So I'm hearing horror stories on PTR 91s

[shooter94]

I want one real bad...if I have to I'll by a DSA FAL. I'm hearing all kinds of unsavory issues like broken (disintegrating bolts), and other catastrophic issues. Anybody have issues with them?

 

[Robert]

I want one real bad...if I have to I'll by a DSA FAL

Have to? You don't have to buy anything. But IMO the DSA FAL is a much better weapon than the PTR 91. No I have not shot a PTR 91 but based on everything I have seen and read I am not impressed with the PTR 91. Some people love them, I am not one of them. The FAL has far better ergonomics and does not tear the brass all to hell. I can easily reload the brass that comes out of my FAL many times over. Accuracy will be about the same for both rifles.

 

[nwilliams]

Remember that you will always hear more stories from people with bad experiences with a product than with good.

Take into account how many people buy PTR rifles and the number of people that have had issues with them is just a small percentage. Like with any product when somebody has a problem with it they like to let everyone know about it, however people with no problems with that product tend to stay quiet.

This seems to be a common occurrence with many guns, people read a few bad reports on the internet and they instantly assume every gun that company makes is going to be inherently flawed.

 

[Maverick223]

I don't own one, but I have a friend that did. It was utterly reliable with brass cased ammo, and accuracy was good (rivals comparable FALs by a significant margin IME). Ergonomics left a bit to be desired (try before you buy), and it beats up brass something awful (without using a buffer) but I believe it is a good overall rifle. Personally I still prefer the FAL, but if you like the PTR-91 there is absolutely no reason not to buy one.

 

[Robert]

This seems to be a common occurrence with many guns, people read a few bad reports on the internet and they instantly assume every gun that company makes is going to be inherently flawed.

That is a great point. I am no expert on the PTR 91 and what I have to say is only my opinion and nothing more. The first FAL I owned was a Century built L1A1, terrible rifle all the way around. My current FAL is built on a DSA upper out of parts by a great smith. Those rifles are as different as night and day.

 

[briansmithwins]

From what I have seen, if you're a reloader the HK roller delayed series is NOT for you:

1) Brass is thrown with great force form the rifle. HK type rifles are th only ones that I've seen toss brass farther than my SKS.
2) The brass will have severe dents in it. Like the AK, the Hk rifles use the back edge of the ejection port as a brass deflector.
3) I suspect that the roller delayed system would cause excess streaching of brass, but I'm not sure on that.

BSW

 

[RP88]

This seems to be a common occurrence with many guns, people read a few bad reports on the internet and they instantly assume every gun that company makes is going to be inherently flawed.

I agree with this. But of course, the mandatory exception to this rule is Century Arms.

I have heard that a port buffer solves the PTR's brass problem, though, FWIW

 

[Z-Michigan]

I owned a PTR-91 bought a couple years ago. I traded it + cash for a used M1A and felt like I got a great deal. I never, ever miss the PTR-91. And mine was 100% reliable in my usage, with both Federal AE (brass cased) and Brown Bear (lacquered steel case) ammo.

I hated the ergonomics, the balance, the trigger, the recoil, the sights, and reassembly of the bolt. I loved - nothing.

I have since acquired the M1A mentioned and a DSA FAL, and both of them are, IMHO, 100 times the rifle that the PTR-91 is. My more detailed comments can be found with a search. Lighter recoil, far better ergonomics and a far higher overall quality feel are just a few of the reasons I greatly prefer either one of them over a PTR. And let me repeat, my PTR was 100% reliable and nothing on it broke!

Finally, have a look at the manufacturer's own FAQ and tech info page, especially at the warranty and ammunition sections:
http://ptr91.com/techinfo.html

I mean seriously, warnings about using German ammo in a German-designed military rifle? Are you serious? Not to mention that South African surplus is considered great and so is Winchester white box 7.62x51mm. Might as well tell us that Hornady and Lapua don't work either. I have used a lot of DAG German surplus ammo in both M1A and FAL with 0.0000% problems.

