SCAR is kill. All hail cz bren

Nobody gives a fuck about the SCAR 16s now, why would they care about the budget model made by Shoddy Machining: The Company?

>>32575298
>takes pmag

So do SCARS, now. If you have an older one you can buy the new lower and swap it in. you know, if you have a shit ton of SR25 mags lying around.

File: potato.jpg (62KB, 600x663px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 600x663px

>>32575298
>more aesthetic

this bait's pretty tasty

>>32575323
Are you serious? Since when? This was the only real thing keeping me from buying one

>>32575328
https://www.handldefense.com/product/mk17-m110/

>>32575351

So you need to pony up for an aftermarket lower since the SCAR lower is retarded? Yeah, no thanks.

File: 9096385177_7068f9b207_b.jpg (251KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 1024x683px

>>32575328
He's talking about Handl Defense's SCAR-H lower that takes SR25 mags

Also the SCAR-L/16 takes Gen M3 Pmags just fine

>>32575351
I know about that, I was asking if the stock Scar-17S accepts PMAGs and SR25 mags

Not paying 400$ for a fucking chunk of polymer

>>32575364
waste of money, see above. it's rape what they're charging for the handl considering it's just a chunk of plastic that some chinks could make for 3$

>>32575326
The Bren looks good, the scar looks questionable.

>>32575371
>Not paying 400$ for a fucking chunk of polymer

Chunk of aluminum actually.

File: donald-trump-grow-up.jpg (55KB, 920x537px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 920x537px

>>32575378

>Forged AR lowers are like $60 bucks at my LGS
>Paying 350 for this garbage

>>32575381
It goes for the same price an AR10 lower does.

>>32575378
for what reason, I doubt anyone has ever broken a scar lower, the only vulnerable point is the tab the slots into the butt stock

its also not a serialized part so they don't have to do any record keeping for them the cost should be at max 150$

>>32575374
kek

>>32575363
>>32575371
SR-25 magazines were not as widely used when the SCAR-H was created.

Also Handl's lower is billet aluminum

>>32575298
>cz reliability
>MAC intensifies

but m-muh stringent quality control and R&D Costs!!!

literally why would you want to add more weight to a scar-H with an aluminum lower? There's no issues with polymer, the design puts zero stress on the lower, and even if it had a catastrophic failure it's not serialized you can just buy a new one

>>32575403
Some people really really really like PMAGS, and right now that company is the only one making a SCAR lower that accepts them, and they make it out of aluminum for whatever reason.

scar fags are hilarious
>buy 2500$ gun
>replace entire lower and LPK for 800$
>replace stock for 250$
>replace charging handle for 50$
>replace picatinny grips with extended M-lok grip for 400$

Congrats you now have what the rifle should have been from the beginning and you've spent 4000$

>>32575422
If it's just a matter of having as many mags as possible, I'd rather spend 20$ each on PMAGs than 40$ for limited availability Scar specific mags.

scar fanboys will tell you that PMAGs have feeding issues and that aluminum mags are more structurally sound but that's just them justifying their purchase and not admitting they are too cheap to buy the Handl

>>32575428
Some people have more money than sense. I'd at most replace the lower to use PMAGS(and maybe the stock because I hear it breaks extremely easily), because I already like how the rifle looks.

>>32575391
Yes the fuck they were in common use.

FN is just pants on head retarded, and greedy fucks in the civilian/le market.

>>32575896
why would they give two shits about the civ/le market?

>>32575896
FN had more confidence in their own FAL mags where they could control the specs so they just modified those. That's not retarded at all.

>>32575314
FPBP

>>32575428
Only thing I'd replace is the trigger and POSSIBLY the stock, but I don't think it's as fragile as people say it is
Dunno why you would add more weight up front, I'd just use a VFG and some pic condoms

File: 6WZ1i54.jpg (903KB, 1200x1417px) Image search: [Google]

903KB, 1200x1417px

>>32575896
>FN is just pants on head retarded, and greedy fucks in the civilian/le market.

FN Herstal is a semi-government owned company which pretty much never fires employees and employs a large number of people. They have high running costs due to that.
This isn't helping FN USA much.

Personally, I still have hope for the MSBS. CZ can go suck a bag of dicks.

>>32575973

The prime reason for replacing the stock is aesthetics. But people don't like admitting that.

>>32575983
Is there any updates to the MSBS? I haven't heard anything about it in over a year and if I remember correctly it didn't get ATF approval.

File: 1380281828879.jpg (898KB, 2500x1667px) Image search: [Google]

898KB, 2500x1667px

>>32575994

It's not really finished yet last I heard.
The army is still tweaking stuff.

