Scar 17 Reliability

[WillBrink]

I've heard that the big, heavy BCG of the SCAR, both 16 and 17, is murder on optics, and even good ones like Aimpoint and Trijicons have a short service life if mounted on a SCAR. Any truth to this?

I recall there was lengthy thread on that one a while back if anyone can find it.

[RetroRevolver77]

deleted

[Nightstalker865]

ELCAN’s and Razor HD’s have been holding up very well on the MK17’s, from what I’ve seen and read.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cagemonkey]

I have no doubt individual users, in looser commands, added aftermarket lowers for magazine compatibility reasons... haven't heard of a programmatic test.

FN has made SR25 compatible lowers (polymer) and would surely produce them if USG asked. I would personally buy one.

The non reciprocating handle conversion is a bit complicated with new carrier and other parts... I would personally buy one.

Military weapons are built around an ammo type. All the minute dimensional changes or hardness in projectiles, brass, primers matter. The type and weight of charge, pressures, really matter.

Great Assessment. These have been around for a while; https://www.handldefense.com/product/mk17-m110/

[jpmuscle]

The SCAR may be a little more reliable than traditional battle rifles but it isn't more durable.

Nobody cares about AKs. Let it go


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pinzgauer]

Compared to "Classic" battle rifles such as the G3 or M14, I would have thought that the SCAR 17 would be more durable, reliable, etc.

The SCAR may be a little more reliable than traditional battle rifles but it isn't more durable.

SCAR is clearly more modern, may have other advantages. But there is no way I position it as more reliable/durable as G3/HK91s.

I'd even gamble that FALs could challenge the SCAR in the reliability dept.

The M-14 was pickier and less durable than the G3 & FALs, so not sure I'd even use them in the same sentence. Maybe more accurate, much beloved, etc.

[RetroRevolver77]

deleted

[pinzgauer]

I would disagree, strongly.

There is no legacy battle rifle that has seen the high round count the SCAR has in SOCOM or could hold up to it. Pre 9/11 I had a 18.5" M14 and a HKG3 that that were not up to the task of modern high round count training (legacy cold weather team weapons... the m4 being less than optimal for some climates)

The SCAR's modularity makes it much more serviceable, minutes of down time to re-barrel or re-spring versus hours to days... or tossing a HK9X variant

I'll defer to your direct experience, especially for SOCOM high round count usage. And the modularity point is valid. If you shoot out barrels, valid point on repairability.

And I'm not advocating the G3 is better, just that it was a pretty tough service rifle in it's day. And no slouch even now in terms of reliability.

I also know there are a ton of ancient G3s still in service around the world. And recent service rifle experience with allies. I still see them in Europe in PD/gendarmerie hands. You didn't hear about stocks breaking, optics failing, etc. (Curious how old your G3 was, 20 years?)

Granted it's civvy usage, but my early HK91 ran a steady diet of German 7.62 when it was $25 for 200 round sleeve. We did not bother with .22, just shot and hunted with the HK. Shot it a ton, cleaned it rarely, for right at 25 years. Never an issue. My civvy experience: They are tough rifles.

Those days are past, roller locks are a moot point now.

SCAR looks like a great rifle for modern mil usage. I'd love to have one. And a SR-25. And a LMT to match it.

[FlyingHunter]

I've had a SCAR 17 for 10+ years. I'm always amused at the "I heard it on the internet" level of chatter regarding the SCAR 17 by those who have zero experience with the gun. I'm nothing more than an enthusiast and hunter with some occasional 3 gun competition use with the SCAR 17.

My direct use experience has the following observations:
1. Dead nuts reliable, in fact, I cannot recall a single failure to function, ever.
2. All of my optics have been fine. Currently wears a Leopold 1x6.
3. Weight and balance are excellent for a 308.
4. Accuracy is ok, 2-3 moa most days.

Top Positive: Reliability
Top Negative: Magazines are relatively expensive, proprietary, non factory polymer option, non platform interchangeable.

In my opinion, while expensive, one of my best firearm purchases. The juice has been worth the squeeze.