Why wouldn't I want a .308?

The price and the weight of the ammunition. If those dont bother you, there's literally no downside.
Though bear in mind, that the SCAR, like any .308, is wasted without good glass.

>>34499438
Im wanting to buy an Acog with a fiber optic for it witand from what i understand it devours any and all ammunition you feed through it, so I'd just buy super cheap bulk ammonand run it with that.

>>34499416
It's a niche weapon that doesn't really fill the role between an AR and a sniper rifle. It's like an unnecessarily heavy DMR, especially in the hands of a powerful, wealthy military.

For home defense or 'defending the homeland' shtf uses, it's even less useful, because you want to focus on weapons that can sustain high volumes of fire. This cannot.

For hunting purposes there's more accurate and much cheaper bolt actions on the market. Same goes for DMR or sniping capabilities.

The primary function of most modern battle rifles is simply for collectors to say "I have a battle rifle :^)"

>>34499416
>how practical is it?

If you're asking this question, a scar 17 isn't for you.

>>34499452
>less than 8 pounds is heavy for a dmr
>can't do high volumes of fire despite being the softest shooting .308 commercially available
>1 moa or better isn't good enough for me, I need my .308 to perform at 1200 yards.

To answer your question op, yes, if you can afford it, it's the most practical semi auto .308 rifle you can buy

There's a reason nobody uses battle rifles anymore, they're fucking retarded. SCAR 17S can be made into a good DMR though.

>>34499416
>My questions is, how practical is it?
Practical for what? It's going to be very loud and overpenetrate if someone breaks into your home.

It's not bad for hunting, since nearly any semi-auto in .308 is going to weigh 8lbs before you put on glass or load bullets in it. You are paying an extra 200% cost for semi-auto compared to any modern bolt action in .308 or a better hunting caliber though.

If you're going for precision rifle competition, you're probably better off with an AR10. Not that the SCAR is inaccurate, but it's just a lot easier to find match barrels and the like for ARs.

>>34499961

If youre on a Mexican cartel hit list and you live in some rural place with next to no neighbors. Is the .308 calibre better than the .223?

>>34499997
I think a better use of funds there would be to clear up your debt or hire some security.

>>34499997
If I'm on a Mexican cartel hit list I'm renting a cabin in dickshits nowhere Montana, getting a .338 lap mag, and shooting every brown person that comes within a mile of me until shit blows over.

>>34500061
>until shit blows over
Well thats the problem, it will never blow over. Also, as much as I like your plan, you wont be sitting in your nest for the rest of your life. So thats my question. Isnt the .308 the best for penetrating cover, long distance shots and having the ability to also engage in CQB?

>>34500023
No, more like if youre a journalist who uncovered something about a cartel operation in the US.

>>34499997
if more than a half dozen spics come after you with aks simultaneously, it's not going to matter what kind of small arm you have

it's time to land mine and booby trap your property

>>34500092
> No, more like if you're a journalist who uncovered something about a cartel operation in the US.

Time to publish anonymously, I guess. Either that, or just pass the info over to the closest police force that's sucking up that sweet, sweet war on drugs money.

>>34499416
Go for it. 5.56 is for militarys with air support and paper shooters.

7.62RFN all the way

>>34500092
Just kys for being a journalist

>>34499416
Personally I would get an FAL. Those things are pure sex. But the SCAR is pretty dope to and if SHTF it can serve most roles you may need it for. If money is not an issue do it.

>>34499416

Rent it at the range.

You will know whether you like it or not.

Or you can just be like other gun buyers that decide on no sex before marriage.

>>34499416
I want one for when I'm in the woods around bears, but I can't justify paying 8k for it.

Get a BAR 3006. 308 is for cucks

>>34499608
why carry a 10 lb SCAR + optic combo when a 5 lb bolt action .308 + optic does the same thing for hunting?

if you want to hunt hogs then sure, but I bet an AR-10 is lighter.