>>32575298
>>32575323

>pmag

You mean people actually use those?

>>32575983
Look at how mad people get just because CZ is delivering a better product. Face it SCARfags, CZ is utterly dominating the market space while the SCAR keeps losing market share and will cease production this year. Your 4k 5.56 belongs on the trash heap.

File: 1422117927637.jpg (2MB, 3264x1310px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1310px

>>32576616

Wait, I'm a SCAR fag because I want an MSBS?

You didn't think this through, did you?

>>32575896

You're a fucking idiot. The SCAR was designed from '03-05, and completed LRIP in '07 - the same year the very first Pmag was ever made. Well before LR Pmags were even a thing.

So tell me again why FN should have designed their weapon around a product that didn't even exist?

>>32575314
cz machining marks is a worse meme than glocknades

>>32576736
He was talking about SR25 mags, which have been in use since 1993.

>>32576834
>He was talking about SR25 mags, which have been in use since 1993.

I wonder why FN-H didn't use proprietary mags made by another company.

Oh, wait...

>>32576961
Why would they not make it compatible? They were making it for SOCOM, who aren't going to have any FAL mags in inventory, so making the SCAR mag a modified FAL mag instead of a variation of the plentiful (for the original customer) SR25 mag was just fiscal dickishness because they knew SOCOM would pay.

>>32576994
>Why would they not make it compatible? They were making it for SOCOM, who aren't going to have any FAL mags in inventory, so making the SCAR mag a modified FAL mag instead of a variation of the plentiful (for the original customer) SR25 mag was just fiscal dickishness because they knew SOCOM would pay.

Did you miss the part where it is SOCOM that gave FN the specifications? If SOCOM cared in the slightest about SR25 mags, they would've stated they wanted the damn magwells to be compatible, you blithering idiot.

FN simply took the mag design they knew best and improved on it.

>>32576994

Why are LR Pmags popular? Because original SR-25 mags are retarded expensive and notoriously unreliable.

FN already had the tooling to produce a modified FAL magazine which are cheap and without issues.

And get this, Kevin Boland confirmed that FN has produced and offered a SR-25 mag compatible lowers to their Mk17 customers, except nobody wants it. The only person complaining about it here is you, and you don't even own a SCAR.

>>32576616
You mean the market space jam-packed with ARs, cause I have seem approximately zero brens for sale in person

>>32576616
The 5.56 SCAR is retarded, but so is the CZ. The only thing "totally dominating the marketplace" is ARs. Unless you just have to be a special snowflake or are a collector using anything but an AR is retarded.

>>32576994
Wht wouldn't they make their own mags so they can get the extra money and can make sure any issues aren't due to someone else's QC issues? Besides I f SOCOM wanted SCARs that used SR-25 mags then they would have gotten them by making it a requirement. They didn't because the didn't care.

>>32577247
>The 5.56 SCAR is retarded

Your fucking face is retarded. The sole reason guns like the SCAR and HK416 exist and continue to be used by JSOC elements today is because they provide reliable functionality in performance categories the Stoner-DI AR fails to deliver.

If you're going to be shooting up to a thousand rounds a day, every day, through suppressed, short barreled machine guns, you need a piston operated platform to keep up.

The M4-CQBR couldn't cut it, the Mk18 still can't cut it. The reason 9 AR-15 entries from Colt, LMT, KAC and others were surpassed in the SOCOM SCAR evaluation is because they couldn't cut it.

I'm sorry to inform you the Stoner gas system is not a be all end all solution for every application and there are face shooters in this world that wanted something else, hence why the SCAR is a thing.

>>32577337
SOCOM no longer uses any 5.56 SCARs. Because they aren't any better than ARs.

>>32577337
no. after evaluating the SCAR the US Army came to the decision that the M4 is still the better rifle so they didnt adopt it

>>32577383
>Because they aren't any better than ARs.

False. 15% budget cuts across the board along with being required to stand up an additional battalion at every group including purchasing required aviation assets meant that SOCOM had to pick a program to defund. The Mk16 was chosen because similar capability was provided by the M4 which are obtained from the parent branches essentially free.

The myth that SCAR's "aren't any better than ARs" is easily discredited by the fact that no AR was selected during the SOCOM trials. FN's product is obviously better at SOME things, the things SOCOM was interested in, otherwise the solicitation and adoption of an entirely new rifle would never have been initiated.

