View Full Version : The rise and fall of the SCAR.
Kid does a good job of covering the rise and fall of the SCAR, with the US mil at least. I didn't know the reciprocating handle had been a demand of SOCOM:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wnb_aJuGELs
Early SCAR L the op rod track was too big, a 5.56 case or cartridge could get stuck there and cause a major jam. That problem was corrected and SCAR L's donated by Belgium seem to be performing pretty well in Ukraine.
Defaultmp3
09-09-23, 20:54
I didn't know the reciprocating handle had been a demand of SOCOM:According to an NSW guy who was extensively involved in the testing of the SCAR platform:
The original SCARs also had 0-45 and 0-90 throws for semi and full-auto, respectively. Until one of the component commands threw a fit over that feature, and insisted it be identical to the selector on an M-4, 0-90 & 0-180. The same component command also did not like the captured charging handle.
Said component command did NOT purchase any SCAR rifles upon USSOCOM’s adoption of the Mk17 after insisting on several design changes.
So not necessarily so much a demand of SOCOM, so much as a specific component of SOCOM.
. I didn't know the reciprocating handle had been a demand of SOCOM:
I think some of the requirements were specifically written to rule out an AR based improvement program. It was justification for a new platform.
I think some of the requirements were specifically written to rule out an AR based improvement program. It was justification for a new platform.
There were things in the M17 program like that, also.
The testers specifically hated the reciprocating charging handle.
I think what really killed the SCAR L was the budget drawdown in 2008-2011, SOCOM no longer allowed to spend like drunken sailors plus the SOPMOD Block II upgrades arriving.
I think what really killed the SCAR L was the budget drawdown in 2008-2011, SOCOM no longer allowed to spend like drunken sailors plus the SOPMOD Block II upgrades arriving.
As he says, the Block II improvements answered all of the perceived deficiencies with the M4 at the time. The SCAR L did not, and was not particularly well liked with the testers, who used it for a training cycle and a combat deployment. It didn’t seem to do anything that the M4 couldn’t. I think I remember it weighing more, too.
Outfitting a military with multiple weapons systems to maintain that basically fulfill nearly the same roles just isn't efficient.
Standardizing platforms makes more sense from a procurement, maintenance, logistics, and training/familiarization perspective.
As he says, the Block II improvements answered all of the perceived deficiencies with the M4 at the time. The SCAR L did not, and was not particularly well liked with the testers, who used it for a training cycle and a combat deployment. It didn’t seem to do anything that the M4 couldn’t. I think I remember it weighing more, too.
When I think of the SCAR I think of the H myself.
When I think of the SCAR I think of the H myself.
The H has lived on in SOF. Though I’m not sure what it does better than the SR25.
What the SCAR H does better than the SR25, half the price, full auto, folding stock and can use a 13" barrel. M110 was a heavy pig something like 19 lbs, Delta got M110K1's and I think maybe Marines got M110K1 uppers to use on their MK11 lowers, SEAL's, Air Force SOF and Rangers got SCAR H's and now Army DM's are getting HK's.
The testers specifically hated the reciprocating charging handle.
It was my smallest complaint about the SCAR, and honestly eliminated the need for a forward assist. The whole rifle was terribly front heavy, really big and clunky and not terribly accurate. Did almost NOTHING that existing AR platforms were already doing better, the ONLY thing it had over the AR was a side folding stock. It also didn't strike me as particularly durable. I know buffer tubes break on drop tests but everything about the SCAR felt vulnerable.
It's one of those rifles I wanted, finally got one, was greatly disappointed and sold it. Right up there with the HK MR556 and HK MR762.
Jeff Guerwich (I probably butchered his name) has a video about why it wasn't adopted. He was part of the test and eval of it. Very interesting.
https://youtu.be/Y5EP9G0p8es?si=KiA75ou8xp58dJ1J
On the civilian side I think it kind of failed because of the price. I actually really like the rifle. But Im not paying 3k dollars for one.
I wouldn't exactly call it a failure still being made and sold today. There are a lot more countries using it than those listed below, not sure how many though.
