View Full Version : SCAR heavies question
Some friends and I are thinking of using two SCAR 7.62s with some serious optics to be our backbone. We figure good ammo availability, good enough accuracy when balanced with the semi-auto capability, and the longer reach of the 7.62 make it a good choice. There won't be any CQB stuff with us, it will strictly be hiding and running if anything rolls our way (too many wives and little kids/infants), figure the SCARs could allow for greater standoff capacity, kind of a SDM role to break contact. Put out best shots on them, the rest of us carrying regular ARs to protect them/move everyone else.
I'd like your thoughts on the idea, and some recommendations on optics if you have any experience with them. I understand from some other threads that SCARs are pretty brutal on optics. Seems to be the only ones I've seen that are supposed to be able to survive are the NightForces and Leupolds. Anyway, not sure it's a good idea/worth the cost.
I have no experience with a scar, but if they way as much as the LR-308 my brother has then I would say find something else. You won't want to be running around carrying a heavy ass rifle. I've carried my brothers .308 through the Sandhills for about 7 miles one day... Not fun. I will admit though, he didn't have a sling on it so that was a factor.
Other than the weight issue i see it as a good idea. If you can afford a scar you can afford to put a high quality optic on it.
The setup in the photo weighs 11lbs loaded. Not too far off from a loaded AR15 with optics, light and sling. I consider the small amount of extra weight on the SCAR to be justifiable considering the advantages it has for long range, penetration, etc. It's a very lightweight package for a .308 battle rifle, particularly if you keep it with the stock rails.
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/BiteyMcClaws/IMAG1929-1.jpg~original (http://s51.photobucket.com/user/BiteyMcClaws/media/IMAG1929-1.jpg.html)
Also, I'm curious as to what you see the role being for this gun. You seem to have a specific scenario in mind (no CQB but ranged engagement and "contact" at an unspecified range and terrain, as well as people to protect) What makes you think things will unfold the way you anticipate, and why?
IZinterrogator
06-16-13, 12:40
Do you already have the SCARs? What range are we talking? If you don't own the SCARs or the optics yet, you may be burning over $5K ($3000 rifle + $1700 scope + $325 trigger) per SCAR when your requirements only need Remington 700s and some less expensive scopes. The difference could be spent on ammo and training.
I'd rather have a LaRue PredatAR/PredatOBR or KAC ECC/K2 and a pile of Magpul mags for that role...
I'd rather have a LaRue PredatAR/PredatOBR or KAC ECC/K2 and a pile of Magpul mags for that role...
True. The SCAR 17 is more of a battle rifle than a Recce style rifle. Unless it is a MK20 the 17 is better suited in the role of a heavier caliber general purpose rifle. I say put an Aimpoint M4 2MOA Reticle on a 17 and call it good for most applications.
The setup in the photo weighs 11lbs loaded. Not too far off from a loaded AR15 with optics, light and sling. I consider the small amount of extra weight on the SCAR to be justifiable considering the advantages it has for long range, penetration, etc. It's a very lightweight package for a .308 battle rifle, particularly if you keep it with the stock rails.
http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f392/BiteyMcClaws/IMAG1929-1.jpg~original (http://s51.photobucket.com/user/BiteyMcClaws/media/IMAG1929-1.jpg.html)
Also, I'm curious as to what you see the role being for this gun. You seem to have a specific scenario in mind (no CQB but ranged engagement and "contact" at an unspecified range and terrain, as well as people to protect) What makes you think things will unfold the way you anticipate, and why?
We all live in a major metro area, in nice neighborhoods, but not far from some not so nice areas. We all have, independently, come to the conclusion that the nation has used up a significant portion of its margin of error (but certainly not all of it). While none of us subscribe to the prepper philosophy of the end of the world, etc. we all have decided that we want to be able to leave the area if we want/need to (given that the more urban areas may become more and more dangerous). We're all still in pretty good shape (some triathlon guys, some marathoners, etc.), but don't pretend to being JSOC studs, so we'll be keeping our head down, moving as fast as possible, and hoping everything settles down, but don't want to rely on that. We plan on taking our families out at the first sign of trouble, but realize we're not psychic.
We're all civilian professionals (doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc.) now, so we've got some ability to set aside some insurance, which is the way we view this sort of capability. And, let's face it, we're all tired of golf and shooting is a heck of a lot more fun and a more practical skill to teach kids, etc. We've just approached this like the life, health, auto, homeowners, etc. insurance we all carry for just as unlikely events (hopefully).