Do you want to take a chance on something with this approach and ammo warnings? Compare to lifetime warranties on the M1A and SA-58 (only on new parts for the STG-58).

 

[shooter94]

Thanks guys for all of your responses...much appreciated. I've always wanted a 91. I'm one of the few here in the thread that likes the ergonomics of the 91. Having never picked up a FAL, that's obviously something I need to do for my own education.

 

[Uncle Mike]

I have an old one and a new one....both truck right along with whatever ammo I have fed them, the older one without the flash hider, shoots much tighter groups than the new one with the flash hider.

Everyone should own a PTR 91 at least once in their lifetime! lol

 

[zeke]

While not a PTR, sold off a 91 to finance FAL purchase several years ago. The HK is very front end heavy, extremely reliable , excellent sights, pretty accurate, hard recoiling and the roller action does stretch the brass. The ergonmics fits larger people better. Excellent mags are cheap.

Still like the DSA SA58 better.

 

[Maverick223]

Excellent mags are cheap.

Not like they used to be, but still cheaper than comparable FAL, AR-10, and M14 mags. Though they do not have a BHO feature.

 

[Slamfire]

I like mine. Function is perfect. I installed a port buffer and that allowed me to reload my cases. I got a Bill Springfield Trigger job.


> [email protected] wrote:
>
> I can set you up with a pull that has virtually no creep in the 4.75 area. I
> also remove all the take up slack. Price runs $54 and return postage is
> included. Only the trigger pack is needed, personal check is fine. My address
> is:
>
> Bill Springfield
> 4135 Cricket Ct.
> Colorado Springs, Co 80918

And purchased from PTR a rear sight with a 100 yard aperture.

The recoil is a harder slap than a FAL or M1a.

The rear sight windage adjustment is hit or miss. Once set just leave it alone.

Zeroing the elevation is a pain, but once done, you leave it alone.

This rifle is a battle rifle. Simple to maintain, built like a tank. As an issue weapon, I believe it is still in production, Pakistan for one place, so it is may be the only 308 battle rifle still being made and issued as a primary service rifle. Maybe the guys from that mountainous region know something about cartridge ballistics that the US forgot.

 

[Frankl03]

I had a PTR 91 and a FAL. I have to say I think I liked the PTR 91 better. I had an early one with no flash hider. I wanted to add a scope rail, decent scope, metal for end and a harris bipod. I didn't have the money to finish this project so I sold the rife.

One thing about the PTR is that it has a very solid feeling.

I believe they are generally more accurate than a FAL but FALs come in many different configurations.

Also I have seen some very nice looking FALs mostly the DSA FALs, paras etc. The other thing is that to get a really nice FAL is big bucks. PTR 91s basic rifle is about $900.

Both good rifles but I would lean towards the PTR 91.

 

[-v-]

The PtR91 is essentially a good rifle, but it suffers from some of the quirks inherent in the roller-delayed blowback system. Many have been pointed out, so I'll leave them be. The other to consider is it was designed to work with NATO spec'd ammo. As you move out of that envelope performance will change. The PTR will begin to recoil more and more harshly as you move up in bullet weight. As you move down, it works about the same. Accuracy of the system can be very good. 1.3MOA out of the box is fairly common in the '91 series.

 

[stubbicatt]

Get the PTR91. It is a very good rifle. I am quite pleased with mine.

I have shot ammo from 110 gr spire points to 175 grain hollowpoints through mine and it functioned flawlessly with all of the ammo I shot through it.

I have conducted recoil comparos with the FAL, M1a, and PTR 91, albeit only one example of the FAL and the PTR, and two examples of the M1a, the SOCOM and a standard rifle, and as might be expected the recoil impulses felt the same. The PTR stayed on target better than the other rifles for faster followup shots, except the SOCOM, which due to its brake I think stayed on target with less muzzle deflection. I sincerely do not know where people make this stuff up about recoil impulse.