Belgian Armed Forces replacing the FN FNC as service rifle L, H, EGLM 13,827 2011-
Bosnia and Herzegovina L, L CQC 9,000+ 2012-
Chilean Marine Corps L, H 13,200 2013–
France Armée de terre H PR 2600 2019
Peruvian Army H 8,110 2013
Portuguese Army, as standard service rifle L, H, H (PR) 15,940 2019
What the SCAR H does better than the SR25, half the price, full auto, folding stock and can use a 13" barrel. M110 was a heavy pig something like 19 lbs, Delta got M110K1's and I think maybe Marines got M110K1 uppers to use on their MK11 lowers, SEAL's, Air Force SOF and Rangers got SCAR H's and now Army DM's are getting HK's.
When I said I don’t know what it does better, I really meant that, because I’m no sniper or DM. I do know that the SCAR H with a can is rather beefy, too.
MARSOC also has them.
Lord I HATE the SCAR. I literally hate the idea of having to shoot those things. The H is miserable to shoot with the recoil. The L is just stupid because you can just grab an M4 and have a way nicer carbine.
Strikes me that too many chefs were in the kitchen on this idiotic creation.
Lord I HATE the SCAR. I literally hate the idea of having to shoot those things. The H is miserable to shoot with the recoil. The L is just stupid because you can just grab an M4 and have a way nicer carbine.
Strikes me that too many chefs were in the kitchen on this idiotic creation.
“Oh, but it’s the softest recoiling 7.62 rifle ever produced.”
- Says those who have never pulled the trigger on one or have zero other points of reference.
I like my SCAR17 alright and will keep it, however: 1. It ain’t that accurate 2. It just about tore my left thumb off 3. Is very front heavy 4. IT RECOILS LIKE A BITCH. - Contrary to what you hear from all the Commie-Tube “experts.”
Oh, and I’m not recoil sensitive, but I’d much prefer to shoot my 458 SOCOM AR.
I find it interesting that some think the SCAR 17 has too much recoil or isn't accurate? I own 2 SCAR 16s, 1 SCAR 17 and a SCAR 20. My wife owns a SCAR 17. This is my personal thoughts with thousands of rounds through all. Who ever complained about the charging handle on an AK? Run it on the right side if you are worried about getting your thumb/stoppages. I do have mine on the left side and it is almost never an issue. I have had it cut my hand/thumb probably three or four times. Always from an odd shooting position. My wife shoots mostly a BCM ELW . She mostly hunts with her SCAR 17. In a three gun this summer she did get a good left hand thumb tear because she is used to an AR. My wife is 5'6" and 120lbs. This is by far and away the most mild recoiling .308 either of us has shot. We have or have owned/shot FALS/CETME/FN49/AR/ Bolt guns to compare. Both our guns with junk ammo are pretty close to 2MOA and with good stuff can get real close to an MOA. I have shot on paper side by side with a buddy of mine and his JP .308 AR and both shot identical group sizes. I have never papered an M110, but have shot steel. I have some DMR/Sniper experience in AO Topeka 05-06. The 17 would work great in that role. During those missions I packed an M24 and an M4. The SCAR 17 would have been nice as I feel that would have allowed me to pack only one rifle.The SCAR 17 with a suppressor does suck to pack. The addition of a suppressor turns a great handling rifle into a front heavy sucks to pack or shoot from any position but bi-pod prone. Since 2017 I have been using my SCAR 16 for matches. My rifle splits are better with a 16 than an AR of comparable weight. Now I have shot heavy ARs that can keep up, but it appears to me that if weight is equal then the SCAR 16 shines. That said if I had to pack one everyday again I would still most likely take an M4. The SCAR 16 is too heavy bare gun. Add a few things on the SCAR 16 rail and I think you would have quite the pig. My M4 in IZ by day 2 had all the wizbangs removed and was carried with just an optic and forward grip from then on out. Now to touch on the SCAR 20. Mine now has a folding stock as it works better to pack in a truck shooting prairie dogs. The 20 really disappointed me in the accuracy dept.Factory it shot no better than my 17 just was 10 feet long an weighted more. I have added an EC tuner brake and that seems to be the ticket along with the previously mentioned folding stock. The gun stays at an MOA or slightly less. When I pick up whatever SCAR my one gripe is the cheese grater rails. Parker Mountain Machine solves this with rail elinination panels and a lower MLok rail. The KDG rails are nice too. Sorry for the spelling and typos. I don't type much because I suck at it! :smile: With all this said I was just a National Gaurd dude not some high end operator. My wife and I have shot competitively for a little of ten years now.
