Which would you choose between the Larue OBR, LWRC Repr, or the

>>32823814
Out of those three I only own the SCAR and I'm completely happy with it. It's accurate enough (I get about 1 to 1.8 MOA depending on the load when I bench it), it's light for its class, and even without the muzzle brake it manages the recoil very well. It's also the cheapest out of those options.

I'd probably be just as happy with the Repr or an LMT 308 but I've never shot them.

Scar? Duh?
>1MOA
>lighter
>more reliable
>more durable

File: 27078009081_964f37d0ac_b.jpg (147KB, 1024x989px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 1024x989px

Also chiming in for the SCAR. Nothing wrong with the other 2, but the SCAR is light, accurate, and reliable.

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

2MB, 4573x2393px

>>32823814
I don't like LWRC as a company. Specifically with the repr they released them with magwells cut too small. The owners have chased off the talent more recently.

The predatobr take down think looks interesting.

SCAR is tits, but it's a one size fits all solution. If that size works for what you want, it's a helluva way to do it.

File: iJUcL.jpg (71KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 800x600px

>>32823814
SCAR, obviously.

>>32823814

SCAR-17 out of those three but they're extremely overpriced.

Now isn't the time to jump on the SCAR 17 bandwagon. They'll be back at $2500 before you know it.

>>32823814

SCAR is easier to pack around.

If you're sitting around, the REPR or LMT as your boat anchor is fine.

>>32824454
>They'll be back at $2500

I want to believe.

SHTF?

Which ever one has more commonly available parts

>>32823814
Op just a word of advice. All those rifles are excellent. But from a parts availability perspective they would be a nightmare in a shtf. Stick with a standard AR15 platform.

>>32824416
Do you know the msrp of the other two rifles, poorfag?

>>32824416
For you.

>>32823814
>SCAR
>shtf

I mean, I'd love it in combat, but after you start to experience wear and need to replace parts, you're going to have a bad time.

>>32824454
>paying $2500 for a gun with a <$800 production cost

>wear
>SHTF
How many fucking rounds are you expecting to blow through in a SHTF scenario? Do you faggots even think about what you post?

>>32829267
>t after you start to experience wear and need to replace parts
trust me phamilia, you'll be long dead when the SCAR experiences effective wear and tear.

>>32829290
>not knowing how market economics work.

File: magcover.jpg (208KB, 607x797px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 607x797px

>>32823814

In for the 17S as well. 2nd choice would be the REPR but IIRC you're taking a pretty significant step up in weight with no perceivable benefit.

>>32831331
>point out the disparity between market and production cost
>REEEEEEEEEEEEE you don't know how market economics work

>>32831505
Cost of production and value on the open market are not always correlated.

Why is west texas intermediate pegged to that shit they pump out of the north sea? Because reasons.

>>32831532
>Cost of production and value on the open market are not always correlated.

woah, you don't say

the point is, that disparity is part of the judgement to be included in a purchasing choice

>>32823814
>SHTF

SCAR hands down, the other two are impressive, but the SCAR just has the reputation where I feel I could lug it around for a lot longer before shit starts to break.

probably the SCAR

>>32831562
I find that the SCAR can command such a high profit margin to be a reason to buy one. Speaks to the ability of FN to stand behind their product for years to come.

>>32829308
>>32831318
I love how it's always treated as if there will just be random bolts and springs sitting around for spares, or some fallout bullshit.

If a person hasn't put away spares and is somehow blowing through thousands of rounds, then why now use a gun from the pile of corpses the fantasy would require to break a gun

>>32831591

seems more like inflated pricing due to herd mentality

i know prices are different now, but back in 2013 i got a larue predatAR (the one with a pencil barrel) for $300 less, and it came a geissele trigger, a surefire brake, plus it weighed a tiny bit less

shit costing more is usually a disincentive unless aforementioned herd mentality is involved

>>32823814
The FAMAS

>>32831615
But SHTF isn't happening

>>32831675
I got mine because I liked it, and the price was not unreasonable.

>>32832334

And I got the Larue because I liked it and it cost $550 less with the trigger included (more if I count the Surefire QD mount).

I guess the high-end AR-10 makers got smart and jacked up their prices now to SCAR-17 levels seeing how the SCAR is no better than their products.

