why would anybody choose a SCAR in 5.56 when M4s/M16s exist for

>>33042573
Yes.

/thread

>>33042573
Not really. They do better without lube, but it doesn't take much to keep a good AR up at peak performance.

Most ARs are lighter and more accurate than their piston counterparts with less recoil (depending on gas/barrel setup)

>>33042573
tavor is best

>>33042667
>Most ARs are lighter and more accurate than their piston counterparts with less recoil (depending on gas/barrel setup)

really? tell that to LMT and LWRC.

>>33042573
>why would anybody choose a SCAR in 5.56 when M4s/M16s exist for cheaper?
Folding buttstock, monolithic top rail if you're trying to put a high-magnification scope on it, tacticool look.
>is a gas piston really better than the direct gas system in an M16 family rifle?
Not really. It has a few advantages and a few drawbacks that equal out to a wash.

The SCAR 16s is about half a pound heavier than a 16" AR with USGI barrel profile despite having a thinner barrel (7.0lbs vs. ~6.5lbs) and over a pound heavier than a 16" AR with one of the lightweight/gunner profile barrels that lines up better with the SCAR's barrel profile. They're wider and slightly taller as well.

>>33042765
LWRC is a piston. And LMT is a dense gun. Big ass quadrail and everything. They're both heavier than the DIs like Larue, Noveske, or KAC--and a good bit less accurate.

>>33042573
You are basically saying exactly what the US military found out. Nothing out new is really improving enough in performance to basic DI m4's to warrant spending to money to switch platforms. .308 SCARS are cool though.

>>33042573
>why would anybody choose a SCAR in 5.56 when M4s/M16s exist for cheaper?
no

>>33042614
You can't thread your own post, faggot.

>>33042765
LMT and LWRC make heavy rifles though.
>http://www.lmtstore.com/complete-weapon-systems-firearms-guns/complete-piston-weapons/cqb-mrp-defender-model-piston-16.html
>weight unloaded: 7.9lbs

>https://www.lwrci.com/p-428-ic-a2.aspx
>weight unloaded: 7.0lbs

Meanwhile a Colt 6920 is 6.4lbs

File: gas expansion.gif (144KB, 1072x268px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1072x268px

>>33042573
>is a gas piston really better than the direct gas system in an M16 family rifle?

For the average infantryman, no.
A piston will handle heat better, but that's not too relevant since you're likely going to be using the rifle in semi-auto 99% of the time and not be doing solo suppressing fire with it.

Another advantage is that if you run a silencer with an AR, you'd get more backpressure (coming out the ejection port mostly), so you can actually get some hot gas in your eyes, which gets pretty uncomfortable after enough shots. But again we have the issue that infantrymen are not going to be using suppressors and not all that many people in civilian life will either (Hearing Protection Act might change this though).

People talk about cleaning, but there's not a serious advantage here, probably the smallest of them. The SCAR takes gas in it's gasblock and against it's piston, and vents straight out into the air from there, as does the Hk416, meanwhile, the gas gets taken inside the bolt carrier on an M16, here it expands and unlocks the action, then venting out the side through the ejection port before the bolt can begin it's travel.
Most of the fouling of an M16 will end up inside the bolt-carrier, which might sound alarming to some, but it's also where the fouling is meant to go by design, the gun handles this perfectly fine, and you can seriously let the rifle get so fouled inside it's bolt-carrier that it looks like Pompeii in there and it won't seriously affect your rifle's ability to cycle (and cleaning it can legitimately be substituted with just more lube if you would need to).
It might be easier to detail-clean a piston action, but it's not really more reliable.

Ultimately, the SCAR and the Hk416 are good rifles, good designs made by good manufacturers, but they don't do anything really that amazing compared to an M16 and M4, which are quite good. In the case of the M4, it's lighter than the Hk416

>>33042726
>+8MOA
Just give me a Galil, fäm.

File: AR-10.png (146KB, 1200x396px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 1200x396px

>>33042829

my buddy has a 7.62 scar and its neat, i wish semi auto 7.62 rifles (particularly AR-10s) were in the price range of a high quality AR-15.

File: Vice Admiral and Navy SEAL Philip Gardner Howe in Ethos magazine volume 10 shitting on 5.56 babies.png (95KB, 880x982px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 880x982px

They shouldn't, the SCAR-L was a mistake.
The SCAR-H on the other hand brought battle rifles into the modern era and invalidated 5.56 NATO for use by special forces and other high budget groups.

>>33042905
I heard Galil's aren't that good. Confirm?

File: PTR-91A3R.png (241KB, 1123x327px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 1123x327px

>>33043082
The PTR91 is a good G3 clone made in America, and the basic GI style models can often be as low as $800, not accounting for dirt cheap surplus aluminum mags that work great.

If you want an entrylevel battlerifle, they're quite suitable (unless perhaps you're lefthanded).

>>33043180

im left handed

d'oh.

File: 1468162489799.jpg (70KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 640x427px

>>33042573
The m4 bores me to fucking tears and I don't care that it costs more.

>>33042573
>folding buttstock
>advantage

>>33043180
>>33043228
Lefty PovertyTheRifle owner here.
Works fine if you get a brass buffer. No badass HK slaps though.

File: galil extendo.jpg (279KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 1280x960px

>>33043155
I know little about the new ACE series, but the original Galil is basically an AK in 5.56x45mm and 7.62x51mm with some neat bells and whistles (my favorite ones are the sights, the turned up charging handle, and the built in bottle-opener).
They might not be mindblowing, but overall they are quite good rifles. You could probably expect one to group like 4 MOA, which is generally considered acceptable for a military service rifle (few soldiers would be able to put 1 MOA or less to good use, so there's no need to strive for that in your service rifle)

Issue comes that they haven't been imported in forever so they have a high price as a collectible, and this goes for magazines too, have fun finding just one Galil magazine for less than $75, and one that's not old and used. If someone found a spare magazine in an unopened package you bet your ass it'll cost more, even higher if it's one of the high capacity ones.

But assuming you actually had a brand new one, with a set of brand new mags, they'd be pretty good, a cut above the average AK. The Israeli got a bunch of free surplus M16s and CAR15s from the US so that kind of stole the Galil's limelight a bit, but there wasn't anything actually wrong with it.

File: 1276909827496.jpg (114KB, 298x500px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 298x500px

>>33042765
muh barrel harmonics nigga

>>33043246
Good enough reason.
The AR15 is excellent but I also want a Mini-14 because it's so different and cool.