Just my 2 pennies on the internet!
Defaultmp3
09-12-23, 14:01
Who ever complained about the charging handle on an AK? Run it on the right side if you are worried about getting your thumb/stoppages.The NSW tester I referenced earlier states:
The side charging handle is a design feature that just plain pisses me off. There is no need for it, yet there it remains. As for being a "self correcting" problem, well.......it is, for those who hit their hand on it once. But there is shit in the real world that doesn't exist on the range. Shooting from underneath a car flat out sucks with the SCAR. If the handle doesn't hit the ground, the car, or your gear, you probably aren't hitting your intended target either. I semi-solved the issue by cutting it in half, and stippling it up with a soldering iron. Still, there exists a SCAR with a captured charging handle.
Who ever complained about the charging handle on an AK? Run it on the right side if you are worried about getting your thumb/stoppages.
Rangers and SEALs complained about the SCAR L charging handle. It was a consistent complaint from the testers. Some just found it offputting, some complained of functional problems as seen above.
Interestingly, I’ve not heard this complaint about the AK for whatever reason.
I think the biggest issue with the SCAR charging handle is the location more than anything. It's not a big deal on the newer ones with the non reciprocating charging handles, but it's not good on the older ones that do reciprocate. Location is everything, which is why it's not really an issue on most all older design rifles that have reciprocating charging handles. As far as modern designs, the ARX has good placement on it's charging handle and the fact that it reciprocates is not really an issue.
“Oh, but it’s the softest recoiling 7.62 rifle ever produced.”
- Says those who have never pulled the trigger on one or have zero other points of reference.
I like my SCAR17 alright and will keep it, however: 1. It ain’t that accurate 2. It just about tore my left thumb off 3. Is very from heavy 4. IT RECOILS LIKE A BITCH. - Contrary to what you hear from all the Commie-Tube “experts.”
Oh, and I’m not recoil sensitive, but I’d much prefer to shoot my 458 SOCOM AR.
It’s the softest recoiling 7.62 rifle ever produced.
Point of reference: I own one, and have owned it for 12 years now. I also own an M1A, AR-10, DSA FAL, and PTR-91. The SCAR will outshoot any of them (possible exception of the M1A), weighs less, and has a far softer recoil than any besides the M1A as well.
People are allowed to like what they want, but posts like yours really make me wonder if there was a fundamental redesign after I bought mine because some people report radically different experiences from factors that shouldn't be subjective.
Well my point was, go stick the right side of your AK,AR,SCAR whatever next to an obsticle where it cant sh!t and see what happens. People put the charging handle on the left side because it feels nice, to include me. Yes I would like it to be like a FAL, but SOCOM (sp) made it the way it was. Since I purchased my first SCAR in 2010 I have shot them under cars, hrough barricades, inside of drainage pipes and with straps hanging all over me, ect. The charging handle on the left side is overblown. Kinda like destroys optics, hard recoil, not accurate, ect. I am not in total love with the SCAR and have noted I prolly wouldnt want to pack it over an M4 in combat. That is totally a wieght issue, but weight is what you deal with everyday in that environment. I will hold to the 17 is the best battle rifle on the market period. Hunt anything in North America, light weight, kills zombies fast and can work in the DMR role. With my 17 in close and fast stages I can keep up with .223 ARs and I don't even have a muzzel brake on it. Mag capacity gets me, but with decent stage planning can be worked with. Funny thing if you watched the video the Ranger says Pmags don't work in the 16. I shoot mostly 40 round pmags,Tula and mine runs great! Even when the feed lips on the 40 rounders crack, which happens, it works until a really hot day.Then I have had double feeds. Plus I only clean it maybe once a year. That being said my wife has been shooting her BCM since 2015 and this year was only its second cleaning. We shoot mostly Tula. Her rifle and my rifle have both been through three Legion matches at this point and several hard as hell matches. No malfunctions that were not nut behind the wheel issues, like ejection port against something.
Mine has the stock ?PWS? Muzzle device and was purchased new in 2014.
If they’re so soft recoiling why do they destroy optics?
Well if you reseach it what destroys optics, is not recoil. BB guns destroy optics. All this is internet research and I am no expert. But optics apparently don't take a forward impulse. I can see how the heavy bolt carrier/bolt combo slaming forward could create a forward impulse in a SCAR. I bet both carriers wieght about the same in the 16 and 17. Why doesnt the 16 "destroy optics"?
My wife keeps her PWS brake on hers and likes it. It does make a difference.
The reason SOCOM and cool kids still think the 17 is worth it? Cause it is.
!6 ain't bad. just too heavy.
Is the SCAR the weapon with the optic killer reputation?
Well my point was, go stick the right side of your AK,AR,SCAR whatever next to an obsticle where it cant sh!t and see what happens. People put the charging handle on the left side because it feels nice, to include me. Yes I would like it to be like a FAL, but SOCOM (sp) made it the way it was. Since I purchased my first SCAR in 2010 I have shot them under cars, hrough barricades, inside of drainage pipes and with straps hanging all over me, ect. The charging handle on the left side is overblown. Kinda like destroys optics, hard recoil, not accurate, ect. I am not in total love with the SCAR and have noted I prolly wouldnt want to pack it over an M4 in combat. That is totally a wieght issue, but weight is what you deal with everyday in that environment. I will hold to the 17 is the best battle rifle on the market period. Hunt anything in North America, light weight, kills zombies fast and can work in the DMR role. With my 17 in close and fast stages I can keep up with .223 ARs and I don't even have a muzzel brake on it. Mag capacity gets me, but with decent stage planning can be worked with. Funny thing if you watched the video the Ranger says Pmags don't work in the 16. I shoot mostly 40 round pmags,Tula and mine runs great! Even when the feed lips on the 40 rounders crack, which happens, it works until a really hot day.Then I have had double feeds. Plus I only clean it maybe once a year. That being said my wife has been shooting her BCM since 2015 and this year was only its second cleaning. We shoot mostly Tula. Her rifle and my rifle have both been through three Legion matches at this point and several hard as hell matches. No malfunctions that were not nut behind the wheel issues, like ejection port against something.
Well, with the right side charging handle model, anything that grabs the charging handle would likely cause a stovepipe type stoppage through ejection port interference. Probably why I’ve never heard anything negative about the AK (and have carried it for work/worked with dudes that did).
That doesn’t change that Rangers and SEALs rejected them.
Is the SCAR the weapon with the optic killer reputation?
It is.
The same component command also did not like the captured charging handle.
Said component command did NOT purchase any SCAR rifles upon USSOCOM’s adoption of the Mk17 after insisting on several design changes.[/I]
So not necessarily so much a demand of SOCOM, so much as a specific component of SOCOM.
It wasn't 1st Special Forces Group. The reciprocating charging handle was considered stupid. 5th Group broke stocks and selector switches.
Navy units were given the option (since they were the ones who stated it was a requirement) to use Blue Navy funds (instead of SOCOM) to buy it for all Blue units -- replacing the M4, M14, and Mark 11. Once put that way, they didn't want it.
It wasn't 1st Special Forces Group. The reciprocating charging handle was considered stupid. 5th Group broke stocks and selector switches.
Navy units were given the option (since they were the ones who stated it was a requirement) to use Blue Navy funds (instead of SOCOM) to buy it for all Blue units -- replacing the M4, M14, and Mark 11. Once put that way, they didn't want it.
Nail, head, hammer.
“Oh, but it’s the softest recoiling 7.62 rifle ever produced.”
- Says those who have never pulled the trigger on one or have zero other points of reference.
I like my SCAR17 alright and will keep it, however: 1. It ain’t that accurate 2. It just about tore my left thumb off 3. Is very front heavy 4. IT RECOILS LIKE A BITCH. - Contrary to what you hear from all the Commie-Tube “experts.”
Oh, and I’m not recoil sensitive, but I’d much prefer to shoot my 458 SOCOM AR.
IMO the G3 is still the softest shooting 7.62 semi. There is only one rifle I'd consistently take over a G3 and that would be a Knights SR-25 / Colt 901 variant.
FALs and M1A are probably tied for second place.
