what went wrong

Price.

Nothing desu.

Economy of scale and the new Sprint Network and sharing center for international flights to the next day I have a good day I have a good time for me know what to expect to see

>>31626831

You're too poor to afford one.

>>31626883
>what went wrong
But poorfag upset is one of the mk17s key selling points.

File: 25Td4X2.jpg (82KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 720x960px

Is the SCAR overrated, or is it the best rifle ever made?
I just feel like the day I put money down on one someone's gonna come out with a mud test or something and prove that it's just a giant $2k POS.

>inb4 price is too high and/or too much for what it is.

Probably because i am gonna go to the new York city of the most important thing is that the only thing I can do it for the first time in the morning and I will be a good time to time and money to pay for the first time in a while.

>>31626903
It is a feature I enjoy in mine.
SCAR hate threads fuel.

>>31626935
I really want one, but they're more than an expensive AR.
So I bought an ar for practical use, and I'm waiting to buy a 5.45 triangle folder for my next fun.

>tl;Dr I buy 2 guns I'll really enjoy instead of one

Nothing, Why wouldnt you want a gun that can double as a prosthetic leg if you suffer an amputation?

>>31626831
HK being corrupt.

>>31627002
welp

>>31626935
i like how it shoots feels smoother than an AR and it feels like there's less recoil imo. it's a meme gun cuz of the fucking price also cuz fn is a bunch of jews

>>31627036
Lol

>>31626935
The stock is kinda flimsy and the charging handle can get annoying.
But the reliability and parts life is incredible. At Battlefield Vegas, they've only had to swap out the barrel and the hammer after 200,000+ rounds. It absolutely blows out the M16 and AK
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PApRcRE-ft8&t=8m7s

>>31627102

> 200000+ rounds
> 1 barrel replacement

Bullshit. Not even if you divided that number by ten would I believe someone who said that.

File: 15AE25D4-D4C7-4081-85B6-B3FB61D7AB12-5088-000005670F6782D5.jpg (57KB, 800x325px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 800x325px

>>31627102
There's aftermarket replacements for both, though. Bent charging handles to not interfere with optics, and Vltor make this slightly less bootlike stock as well as an AR buffer tube adapter. And then there's the Handl Defense lowers and caliber conversions for mag compatibility and alloy parts instead of polymer.

>>31627143
I meant no other parts besides those two have been replaced over those 200k+ rounds
Barrels have to be replaced on regular intervals no matter what gun they shoot there since they all fire full auto
With the M4, the gas tube and BCG also need to be replaced every so often but otherwise the upper and lower receivers continue to function
Apparently the AK's start to crack after 100k rounds, but they might be using aftermarket rails

File: 4220083677_fe3f6fe538_b.jpg (139KB, 1024x680px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 1024x680px

>>31627102
>The stock is kinda flimsy

When will this meme die? The stock has solid aluminum internal frame that I would argue is more rigid than any AR stock save for maybe the UBR. The GearScout testing showed that most AR stocks will break after a single or two drops, meanwhile we know the SCAR passed the required drop testing criteria during the SOCOM trials.

The only thing that was ever an "issue" with breaking was the original stock latch that keeps the stock from folding. The latch teeth weren't radiused enough and could shear off if you slammed it repeatedly. Thankfully FN solved that problem and it is no longer a factor. The meme can die now.

>>31627291
Nice try fag, Im gonna shit post this meme tomorrow and you cant stop me

>>31627198

Wait, the 17 never had a shorn or cracked lug after 200000 rounds?

>>31627072
Bait aside, H&K are some shady mofos

>>31627421
16

>>31627002
Not as bad as the makarov's dickgrips

>>31627002
This is literally what any normal human being sees the first they see this weapon.

>>31627421

I'd buy 20000, maybe even 40000 if FN has some proprietary metallurgy, but 200000 is a bridge too far.

File: 20151119_150253.jpg (2MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1836px

Not a damn thing, OP. One of the best rifles on the market in either caliber.

If they cost ~1/3rd less, Anon couldn't keep it's balls out of their mouths.

>>31627493

But it's true. That's what you get when a rifle is properly designed around the cartridge it's chambered for.

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

>>31627493

Cam track is longer. If you ever touch a scar, check out how smooth the action is. There's 0 stress on the bolt.

>buying something solely to spite poorfags

yikes. you're likely an insufferable faggot

>>31627542
>>31627615

Forums at FN (probably not the most unbiased source either) are reporting the chassis is good for 90k. I doubt the bolt is going to last over 2x that long.

If the bolt did last 90k, that's still fucking ridiculous.

http://fnforum.net/forums/fn-scar-16s/74845-bolt-lifespan-scar-16-a.html

http://fnforum.net/forums/fn-scar-17s/30237-lifespan-fn-scar-17-a.html

>>31627291
Stock is a rattly piece of shit
>But muh aluminum frame
Keep ignoring that and the plastic latch,

File: stuff.jpg (7KB, 248x203px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 248x203px

>>31627002

>>31626935
look, while there is a lot of information to be gained from a mud test its not an end all be all definite "this rifle is shit" test. this is coming from an AR fanboy who watches karl and ians videos.

File: 1476074331760.jpg (964KB, 1600x1043px) Image search: [Google]

964KB, 1600x1043px

>>31626883

I'm incredibly wealthy but that shitty, ugly stock they put on it and the fact it's a wannabe SOF gamer meme gun only really available in FDE like SOF uses turns me off to it entirely.

I'm sure it's a great weapon. I'll get one when operational units drop the fuck out of using them and the meme price comes down. I can't even justify it as a luxury brand purchase because it's not.

>>31627143
barrels can definitely be replaced every 50k rounds if the only thing theyre doing is shooting full auto at tourist ranges

>>31626831
The biggest problem with the SCAR is what went wrong with the Mk.23, and that is that it was a gun designed around parameters requested by SOCOM when SOCOM themselves only had a vague idea of what they wanted.
As with the Mk.23, the SCAR nailed everything it was supposed to do and be with 100% accuracy, but unfortunately SOCOM realized that those parameters specified in development were not ideal in fielding, and by that point it was too late to go back.

That's why the Mk.16 was canned, because most everybody realized that they prefer the M4A1 SOPMOD blocks and Mk.18 by the time the 16 made it out and that it didn't do anything better for a 5.56 spitter. The 17 and SSR survive because the M14/EBR variants desperately needed to die by that point and the legacy SR-25 only held a reputation as a sniper system, not a battle rifle, and it's arguable that that's still true today even with the modern SR-25s.

