SCAR Non-reciprocating Charging Handle

[The Dumb Gun Collector]

Not arguing, but what AR-10 is as light and reliable as a Scar-17? I totally agree that they should include a rail extension, and accept that the stock hinge should be improved (although none of my three have ever had issues, but I don’t do anything wild with my rifles). But my impression is that the scar-17’s weight and reliability is class-leading.

[SteyrAUG]

I do believe the SCAR 16/17 does a few things better than the AR (DI) platform:

1. Running suppressed. Less heat is getting back into the receiver. There is no comparison when I run any of my ARs vs my SCAR. Same goes for many piston platforms with adjustable gas blocks.

2. Easier to clean. Less gunk in the action when running suppressed just like my AKs and Galil. Now for some who just keep adding Slip 2000 EWL, I guess this isn’t an issue.

3. Barrel swaps. Not much of an issue, but you don’t have to remove the handguard to do it. LMT’s system is arguably better though.

4. And for those of us in the military, over the beach use is better with piston rifles (completely irrelevant for most of us of course).

I like my SCAR and it has treated me well the past 10 years. No, I would not sell it for any SR-25.

It has some advantages over AR platforms, but in my opinion they are minor. But more to the point my SIG 550 series dances circles around it, especially my 551-2 SWAT (especially suppressed). I couldn't get my SCAR to perform anywhere even close to my SIGs. And while we are at it, my HK 93 was generally more accurate and also suppresses well. The 93 might not be as handy or as light, but with the lightweight keymod rails they make now even that rifle is pretty close. The downside is obviously optics options and mag changes aren't as fast unless you own a 33 or 33k. The upside is the HK rifle is far more robust and durable.

I guess what disappoints me most about the SCAR is what is should have been. It really should have been FN's crown jewel and the rifle that changed everything, but it wasn't. And that's really a shame because FN is a very capable designer and weapon manufacturer, but every so often they come up short.

[themonk]

Not arguing, but what AR-10 is as light and reliable as a Scar-17? I totally agree that they should include a rail extension, and accept that the stock hinge should be improved (although none of my three have ever had issues, but I don’t do anything wild with my rifles). But my impression is that the scar-17’s weight and reliability is class-leading.

SR25 acc- 8 lb. 4oz
Sig tread - 8.5lb
M&P10 SPORT - 8lb
POF Revelution - 7.3lbs
V7 harbinger - 6.5lb

[The Dumb Gun Collector]

I would be interested in any objective data comparing reliabity. My suspicion is the only one that might actually get a real shakedown would be the KAC.

[themonk]

I would be interested in any objective data comparing reliabity. My suspicion is the only one that might actually get a real shakedown would be the KAC.

KAC as we know is reliable. As is the Sig as its the primary for the Indian army. I would guess the M&P is solid. We could also through the Larue Predatar on the list as its in the ballpark weight wise and being used by some three letter agencies.

[The Dumb Gun Collector]

KAC as we know is reliable. As is the Sig as its the primary for the Indian army. I would guess the M&P is solid. We could also through the Larue Predatar on the list as its in the ballpark weight wise and being used by some three letter agencies.

I agree with you on the KAC or at least I’m willing to presume it is reliable enough for its other advantages to outclass the scar . The rest, nah. Some agency buys and the Indian army (almost a negative…lol) just aren’t enough to convince me they are a match for the FN in reliability. Also, I note the closer they get in weight the less plausible they are.

But I would love to see testing data (I’m just thinking out loud, I doubt it’s available).

BUT! I think you have inspired me to buy a tread since I pretty much buy anything with a legit military connection for my collection.

[themonk]

There is a pretty good thread about the tred over at snipershide that sinister chimed in about. Worth a read if you would actually buy one.

Forgot to add the DD dd5v3 16" which seems like one I would buy.

[The Dumb Gun Collector]

I’ve looked at the DD a few times. It’s been out long enough I consider it as a shooter. Usually I won’t buy anything from SIG given their horrible track record over the last 15 or so years but for $1100 or so the tread seems to be worth having in the collection.

[JoshNC]

Not arguing, but what AR-10 is as light and reliable as a Scar-17? I totally agree that they should include a rail extension, and accept that the stock hinge should be improved (although none of my three have ever had issues, but I don’t do anything wild with my rifles). But my impression is that the scar-17’s weight and reliability is class-leading.

SR25 CC is very close in weight with similar barrel profile. The CC also has a longer, more functional rail.

The LMT MWS MLOK, 16” LW barrel is a bit heavier, but close enough and sufficiently light weight to be used as a battle rifle. Again, longer more functional rail than the SCAR.

[BoringGuy45]

It has some advantages over AR platforms, but in my opinion they are minor. But more to the point my SIG 550 series dances circles around it, especially my 551-2 SWAT (especially suppressed). I couldn't get my SCAR to perform anywhere even close to my SIGs. And while we are at it, my HK 93 was generally more accurate and also suppresses well. The 93 might not be as handy or as light, but with the lightweight keymod rails they make now even that rifle is pretty close. The downside is obviously optics options and mag changes aren't as fast unless you own a 33 or 33k. The upside is the HK rifle is far more robust and durable.

I guess what disappoints me most about the SCAR is what is should have been. It really should have been FN's crown jewel and the rifle that changed everything, but it wasn't. And that's really a shame because FN is a very capable designer and weapon manufacturer, but every so often they come up short.

The SCAR was a product of its time. The two post-9/11 wars were the first where the M4 saw widespread use as the standard issue rifle of both conventional and special operations forces. As we know, it revealed a lot of the problems and shortcomings of the rifle and the ammo. I remember that every gun blog, magazine, and TV show concluded that the AR design was obsolete and fundamentally flawed from top to bottom, and what we needed was to either go to either a new rifle in a bigger caliber like 6.8 SPC or 6.5 Grendel, or back to the M14. I remember people thinking that even the 416 was likely a stopgap at best until the XM8 and/or SCAR got up and running. Then the XM8 got cancelled and the M4 got tweaked, improved, and upgraded, and suddenly it was an excellent rifle and a lot of the original complaints about it were solved. On top of that, the JSOC units loved their 416s. The SCAR hit the sandbox and proved to be decent, but not the one rifle to rule them all...especially at its price point. It's biggest problem was that it offered very little that other rifles didn't.