It’s the softest recoiling 7.62 rifle ever produced.
Point of reference: I own one, and have owned it for 12 years now. I also own an M1A, AR-10, DSA FAL, and PTR-91. The SCAR will outshoot any of them (possible exception of the M1A), weighs less, and has a far softer recoil than any besides the M1A as well.
People are allowed to like what they want, but posts like yours really make me wonder if there was a fundamental redesign after I bought mine because some people report radically different experiences from factors that shouldn't be subjective.
My SCAR sucked as well. I don't remember excessive recoil, but I remember being disappointed it wasn't any better than any other .308 I've ever shot. Mine also gave me shitty accuracy, could be from trying to shoulder a rifle with the ergos of a lego block, but it just wasn't impressive.
Maybe it would have gotten better over time as I got used to it, I think maybe the reason I shoot G3s as well as I do is because I've been shooting 91s since middle school.
IMO the G3 is still the softest shooting 7.62 semi. There is only one rifle I'd consistently take over a G3 and that would be a Knights SR-25 / Colt 901 variant.
FALs and M1A are probably tied for second place.
I don’t own a proper G3 but my HK91 is a super soft shooter. Even with the A3 stick affixed which it is most of the time on mine.
Never shot an SR25 but the AR platforms are generally soft in recoil.
Well if you reseach it what destroys optics, is not recoil. BB guns destroy optics. All this is internet research and I am no expert. But optics apparently don't take a forward impulse. I can see how the heavy bolt carrier/bolt combo slaming forward could create a forward impulse in a SCAR. I bet both carriers wieght about the same in the 16 and 17. Why doesnt the 16 "destroy optics"?
My wife keeps her PWS brake on hers and likes it. It does make a difference.
The reason SOCOM and cool kids still think the 17 is worth it? Cause it is.
!6 ain't bad. just too heavy.
….and I’m no physicist, but every action has an equal and opposite reaction. So if it’s going forward, it is because it went backward at a significant clip.
…..and I blame that enormous Bolt group mass for the shitty recoil impulse of the rifle…..that and the light back end.
BUT, it ain’t like the SCAR is alone in that aspect as my TAR21 has a very similar Bolt group. It’s recoil is more than an AR, but wholly tolerable probably because 556 shoots basically like a .22.
Regardless of all of this, I won’t be selling my SCAR.
SCAR H vs HK, FAL, M1A as a MSR wins as lighter, optic and accessory mounting, ergonomics. I like all the legacy MBR's for what they are and yes they can be updated but all suffer from weight and ergo problems and either 60 year old or civilian produced parts.
SCAR H vs SR25 M110K1, ECC, ACC tough call, both combat proven, both expensive, one is literally twice the price of the other.
SCAR H vs Colt 901 no experience no opinion.
SCAR H vs HK 417 on experience no opinion, one is unobtainable for civies.
SCAR H vs other AR10's - AR10's suffer from not having a TDP like M16's brand specific parts class all these as hobby guns IMO.
SCAR H Robinson Armament XCR great rifle but not in production or saw any wide spread use. Rumor is that but for the lack of blank adapters the XCR might have won the SCAR competition.
Optics killer, recoil pulse and possible receiver flex, good optics and mount can mitigate.
Accuracy - suggest you look up the 9 hole review where they discuss the accuracy issues they had prior to discovering that proper torquing of barrel retaining screws cured that problem.
It wasn't 1st Special Forces Group. The reciprocating charging handle was considered stupid. 5th Group broke stocks and selector switches.
Navy units were given the option (since they were the ones who stated it was a requirement) to use Blue Navy funds (instead of SOCOM) to buy it for all Blue units -- replacing the M4, M14, and Mark 11. Once put that way, they didn't want it.
Navy jokes aside, why did they specifically make it a requirement?
Navy jokes aside, why did they specifically make it a requirement?
Because the M14 had one. Seriously who knows likely only some retired sailor still laughing in his beer about how he stuck SCAR users with it.
Defaultmp3
09-13-23, 09:40
Why doesnt the 16 "destroy optics"?A USASOC tester once wrote that the SCAR-L is actually harder on electro-optics than the SCAR-H, due to it having a sharper impulse on recoil. I suspect that it's not as well documented simply because most folks are putting RDSes on the 16S, instead of the more fragile magnified optics that we see more on the 17S, so it's not as noticeable.
