What would stop me from putting an AR-57 upper on this and

Your lack of funds

>>34451798
Ive looked it up the bolt for the scr is proprietary. You would have to modify the 57 bolt to work with it. The 57 bolt is a fuck huge blowback bolt and i think you would end up having to cut off way to much wieght of the bolt to get it to work.

5.7 uppers are absolute garbage.

However I fully support your endeavors.

>>34451798
Do it OP. Then make wood furniture.

>>34451798
Lack of patience, skill, and funds. Go for it OP.

>>34451945
You should be able to put any bolt face into the scr bolt carrier

File: 1497500141504.gif (148KB, 425x417px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 425x417px

>>34452627
>>34451798
>Wooden top mag 5.7 carbine in an unconventional AR arrangement
Almond status: active

>>34453083
And SBR it.

>>34451798
The world is in desperate need of a 5.7 carbine.

>>34453092

Just an over glorified. 22mag.

>>34453463
oh look, it's this meme again

File: 93bc6090aafdf9542b07ead28061489c.jpg (54KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 500x281px

>>34451798
You damn well better put some wood furniture while you're at it.

>>34451798
Because the AR-57 is actually extremely poorly built, some plebbitor bought one and it was a piece of garbage

>>34453463
End you are self

>>34453463

What's wrong with that? PCCs are fucking neat stuff.

>>34451798
The SCR uses a proprietary bolt carrier and the AR57 (along with every other pistol caliber blowback AR-15 upper) uses a different unified bolt and carrier. The SCR isn't compatible with almost all pistol caliber uppers (there are a few gas operated pistol caliber uppers that may be exceptions, but I haven't checked if they use proprietary or standard bolt carriers) or any other upper that doesn't use a standard AR-15 bolt carrier.

>>34453463
>rimless 22mag with spitzer bullets
>not cool as heck

>>34452700
Nigga did you read any of what he said

The AR-57 bolt is totally different, as it's blowback.

Both the SCR and AR-57 bolt systems are proprietary, so you're going to have a bad time trying to rig them together

>>34455123
>>34455059
>>34451945
Doesn't the AR57 use a self-contained blowback system in the upper that does not engage the regular buffer?

>>34455165
No, it uses the buffer and buffer spring. That combined with the long, heavy bolt makes sticking it in the SCR a no-go. The SCR uses a bolt with a rat-tail like the FAL to make up for the recoil system not being in-line.

>>34455118
the problem is it's kind of expensive and reloading for it is a HUGE pain in the ass.

>>34451798
The ar57 upper is a non-standard meme that is literally just a blowback pistol design. The ar aspect is just marketing.
The scr uses a non-standard buffer tube and a rat tail.

It's like asking why your HiPower won't fit onto your m2, they are similar in name only.
If the ar57 was a proper ar design instead of a meme, it would work no problem.

>>34455513
>>>34451798 (OP)
Basically, what you need to do is make or commission a 5.7mm barrel blank into an ar barrel, and do the same for the bolt (remember to have the ejector at the top). Don't fuck with the bolt carrier.

File: SCR 57.png (72KB, 819x213px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 819x213px

Apparently it's complicated if not impossible.

I still made a shop because that would look neat.

>>34455660
If the ar57 wasn't a meme cash grab and was instead a proper ar design, then it would be as simple as changing out the bolt and barrel.
(note: bolt =/= bolt carrier)

>>34453463
Just like 5.56.

>>34455674
>If the ar57 wasn't a meme cash grab and was instead a proper ar design, then it would be as simple as changing out the bolt and barrel.
Why? There were already straight blowback AR uppers in pistol calibers (including those made by Colt) and the P90 was straight blowback as well. Why would they go through a ton of trouble dicking around with a gas operated design that would likely have issues due to the relatively heavy bolt and carrier it would need to actuate compared to existing gas operated pistol caliber rifles/subguns already in existence when they could just go with what has a history of working well?

>>34456998
Because half the appeal of the ar is that you know a component will work/fit.
Using more non-standard components that necessary defeats the utility.

It would be like designing an ak with an ar style stock, but changing the design so that buffer tube is actually used instead a recoil spring.

>>34457221
>Using more non-standard components that necessary defeats the utility.
So what the SCR does then? The AR57 would work with all the stocks and buffer tubes available at the time as it came out (same with all the pistol caliber ARs at the time, including those made by Colt) as it was designed in the mid 2000s. Buffer tube designs that require proprietary bolt carriers like the SCR and those extra short PDW stocks are much newer. Furthermore, a gas operated 5.7x28mm AR-15 would more than likely have needed a proprietary lightened bolt carrier to function well anyways so it would still run into problems with buffer tubes that require proprietary bolt carriers.

>>34457380
You don't need a proprietary bolt carrier to have a lightened bolt carrier.
The scr has (arguably) one nonstandard part, the rat tail.
The action of the ar57 is non-standard.