That's the circumstances under which the guns would be used.
I'd rather have a LaRue PredatAR/PredatOBR or KAC ECC/K2 and a pile of Magpul mags for that role...
True. The SCAR 17 is more of a battle rifle than a Recce style rifle. Unless it is a MK20 the 17 is better suited in the role of a heavier caliber general purpose rifle. I say put an Aimpoint M4 2MOA Reticle on a 17 and call it good for most applications.
Thanks guys. I've got a friend who is a FN dealer, that's why I was thinking SCARs (and the fact that a lot of front line units carry them), but the LaRue/KAC rifles may still be more cost effective. I'll take a look at them.
I have used a mk17 and a mk20 and liked it so much that I went an bought a SCAR17S. Plus I feel that I need a personal copy of each issued weapon. Now understand that the SCAR has some issues which I think that now the civilian market is finally catching up to (Gissele, Handl, Vltor, PWS). For your particular situation I think a few things need to be thought about.
"Amateurs talk tactics professionals talk logistics" or "its not what your going to do its how you're going to get it done"
We are just going to assume you will have a SCAR 17 not an OBR, LMT, SIG or HK417
This is rifle with a small logistical support chain compared to the AR-10. Which also that has a bit of notoriety for its behavior and durability from operational use. Do I think this is a huge issue? No, but you have to think about if the world breaks down and your gun breaks how do I fix a gun where parts are pretty limited compared to the AR platform. SOLUTION: Substantial spare parts kit if not an out right spare gun.
Also the SCAR uses proprietary magazines that are not as durable as say the SR25 or Pmag. From my personal experience they do not like being dropped. So buy a good number of them. I really like interoperability between platforms whenever possible. SOLUTION: buy a Handl Defense SR25 compatible lower, I have one, it works great. (do not worry about the overt slander of its competitors) It lets me put AR -10 mags in my SCAR
The power of 7.62x51 in such a light platform does a few things to the gun. It has a tendency work loose sight mounts and anything else not tightened down. I use an ADM QD setup on my gun and like it alot but it requires checking the QD levers from time to time.
With sustained rates of fire the lower 1913 rail assembly can get quite hot and there is a lack of rail space by comparison to AR platform is. Add to this it is difficult to find good lighting solutions with the stock configuration IMO. SOLUTION: aftermarket fore-rail assembly (I currently have a VLTOR but I am waiting for the Handl defense one that solves the heat issue)
I also have switched the charging handle out to an angled type as many of the sight mounts or wide based reflex sights will tear your hands up. EOTECH!
lastly the optics I prefer on this gun are variable power with red dot capacity. This gun can shoot man size targets over 600m. With your intended purpose for this gun you need an optic that can support that. Yet the gun is light enough and flexible enough that CQC type of work is absolutely doable. This advocates the use of a low magnification red dot. SOLUTION: Leupold Mk8 or Mk6, Vortex Viper PST HDII, Elcan 1.5x6 (I have the Vortex but after working with a mk6 I find it superior and the Mk8 is really nice but seriously expensive)
I hope this information helps you on your way.
SCAR 17 with an Elcan or ACOG. Don't cut corners with optics for these. I loved mine and can tell you without a doubt that the SCAR platform is one of the most reliable rifles on the planet. Over 5,000 rds without a single hiccup. Not to mention that it was lightweight and nasty accurate. Modularity and balance are top notch. Why stop at the 17? Get some 16s's as well.
Those scars are pretty cool :)
DiabhailGadhar
06-19-13, 08:29
I think for your given situation the scar would be perfect I just got mine less than a month ago and I can tell you it lives up to the hype. I shot an MOA or better group with a grip pod and a primary arms 1-4x24 that my brother gave me, granted it is sitting in a larue SPR mount that I painstakingly loctitied and leveled the junk scope into, I couldn't believe how accurate it was. My brother who is a bolt gun fanboy was super impressed. (I may have converted him) Mags aren't near as scarce as they use to be, hell there's 3 sitting at a local gun shop for $40 each and they've been there nearly two months now. The mags people are saying are weak, I just dropped a fully loaded one the other day on a hardwood floor and it did nothing. Get some magpuls on the floor plates and that will sort that out. There are cheaper options out there but none will be field tested to the extent a scar has been....oh but you will need a sling because even with the light weight of the rifle mine feels a lot heavier then my AR..especially hand carrying it.