>>33043248
I think the advantage of a folding stock is overblown, but it's not a bad feature to have as long as it's not a shoddy one, like the old AKS/AKMS underfolders.

File: 1416536339371.jpg (232KB, 1000x1500px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 1000x1500px

>>33043082
not knowing about M&P10

File: M&P10.jpg (457KB, 1280x886px) Image search: [Google]

457KB, 1280x886px

>>33043370
Do they still make that? How are they, comparable to the M&P15s but just bigger?

Would be nice with some basic OD furniture and a bipod.

File: 12472335_1349074305119269_7522644893021319149_n.jpg (39KB, 720x818px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 720x818px

Jesus Christ it's every other day with you people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PApRcRE-ft8&feature=youtu.be&t=8m9s

tl;dw SCAR 16s (armorer says more than one) 200,000 rounds *conservatively* of full auto fire and relatively never break. They have replaced only barrels and one hammer in that time. "Nothing else even comes close."

AR15's "We shear bolt lugs, we've egged out pin holes" "heat cycling kills them.

And before you start crying that it's anecdotal - these are 100% ideal conditions. Regular maintenance in a controlled environment and the SCAR comes out on top.

Speaking further to the reliability of the SCAR design (yes this is 7.62, I realize that ya queers) The LWRC and LMT rifles both fail in sand. SCAR passes. The H&K fails in mud. SCAR is the only one to pass to final drop test.
http://elcomercio.pe/politica/gobierno/defensa-reactivara-compra-fusiles-us31-millones-que-se-frustro-tres-veces-noticia-1627509

Lastly - if the SCAR design wasn't successful - why are so many "top tier" companies and countries so eager to clone it? (H&K, Chynah, CZ, etc)

So yes, you can shoot the same caliber for less money and you can do so fairly reliably with an AR - but the SCAR is the choice of alphas, nonvirgins, and people who work for a living.

Poorfags - please reply with tears now.

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

139KB, 1024x812px

>>33043561

>>33043580
Can someone do a price estimate on this rifle?

>>33043082
Multiple AR10's are under $1000 though.

If you extend that to any semi .308 you have the VEPR, PTR91, and several companies' FAL builds that're under a grand.

>>33043676
Scar 16s - $2700
KDG stock - $300
Barrel cut - $175 or $1000 new barrel
Aimpoint m4 - $800
Light w/ tape - $275

>>33043747
Oh
Vltor handguard extension - $250

>>33043689

im left handed and AR-15s are the most left handed friendly right handed guns in existence so im interested in the AR-10 for that purpose, since an AR-15 is a scaled down AR-10

>>33043783
Well, you have the M&P10, DPMS G2, DPMS LR308, PA10, and CMMG's AR10 all under $1000 for most models.

Of them, the DPMS G2 would be my choice. Pretty basic-bitch furniture but they have good barrels and accept the most AR15 parts of any .308 rifle.

>>33042573

It's significantly more reliable and has somewhat lower recoil than a standard AR. That's about all it has going for it though. It's a better idea to put money towards a SCAR 17 where the reduced recoil really shines.

>>33043852
>has somewhat lower recoil than a standard AR
Because it's somewhat heavier. It kicks more than a 7lb AR but less than a 6lb AR.

>>33043115
I saw that img before. Does it say what I think it says? Talibans would walk to them and expect medical treatment?

>>33042573
the MK16 is the apex of assault rifles anything else is trash tier. You can cry your poorfag tears all you want, deep down you know it's true.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_6_24/447078_.html

>>33043921
Yes.

Same shit happens/happened in Iraq.
>get ambushed
>hose down a bunch of haji's
>8 hours later they're standing outside the FOB begging for medical treatment
Granted that was generally close range fighting and none of them had center-mass hits because those that got hit center-mass fucking died on the spot. I saw people with exploded arms and shit though.

My favorite was one guy we showed the Kiowa cam footage of him getting his arm blown off by the Kiowa's .50 as he's digging in an IED as the docs are sewing his stump closed. He'd even looked right at the bird and it was easily a 100% ID match, he even admitted it was him.

Guess he'd rather be detained for a few months by the IP's than die of sepsis.

File: 1436318818818.jpg (188KB, 1280x854px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 1280x854px

>>33043561
>>33043949
>SCAR 16s (armorer says more than one) 200,000 rounds *conservatively* of full auto fire and relatively never break. They have replaced only barrels and one hammer in that time. "Nothing else even comes close."
the ghosts of John M Browning and Dieudonné Saive must still roam the FN factory.holy shit

I like my SCAR17s. Don't have a proper optic yet, though. Wouldn't get a 16, I just don't see the reason.

>>33043115
I'll add some heresay anecdotal evidence.
A corporal I knew said the 5.56mm was just not appropriate for the Middle Eastern theatre, as the average engagement was so far away.
The stopping power of 5.56mm is just not enough beyond 300m, and he claimed the average contact distance was 500-600m.
This is why 7.62mm is prefered in that theatre. 5.56mm is probably more suitable for closer engagements.

If I had to pick one for myself, for civilian use, I'd still probably go with 5.56mm

>>33043985
>begging for medical treatment
If it wasn't for political correctness, we could help them on the condition they convert to christianity.
They would then be our most loyal soldiers, no turning back.

>>33044042
I'll add again, this exact reason is why they rearmed the section marksmen with SR25/HK417 instead of the issue F88, and replaced some of the section level machine guns (normally 5.56mm Minimi) with the DFSW level Mag 58 7.62mm, or the 7.62mm "Maximi' machine gun.
This is the Australian army btw

>>33042852
6920 has a plastic handguard.

>>33042573
556 scar a shit
762 a best

>>33043838

i was looking at the MP10 because i have the MP15

only thing i dont like about it that it doenst have a full length rail and that god awful A2 grip and A2 stock

>>33044021

>Dat eye relief

kek

>>33043873
You don't know how recoil works do you?

File: osmium.jpg (9KB, 308x164px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 308x164px

>>33043873

>because its heavier it kicks more

if i got a 10/22 and made it out of pure osmium it would kick more than a standard factory 10/22?

oh wait it wouldnt recoil at all, because thats not how recoil works

>>33044167
He's not looking through his magnifier ya dingus. It's rotated off to the side and he's looking through his Eokek.

