Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 52

Thread: InRange TV - Mud Test: FNH SCAR 17S

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    2,156
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    I know Karl is periodically one of the guests on the Primary and Secondary podcasts, which also tend to have a lot of industry people and end users on them. So maybe he heard anecdotes about the SCAR's service life from some of those guys during one of the discussions he was present for.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    564
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dionysusigma View Post
    What did they mean by "we've heard stories about it not having great service life"?

    A rifle costing $3000 + better have a Methuselah-like service life...
    The only think that pops into my mind is that the BCG runs on internal aluminum rails that are part of the receiver extrusion. Once those wear out you're replacing the receiver.

    I'd expect to go through multiple barrels before that happens and enough ammo that the price of a new SCAR is trivial.

    H

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,234
    Feedback Score
    0
    YouTube sample-size-of-one torture tests are worthless anyhow, but this one is even more so considering the amount of R&D that went into the SCAR program.

    Any gun will choke if an errant pebble wanders where it shouldn't. I'll trust the results of the engineers who did this the right way when the gun was in development.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Midwest Flyover Country
    Posts
    3,742
    Feedback Score
    0
    Their testing is flawed because it only highlights that weapons that are primarily sealed against outside elements will run since the internals aren't compromised. The real test is whether they will run if they are compromised. I want to see that SCAR pass the swamp test that "Regular Guy" does on youtube. So far only the AK passed his testing.
    Last edited by RetroRevolver77; 06-13-18 at 14:33.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    1,224
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 7n6 View Post
    Their testing is flawed because it only highlights that weapons that are primarily sealed against outside elements will run since the internals aren't compromised. The real test is whether they will run if they are compromised. I want to see that SCAR pass the swamp test that "Regular Guy" does on youtube. So far only the AK passed his testing.
    The AK has actually passed one of these YouTube "gun tests"? It usually fails miserably pretty early on just like the Mini 14.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    N.E. OH
    Posts
    7,595
    Feedback Score
    0
    What ive learned:

    No matter what gun you have:
    1. seal it until use.
    2. If it get filled with shit, rinse it out before using.
    3. Make sure the all paths of movement are clear, then rock on.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,175
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    I've heard anecdotally, through an E6 that went through the course, that the SCAR H's in the Bravo course had issues with service life. Not exactly surprising, and its only anecdotal evidence with a sample size of one. I can't recall with specifics as to what part/parts were the failure points, but I don't have any reason to doubt it really. Guns aren't magical. They do break eventually guys.
    Aimpoint M4S- Because your next Aimpoint battery hasn't been made yet.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Midwest Flyover Country
    Posts
    3,742
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 556Cliff View Post
    The AK has actually passed one of these YouTube "gun tests"? It usually fails miserably pretty early on just like the Mini 14.
    The swamp test, each weapon is compromised internally right off the bat in sandy muddy water- in a real swamp. I'd like to see if the SCAR could pass this but so far only the AK has. This to me would be more realistic given say, an over the beach exercise or crossing a river system etc.


  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,234
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 7n6 View Post
    The swamp test, each weapon is compromised internally right off the bat in sandy muddy water- in a real swamp. I'd like to see if the SCAR could pass this but so far only the AK has. This to me would be more realistic given say, an over the beach exercise or crossing a river system etc.

    It's not meaningful data, though. The AK could just have gotten lucky that the wrong rock didn't get where it could cause trouble. You need a statistically significant number of guns, controlled, identical conditions for each trial, mud that is sifted to be uniform between tests, etc.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    On Stage
    Posts
    54
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by MadAngler1 View Post
    I love it. Makes me feel better I bought a SCAR 17s despite all the negative comments on the web regarding optics, magazines, etc. I love my SCAR and enjoy it every time I take it out.
    I am with you, and have no buyers remorse , about my SCAR 17.
    My internals are showing no signs of wear, after 7 years of moderate use...applying Super Lube grease. Running reloads too.

    Battleground Vegas has had great results while renting both the 17 & the 16.
    The least breakage of all their rental weapons .( by proportion of use)
    Amateur Shooter... Professional Accumulator // Don't do anything Stupid; Don't let Stupid do anything to You.
    TAKE YOUR TIME......... IN A HURRY.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •