Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 40 of 40

Thread: My review of the Handl Defense SCAR 25 lower for the SCAR 17 S

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Bourbon Country
    Posts
    366
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Well, with the Handl and the Cav lower already on the market, and the S.E.A.L. and HDD lowers being released soon, the market will likely be saturated. Which can only help those of us who don't want another type of 308 Magazine to support with lower prices due to competition. I don't see it as a bad thing.

    Rick

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    4,383
    Feedback Score
    16 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by BooneGA View Post
    Well, with the Handl and the Cav lower already on the market, and the S.E.A.L. and HDD lowers being released soon, the market will likely be saturated. Which can only help those of us who don't want another type of 308 Magazine to support with lower prices due to competition. I don't see it as a bad thing.
    Agreed, the more support / options the better.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    362
    Feedback Score
    0
    In any endeavor it is about who you are, where you are, when you are there. This post will be long and detailed, it has to be.

    When I met Alan Handl (about 18 months ago) the lower was several aluminum prototypes that had dimensions taken from 3D prints that were the test runs. I do not know the exact genesis of the concept (it had to be well along) but I can talk about what I have seen since I met him. I can talk about the direction of the overall project and what I see in the company. I can also talk about how others have adversely effected it.

    The issues with the SCAR platform were based in two things in my community, bias and reality. I found those who did not like the way the SCAR functioned or felt, then went out of their way to bash it. Then I found those who actually broke it or had issues with them in theater. It is hard, very hard to discount the first group of guys too. When guys who taught you what you know say "**** that hunk of shit", it makes you stop. I have seen parts break and the SCAR stump the Bravo's as to why it wasn't working right.

    So when I met Alan Handl it was not about the lower, it was about all the things the SCAR could be. I see the SCAR just like the M16 in 1964, immediately dismissed by large swaths of the military who are loyal to the previous system, and the gun nowhere near its potential. Alan Handl and his team were fully committed to unlocking the SCAR as a whole. They have a SCAR-H 7.62x39 kit, a SCAR-H 5.56 conversion kit, and a whole list of yet to be released parts.
    I helped them with collecting the data from a bunch of other guys in SF and NSW who had used the system, in order to focus the project towards those who actually need it. While not the comprehensive collection of the fielding, it was not sterilized and diluted as all military fielding reports are. Couple this with 4 SOF guys who all had been around the block feeding them with direct input, they got some pretty significant market focus.

    About a year ago, they had pretty much everything together and realized they could not support the whole program at once and decided in to do it in phases. The multi-phase program to improve the SCAR platform (mk.17/mk.20) was submitted to USSOCOM in March last year. It was initially warmly received, then things changed about the same time things went sideways on FNFourms. I cannot prove it but I suspect they are linked.

    I did not see any of the complaints people over there complained about. I have seen Handl lowers tested to the Crane standards, I have seen them hold 500lbs while suspended without deforming. I have seen them run through 1000 rounds as fast as possible without a single hiccup in function. They work, if assembled properly, and installed properly, they work.
    There was an insane level of undermining going on over at FNfourms at the exact same time it was being looked at in Tampa. There were several "broken" lowers sent back that never touched a gun. Every returned lower was taken and installed on a gun and tested. It is how they found out it about a production error on about 20-30 of the lowers. Improper index (I do not know what that means BTW)

    I want you to stop and think about this, of the 5000 or so lowers that have been sent out, 20-30 have been returned. A .005% percent return rate on a new conceptual item. These all came from the first run BTW, the same guys who make these lowers make parts for the F-22, F-35, and most other commercial aircraft. So those who say it is not made well are simply part of the .005% or full of shit. I lean towards the latter, plus they have a return policy that should cover any of that small percentage.

    Needless to say FNFourms kicked Handl Defense out when they confronted the ownership with evidence of what was happening. I saw the e-mail from the FBI's National Intellectual Property Right Center that said "that Handl Defense's project was rev-engineered" and they were sending it up the chain. The ownership of the site (forum foundry) was shown this and Handl was sent packing.

    So yea fnfourms is shady, yep, one dude over there is using it as cover and concealment, yes they are screwing anyone else who is not part of their game. I think that is painfully obvious. I think this may have effected Handl Defense and the purchase of its product, but that is for attorneys to decide.
    It does not affect my wallet, so I watch with interest as I would like to see the whole project adopted (not just the lower). I do not get paid by Handl (DOD is real funky about gifts and such) because if it did affect my income there would be dead bodies at the bottom of Lake Michigan. But I can understand why Handl is pissed off, they should be. I can understand why Chad is pissed off, you should have seen the way they treated him (I told him not go to FNForums).
    So I see it all coming down to this statement. The Handl lower concept works, they were swamped by initial production, coupled with R&D on the other phases, this must have caused lags in customer service, then it was attacked by its competitors/detractors, this effected its sales, and possibly its adoption by the military.

    I think (last time I talked to Alan Handl) they have shipped out somewhere north of 5000 lowers, and there are only 25000 or so civilian SCARs.
    It has not done too bad, but to answer you Rhino. I think there are a lot more Handl lowers out there on guns than I think. Not everyone makes purchase decisions based off of internet forums. I just found out 2 guys on my team have Handl lowers on their personal guns and I had no idea.
    I don’t see a lot of room for the other guys to make much headway on the lower as I agree with its limited application in the CIV market in current conditions, but considering there is so much more the gun needs, there is A LOT of room for improving the SCAR.

    But I hope this post puts a lot of the Handl questions to bed
    Last edited by Fox33; 02-14-14 at 00:47.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    221
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Squid View Post
    I'm curious, what kind of witness mark is left by pairing the Handl lower with the SCAR receiver? Might be good information for prospective EE buyers to know whether they're purchasing a used item or not.
    The rear "tang" (for lack of a better term) of my Handl lower wore through the anodizing where it mated with the rear of the SCAR upper. The lower fit TIGHT and made the rifle feel less sloppy. My lower worked 100%.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    27
    Feedback Score
    0
    I have seen this on a few of the lowers that have come off of guns. I think it is more pronounced on the FDE guns.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    362
    Feedback Score
    0
    I talked to Alan Handl again today. About some thing completely unrelated. After talking about his Mk. 17 / Mk. 20 improvement program. I discovered I was off on the number of lowers they have shipped out it is some where north of 3800.

    I am trying to be very careful about being 100% accurate on the comments I make about what they have going on

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    27
    Feedback Score
    0
    Fox ...good to see you PM about the bolt carrier inbound

  8. #38
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    362
    Feedback Score
    0
    okay cool

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    21
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    I have no vested interest in the success or failure of Handl Defense. However, The effort to improve the design issues experienced by end-users, and reducing the different types of magazines that a unit has to keep in inventory, (mag commonality with M110 etc...) is a force adder. I don't think judging this product based on how much it will save the civilian end-user in mag-dollars or perceived neat factor is as much importance as simplifying the logistics train for deployed unit(s). Also, I am as low speed as they come, but I have shot the Scar H and the latch mechanism feels "breakish" to me, I wouldn't give them to a bunch of PFC's and expect to have any come back unbroken. Think about how many foreign weapons introduced here with oe peculiar magazines that are redesigned (sometimes to the detriment of overall reliability) in order to better fit the "supply chain" for civilian markets.

    Fox33/Chadgvn if I am out of my lane, I apologize, I wanted to point out some other raisons d'etre for the Handl lower.
    Last edited by Intransigent; 04-09-14 at 11:51.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    N. Alabama
    Posts
    2,048
    Feedback Score
    8 (100%)
    Did these things ever hit the market?

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

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
  •