>>32577388
after evaluating the SCAR the US Army came to the decision that the M4 is still the better rifle so they didnt adopt it

Also patently false. The entire SCAR family of weapons (including the Mk16) passed Milestone C and were officially adopted into the US Military's arsenal. Individual units that wish to procure their own funding are free to purchase and utilize the Mk16 as they see fit. SOCOM elected to defund their acquisition due to the aforementioned budget constraints, absolutely nothing to do with the M4 being "the better rifle".

>>32577464
Yeah you're full of shit. The SCAR16 is a dumb concept. It offers nothing over the M16 family other than higher costs.

>>32577535
>extruded aluminum, hammer forged barrels, large blocky parts and injection molded polymer is expensive

No you. The only thing the AR has going for it is economy of scale and over a half century of continuous refinement. And even given that, it's still not better at being a SCAR than the SCAR is.

File: 1417370076452.jpg (586KB, 1516x1153px) Image search: [Google]

586KB, 1516x1153px

>>32575298
It's only in .223

>>32577587
Quit arguing with morons. It's making them feel inadequate.

>>32577587
>this thing isn't this other thing, so it's shit
fuck off cunt.
They're both 5.56 pill spitters. the scar isn't better. deal with it.

>>32577611

Let me know when your 10" barrel AR can shoot more than 6K rounds of suppressed full auto without self destructing and get back to me.

>>32577591
this....

was OP thinking it was 308 or comparing it to the 17S....?

>>32575996
Is that a Russian red dot? Looks really familiar. Czech maybe?

>>32577587
>extruded aluminum, hammer forged barrels, large blocky parts and injection molded polymer is expensive

You can get all this on an AR-15 too. So theres no need for the SCAR

>>32577984
>You can get all this on an AR-15 too.

Not really. And when you try, you end up with something like the ARAK or Serbu-15, which are ostensibly NOT AR-15's.

>So theres no need for the SCAR

There is when you are trying to shoot large volumes of fire through a suppressed short barreled rifle. That is what the SCAR was designed to do, because that is what the original costumer NEEDED it to do.

>>32575326

It does look better.

File: 27381056571_0c835f91a3_b.jpg (139KB, 1024x812px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 1024x812px

>>32578080
But it objectively doesnt,

>>32578068
>Not really.
Yes you can. It's called the HK416.

>>32578094
>posts heavily modified SCAR
Just face it. The SCAR is on it's deathbed.

>>32578113
>thinking anyone who wants wants a scar will be dissuaded
They're a status symbol, mostly and civilian models are an afterthought because FN already has military contracts.

File: 11084623_892640060798035_67481531_n.jpg (133KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 640x640px

>>32578113
That just it, it can be heavily modified. Can the bren even take aftermarket grips? Does it even have an aftermarket?

Why is it only in .223?

Why would I want a weapon made by czechs?

>>32578101
you don't even know what extruded aluminum and injection molding are you fucking idiot. The entire point of designs like the SCAR/805/APC556/etc are to be cheap as balls to make. Just like the original AR-15.

>>32575385
Only if you care about rollmark. I got an APF complete lower with a fantastic trigger for those dollars.

>>32578207
>stampings
>cnc machining
>extrusion / plastic injection
that's the real progression of small arms not stupid shit like tweaking gas piston for the millionth time

>>32578101

There's no extruded aluminum receiver, large simple to machine parts or injection molded plastic besides furniture on the 416. And in that regard it's no different from any AR-15. It's also expensive to manufacture, just like the AR-15, which was the issue being argued. So thanks for backing up my point.

However there is one major difference between the 416 and the Stoner AR, that obviously being its method of operation.

The 416 uses a short stroke op-rod gas piston because JSOC (the people who first requested, adopted, and continue to use it) found the direct impingement gas system of the M4 to be incapable of providing reliable operation and parts sustainability for their firing schedule.

So once again, thank you for further backing up my point that the AR is not a be all end all solution for every user and situation. It is most certainly not "the best" at everything.

File: VZM.IMG_20151019_153709_zpsiz9d0sze.jpg (134KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 800x450px

>>32578177
The Bren grip has interchangeable back straps. They will eventually have a healthy aftermarket after it gets into more peoples hands. The CZ Scorpion hasn't been out that long and they got a pretty good aftermarket.

.223 is all you need.

Czechs make good guns.

>>32578177
I'm guessing it's to take advantage of the US markets and if it does well they'll realise a .308 eventually.

I can see it finding decent success here provided it isn't dogshit and there being a good after market for it.

Not sure why people are salty or gloating, it's potentially another great gun that will make jobs stateside churning out doodads and toys.

CZ literally brined the Czech military into adopting the Bren despite it having issues. There's reports of Czech military people disliking the Bren because of this.