>>33042573
tl;dr
Socom and army didn't want to cooperate, so shills try to shitcan M4 to sell their Ar18 clone

The whole scar debacle was due to SOCOM operational needs vs. Big army logistical preferences. Back when the M16A2 was the service rifle, the M4 was a supplemental arm. Therefore, parts compatibility with the A2 was prioritized over optimized carbine reliability. When Socom used the M4 outside the expected use parameters, they had problems and launched the SCAR program. Colt, the army, and socom eventually fixed the M4 with changes such as o-ring extractors, m4 feed ramps, H buffers, A1 profile barrels, etc, and the mk16 was deemed superfluous compared to the M4A1s. How all of this became mainstream was when competitors made a couple congressmen shill to the public that the M4 was shit. 2 non repeatable test were conducted to shit can the M4's reputation and help sell the need for a new service rifle. With the M4A1 upgrades and Socom block 2 accessory package, there is no fundamental improvement compared to anything else on the market.

>>33044436

>SCAR
>AR18 clone

dont you EVER compare the greatest rifle ever made to a SCAR

>>33043747
not accurate

Here is what I paid for mine

Scar 16s - $2300
KDG stock - $270
Barrel cut - $175 or $1200 new barrel
MRO - 385
Light w/ tape - $200
Trigger = $300
PMM selector upgrade = $35
Ergo grip = $20

>>33044436
Your also forgetting that the budgets were over burdened by no longer able to have big army pay for things like planes and helicopters.

It's not the SCAR 16 doesn't have advantages over even an m4a1, it's just that gap is much smaller than with the m4.

>>33044589
Good luck picking up a 16s for $2300 today. And it's not an MRO in that picture

>>33044643
why anyone would want to use that piece of legacy hardware is beyond me. There are a lot better red dots on the market these days.

>>33044665
It's the strongest red dot out there and the battery life is even better if your worried about that.

File: Nicole-Gay-1408055634.gif (1007KB, 400x221px) Image search: [Google]

1007KB, 400x221px

>>33043404
faggot detected

>>33043561
Wow those guys who have the job of selling scars sure do like scars.

>>33042897
>infantrymen are not going to be using suppressors

ok can someone explain to me why the US military *doesn't* widely use suppressors?

>>33046964
Because they're incredibly slow to adopt new technologies, especially when it's very expensive, requires maintenance, and is little more than a safety feature.

>>33046964
increased cost, increased weight, increased length, another potential failure point, marginal hearing benefit at best. If they're using subsonic 300memeout rifles then sure maybe - but if you've ever fired an 11.5" 5.56 suppressed you know it's still louder than holy hell.

They have a place on some applications, but widespread use on all infantry rifles wouldn't make feasible sense.

>>33042573 (OP)
>is a gas piston really better than the direct gas system
Meme. Ar-15 is wrong in the other parts than direct gas system. Putting piston on Ar-15 is like putting lipstick on a pig.
http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?62889-SCAR-vs-AR-A-detailed-look

>>33044580
The SCAR is a pretty good derivative of the AR18 though.

>>33046964
The Marines are trying it with a whole battalion right now.

Mostly its because the military is a bureaucratic piece of shit.

>>33046964
Same reason they doesn't widely use magnified optic and have bayonet lug on their rifles.

>>33042842
shut the fuck up bitch ass nigger

>>33046964
5.56mm doesn't really suppress very well, because it's a cartridge built on speed, most of it's noise comes from the bullet itself traveling at 3000fps, which the suppressor can't do anything about.

Suppressors are also pretty big for a rifle (if you want it to do anything at all), the M16 has a 20" barrel, and tacking on a big suppressor on there is going to make for a fucking long rifle, on top of not being very useful for the caliber.

You could argue for different loads, but there's no subsonic or otherwise very quiet load which would be suitable for an assault rifle, since it has to cycle.

At most you could argue for silencers on the M4, since the shorter barrel means a lot of blast by the muzzle, and it could help against that (this thought goes back to the old CAR15s and their Moderator), but then the M4 stops being as short, and there's still the fact that the bullet is going very fast so it's not like you don't have to wear hearing protection or like the enemy won't hear you.

Now, .300BLK is a round which you can suppress quite well, subsonic if need be (and performs grand from a short barrel if supersonic), but it's best suited for carbines, so rebarreling M16s would be a waste, it'd be the M4 only, and it would introduce a bunch of logistics concerns. I also can imagine a bunch of dumbass grunts putting a carbine magazine in a rifle or vice versa and having a very bad day.

>>33047959
You talk like someone who reads a lot of Wikipedia but doesn't actually own any guns

>>33047959
>most of it's noise comes from the bullet itself traveling at 3000fps, which the suppressor can't do anything about.
But this supersonic crack is unsuitable for pinpointing shooter's location by ear.

>the M16 has a 20" barrel
>2017
>M16

>>33047826
Not being made like shit helps A LOT

>>33048036
Hes a nocans, probably no guns.
His opinion literally means nothing

>>33048036
The M16A4 is still being issued though

>>33048273
In a conversation about the SCAR, the m16 is essentially irrelevant comparison.

Why hasn't anyone made a decent inexpensive AR18 upper for AR15 lowers? If it could use as many AR15 parts as possible it'd be incredible.

>>33048353
No demand.

>>33042573
Because the AR15 platform is a meme rifle for peasants.

>>33048273
As long as any object still exists in a military's inventory, it will be issued somewhere. They "issued" C7A1s until 2014 or so, but only for BM[*]Q, and some SATS systems still use A1s presumably because it's the same fucking rifle and the only differences between the various north american AR variants are things that can be totally nullified with the usage of a screwdriver or a wrench (e.g. barrel length, is it still an M4 if you swap out the barrel for a longer one? is it still an M16 if you replace the black furniture with green stuff?)

>>33048353
Why doesn't Honda make Civics that already come ready to use a Porsche bodykit?

Because anyone who wants something that looks like a Porsche will just get a cheap Porsche, and anyone who wants to rice out a Civic probably wants it to be identifiably a riced-out Civic.

File: stm556-tfb.jpg (35KB, 900x599px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 900x599px

>>33048457
Your unfamiliar with the STM 556 I see

>>33048036
>But this supersonic crack is unsuitable for pinpointing shooter's location by ear.
What?

Literally what is the difference between that crack and the noise of burning powder?

