SCAR Testing Review Military
 

Guy in the Army, Ranger? Is in the process of testing the SCAR. It doesn't look good.


http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=6&f=2&t=280622

Looked okay to me, saw no major complaints. The few errors are part of breaking in as he said, ive never known anyone who bought an AR without breaking in errors. He also says he prefers an m4 due to familiarity. If someone is trained on something a while they get used to it. If people used only scars and switched to ar15s similar result.

Major sense of "blah" is the impression I get from it. See his conclusion:

And what he says makes complete sense, too.

Right, but what about the SAS operators who spend their careers training on the L85 and instead use M4s once they join the SAS? Or the Aussie commandos who start out with the AUG as cadets but switch to M4s once they go SF? Or what about the French RDP who prefer the M4 over the FAMAS used by the rest of their military?

Saying that people prefer the M4 due to "familiarity" is not a satisfactory explanation for why almost every SF unit in the world likes the M4 over whatever service rifle their country issues.

Well id take anything over a famas, enfield or aug, as i hate bullpups The m4 is in existence, we give people good deals on m16 series rifles to try and get the world to use it, its modeular, and whatever the military uses must be good, right?

I think the reason nothing else akes it is everyone says "the m4 is good enough why buy something better."

m4s are good, there is just some way better stuff. Politics also has something to do with it, god forbid they spend money on new guns....even though we could replace all the existing m4s and m16s with SCARs for the price of a single B2 bomber. The m4 is also currently used so people with one will be partial and biased, most are incapable of admitting there is anything better. Although I know some vets who claim that the Daewoo Rifles used by SK troops are better....

Right, but you don't necessarily represent the opinion of every fighting man and woman on the face of the Earth. ;)

Anyway, those aren't the only ones. What about Japan? They use the Type 89, which is basically a glorified AR-18, and yet their SF also uses M4s. Take a look at the Wikipedia article on the M4 and check out "Users". You'll see endless countries whose SF use M4s, even though the rest of their troops use something else...not necessarily a bullpup, either.

Wrong. These are SF units we're talking about, who buy M16s and M4s in extremely small numbers. I'm not referring to countries like Taiwan or Saudi Arabia that depend on U.S. supplies to equip ALL of their troops. I'm talking about countries like France, Japan, the U.K., etc. that have their own defense industries, and in most case produce their own service rifles. Their SF has the option to use these rifles, or anything else they want. But they choose M4. Why is that?

Per-unit cost isn't the only issue; it's also a matter of training all of our troops on the new weapon, and the fact that we're involved in two wars. In circumstances like that, the money goes to stuff that's a priority. And it isn't the DoD's priority to re-equip our troops with a new service rifle just because every kid who plays "Call of Duty 4" thinks the SCAR is cooler than the M4.

Not to mention that small arms are pretty much irrelevant to the broader, more strategic picture of American military prowess, anyway.

If we refused to ever adopt a a new rifle to to training and costs well be using m4s when we are being ripped to shreds by lazer cannons. The m4 has seen its day, its just a matter of time now. And for the record, video gamers love m4s and there is no SCAR in call of duty. And m4 fans will discredit everything, say the dust test is inconclusive or rigged, etc. Im willing to bet if the m4/m16 never existed, and something else was in use, people would be saying that thing is better and shouldnt be replaced.

Not that these pissing matches ever go anywhere. Im betting way back there was complaints when they tried to replace trapdoor springfields with krags....

Because all gamers in the future will make decisions on our military firearms right?

To be fair, the first Rainbow Six Vegas has an FN SCAR and no M4 at all. By the second one, they give you the M468, which was dumb because I wanted a damn M4! No 6.8mm for me please, I want realistic 5.56mm. And they got the magazine capacity wrong I believe, don't 6.8mm's hold 28 rounds, not 30?

I thought the 6.8 held 25? I loved the lack of M4, its the most overused video game gun. And gamers should never decide military weapons, because the DE 50ae would be the standard sidearm. I want to see a 6.5 type round redisighned to feed more reliably (6.5mm tends to jam easy) then youd have manageble recoil with better punch and ballistics.

A good compromise may be keep the AR platform, in the form of the LWRC IAR, in an intermediate caliber.

Well with this soldiers think we would still be using Trapdoor Springfield's. Does he realize that the M16 system is almost 50 years old. It hold the record for the longest serving rifle in the US military surpassing the Trapdoor Springfield.

If he is a Ranger he just made them sound like a bunch of idiots that can't transition to another system.

