View Full Version : Micro Galil Review

05-05-2005, 05:22 PM
I was recently sent to a school with 29 other LE officers. We are issued micro galils and the other team with us were issued a variety of other weapons. (mp5s (sd and PDW), g36s, M4s). 8 of our 15 micros went down at one time or the other during the 4 day course. This was in a sandy climate with weather from 58 to 80 degrees. There were 2 days where it rained on and off. 3 micros had problems with the firing pin. 5 had failures to feed from the magazine. The magazines were relatively new and all IMI. In the past, just about all of us have had failures to feed directly from the magazines, and no, we aren't riding the charging handle forward. 1 had failures to feed, mine, when ever I used thermold M16 magazines in it (I had an adaptor for M16 magazines), it fed 100% with mil spec, alum mags. The other team had some failure to feed with the M4s (selective fire Armalites) that were probably mag associated. The HK stuff ran 100%. I just wanted to post this FYI. When we were trying to decide whether to buy these or not, I couldn't find very much info on these weapons or their performance. About 700 rounds were fired per weapon full and semi. They were not cleaned, but they were oiled when needed.

05-05-2005, 10:14 PM
Interesting plz give us more details and you personal opinion on how the gun shots. accurse , and controllability under FA I personally rely like to hear about these things (even I cant find a persona that had served or tested micro)
Ps what mags did you have ? what ammo ? was it new IMI mags ?

05-06-2005, 11:25 AM
Winchester white box 62 grain FMJ
Less than a year old 35 rd magazines

Opinions (micro only):
Basically a 5.56 AK with an different folding stock and tritium sights.
Need uzi sight tool to adjust the sights.
Safety must be disengaged (put on a firing mode) to eject a round.
Single point sling attached to the folding stock, so that if the weapon is slung and the stock folded and you jump out of a vehicle, the stock will unfold and the weapon will hit you in the knees or other uncomfortable places.
Left hand shooters have a problem with accidently moving the selector switch from full to semi due to the location of the safety above the left grip.
Rear sight mounted on the reciever top cover (which is made of sheet metal).
Safety still makes a clack, clack when activated.
Velocity is reduced too low to insure reliable fragmentation (8" barrel) @ about 2300 fps. Federal told us we needed at least 2600 fps. for reliable fragmentation.
Hard to mount optics on.

Overall, its a good piece of equipment with limitations that are not found in some of the newer designs. But keep in mind that the skill of the person using it is more important than the tool used. If I had my choice, I'd rather have something else, but I can make due with the micro galil.

05-06-2005, 10:54 PM
Thank you for the response its rely hard to get any true experienced opinion on such weapons (to much lab test BS is out on net) personally I am already send my NFA AR Galil to be converted to micro but I am keeping the original folding stock (I canít figure out why in hell did Israelis change it ? its looks to flimsy to me). Perhaps I need to look 4 another one like ARM.

05-07-2005, 11:05 PM
I also am building a Micro kit on a registered IMI receiver so I guess I'm keeping the original stock myself because I can't find anyone that can machine the rear to accept a true Micro stock, although I'd like it to be as true to the original as possible. Any ideas AKman?

Anyway, I'd also like to clear up something that was said about not being able to eject a round unless the safety is off. My Micro kit has a left side charging handle and top cover that will allow me to chamber or eject a round with the safety lever up, so there is a way around this issue.

05-08-2005, 03:11 PM
What I donít understand is why Israelis changed it ? what is the advantage of the new vs the old because from what I see is that the old is acutely superior to the new one. Am I wrong if so why plz tell me

05-08-2005, 06:51 PM
The left hand charging handle and different top cover would be a way to overcome the design flaw. I was just commenting on out of the box factory weapons, not custom modified weapons. All the negatives of the weapon could be rectified if you have enough money to fix them.

05-08-2005, 09:22 PM
The only advantage that I see is that the Micro stock uses a push button on it while the folder that I have has to be manually seperated before folding. If you're carrying a standard size Galil rifle then sure, it might seem easier to operate but on the Micro rifle, it might be a little more difficult to do.

05-08-2005, 09:29 PM
Originally posted by sj
The left hand charging handle and different top cover would be a way to overcome the design flaw. I was just commenting on out of the box factory weapons, not custom modified weapons. All the negatives of the weapon could be rectified if you have enough money to fix them.

If your department is going to use the Micro and the safety lever flaw is something that bothers you or you think needs to be addressed, then by all means I would mention it to your superior and suggest the left side charging handle and top cover. I don't think those parts would cost a fortune and there aren't any modifications needed to be done to the weapon to make it work. Just a suggestion.;)

05-09-2005, 06:32 PM
Installing non factory parts opens up liability concerns. The real answer was probably to purchase a weapon that was more in line with our needs. We were asked our opinions, but ...