Same reason FN has been losing major contracts left and right to the 416 and other AR pattern guns, the ergonomics, weight, and handling are more familiar and preferable to most Western nations and fits their needs better than a gun pigeonholed for SOCOM.

>>31626831
not sufficiently better than what exists to warrant a mass scale change over currently issued weapon systems.

>>31629450
basically this
If the SCAR is 300% of the price of the AR but only does thr same job 15% better, why spend the money on large scale adoption rather than just for the secret squirrel people who need it?

File: rangers-scar-h-hr.jpg (339KB, 2574x1389px)

339KB, 2574x1389px

>>31626831
With the SCAR 17? Nothing. Still in use by Spec Op forces.

SCAR 16 though? Not wrong per se, but during its use in the Ranger battalions it wasn't deemed BETTER than the M4. They found it to be AS GOOD as the M4, but not good enough to warrant the large scale replacement of the standard rifle.

>>31626831

Nothing is wrong with it. It's as awesome rifle just over priced for what it is. I can get the same bang no pun intended for 600 bucks.

The scar is the apple of the gun world.

>>31629450
>>31629488
>SCAR
>better than an AR
Cool story.

File: 1446517221809.jpg (75KB, 660x660px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 660x660px

>>31627499
Pmag in a scar, are you retarded or just plain want to waist money?

>>31629601
keep in mind I did say if. and there arent many AR10's that stack up as battle rifles compared to the 17

I've considered getting one, but I don't know if it's different enough from my AR to warrant it.

>>31629707
See MRPs

>>31629837
I literally only see those being used as DMR's

>>31629775
It's about as different as modern guns get these days.

Just get one in .308 and console yourself with "It's my battle rifle, it serves a purpose, it's worth it."

>>31626935
>I feel like an isolated incident will completely sway my entire opinion

How do you even get out if bed in the morning?

File: 1475118678949.jpg (108KB, 409x409px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 409x409px

>>31629249
Oh, absolutely, I know that, but still, if I pay $3k for a rifle, it better be able to get through a mud test.

>>31629947
>How do you even get out if bed in the morning?

>imblying

>>31626831
Ugg boots make even hot girls look stupid. It's not surprising they did the same to an AR-18 cosplaying as a new design.

>>31629260
So ignoring the black and green scars while bitching that it's a proven and tested design because you think it's a meme. What the fuck goes on in that POS brain of yours. For that matter what guns ARE acceptable to you

>>31626831
plastic

File: DSC08115.jpg (236KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 1024x768px

>>31630026

How much mud would it take to satiate your reservations?

>>31630069
that looks like a good amount

>>31626831

>implying

>>31629148

Show me one broken latch in the FDE release generation. One.

File: DSC08127.jpg (168KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 1024x768px

>>31630180

It kept working on a closed bolt so I decided to leave the ejection port open. It finally stopped ejecting when I could no longer safely lock the bolt in battery. Was using only Tula btw. I don't have any doubts about this rifles ability to function in adverse conditions.

I'm a poorfag, and I still love the SCAR. I'm not a butthurt poorfag.

File: 20140819_202619.jpg (590KB, 1252x1550px) Image search: [Google]

590KB, 1252x1550px

>>31629604

It's easy to fix the pmag issue with a dremmel or a hand file.

>>31629604
Is that the rape baby of an MP5 and SCAR-L?

>>31626831
Literally, the price.

3rd Bat got Issued the Mk16 and Mk17. not even 6mon later the DOA got the bill, shit bricks, and then demanded 3rd Bat. turn in every single rifle so they could turn them in for a refund. 3rd deployed to afghaniland and said "lol, deployed. we can't". a major shit storm/pissing match between 3rd and DOA ensued and in the end they were turned in while they were still in theater. they were then officially un-adopted by USSOCOM solely because of the cost.

>>31630304

That's not how SOCOM acquisition programs work and nobody gets a "bill" or "refund" However, yes, the bottom line reason the Mk 16 was defunded was due to budgeting issues.

>what went wrong
The AR came out 50 years earlier

>>31626847
wut?

>>31626831
The stock, the price and the plastic lower.

>>31629001
Bolt, at most, would probably survive 50k, for the 16, no way in hell for the 17.

It doesn't matter what kind of steel you use, at some point, something is going to shear, wear down, et cetera.

Not tool steel, stainless, Chrome moly, manganese, 4150, nothing. It's a high pressure, high cycle, low surface area part.

It should come out to the same as an AR in many, many areas, if you swap out the gas rings with the barrel as you should.

I'll say the same fucking thing about the barrel.

Unless fucking FN is making cold hammer forged, chrome plated, Titanium carbide steel, ion nitrided fucking barrels, there's no fucking way in all of hell that they can last 20,000 rounds.

Zero.

At most I've seen AR barrels last 10k from very high end brands that use very good steel and plating, and by the end, the throating is gone.

And this goes double for the 17. If a fucking bolt action has an average life of 4-7K, no fucking way in hell is the SCAR lasting more.

>>31630535

It's partially about how little extra stress it puts on the parts due to heat.

File: 1471294814652.png (95KB, 590x586px)

95KB, 590x586px

>>31630033

Sensing some buyer's remorse.

>>31630556
Heat doesn't create stress, it messes with heat treatment and temperament, which in alloy steels, doesn't do much of anything, and in carbon steels, jack shit if you temper the bolt properly.

Automatic fire is still automatic fire though.

You dump 700, 800, 1000 rounds down a SCAR or a decent AR and you'll get the same results. Broken bolt heads, because it's still a massive volume of firing that will cause the temperature of both rifles to get stupidly high, to the point of failure.

>>31630535

FN claims the SCAR barrels have a 35K round service life, with the receiver rated at 90K.

Ron the owner of Battlefield Vegas documented one of their 16S bolt lasting over 100K rounds before shearing a lug. In another video one of their armorers claims the rifle has lasted in excess of 200K rounds. So take your pick, even the lesser number is still an incredible feat and testament to the thoughtful engineering put into this weapon.

Just because you refuse to believe it doesn't make it any less true.

>>31630622

I'm not going to paraphrase this, it's too long. Read for yourself and formulate an opinion.

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

File: 79b3c01d40653f123a0d6424dbf1ca71.jpg (38KB, 385x434px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 385x434px

>>31630239
Show me one drop test the scar pasted. One.

>>31630735

>Given that it appears no rifle entered into the competition was able to complete all the tests, I think it is safe to say that the tests were at fault rather than the rifles.

>>31630735

The one where it was adopted by SOCOM?