It jammed three times on him. Two of those jams were double feed. Those take a lot longer to clear then the standard malfunction. You also lose an entire mag clearing it. The SCAR was suppose to more reliable then the M4 what happen to that?

Hopefully he keeps us up to date in the post.

Ive seen Ars and m16s jam a lot too. Theyre a complicated system. But now you'll say those are only certain ARs. Now ill say this is only one SCAR rifle. The m16 is still around because of people saying that it gets the job done and we shouldn't get soemthing new, that it will cost a lot, that it takes new training.

Also, this is the early SCARs. Look at what a total POS the first SP1s were. Those were tuly awful weapons and it took years of redesighn to get them up to todays standard. A SCAR thats not even broken in and in its first model looks like a promising platform to build off of.

Every guns jams. That's just fact. The main selling point for the SCAR is ultra reliable, which it is not by many accounts. Two double feeds within 200 rounds from each other is unacceptable. Again double feeds take a lot longer to clear and you lose a magazine in the process.

AR15 is mechanically simpler then the SCAR, AK or any overhead piston rifle. It has at least one less part then piston rifles. In the AR15 DI the bolt is the piston.

Ars are simpler than AKs? Wow, next youll say its simpler than the mosin. Im willing to bet if the military had been using SCARs for 50 years then tried to introdce a "new" m16 to replace it the exact opposite of this conversation would be happening. I bet after a little field testing and a few modifications the SCAR will really shine. Like I said, the m16 took this long to get good. And I think a test of one SCAR is inconclusive. Ive seen other tests too. The SCAR also performed WAY better than the m4 in the infamous dust test.

Do not argue with me on the mechanical actions of rifles. You will lose because you never took the time to understand how rifles and pistols work.

AR15 DI are mechanically simpler then AK and any overhang piston type rifle. It isn't my opinion it is a fact.

Very few military people I know are impressed with the cartridge 556. I know people who stopped using mini14s or compact bolt guns for hunting yotes cause the 40 pound animal would suck up a round and run off. Now they use 22-250s or 12 ga. I dont want to think about what determined humans in the 150-200 lb range can take. An Iraq veteran once told me "dont bring an m16 to a gunfight." I neever liked the feel of them. My favorite part of the rifle is tricking people into slapping themselves with the charging handle. The SCAR runs cooler, like many piston guns. It outperformed the dust test. Its just as modular. One review there wont sway me. Besides, I bet FN will have it completely perfected soon and the military will still hold onto the current system due to costs. Well, replacin the m4 is step 1. Step 2, getting rid of the friggin beretta. Whos idea was it to use 9mm anyway?

And I still say the m16 took forever to work out the kinks, the sp-1 was a TRULY AWFUL RIFLE THAT DOES NOT DESERVE TO EXIST and now you have okay rifles. The Fact FNS start equals or exceeds 50 years of development on another platform is quite impressive.

And in the dust test the m4 jammed every 68 rounds, compared to the SCARs 265. Hm.

WTF? This isn't a caliber discussion this is about the SCAR.

Oh about the dust test. The M4 that was used in the test was an old beat up one. While the SCAR and other rifles were brand new. Once that was realized they redid the test and the reliability was about the same as the rest.

I love how you still keep dodging my point about other countries' SF units all carrying M16s and M4s, even though they have the option to choose anything they want, including the M14s that you worship. Even after I shot down your last excuse...

Right, because we all know that the DoD is that far behind the curve...at a time when most of our country's enemies are still armed with the same old 7.62x39mm AKs that your dad and his dad encountered in combat decades ago. :rolleyes:

It's not simply costs and training, it's whether the new platform provides sufficient advantages to justify the cost. Military procurement programs are inherently conservative by nature. Nobody denies that. But IMO, that's actually a healthy mindset. Running out and buying the newest weapons platform on the market, simply because this or that test shows that it jams a little less frequently than the current platform, is not sound policy.

(1.) Every video gamer I've ever met thinks that the newest H&K toys (like the 416) are the best firearms ever, and hates the M16 platform. There's even a group on Facebook urging the DoD to adopt the 416, and (not surprisingly), the members are all high school-age gamers who aren't even old enough to buy a semi AR-15.
(2.) Point taken that there's no SCAR in the game. I've only played the demo. That being said, it was a metaphor. You do know what a metaphor is, right?

Actually, it's debatable whether the early M16s (SP1) were really "awful" - the USAF (which was the only service that used them in large numbers) simply tried to make the rifles as cheap to manufacture as possible, the reason being that they didn't really place much of a priority (or funding) on small arms. Of course, the SP1 wasn't the version that saw the most service in 'Nam. That was the XM16E1, which is the version most people are referring to when they're thinking about the M16's controversial early history in Vietnam.

