View Full Version : SCAR "short handguard"
wild_wild_wes
10-16-10, 00:43
Some people are finding the SCAR "handguard" (the reciever from the mag well to the has block) to be too short for their liking. How long is it, in inches?
It is approx. the same as a carbine length handguard.
Here ya go. :)
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_HgXXJgFU9ng/TLueP4mviFI/AAAAAAAAA5s/rJaWtK1HW3E/s400/IMG_6337.JPG
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_HgXXJgFU9ng/TLuePZJIKAI/AAAAAAAAA5o/oMSEY1_5psk/s400/IMG_6335.JPG
wild_wild_wes
10-17-10, 21:44
8.0"?
It's actually closer to 7 inches to the take down pin and about 8 inches to the front of the magazine well.. The tape measure is hooked onto the front of the side rail. Hopefully this picture shows it better.
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_HgXXJgFU9ng/TLvAck-8cgI/AAAAAAAAA58/siAMb8dJZbE/s800/IMG_6338.JPG
Here is a link to the album where you can look at bigger versions of these pictures.
Link (http://picasaweb.google.com/Deoje362/GunStuff?feat=directlink)
wild_wild_wes
10-18-10, 21:35
Thanks for the pics and info, Deoje! I suppose the SCAR-17 must be a similar length.
My local gunstore just got in the SCAR 17. So I put it right next to a 16 and The 17 is just a little bit longer. Alas I did not measure. Maybe 2 inches longer?
IPSC_GUY
SIERRA II ALPHA
wild_wild_wes
10-19-10, 20:44
In another thread I was informed the SCAR 16 and 17 have the same lower rail length- 7".
justin_247
10-20-10, 09:17
Here ya go. :)
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_HgXXJgFU9ng/TLueP4mviFI/AAAAAAAAA5s/rJaWtK1HW3E/s400/IMG_6337.JPG
http://lh5.ggpht.com/_HgXXJgFU9ng/TLuePZJIKAI/AAAAAAAAA5o/oMSEY1_5psk/s400/IMG_6335.JPG
This looks like a good way to burn the crap out of your fingers.
RAM Engineer
10-20-10, 19:31
http://www.aimsurplus.com/product.aspx?item=XBTscar2
A new option.
http://www.aimsurplus.com/product.aspx?item=XBTscar2
A new option.
Yeah I got that email today too. Gonna hold out for the PWS one
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150265128945456&set=a.137133175455.228672.137124470455
RAM Engineer
10-20-10, 21:14
Yeah I got that email today too. Gonna hold out for the PWS one
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150265128945456&set=a.137133175455.228672.137124470455
Me too. Like I said, it's just another option. If someone SBR'd their SCAR 16S to 10.5", then the one at AIM might be a good option. If they are like me and keeping it 16", PWS seems to be the way to go.
diving dave
10-21-10, 03:12
Yeah!!Finally fixing one of my very few complaints on the scar. The other being the annoying A2 style grip, but thats an easy fix. I like the looks of the PWS version.
http://www.aimsurplus.com/product.aspx?item=XBTscar2
A new option.
That is an awesome product.
I'd love to see a 4" version as well.
justin_247
10-21-10, 13:16
Yeah I got that email today too. Gonna hold out for the PWS one
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150265128945456&set=a.137133175455.228672.137124470455
ACR... bow down! That is sweet.
It is approx. the same as a carbine length handguard.
Which oddly enough, many people are finding too short.
I'm wondering if they designed it too short because the VFG and Magwell gripping methods were most popular when it was designed?
RAM Engineer
10-21-10, 16:36
I'm wondering if they designed it too short because the VFG and Magwell gripping methods were most popular when it was designed?
No, they designed it that short because it was supposed to be able to take a 10.5", 14", & 18" barrel. They went with the longest length that would accomodate the shortest barrel option.
The 16" SCAR 16S is a spin off from the military Mk16. The military requirements drove the design. It seems odd now that the civilian gun comes with a 16" barrel, but that's not what drove the design.
shittercrewchief
10-21-10, 23:19
Also remember that while the lower rail on the 16s and 17s are the same length. The 17s upper is longer. With 41 t-marks instead of 38 on the 16s. The upper rail on my 17s when compared to my mid length omega railed ar15 is two more rail spaces longer.
Hence why the 17s feels perfectly fine to me.
Just my observations.
also good thread comparing 16s and 17s side by side.
http://fnforum.net/fn-scar-17s-compared-to-fn-scar-16s-t22284.html
Which oddly enough, many people are finding too short.
Who are these people? I'm a big guy and I don't find my carbine length hand guards too short.
wild_wild_wes
10-22-10, 00:35
I'm wondering if they designed it too short because the VFG and Magwell gripping methods were most popular when it was designed?