>>32823950
>>32824399
>>32831405
I'd go with the SCAR. If you're willing to spend more money than necessary, I'd go with an SR-25 Mod 2 as well.

I's only between that and the SCAR for me.

>>32832573
IMO LaRue has fallen well behind most other manufacturers, at least as far as making a modern fighting rifle with the features and parts you'd get if you just went with Daniel Defense or something similar.

Their precision shit still seems to be top tier though.

>>32831675
>bahhh anything I don't like but is being sold at a premium is herd mentality, but I pay big bucks to suck Mark Larue's dick out of pure genius.

Nigga listen to yourself.
And then kill yourself.

>>32833073
I was nicer about it, but basically this DESU.

I bought a REPR years ago with deployment money, fucking heavy but fun to shoot. Ive taken it hunting and took a good sized deer with it too. Doesnt like certain mags.

>>32833073
>paying less for something that is just as good is sucking dick

pro-tip: premium means something that is objectively better, which the SCAR is not.

>>32833251
>paying less for something that is just as good
>just as good
I don't see a fucking short stroke gas piston on that FagRue.

pro-tip: price premium is not what you think it means, dumb fuck.

>>32824454
Here in Belgium (of all places...) the cost of a SCAR is 4500 € (4800 $)
Fucking FN policies

>>32833251
If you keep repeating it I'm sure it will be true, poorfag :)

>>32831615
By the time your gun would break in a hypothetical SHTF you'd either long since have run out of ammo or you'd have a giant pile of other collected guns to choose a replacement from. It's not gonna be an issue. If you're that worried about extreme long-term though, get yourself a bow and learn how to make your own arrows.

>>32829290
you've seen their books and know what their overhead is?

also you seem to forget that most of the cost of a product is
1) product liability insurance
and
b) transportation

now go outside and light yourself on fire.

>>32833251
>Just as good as

The mating call of the poorfag

>>32833251
Did u not get your GED?

>>32823814
Scar erry day

>>32823814
SCAR. LaRue is a faggot and piston ARs are shit.

>>32829290
>MUH BOM

>>32838514
Nice meme gun

>>32838531
It's not a meme gun

>>32838514
>8-shot fuddy-five the size and weight of an AR
>the path that the cartridge would have to travel to get from the magazine up to the chamber
I'm going to vomit.

File: 1424214229013.jpg (118KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 640x640px

>>32839967
It's an April fool's joke
>He thought it was real
>Mark larue wins again

>>32838514
That might be the worst thing I've seen today.

None; the HANDL Mk17.

I own both a SCAR17s and an OBR along with several other 7.62x51 rifles. The SCAR is the best all around 7.62x51 rifle I've ever owned. The OBR is an excellent semi-auto precision rifle, but is much more a niche rifle.

Wait for SCAR prices to drop back down and buy one once they drop below $2700. Do not fall for the DPMS gen 2 meme.

>>32823814
I got a 7.62 larue predatar. It's light like a scar but sub moa with match ammo.

File: K&MM17S.jpg (144KB, 1620x749px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1620x749px

>>32823814
>>32824454
Meanwhile this sweet .308 spacegun is $2000 and made out of AR-10 parts and easy to swap
You just have to wait for them to build you one

>>32841021
SCARs are submoa with match ammo

>>32823875
The Scar has a muzzle brake? As opposed to a compensator/flash hider?

>>32823875
>>32823904
>>32823950
Pretty sure the scar is heavy as fuck for an AR.

>>32841141
16 is a heavy gun compared to an AR-15.

An AR-10 can be as light as a 17, but are normally closer to FAL/G3 weight.

>>32841021
The Mk20 SSR was developed because straight-out-of-the-box Mk17s were stomping all over M110s, to the extent of shooting ~9.3" groups at 1000 yards.

>>32841141
A SCAR-H only weighs .15 lbs more than an M4A1 despite having 1.5" more barrel and being a .308.

>>32841141
>a 308 battle rifle should weigh no more than a 556 m4 clone
>a scar 17 is heavy
>a scar 17 is heavy compared to other 308 battle rifles

Wanna know how I know you don't know shit about guns?

>>32841135
In the US it sells with a PWS muzzle brake.

