SCAR 17 CQC....why or why not?

[lj_1187]

I have had my Scar 17 a while now. Love it. Recently got my Sandman S which I intended to run on my 17. With the stock barrel, it is quite long and a little front heavy. I'm seriously considering sending my barrel to Marvin Pitts or PMM to have it cut down and the FH pinned to 16in OAL. This will make for a much handier rifle with the suppressor. I run a TA11E on my 17s as a battle rifle. I don't get why guys put these big scopes on a 17s. You can get better accuracy with another platform. The SCAR 17 is a friggin battle rifle to me so I want to run it like one suppressed. I realize I will have to mess with the gas jets a bit.

My reservations are the loss in velocity. And how much punch the round will have at a distance. Idon't intend to really ever take shots past 600 yards for sure, and nothing past 300 yards hunting.

I'm looking for some help deciding from guys who have real world expirience with a SCAR 17 CQC at the range, GWOT, and hunting in the states. Thanks in advance!

[1911-A1]

I SBR'd my 17 and love it. It's very maneuverable and makes it handier when you hang a can on it. I am going to take it to longer ranges in a few weeks, and I've heard people having excellent results in that role.

IMO, 1-6x and 1-8x optics suit this gun very well.

[Sensei]

10 years ago the conventional wisdom was that a .308 with a barrel less than 16" was the ballistic equivalent of a very loud 7.62X39. Thanks to advances is modern ammunition, that has shifted some. Yes, there are loads that expand out to 100+ yards such as the MK319Mod0. No, they will not turn a 13" SCAR-17 into a 500 meter gun. You need decide if such a gun fills your needs despite the drawbacks. I did the calculus and opted to leave my barrel at 16".

[Fox33]

/\/\/\/\/\ this /\/\/\/\/\

If I were you I would go buy the can and the 13" barrel. File the forms and wait. I would be very selective about the suppressor as well. I am in the process of writing up a blog post about suppressors and SCARs. Bolt speed increase is no small matter on a SCAR.

I would keep your 16" barrel.

[Sensei]

/\/\/\/\/\ this /\/\/\/\/\

If I were you I would go buy the can and the 13" barrel. File the forms and wait. I would be very selective about the suppressor as well. I am in the process of writing up a blog post about suppressors and SCARs. Bolt speed increase is no small matter on a SCAR.

I would keep your 16" barrel.

That is a very good point. The SCAR-H can be rough on optics. I'd imagine that barrel cutdowns do not help this...

[Fox33]

Sensei,

Did you read my post about SCARs and Handl trigger modules? I discuss recoil impulse waves in metal I talk about optics a little bit.

[Tspeis]

I have had my Scar 17 a while now. Love it. Recently got my Sandman S which I intended to run on my 17. With the stock barrel, it is quite long and a little front heavy. I'm seriously considering sending my barrel to Marvin Pitts or PMM to have it cut down and the FH pinned to 16in OAL. This will make for a much handier rifle with the suppressor. I run a TA11E on my 17s as a battle rifle. I don't get why guys put these big scopes on a 17s. You can get better accuracy with another platform. The SCAR 17 is a friggin battle rifle to me so I want to run it like one suppressed. I realize I will have to mess with the gas jets a bit.

My reservations are the loss in velocity. And how much punch the round will have at a distance. Idon't intend to really ever take shots past 600 yards for sure, and nothing past 300 yards hunting.

I'm looking for some help deciding from guys who have real world expirience with a SCAR 17 CQC at the range, GWOT, and hunting in the states. Thanks in advance!

A lot has changed in ten years with regards to short 308's. A few things worth considering. MOST rifle rounds, regardless of caliber, will generally exhibit the same terminal performance when impacting targets beyond 300 meters (enter, yaw, exit). I see the Hornady ELD-X and similar offerings are said to upset in tissue as far as 800 yards, but I have no first hand data to support that.

Inside 300, my primary concern would be terminal performance. Beyond that, it's a matter of hit probability. From a 13" gun, load selection will obviously be limited, but there are some loads coming that will definitely make it a viable option. Your 1:12" twist is the limiting factor in my opinion. If it were me, I'd want a 1:8" twist and optimized loads. For punching paper, there are high BC bullets you can take advantage of with a fast twist, even in a short barrel. In sea level conditions, JBM shows a 160 gr Warner Flatline (.585 G1 BC) staying supersonic past 1,000 yards using a 12" barrel MV. One upcoming load in particular will be designed specifically around 12" - 16" gas guns. I'm told it has shown consistent terminal effects (both FBI spec barrier and unobstructed) from 0-300 and retains better velocity out to 1,200 yards than the 168 gr Gold Dot.

If you're going to go 13", I'd drop the extra coin on a new barrel altogether and see if you can source one with a 1:8" twist to make up for the loss in velocity. I think with the right setup, you could stretch a short gun pretty far.


Tspeis

[Fox33]

/\/\/\/\/\/\ this /\/\/\/\/\/\

[Sensei]

How does one get a 1:8 twist barrel for a SCAR-17?

[Leuthas]

How does one get a 1:8 twist barrel for a SCAR-17?

There are shops that'll make custom SCAR barrels these days. I was looking at a 1:10 for my 17 last year, before I ditched the platform.

I hope the popularity of the SCAR continues to grow, because it seriously needs aftermarket support.