File: IMG_0487.jpg (667KB, 1728x1296px) Image search: [Google]

667KB, 1728x1296px

>>34500689
Because its a reliable semi auto

File: 1472304398357.png (244KB, 1200x4168px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 1200x4168px

>>34500636
>ride the rifle carousel for years, spending thousands of dollars looking for "the one" instead of just buying the 17s and learning to live with it
If you don't stay pure for your raifu, you'll never be happy because you'll always be comparing it to every other gun you've ever shot.

>>34500689
The SCAR is 8 lbs, and most bolt guns weigh 6+ lbs dry.

>>34499416
Was going to get one but decided against it. I'd have to spend upwards of $7,000 altogether to get it where I'd want and I could spend that on a much better rifle instead

At this point I'd rather get one of those POF Revolutions, lighter, cheaper, sub MOA(from youtube reviews), less recoil, and more customizable.
Not that I'd be able to actually shoot well enough to get sub moa lol

>>34499416

Cost, weight of the gun and total system, recoil, report.

That's basically it.

>>34500735
Correlation does not imply causation.

>>34499452
>For home defense or 'defending the homeland' shtf uses, it's even less useful, because you want to focus on weapons that can sustain high volumes of fire. This cannot.

are you some kind of expert on militia tactics during invasions?

>>34501120
It works well enough for insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq. Harassing fire from well-positioned PKMs was a constant issue, according to what I've read, and part of why so many programs are trying to extend the range of the 5.56mm.

>>34500735
> Implying you first and only gun was a semi-auto .308
> Implying 5 years down the road that Weatherby with hand checkered stock chambered in something mildly exoctic like .264 Magnum isn't going to catch your eye
> Implying even if you ignore that, one day a .357 Mag lever/revolver pair isn't going to walk up and say hi

>>34501051
>POF Revolutions
>piston AR
Nah.

>>34499416
Do it. It's the best all around rifle round for civilians (unless you're a poorfag in which case it's 7.62x39).

Civilians shouldn't deal in matters of suppressive fire so .22 caliber rounds like .223 are less practical.

>>34501172
Lightest semi-auto .308 out there. Here's hoping someone figures out how to do the same with DI too.

>>34501169
You sure are good at picking out things I wouldn't be tempted by.

File: 1459042695061.gif (984KB, 542x498px) Image search: [Google]

984KB, 542x498px

>>34501145

so when armies don't extend their effective ranges, and you're left with a heavy 308 rifle and a few friends, couldn't you achieve the same effect?

your reasoning is silly, a semi auto 308 of any type would be a great SHTF gun, and one of the few available over the counter that has the power to be a real threat to folks with armor, or vehicles

>>34501236
Are you trying to say 5.56 NATO isn't a threat to people in vehicles? You should Google that.

>>34501145
>Harassing fire from well-positioned PKMs was a constant issue, according to what I've read, and part of why so many programs are trying to extend the range of the 5.56mm.
Why is the army so fucking retarded?
>Half the engagements we receive are past 300m with crew served weapons
>better pretend the issue is with our riflemen being inferior
>nevermind half of them just skip even bothering to shoot at 300m on qual ranges.

>>34501221

>not wanting a 357 combo.

End yourself.

>>34501236
I agree with you that .308 is dank, but I feel it is important to inform you that a 308 is blocked by level 3 plates, while you need 3+ or level 4 plates to stop .223 (due to velocity)

>>34501248
>in vehicles?

using vehicles as cover, as in, needing to shoot through the vehicle

i'd never trust a 5.56 for that

File: 15151434_10154560620994892_1159206551_n.jpg (41KB, 360x640px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 360x640px

>>34499416
>EU
If we did not have shit gunlaws here i would buy a Scar 17, HK 417 or a SR25.
had to settle for a FNAR, buying a new optic later

>>34501316

there is no body armor that can stop a .308 that can't stop 5.56

>>34499416
Just get a Vepr and save a few grand

>>34501097
Correlation is drawn from scatterplot analysis anyways, not bar charts. The indeterminant variable can still be a predictor of the determinant variable without "causation".