File: IMG_7265.jpg (72KB, 478x490px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 478x490px

>>32841254
It's a fucking beast too. If you shoot a 17 at an indoor range, every one will hate you.

People can feel the concussion two stalls down.

>you also get stared at by all the grills who came to the range thinking guns weren't loud

>>32841286
Yeah, I swapped mine pretty quickly for a flash hider.

>>32841223
>the mk20 was developed because the mk17 were stomping all over m110s.
>An upgraded version of a gun was made BECAUSE the gun was good.

senpai? whatcha smoking?

I personally love my SCAR-H. However ammo has gotten expensive, and somewhat scarce in my area, I have a few (minor) issues with the stock and I haven't even held much less shot the other two rifles you're considering OP

File: IMG_7271.jpg (26KB, 300x299px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 300x299px

>>32841326
How is the recoil? I don't ever shoot from a bench at an indoor or outdooor range. All my shooting is done at my grandfathers farm but goddamn even then if your not the one shooting it prepare to flinch.

>>32841385
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?5709-SCAR-17-discussion&p=97049&viewfull=1#post97049
>In early 2009, the organization sponsoring the development of the system held a two week test of the Mk16 and Mk17 versus the Mk12 and Mk11 respectively.
>During this testing, both service grade, off the rack SCAR's roundly trounced the existing precision rifles they were competing against.
>I witnessed a 9.275" group fired from one thousand yards out of a Mk17, stock, no upgraded triggers, or anything else.
>Gun came out of the box, scope was mounted and off it went to the range.
>It was from this testing that the Mk20 precision SCAR was developed.

File: 1469110972795.jpg (265KB, 1334x1000px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 1334x1000px

>>32841460
TL;DR
The 17 was so good, they wanted to see what dedicated accurized version would do

.5moa is the answer

>>32841396
It's still pleasant for a .308 even without the brake. The slow cycling heavy bolt carrier really helps.

>>32841479
This

>>32841479
>The slow cycling heavy bolt carrier really helps
>a heavier mass will somehow impart less energy than a lighter mass

someone skipped intro high school physics

>>32823814
Scar for sure

File: shit.jpg (106KB, 578x712px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 578x712px

>>32835481

File: seinfeld.gif (574KB, 295x221px) Image search: [Google]

574KB, 295x221px

>>32834699
>most of the cost of a rifle is product liability insurance and transportation

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

51KB, 385x535px

>>32843146

File: checking.png (7KB, 463x132px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 463x132px

>>32843364
>people with different opinions on a subjective topic must be poor

>>32843082
>energy
Look into impulses.

>>32843530

no, look into energy, i.e. the thing that operates the action which will result in some sort of felt recoil once the impulse of the recoil spring and other factors are accounted for.

File: lm8mws_f_lg_1.jpg (210KB, 2800x1867px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 2800x1867px

>>32823814
>no LMT LM8MWS

Because glorious 7mm-08

File: screenshot.jpg (50KB, 414x533px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 414x533px

>>32843433
>implying

>>32841141
The fuck?

A SCAR isn't an AR. Also for a 7.62 battle rifle it's featerweight. Go pick one up compared to an FAL or CETME and tell me the SCAR is heavy. Yeah a bare bones AR-10 can be as light, but none of the ones actually being used are that stripped.

File: bill gates.jpg (154KB, 850x580px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 850x580px

>>32843717
>mfw bill gates doesn't want a scar

scarfags btfo

>>32840175
>>He thought it was real
>>32839967
>would

>>32823814
>general shtf and hunting purposes?

A bolt action 308

File: AA12 open cycling slowmo GY6.gif (2MB, 721x367px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 721x367px

>>32843652
The more equal and opposite the momentum of the bolt carrier group is to the momentum of the projectile/s and gases out the muzzle, the more proportion of the rearward impulse of the gun against you the spring can reduce, keeping shoulders comfy.
Though with weapons firing from a closed bolt, the forward impulse of the bolt slamming into the shut position at the end of a cycle is unopposed and relevant to keeping the gun steady, so for that reason a faster, lighter bolt can be better at staying on target.

>>32823814
HK MR308

>>32844072
>The more equal and opposite

The force imparted by the projectile and gas leaving the barrel and the bolt carrier group acting against the recoil spring are in the same direction, there is nothing opposite about them. The SCAR is not the AK-107.