Also, the word ergonomics is flashed about a whole lot with the PTR, and I don't understand that either. The only two issues I had were remedied by having Bill Springfield install a paddle mag release and I installed an ambi safety/selector.

People compare the PTR and the FAL a whole lot and near as I can tell the PTR has better sights, is more reliable, easier to clean, and definitely more accurate. Also, you can still hold on to the PTR after a couple mag dumps, something that is not possible with the FAL unless you use an oven mitt or something to hold that singeing hot forend.

Lastly, the issue of mangled brass is a non issue if you have a port buffer. *Finding* the brass still remains an issue as the rifle does fling it pretty far.

If you have an acquaintance who will let you try theirs out, give it a whirl and see what you think. Oh. The HK91 is recommended in Boston Gun Bible, IIRC.

 

[Z-Michigan]

I sincerely do not know where people make this stuff up about recoil impulse.

Nothing made up here. Shooting the same ammo, in one case out of the very same box, the PTR was borderline painful to shoot, perceived recoil approaching a 12ga, while my FAL, with the gas regulator properly adjusted, feels not much worse than a .223.

Recoil is part reality, part perception, but perceived recoil on my PTR was really bad. And I also find the FAL and M1A much easier to keep on target from shot to shot.

PTR/HK91 recoil can vary depending on the bolt gap, but my PTR was factory new with only a couple dozen rounds through it. As someone noted in a past thread, it is possible I got a PTR that was bad in some way, although again, it was brand new and completely reliable. (Incidentally, my M1A has had zero jams, and the only jams with my FAL were in tuning the gas regulator and having it set too far open.)

Also, the word ergonomics is flashed about a whole lot with the PTR, and I don't understand that either. The only two issues I had were remedied by having Bill Springfield install a paddle mag release and I installed an ambi safety/selector.

I wear men's XXL gloves and still I could not get my thumb to reach the safety selector on a PTR without greatly rotating my hand on the grip. I can easily reach a FAL selector (metric or inch) without moving my hand, which is funny since many people say the metric FAL has the same problem with excessive reach to the selector. Maybe if my hands were XXXXL I could reach the PTR selector naturally.

The weight balance of a plain jane 18" PTR-91 is the proverbial pig on a shovel. And the reach to the cocking handle is too far in anything but a relaxed standing position. Try it prone and see how it works in that position.

By all means, the OP should try to shoot a PTR and any other rifle he's considering to see how it feels to him.

 

[desidog]

I've said it before and I'll write it again; Buying guns is like buying cars...whenever possible, Test-drive before you buy.

 

[NavyEngineer]

Most issues have been covered - I have a PTR-91 and like it a lot. I haven't found recoil to be excessive, it functions 100%, Bill Springfield's trigger job made the horrible factory trigger pull smooth and much lighter, with the port buffer installed the brass isn't damaged, and isn't flung so far or hard and has been easy to find. However, the reason that the PTR-91 gets more use than my Navy 7.62 NATO Garand is the cheap and readily available surplus German plastic training ammo. You can buy a special bolt and carrier (about $100), and then shoot plastic bullets using standard magazines. The setup functions well in semi-auto, the bullets will tear the center of the target out at 50 yards (accuracy degrades rapidly beyond 75 yards in my rifle), and they cost 15-16 cents per round - much cheaper than any other surplus 7.62 NATO. You can also still buy surplus 22lr conversion kits and then shoot bulk pack 22lr ammo reliably and inexpensively. The old PTR-91/HK-91 design still has a few things going for it.

 

[Maverick223]

I sincerely do not know where people make this stuff up about recoil impulse. [...] Also, the word ergonomics is flashed about a whole lot with the PTR, and I don't understand that either.

I still believe that the PTR-91 is a good rifle, but the ergonomics aren't right for me, which probably leads to the perceived recoil impulse being greater for myself and others. Ergonomic problems for me include stock fitment, balance, and controls (primarily the charging handle and selector switch).