>>34501169
Yes, implying most of those things.
Having a .308 as your only firearm would be silly, since you can't carry it concealed (inb4 "speak for yourself").
When it comes to your primary and secondary, unless there's something dramatically wrong with them that makes it impossible for you to shoot them well, you should be faithful to them.
Having a range toy or two, or a rifle or handgun specifically for hunting, or other guns with specialized purposes is OK, but just going out and buying guns because they caught your eye is how you end up with dozens of perfectly good firearms unappreciated and gathering dust in your safe and having a "carry rotation" because you have five different handguns that are all equally suited to CCW and you just can't decide which one to carry today.
Every gun has its pros and cons, and having/trying more guns will only make things worse by making you more starkly aware of those pros and cons; it's far better to simply not know what you're missing out on.

>>34501250
>nevermind half of them just skip even bothering to shoot at 300m on qual ranges.

Lol wut

>>34501316
Got any reputable sources on that?
Would love to see their testing parameters

>>34501316
>while you need 3+ or level 4 plates to stop M193 out of a 20" barrel (as if anybody runs that setup anymore)

>>34499416
It's a .308 semi, it's a child of SOCOM oper8ers using all their rifles like light machine guns so it's incredibly overbuilt but not over heavy for what it is.

If you have unlimited dosh it's the best choice, if you care at all about cost an AR10 would serve you better

>>34499416

Just buy it. That way if you hate it some other guy will get a discount when you sell it used.

>>34501784
A lot of soldiers skip the 300m targets to save more rounds for closer ones. It's a pretty common way to game the qual and ensure people get at least Sharpshooter scores.

>>34499452
>It's like an unnecessarily heavy DMR
what have you been smoking? if anything it's too lightweight to be a DMR.

but as a Recce DMR in open windy areas where engagements would be at a distance, it's it more suitable.

File: M14.jpg (562KB, 1920x1440px) Image search: [Google]

562KB, 1920x1440px

Do it. I got a M1A for about 1400 at my local gun shop. Bought a 500 round bulk for 400 and some extra 20 round mags. So spent about $$1900 and haven't looked back.

Also with everyone and their sisters cousins grandma having an AR. i can always shoot one with a friend...

>>34501687
>When it comes to your primary and secondary
Unless you're a cop, active military, hunting guide, or a LARPer, then this will be 1 or 2 pistols.

So you don't have to worry about .308 at all.

>>34499447
Acog is a good choice, however I will say from experience that if you ever SBR it you are pretty much limited to an Elcan, otherwise it will destroy any other optic.

>>34499709
Except for all of the US SF guys using the MK17

>>34501145
> Constant issue
Once again, I ask why, all of a sudden, are all of our squads operating in isolation from the rest of the platoons and their 240s?

>>34503659
Because call of duty says so

>>34503618
>using a pistol for HD or hunting
>shooting 3- or 2- gun with only one kind of gun

>>34499452
>It's a niche weapon that doesn't really fill the role between an AR and a sniper rifle
I didn't know they let special ed kids on the internet.

File: 6.5 Maten.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>>34499416
I had a Scar 17 and it was great, but I sold it and replaced it with a homebuilt AR10. I did this because with one lower I can have a 16'' .308 and by pushing two pins I have a 22'' 6.5 creedmoor. I push those 2 pins again and now I have an SBR 358 Winchester.

You will be well served with the Scar, but if you ever want to dabble is new or odd calibers, the AR10 makes it easier to do so.

>>34499416
I personally wouldn't get a SCAR (for the money, I'd rather get a PTR and a FAL, and have enough left over for either ammo or a AR), but I can understand why you want one.

>>34503635
I've seen Elcans die on the 17. Honestly, get something that's rated for 50cal.

>>34505193
> Implying primary-secondary-only autism allows 3 Gun to even exist
> Implying you'd even own a 1911 to run Heavy Metal
> Implying a true warriors dedication allows for hunting or sports when every free waking moment must be dedicated to training to engage 6 man fire teams in a tactical manner

>>34505337
>(for the money, I'd rather get a PTR and a FAL
>for the money
>PTR
>FAL

why is it that PTR/FAL fags are ALWAYS on a poverty level income? I'm VERY curious.