Also the recoil spring impulse is a function of the spring weight, not the mass acting against it.

>>32823814

Unless you're in a tree stand you'll probably enjoy a bolt action rifle more for "general hunting purposes."

File: aa12 recoil, gentle push.gif (2MB, 239x95px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 239x95px

>>32844120
>The force imparted by the projectile and gas leaving the barrel and the bolt carrier group acting against the recoil spring are in the same direction
Pressure works on the piston and bullet, sending the bolt carrier group rearward and the bullet forward. Opposite.

If the bolt carrier group and bullet/gases have equal but opposite momentum after they're done being forced upon, the rest of the gun shouldn't have changed velocity from firing; no recoil for now.

Instead of a bolt carrier group, it could be gases that are given equal and opposite momentum to the projectile and gases going forward, and you could let the gas blast backwards out a tube over your shoulder, giving you a recoilless rifle.

But back to a bolt carrier group, you want those to stop, and doing that is going to push back the rest of the gun, into you. But not all in one sudden slap, thanks to the recoil spring. If your bolt carrier group is heavier while having a certain amount of momentum, it goes slower, which means a suitable recoil spring can push the rest of the gun into you with less force, but for a longer amount of time. More distance for the bolt to travel can also increase the time and thus decrease the force that an appropriate recoil spring will work the gun into you.

>>32844685
>sending the bolt carrier group rearward and the bullet forward. Opposite.

The bullet going forward isn't what causes felt recoil, it is the reaction going the opposite direction (i.e. towards the shooter). Your statement betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of Newton's Third Law.

>no recoil for now

Nope. The reactionary force from the expelled gas has already acted on the shooter at this point (where else could that that force be going)? The advantage of a semi-auto action in recoil reduction is that it has siphoned part of that reactionary force to operate the action.

>Instead of a bolt carrier group, it could be gases that are given equal and opposite momentum to the projectile and gases going forward

And in a recoil-less system the entirety of the reaction force is vented backwards into the air behind the shooter, meaning the shooter is not even part of the system. An irrelevant statement since in this context, the entire point is the issue of felt recoil.

>it goes slower

And it is still heavier, momentum being the product of mass and velocity, so what is your point?

>which means a suitable recoil spring can push the rest of the gun into you with less force

And what prevents the use of a heavier recoil spring with a lighter BCG, which will do the exact same thing with a heavier BCG: spread the force out over more time.

You might want to read about how exactly the AA-12 can behave in that way before posting it again. The key is how much of that reactionary force is siphoned off to operate its action.

>>32841141
nogunz pls
go talk about your video game guns somewhere else

>>32844879
>The bullet going forward isn't what causes felt recoil, it is the reaction going the opposite direction
The reaction is a process which I have described sequentially, ending with shooter's felt recoil.

>The reactionary force from the expelled gas has already acted on the shooter at this point (where else could that that force be going)?
The reactionary force from the expelled gas pushes the bullet forward and the gun back. Extremely shortly after that starts, the gas port gets pressure in it, and the reactionary force from the expelled gas also pushes the bolt carrier back and the rest of the gun forward. If the bolt carrier group was sent back with equal and opposite momentum to the bullet, then the rest of the gun would have started and stopped moving. This time is extremely brief, so the distance the gun moves is extremely little, negligible, so there is no human felt recoil with an equal and opposite momentum bolt carrier group/bullet, yet, before the spring's compression.

>An irrelevant statement since in this context, the entire point is the issue of felt recoil.
It's relevant in that it demonstrates what's going on at a certain point in cycling, with the BCG/backblast going rearward, the projectile going forward, and the gun currently going nowhere. It will have the end result of recoiling, but we're not at the end yet.

>>it goes slower
>And it is still heavier, momentum being the product of mass and velocity, so what is your point?
Time. Traveling slower over a distance means the travel takes more time. More time for the spring to work, less force it needs to do it.

>And what prevents the use of a heavier recoil spring with a lighter BCG, which will do the exact same thing with a heavier BCG: spread the force out over more time.
A heavier spring can stop a faster BCG within a given distance, but it takes less time.
A longer spring can stop a faster BGG within a given time, but space is limited within a reciever.