>>31630756
>>31630759
http://elcomercio.pe/politica/gobierno/defensa-reactivara-compra-fusiles-us31-millones-que-se-frustro-tres-veces-noticia-1627509

>>31630630
HK also claimed that 4.6 was ballistically superior to 5.7. That doesn't mean jack shit.

Their claim of a 35K barrel life just means, "yeah, we pulled the trigger, it still shot." it doesn't mean jack shit about accuracy, barrel wear, throating wear, nor have they ever mentioned what unobtanium they're using that is able to survive what no other manufacturer has been able to accomplish. Nor have they mention what conditions they tested. Were they doing 10 shots a minute? Full retard? What kind of ammo? What was the ammo's load data? This all works together. At best, it's bluffing, at worst, bullshit.

Receiver is nothing. AR gets the same life. Both are exclusively low stress parts, AR will last longer though, for being made of aluminum alloy.

Bolt life is the same way. Depends on volume of shooting, maintenance done, kind of ammo being used. In any case, I want to know what kind of unobtainium steel FN is using, and why nobody else is using it.

And their Armorer is flat out lying. Look at that number. Do the math. If they've had it for 5 years, thats 40,000 fucking rounds a year, 800 rounds a week.

They're.

Lying.

All the SCAR is, is an AR18 supped up. If FN was able to pull this sort of bullshit off with the AR18, nobody, no country, no cheap ass military would think TWICE about stealing the technical data on the SCAR and using it in their own systems, if not out right stealing it.

It's not incredible engineering, it's incredible marketing and incredible stupidity that people like you actually believe it.

>>31630671
This dude knows nothing about what he's talking about
>HURR BOLT PATH LONGER RELIABILITUH
All that fucking is, is a design choice from the Automatic aspect of design. Longer bolt travel means longer dwell time, which transfers more heat to the bolt. Doesn't mean much of anything. Forces at play are still jack shit.

>>31629542
This is true. What company were you in?

>>31630788

We're talking about the same test, idiot. An unscientific drop test from 8 feet onto concrete seven times. Not a single rifle passed.

>>31627002
UGGs are pretty comfy. I enjoy wearing mine.

>>31630820
Only the SCAR was dropped tested. It failed spectacularly when the lower blew out.

you can't corner the Stoner

>>31630788
>actually citing the peruvian "tests"

The SCAR was the only gun that actually made it that far. The government was determined to see that no foreign weapon beat their own, so when it came to the drop "test" they repeatedly threw it off a 6'+ ledge onto concrete until the lower cracked.

Even afterwards the gun still functioned and FN wanted to continue the evaluation but the military refused. It was an obvious farce and citing that as a legitimate source only showcases your blatant ignorance.

>>31630839

Only the SCAR was drop tested because none of the other rifles made it that far. Can you even read?

File: 1471880988039.jpg (1MB, 5000x5000px)

1MB, 5000x5000px

>>31630849
>>31630861
>SCAR failed the drop
>the lower blew up
>YA WELL THE SCAR MADE IT THAT FAR!!! FN IS DA BEST!!!!

>>31630799
>And their Armorer is flat out lying. Look at that number. Do the math. If they've had it for 5 years, thats 40,000 fucking rounds a year, 800 rounds a week.

"I don't know anything about Battlefield Vegas" The Post.

>using it in their own systems, if not out right stealing it.

What do you call the CZ Bren, B&T APC556, etc?

>>31630901

>design a test every rifle is supposed to fail
>SCAR survives all elements of the test while the others all break
>Well shit, now I guess we have to throw it off a building until it breaks too.

Yeah, pretty much exactly that. You're getting demoted to a 3/10 troll.

>>31630799
>UH DIAMETER OF .02 SOMTHIN MEANS SO MUCH MUR
All of jack to the fucking shit, power of squat.

So does heat. Proper heat treatment on a metal, as well as proper steel choice come into play here. IE don't fucking use 440 steel and you're fine.

Hell, if you use chrome plated parts, that's even better.

And if the SCAR is using an unobtainium Tungsten, Alum, Steel, then it'd get the same benefit.

Chicken tendies also goes on to balk "the carbon buildup" of the AR, of which yes there is some, but not in such quantities that it'd mean anything since the system operates at such a high pressure that any carbon build up that may develop, is expelled out of the system.

And then goes on to talk about feed ramp angles, which my fucking god, is this pointless. All that has to do with anything is that it relates to the dwell time and velocity of the bolt carrier. IE fast ROF and bolt, sharper incline. It has NOTHING to do with reliability.

And the best part, where I'm stopping, is where he fucking talks about barrel length. Gee, if my barrel is 11.5 inches long on my AR, as opposed to my 16 inch SCAR, which every fucking engineer will tell you, will drastically effect everything in testing, then maybe I'm a little retarded in my testing.

This literally means nothing, other than it's fucking funny a mall ninja on the internet is so easily believed because he's using an ex SOCOM rooty tooty.

>>31629260
Have you shot one? 17 is basically the best rifle

>>31630901

Except the lower didn't blow up. It had a fracture and they used that as an excuse to stop the test because they were looking for any reason to do so. The gun continued to function and outperformed every other in the competition. You're doing pretty good at trolling though so keep it up.

>>31630933
>It has NOTHING to do with reliability.

Please stop posting. You're that guy that thinks they know everything but very clearly has no idea what they're talking about. As stated earlier, you don't have to believe it, but it doesn't make it untrue.

>>31626831
It's a fine rifle, it really is. High quality, reliable, great in .308, etc. My problem is that while it's high quality, it's not a THREE THOUSAND DOLLARS HOLY SHIT THAT'S EXPENSIVE rifle.

I mean, with $2,900 I could very easily build an extremely high quality DMR or nearly top-tier distance rifle easily good to 1,200 yards with the right ammo and shooter.

>>31630901
oh so youre just pretending to be retarded

>>31630922
And a company that does full retard shit, which is also probably endorsed by companies like FN, are also probably going to shill the fuck out of their sponsors.

And
>CZ Bren
Shit, according to everybody who's used it.

>APC
I literally had to google, but is just one of three or so "SCAR" clones that are more or less, another point in the list of companies that are trying where HK and FN ultimately failed.

>>31631030
I'm sorry I hurt your mall ninja sensibilities with actual fucking engineering logic. I didn't say I disliked the SCAR, quite the opposite, in fact, I'd love a AR18 piston style AR upper, but I'll sure as shit discredit blatant fucking lying and marketing.

The fucking angle of which the fucking feed ramps are at literally has nothing to do with the guns reliability when it comes to the AR.