Also, how long is "forever"? Pretty much all of the M16's best-known faults were corrected by the time of the A1 model, in the late-60s. That's less than 10 years. Unless you think every M16 variant before the M4 and M16A4 were crap?

He keeps changing the subject and dodging valid points that are made in the thread.

Anyway for those of you that are interest on how the AR15 DI works and wonder why AR15 DI has a piston click on the link. It's a very simple system and all done in a nice compact package. If you still don't understand it I'll try to explain it as best as I can.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.htm...f=130&t=165511

Also, discussing the (alleged) faults of the 5.56x45mm round seems irrelevant, since (1.) everyone, including the Russians and Chinese, use smaller calibers nowadays, and (2.) there are AR variants available in 7.62x51mm. If caliber is your biggest grievance with the AR platform, then you have no legitimate complaints.

As much as I do like the SCAR, my stance on it remains the same. I still have my suspicions that this "Special Operations rifle" (the 5.56 version at least, I imagine the 7.62 version will see some use) might end up sharing the same fate as the Mark 23...

What I don't get is that if SOCOM wanted a gas piston so bad, why didn't they just buy an HK or LWRC upper, slap it on an M4 lower, and be done with it at a fraction of the cost?

Well, chances are HK would charge out the ass for theirs, but I'm sure you'll understand my point.

Or maybe I just answered my own question or something, I don't know. They deemed this civvy unfit for military service...

You my friend are wrong on the AR DI being mechanically simpler. The AR has for that system a Gas Tube, Gas Key, two Gas Key Screws, Carrier, Bolt, three Gas Rings, Cam Pin, Firing Pin, Firing Pin Retainer Pin = 12 parts. The AK has a Gas Tube, Bolt Carrier, Piston, Bolt, Firing Pin = 4 parts. Less parts on the AK therefore it is mechanically simpler.

The intent of using a gas piston compared to the DI is to reduce fouling during combat. A gas piston AR is useless to law enforcement or civilians as they are not operating in the harsh environments that our troops operate in.

I have had the SCAR in my hand as we have demoed a couple of times there are still some things that are being changed on it on being the bolt handle. But overall the weapons operation is excellent. I am sure that if the SCAR had 50 years of development it too would changed in configuration. Think XM177E1 to M4A1 similar looks yet completely different systems each with there own problem.

I understand you stance as being pro AR system but the AR is not the only thing in the world and I have built over a Thousand AR's in my life so far.

Well jdun you mind me asking your experience with the ar-15 platform? Just curious.

And Id love to see LWRC uppers. Also, the dust test had multiple m4s, I knew youd try to discredit it, all the AR fans do. My friends dad has some manuals left over from his GM days, the m16a3 manual says that its important to learn SPORTS because you can expect at least one jam every 90 rounds.

The hell? I've killed coyotes with a .22 Magnum before, so maybe these guys just need to learn how to shoot. I've killed two coyotes with an Anshutz .22 Magnum bolt gun, both at the length of a 60yard field. The coyotes had mange and were wandering around at 4:00 in the afternoon, so it seemed humane to put them down. I went up to where they were and waited until they came out. I shot one in the heart. The other one I hit in the head when he poked his head out of the brush. It was a pretty lucky shot, I had about a two second window before he'd run back in the brush and the gun wasn't in my hands but I swung it up and hit him (I paced 55 yards from my shooting point). Not to brag though, I just wanted to clarify that if a .22 Magnum can kill a Coyote, a .223 Remington is damn sure capable of it. If you plan to kill and animal or a person, you should shoot for a vital area like the heart or the head. And any bullet will kill something if it hits the heart or the head with a 1 in a 100 chance of survival.

I saw some interesting suggestions on thr.us when i posted a poll on what next rifle should be:

SCARH, 260 remington
FN FAL, 7mm-08

Seems, well, wierd. A sig 550 in an improved 6.8 remington seems good to me. Then aain, I am a bit partial to SIG Sauer products.
And a 223 can kill yotes, but why not get a better tool for a job. A 22250 has less failures to stop, its the better tool. You want the best, not just whats serviceable. I was at the range today with my freinds m48, 8mm. Round comparable to a 308. We looked at the holes compared to a target a guy with his m4gery was shooting. Much bigger. Then you got the recoil shy people. I say get the best of both worlds with an intermediate cartridge and get a reliable piston system. Most systems these days are just a retrofit of a DI gun and mostly make it less reliable. Something like an LWRC is built from the ground up as a iston specific gun with good results.

