SCAR vs AR; A detailed look...

[decodeddiesel]

Wow, this is one hell of a thread. It has an incredible amount of information and raw data. It is certainly one of the finest SCAR threads to be found anywhere on the Internet.

I know Hootiewho and is a very well trained shooter and extremely knowledgeable on firearms.

For anybody who has purchased a SCAR or is thinking about it this thread is a "Must Read" in my opinion.

I agree. Really had no interest in a SCAR, but now the mechanical engineer in me is certainly intrigued. Extremely comprehensive testing. Well done Sir.

[RAM Engineer]

SCAR barrels are made in Belgium. Tell gov.org how stupid their laws are that prevent importation of gun barrels. It's not FN's fault.

FN has the capability to make CHF barrels CONUS if they thought there was a market and had the desire.

Anyway, great writeup. I really enjoy shooting my SCAR 16s, and this thread is making me wish I weren't sick so I could hit the range tomorrow.

Also nice to meet another reliability & maintainability engineer.

[BiggerStick47]

Great read, thanks. I'm considering selling/trading my Noveske RECON for a SCAR but wanted more detailed info on the SCAR.

[decodeddiesel]

Honestly at this point the only things holding me back from a SCAR are the ergonomics. I think short rail length and the inability to use a BAD lever, or employ some sort of FAL/ACR/XCR bolt catch and release mechanism are an oversight which I wish would have been addressed with the initial design of the platform.

I understand they (being FN and USSOCOM) wanted to keep the ergonomics very similar to the M4. I really get the feeling this is one of those "design by committee" decisions. I guess it's not a terrible thing as the ergos of the AR/M4 are IMHO superior to just about any other modern assault rifle. However I believe certain ergonomic improvements like the BAD and a longer rail/hand guard are major steps forward that I wish would be incorporated into the SCAR.

I am still on the fence about this rifle. I would love to get some trigger time on one before I plunked down the cash I have saved up as for me it would either be a SCAR or an LMT MWS .308.

[CQC.45]

Honestly at this point the only things holding me back from a SCAR are the ergonomics. I think short rail length and the inability to use a BAD lever, or employ some sort of FAL/ACR/XCR bolt catch and release mechanism are an oversight which I wish would have been addressed with the initial design of the platform.

I understand they (being FN and USSOCOM) wanted to keep the ergonomics very similar to the M4. I really get the feeling this is one of those "design by committee" decisions. I guess it's not a terrible thing as the ergos of the AR/M4 are IMHO superior to just about any other modern assault rifle. However I believe certain ergonomic improvements like the BAD and a longer rail/hand guard are major steps forward that I wish would be incorporated into the SCAR.

This. If it had the XCR/ACR bolt catch/release than it would most likely rule the piston market. This is the ONLY thing holding me back from the SCAR. After owning a XCR and playing with an ACR, this feature is far better than the traditional M4 style IMO....

[DirectAction]

This is one of the best posts/reviews I have ever read on the subject.....

Great job brother!

[JDW67]

Wow, now, that's what I would consider "detailed"

Nice write up...

[snackgunner]

This is a great write up

thanks for taking the time to post this up

[Smokerr]

I am going to do a different take on this.

While a lot of work went into the write up, I think it missed the mark.

For someone shooting the gun, what counts is how well it works (reliability which only time will tell), accuracy (does it do what it needs to), ease of disassemble and assembly, ergonomics of controls and overall feel for function.

Once you delve into minute depth details, then I think it falls off the map.

Do a comparison with an AK and you would come up with a cheap piece of junk. Put the AK parts in context and its only drawback is accuracy (and that's not a drawback for untrained or conscript armies). Its cheap and it works (even for top operators in the right situation)

Assumptions of harmonics affecting the accuracy, piston vs DGI and all that drift into speculation as does timing, letting the feed work better etc.

I think you need to be a gun engineer/designer to actually asses how each of the components contributes, detract or even makes no difference in the gun functioning.

Ultimately, what actually tells is putting it into a lot of use to see how it holds up (and if you "improve" a component, the same thing, only use will tell, not an analysis - that just gets you the basis for what to do and you need to know what you are actually after in how that part relates to the rest of the mechanism). A designer because he knows the environment the part works in can make a good attempt, though it still have to be used a lot to tell for sure. Usually trial and refinement involved. Ergo agreement on certain components improvements for the AR we now know are better due to time and testing (SCAR is too new for that and proprietary so no aftermarket).

For me, I handled a SCAR the other day. My take is that it is a very well done gun quality wise, fit and finish were very good. That is the first impression, knowing FN it probably translates into very good results, but.......

I saw it stripped down but did not try it myself, would have to do that and see. Basing it on my XCR it seemed to be more parts to loose, but that's an impression.

I did not like the reciprocating charging handle (XCR does not have that and I see no advantage). The guy had put it on the right side as it was an issue. Non reciprocation on the left side for right handers works better if you are need speed.

Magazine release was good (and ambidextrous which is a plus)

Safety was too small and I did not like how it functioned.

I did not like the bolt hold back/ release mechanism ala an AR type (XCRs is probably done so well you cannot improve on it). The SCAR is better than an AR as it has a better shape, but still an AR location and setup which I do not like.

Fit and finish are far better than the XCR, handling and balance is better than my XCR, overall I would still take the XCR (I can improve the XCR if I was willing to get the light barrel, but still I do not think it will be as good as the SCAR of the MP15-T I have handled and shot)

That,s the kind of comparison that works, yes its my opinion, but I base it on actual facts from my viewpoint, and you can do the same and see if that fits you or not.

The massive XCR bolt would seem to be an improvement over the flimsy staked AR bolt, but time will tell. A poorly done massive bolt (even a beautifully machined one) is worse than a well done lighter bolt (though AK was a lot like the XCR so it looks good, but that's not proven fully though few if any XCR related bolt issues have surfaced)

Now that is s my take, the rest have liked this, for me it does not tell me what I need to know in far to much detail and does not give me a basis to assess with information I can use .

[Stephen_H]

I'm not even sure where to begin. You lament a very scientific comparison between several modern firearms as being unrealistic or irrelevant, but then cite your own opinion and personal preferences as reasons to choose a carbine? Is that pretty accurate?

Stephen