Fucking CAM pin diameter doesn't matter because if you're bleeding gas INTO the pin, you're already fucked. This is, frankly, a design failure of the AR15, brought about by manufacturing constraints, but could easily be solved, albeit with some work.

Fucking bolt travel just means that the bolt is in contact with the barrel longer fuckwit, which means it will be hotter and have less time to ventilate. Decrease this, decrease ROF, increase dwell time, less heat in general.

I'm not the guy who has no idea what he's talking about, you're the ignorant fuck wit who knows nothing about engineering but wants to justify FN's 4,000 dollar marketing scheme.

>>31630932
>>31630978
>>31631115
Did the SCAR fail the test or not?

File: 1428791558894.png (25KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 625x626px

>>31631206

>>31631201
>actual fucking engineering logic

You're displaying quite the lack of cognitive reasoning ability to be honest. It's rather simple actually: FN put out service life numbers based on the 2 million rounds expended during that weapon's development and Battlefield Vegas has confirmed those figures based on their own findings. And yet here you are typing out long winded drivel about how they're wrong and all liars. I'm pretty sure that's what I'd call autism.

>>31631285
>The FN SCAR is so fucking great guys

Which is why SOCOM is still using it?

I couldn't care less what they claim, they're a company, one that makes their money from military contracts.

Last I heard, their SCAR anything contracts are dropping like flies.

Their Pistols have yet to win anything besides being squish.

Their PDWs were dropped for 10.5 reworked M4s.

And lost half of their production to Colt after Colt's old management got the boot and new management came in and started fixing shit, to make their military contracting side more profitable by actually being capable of cheaply and reliably filling contracts.

And yet, no matter what FN tries, they still havent been able to oust the M4 in terms of reliability, as far as the Military has universally been concerned.

File: IMG_0534.jpg (195KB, 1270x987px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 1270x987px

Don't worry, the SCAR will make a decent popsicle come winter

>>31630799
just for clarification

>Receiver is nothing. AR gets the same life. Both are exclusively low stress parts,
I agree
>AR will last longer though, for being made of aluminum alloy.
SCAR's upper is aluminum, while the lower is poly. However the SCAR's lower receives even less stress than the AR because the SCAR has a trunnion that is pinned at the back of the aluminum upper, so the lower is not taking any of that cycling force.

>Bolt life is the same way. Depends on volume of shooting, maintenance done, kind of ammo being used. In any case, I want to know what kind of unobtainium steel FN is using, and why nobody else is using it.
The SCAR's bolt is just thicker than the AR

>All the SCAR is, is an AR18 supped up.
Nooooooo it's very different. I really don't like the SCAR/AR-18 comparison. The SCAR's gas system is like an M1 Carbine, with a long receiver and a small captive tappet piston in the gas block. AR-18 uses a multi segment gas piston / op rod. The SCAR bolt carrier rides on rails in the receiver, AR-18 carrier has no rails but is sorta supported by the spring guide rides. It's very different, not just a modded AR-18

>>31630799
>800 rounds a week
>not possible
You do realize battlefield vegas is a major tourist spot near vegas, a non stop capital for tourists, right?

>>31631340
Are you now seriously implying whatever special forces use = good, no debate!

>>31631548
>implying

shit nigga, that's what the vast majority of scar owners believe as gospel

>>31627102
My buddy has a Scar 17 and it's stock is rock solid.

>>31631455
It's a matter of material. Stress wise, the AR is experiencing slightly greater stress, but it is transferred almost exclusively to the buffer tube which is actually why carrier tilt is a major issue. It's just receiving impact force, add in actual physical wear and you're going to see issues.

But then you can argue that an AR upper will last longer than an AR lower because of the SCAR's trunnion.

But in terms of aging and conditioning, Aluminum will do better than 99.99% of all polymers. Whether it's heat, arid climates, cold, et cetera. It's a nature of the material.

And the thickness isn't that much greater though. In practical terms, it's not the deciding factor between having a bolt that will last 20K rounds and 200K rounds, not for something like 556 which is already pussy whipped weak. It really comes down to the steel being used, along with various other factors on both guns.

But in terms of design, they're identical. Short stroke piston operated, square bolts that are nearly identical dimensionally. The big difference is the piston housing piston itself which has no impact on life, but rather reliability in terms of environmental issues, IE keeping sand out of the action.

The AR18 also had rails that it sort of sat on like what the AK has.

Its definitely an evolution of the AR18, but it is an AR18 evolution from a engineering standpoint. They're not interchangeable, but it is a 80/20 difference in similarity and improvement.

>>31631513
It's not impossible, but considering the armory they own and employ, within a very generous time frame, not accounting for down time, rifle maintenance, happenings and the like, they have a rifle that saw a metric shit ton of undocumented action, spouted by a no doubt shill.

>>31631548
Because the military, as stupid as they are, are some of the dumbest penny pinchers you'll ever see.

If FN was able to back all that hot shit about the SCAR, then SOCOM would have never dropped the 17.

>>31629260
If you need justification for spending 3k USD, you're not wealthy.

>>31631767
>If FN was able to back all that hot shit about the SCAR, then SOCOM would have never dropped the 17

I'd give you the benefit of the doubt that was a typo, but the rest of this thread has repeatedly demonstrated your ignorance.

It doesn't matter if the SCAR only cost $1, that was still $1 more SOCOM was spending in place of M4's they receive for free. When you're slapped with a 15% budget cut and tasked with standing up an additional battalion at every group you have to make some cuts. Defunding a redundant 5.56 platform was deemed the best place to start.

So I'll say it again because it's just getting silly; You think you know what you're talking about when you really have no clue.

>>31630799
Look, clearly you're out of your depth, so stop talking.

>>31631940
Why waste time with him? You're better off talking to a brick.

File: IMG_1125.jpg (3MB, 2602x3470px)

3MB, 2602x3470px

>>31626831
Your career choice

>>31632192
Subtle, I like it. 8/8 I r8.

>>31632192

Those HK hooks are going to chew through your sling loops. I recommend a knot of 550 cord between them, quieter and more flexible too.

>>31632272
Didnt know that, thanks bb

File: AR180ReceiverInterior.jpg (32KB, 350x324px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 350x324px

>>31631767
>The AR18 also had rails that it sort of sat on like what the AK has.
nah it doesn't have anything. Pic related. The bit on the left side is the cam pin guide to prevent out of battery rotation. The carrier doesn't have support aside from the spring guide rods.