Never noticed heavy recoil out of my 17. Less recoil than my .450 Bushmaster
Haven't destroyed any of the lpvo's I've put on it and none of them have been high dollar
It's as accurate as my 3 Daniel Defense 5.56 rifles.
I must have got the best one.
MadAngler1
09-15-23, 15:39
This was already posted, but I am going to post it again. Everyone should watch this about the SCAR Mk 16:
https://youtu.be/Y5EP9G0p8es?si=IKPy_G-u4vRAsn0h
It sounds like had actual end users had input from the get go, and if FN was allowed to make changes, it would have been adopted.
I own a Belgian made 2012 SCAR 17 and a new 2022 SCAR 16 NRCH. I have had zero issues with either platform thus far, minus the lack of a shoulder on the end of the 17’s barrel when mounting Surefire SOCOM flash hiders.
SCAR 17: 3k rounds now (not more since I work 60-70 hrs a week). Zero malfunctions. With 168 gr match ammo it is a 1.5 MOA battle rifle. I find it softer shooting with an appropriate grip and stance than any G3 clone, FAL, M1A that I have tried. The LMT MWS has more recoil, whereas my DD5V3 and a friend’s KAC that I have tried has less. I shoot almost exclusively suppressed with a Surefire SOCOM 762 (and now I also have a SOCOM RC2 762K). Zero issues. The two optics I have used are a Kahles 1-6 in an ADM delta mount and now a VCOG 1-8. Zero issues.
Things I don’t like about my 17: need to add everything out of the box (handguard, Geissele trigger etc). FN should have installed a better rubber back plate or buffer system to reduce the impulse and shock on the receiver when the large bolt carrier cycles. The lack of a barrel shoulder can cause grief when installing certain muzzle devices, and I bought mine before the KBA ring came out unfortunately . Last, FN failed to develop and support the platform early on and refuses to warrant their products when shooting suppressed.
SCAR 16 NRCH: So far so good. No issues; up to 1000 rounds mostly suppressed with a Sandman K. Have not done accuracy testing yet on it.
Anyone who runs suppressed with appreciate the superior heat mitigation of any piston driven system over DI. It’s the entire reason I bought the NRCH 16 last year. I think FN could have updated the stock, offered caliber conversions, an AK mag lower :cool: , and a few other things early 2010s. This platform would have gone more places. I am hoping for the LICC project to reach fruition in 5.56 NATO etc
Great video. I was curious in the first video when the Rangers had cases get into the receiver. I am shooting Pmags with cracked lips and on hot days have had double feeds, but never that bad. That would be a thing. Putting the NRCH on it would be a great improvement. I just have not had enough trouble to justify the $800 expense. Just to claify what I posted earlier, my 17 really is about a 1.5 MOA gun with good ammo. Thing is my 20 was about the same before the EC tuner brake. That was a real disappointment!
If you do a goggle search of the interwebz today for the SCAR in USSOCOM service you may identify who wanted it bad enough to use their own parent service's money to buy or keep them.
My money is you'll see more M4 variants than anything else.
Mother Army will provide every Special Forces and Ranger Soldier an XM7 if adopted. My guess is you'll see a repeat of what you would find in an Australian SAS Regiment Squadron arms room -- pristine AUGs in the rack, and modified camouflaged go-to-war M4 variants in the field.
European Union NATO armies can buy whatever they want without import tariffs or taxes -- including their own antique designs.
They're choosing AR clones -- including Colt Canada and Knights', some LMTs, but mostly HK 416s and 417s.
If you do a goggle search of the interwebz today for the SCAR in USSOCOM service you may identify who wanted it bad enough to use their own parent service's money to buy or keep them.
My money is you'll see more M4 variants than anything else.
Mother Army will provide every Special Forces and Ranger Soldier an XM7 if adopted. My guess is you'll see a repeat of what you would find in an Australian SAS Regiment Squadron arms room -- pristine AUGs in the rack, and modified camouflaged go-to-war M4 variants in the field.
European Union NATO armies can buy whatever they want without import tariffs or taxes -- including their own antique designs.
