In terms of combat effectiveness with the same barrel length

File: b7028bee6aadef0fc8670b46245a5e9a.jpg (28KB, 736x349px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 736x349px

>>30779698
HK416A5 for comparison

Everyone that has both/has the option of selecting one of the two uses the SCAR more.

>>30779830
Why do you think that is? Weight?

>>30779830
I've seen both. I think it factors down to user preference, honestly.

Though HK416 does carry the albatross of "our gun exploded because it was wet" video.

>>30779698
Combat effectiveness? About the same.
More people use the HK.

>>30779866
Was that the one where it was compared to the M4?

>>30779698
The HK is too heavy for an AR.

>>30780060
I looked it up and they're the same weight

the h&k shoe horns a piston system into an ar15, where there are no rails to guide the bolt, leading to carrier tilt and increased damage and parts wear. now, h&k compensates by having ridiculously tough and expensive parts in it that ensure the weapon is serviceable to 60k rounds, which is insane. but it's fucking heavy

the scar is also a piston system, but it's built from the ground up for it. It recoils very smoothly, and while it has it's haters, I like the stock.

I am saving up for a scar, im just deciding between a 16 and a 17. I've shot both, and I liked the 16 better, but I already have an ar15.

IMO the Scar16 is kind of pointless, I'd rather get a nice AR or just go full NATO with a Scar17.

>>30781991
I thought that until I shot one. It shoots differently, and in my opinion it shoots better. I would rather have a scar than an ambi ar15 with a ubr stock and 10 inch free float rail, which Is about the same rifle

>>30781358
>the h&k shoe horns a piston system into an ar15

I don't even like the 416 but come the fuck on man. The 416 is less AR than the SR series and it sure as shit isn't some Adams arms throw together

Should be FNAC vs HK416A5.

Or FN SCAR IAR vs M27 IAR.

Those are the most advanced evolutions of both platforms.

In terms of combat effectiveness, why would they be any different? They both shoot 5.56mm. Both are slightly more reliable than ar-15 in the volume that Special Forces shoot their rifles, but cost more than an M4.

In terms of design, FN wins out. HK was hampered by the legacy of M4. Build quality? Same, both European, both companies built guns for a long long time for the US military and others.

What's my personal preference? Why not both? This is America after all.

>>30782342
>>30781991

Not to go all SUPERSCARFAGLOLSQUID but the SCAR is demonstrably better than the AR platform in some key areas. The value those areas have to your average shooter is debatable but the facts are not.

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?62889-SCAR-vs-AR-A-detailed-look

File: image.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px)

2MB, 3264x2448px

I shot a 16S for the first time a few days ago and was really impressed. Very lightweight. The bolt carrier was extremely smooth to operate and the recoil impulse was really soft and just overall felt controllable.

Shot an MR762A1 the same day. Not really comparable, but I was highly impressed by it as well. They didn't have a 556 to rent or I would have tried it too. What I can say is that the stocks on both felt cheap but the HK stock was worse by far.

>>30783024

Yes, what most people don't know is that the SCAR's BCG has a longer channel for the cam pin, which makes the operation much smoother. I think the LMT Enhanced BCG also has this feature. The HK is limited to the AR BCG and is plagued with the same problems like sheared lugs, and broken cam pins after high rounds.

The lengthened cam channel reduces stress significantly by delaying the unlocking process. As for the stock, the SCAR boot is fine. Doesn't feel cheap to me at all. Take it off the rifle, and you'll notice it's quite solid.

>>30779830
Prove it.

>>30781991
Correct.

>Does nothing better than an AR
>Shit tier ergos
>Designed to be cheap to manufacture
>FN sells them to Civilians at $3,000

17S is the best .308 semi auto, but there's a reason why SOCOM rejected the 5.56 variant and why everyone who gets a choice runs a 10.5" AR15.

>>30784509

Simply untrue. See >>30782859