File: 140062648495.jpg (573KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

573KB, 1280x960px

>>31632385
oh sick I found a higher res photo of the upper guts. Thanks opchan

File: 14580331_1068757316572166_532001024_n.jpg (48KB, 360x480px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 360x480px

>>31626831
It costs too much for most people/countries to buy/replace/implement.

>>31627102
>>31627291
>>31629148
I was in a gunstore the other day, and a guy knew I have a SCAR and he said he prefers the Bren because the stock isn't so tight.
To hear people say it's "rattly" just proves how fucking dumb they are.

Stay mad you know-nothing bitch.

Nothing.. well other than the US DoD/etc super perfectionist bigwigs.

>>31626831

Basically it's just too expensive. For the same price you can get an AR-15 that is better in every way.

If you are flush with cash, really like it and want something different than an AR-15 then i guess it's cool, but it still has stupid things about it like not even using AR mags. . .

>>31632787
>If I ignore the the plastic latch and shout noguns maybe the argument will go my way.

>>31626831
>what went wrong
They made a non-standard upper that wasn't compatible with standard lowers,
AND a non-standard lower that wasn't compatible with standard uppers.

It's just about the worst AR that you can buy, just about the only parts commonality it has with the standard design specs is the grip.

>>31633049
>that is better in every way

Subjective opinion.

>it still has stupid things about it like not even using AR mags

Except that's 100% completely wrong.

>>31630830
Tom Brady shitposts on /k/?

File: IMG_2118.jpg (484KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

484KB, 1080x1920px

>>31633082
>get contracted by government to make an AR killer
>people get pissed that you didn't make the recievers compatible with AR uppers/lowers
are you really this retarded or are you putting on a show for us?

>>31633094
>Subjective opinion.

Not really. It's a fact you can make an AR-15 that is lighter, just as reliable, more accurate and a better trigger for much less than a SCAR-L. Then you factor in teh aftermarket for subjective things like stocks, grips, rails. . .

>>31633061
>if I strawman people's arguments and hold hypotheticals above first hand experience, maybe the argument will go my way

>>31633179
ok
come back when you've made a short-stroke piston AR with a reciprocating front charging handle, ambidextrous safety, movable cheek comb, two-position gas block, with a quick-change barrel without a buffer tube and with a folding stock and let us know if it was under $2100

>>31633238
meant to say ambidextrous mag release

>>31633179

And it still won't be as reliable firing supressed full auto from a short barrel which is what the SCAR was tailor designed to do.

When you take price out of the equation and look purely at the merits of each design you'll find that the SCAR still has a solid place in the niche it was designed for.

>>31631352
>random unsupported quote from a youtube autist
If this is how you justify your decisions you have some serious issues

>>31633238

This is what we call moving the goal posts. You lost on accuracy, trigger, reliability and weight for the price and now you make up some BS shit that of course only the SCAR has and make it sound like it's more important. *hint* it's not. Only you are so butthurt to care.

>>31633249
>And it still won't be as reliable firing supressed full auto from a short barrel which is what the SCAR was tailor designed to do.
>When you take price out of the equation and look purely at the merits of each design you'll find that the SCAR still has a solid place in the niche it was designed for.

Cool. I guess it's better at something that 99.99% of the people here will never be able to use.

>>31633213
>so delusional that he's saying the plastic latch on the SCAR is "hypothetical"

>>31633334
>you make up some BS shit that of course only the SCAR has and make it sound like it's more important

Remember that part about subjective opinions? It's a two way street compadre.

>>31630933
>>31631767
as far as my searches are pulling up unless it hasn't come up yet and you guys know something the internet doesn't SOCOM still uses the 17

>>31633334
from the trials:
>"During the test, the SCAR suffered 226 stoppages.[21] The FN SCAR ranked second to the XM8 with 127 stoppages, but with fewer stoppages compared to the M4 with 882 stoppages and the HK416 with 233."
the M4 had FOUR TIMES the stoppages that the SCAR had. So how exactly are you going to homebuild a shortstroke piston AR that is more reliable, is sub-MOA, and lighter (you should bear in mind that the HK416 weighs EXACTLY the same as the SCAR)? Especially since Milspec M4s are four times more prone to failures than the SCAR. If you use just any upper or any BCG converted to piston, you're going to get LESS reliability due to carrier tilt, so please explain.

And that's completely discounting the plethora of other features that ARE important.
>adjustable cheek comb:
better cheekweld for different optics
>reciprocating charging handle:
no need for a forward assist, can slam bolt home from a shouldered position
>folding stock:
portability and ease of firing in vehicles
>two position gas block:
aids reliability when running suppressed, especially with QD suppressors

>>31633483
The M4's were old rifles taken from the armory while all the competitors brought brand new rifles with new magazines

>>31633147
>get contracted by government to make an AR killer
You're just making excuses for lazy engineering.

>>31626831
>from a military standpoint
Doesn't do enough better than the rifles we already have to justify their use outside of niche applications (such as SOF use).
>from a civilian standpoint
It's a $3000 battle rifle that came out 30 years after the death of battle rifles, with extremely limited aftermarket and little ability to be used as a hunting rifle or serious target rifle (due to no </=10rd mags or high-end cut-rifled barrels being made, respectively).

Also they *really* dicked up by not making it 100% compatible with DPMS-pattern .308 mags.

>>31631933

Have you not heard of discretionary spending in accordance with ones' taste?

>>31633483
>And that's completely discounting the plethora of other features that ARE important.
>>adjustable cheek comb:
>better cheekweld for different optics
>>reciprocating charging handle:
>no need for a forward assist, can slam bolt home from a shouldered position
>>folding stock:
>portability and ease of firing in vehicles
>>two position gas block:
>aids reliability when running suppressed, especially with QD suppressors
You can make an AR do all of that.
You're arguing against the M4, not the AR platform.

>>31633483
>the M4 had FOUR TIMES the stoppages that the SCAR had. So how exactly are you going to homebuild a shortstroke piston AR that is more reliable, is sub-MOA, and lighter (you should bear in mind that the HK416 weighs EXACTLY the same as the SCAR)? Especially since Milspec M4s are four times more prone to failures than the SCAR. If you use just any upper or any BCG converted to piston, you're going to get LESS reliability due to carrier tilt, so please explain.

>Piston
>top lel

DI baby. Me and my buddy's/family have a dozen ARs between us. You want to know how many times any of them have jammed with probably 20k rounds through them? zero. Me and my brothers most used ARs both have over 5k rounds through them and not one jam. I'm not worried. They are all more than adequate when the come to reliablilty.