>>32578272
This is the story of every military procurement forever no one cares and Czechs don't even have a real military

>>32578272
Good. They should support their domestic arms industry. Holding a grudge on a weapon that is now excellent (806) is retarded but expected for slavs. The 805 I pretty good too with NATO mags despite some manipulation oversights.

>>32578247
The scorpion has a good aftermarket because its one of the cheaper latest wave of 9mm rifles. The bren is in a sea of competition for about the same or less money.

But .223 is not all I need.

>>32578311
Its taken 10 years to work the bugs out.

>>32578177
>Why would I want a weapon made by czechs?
i really cant even say if this is bait or not

>>32578247
>.223 is all you need.
actually, 5.56x45 version is available in france

and the SCAR is very good for 7.62NATO, for 5.56 it's litteraly useless unless you have a FA version

>>32578342
>Its taken 10 years to work the bugs out.
None of the complaints the Czechs had were reliability based. Being a faggot about kikes forcing you to use their mags and not having a bolt release don't make a gun buggy.

>>32575298
>Not even bullpup

Idk why you guys get so excited for the same thing over and over again.

File: f40.jpg (47KB, 640x249px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 640x249px

>>32578358
The Bren can use 5.56 and .223.

>5.56 it's literally useless unless you have a FA version
pic related

>>32578380
Why would I want a failed design?

>>32578342
Outside of some bullpup most don't really care for, the AR, some AKs, the SCAR and a handful of other small projects there's not really much in the US semi auto rifle market because the AR is so darn profitable and popular.

It'll find a niche and aftermarket will appear, the Scorpions is a successful pistol caliber carbine in an age when it is rapidly approaching obsolescence, people like CZ and they like fun new things, let's see where this goes.

>>32578384
I think he was referring to the increased bulk and cost not being particularly beneficial in 5.56 which I suppose I agree with but again, fun things are fun

>>32578177
>Why is it only in .223?
Now available in .300 blackout

http://cz-usa.com/product/cz-805-bren-s1-carbine/

>>32578472
Not sure if thats an improvement

>>32578511
For SBR purposes it is.

>>32578518
Depends on what your SBR purposes are, and if your double stamping it.

File: 1460526317063.png (195KB, 368x375px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 368x375px

>>32575326
>scar
>looks like a tan one legged dicksucker wearing an ugg boot
>bren
>looks like a sleek black gun from your favorite video game

>>32578472
>16" .300blk

If there's one thing monolithic receiver designs like the SCAR, BREN, APC, etc have a shortcoming with it's adapting the gas piston location to correspond with different caliber requirements without redesigning the entire weapon.

>>>32578518

You're never going to see that gun in that caliber with a barrel shorter than 14" because it just won'twork. 300blk requires a pistol length gas block location to ensure enough back pressure to cycle the weapon. You can't move the BREN's gas port location further into the receiver so you're stuck with extra barrel out front.

That being said, .300 is a meme caliber so I don't really care much anyways.

>>32578572
>You're never going to see that gun in that caliber with a barrel shorter than 14" because it just won'twork
CZ's website says otherwise.

http://cz-usa.com/product/cz-805-bren-s1-pistol/

>>32577591
WRONG. Google cz bren. 1st link to cz website. Says 223/556. What's it like being that much of an angry poorfag

>>32578646
yeah, same thing

>>32578599

Let me know how it works with subsonic loads. If it even works at all.

>>32578207
>The entire point of designs like the SCAR/805/APC556/etc are to be cheap as balls to make

That's why SCAR/APC556 are so cheap right?

>>32578687
FN sells the 16 for under $1000 to departments

>>32577098
Well, here in Athens at Clyde's Armory if I remember correctly, there IS one behind one of the counters, an FS-2000 as well, haven't been there in 5 months though, so they may be gone.

>>32575381
What's billet machining? What's economy of scale? Why are you so dumb? Why are you so poor?

>>32578687

They are cheap to make. Less so to produce in low volumes, import in restricted form and convert for commercial sale. But still relatively inexpensive to manufacture.

FN simply chose to price the rifle commensurate to competing products with a similar feature set and reap the huge profit margin as a result.

Do you have a problem with capitalism?

>>32575434
Stock is fine. This is coming deom someone who owns the KDG stock as well.

>>32575433
>>32575428
Retards on poverty level incoming projecting hard. Fucking kill yourselves.

>>32575422
Magpul is going to make a SCAR PMAG anyway

>>32578247
>>32578177
>Only .223
Nigga it literally says in their websites that it's in .223/5.56

>>32578068
What's wrong with the arak

>>32578782
So basically the same thing.