Are there other options out there that are cheaper? Yes.
Are they better? I wouldn't go that far, lol.
I'm wondering if someone with some real world experience would be willing to chime in after reading the OP's reasoning for wanting these rifles on his optic's choice?
When I think of the situation he describes and all of the people in question having limited experience with firearms I am thinking that a magnified optic is not the best choice for the initial scenario where they are leaving the area in question.
Any thoughts?
DiabhailGadhar
06-19-13, 17:22
I'm wondering if someone with some real world experience would be willing to chime in after reading the OP's reasoning for wanting these rifles on his optic's choice?
When I think of the situation he describes and all of the people in question having limited experience with firearms I am thinking that a magnified optic is not the best choice for the initial scenario where they are leaving the area in question.
Any thoughts?
Somebody already has...Rana chimed in earlier in the thread. I don't think someone that is a "lawyer, doctor, or engineer" would have issue with a variable optic. Not trying to be a douche, but I was able to squeeze MOA out of the rifle my first time shooting it and my first time ever with a variable. I do have time behind multiple other systems but that rifle does a lot of the work for you...:p and I would add to the OP that this site had a plethora of info on all subjects relating to his "scenario" ORANGE SEARCH BUTTON^^^
I'm wondering if someone with some real world experience would be willing to chime in after reading the OP's reasoning for wanting these rifles on his optic's choice?
When I think of the situation he describes and all of the people in question having limited experience with firearms I am thinking that a magnified optic is not the best choice for the initial scenario where they are leaving the area in question.
Any thoughts?
Leupold Mark 6 1-6X20 or SWFA SS 1-6x24 would fit the bill perfectly.
I have the SWFA on my 17 and I love it
FlyingHunter
06-19-13, 20:22
Have a Leupold VX-6, a 1-6x w red dot on my SCAR 17.
Great combo. Took a few deer last year with it. Love the 1x while stalking and use the 6x for long shots or discriminating between a doe and possible button buck in low light.
I think the OP's choice would be great. I also agree with those who stated a LaRue or KAC 308 w MagPul mags would be fine.
I'd rather have a LaRue PredatAR/PredatOBR or KAC ECC/K2 and a pile of Magpul mags for that role...
I'm as excited as the next guy about these K2 series guns, but there only seem to be a couple of prototype guns in house at KAC. Also if the barrels on these K2s are truely lightweight and chrome lined, do you really think that they be night and day more accurate than the SCAR 17? And at the current price of ~$6k for an ECC? You gotta be kidding me. It's almost as though KAC is testing the waters to find the absolute limit of what the market will bear. For that price, I'll buy two SCAR 17s and a stack of mags (that arn't plastic) they can both use.
At 1-1.5 MOA, the SCAR is a darn accurate rifle. I'd like to see what those Sage EBR M14s were turning in the accuracy wise. I think that folks on this site that are splitting hairs between platforms on the basis of ~.5 MOA are really kidding themselves. All of the discussed rifles will shoot circles around off the rack hunting rifles that have been putting meat in the freezer for years.
The LaRue OBR guns may be more accurate than all the above, but IMHO, they fall into more of the precision catagory. I havn't read anything that would suggest that the PredatAR guns are significantly more accurate than the SCAR. I have seen posts that would seem to sugest that the LaRue guns don't function as reliably as the SCAR. Kind of two different purpous built platforms.
I'm running a Leupold VX-R patrol 1.25-4x20 on my SCAR 17 and I love it! Best scope out there for under $500(if you lok hard) in my book. Make sure you get the PATROL model though.
leadpoisonr
06-24-13, 17:49
I have settled on the Bomb proof ACOG for mine
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v478/leadpoisonr/scar1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v478/leadpoisonr/scar2.jpg
blusheepdog
06-25-13, 02:55
I have owned several different AR variants both DI & Piston rigs. I have a Hogan H-308 (think POF) and love it. An opportunity presented itself to me to pick up a new SCAR 17S for just under $3k.
I am probably gonna sell the Hogan and just run my SCAR. It's light weight and accurate and sounds perfect for what you describe what you may use it for. I bought the Calvary Manufacturing lower as I already had a bunch of SR-25 PMAGS. I also swapped out the trigger for the Geissele SS and the safety selectors out for Empire Tactical "Thor" selectors.