Just speculation on my part, but what about gas port placement, carried over as an M4 legacy? A 7" "handguard" makes me suspicious....
Belmont31R
10-22-10, 01:53
Who are these people? I'm a big guy and I don't find my carbine length hand guards too short.
A lot of people have figured out you have better control over the gun with a more forward grip, and that means you need a grip longer than 7" to accomplish that.
This is one big reason I have not even seriously considered buying a SCAR because I could not grip the gun in a method that gives me the most control and ability for faster more accurate follow up shots.
Just speculation on my part, but what about gas port placement, carried over as an M4 legacy? A 7" "handguard" makes me suspicious....
As RAM Engineer mentioned, the rail design stems from several things. One was barrel commonality; it had to work with 10, 14, and 18" barrels. Because these barrels were removable, they wanted to keep the sighting system attached to the barrel so that minimal re-zeroing was needed after a barrel swap. Lastly, they had to meet the SOCOM/Crane weight requirement (which escapes my memory at the moment).
Stephen
I think that most people would prefer a longer rail on the SCAR. I think that FN should offer it as an option. Remove the flip up sight ( as per the MK 20 SSR ) and offer a 9'' and 12'' long chassis.
That being said , we have a hell of a lot of M4's out there with 7'' rails that are doing just fine.
The SCAR's shorter rail saves weight and with a vertical foregrip works just fine.
I personally cant get comfortable with the hand positioned all of the way at the end of the rail with my elbow sticking out. I prefer the foregrip.
militarymoron
10-22-10, 09:37
i want a longer rail on the SCAR for better light/switch mounting options. i typically like to actuate a light with my support thumb vs a pressure switch, but the short handguard on the SCAR doesn't allow that kind of setup.
There's a little info on the new PWS rail extension here in this thread:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=64127
Also, I saw a rail extension from another company over on Aim Surplus' website. I can't find the darned thing now, though. They must be sold out...
http://www.aimsurplus.com/product.aspx?item=XBTscar2
shittercrewchief
10-22-10, 15:53
Just purchased one of these: http://promotedpawn.com/products/25
along with the side rails from aim surplus.
My plan is to run a x300 at 12 o-clock with a troy flip up right behind it.
militarymoron
10-22-10, 15:53
i thought of getting the AIM 2" extension when it came out early last week (i think), but decided to hold out for a longer version (4" is what i'd like).
RAM Engineer
10-22-10, 17:26
Just purchased one of these: http://promotedpawn.com/products/25
along with the side rails from aim surplus.
My plan is to run a x300 at 12 o-clock with a troy flip up right behind it.
Looks like that top rail will hinder the barrel's ability to free float.
http://www.aimsurplus.com/product.aspx?item=XBTscar2
Thanks!
A lot of people have figured out you have better control over the gun with a more forward grip, and that means you need a grip longer than 7" to accomplish that.
This is one big reason I have not even seriously considered buying a SCAR because I could not grip the gun in a method that gives me the most control and ability for faster more accurate follow up shots.
I'm just one guy with very little experience. I was honestly shocked at how well I adapted to the short hand guard on my M4, maybe I haven't pushed it enough to really see a flaw yet.
shittercrewchief
11-14-10, 20:37
The PWS rail is now for sale on their website in case you have not seen it.
i thought of getting the AIM 2" extension when it came out early last week (i think), but decided to hold out for a longer version (4" is what i'd like).
Do you know if 4" version is in works, or was it a guess?
militarymoron
11-15-10, 10:42
Do you know if 4" version is in works, or was it a guess?
it was a 'desire'. i don't know what they have in the works. since they haven't said anything about it, i went ahead and just ordered the PWS one. it's backordered already though.
Thanks. Please let us know how it works. I have the same issues with light placement, and had to resort to cable switches which I don't like.
PWS unit looks like right length, although I don't know about utility of top rail.
From the pictures it looks like the rail blocks the front sight from folding. I hope that isn't the case, does anyone know?
militarymoron
11-15-10, 14:16
From the pictures it looks like the rail blocks the front sight from folding. I hope that isn't the case, does anyone know?
the front rail is lower, so i'm thinking it'll clear the folded front sight. i don't think they'd have designed it so it prevents the front sight from folding. they should have posted a pic with the front sight folded, as i'm sure that every customer has that same question.
Just got off the phone with PWS. The guy I spoke with said the rail extension doesn't interfere with the function of the front sight or the rail's ability to free-float.
The front sight, when folded, will cover approximately 1/4" or so of the extension rail. The top rail is on another plane, as MM pointed out above.
militarymoron
11-15-10, 16:28
thanks for confirming that.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.