Why isnt it in .308 too?

>>32575896
Why do morons with no subject matter expertise so passionate opine on said subject? Oh wait, I'm on k/.

>>32578662
I would have a hard time beleieving they are going to chamber a gun in a caliber whose entire point is to be shot suppressed, without consideration for subsonic ammo.

I mean way stupider things have happened in regards to firearm design but let's not be too pessimistic

>>32576961
>proprietary mags made by another company.
The SR-25 uses LR-308 mags, which are not proprietary, they are the closest thing to standard in the semiautomatic .308 world, and have been for almost 30 years.

>>32578231
was looking for a cheap ar10 lower thanks anon

>>32576994
See >>32577085

>>32578808
the LR 308 uses SR25 pattern mags.
They havent been the closest thing to a standard since magpul released the pmag.
There are four or five companies who make SCAR mags right now, and its not hard to modify FAL mags to work reliably.

>>32577383
Wrong.
>>32577388
Wrong.

>>32578795
>Basically the same thing
5.56 and .223, while sharing similar dimensions, are not the same thing. Put 5.56 in a .223 gun and you'll blow up the rifle from the pressure. Put .223 in a 5.56 gun, and it'll -somewhat- cycle. There's a reason why the .223 Wylde chamber is popular because you can shoot both .223 and 5.56 loads safely and reliably. It's basically the same thing with 9mm Gilsenti and 9mm Parabellum, they share similar dimensions but one has weaker chamber pressures than the other.
>Why isnt it in .308 too?
Market demands, and that also means going back into the drawing board followed by a shit ton of planning and discisions for which available magazines it'll accept, import/export laws, etc.

>>32578272
The Czechs were coming off the VZ58 - a fantastic service rifle - of course there is going to be gripes.
Just like there were gripes on the M14 after switching from the Garand

>>32577535
Why are you so butthurt? Is it because you're too poor to afford a scar16?

>>32578860
So basically the same thing.

>>32577672
It's israeli

>>32575298
Because you can remove the cheesegrater on the SCAR.
https://kineticdg.com/product/mrex-mlok-short-fde/

I have a 17S, but a 5.56 could be fun.

>>32578755

I should further emphasize the brilliance of the SCAR's design:

It was brought to market and priced to compete with top of the line AR's like the KAC SR-15 and LWRC M6. Rifles representative of the best capabilities the AR had to offer and each sold with pricetags to reflect their respective manufacturers investment of quality research and development.

Meanwhile the SCAR is the comparative equivalent of a modern western AK-47. Designed to be cheap and fast to produce in huge volume. Yet it still provides the accuracy, reliability and performance features the same or better than those top of the line rifles it was priced to compete with.

It's both cheap and good. No matter your personal preferences you have to admit the design has true merit.

File: download.jpg (10KB, 244x207px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 244x207px

>>32578860
>Put .223 in a 5.56 gun, and it'll -somewhat- cycle
There is not "somewhat", it works fine.

>>32578659
You can also get it in .300 memeout

>>32578875
No, not the same thing, otherwise I could shoot 5.56 ina .223 remington chamber. Oh wait.

>>32579003
Your just the 3rd person to say that

>>32579022
You can, you may not want to. But its essentially the same thing, slight pressure difference essentially. If your autism needs shine a light between them for you to be happy go ahead.

>>32575298
but dose it come in .308 flavor???

>>32578247
>.223 is all you need :DDDDD
found the Cucc

>>32578872
>willingly buying a second rate product because of cost
See >>32578912
A top of the line AR would be better actually because a stock SCAR is lacking until you do some work on it.

Nice rifles and made well, but they are overpriced for civilians because FN can get away with it

>>32575434
>Some people have more money than sense

If poor people had a mating call, this would be it.

File: Best Economics Textbook.jpg (41KB, 655x621px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 655x621px

>>32579100
Its priced in line with its competitors, the sell whatever the ship over in short order. I would dare say that FN has found a very valid price discovery mechanism.

>>32578472

>"available"

So are ACR, MCX, and MPX caliber conversion kits. Let me just run out and grab one.

>>32578860
>>32579022
the difference is the same as 7.62 RFN and .308 you coon, just because it says .308 on the side of the gun does not mean it can't fire 7.62

>>32579128
"Just as good as" as well

>>32579146
.308 have higher pressure than 7.62x51 NATO. So yes, a gun chambared in .308 can fire any 7.62x51 but not every 7.62x51-chambered weapon can fire .308.
With ..23/5.56x45 its the other way around

>>32579100
>they are overpriced for civilians because FN can get away with it

But that's the oxymoron of the SCAR. It's both overpriced because it's dramatically cheaper to manufacture, and at the same time it's not because other products with similar features are priced in the same bracket.

