After having read most of the posts on this thread mostly in favour of Krytac over G&G I thought i would inject some of my experience comparing two AR-15 (M4) platforms between both the manufacturers.
I own or have owned the following:
A G&G TR4-18 Light in Tan, cost me £317 from Landwarrior Airsoft
A Krytac Trident CRB, cost me £300 from Pro Airsoft Supplies
The G&G TR4-18 (herein the 416) is basically G&Gs take on a short carbine HK 416, it came with a MOSFET installed, fired around 16RPS at around 370FPS on .20g BBs
The Krytac Trident CRB (herein called the CRB) is basically a simple M4 short carbine take made by Krytac, it came with a built in MOSFET attached to their Nautilus Gearbox and fired around 16RPS at about 310FPS.
Having owned at the same time and operated both at various skirmish sites i noticed the difference between the two:
The CRB had a plastic flash hider glued to the front end that when i removed i basically destroyed, the G&G had a metal one
The RIS/RAS front handrail for both was well made, the CRBs one felt light which was good but the G&Gs one being old style picatinny was bulky feeling.
The CRB felt really light and even though was a full metal receiver it never felt like it was made from the same quality of metal the 416 was made from as that felt a lot sturdier like i could throw this and it would survive.
The pistol grip for the 416 felt a lot better with more curves and grooves for you hand whilst the CRBs pistol grip looked cheap and tacky, it was amongst the first thing i replaced on the CRB because it looked so bad
Whilst i prefered the look of the crane stock of the 416 i did prefer the battery loading of the CRB.
Like Sitting Duck says the MOSFET of the G&G was pretty pants and was one of the few things i changed however what i did like about it was that G&G went to all the trouble of using a double wire trigger MOSFET. Krytac on the other hand only used a single wire MOSFET screwed into the gearbox.
Both the 416 and CRB had propriety gearbox casings which follow the principle of the TM V2 GB, the G&G one had their pneumatic blowback system and the Krytac have their Nautilus range which has various cut outs for AOE, re-greasing and the MOSFET.
Overall i found the insides of the gearbox of each to be comparable with each other though the G&G did need some more shimming work than the Krytac which was good as is.
Performance wise out of the box I preferred the G&G, it sounded much more crisp over the Krytac which sounded whiney, i tried to correct the motor height but to no avail, in terms of range i personally thought the G&G had slightly better accuracy using stock barrel, hop up chamber, rubber and bucking over the Krytac. At about 60M away i could hit a drain pipe 8 out of 10 times with the 416 and probably 6 out of 10 with the Krytac from a standing position.
In the end i sold one of them on to a friend as i could not justify owning two M4s, can you guess which one i sold? ............
It was the KRYTAC
Why?
Because everytime i did a side by side comparison of the two i just preferred the feel and performance of the G&G 416, when i had both available for a skirmish day, i would grab the G&G over the KRYTAC. Out of the box it fired smoother, straighter for longer over the Krytac.
In the end i upgraded the G&G with a bunch of things, it now shoots a dead consistent 342FPS at a rate of 24RPS able to hit a drain pipe 8 out of 10 times at 70M.
In the end my G&G TR4-18 looks like this:
It has no sights as i normally mount a RS EoTech 552 Holosight
Budget under £400