>>33046964
>why doesn't the military buy things?
that shit costs money m8

also it's probably deemed irrelevant to use one when you're silhouetting yourself in the desert and shouting a bunch and firing basically from the horizon anyway, and if you wanna look at it from the standpoint of shooter comfort, it's easier to give little foam ear defenders than to issue expensive and potentially breakable (everything issued in the military always breaks at some point, some nerd finds a way to ruin it) suppressors

>>33043873
shouldnt a heavier rifle kick less because the recoil force has more rifle to move

>>33048504
How new are you?

>>33048538
is "this supersonic crack is unsuitable for pinpointing shooter's location by ear" some kind of hot new meme, ive been here a while but only come sporadically

>>33048457
AR18s aren't Porsches, they're cheaper to make than AR15s.

>>33048393
It's hard to gauge demand on something that doesn't exist.

>>33048543
see http://www.silencerresearch.com/sound_suppressors_on_high_powered_rifles.htm

>>33048612
What advantages would it have over an AR15 made today?

>>33048651
The original AR18? None really, economy of scale has already made the AR15 very cheap, and if we compare both rifles, the AR15 is just better in every way.

>>33048681
The AR15 of the 70s needed help. Today? Not so much.

Those things that the AR18 design had over the AR15 have been adopted by a number of rifles. They also left out the utter shit, generally, that was inherent in the design.

>>33042614
Fuck this guy

/Un-thread

>>33048651
>>33048681
>>33048721
It wouldn't have to be an exact AR18 upper of course, just using the squared off bolt carrier/dual guide rod/short stroke piston system from it. Could use a Leader T2 bolt, and a polymer receiver to simplify and cheapen it further. It'd run cleaner and longer, suppress better, and because it's cheaper I imagine you could sell it for the same price as well established AR15 uppers.

File: fnac_fn_advanced_carbine-tfb1.jpg (94KB, 900x454px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 900x454px

>>33048832
So you want an FNAC?

>>33048612
Porsches are surprisingly cheap. You're missing the point anyway.

Someone who wants an AR18 will just get an AR18. Someone who wants an AR15 probably wants something that looks like an AR15, and is unlikely to want an AR15 made to look like anything other than an AR15.

>>33048621
I'm not reading all that shit. Where's the meme?

>>33048920
Two sounds are actually created, one from the front of the bullet, and one from the rear. Near trees and buildings the sound waves come back as a distinct crack or pop each time the speeding bullet passes some object with a vertical, reflective surface. Once the muzzle report has been diminished the supersonic boom becomes dominant. Curiously, the sounds will now appear to come from the target area, rather than the rifleman's position.

>>33048933
I don't think that's physics

>>33048965
Then read the article
Any projectile moving through the air at a velocity greater than the speed of sound (332 to 340 m/s or 1,089 to 1,114 fps in dry, 18 C or 65 degree F air, depending on who one listens to) will create a supersonic crack. Temperature, humidity and atmospheric pressure variations play a role in raising or lowering the speed of sound by a small percentage. In a firearm which lacks a substantial muzzle report (being fired over an open field) the sound resembles the loud tearing of a bed sheet.

>>33048993
that sound is going to come towards you from a certain direction, and that doppler effect of it changing pitch as it crosses you changing the frequency of the sound of its movement is going to give you a fairly good idea of where it's coming from

get your fuddlore outta here

>>33048504
>Literally what is the difference between that crack and the noise of burning powder?
One comes from the location of the bullet another comes from the location of the gun.

>>33049060
>One comes from the location of the bullet
which originated from the gun, and travels across a line that will point at where it came from

>>33049074
Why do you insist about talking about something you clearly know nothing about?

>>33049109
are you denying the existence of the doppler effect, and that bullets originate from guns when fired?

>>33049128
>being this noguns
Your trying to make it purely about the math. Its more about humans hear, and how the sound of a suppressed supersonic bullet in flight is a smear of sounds that are unlike anything else that most people are used to.

>>33048860
>So you want a Scar L
No.
>>33048920
Someone who wants an AR18 would much prefer an AR18 with AR15 aftermarket part compatibility, and much cheaper parts. Someone who wants an AR15 would probably prefer a rifle that's more effective for the same price, and looks cool and unique because the receiver isn't a sheet metal box like the AR18s.

>>33049175
The FNAC is not the 16s.

File: 1479532794881.jpg (20KB, 432x281px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 432x281px

>>33049074
>and travels across a line that will point at where it came from
Only shockwave from supersonic bullet doesn't travels across the line, it travels at angle to its trajectory and will point at some point across of its trajectory.

>>33044665
>There are a lot better red dots on the market these days
You're right, that would be the T2 micro

>>33049192
do you even understand what a wave is

>>33049260
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_wave
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bow_shock_(aerodynamics)

>>33049175
>someone who wants an AR18
Both people who want an AR18 dont really make a market

>>33049189
You're right, it's a slightly modified version of it.

>>33044060
If you're making a comparison to the Janissaries, they were notoriously disloyal. They abused every ounce of power they took to better their station.

>>33049584
He's just an edgy underage b7 from /pol/. Pay him no further mind.

>>33048273
only to Marwheen pogs

File: IMG_20160726_161739.jpg (383KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

383KB, 2048x1536px

>>33042573
>>33042614
>>33042842
>>33048809
Yes.
/thread

>>33049245
of which I own 2.

>>33044244
>>33044311
>>33044311
>>33048513
Reading comprehension please. I mean i'm not even a burger but i still understood it.

File: Renowned Navy SEAL Marksman Chris Kyle shitting on 5.56 babies.png (245KB, 861x806px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 861x806px

>>33043115
Are you the guy that made these? I enjoy the entire series, especially the filenames.

>>33042573
>why would anybody choose a SCAR in 5.56 when M4s/M16s exist for cheaper?
Over and over people say you can buy a AR cheaper....but WHICH AR?????

The SCAR is ONE RIFLE built by ONE COMPANY, there are probably thousands of AR types, of course many of them are cheaper but who is to say which AR is worth as much as a SCAR. Most highend AR's cost $2k to $3k so honestly you are getting a bargain buying a SCAR since it is made in Belgium by gun experts.

File: coldsteel the edgehog.jpg (64KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 1280x720px

>>33050046
>See you on the other side brother.
>if you've ever shot someone in the head it's a damn hard shot to make
>It's the kind of chest pain that ends quickly and never comes back

File: Yplh18u.png (26KB, 527x409px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 527x409px

>>33050104

>>33050213
gee, am I trolling?? I dont know either, here is another question for you to determine if I have a legitimate point or not:

Why doesnt anyone have problems paying $3k for HK and Sig AR's???? But somehow the SCAR is overpriced? I dont get it

>>33050353
I honestly don't know anyone who has bought a HK or Sig piston rifle. "High end" ARs can be had for $1500 or less, even cheaper if you build it yourself.

