Give me one good reason why shouldn't you buy a scar-l over

File: M16_soldier.jpg (51KB, 640x406px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 640x406px

It's lighter.

>>34333742

1st post best post
and best m16

>>34333633
You should get it. It makes poorfags extremely jealous and angry, some of them will probably post in this thread soon.

looks dumb compared to many other things that you can get for $3k
two bitchin AK's
or
a SwissArms 550
or
an LR-300
or
NV setup with an AR15
or
like a couple of spam cans worth of 5.45 dumped on a hotel bed underneath a classy escort with a slavic accent

>>34333633
Scar is ugly imo. More clunky plastic than a nerf gun. It's always in that color that resembles the streaks in muh undies.

>>34333633
The price. It's better than an AR15 but not so much of a improvement to justify the cost.

>>34333633
Ge a Cz805 instead

only replies so far

>appearance
>price

one of which is subjective, the other was ruled out as a factor in the OP

Das boot. Mein FN.

>>34333827
>streaks in muh undies
you're disgusting.

>>34333892
Go big or go home.

>>34333875
maybe because those are the only fucking factors that matter when comparing a SCAR to an AR15.

weight
after market support
caliber selection

File: colt-car15-commando-xm177-carbine.jpg (85KB, 800x550px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 800x550px

Because the AR is a sealed system, unlike the SCAR with its huge cutouts in the receiver.

File: 1486775243054.png (24KB, 657x525px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 657x525px

>>34333633
Because every nation worth a damn has abandoned the SCAR and the only thing it has going for it are middleclass fags who buy them and think they're richfags because of it.

>>34333937
wipe well or be disgusting

>>34333633
>give me one reason why you should spend $2500 instead of $800 for a rifle without mentioning price

see how stupid that sounds? SCAR is a fine rifle but basically needs the KDG rail, a new trigger and delete that fuck ugly boot right out of the box

so you've spend at least $4000 before glass or accessories. if you have money to burn thats fine, you could easily spend that on a high end AR, but you certainly dont have to spend that to get comparable performance.

SR15 is about $2200 and thats truly optics ready. great irons, trigger comparable to something geissele, nice stock, nice handguard, decent muzzle devices, lighter than SCAR, more parts compatibility and a 20k rounds warranty

>>34334012

Shit trigger discipline desu..

>>34334169
Nah i think he's getting ready to hipfire some baddies right next to him.

>>34334082
How's your summer going?

>>34333827
Learn to wipe your ass you savage

>>34334140
>so you've spend at least $4000 before glass or accessories
more like 3500, my bad

File: IMG_20170228_174639302.jpg (2MB, 2331x3535px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2331x3535px

>>34333633
Go for it

>>34333633
It's not a Scar 17.

Only thing a scar needs out the box is a match grade trigger, which is no different than the bottom feeder 800$ AR. Only cons are added weight, optic height over bore and arguably the reciprocating charging handle. The ports at the front of the receiver are for heat venting.

When deciding, as long as cost isn't an issue, you have to factor in the trade offs.

The advantages it holds over the AR:

The scar runs cleaner and cooler due to the short stroke piston system. It features an adjustable gas block for suppressed use, and won't bleed hot lube/carbon out the rear of the receiver and into your face when you burn through a few mags, suppressed, in quick succession. It has a folding stock with adjustable cheek height and a small storage compartment. Barrel swapping is quick and incredibly easy. Immediate and remedial action is faster than on an AR due to the reciprocating charging handle in conjunction with the ability to lock the bolt to the rear with your support hand only if you're right handed.

File: Rxn Sam the cave man TPB.jpg (93KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 1280x720px

>>34333827
>It's always in that color that resembles the streaks in muh undies.

What does a SCAR do that an AR can't?

>>34335399
Fold at the stock and still be operational. Some people might prefer having a reciprocating CH over the ar's. SCARs are generally easier to suppress but you'd need to replace the shitty stock gas jet and void your warranty.

>>34335678
Outside storage and vehicles, folding stocks are pointless.