But they are all more accurate, have better triggers and are lighter than a SCAR. Kind of some of the most important objective stats when it comes to a gun. . .

>>31633483
>>adjustable cheek comb:

ARs have many more options available. AR wins

>reciprocating charging handle:
wow. big fucking deal, seriously. that moving charging handle also has some serious cons to it bro. i'd take my raptor charging handle any day to that moving clusterfuck.

>>31633483
>portability and ease of firing in vehicles

I've give you that, but the AR is still lighter, and still can be pretty damn short.

>two position gas block:
many available for ARs. . .

>>31633542
>high-end cut-rifled barrels being made
they make quality barrel blanks, do it yourself.

>>31633542

There are both 10 round magazines, and aftermarket heavy profile target barrels available for the 17S, not to mention the trigger modules that provide magazine interchangeability you desire.

File: MASADA.jpg (292KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

292KB, 1024x768px

>>31626831
>what went wrong
It's not a Masada

>>31633587
>SCAR = fake ACR
/thread

>>31633483
>two position gas block
>aids reliability when running suppressed
At least the model I got to use, the gas block was the same as on the FS2000--"normal" and "austere conditions" settings, which translates to "enough gas" and "overgassed". The second setting opens the port, not closes it, which is what you want for a suppressed gun.

>>31633556

Your whole post is "stop liking what I don't like" while we're over here like "we're not trying to make you like what we like."

We get it. The AR is better for you. Myself and others elected to purchase the SCAR for our own reasons. Have a nice day now.

>>31633616
>Myself and others elected to purchase the SCAR for our own reasons
yeah but your reasons are shit and you could have fulfilled those reasons better and for less money.

>>31633601

this is correct. there is no less gas setting for suppressors.

>>31633483 is retarded

>>31633601

The SCAR uses a similar but different gas block than the FS2000. There is only one version and it has three positions: Normal/Surpressed/Disassembly

>>31633616
>We get it. The AR is better for you. Myself and others elected to purchase the SCAR for our own reasons. Have a nice day now.

No I get that. What I am saying is that for the majority of people they can get a better rifle for much cheaper than Scar in those important areas. I bet most people, when it comes to their hard earned money, would take a cheaper AR-15 that is more accurate, lighter, better trigger and has a bigger aftermarket 9/10 times. It's the reason that so many ARs are bought over SCAR's, even Gucci brand ARs that cost as much.

>>31626847
Clearly folded expectations were often less commonly to blame than whoever in the sight of had coming yet nodded

>>31633571
Literally nobody sells the proper barrel extensions though, so you'd be looking at reverse-engineering the one on your rifle and having it custom-fabbed. You'd be in for another $1200-1500 for a mid-grade button-rifled barrel.

>>31633580
The trigger modules are $550, and even the "heavy profile target" barrels are still chrome-lined, CHF or button-rifled, carbon steel barrels. While they're durable, they don't have anywhere near the accuracy potential of a [big name] stainless cut-rifled barrel.

I was not aware they'd started making 10-round mags for it (finally), 10 months ago they did not exist (in the US, anyway).

>>31633625
>subjective opinions

Subjective opinions.

>>31633628

t. non-SCAR owner

File: scargasblock.jpg (19KB, 385x306px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 385x306px

>>31633633
"""no"""

>>31633635
>It's the reason that so many ARs are bought over SCAR's

I'm not disagreeing with your premiss but I'm pointing out the futility of your argument. Not everyone is bound to a budget and others are willing to spend more for what they want. Just because the features the SCAR offers do not directly coincide with those you are looking for does not mean it offers no value to someone else. You need to get outside of your own head and look at things with a different perspective once in a while.

Oh and one reason so many AR's are bought instead of SCAR's is because literally every SCAR is sold the moment it roles off the assembly line. You can't buy what isn't in stock.

>>31633641

You can buy barrel extensions from MGW, they had a bunch in stock last week. So go get whatever blank you want and have someone do the conversion if you don't want to wait for someone like HANDL to offer their barrels on the market. Also those 10 round mags have been available for years now. You probably just weren't looking hard enough.

>>31633709
>Oh and one reason so many AR's are bought instead of SCAR's is because literally every SCAR is sold the moment it roles off the assembly line. You can't buy what isn't in stock.
So you're saying low demand and low production is a good thing?

>>31633721

No, I'm saying low production and high demand is the reality of the situation driving market prices through the roof on SCARs.

>>31633731
Then why hasn't the MSRP gone up?

>>31626935
To look at the hardiness of the 16s, battlefield vegas armorer has said the 16s has fired over 200k rounds and they are only on the 3rd barrel and had to replace 1 hammer.

>>31633743

Because that's not how FN choses to operate. What do you want me to tell you? They haven't changed MSRP since it was introduced to market in 2009. They're not earning a penny more off the $3000+ street price and they're not pulling any marketing strings as so many people would like to suggest.

>>31626831

Retards decided to pay $3k+ for extruded plastic because of "muh speshul farces" meme

then they attribute all kinds of magical properties to their emotional investment by saying stupid shit like "it is smooth shooting"

at $3k you can buy a LMT or Larue which has better build quality

>>31633781
>at $3k you can buy a LMT or Larue which has better build quality

Or for 1.5k you can build an AR-15 that shoots 1/2moa, weighs under 6lbs, and has a Gissele trigger.

File: IMG_8488.jpg (102KB, 750x775px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 750x775px

>>31627002
Nice try but this only makes me want to stick my dick in it even more

>tfw no well-off white girl anthropomorphic SCAR raifu in yoga pants and Uggs™ to bitch at me with all her materialistic wants

>>31633781
This

Everyone of these threads have SCAR owners trying to give a plastic gun magical properties that somehow make it the exception to the laws of physics. They are petty much the same guys from a few years back who bought the ACR thinking during the Obama scare and are now stuck with a rifle that is no longer supported

File: k gun review squad.jpg (21KB, 304x420px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 304x420px

>>31626935
>>31628330
>>31629148
>>31629260
>>31629488
>>31629601
>>31630467
>>31630799
>>31630839
>>31630901
>>31631206
>>31631352
>>31633049
>>31633334
>>31633556
>>31633628
>>31633635
>>31633721
>>31633781

>>31633878

Yeah no. . . I have several guns that cost more than a Scar. It's the last line of attack when a SCAR owner uses this tactic. Like the only thing keeping any gun lover from a SCAR is the price. . . It's not like opportunity cost exists or anything. . .