>>33050415
>"High end" ARs can be had for $1500 or less, even cheaper if you build it yourself.
Going back to my original point then, a $1500 is only high end if you happen to know people who are into AR's and they tell you they are good. If Joe Fudd justs wants to buy an AR off the shelf he has no way of knowing if any AR is worth the money because their is a HUGE difference in quality between AR manufacturers, buying the wrong AR can mean having a gun blow up in your face

File: 1485654161452.jpg (34KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 800x800px

>>33050445
>>33050445
>their is a HUGE difference in quality between AR manufacturers, buying the wrong AR can mean having a gun blow up in your face
Okay now I know you're trolling.

>>33042573
Literally watch this video and take some time to learn something rather than post on this shitty Malaysian basket weaving forum

https://youtu.be/wCobOaBze6A

File: M16A1 a.jpg (824KB, 2000x1333px) Image search: [Google]

824KB, 2000x1333px

>>33048721
>The AR15 of the 70s needed help
Not really, the M16A1 was objectively excellent and all the problems were solved by this point.

>buffer is given more weight so the rifle cycles the otherwise too hotly loaded ammo at a safe rate
>shitty and flimsy disposable magazines are replaced with normal reusable magazines
>gun is supplied with cleaning kit and instructions
>bore and chamber are chrome-lined to improve barrel life as well as facilitate much easier cleaning and vastly improved extraction
>pronged flash-hider is eventually replaced with a birdcage one

All of this happens before the 80's, the big problems of the M16 mostly stem from the really early ones which were deployed in pretty limited numbers, and the biggest factors for their problems were overpressure (and dirty) ammo, as well as bad magazines. The A1 was a REALLY good rifle for it's time.

The M16A1 absolutely wipes the floor with the AR18 of the same era, and while new AR18 based designs are really quite good, so are modern AR15s.

>>33050590
The magazines of the A1, while a marked improvement, werent really dialed in until much later. Small parts, like the type of o rings used as well.

The A1 was a marked improvement, but still had issues. The decades since have really polished it up even more so.

>>33050590
>It wipes the floor with the AR18
Literally how

>>33042573
As a mk17 owner i agree

>>33051176
As a 16s and 17s owner, I think you're full of shit.

>>33050887
The recent non-tilt followers were also probably the biggest recent fix.

>>33051176
You don't own a mk17.

File: ArmaliteAr1801.jpg~original.jpg (54KB, 1024x681px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 1024x681px

>>33050887
Well yeah, the magazines weren't perfect yet, but making them reusable proper was a right step, the later 30 round magazines had better feed geometry too.

>>33051165
The original AR18 has a bit more recoil, some less inherent accuracy potential, the hinge on the folding stock wasn't quuuuite as strong as it could have been, and the front receiver hinge is actually a bit brittle and could get excess wear if you're not careful opening the gun up (to the point that it could end up breaking), and some pins could start walking at times.
Not significant problems, the walking pins could be fixed (and usually were with kits by people who had these rifles), and the brittle hinges could be changed with a redesign.

The AR18 isn't a *bad* rifle, but the original rifle just couldn't quite compare to the AR15 at the time, which had become very good, people did much better things with the AR18 action later after ArmaLite went out of business, and I'd say that many of the modern AR18 derivatives are at least as good as the modern AR15.

>>33051459
Honestly I think recent developments in plastic magazines have been very important, being lighter and less likely to deform from damage.

Anti-tilt followers are crunk though.

>>33051733
There's a bit of a difference between
>wipes da flur!!!
and
>couldn't quite compare

>>33051775
>average can compare to excellent
Don't be such an autist.

>>33043246
Is that Carnik Con?

>>33052766
u no it bb
>tfw no more Dugan in anyone's life

SCARs are only expensive to civilians, the DoD gets them for dirt cheap. They're often more reliable, have a field adjustable gas system, a muzzle brake to fit silencers, and a folding stock. My experiences using one in the Marines gave me a pretty positive feel. Even in 7.62 the recoil impulse is completely minimal. They are a bit front heavy, but compared to a full length M16 I'd take a SCAR.

>>33048481
>top charging, buffer tube
as should everyone else

>>33046906
They don't sell SCARs, you double nigger, they're a range that rents out FA guns.
They also have M16s, but they didn't get that praise, did they?

>>33052938
They said the receivers are good to about 200k rounds before the lower cracks. AKs need rewelding the receivers at 100k

>>33042765
>Most ARs are lighter
>tell that to two fucking companies out of dozens
>MOST

>>33051751
Plastic mags are nice, but they aren't standard issue, but a simple change to standard issue mags fixed a lot.

>>33043783
>since an AR-15 is a scaled down AR-10
>acthually

You have that backwards but I get what you're saying. The modern AR10 is a scaled up AR15

>>33054639
>old AR10 gets scaled down to AR15
>which a long time later is scaled up into an AR10 again to shoot the big cartridge of the original

Funny that. Of course, many improvements happened since the original AR10 and AR15.

>>33054524
>Plastic mags are nice, but they aren't standard issue,
That's no longer the case.

>>33042897
>literally pooping where you eat

>>33055139
Only for Marines.

>>33055274
>Babbies first meme

>>33054521
I left out PoF. What other OEM ARs are there?

File: scar31a[1].jpg (80KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 800x600px

>>33042573

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

Bolt carrier rides on proper rails
Slower RPM
Runs cooler
Dissipates heat faster
Smoother and more gradual unlocking
Better feed ramp angles
Beefier parts overall

Beat several ARs including 3 from Colt in the SCAR competition.

>>33042829

The HK416 does nothing better to warrant spending money to switch platforms.

>>33055274
>pistonbabby catchphrase

>>33057437
It does, however, if what you're currently using is the FAMAS.

I think the French will probably be pretty satisfied with their new HK416 rifles.

>>33058149
HK isnt even submitting the 416 to Germany's own trials. I don't see the 416 long in service with the French

File: 416 mlok.jpg (67KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 1000x750px

>>33058168
Why? The FAMAS is being replaced because French cheapskated too much and for too long, to the point where they can't maintain them anymore. There's no new rifles and no replacement parts, the guns are old and worn.