>>34505390
I'm going to the Surefire WMG championship this October and the heavy metal division allows 9mm double stacks and semi auto shotguns. Your argument is kind of moot...

>>34505440
>heavy metal division
>9mm double stacks
gay
HM should require .4x cal with a respectable power factor floor, at minimum

>>34505440
>heavy metal division allows 9mm double stacks
Whoa, when did that change?

>>34505533
>>34505552
I think it may just be for this match so they can get 10 people to make it legit category. They call it "Heavy Optics" so maybe its an outlaw category.

http://www.surefirewmg.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Surefire-wmg-rules.pdf

>>34505390
While Heavy Metal division is implicitly a safe space for 1911fags and their M14s, the handgun rules typically only require .45 Auto caliber and no more than 10 cartridges per magazine, which allows a wide variety of relatively normal sidearms to participate.

>>34505396
>for the same amount of money that I'd spend on a SCAR, I'd rather buy 2 other guns and ammo for them

Not him, but was that really so difficult to understand?

>>34506930
But you can only shoot one at a time, and the SCAR is better than both of them in every practical respect.
The only reason to get a PTR or FAL is if you specifically have a hard-on for legacy battle rifles, in which case the SCAR wouldn't have been in consideration to begin with.

>>34507007
>rather
It's almost as if he was speaking about his personal preference. As someone who's shot all of the big 3 and a SCAR, I'd rather have the PTR and FAL too. The SCAR is certainly a better rifle in just about every aspect but the other 3 are more fun to shoot in my opinion.

>>34500689
Please show me a bolt action .308 that weighs 5 pounds, optic included.

>>34507161
If it exists, I don't want to shoot it.

>>34501859
>using all their rifles like light machine guns

That's not how these are used at all. Part of the reason they are so light is that their barrels are very thin.

>>34501808
hate to break it to ya kid

>>34507382
>>34507161
my bad

Is there anything a FAL has over a SCAR?

I just want a battle rifle for the novelty and to check that category off my list, and the FAL is more aesthetic to me.

There's nothing practical about how much you're gonna have to spend on it + an acog. Go to bed anon.

>>34499999
>>34500000

>>34499452
> heavy

Stopped reading right there. Check the specs friendo. Also, you're a fucking idiot

File: 1446716339768.jpg (108KB, 457x580px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 457x580px

>>34505337
lol you wish you could get a SCAR poor fag, keep justifying your PTR purchase loser.

File: 1498302832139.jpg (53KB, 620x465px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 620x465px

I have the somewhat unique situation of having a "free" SCAR 17 (it's on long term loan) so I've had the opportunity to use one for a while without the psychological baggage of having spent a shit ton of cash on it.
I love it. I wish I didn't because of the ammo cost compared to my 223 AR, but I do. It's light, the iron sights work well, and it just feels good. So far I have only shot out to 300 yds, but there is no problem hitting a 16" plate at that range with the iron sights.
I'm thinking of using it instead of my AR in an upcoming 2 Gun match just to see if running around with it slung all day changes my opinion.

>>34509273
>the FAL is more aesthetic
That's basically it.

Shannon Smith first time with SCAR
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EumFWx6jzXU

First time MK20 suppressed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3mmfighfjQ

First time run and gun
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRpM2giA91Y

File: 1496424100045.jpg (53KB, 538x546px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 538x546px

>>34499416
>Guys, I found this gun with great reviews that shoots the calibre I want and I can afford it. Should I buy it?

Really nigger.

>>34509273
>Is there anything a FAL has over a SCAR?

+cheap parts
+steel, not alloy
+long history of removing communists
+looks cool

File: 1496324523396.png (661KB, 717x474px) Image search: [Google]

661KB, 717x474px

>>34511697
Steel is an alloy

>>34499416
I absolutely can't get over how the stock looks but if I could afford one I'd still get it

>>34499452
Stop posting anytime
Holy fuck you haven't got the slightest Idea what you're talking about even by /k/ standards, I'm actually a bit baffled

>>34511710
sorry aluminum, i've been listening to bongs talk for too long

File: p_100016831_2[1].jpg (11KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 400x400px

>>34511724

They make adapters for that. Though with the failures of most AR stocks in a drop test/mortaring, maybe you shouldn't.