>>32841141
i would fucking permaban your ass just for that comment.

>>32845091
>The reaction is a process which I have described sequentially, ending with shooter's felt recoil.

Your sequence is utterly wrong. Especially the part where you said "no recoil for now".

>If the bolt carrier group was sent back with equal and opposite momentum to the bullet

You mean, the bullet and gas since the two are inseparable in this discussion. And no, this is not what happens in reality, since that would mean 100% of the reaction force is captured by the action. There is no if here.

The reactionary force of the bullet cannot be captured. That reaction is completely translated into felt recoil (and it is not negligible). The reactionary force of expanding gas is what is used to operate the action.

>It's relevant

It isn't because what you describe is not what happens with real semi-automatic rifles. A hypothetical rifle that captures 100% of the reaction force leaving zero recoil when the bullet leaves the barrel would be firing a zero mass bullet, and have no expanding gas leaving the barrel. Literally impossible.

>More time for the spring to work, less force it needs to do it.

Spring force is a function of its compression and its rated weight, not time or mass.

>A heavier spring can stop a faster BCG within a given distance, but it takes less time.

And that same lighter BCG has less energy to impart, so again, what possible comparison can you make here? None whatsoever.

>>32843652
you're pretty fucking dumb. You know that, right?

>>32845222

Thank you for your input.

Here, feel free to explain how I am wrong in

>>32845162
>>32844879
>>32844120

Otherwise, keep your whore mouth shut.

>>32845162
>captured
Well, I'm cutting my losses here
If you really don't get it, sorry I couldn't explain in a way you could understand.
If not, I'll give you a 7/10, got me blabbering quite a bit.
Not me: >>32845222

>>32845247

guess i will sleep now

food for thought: energy of 308 ball at the muzzle is over 3kJ and that is 100% felt recoil (unless you can explain how the action is actuated by something other than gas in a fixed barrel system). how is that negligible? this is before any talk of expanding gas, by the way.

>>32845275
You don't even know what perceived recoil is. Fuck you're dumb.

File: 1462778865409.png (296KB, 668x437px) Image search: [Google]

296KB, 668x437px

>>32823904
>A 308 SCAR-17 is heavier than my 223 AR-15, this is unacceptable

>>32829290
Yes, because God forbid a business seeks profit

File: 100_0178.jpg (3MB, 3456x4608px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3456x4608px

>>32843698
You can get a SCAR in 7mm-08 if you wanted.
Creedmoor is better

>>32845275
Where is time factored into your maths?

File: IMG_1125.jpg (3MB, 2602x3470px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2602x3470px

>>32823814
Scar is the shit m8

>>32843652
>>32845238
A heavier bolt that cycles slowly will take more time to transmit force than a fast bolt. Force over time equals acceleration. More time results in less acceleration. Humans regard high acceleration over short periods to be stronger recoil than acceleration over longer periods. A slower bolt takes more time to depress from the bullet recoil, so that's why the SCAR has softer recoil than say, a bolt action rifle of the same caliber

>>32846347
I didn't know India used the SCAR

File: IMG_5579.jpg (348KB, 715x980px) Image search: [Google]

348KB, 715x980px

Old Lothar Walther barrel obr for sass. Scar as general shtf battlerifle. Shtf want rifle with you at all times 5.56 ar and loadout is my first choice.

>>32848944
What does that mean in English?

File: IMG_5580.jpg (78KB, 538x538px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 538x538px

>>32849120
1. Would go with earlier production Larue OBR when they used LW barrels for semiauto sniping
2. Come SHTF I would favor the SCAR for everyday use from among the choices but I know with optic and loadout I would be putting it up more often and would go back to a lightweight 556 AR.

File: lRvnxN8.jpg (680KB, 3765x2439px) Image search: [Google]

680KB, 3765x2439px

>>32851088
>with optic and loadout I would be putting it up more often and would go back to a lightweight 556 AR
suck less you wimp

>>32851088
The SCAR is lightweight

>>32846484
>A heavier bolt that cycles slowly will take more time to transmit force than a fast bolt

And yet the force will be applied for a longer period of time... so where does that leave you?

There are two time periods to consider: firstly, the force being applied through the recoil spring while it is being actively compressed to the fixed end (the stock and shooter). This is a function of the spring weight, not the amount of mass pushing it.