 

[TonyRumore]

I have never had a PTR-91, but I owned an HK91 in the late 80's. It was a POS. The trigger was horrible. I don't think it is even possible to purchase a gun with a trigger as bad as an HK.

In a world of compromise, HK starts with the trigger.

Ergonomics are probably the worst of any black rifle I have ever fired as well.
Accuracy sucked ass. Even with a Leupold 12x target scope in an orginal HK mount, it could barely get 5 shots into 3 inches at a hundred yards. I tried a pile of different handloads and 3" was the best. Most groups were in the 4-5 inch range.

I have never owned a FAL, but I can't imagine the thing could possibly be worse than an HK91.

Tony

 

[goldie]

I have an HK91 ive had for 27 years.the one thing i hate about its design is its a real project to clean.it gets extremely dirty in the chamber,the bolt,all the complaints ive ever heard about AR15's & DI systems, the HK type system puts tons more crud into the bolt,carrier,& chamber than the AR.ive even played with the idea of selling it,i dont shoot it that much, & have an SAR 48 which is 10 times easier to clean,similar accuracy,my only problem with the FAL is im a lefty, & i have to be careful with my trigger hand,its very easy to throw the lever that breaks it open.....

 

[Kwanger]

Not like they used to be, but still cheaper than comparable FAL, AR-10, and M14 mags. Though they do not have a BHO feature.

They are actually cheaper than they used to be not so long ago - for any rifle, you can't get too much cheaper than the 97c a mag that CTD are selling them for, its about a 10th or 15th of the cost of a FAL mag.

http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/MAG304-36.html

The PTR, IMO, is a well built rifle....but is overpriced and for some reason they decided in recent years to put a particularly finicky match barrel on it which unfortunately makes it picky with ammo - which to my mind is taking away what it is supposed to be - a totally reliable, accurate enough for combat battle rifle.

I have a Century CETME which I bought recently for $500 from J&G....I have pretty much turned it into a G3tme, all in for less than half the cost of a PTR91. My rifle is as reliable as a day is long - I have put 1000 rounds through it, it has not had one stoppage, is accurate, the ergonomics are nowhere near as bad as what the "death by internet" makes them out to be. Mine will eat any crappy cheap ammo you throw at it, and is "combat accurate" with 1970's surplus out to 300-400 yards with iron sights (at 400 yards shooting off a bench or prone without any real support with the G3 diopter sight, I can get 20 rounds onto a 2 foot square target) - the gun was a bargain. The one truly sucky ergonomic bit is the awkward mag release - but that's only because BAFTE decided having the original G3 paddle release was dangerous, so they had to remove it. There are ways to improve on that as well. Lack of a BHO is a disadvantage, but how it is with these. The trigger is heavy...again, that's how they are, but can be "jobbed" if you want for less than $50 which makes it much better, apparently. Recoil is surprisingly light for a 308. I don't find the cleaning of it to be any trouble either, its real simple.

If I were you I'd sooner consider a third party enthusiast built G3 parts kit build, or go for a (half the price of a PTR) CETME (and then make it into a near G3, if you like). Sure, you might have to put new rollers in, or replace the locking piece and bolt, but at the end of the day you'll have a totally reliable, accurate enough rifle which eats crappy cheap ammo all day long for not much money.

 

[Maverick223]

They are actually cheaper than they used to be not so long ago

I stand corrected, I have noticed that they have spiked to the exorbitant sum of about $5.00 lately...good to see that they have again fallen in price.

 

[Slamfire]

Accuracy sucked ass. Even with a Leupold 12x target scope in an orginal HK mount, it could barely get 5 shots into 3 inches at a hundred yards. I tried a pile of different handloads and 3" was the best. Most groups were in the 4-5 inch range

Don't know about the barrel quality on a real HK91, but the PTR barrels are made by Thompson Center and they are better than any service rifle barrel put on any issue rifle.

As for the awful ergonomics of the safety and the "terrible trigger pulls", they are better than the safety or triggers of any SKS or AK47. And yet, these are successful designs.