>>34333633
Buying a scar in 556 is the equivalent of putting a hybrid engine in a muscle car.

>>34333633
Its not best scar

>>34333633

Why spend that money, when we all know it'll probably only get shot a few tomes.

>>34333633
Its an ar with less modularity

>>34333777
These digits don't lie, do it OP.

>>34333826
Scars are $3000? Maybe I should get the one my lgs has for $2400.

>>34333633
The price tag is ample reason. Having somegunz is better than nogunz.

>>34333875
Weight (first post).
No aftermarket. Little support.
Maintenance.
Lacking any real users, and being worse than an AR for nearly 3x the price, it will not be on the scene very long. Back to the support problem.

If you must have a SCAR, get the 17/H.

File: 1493693647200.jpg (21KB, 325x270px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 325x270px

>>34333827
>streaks in muh undies

If you're already paying that much more compared to an AR, why not save a little more money and get something even cooler like FNC or SG550?

File: 20170607_105416.jpg (4MB, 4032x2268px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4032x2268px

>>34333633
Why not buy the bren?

>>34333633

Can't really come up with a reason past aftermarket.

>>34333633
Two things that comes to mind is one you like the ar platform and two you don't like reciprocating charging handle. But I got both so there is that.

>>34336413
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrUGQpzLg6k

>>34336409
It's got a pretty good sized aftermarket, what are you talking about?

>>34336518
>yankeeSJWfaggot
did you link that unironically?

>>34333633
Mk-16 stock looks like a boot. You will never unsee this niggers.

>>34336409
Its actually better than an AR, just not 3x better

>>34333633
You hardly have to clean it so you won't lean the in's-and-out's of the gun as fast. Also it's way more reliable so you won't learn the repair tasks as quickly. It's a total piece of garbage.
Love,
That faggot that's kill a bunch of shitskins down range with both

File: Stock Boot - Oboz.jpg (1MB, 1557x3585px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1557x3585px

>>34336574

>>34333742
Not really. SCARs weigh about 8 pounds. Many ARs weigh the same, with standard weights usually being about 6-7.

>>34335790
Ok? I don't normally keep my rifle slung on my back 24/7 so storage and transport are things that might apply to people.

File: 18072429_10155970753153906_1615847747_n.jpg (79KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 960x720px

>>34333827
>hurr durr ITS PLASTIC LIKE A TOY
>same wit dem glocks!
>dats not a REAL mans gun

Literally 3 posts up someone is complaining that it's too heavy.
And you're complaining it has too much polymer.
>>34333826
The SCAR is more reliable than all of those guns. However you could probably find short stroke gas piston AKs.
>>34334012
And yet the SCAR is far more reliable.
>>34334019
>every nation worth a damn is billions or trillions in debt
>and most of them don't pay for or care about their own national security
>>34335340
Reciprocating charging handle is a plus. I could never go back to shooting ARs. If I had to choose a different gun, I'd go with an AK. That's how easy and effective they are to use.
>>34336383
Wrong. Having one great gun is better than having a million mediocre, or even good, guns.
>>34336409
>weight
No.
>aftermarket
There is quite a bit of aftermarket for it.
>maintenance
...easier and less often than any AR on the planet.
>worse
It is not. It is an improvement in almost every way.
>>34336684
>if you don't have to take the gun apart, you never will
>even though that is completely fine because it's one of the most easiest modern rifles to strip and clean and can be learned and mastered in a matter of moments
It also has a service life that's almost three times as long as high end ARs

>>34335036
>>34335808
>>34336092
>>34336409
These people are bench warmers who think 5.56 is a fad and have never had to carry any amount of ammo any amount of distance aside from the 20 rounds in there pocket when they go deer hunting.

Price is the only reason you shouldn't buy a SCAR. ARs and AKs and many other guns work fine for at most half the price. But the SCAR is still a better design.

>>34337241
I honestly think the SCAR stock is uncomfortable and the AR stock conversions are ugly as fuck. Also I'm a poorfag so who gives a fuck what I say.