CQB. In my opinion, I think that the TDI Vector is more advanced and effective than both the P90 and the MP7 in statistics, though I still like the MP7 and the P90. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 22:22, 16 September 2011 (CDT)
+:Yup. - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 02:58, 17 September 2011 (CDT)
+One thing I also want to add is that the MP7 has a low chance of jamming in certain environments than the P90 due to the gas system (similar to that of the G36). The gas system can block out sand, mud, water, and dirt, allowing the weapon to remain perfectly functional in most environments. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 10:35, 17 September 2011 (CDT)
+:What's wrong with the P90's system? Are you trying to spreading H&K propaganda? ;D (FYI, I am an H&K fan.) - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 01:09, 18 September 2011 (CDT)
+There is technically nothing wrong with the P90. I am just pointing out one major advantage the MP7 has I didn't add to the post above. Like I said, I still love both the P90 and the MP7. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 23:46, 23 September 2011 (CDT)
+I still believe that the [[Crysis#.22MPX8.22|MPX8]] from Crysis is a good direction for H&K to take with a possible longer-barrelled MP7A2 variant. Something like that, with its very compact telescoping stock, the ability to mount an underslung shotgun like the M26 MASS, and the ease of reloading in the pistol grip (since your hand finds your other hand easily), would make for a great CQB military or law enforcement weapon. The underslung shotgun can be loaded with less-lethal ammunition for police work, or if you really are feeling undergunned, be used with the new Frag-12 High Explosive rounds! Enlarging the grip to accomodate a quad-stack casket magazine would be welcome too, since that would mean you could now carry 40+ rounds without sacrificing the ability for effective use while in a prone position. Anyone know what the minimum mounting space is necessary for the M26 MASS? --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 22:12, 18 September 2011 (CDT)
+:Silly, so silly. :D - [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] 22:19, 18 September 2011 (CDT)
+::Now, just let me find that jungle tape... [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:21, 24 September 2011 (CDT)
+== 4.6x30mm ammunation ==
+I don't know if anyone could even answer this but either way, does anyone know the effectiveness of the 4.6mm round? i get that its made as a PDW and its proven to slice through kevlar body armor/helmets but how effective is it against a unarmored target compared to say a 9mm round? to me it just seems like its made to go through but not really go any dammage like a 5.56 or 7.62mm round would, thoughts? [[User:Scarecrow|scarecrow]] 00:07, 4 January 2012 (CST)
+:You can find a rather illuminating analysis of the problems with PDW cartridges [http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19913 here]. In short, the small diameter and light weight of the projectiles, along with the fact that they do not fragment once inside a soft and squishy body as 5.56mm NATO does when fired from a sufficiently long barrel or when properly loaded (such as the Mk 262 round) means that while they travel far, have little recoil (even on full-auto) and penetrate Level IIIA armour and lower, they don't cause much trauma. I do not know if indeed they cause "even less crushed tissue than a 9x19mm FMJ does," as the link I provided claims, but this doesn't look very good for their chances as a reliable weapons platform.
+:Of course, numerous agencies have been using ultracompact 5.56mm NATO SBRs (which don't have a sufficiently long barrel to cause fragmentation) for a while now, even before the introduction of the Mk 262 round, so it's anyone's guess whether this problem will hold anyone back. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 19:50, 4 January 2012 (CST)
+::Also most PDW manufacturers cheat their range figures by using the absolute maximum effective range (distance past which the round cannot be considered lethal) rather than the maximum effective range on a point target (distance past which you cannot expect to land more than 50% of shots on a torso-sized target). [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 22:30, 4 January 2012 (CST)