I LOVE THIS THING! I'm gonna try it out elk hunting this fall if I get the chance. If you have the money, get the Vortex Razor 1-6 with an AD mount and call it a day. I would always recommend purchasing some extra parts. I don't like to gamble. Get a can for it as well if you have the cash.
+1 for SCAR + Elcan + G trigger..
http://i1312.photobucket.com/albums/t523/TxPiKapp/5BEE621F-E09C-48C5-8950-536D209C5D8B-28487-000004E8B3EDD7BB_zpsf159f315.jpg (http://s1312.photobucket.com/user/TxPiKapp/media/5BEE621F-E09C-48C5-8950-536D209C5D8B-28487-000004E8B3EDD7BB_zpsf159f315.jpg.html)
sadly this setup is up for sale since i am switching to an all FDE setup
SeriousStudent
10-24-13, 00:27
+1 for SCAR + Elcan + G trigger..
http://i1312.photobucket.com/albums/t523/TxPiKapp/5BEE621F-E09C-48C5-8950-536D209C5D8B-28487-000004E8B3EDD7BB_zpsf159f315.jpg (http://s1312.photobucket.com/user/TxPiKapp/media/5BEE621F-E09C-48C5-8950-536D209C5D8B-28487-000004E8B3EDD7BB_zpsf159f315.jpg.html)
sadly this setup is up for sale since i am switching to an all FDE setup
Just an FYI to you. If you are thinking about quickly running up your post count to 30, just to sell that here on the EE, you might want to contemplate that further. Just friendly advice.
Just an FYI to you. If you are thinking about quickly running up your post count to 30, just to sell that here on the EE, you might want to contemplate that further. Just friendly advice.
understood and acknowledged.. thanks
The AR is good at long range: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=138239
Unless you just want the scar (certainly nothing wrong with that!) I would seriously consider the socom for long range.
shootinmedic
11-04-13, 11:15
[QUOTE And, let's face it, we're all tired of golf and shooting is a heck of a lot more fun and a more practical skill to teach kids, etc.
[/QUOTE]
It was mentioned earlier that cost may be an issue, or at least trying to save so as not to spend unnecessarily, and I thought I'd chime in on saying that grabagun.com has some competitive pricing for the SCAR series. I'm trying to buy a 16S myself as soon as I can sell the Christensen CA-15 I currently own. Grabagun is where I'm headed as soon is it sells.
viper3colt
11-12-13, 16:24
Fox33 would you recommend a ACOG for the Scar17S? Maybe with a offset RDS?
In my mind it would be a great general all around ranch/farm/defense/other rifle which would replace 3 rifles I own. This would reduce overall logistics on ammo at the least. Plus in a Katrina/shtf scenario like the OP is worried about the thought of having to abandon rifles that are left in the safe/home is unsettling.
HeliPilot if you are current Mil you may qualify for a LE/Mil pricing from FNh (at least I do) which is a better price than retail.
IMO variable power with red dot capability is the way to go
USO SR-8c , Leupold mk6, (mk 8 if you got the cash), vortex RAZOR HD II (I hate the reticle)
with a quick throw lever and QD mount
this gun is capable of greater than 600m shots on man sized targets without a problem but the optics to do that should be 6x or greater be prepared to drop $2000-2500 retail on a proper scope for this gun
You can use a mk17 in a house, so a red dot with low power is a must, but its not really meant for that, it is for the open expanses of A-Stan or western US
So get a scope that can support it
viper3colt
12-08-13, 13:54
Would Nightforce 2.5-10x32 be on your list?
Your scenario seems unrealistically specific. I would say that you all are better suited with AR15s, and possibly a Remington 700 for the longer range shots.
I think that the SCAR17 would be more of a hinderance. I am saying this even though I really like the SCAR.
It's cool and very expensive.
'nuff said.
I had one and sold it off and replaced it with a precision rifle. I can not blow away Zombies at 1000 yards.
No need for a SCAR.
VooDoo6Actual
12-08-13, 17:24
IMO variable power with red dot capability is the way to go
USO SR-8c , Leupold mk6, (mk 8 if you got the cash), vortex viper HD II (I hate the reticle)
with a quick throw lever and QD mount
this gun is capable of greater than 600m shots on man sized targets without a problem but the optics to do that should be 6x or greater be prepared to drop $2000-2500 retail on a proper scope for this gun
You can use a mk17 in a house, so a red dot with low power is a must, but its not really meant for that, it is for the open expanses of A-Stan or western US
So get a scope that can support it
+1 this only to add NF 2.5x10.24 to the que
That's based on your MEN's statement. For whamming & scramming, looting & shooting tough to beat because of the weight. NVD's / IR's have a terrible attrition rate.