It's the duplicity of the SCAR's design reality and FN's free market tactics that most critics fail to address which specifically they're criticizing and even more frequently confuse with one another.

>a stock SCAR is lacking until you do some work on it.

For what it is and what it's intended to be I completely disagree. The SCAR comes out of the box with everything you need besides ammo. Anything you might chose to add is a matter of personal preference more than implicit need.

File: not worth it.gif (613KB, 295x221px) Image search: [Google]

613KB, 295x221px

>>32579195
You need to do a fair amount more shooting I see

>>32579195
Maybe go do some more research.

>>32579137
True, not a terrible price just so many ARs it kind of warps the markets.

CZ honestly should have started out with a .308 model, making a 300 blackout first is a puzzling thing given all the work it probably that had to go into it.

>>32579200
I was comparing it to an AR in the same price bracket, which like I said is probably unfair given the import costs and middlemen required for the civilian market.

>>32575298
You can actually buy a SCAR 16 though, the Bren 2 (pictured) isn't even set to be imported yet.

>>32579321
If CZ had come out with a .308 model and a 6.5 creedmoor model for $1500-1750 it would have taken the market by force.

Coming out with an intermediate cartridge version first? Its another one in the bucket.

>>32578855

kill yourself

>>32579382
They're already tooled up for 5.56 so 300 blk probably made sense given the only things they would need to change are the bolts and barrel after doing some math to figure out what to tweak.

>>32579557
>5.56 to 300 blk
>the only things they would need to change are the bolts

Are you for real right now?

>>32579583
The level of gun knowledge you have to contend with on /k/ is staggering.

>>32578094
>cantilever mount on a continuous top rail
For what purpose?

>>32579867
Some people use one optic on multiple rifles

>>32579583
I have also been told this by gun store employees. Except that all you need to change is the barrel and .300 BLK is good to go in any AR.

File: 620px-MSBS-5,56.jpg (125KB, 620x479px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 620x479px

posting MSBS best BS

File: 1408496369269.jpg (62KB, 720x677px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 720x677px

2/?

File: fb-radom-factorytour-thumb.jpg (113KB, 670x250px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 670x250px

>>32579960
3/?

File: fb-radom-msbs556-bullpup-demo-01-620x310.jpg (132KB, 620x310px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 620x310px

>>32579973
4/?

File: fb-radom-msbs556-bullpup-demo-04-620x310.jpg (58KB, 620x310px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 620x310px

>>32579992
5/?

File: msbs_demo_20120814_02-tfb.jpg (80KB, 900x290px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 900x290px

>>32580002
6/?

File: msbs-demo-20120814-04.jpg (237KB, 800x465px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 800x465px

>>32580014
7/?

I'm Czechfag...
BREN costs +/- $1600 here
Some experience during service in active reserve

I'm not saying it's a bad weapon... But I prefer to renovate the bathroom with that money

>>32580062
Your bathroom would look like shit with that budget.

File: msbs.jpg (85KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 600x800px

msbs is utter shit.

it's not going to be mass produced any time soon and you can forget it will be exported outside Poland due poland's poor choices.

>>32580292
>msbs is utter shit.
May I ask how you know?

>>32580215
In comparison with the current situation, after the investment of two BREN's will look like Lenin's mausoleum!

>>32580405
I thought I was the only one who thinks in terms of how many guns and bullets something will cost me

>yfw not obese anymore after discovering /k/ and cutting out most junk food and snacks because I can feed my guns with that money

>current year
>still thinking a 5.56 rifle weighing more than 7 pounds unloaded without a light, sling or optic is acceptable

>>32580488
I know exactly what you're talking about
>go out on Friday or 7,5 boxes of 9x19
So I'm not going anywhere and buy 20 of them...

>>32580315
I don't know. There are couple little thigs that could be annoying like accidentally changing adjustment of gas block.

Generally speaking, MSBS is ready to be produced since 2014, but Polish Army is holding them off for some reasons, instead, they ordered 30k Beryls in 2016, what really exhausted production capacity of FB Radom for the next 3 years (about 10k beryls per year with 3 shifts a day)

>>32579195
I don't know why y'all are nay saying this post, its right.

>>32579100
>a stock SCAR is lacking
what does it lack?

I own both high end (2000+) ARs and a SCAR16s.

Oh wait, you actually don't own any. Yeah, STFU.

