Semi-Auto Battle Rifle... Which one?

[henschman]

Yeah, the SCAR has its downsides, not the least of which is the fact that it is a proprietary commercial design, which means spare parts are expensive and hard to come by, and will dry up very quickly if it doesn't end up getting adopted as a service rifle and FN stops production.

There are a few things that I don't like about the design, too. For one, I don't like the short stubby handguards and short sight radius. I realize they had to do this to be able to use the same handguard on a 12" barrel as on a 20", but I like a longer handguard for the shooting techniques I use. I also don't like how it has a quad rail handguard instead of a modular one that allows you to use rails only when and where you want. Since the handguard is part of the receiver, these things aren't easy to swap out like on an AR.

But I do agree that both the weight and the accuracy they were able to achieve with the SCAR are amazing. It has some serious potential to be the ideal battle rifle with a few tweaks, AND if it actually gets adopted as a service rifle and more manufacturers start making rifles/parts.

 

[redmax51]

Yeah, the SCAR has its downsides, not the least of which is the fact that it is a proprietary commercial design, which means spare parts are expensive and hard to come by, and will dry up very quickly if it doesn't end up getting adopted as a service rifle and FN stops production. There are a few things that I don't like about the design, too. For one, I don't like the short stubby handguards and short sight radius. I realize they had to do this to be able to use the same handguard on a 12" barrel as on a 20", but I like a longer handguard for the shooting techniques I use. I also don't like how it has a quad rail handguard instead of a modular one that allows you to use rails only when and where you want. Since the handguard is part of the receiver, these things aren't easy to swap out like on an AR.

But I do agree that both the weight and the accuracy they were able to achieve with the SCAR are amazing. It has some serious potential to be the ideal battle rifle with a few tweaks, AND if it actually gets adopted as a service rifle and more manufacturers start making rifles/parts.

That's what I'm sure a lot of people said when Stoner released his new design.

 

[Dinner]

The Scar 17 has been adopted in SOF community and is known as the mk17. It is the first rifle that was designed from the ground up with input from SOF operators, something to think about. I do agree wiith henschman that it does have a few quirks, I'm not fond of the rail length either but they do make a factory extension if you want to add the weight.

 

[SMS]

The Scar 17 has been adopted in SOF community and is known as the mk17.

While it has been adopted by SOCOM it is very relevent to point out that the Mk17 has not replaced the M4 in SOCOM, it is being issued and used in conjunction with it. SOCOM and regular line troops are still stacking johnnie-jihad like cordwood with the M4, just like they have for more than a decade now.

Still much more field time/data needs to be collected before I'd declare it any kind of winner.

 

[Dinner]

sms, I think you are confusing the mk16 scar (5.56) and the mk 17 (7.62).

 

[SMS]

sms, I think you are confusing the mk16 scar (5.56) and the mk 17 (7.62).

No, I'm not. SOCOM said they had no need for the Mk16, but kept the Mk17.

My point is, despite all the hype about needing a 7.62 instead of a 5.56, SOCOM is still only supplementing the force with 7.62 Mk17s not replacing the 5.56 M4....and therefore the jury is still out on the Mk17 since it has not yet seen wide issue and use on the battlefield (but it is a sexy looking gun!).

 

[Dinner]

SMS - I would never replace the m4 with the mk17, totally different weapon for a different mission when range is needed

 

[SMS]

SMS - I would never replace the m4 with the mk17, totally different weapon for a different mission when range is needed

Exactly. And some guys with recent experience with the SCAR are saying that the range is not needed (despite the chain email-like phony AARs)....unless you just want to sit back at 600 meters and trade lead. Guys who have to maneuver on and close with the enemy are seeming to still prefer the M4 (with training and round improvements).

 

[been]

i chose the M1 Garand...my first rifle and helped us win the second world war

 

[Lone Wolf '49]

been, you are so good, and thank you.