Setting up on a LP / OP is a different game.
Light is fast, speed is survival...
+1 this only to add NF 2.5x10.24 to the que
I have never shot one, much less on a SCAR H or Mk17 so I wasn't going to endorse it. I like the MOAR reticule and I like nightforce. But the big thing for me in relation to the mk17 is the need for the shooter to be able to dismount quickly, enter a structure, engage targets at CQC distances, then be able to hang out the window and get a squirter @ 150m, then take a deliberate shots @ 600m.
The optics to support that type of operation normally do a much better job at supporting the distance work but not the reflexive shooting. Since IMO the mk17 is at an ergonomic disadvantage in CQC work, a variable power optic has to do a phenomenal job at CQC ranges, to not leave the mk17 in the truck.
The three above I have found do a good job, with the RAZOR the budget item and the mk8 my choice regardless of cost.
If nightforce is willing to send me a copy I'd sure put it through the paces :) !!!
I wish I could get my hands on a NF 2.5-10x24, but it is verboten apparently to us non-military types.
Honestly I think the mid power variable market (1-6+) is still evolving, like the 1-4x did over the past several years. Currently 1-6/8x are generally large, heavy, and expensive - and the reticle choices / focal plane (FFP vs SFP) is still a "work in progress", IMO.
Obviously it's trade offs and it's unrealistic to expect 1-6/8x variables will be as light or inexpensive as 1-4x scopes, but I'm still having difficultly finding one that would be "just right" for my needs. And that would be generally low weight (<20 ounces), daylight visible illumination, mil based reticle, and either FFP or SFP, although I think in general a SFP scope is fine for that power range, especially since current FFP scopes seem to be a compromise since it usually leads to less than satisfactory daylight illumination and in the case of the Mark 6 1-6 TMR, clutters the reticle with the little half circles which it attempts to use for illumination at 1x.
YMMV, but I think the SCAR 17 is a great all around weapon that is easy to setup depending on your location / needs. For me in FL, long range shooting is uncommon, so a 13" barrel, suppressed with lightweight low power variable is my preference. But after doing 2 weeks in UT/WA for work, I would definitely want the 16" barrel and a variable with at least 10x on the high end, with offset irons or RDS, since it's wide open territory with lots of long range shooting available. Nice thing with the SCAR is with quick barrel change and QDs on an optic, you can change that out in less than 10 minutes, confirm zero and you are all set.
VooDoo6Actual
12-11-13, 19:45
I have never shot one, much less on a SCAR H or Mk17 so I wasn't going to endorse it. I like the MOAR reticule and I like nightforce. But the big thing for me in relation to the mk17 is the need for the shooter to be able to dismount quickly, enter a structure, engage targets at CQC distances, then be able to hang out the window and get a squirter @ 150m, then take a deliberate shots @ 600m.
Since were just spittballin, I'll throw this in the fray for poops & giggles: Your logic is sound & for me the 16" makes the most sense if I had to pick only one. Having your cake & eating it too is the goal. Whether it's the S&B 1x8 @ approx $3600-4K, a Leupy Mk8 1.1x8 CQBSS at w/ H27 approx. $2400+ (Liberty Optics) or March 1x8 $2550 non illum - $3300 illum, or USO SR8 s / c / or yet to be released m at approx. "s" prices starting $1700+ they all well do the job for what we are postulating. Their respective weights are similar w/ S&B 1x8 @ 24-25 ozs., USO @ 24 oz, Leupy Mk8 @ 23-24 ozs, March w/ premier ret 1x8 @ 25 ozs. Illum vs. non illum 19.5 - 22.5 ozs. etc. You get the CQB urban type capability but all theses optics weigh a few ozs. more. A NXS NF 2.5x10x24 weighs about 17 oz so you save 8 ozs. but lose the CQC / urban room / structure clearing w/ the 2.5x, have to compensate by adding a Doctor Optic / RMR / J point / Leupy Delta / Burris etc. so you pic up a few ozs. there & train w/ it regularly to program into MM to rotate in CQB / Urban Clearing TT&P's etc. (unless you run it on top of Optic & tilt your head up some but if your doing weak side transitions, it's a better option than offset) again, trade offs. For example, if I'm patrolling & come on a Urban structure or terra firma formation i.e. rocks / Wadi or ? & don't have time to because of furtive threat or forget to dial down my optic e.g. 10x or 8x then I can go to it reflexively w/ really no hesitation & then back onto engaging longer threats using H58 or CDMIL ret. So, in essence you get 2.5x10 @ 17 oz. & the mount weight + Doctor Optic lll @ 1.5 oz your minimizing weight w/ a pretty nifty package & it's less $ than the others.