They're choosing AR clones -- including Colt Canada and Knights', some LMTs, but mostly HK 416s and 417s.
Nothing does it all better than a good AR variant.
If you do a goggle search of the interwebz today for the SCAR in USSOCOM service you may identify who wanted it bad enough to use their own parent service's money to buy or keep them.
My money is you'll see more M4 variants than anything else.
Mother Army will provide every Special Forces and Ranger Soldier an XM7 if adopted. My guess is you'll see a repeat of what you would find in an Australian SAS Regiment Squadron arms room -- pristine AUGs in the rack, and modified camouflaged go-to-war M4 variants in the field.
European Union NATO armies can buy whatever they want without import tariffs or taxes -- including their own antique designs.
They're choosing AR clones -- including Colt Canada and Knights', some LMTs, but mostly HK 416s and 417s.
Those Australian F-88s did not have a good service record, the CQ was pretty bad.
MadAngler1
09-18-23, 05:32
If you do a goggle search of the interwebz today for the SCAR in USSOCOM service you may identify who wanted it bad enough to use their own parent service's money to buy or keep them.
My money is you'll see more M4 variants than anything else.
Mother Army will provide every Special Forces and Ranger Soldier an XM7 if adopted. My guess is you'll see a repeat of what you would find in an Australian SAS Regiment Squadron arms room -- pristine AUGs in the rack, and modified camouflaged go-to-war M4 variants in the field.
European Union NATO armies can buy whatever they want without import tariffs or taxes -- including their own antique designs.
They're choosing AR clones -- including Colt Canada and Knights', some LMTs, but mostly HK 416s and 417s.
Agree
This lowly civilian would also choose an HK 416 A5/A7 variant if HK sold such a product stateside. LMT’s piston gun doesn’t come close. FN gives us the real deal at least, not the MR556. :bad:
I can run my SCAR 16 as fast as my two go to DI ARs. Only difference is the charging handle position. Everything else is the same.
Agree
This lowly civilian would also choose an HK 416 A5/A7 variant if HK sold such a product stateside. LMT’s piston gun doesn’t come close. FN gives us the real deal at least, not the MR556. :bad:
I can run my SCAR 16 as fast as my two go to DI ARs. Only difference is the charging handle position. Everything else is the same.
Genuine question. In your experience, and opinion, what do you think the SCAR 16 brings to the table over and above the AR?
MadAngler1
09-18-23, 20:42
Genuine question. In your experience, and opinion, what do you think the SCAR 16 brings to the table over and above the AR?
In 2023, my SCAR 16 NRCH does a few things better than my similarly set up 16" DI AR:
1. A cooler system and handguard when running suppressed with a normal baffled can (Surefire or Sandman K)
2. Less carbon build up in the receiver when running suppressed than a DI rifle
3. Larger more robust bolt.....check out the Battlefield Vegas thread on ARFCOM. These rifles can run for tens of thousands of rounds without breaking parts.
The most important thing for me is running suppressed. A piston gun has advantages over a DI system using traditional baffled cans. Now, I have not tried a FLow 556K yet. Perhaps that will tilt the favor back to a normal DI rifle.
Of course, if you don't run suppressed, there is no advantage in my opinion besides the fewer stoppages the original Army tests showed pre-2010 on the SCAR and XM8 platforms over the M4. Not sure if that would still hold true today with the current generation of mid-length ARs on the market.
Had a SCAR 16S maybe a decade+ ago early in its release. I pre-paid for it at $2700ish I think. Showed up with a pretty bad anodizing job, and the shades of FDE were all over the place. Presentation aside, the charging handle was annoying to work around, the hand guard/rail was way short, and it took awhile for factory SBR barrels to appear at $1000 a pop. I ultimately sold it. Nothing about the SCAR demands the current $3000+ asking price.
In 2010 it had plenty of hype and press and novelty. In 2023 it's a non-starter for me.
SCAR 16 as a M4 replacement was a non starter, especially as the SOPMOD Blocks started showing up but the SCAR 17 as a replacement of the M14 makes sense. Also keep in mind that the M110 at the time had a bare bones weight of 13.8 lbs and I suspect the specs were written to keep AR's out (folding stocks, swapable barrels etc.).
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.