+I believe the 4.6x30mm tumbles as soon as it enters soft tissue due to the shape of the round rather than the 9x19mm FMJ which doesn't. This means that it creates a wider wound channel than the 9x19mm FMJ. Also, bear in mind that there are three different variants of the 4.6x30mm case for different purposes. There is the steel core armour penetrator for hard targets, the JHP for soft targets and the FMJ. I believe the FMJ has a longer effective range due to it being a heavier, denser bullet than the AP round. Compared to the similar FN 5.7×28mm there have been two studies: the first was done by HK which (unsurprisingly) decided the 4.6x30mm was superior, and the second was by NATO which decided the opposite. I think the 4.6mm AP has sligtly better performance against armoured targets, but the 5.7mm AP is much better against unprotected targets. With normal FMJ rounds I believe the 4.6mm would be superior to the 5.7mm. If anyone reads German there is some useful information in [http://www.pfa.nrw.de/PTI_Internet/pti-intern.dhpol.local/TagSem/Fachkonferenz/WuG-05/RUAG/Baum_4,6x30.pdf here]. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] 07:44, 5 January 2012 (CST)
+:It'd be nice if one of our German users could translate that document into English, but it's obvious that it predates the NATO trials (it says that the now-cancelled HK UCP is a prototype, even). And yawing is common to all spitzer-type bullets; it's just that some are better at yawing sooner than others, and (according to the article I posted) it is still no substitute for sufficient initial bullet diameter or expansion capability (which forces beholden to the Hague Convention obviously can't use). Still, we've had ultracompact (meaning around a barrel length of 10 inches or less) 5.56mm NATO carbines ever since the Vietnam War (go see the M16 page on this), so apparently putting lots of .22 caliber or smaller holes (which 5.7x28mm and 4.6x30mm FMJ or AP ammunition will do on impact) in even unarmoured targets will yield results, however inefficient that may be. The article I posted does, however, warn against this inefficiency because it costs precious time during a CQB gunfight. And if you have to go to JHP version of the PDW rounds, there's still the question of what they can do that the ubiquitous 9x19mm round in JHP format can't, more cheaply.--[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 22:17, 5 January 2012 (CST)
+== MP7A2 ==
+It had to be available as far back as 2011, unless Mark Bissonnette's MP7 shown in ''No Easy Day'' (which would appear to be an A2 by its underbarrel rail) is an in-house custom job. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 21:51, 23 June 2014 (EDT)
+:More likely to be a custom job really. Because I don't remember seeing H&K offering the A2 until very recently. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] ([[User talk:The Wierd It|talk]]) 20:31, 26 August 2014 (EDT)
+::Plus apparently [https://tnvc.com/shop/wilcox-mp7-rail-chassis/ NSW units commissioned Wilcox to make an RIS for the MP7A1.] [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] ([[User talk:The Wierd It|talk]]) 20:32, 26 August 2014 (EDT)
+:::I don't see the improvement with the A2. What's wrong with the built in folding foregrip and two side rails? You're essentially paying more for getting less than with the A1 (no foregrip to start with). And don't even get me started on the garish RAL8000 finish. [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] ([[User talk:Mr. Wolf|talk]]) 16:55, 20 April 2016 (EDT)
+== Maintenance ==
+I read on a blog that the MP7 requires servicing by an armorer with proprietary HK tools every 500 rounds.  Anyone know anything about this? --[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] ([[User talk:Charon68|talk]]) 21:08, 21 July 2015 (EDT)
+:Technically, yes that it true. The reason is that the recommended cleaning schedule for the MP7 is every 500 rounds, and that includes the gas piston. The thing is though that the gas piston is not intended to be user removable, technically requiring that an armourer does it which requires (I think) two special tools (don't know if they are proprietary or just odd non-tamper type tools). I think that it is actually pretty quick and not that hard to do though, it just requires the special tools.--[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 14:46, 22 July 2015 (EDT)

Talk:Heckler & Koch MP7: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 01:10, 10 September 2022

Contents

Additional Images

Additional Variants

Airsoft Variants

Discussion

Subsonics

Discussion

4.6x30mm ammunation

MP7A2

Maintenance

Navigation menu

Talk:Heckler & Koch MP7: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 01:10, 10 September 2022

Additional Images

Additional Variants

Airsoft Variants

Discussion

Subsonics

Discussion

4.6x30mm ammunation

MP7A2

Maintenance

Navigation menu

Search