The second period is the force/acceleration acting upon the shooter with the spring at full compression (i.e. when the BCG is at its most rearward position). This calculation includes the mass of the entire rifle, the mass of the BCG is irrelevant at this point since the spring is static. The work applied to the rifle is the amount of energy carried by the BCG's residual rearward motion. This is a function of mass and velocity, not just mass.

>so that's why the SCAR has softer recoil than say, a bolt action rifle of the same calibe

No, the SCAR has less felt recoil than a bolt action because part of the reaction force of the expanding gas that would have been fully felt as recoil in a bolt gun has been siphoned off to operate the action. It is the same reason any semi-auto of the same weight and caliber has less felt recoil than a bolt gun. How much less depends on many issues, and I posit the mass of a bolt carrier is of a secondary nature. The primary factor will always be the amount of energy that the action managed to siphon off.

>>32845486

see >>32845238

>>32854490
>And yet the force will be applied for a longer period of time... so where does that leave you?

It leaves you with a more manageable recoil, kid. Did you even read my post? You can't comprehend basic physics. You're like that black actor who dropped out of college because he though 1 was equal to zero. He was so sure about it, but he just didn't get it.

>>32854490
Do you understand why a pully is useful?

>>32854576

Already discussed this, the force being acted on the fixed point during spring compression has nothing to do with the mass, but the spring weight. At full compression the mass of the BCG isn't even relevant.

Your post is incorrect garbage. Especially egregiously stupid is the statement regarding why a SCAR has less recoil than a bolt gun because of bolt mass. Are you fucking serious? You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.

>>32854615

Yes, explain how the concept of mechanical advantage is relevant when the bolt travel of a SCAR is the same as all the other semi-auto rifles.

I want to hear this.

>>32854510
Look, this is like trying to explain to a fucking cow why grazing on a railroad is a poor idea. The most expedient solution is just to run it over with a cow catcher.

Retards aren't worth the time, especially on 4chan.

>>32854960

You must be feeling especially euphoric right now.

>>32854227
8.2lbs+1lbs10.5oz loaded mag+optic+Light

Not as bad as I thought compared to my 308 ars.

>>32855038
I shall tip my fedora to you, sir.

>>32854936
>shock absorbers would absorb shock better if they didn't absorb shock.

That's all you're saying. You're the only one who believes your crap, so I'm content to let you continue being retarded.

>>32854952
Hahahahahah oh jesus you're so fucking dumb.

>>32854490
You sure write alot for someone with double digit IQ.

>>32855195
SCAR weighs 8lbs stock

>>32854952
Being able to spread the force out over time is advantageous.

>>32857003
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

>>32854490
>And yet the force will be applied for a longer period of time... so where does that leave you?
With a lower impulse.

>>32823814
Got me a SCAR and an OBR, don't have a Repr, so can't speak on that. But I'd go with that SCAR. Thing seems invincible from what I can see so far. The LaRue is nice, one of them botique rifles and all, but doesn't seem to run as doggedly as the FN.

>>32857384
Yeah, 4 mag load out 6.6lbs mags.
Optic and mount maybe
2lbs +oz for light brings gun to 11 or so lbs loaded. Not bad.

>>32823814
>>32823963
>>32824399
>>32831405
>>32841474
>>32845824
>>32846347
>>32852922
>SCAR is beautiful weapon
>Love it to death
>would be my pic for OP's question
>that fucking stock though
ugly as shit

>>32859505
The boot is seriously based as fuck.

>>32859505
Your taste is as shitty as your life.

File: IMG_5624.jpg (79KB, 1024x744px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 1024x744px

>>32859505
Other stocks out there

>>32823814
No matter how fancy and exotic you make your AR it's just an AR. Because of that I'd either get a basic no frills AR or the SCAR.

>>32862956
Fucking photographer putting the throw levers on the wrong side

>>32862938
>UGG Boot, meet SPESS Boot

>>32863802
Maybe the charging handle is on the right side.

>>32823814
SCAR. I own a SCAR and OBR, and the OBR weighs a fuck ton and you're not supposed to use steel cased ammo in it. It works well if you're shooting from a bench with a bipod, but for hunting and SHTF the SCAR is much better.