>>31627002
wtf I hate SCARs now

>>31633878
>own a plastic rifle that is priced approximately the same as most decent 308 semis
>everyone else is poor

shit nigga i own pistols that cost more than a scar

File: 1473010814016.jpg (110KB, 619x1008px)

110KB, 619x1008px

>>31626831
What do you mean by 'what went wrong'

In the civilian markets everything is subject to market forces. $2k for SCAR when you can get a decent all-american AR for half the price.

For the military? It's in use for select few specialized units so in a sense it's already a success. But do you know why US is pretty much stuck with M4s just like Russians are stuck with AK-74? Do you know how much it costs to replace all service rifles with a whole new model? FN can't compete with Colt in production. Colt has well established production lines within US borders and established logistic chain for materials and deliveries. FN doesn't which means cranks up the price and makes the delivering slow. For better or worse America and M4/M16 -family are married and due to prenup there no divorce in sight..

>>31634782
Will you please go look up who has the M4 contract before you continue making an ass of yourself.

>>31635344
This.

>>31634782
Stop posting. Figures an anime posting retard would spout about shit he knows nothing about. Pure cancer.

>>31635344
Pretty sure that Anon was talking about FN's SCAR production and not the m4.

>>31635353
I'm pretty sure you and that anon are gay together and it's gross

>>31635353
Pretty sure you are a complete dumbass who cant read.

You are defending the indefensible.

>FN can't compete with Colt in production.

>>31635374
As far as rifles go they can't. How many years has the SCAR heavy barrel variants been in design?

One thing Colt doesn't do is sit on models for years. They either produce it or it gets canned.

>>31635387
>As far as rifles go they can't.

See

>>31635344

Then kill yourself.

>>31635397
Yes a rifle that they were handed the TDP to.

Seriously how many years has it been? I think we're nearing 10 if not over.

>>31635424
0/10

>>31635446
Right when FNtards get hit with hard facts you don't have a comeback to you shout trolling.

>>31635453

Zero out of ten.

>>31626831
Nothing. It's a great rifle. But no rifle that exists today is better ENOUGH than the M4 to justify the costs of replacing it.

>>31628330
No, he's probably just Squid.

>>31635576
7 years going by the wiki.

>>31633767
Why would they change it if there is still high demand? Lol

>>31635767
There isn't high demand.

i still dont know what the scar offers that cant be done by the thousands of AR's already in service

>>31635800
Be a CoD gun.

>>31635800
>longevity
>reliability
>accuracy
>manual of arms

>>31635871

> Reliability
> Accuracy

These are so close as to be indistinguishable for those of us on /k/, and especially you, anon.

>>31635882
>go shoot a lot of bullets
>maybe even...TRAIN

>go shoot one bullet at something really far away

If you say so.

>>31635871
im interested to hear your examples for each category showing how the scar is superior
>inb4 piston is more reliable maymay

>>31635891
t.noguns

>>31635903
I've already posted pictures of my SCAR in this thread.
t.retard
>>31635893
>Longevity and reliability
See >>31627102
I can provide more reliability tests if 200,000 rounds isn't enough in your book.
'cause I'm sure you shoot so much, being an oper8r and everything.
>accuracy
The SCAR can hold MOA out to farther distances than an AR or an AK.
>manual of arms
Everything is ambi. You can run the charging handle right handed, gun hand on gun and other hand can manipulate the bolt, left handed is vise versa, or you can just use it like you would an AK.

>>31635930
>>31635871
>what is an MRP
>what is an SR15

>>31635893
If you really are looking for examples of everything this late in the game, you need to lurk moar.

Step it up, bring an actual complaint against the rifle if you want to bitch.

>>31635930
>I've already posted pictures of my SCAR in this thread.
oh shit sorry, i had my IP tracer turned off
>literally everyone posting as anonymous
sounds like you're the retard

>I can provide more reliability tests if 200,000 rounds isn't enough in your book.
why dont you do that since your proof of that claim is two dudes talking in a room

>The SCAR can hold MOA out to farther distances than an AR or an AK.
conjecture, and primarily barrel related

>Everything is ambi
you can make an ambi AR cheaper than buying a SCAR

>'cause I'm sure you shoot so much, being an oper8r and everything.
>SCAR owner
>calling others mall ninjas
>all this projection

>>31635985
.308 stays super sonic longer than .223 or x39 can
And you full on mad posting.

>>31627057

I shot one with 10th Group during an FTX, I like that there's very little muzzle flip on semi, certainly less than M14s. Auto's not terrible. I was able to get two round bursts on target at 400 with irons from the knee, and I'm pretty weak for man. My only con is that the gun is so light and the recoil impulse is so short that it felt like I was being prodded in the shoulder pocket with a knife hooked up to a car battery. Granted, I'd been shooting upwards of 60 rounds a day through an M107 for the previous four days and that morning, so maybe I was a bit tender. It's something I could get over, I guess, but that's what stuck out at the time.

Also,
>dat high-pitched "ping!" with every shot

>>31636009
>now were comparing the scar 17 to an AR in 5.56 because I say so
>not realizing you can have the SCAR or an AR in either 308 or 556
kill yourself my man

File: Scar 17.jpg (351KB, 1600x1071px) Image search: [Google]

351KB, 1600x1071px

>>31626831
Turns out for the price for a 5.56 gun it wasn't worth adopting, the Scar 17 however with the 7.62 x 51 is totally worth adopting.

>>31636032
When your budget gets slashed, you cut costs.
Thats not a concern for everyone though.

>>31635985
lol, I'm retarded because I'm posting as anonymous or I'm retarded because you think I'm lying?

Well, it's not "two dudes talking in a room", it's one of the most popular ranges in world, running guns on FA until they break. And then doing it over and over.
But to be fair, skip ahead to 8:05

It's does have to do with the barrel, yes, but do you think a Bergara USA with a 20 inch barrel will have the same accuracy as a C308 with a 20 inch barrel?
Sub MOA doesn't come from making the barrel longer.
And it's not conjecture. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLBF_Gkg91U

Yea, and then you've redesigned the gun. So you're admitting that the features that the SCAR has are better than that of an AR.
Thank you for proving my point.

>projecting projection

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

The more you know

File: 19425323439_6c20aedec3_o.jpg (286KB, 1800x1201px)

286KB, 1800x1201px

>>31636050
>>31635930

>>31626831
Obama, the generals, and the media kept saying 'boots on the ground' and everyone would just drop their rifles. It was never meant to be.

>>31635985
>you can make an ambi AR cheaper than buying a SCAR
But then at the end of the day you still have an AR.

