So, would you consider the SCAR 17 to be the modern "Uber 7.62"?

[3is]

And in what way (not being a smart ass, I'm really just curious) do you think our guys are carrying Mk17 ammo, that a bandolier or belt could carry more 30-06? I can provide examples of guys carrying 120rds (only a little over 7lbs) for the Mk17 and still remaining fairly "slick". That's not even mentioning backpacks with spare mags, vehicles, etc.

160 rounds each
Scar 17: 13.25 lbs (26.5 ounces for full mag x 8)
Garand: 10.62 lbs (5.31 lbs for 10 loaded en bloc clips x2)

but the argument isn't about garand vs scar 17. and i agree it's about if the scar 17 is as good as the garand was in its time. But I just don't think the scar is. I imagine it'll be some kind of bullpup if anything. Maybe this desert tech mdr in 308

[Walleye]

160 rounds each
Scar 17: 13.25 lbs (26.5 ounces for full mag x 8)
Garand: 10.62 lbs (5.31 lbs for 10 loaded en bloc clips x2)

but the argument isn't about garand vs scar 17. and i agree it's about if the scar 17 is as good as the garand was in its time. But I just don't think the scar is. I imagine it'll be some kind of bullpup if anything. Maybe this desert tech mdr in 308

Your numbers are a bit fudged up there...

160 rounds of 30-06 on M1 clips = 11.9 pounds
160 rounds of M80 ball in SCAR-H magazines = 12.96 pounds

Average weight of M1 = 10.5 pounds
SCAR-H Standard weight = 7.9 pounds

With the bare rifles alone plus 160 rounds of ammo, the M1 is about 2 pounds over the SCAR-H.

So as long as we're splitting hairs.

[SOW_0331]

We're just gonna have to agree to disagree on all of it at this point man. The ammo weight may be down, but the practicality of the Garand clips vs the modern 20rd mags is nowhere close.

Now a bullpup is about as impractical as it gets, so I suppose that's your thing

[ABNAK]

I think to compare the SCAR 17 to the Garand isn't quite an accurate comparison. Comparing the Garand to the M4 might be a little more pertinent. Why? The WWII Garand, in an era before "assault rifles" were COMMON (so rule out the MP-44) was the issue weapon for U.S. infantry. That would be the M4 today. Yeah, seems like an apples to oranges comparison but from an issue/use perspective it becomes more relevant. The SCAR 17 fills a "battle rifle" role in what is currently an "assault rifle" age. It is used as a supplementary weapon, if you will, as opposed to occupying a general issue/use role. Could it be a general issue weapon like the Garand was? Sure, but no first-world military these days fields a .30cal "battle rifle" as it's first-line issue weapon. So basically it is a moot point to compare the Garand/SCAR in regards to the role they occupy.

In a true "battle rifle" role? Hell, even the M14 outdid the Garand given the acceptance of a detachable 20rd magazine alone. That translates to an increased firepower advantage in a firefight. The M14/FAL/G3 all outperformed the Garand in a firefight role. The SCAR is a modern iteration of the battle rifle and as such utilizes polymers for reduced weight savings while still retaining the firepower advantage of a 20rd detachable mag. So yeah, I'd say it outdoes the Garand.

[Failure2Stop]

The Mk17 might not be my first choice, but it certainly would be well above my last choice.

[SOW_0331]

ABNAK,

I agree with all of your points. The SCAR isn't going away anytime soon. Neither is the M4. Having both as options with each filling it's role enhances our capability without limiting us to compromise. And I love my LMT MWS308, the SR25 cut and the barrels are definitely a great design and worth keeping around. But the SCAR as a battle rifle, absolutely.

The only guy I know who has been in hand to hand combat (not the same as CQB...actual hand to hand) was pretty good at handling himself without needing a 12lb club of a rifle. Google Cliff Woolridge.

What might kill the Mk17 is the reduction in force and the end of wars. Lessons learned the hard way will be forgotten by the RMFers who focus in things like the pleasing visual of uniformity, banning tattoos, and removing options for gunfighters who know what they want and need. Maybe...maybe the Garand will come back. Has that good snap and pop for the drill field, and isn't that the most important thing?

[ABNAK]

The Mk17 might not be my first choice, but it certainly would be well above my last choice.

Oh, I bet I could guess what your first choice would be!

[ABNAK]

Google Cliff Woolridge.

Holy crap! Not to derail my own thread but screw the Navy Cross....that is MoH shit if I've ever read it!

[Airman596]

It is probably the best of the factory options right now. It has been through more field and development testing that pretty much any other rifle other than the old-line battle rifles (G3, FAL). I think of it more as a replacement for the old battle rifles than a DMR rifle. Really, there aren't any real downsides other than cost (and none of the quality options are cheap).

I own a SCAR and, while I love it, there are some gripes I have with it. First, the stock sucks. The stock rattles and moves/flexes. Second, the sling attachment points are small and do not provide a lot of articulation. Many folks resort to using paracord, a large keyring, or Blue Force Hear Universal Wire Loops to mount a sling. Third, there is very little room in between the barrel extension body and the charging handle when its in the forward position. Fourth, there is very little room in between an optic and the charging handle when its in the rearward position. Fifth, the charging handle reciprocates.

I keep hearing about all the "field testing" the SCAR has been through, but I find it hard to believe this is the end result of all that "testing." Either the military or FNH did not listen to the folks giving them feedback. While I love my SCAR, I can't help but feel the design is in beta testing and I'm the beta tester.

[Airman596]

My IBA (armor) was about 40lbs by itself. Not to mention H2O, gear vest, helmet, bag, and weapon.
Ounces make pounds, pounds make pain.

essayons

Years later, my back, neck, and knees are paying for all that weight I had to carry around on deployments. Try to take care of your body as best you can.