However, if they get HK416 rifles, they then have very sturdy and well made rifles for which they can get replacement parts from all kinds of places in Europe, and from North America if need be, (if for whatever reason Germany are being trifling bitches), because it uses a lot of standard AR15 parts (and I'm sure some company that makes piston ARs can make replacement for the rest if need be).

They obviously hate the idea of spending a lot of money on their rifles so picking something which they can actually stick with for a really long time seems like a reasonable investment for them. Based on how the French usually looks at small arms, they're probably not going to replace the HK416 because it'll still be good 30 years from now, and probably remain 'good enough' for the following 30 years.

They may or may not buy spare parts and upgrade kits some day in the future, but at the end of the day it's a select-fire intermediate rifle, and that's not going to be obsolete as a concept in our lifetimes.

>>33050353
Remembering what a SCAR used to cost is a factor, and the fact that a lot of people are automatically going to drop another $500 on top of that price

>>33058320
It's not replacement parts that's the concern. The long procurement period of the contract, and HK not even submitting the 416 domestically. France may switch which rifles fills the contract mid stream

>>33042573
Suppressed and subsonic .300 memeout or similar.

>>33057417
>Bolt carrier rides on proper rails
An AR-15 doesn't need them, the bolt recoils straight into the buffer tube.

>Slower RPM
>Runs cooler
>Dissipates heat faster
Questionable opinions.

>Smoother and more gradual unlocking
I don't think this has ever mattered.

>Better feed ramp angles
Riiiiigghhhttt.

>Beefier parts overall
In a heavier rifle for no accuracy or reliability benefit.

File: 16507877_10158173737340416_141663784969702725_n[1].jpg (31KB, 777x437px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 777x437px

>>33058168
Nope, that's the HK433.

>>33059090
It does run cooler
There is data and flir pictures
http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?62889-SCAR-vs-AR-A-detailed-look

>>33059113
I need the teutonic SCAR and G to make a handguard for it.

My body is ready.

>>33058652
They've already held trials and determined that the HK416 is good though, they'd have to hold new ones for a new rifle.

>>33059113
>the 416 fucked a SCAR
I never knew it could be so aesthetic.

File: 28f011aff7042ef6abe3701dbe7f05f7.jpg (73KB, 500x646px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 500x646px

>>33059436
>Reverse shelfmod
>Aesthetic

>>33059551
The shape of the receiver and general outline.

It takes the best features of both the SCAR and 416 from an aesthetic standpoint.
Also inverted mounting points such as keymod and mlok are hugely superior to normal quadrails, less weight and a sleeker package.

>>33059647
The 416 pistol grip is uggo as fug though

>>33059436
It's basically a 416 with the old school roller lock rifle ergos.

>>33059722
You've got a terrible eye

>>33059742
It's an AR-18 style short stroker with G3 family charging handle and selector switch. And a bit of streamlining.

>>33059822
Moving the charging handle forward doesn't make it G3 style though, unless you are just looking at placement, and mean nothing about function or manual or arms.

>>33059897
Just because you aren't seeing it doesn't mean I'm wrong.

>>33059090
>or reliability benefit.
>>33043561

>>33060041
>$1000 rifle you can replace all parts on yourself
>$3000 rifle you can't

>>33060094
http://www.midwestgunworks.com/page/mgwi/ctgy/scar-parts

>>33060107
Another point: 95% of owners will never put enough rounds through their rifles to need to replace worn parts.

>>33042573
Gas piston is better than direct impingement, but almost nobody fires the guns they buy enough for it to matter.

A gas piston gun will foul and jam after a lot more rounds than direct impingement, but lets be honest, almost nobody fires their guns enough for it to matter.

If you are gonna go down to the range and fire 1500 rounds in one sitting youre going to want a gas piston, but if all you do is run 100-200 rounds in a sitting or less you will never notice the difference between the two.

>>33042573
Because SCAR17s are expensive and being expensive means the rifle is better and by extension the owner is better. It's richfag vs poorfag mentality.

>>33060166
>Gas piston is better than direct impingement

>We no longer use ANY piston conversions or factory pistons guns with the exception of the HK-416 "knock-off" TDI upper. I purchased a FACTORY brand-new MR556 and it started keyholing after only 10,000 rounds. I was SO pissed because I spent all that money on the gun and it couldn't last 10,000 rounds. I had barrels from before we even opened the range with 1,000's of rounds on them from J&T Distributing (chrome-lined) that didn't keyhole well into the 80,000-100,000 range. I don't know who makes or made the J&T barrels but I was so pissed that actually wasted the money on a MR556 and that's all I got from it. I purchased two of the 14.5" TDI knock-offs approximately 6-8 weeks ago and they have been on the line daily with ZERO issues. I only purchased them because people will come in specifically request the "416" and even they've never handled a weapon their entire lives, they KNOW that the top half isn't the "416 like in COD/MW".
>The only piston system to last on the range so far is the HK416 and TD415 system. Ever other systems we have tried has failed in one way or another. I won't say who's broke or how they broke so PLEASE don't ask. Each mfg has their own system for cleaning intervals and we may not follow their way. We have a way of cleaning and keeping records that suits our needs because of so much use.

>>33060222
I can use anecdotal evidence too.

Like how I had a gas impingement M4 and later an M27 IAR by HK with gas piston, and the latter was far more reliable and could handle way more rounds before fouling.

As it should have, because the IAR is a full auto weapon and you can run a thousand rounds through one in about 2 minutes.

It would take you all day to do that with an M4, and we routineley DID fire our M4s all day.

The gas piston system fouled waaaaay less, even after a few thousand rounds you could pretty much just wipe down the piston, run a few patches down the bore and gas tube, and it was ready to go again.

M4 youd be stuck cleaning the thing for a few hours after running half as many rounds through it.

But as I said (which you ignored) most people will never fire their guns anywhere near the point of wearing it out, so it doesnt make a difference for your average shooter, 90% of whom will never fire 10,000 rounds out of the same gun ever in their life.

And as far as "boo hoo 10,000 rounds and its keyholing" thats a barrel issue, not a piston issue.

>>33060359
Cyclic rate is 700 to 850 rpm, sustained is 36

>>33060359
How are you going to fire a thousand rounds in a magazine fed weapon that fast, but take "all day" in an m4.