>>32858032
>>32857003

That's nice. Let's see your engineering degree.

>With a lower impulse.

Impulse is change in momentum, which is mass * velocity. A heavier bolt is more mass. So why do you insist the impulse is lower?

>>32856337

Your fundamental ignorance on why a semi-auto gun of any type has less felt recoil than a bolt gun means everything you say on this topic can be discarded.

>>32841141
If it has an adjustable stock and the fixings, seems pretty reasonable to me. Also, the mechanisms seem pretty robust, so you could actually lug it and use it. Granted most of /k/ are a bunch of fat fucks, but they have good knowledge.

>>32866073
RETARDS GONNA RETARD.

>>32866617
>so emotionally invested in a run-of-the-mill mass production rifle that he attributes fantastical physics-defying properties to it

sad

File: 1420752328828.jpg (19KB, 262x236px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 262x236px

>>32866708
>so mad about being too poor to buy a rifle that he spends hours writing retarded posts bashing it so he can tell himself that those grapes don't taste that good anyway

>>32866754
>mfw when my gun collection is worth $100k

nigga didn't you see that screenshot. >>32843433

i got like $77k in my checking account.

i could buy 25 of the damn things tomorrow. i could sell some investments and buy another 50. but i won't, because i'm not a superstitious idiot.

File: image_0.jpg (121KB, 601x601px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 601x601px

>>32866784
>my dad works at Nintendo!
You've got to grow up some day kiddo

File: mfw.jpg (970KB, 2877x1969px) Image search: [Google]

970KB, 2877x1969px

>>32866798
>final grasping at straws

yes there are educated adults with disposable income on this board

File: reaction146.gif (3MB, 200x150px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 200x150px

>>32866824
>some numbers on the screen are proof! Waaaaaaaaaaaaah!
Kek, if you're trying to convince people that you're wealthy maybe you shouldn't prove yourself to be a moron incapable of understanding basic physics

>>32866784
>i could sell some investments and buy another 50
you're really poor, then.

File: 100_1049.jpg (1MB, 3049x2197px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3049x2197px

>>32866839
>if you're trying to convince people that you're wealthy

I never said I was wealthy. that was merely to prove that SCAR rifles are hardly beyond my reach. the "poor" argument is utterly infantile but i figure i would dispense with that childishness.

>maybe you shouldn't prove yourself to be a moron incapable of understanding basic physics

Funny. I took the time to respond to arguments I found to be incorrect, and I was met with nothing more than insults. Sad really.

Admittedly, I only have two years of college physics (mandatory for engineering majors) and then one semester each of statics and dynamics (out of academic interest), but really, this is fairly basic stuff.

>>32866865
>some
>that means "not all"

There is a difference, dear anon.

File: 1450460891117.png (8KB, 56x21px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 56x21px

>>32866891

>>32866824
Post guns?

>>32866920

If an autist can get a MS, what does that make you?

File: 100_1050.jpg (1MB, 2000x1265px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2000x1265px

>>32866933

sure, why not. already have my potato camera out.

File: 1482014659125.jpg (48KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 500x375px

>>32866935
Not a noguns trying to write autistic blog posts on an anime imageboard :)

File: 100_1052.jpg (1MB, 2000x1500px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2000x1500px

>>32866952

File: 100_1053.jpg (871KB, 2000x1500px) Image search: [Google]

871KB, 2000x1500px

>>32866973

last one... it is way too late to be taking new arsenal pictures.

honestly, i am a bit saddened by the reaction i get for trying to reason through the topic of recoil, something i find genuinely interesting to me as both an engineer and a gun enthusiast. fairly standard for 4chan, i suppose.

look at all the upset faggits in this thread.

>>32866990

Of the two which do you prefer? The Tavor or the F2000?

>>32866990
nigga you don't even understand the difference between perceived recoil, net recoil, and impulse. Maybe you should fucking shred that FagNel diploma because it's clearly not doing you any good.

>>32866995

Definitely the FS2K. It is comfy as fuck.

Tavor has issues with POI shift with handguard pressure.

>>32867001

Au contraire, I think I have a pretty good idea what perceived recoil and impulse is. I have no fucking clue what net recoil is (and by inference, total recoil?). Please elaborate.