>>31636050
>lol, I'm retarded because I'm posting as anonymous or I'm retarded because you think I'm lying?
no you're a tard for thinking someone knows youre the same poster was someone who posted their scar earlier in the thread despite everyone posting anonymously

>posts video with negligible difference in accuracy
>could easily come down to the shooter
wew, ya got me

>Yea, and then you've redesigned the gun. So you're admitting that the features that the SCAR has are better than that of an AR.
>Thank you for proving my point.

>the scar was the first ambi gun
>nobody made ambi controls for the AR before the SCAR was introduced

>>31626831
My Turkish MPT-76 arrived today

60% the price of a SCAR, and .308 goodness

MPT will be a fucking god bestseller in a year, mark my words, heaps better than FN shit

>>31636096
No, I'm not retarded for him/you assuming I'm no guns.
He's wrong.

Yea, it shows both guns being sub-moa...which is what I claimed. Glad we could clear that up.

I didn't say it was the first ambi gun and whether it was or wasn't isn't relevant. Stop making irrelevant points because you're wrong.

>>31636156
Should read
>holding MOA, not sub-MOA
They're sub MOA at ranges that weren't tested, if memory serves correctly.

>>31636135
I just heard from my brother that Delta ordered 400 MPTs for use in Maghreb.

Apparently its an improvement over 308 HKs

>>31636156
I never claimed the scar wasn't a sub MOA gun. my claim since the start is the scar doesn't justify its price tag when the thousands of AR's in service can achieve the same results. not to mention is cheaper to service and repair an AR than a scar

>making an ambi AR is making it more like a SCAR
>bringing up ambi AR's is "irrelevant"
how is that irrelevant, ambi AR's existed before the SCAR was introduced, it's not something FN invented

>you're wrong
remains to be proven

>>31636204
HK 417 is better
Turk MPT 308 is better than both
However as a DMR SCAR still is the preferred rifle until 417 fixes their shit, or MKE makes a Turk DMR version of MPT

Scar had a good run. But it was more polish than substance.

JSOC adopting it for 6 years gave it a huge rep boost with laymen.

>>31636204
I never said anything about the price, nor did I address anyone who mentioned the price.
I said the SCAR has advantages over the AR.
Which it does and which I've just proven.
Multiple times.

It's irrelevant because weather the AR or the SCAR was the first or the LAST gun to be ambi, the AR is not ambi, the SCAR is.
If you buy a car with square tires, and then replace them, a car that comes with round tires has an advantage over it.
You could've been replacing square tires since the dawn of time, it doesn't matter.

ambi > not ambi
therefore (at least in this instance)
SCAR > AR

File: 24425259612_35e139e129_h.jpg (356KB, 1600x1200px)

356KB, 1600x1200px

>>31636259
>I said the SCAR has advantages over the AR.
The MRP is ambi btw retard. And no I'm not that anon you're talking to. Just laughing at retarded SCAR owners.

>>31636259
>reiterate the same points multiple times
>still haven't proved any point yourself
>abstract car analogies
lel ar btfo amirite

File: later homo.jpg (56KB, 500x499px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 500x499px

>>31636280
YES YOU FUCKING MORON.
It's ambi, because they realized that that was a preferable design.
So they changed it from the design of the AR.
Because it's an advantage over the design of an AR.

>>31636287
I have proven that the SCAR has advantages over the AR in the following ways.
>longevity
>reliability
>accuracy
>manual of arms

That is what I claimed.
That is what I have proven.

If you would like to see these things proven again, see >>31635871 and follow the conversation as long as your paramecium brain can handle until you admit to yourself that you do not have the cognitive capacity understand the very simple examples I have provided.

>>31626831
Price, reciprocating charging handle, and proprietary accessories.

File: 1471882689523.jpg (83KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 500x500px

>>31636356
>Because it's an advantage over the design of an AR.
Right so lets compare modern rifles to a rifle designed in the 50s/60s while not coutning any improvements to said desing

You are a fucking retard.

>>31636356
>I proved it by showing a youtuber talk about it
lmao stay triggered

>>31630671
Interesting read, thanks.
As opposed to most gun nuts online, the guy has actual engineering knowledge and knows how to apply it. 10/10 would read again.

File: IMG_7643.png (363KB, 480x639px)

363KB, 480x639px

the buyers remorse in this thread is delicious

>>31626831
>military
It's just a new gun that they don't actually need. So why spend untold millions changing to a scar?
>civilian
Real proliferation won't happen until they lower the price tag. I've held one, do think it feels very nice, especially light and good feeling for a 308 rifle. The base 556 model was nice, but nothing that special.

>>31626831

These threads are literally all made by the same guy:
>>31636490
>>31626831
>>31636101
>>31631264

>>31626935
>Is the SCAR overrated, or is it the best rifle ever made?
It literally doesn't do anything better than a regular old AR15

>>31636561
This is true, but it is undeniably better than the AR-10...or really any other battle rifle for that matter.

>>31636548
>These threads are literally all made by the same guy:
probably is the same faggot

>>31636561
>It literally doesn't do anything better than a regular old AR15
Being just as good is a feat in and of itself. It's a viable option for destroying motherfuckers.

>>31636561
>>31636601
Samefag

>>31636601

>>31636490
>>31626831
>>31636101
>>31631264
>>31636587

Hooolly God, he just keeps going...

File: butthurt.jpg (33KB, 494x358px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 494x358px

>>31626831
they carried over all the flaws of the AR15 lower, yet it is not compatible with any lower

>>31626831
$3000 dollar price tag

>>31631340
I heard that FN wasn't allowed to modify COLT's production processes when the contract switched over.
essentially making then fn branded colt m4s

File: FU pepe.jpg (64KB, 645x548px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 645x548px

useless thread

another useless thread in a sea of useless /k/ millennial shit threads

Oppenheimer and many other halfway intelligent people ditch /k/ because of the colossal stupidity

constant circlejerking AR threads

the same question asked over and over

the same whiny fucks complaining about SCARS and having no first hand experience about firearms besides a mosin nagant and a shitty revolver and a hi point and the guns they can not afford that they "finger fuck" at the store

writefaggotry about sade feelings and anthropomorphized female guns and sad tanks

posting feet at any possible opportunity

I didn;t think it was possible that /k/ could get worse than it was years ago but I was proven wrong

to drive this point home the white knights will screech and complain about THIS post and tell me to get the fuck out.

wew lad

https://youtu.be/M1uK8XpBkUg

well this mud test on the scar showed a malcunction of some sort, though it look like he didnt drop it action side in the mud. id still buy it