>>34500689
>SCAR-H STD 3.58 kg (7.9 lb)

You are fake news.

>>34500641
>8k dollars for a SCAR

That rifle is 3.3k NIB off of FN's own website.

They can be had for as low as 2.5k on the secondary market.

>>34500641
>8k

File: 1395705299492.jpg (76KB, 600x900px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 600x900px

>tfw paid out the ass for a new SA58 FAL
>could have had a new SCAR for a couple more bills

no regrets

>>34511837
Yes, but then there are the pretty much necessary modifications and ACOG I have to put on it so it doesn't get destroyed.

>>34511789
Just do what everyone else does. Call the ACR shit and then take its stock for the SCAR despite just having said it was a shit rifle

>>34511878
Geiselle super scar trigger $250
Angled charging handle $50
That's all you need.

The scar killing optics is a myth on semiauto versions.

File: stock[1].jpg (221KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 1200x1600px

>>34511926

File: receiver[1].jpg (227KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 1200x1600px

>>34511926

>b-but Magpul!

>>34511926
the acr stock looks cool but the hinges are weak. the scar stock is ugly but the fact is, its much stronger. case in point, find a pic of a broken scar stock.

What's a solid entry level battle rifle?
What kinda glass should I put on it?

File: opplanet-atn-pvs14-3-3a-1aa-night-vision-monocular-gen-3-3a-pvs14-3-1aa-main[1].jpg (69KB, 978x550px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 978x550px

>>34511878

ACOG TA33 .308 was $800 on sale.
ADM ACOG mount for $50
Shooting sight trigger for $250
Handstop/vertical grip for $20

Shit man, even at non sale prices how the fuck do you get to 8k?

You'd need fucking night vision and a DBAL to get to that price range.

File: alton-brown-gun[1].jpg (74KB, 600x803px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 600x803px

>>34499416

www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgFeVlw2Ywg

If only Alton did gun reviews.

>>34501097
t. roastie

>>34509273
Every real FN production FAL I've found is more expensive than a SCAR

>>34512124
Ptr91
Anything 3-12 magification, fixed or variable.

>>34513169
Can those be had for less than the cost of building an ar-10?

>>34513402
PSA had some AR10s on sale for like $700 recently but for the most part yes.

>>34512749
Is the L1A1 more accurate than the FAL?

>>34499416
Because .308 cost twice as much as 5.56. if your fine with paying about twice as much to shoot it, and if your buying a scar that tells me you are, then its not an issue so go for it.

>>34513471
>cobbled together by beady-eyed Anglos too dumb to even into the metric system
>more accurate than a proper FAL built the way Saive intended
wew

File: 1467058522753.png (579KB, 800x900px) Image search: [Google]

579KB, 800x900px

goal body

File: 0FE672E2-A211-4A83-B53E-734D9D412F32-31045-00002638562189A0.jpg (46KB, 400x500px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 400x500px

>>34499452

>>34500689
You bet stupid. The AR-10 I sold to buy my 17 was almost 2 pounds heavier. Feel free to stop speaking out of your ass now.

>>34501097
>correlation does not imply causation
only dumb faggots parrot this meme. correlation does not indicate causation, but does imply it.
for example, lets say that op both eats pb&j and sucks dick. there is no correlation between eating pb&j and posting shit threads and so you dont assume that op posts shit threads because he eats best sandwich. there is a correlation between sucking benis and being op though, so you assume that there might a causal relation. viz., it is implied that there might be a causal link between correlated phenomena, because it is more probable than a causal relation between uncorrelated phenomena

>>34510476
>I've had the opportunity to use one for a while without the psychological baggage of having spent a shit ton of cash on it
This is a valuable perspective; thank you.