That's not anecdotal evidence, that's just bait

>>33060359
>what is reading comprehension
>>The only piston system to last on the range so far is the HK416 and TD415 system

>>33044060
Doesn't matter. Islam, like all Abrahamic religions, allows you to lie to "protect yourself" from apostates and infidels.

>>33060403
And this proves me wrong how?

You can run 1,000 rounds through one in 2 minutes. I didnt say it was NORMAL to do so, I said you CAN.

On battalion and company level live fire exercises it was pretty normal to run 1,000 rounds through an IAR in one afternoon.

Its also my entire point, the way the military uses and abuses weapons is a world apart from a leisureley day at the range. My average range visit is usually about 200 rounds through my AK or AR, and thats a bit higher than most. Id say most of the guys I see at the range are doing maybe 100 rounds for their entire trip, and most folks aint at the range every sunday like I am.

Even if a rifle only lasts 10,000 rounds at my rate im going to get 5 years of firing out of it. At which point you just change the barrel, and use it as a beat up innawoods gun for the next decade and get another one for your serious shooting.

Lets say the average guy fires 100 rounds once a month, its going to last him the better part of a decade.

>>33060521
Because they don't make thousand round magazines

>>33060422
Because an M4 is semi auto and an IAR is full auto.

M4s are point target, IARs get used for supression. It only takes about 2 seconds to empty the magazine during full auto supression, so you bring a fuck load of mags, and your fire team brings a fuck load extra, because during the course of a live fire exercise lasting 2 or 3 hours you are going to use pretty much all of that ammo, plus you will probably end up firing off some of your buddies ammo too because who the hell wants to spend 2 hours turning in ammo?

>>33043873
It kicks less than a 7 pound AR. Sure, the weight is part of how it absorbs recoil, but the mass and length of travel of the bolt are the primary factors in reducing the recoil on the SCAR.

>>33060556
>M4 only exists in semi auto

>>33049048
The problem with what you're saying is that you hear all the noise at once due to the speed of the bullet. The doppler effect doesn't apply anymore because the sound is being generated right by you before the further sound has reached you, making all the sounds blend together.

>>33059090
>no accuracy or reliability benefit.
you're dumb as shit. Look at the SCAR trials. Colt variant A and B were immediately down selected.

>>33060649
The one they issue to the marines only come in semi auto.

Well technically they have a 3 round burst, but weve literally never used that feature without getting screamed at by some officer.

The snipers would usually give the spotter a supressed M4a1, which is a 1moa version with full auto fire instead of the typical 3 round burst that the regular M4's your average grunt recieved.

I think pararescue uses the full auto variant as well. But they are very very uncommon in the Marine Corps, though I think the army might be switching over to them because 3 round burst is fucking useless. (Especially since the worn out POS m4s the marines have usually only fire 2 round bursts, or just fucking jam when using that setting)

>>33060780
Colt doesn't make any service rifles now, either.

>>33060996
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/09/foghorn/colt-on-the-brink-of-disaster-awarded-m4-m4a1-contract-kinda/

>>33061557
>http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/09/foghorn/colt-on-the-brink-of-disaster-awarded-m4-m4a1-contract-kinda/

>In short, while Colt is on the contract (and despite what some other gun news outlets are saying) they still aren’t getting the work.

>>33058320
What standard part does the HK416 use? Other than the magazine, stock and pistol grip? HK made sure everything is proprietary and protected by patents. France is fucked on all levels : got an overpriced, heavy and all proprietary piston AR from fucking Germany of all countries (and they have laws against supplying warmongering countries), and right after HK got the money, they developped a new rifle for the Germany army which won't get the HK416. So much for interoperability.

>>33043561
Case in point about how people read so much into this video and even skew its contents to fit their argument.

File: 1484502977231.jpg (157KB, 908x1021px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 908x1021px

>>33060359
>a marine thinks he knows how to properly clean an M4
lol

>>33061928
>all this whining

Not an argument.

>>33062270
These comics are one of the most unfunny things in existence. Are they only funny to "people" who are as mentally deficient as the characters themselves?

File: 870csy6wyuux.jpg (130KB, 806x908px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 806x908px

>>33062422
Maybe you're just too dumb to get it.

File: Twin Pack.jpg (175KB, 810x1081px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 810x1081px

>>33062422
I've long ago stopped wondering about appeals to people, it's ponderous, and I'm a man of varied and diverse tastes.

>>33062494
Too dumb to understand "hehe he talk funny gooby pls amirite"? Yeah that must be it.

>>33062612
>t.marin

>>33062635
>>33062612
>>33062511
>>33062494
really the only funny one is w/ the mreen mre

>>33062422
if you kill yourself they'll go away

File: WWadmql.jpg (150KB, 800x534px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 800x534px

Before this thread I was thinking about getting a 16s.
Now? I think I'm leaning towards getting a second 17s and SBRing one of them.

>>33062635
If I was a MARINE I'd probably OORAH myself to death because jokes of that caliber are right up the alley of DEVIL DOGS

>>33059690
The grip angle is way nicer though.

>>33042573
Piston is significantly more reliable, but switching to piston will cost money and even though the military loves to spend money on jets, they don't care as much for the grunts.

>>33062942
>Piston is significantly more reliable
He says, based on no actual evidence.

>>33062931
Those straight ones? Awful
YMMV

>>33060807
No, you retard, the pre-A1 M4 hasn't been issued since the 90's, there are no carbines with a burst cam in service, and being safe/semi/burst doesn't make the carbine "a semi-auto weapon", it's select-fire.

>>33042826
Can you better clarify that statement?
In all seriousness.

>>33062985
I hate the generic M16 pistol grips, grip angle is too steep for me, I want my stock all the way out and my grip with a fairy straight grip-angle.

>>33063002
Ergonomics is not one size fits all. If you dig it, that's great.

>>33061869
Things which is either standard or close enough would be magazines, magazines, magazine release, bolt-release, fire-control group, grip, sights, barrels.

Most things could either be found on shelves, or designs could be slightly modified to fit.

>>33052778
He has an instagram that he is active on.

>>33043561
>wearing Multicam Tropic combat shirt in Nevada
>wearing it at work when you work inside
I get the whole wanting to look operator and shit but holy fuck that is autistic.

>>33063338
tropical multicam is sex tho

>>33063375
I know, I own some just I like it. But dude, c'mon.

>>33063409
When you work at a place literally called "BATTLEFIELD" its part of the uniform.