The 8X is nice @ 600 engagements & clearly has that advantage over 4x & 6x albeit, somewhat minimal. You could go w/ the Vortex HD 1x6 & RDS offset & call it good as it's a good optic, some guys like the glass better than NF. It's light weight, good price point comparatively, minimal size, good eye box on the JM ret, but I prefer a little more mag from my experiences in the field. On a square range or 3 gun sure, but on a 2-way dynamic range I want 8x or 10x remembering time & distance are your friends. There is no set right answer it's just figuring it out & what you want to accomplish. Keeping in mind, it's still 3 lbs lighter & more accurate than a FAL which was the probably the most prolific combat .308 in existence from my knowledge & understanding IIRC, I could be wrong.
Here's a decent video that shows offset RDS concept in play:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVy-qobrts0
I like extra 2x on the USO 1x8 @ 600 m but I like the NF 2.5x w/ Doctor Optic offset as well. I don't mind the extra 6+ ozs. for simplicity for Urban clearing as well & I generally don't have any Eye Box or FOV issues w/ any of them & can work w/ them all. I like the KAC offsets on my SCAR & LMT. They are minimal size, light weight, easy to operate, good sight pic etc. in short no drama. So add to the que, the NF offers lighter weight 17 oz. but you still have to add CQB RDS @ a few ozs. give or take but you do pick up another 2x on the top end which is why I threw it in. NF's 2.5x10x24 I see actually fairly often (about 2 times a month) on SH & AR15. They run typically $1400-1800 in MOAR, Velocity, NF-1, FC-2, MILDOT ret flavors etc. March has a 1x10 that looks pretty sweet & I have not been able to put one through it's paces as of yet as does IOR Val. Would like to. If I had to patrol MOUT or similar Urban & open areas w/ just one weapon all day for long periods that was Jocked up, the SCAR 17s would be one of my choices. Certainly lighter than a FAL or LMT MWS. .308 Ammo weighs more, but better penetration for MOUT type stuff (structures, intermediate barriers, concealment etc), better 1st hit lethality percentage so I shoot less ammo ;-/. Not everyone can hump a jocked up 762x51. Some people prefer 5.56. Just some random thoughts to ponder, so as always YMMV.
The optics to support that type of operation normally do a much better job at supporting the distance work but not the reflexive shooting. Since IMO the mk17 is at an ergonomic disadvantage in CQC work, a variable power optic has to do a phenomenal job at CQC ranges, to not leave the mk17 in the truck.
The three above I have found do a good job, with the RAZOR the budget item and the mk8 my choice regardless of cost.
If nightforce is willing to send me a copy I'd sure put it through the paces :) !!!
ETA: Leupy 3.5x10x40 or 2.5x8x36 will also fit the bill.
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e225/teehee321/Mobile%20Uploads/seals33_s630x419_zpsa9ace901.jpg (http://s40.photobucket.com/user/teehee321/media/Mobile%20Uploads/seals33_s630x419_zpsa9ace901.jpg.html)
True. The SCAR 17 is more of a battle rifle than a Recce style rifle. Unless it is a MK20 the 17 is better suited in the role of a heavier caliber general purpose rifle. I say put an Aimpoint M4 2MOA Reticle on a 17 and call it good for most applications.
At first, I was going to put a variable power optic on my new SCAR, but I took your advice and transfered my Comp M4 from my 16S and put it on my brand new 17S. I've got a FTS 3X magnifiers that I can add if I ever feel the need for more target discrimination. I'll get a T1 for the 16S. The idea is to take full advantage of the SCAR's light weight profile. I've got other .308's that can serve SDM, rapid precision, and long-range precision roles.
VooDoo
I could write a book responding to your post. BLUF: I agree with your post.
I also want to take a good look at that march 1x10. More than that, I do some consulting for Vortex and I have addressed multiple times the need for an optic to fit this bill. Back in 2011 or so there was a bid out by the J8 for the Mk 17 optic. I consulted for another company at the time the did not take my advice and they did not win the bid (that's a good story BTW). Having used this gun in multiple capacities, while I might not be the end all be all SME, I know what she needs.