Also feel free to make suggestions and corrections, that is the heart of learning and discourse. :)

>>32866953
>noguns

>>32866952
>>32866973
>>32866990

:)

>>32867016
>that is the heart of learning and discourse
bitch this is 4chan.

From one EE to another, my sincerest advice is that you assume all posters on /k/ are of the lowest human denominations and treat them accordingly.

AdHom is my preferred method of communication here, and it should be yours too.

>>32867001
>FagNel

I like that. My preferred term is "cunthell".

>>32867037
>EE

Specialty? I do CPU stuff.

>>32867048
MEMS and VLSI.

But we're all just shitposters here.

>>32866073
Because the velocity is lower

>>32869354
>yo dog, we heard you like having your face destroyed so we put a 1913 rail on the cheekpiece of a bullpup with a reciprocating charging handle so you can rip your flesh while you get your teeth knocked out

>>32869403

It's probably a model/airshit, but the charging handle is on the other side of this thing.

>>32870201
It's a 3D printer lower, and has a ladder cover to keep from grating faces

>>32869354
I laughed

But seriously, the charging handle has been moved to the other side and you can probably get a cheek rest to attach to the rail.

>>32866990
>owns more than one bullpup
>doesn't own a safe

>>32841141
"AR" DOES NOT STAND FOR ASSAULT RIFLE
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

What's a good price for a SCAR 17S?

>>32871274
Below 3000 NIB

>>32871274
Jump on under $3k
This should go down if you wait

>>32871274

Below Serial #HC20000 $2200-2400
Besides wear and tear, these models lack the improved stock latch and the no-rattle stock clip.

2012 you could expect 2700 pre-election. 2600 if you found an exceptional deal/generic % off coupon.

Price increased due to $3000+ post election because of the repeated attempts to pass a new AWB causing panic buying with rare dips to $2900.

You should be able to find one for $2800 if things calm down. $2700 would give some people a semi-erection nowadays.

>>32829308
SHTF like Syria is an extended unconventional war. Real SHTF is usually a long, drawn our process.

Prepare for years, not months. Prepare to participate usefully in a local ad hoc militia, because those form in real SHTF. Ignore all fantasy SHTF and study history.

Resupply isn't likely for lone wankers. If you don't have it stashed, you won't have it.

>>32872470
And it will not happen in the US anytime in your lifetime

File: Opinion.jpg (48KB, 394x406px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 394x406px

>>32873227

>>32873321
Civil war is more likely
And the concept of a long term conflict in conus without massive amounts of foreign intervention is farcical. There are just too many resources in this country to not see other governments pouring in something.

>>32823875
All of those rifles MSRP is around 3-3.5k. How is the scar 17 any cheaper?

>>32873443
Other countries may intervene, but it would be a while before they did anything in order to make sure the civil war takes its toll on Americans. It would probably be years before any serious intervention actually happened.

>>32874190
No one wants to be late to the party when that means land grab or proxy governments.

>>32875877
BRB, need to puke super hard for real right now

File: tumblr_ogv17fyBnJ1qjtttio1_540.jpg (143KB, 521x810px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 521x810px

>>32875970
better?

>>32876011
maybe a little but that Arisaka offset Scout mount with nothing on it still isn't doing anything for me

>>32841082
I've heard of QC issues with those. The 5.56 version, that is.

File: tumblr_o6vv9frdTJ1tre780o1_1280.jpg (109KB, 750x501px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 750x501px

>>32876077
Fair enough

>SCAR-17 for SHTF
Is life even real?

>>32877502
Do you even have a 2 digit IQ?

File: R716-16B-P-FDE-2.jpg (73KB, 989x335px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 989x335px

>>32823814

>>32877786
>Piston AR

>>32876093
Intellectually I know that gun probably isn't much longer than a 21" FAL but holy shit that looks like a totally unmanageable fencepost.

File: tumblr_mpssxtCptq1qg8bcmo1_1280.jpg (137KB, 1280x851px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 1280x851px

>>32881425

File: IMG_6576.jpg (102KB, 640x400px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 640x400px

>>32883450

>>32885603
What light is that?

>>32886253
The picture's from 2011, so whatever it is, there are probably much better options these days.

>>32886296
That might also explain the muzzle device

Early REPR models came with too small magwells.