>>33063766
I know, I saw the video. It's still cringe as fuck to me.

>>33063812
Thats what vegas is founded on though.

>>33043248
if you get in and out of vehicles frequently with a rifle, its a feature you appreciate

>>33043676
$280 give or take is the cost to make that

File: FDE Bren.jpg (41KB, 670x447px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 670x447px

*cough*

>>33064048
Too heavy. 806 when?

>>33063915
I didn't know you can physically pull shit out of your mouth, but I forget you eat shit all day.

File: got-nat-fingers.gif (1MB, 324x490px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 324x490px

>>33064048
Plagued with issues early on.
Zero aftermarket (virtually)
Made by czechs
2moa

>>33064048
>generic scar copy
>flat dark meme color
Gross. Go back to making Vz58s please, the Canadians need them.

>>33044589
I paid 2473.00 for my scar 16s

That was with a 10% discount and no taxes.

How'd you get cheaper than me?

File: 1419061792645.jpg (11KB, 538x275px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 538x275px

>>33059090
>>Smoother and more gradual unlocking
>I don't think this has ever mattered.
It does if you're an engineer or know anything about highschool level mechanics.

>>33048513
in theory yes but definantly not a rule of thumb

>>33064802
Are you aware what "a rule of thumb" means?

>>33064618
I've yet to ever hear of it ever causing any issue, i.e. it's a stupid nitpick instead of any real issue to weigh with.

>>33064830
May I? Rule of thumb means that you should not spank you wife with cane larger than thumb.

>>33064541
shotshow special, and I spent about 30k at my dealer in the preceding 18 months.

>>33044042
guy sounds full of shit
you're not engaging targets out to 600 with an assault rifle

> Middle Eastern theatre
Afghanistan isn't in the fucking middle east

>>33064934
I would argue that it is the reason AR bolts won't last as long as SCAR bolts.

File: for_item_2241.png (193KB, 2000x700px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 2000x700px

>>33042573
SCAR is fucking done

>>33065678
>Supporting mormon cults

>>33064934
It's called lifespan and reliability you uneducated gorilla. Battlefield Vegas guys made a video where they said the Scar L was the best gun they had, because all they changed on it in 200000 rounds or something were a barrel and a hammer.

File: 2017-rs556-04.jpg (54KB, 640x850px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 640x850px

>>33061869
>right after HK got the money, they developped a new rifle for the Germany army which won't get the HK416.

French requirement was for rifle that is already in wide scale service somewhere and has all of its teething issues solved. They basically told Swiss arms (SG 516), Steyr/Rheinmetal (RS556) and all smaller manufacturers offering various AR-15 derived rifles to fuck off as first thing in when rifle trials began.

When it comes to HK416 being overpriced, unit prices for big government contracts are way lower than what consumers pay.

When it comes to Bundswehr... they can't afford HK416, that is the main reason why HK433 exists.

>>33065923
Fun fact : an FN official essentially promised France free SCARs if they won the competition. So FN fucked up the paperwork.

>>33065707
I must note that they are an extreme use case that isn't indicative of even military usage rates.

All h&k product is better than FN waffle shit.

File: right arm.jpg (39KB, 736x256px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 736x256px

>>33069107
>All h&k product is better than FN waffle shit.

No.

>>33049697
stop being a faggot trying to /thread yourself

/unthread

>>33069309
FN at least innovates
HK tends to arrive late to the party and borrows other people's designs, changes a couple elements, calls it a day. The p7 was an exemption, not much else.

>>33069985
So when FN did things like build a what was essentially a monstrously huge M2 with a dual feed, H&K failed to innovate anything with a rifle system nobody had ever seen before and which did absolutely all new things?

Nevermind the fact that neither of those projects panned out or became anything, what was more innovative there?

Also what the fuck is innovative with the MP7? It's literally a miniature AR18 feeding varmint cartridges from a pistol grip.
The P90 doesn't have an amazing advanced action or anything (the magazine is unusual though, and grip/ergos certainly was new), but that's arguably in it's favor, meaning it doesn't need to be cleaned by an armorer every 500 rounds or so. Of course, it also shoots a small varmint cartridge.

>>33069985
Fuck, I misread that.

The P7 isn't really a super new thing either, gas-delayed blowback has been done in the past, most notably during the late stages of WW2. It's a crunk package of a pistol though.

File: HKP7gecoprofiledark.jpg (56KB, 596x436px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 596x436px

>>33070093
>H&K failed to innovate anything with a rifle system nobody had ever seen before and which did absolutely all new things?

What?

>>33070136
Im not sure what P7 your thinking about

>>33070172
The G11, you mong.

It wasn't especially good, but short of a rifled bore, everything it did was new.

>>33070479
Being a failure is hardly new

>>33070516
That's not my fucking point you sperg.

The G11 had an all new action that had never been seen before, an all new cartridge, an all new FCG, and all new magazine feed, etc.
It didn't innovate in the right way, but it did innovate a lot.

>>33042573
the beige finish looks cool tbqh

>>33070532
A rube Goldberg device isn't necessarily innovation

>>33070630
Innovation doesn't have to be good, lots of innovation is useless or bad.

>>33070651
The g11 was an interesting engineering 'proof of concept' piece, but its mechanical systems were far to delicate.

It was never meant to be a infantry rifle

>>33070686
They sure tried to sell it to the Bundeswehr though, they had brochures and everything.

What killed it was the end of the Cold War, and probably the fact that it ultimately wouldn't have been better than a normal assault rifle.

HK's SCAR clone is looking good
CZ's SCAR clone is looking slipshod as fuck

>>33065540
I'm gonna call bullshit. Let's see the receipt

File: cz-bren.png (55KB, 1317x513px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 1317x513px

>>33071341
H&K's SCAR clone looks better than the SCAR.

File: tumblr_nc2salhAZy1tps90ko1_1280.gif (974KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

974KB, 640x360px

>>33071480
As configured from HK and FN, yes.
The SCAR has some really nice aftermarket options that step it up beyond

>>33065175
>>33064830
The origins of the phrase are up for debate, but the modern definition was appropriate for anon's statement.

>>33071440
Why are u so butthurt that I got mine for a little over 100 less than you? You still got a great gun at a good price. Why u mad?

>>33072728
He's a special, and unique snowflake.
Anybody who can even slightly one up him has to be called out.

>>33072728
Because the value of a SCAR is directly proportional to its price.

>>33073220
I'll need pictures of both to determine the value