If things go well and considering Vortex seems to have it's head firmly screwed on, I hope that by this time next year everyone will be ditching Elcan's and NF and slapping a vortex on there.
Environments drive the situations that drive tactics which should drive procurement, not buying kit and swagging it to make it work. The current crop of optics fail IMO to fully take advantage of the MK17's capacities, considering it's usefulness across a very broad spectrum of environments. Considering the Mk.17 is not even a fully developed system IMO. That once fully refined, I think the SCAR could be the go to gun of the early 21st century. But it faces serious headwinds (some from FN and own brethren).
The optics to take advantage of this wide capability of the Mk.17 are going to have be as flexible across the entire same spectrum of environments. They will need to be able to support the functions of an ever expanding scope of capability from that platform. IMO this is going to require a change in some of the features, look to my Mk. 17 employment strategy as the focus.
oh and Voodoo PM inbound
I currently have a Scar-17 (with OEM and Handl lowers), Colt 901, two DSA 18" Para's, and several Springfield Armory SAR-48's.
I'm selling the FAL's and keeping the 901 and Scar. My reasoning? The Scar is very lightweight for a 7.62Nato semi-auto and is well thought out (I'm in the "likes" the charging handle crowd). My only compliant to date is getting the gas piston out is a pain. The only way I know to do it is to drive it out from the rear of the receiver with a cleaning rod.
REGARDING OPTICS
I currently have a couple of scopes for the Scar: US Optics SN4 in a LaRue OBR mount and a ACOG TA11-H. I'm going to sell the SN4, only because I also have a TA11-H on my Scar-16. There seems to be a lot of chatter about the Scar-H breaking optics. Hence the SN4 and ACOG. I contacted Trijicon before buying the ACOG and was assured they are not seeing a lot of Scar-H damaged ACOG's being returned for repair. Therefore, I bought one and have been very pleased with it. I do prefer the variable power of the SN4 (I have a TR24G on my 6920 and really like it too), but having a "cheap to shoot" 5.56 version of the Heavy seemed like a good idea and USO no longer makes SN4's so I had to go the ACOG route. Both have lifetime warranties.
FN charges too much for a gun mostly made from plastic and aluminum. However, I (obviously) felt the benefits were strong enough to warrant "over spending" one in 5.56 and 7.62.
SIDE NOTE: I'm keeping the 901 because I have 29 years of experience with AR's (built my first in 1984 and bought my first "factory assembled" that same year). I like the 901, but it is a HEAVY pig.
I would like to try this guys optics setup on my Scar 17s, seen at the beginning of the link below. Instead of using the Trijicon RMR for the back-up, I think I would use the EOtech MRDS ( shown on page 3 of link) either piggybacked on the scope tube as he does or maybe mount it off the top of the front ring. One feature about the EOtech MRDS sight is, I believe the battery is installed from the top vs the Trijicon bottom install. For my primary optic, I plan on using the Nightforce 2.5-10x42, probably with the MOAR reticle. It does not appear that the back-up MRDS sets up to high in his setup. It seems that about all of the 1-8 or 1-10x scopes have overly tight eyeboxes on their top end, right where I will be using it most, so they are a no go, for me. I think I would also prefer to use some type of MRDS as a back-up, rather than dialing down to 1X, as I believe it would be quicker.
http://fnforum.net/forums/fn-scar-17s/52874-upgraded-my-scar-17-a.html
Failure2Stop
12-18-13, 12:11
Despite what lots of folks think, a piggybacked MRDS on top of a mid-range variable on top of a already high LOS over bore firearm like the SCAR is not a suitable solution for CQB application, nor is it the reason that most users are putting the MRDS on the affair.
For aiming solutions I would lean toward a set of offset irons.
I can't imagine the shoulder weld or "cheek hold over" required to acquire a MRDS on top of an optic mounting on a Scar (or similar). I already have the adjustable cheek piece in the "up" position on my two Scar's just to get a decent weld for use with a TA11 in a TA51 mount. I'm switching to a LaRue mount and have heard it raises the distance over bore axis even more!