>>32581450
They're retarded teenagers that think that writing NATO after the name of bullet automatically means its got mo stopin powah

>>32581514
because with 556/223, it's the opposite.

>>32581720
Yes but >>32579195 said this.

>>32575298
Considering how much the first model was a piece of shit, and how anything made by CZ lately has been garbage, nah, I'll pass.

>>32579200

The .308 SCAR is about $1000 more expensive than it's worth. I bought mine NIB from a guy that bought two and hid one in the safe until his wife saw the charges on their statement.

I learned two things that day:

1. Americans with credit cards = gun deals waiting to happen.
2. If I ever get married I'm keeping my separate accounts.

>>32578749
>buys overpriced shit
>calls other people poor

Kill yourself my man

>>32575314
didn't SCAR make a batch where the color was fucked up then sold them as limited edition

>>32575433
GI mags with magpul followers are FINE

RIFLE IS FINE

File: IMG_1978.png (980KB, 1200x809px) Image search: [Google]

980KB, 1200x809px

>>32582765

That was the first 100 SCAR 16S and ironically they were probably the best color matched SCAR's ever sold commercially.

File: 100_0190.jpg (2MB, 4573x2393px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4573x2393px

>>32575433
I dont like PMAGs, I buy Lancers L7s for my .308 AR, which are more expensive than 17s magazines.

>>32582841
>they were probably the best color matched SCAR's ever sold commercially.
You're kidding right?

>>32575428
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCIrnId7jwM
What do you expect. They had enough money to dump for an expensive rifle, they're certainly going to have enough to spend for all the "upgrades" for it.
The only worthwhile "upgrades" for the gun would be a better trigger and a angled charging handle.
Regardless, if FN had half a brain cell, they'd sell them for 2k MSRP and they'd make more money than they would ever dream.

>>32582880

No, I'm not kidding. Look, this is my serious face.

>>32582903
This guy talks like a faggot and his shit's all retarded.

>>32582903
>Regardless, if FN had half a brain cell, they'd sell them for 2k MSRP and they'd make more money than they would ever dream.

No they wouldn't. They'd make less than they are currently because every SCAR is being sold as soon as it leaves the factory. There is literally no economic incentive for FN to lower SCAR MSRP given the current market demand for them which far exceeds supply.

What would actually make sense is for FN to increase SCAR production, especially stateside in their SC facility. Then you might actually start to see prices lowered as availability and demand reach equilibrium.

It's basic shit my dude.

>>32582507
>The .308 SCAR is about $1000 more expensive than it's worth.

According to whom? You? Who the fuck are you? Explain why the market price for SCARs is as it is then.

>bahhh pe-pe-people pay more for it because of the scar name
>I-I-I don't have 3000 of disposable cash, and I-I-I won't spend it on the gun if I did. IF I DID.

It's called market pricing you dumb shit.

>>32582903
>if FN had half a brain cell
some random no gun faggit with poverty level wage calling FN stupid because he can't afford their products.

>>32583005
>my dude
never say that again, fag.

>>32583222
How is yours?

>>32583247

I'll say what I want, famalam.

>>32579022
The difference in spec is lead in the throat and the thickness of the neck.

A tight .223 chamber will produce overpressure with 5.56 because of constriction, not powder charges. The thicker brass in 5.56 means it'll actually hold less powder, and some .223 loadings aren't safe to use with 5.56 brass.

The vast majority of .223 marked guns have 5.56 compatible chambers though, so quit being a sperg unless you think a Czech bullet hose has an archaic match chamber cut.

>>32582841
Dud you frame your little certificate of achievement for being such a god damned sucker?

File: 1483793493701.png (762KB, 602x616px) Image search: [Google]

762KB, 602x616px

>>32583458

>>32577635

>>Implying the SCAR, HK416, XM8 (Insert other next gen rifle) can...
>>Implying anyone can carry 160lbs of ammo + magazines
>>Implying your not retarded

>>32583507
>implying they can't
>implying anyone said anything about carrying that much ammunition
>implying you aren't a faggot

>>32583591
>>Implying the DoD hasn't been trying to replace AR pattern rifles for 40 years
>>Implying any of them do anything at all better.
>>Implying the only thing you know about firearms isn't from Call of Duty: Autism edition.

>>32583706
Nigga u dumb as fuck.

>>32583706
>implying the SCAR trials weren't the first fully competitive rifle procurement since 1941
>implying the AR is the best there is or ever will be
>implying you even know how to imply correctly

It only takes one arrow you fucking idiot.

>>32576736
>So tell me again why FN should have designed their weapon around a product that didn't even exist?

Nigga, you dumb. Like a hard dumb.