If CQB distances AND 100+ yards are desired out of the same rifle/optic I can't imagine considering anything other than a 1-4 or 1-6 or 1-8 (with an illuminated reticle). Piggyback solutions don't appeal to me at all.
shootinmedic
12-20-13, 23:55
Despite what lots of folks think, a piggybacked MRDS on top of a mid-range variable on top of a already high LOS over bore firearm like the SCAR is not a suitable solution for CQB application, nor is it the reason that most users are putting the MRDS on the affair.
For aiming solutions I would lean toward a set of offset irons.
What about the LaRue, TNVC, and Gear Sector offset mounts for a T1 that have the same overall height as a regular RDS or magnified optic mount with less angle of cant to use?
Had a Scar 17 for a while ran it with the leatherwood CMR hi lux and a larue mount. It could hit steel quite easy at 547 meters and shot a few deer with it.
Pros-
easy to break down and clean
lightweight
accurate for a DMR
ergonomic
handles very nice as far as recoil -
cons-
$$$
parts replacement $$$
weak stocks (plenty of recorded breaks overseas)
hard on optics
upper receiver wear
lighter barrel
does not use magpul mags $$$ ( I trade a Handle receiver they suck and are out of spec)
better trigger is $$$$$
sold it and im saving for a larue, or sr25
my .02
What about the LaRue, TNVC, and Gear Sector offset mounts for a T1 that have the same overall height as a regular RDS or magnified optic mount with less angle of cant to use?
I think that's generally accepted as a valid COA, however I personally prefer the simplicity of offset irons and the ability to use them even when an optic has fogged over due to changes in temperature, fog, or other obscurations that would also affect an offset RDS.
YMMV
Just seen this - http://www.defensenews.com/article/20131220/DEFREG01/312200020/Lithuania-Picks-New-Assault-Rifle-Its-Land-Forces
Just seen this - http://www.defensenews.com/article/20131220/DEFREG01/312200020/Lithuania-Picks-New-Assault-Rifle-Its-Land-Forces
Whoa, from G3s to SCARs! Their gonna think that they died and gone to Heaven.
Had a Scar 17 for a while....
does not use magpul mags $$$ ( I trade a Handle receiver they suck and are out of spec)
I got back form my last little bit of military tourism, you know hot places, great food, and lots of women. But before I left, I and a few other guys like me helped handl defense get their program submitted. Initially there was a solid 5-10% of the first run of lowers (200) that were not properly indexed to the CNC lathes. Figured out the stoner working in the shop (pot is legal in WA) indexed to the lower to the bottom instead of the top. Handl says they replaced (and will replace) every single one of them. You got rid of yours just a bit too soon.
I think that's generally accepted as a valid COA, however I personally prefer the simplicity of offset irons and the ability to use them even when an optic has fogged over due to changes in temperature, fog, or other obscurations that would also affect an offset RDS.
YMMV
remember when I told you I was working with vortex, this specific issue (having to use offsets) is one of the things being worked on. I like the a RDS or irons as an offset, I do not like a T1, I like a bit more of the J point.
VooDoo6Actual
12-27-13, 09:42
remember when I told you I was working with vortex, this specific issue (having to use offsets) is one of the things being worked on. I like the a RDS or irons as an offset, I do not like a T1, I like a bit more of the J point.
B.L.U.F., I agree.
Not ALL variable optics are HLOS. That is why many people like NF / Vortex will the small obj. size. The weight vs. form factor vs. cons makes it viable. It allows the TP to get the scope close to the bore & w/ RDS it is still lower than ACOG ECOS / RMR et al. Keeps head down & KIT doesn't get caught up w/ as much frequency. That is precisely why we prefer the 24 / 27 mm obj. I have not had issues w/ any LL engagements in those dark places either. Which is why I will not even think of using a 42mm obj. The Bell mandates a taller profile. Mounting options also don't dictate on top or piggyback either. I measured most of them & they are all well more than .75+" below ACOG ECOS / RMR et al. I tend to disagree w/ comments regarding w/ BUIS in most LL situations (it is a problem acquiring a decent sight picture in LL especially in an exigent circumstance) whether it's inclement of weather / smoke or otherwise. I think you have a good idea worth developing & look forward to seeing it's final iteration. It makes sense since many are just Ad Hoc-ing that same config already & there are several units using them just not at liberty to discuss.
remember when I told you I was working with vortex, this specific issue (having to use offsets) is one of the things being worked on. I like the a RDS or irons as an offset, I do not like a T1, I like a bit more of the J point.
Yeah I recall. Honestly I'm just gonna wait out the year and shoot with what I've got.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.