>>32575983
Polish space rifle when?
I don't even care if it's any better than a SCAR 16 or high end AR, that thing just looks awesome.

>>32582879
For a $3700 gun in Canada are they even trying to match the FDE?

>>32583921
Why would you care about matching?

>>32575314
>Nobody gives a fuck about the SCAR 16s now
Is that because everyone can have SBR's now?

>>32575314
who cares about machining marks when the guns work?

>>32583997
16S doesn't enjoy as dominant a position in the 556 market as 17s does in 762. I'm speaking as a 16s owner. Having said that, I prefer the 16s to most ARs I have shot.

>>32584089
Or the finish falling off, amirite?

>>32577591
.223 is the best all around caliber.

File: 1439585398964.jpg (108KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 960x960px

>>32584143
But its not

>>32578159
You're an idiot. FN makes a FRACTION of their SCAR sales on military. Civilian sales are multitudes more. Look up sales stats idiot.

>>32584160
prove it

>>32584165
Got a citation on that chief?

>>32584160
>>32584178
7.5 Swiss is actually

>>32584187
too expensive, not enough guns chambered in it.

>>32583997
>everyone can have SBR's now
The fuck u meen?

File: 20160101_obama.jpg (131KB, 1167x790px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 1167x790px

>>32584216
>postan about being poor in a SCAR hate thread

>>32584229
even if you have a million bucks to spend on ammo you can still get more of it if the ammo is cheaper.

File: aesop__the_fox_and_the_grapes_by_midnightsqueaks.jpg (51KB, 385x535px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 385x535px

>>32584250
>the poverty intensifies

File: smug anime face 51.jpg (127KB, 1372x1080px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1372x1080px

>>32584282
>ad hominem
smug face time boys

File: anus.jpg (112KB, 615x435px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 615x435px

>>32584302
>ill call it an ad hominem!

File: smug anime face 19.png (117KB, 372x351px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 372x351px

>>32584337
>calling someone poor to refute their argument isn't the literal definition of ad hominem

>>32584382
Not when the argument literally is about cost.

>>32584409
so are you saying that cost is irrelevant, or that high cost is better?

File: chicken-with-a-gun.jpg (103KB, 790x1053px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 790x1053px

>>32584428
Neither. But go on

>>32578113
That's a ridiculous argument. Customizability is one of the AR-15's best features.

>>32575314
>this triggers the czechyboo

But actually though, nobody gives a shit about meme marks. My sig has them but i forget about them when im pulling that candy cane trigger that gives geisseles a run for their money.

>>32584182
fucking google lol are you serious?
www.howtogooglesomething.com

I really wanna know. Are all the SCAR hate threads started by like, a select group of poor fucks who just want to troll?

>>32583222
Market price in this case means paying for a name.

>>32585131
WHAT NAME? You think Bubba knows what Fabrique Nationale is?

If you can't see the merit of the gun and don't understand that the SCAR is the product of a purely SOCOM focused competition, you probably don't own a lot of guns and are dumb as fuck.. If you think 3000 is too much to pay for a rifle, you're really too poor to be talking about high quality firearms in the first place. Look at the SR-25, the REPR, the GAP-10, the JP guns. Fuck man, 3 grand for a piston driven sub MOA 308 out the box is a fucking bargain.

>>32585131
>>32585263
toldasaurus rex

>>32585263
>scar
>out of box
>sub MOA
I'm going to need proofs on that

>>32585511
then look at all the photos of the sub-moa targets on the tens of forums with these photos already?

>>32580650
>"I don't know"

At least you gave some justified reasoning.

Besides that shut up if you haven't heard reviews about it yet.

>>32585263
The real question is: Is it worth $2000 more than a FAL or PTR?
Yes if youre a faggot

>>32585790
ez yes because fal & ptr weight 6x as much lol

>>32585790
To you? Nah. You can barely afford to eat. To me? Of course. You realize cost/benefit curve is not a fucking constant, right? Poverty wage earners like you obviously have much more pressing needs like food and shelter. To someone like me (2 degrees 3 cars and 6 digit salary), of course.

File: JUST_98.jpg (31KB, 526x508px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 526x508px

>>32585853
Trump pls

>>32575298
>$1000 cheaper
First and foremost SCARs are luxury rifles and status symbols. How does a reasonably priced clone compete at all with the SCAR exactly?

>>32578646
223 AND 556 wowwie

>>32585853
Post bank account.

File: 1368514264492.gif (1MB, 225x124px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 225x124px

>>32575298
>cz

File: 1473059280435.jpg (53KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 300x300px

>>32575394
>MAC