I think the 550 series of rifles are SIG only, no Sauer.

I really don't favor those new and "exciting" rounds out today like the 6.8mm, I don't see what is so bad about what we have. We have the .50 BMG when we want to touch someone at a mile, we have a .300 Win Mag when we want to down someone at 1000 yards, we have a .308 Winchester for when we need to touch someone at 500-900 yards. We have a .223 Remington when we want to fight at up to 300 yards and at CQB. And we have multiple pistol caliber handguns and submachine guns at close range. I really think we have the basics covered.

I really think 556 is a poor manstopper. If we used JSP ammo the whole point would be moot though. We didnt even sighn friggin geneva, even if it was sighned it is only covering how to deal with soldiers, not terrorist scum. If i was restricted to FMJ id want some 308 power. I see the 6.8 in 120 grain being used to hunt deer effectively. The loadings sent to the military so far have not offered much. The cartridge has some real potential though when loaded right. On a good note, the 77 grain round is being more widely issued, I think 55gr will be dead fairly soom! Yes!

I'm so glad I live in this fucking communist state where I can only hunt deer with a shotgun. Even though I own a Deerstalker .44 Magnum rifle, which has velocity almost exactly like a shotgun slug, it isn't allowed to hunt with because it is a rifle. BS. I want a shirt that says "I FUCKING HATE NY". It can replace the big Heart symbol.


And dude, you've got to take more time when you write your posts, I feel like I'm translating what word you MEANT to say.

"We didnt even sighn..." I assume you mean "signed"? Not to cut you down, I just can't read your writing easily man.

Sorry, also if "U" "0" "E" "D" "H" "W" or "G" and "P" are missing from anything, its this sticky keyboard.

Okay, I understand. My right mouse key sticks because all of my damn kittens keep pulling it off the counter and slamming it on the floor. I suggest buying a new keyboard if you ever get a chance.

BTW, just a briefing, you may have remembered in April I was really sad my cat was put to sleep, but a month later two strays had moved into my home and both of them had a litter of kittens (the gray cat had seven, the black cat had 4). I can't call it coincidence because that's just too wierd. Anyway, 11 kittens are a pain in the ass, but I now have only have 7 left, and I think we are giving one more away.

But back on topic, I'd love to use a well made accurate bolt action rifle but NY believes I could harm others because I'm a dumb hunter, so I have to use a shotgun.

I prefer to use my dad's Browning A-Bolt 12 Gauge, which can touch out to 80 yards easily and accurately without drop. But so does my dad...

I was recently "handed down" (which means my dad gave me his older Sweet 16 Browning A5 smooth bore, made in 1955, which can't hit anything) this gun to hunt deer with. I aimed at a deer about 60 yards away, because my dad failed to mention this gun was a smooth bore, so I figured a slug could travel 60 yards easily. I aimed a little above the heart and fired and the damn thing ran away with a minor leg scratch (couldn't find him, and the blood trail stopped so this deer is fine). But since a herd of about 20 deer was at my disposal, I fired a total of seven shots (I even had time to reload!) but this thing was so inaccurate it couldn't touch them, even at 30 yards! I eventually hit a button buck in the shoulder at about 40 yards because the gun missed the heart a tad. Luckily it stopped blatting before I walked up to it. I really didn't want to have to finish it off.

Anyone else here ever deer hunt? It's the only hunting I do, because if I hunted anything else I'd be branded as a hick, and I don't wish to be put in that category.

Laptop, cant exactly buy a new keyboard.

Ah, I see. The only laptop I ever owned overheated in 5 minutes, loaded at a snails pace, and was outdated by like a century (an IBM ThinkPad to be exact). It's dead and gone now, I'm currently seeking a new replacement.

And I think you might be able to get your laptop keyboard switched. Just give to the GeekSquad at Bestbuy or something and ask if they can fix it. They can probably switch out for a better keyboard or fix the sticky keys.

Im looking for an aircan to spray the keys and see if that works.

It's amazing how we go from talking about SCARs to computer keyboards. :D

My bad, though. I started it.

Alright then, what is better, the SCAR or the Bushmaster ACR? They both have a similiar built to them

Nobody will know until bushmaster actually releases the thing...every year they say it will be released by the end of the year....

Bushmaster makes really high quality guns, so I'm expecting something good. Chances are I will never handle either gun in my entire life though, so it doesn't really matter for me.

Well at the last shot show or whatever it's called, Bushmaster took their latest prototype design of the ACR out and it is pretty impressive

There president is a member of my gun club and bushy used to do testing there, but 8 hour full auto sessions angered the neighbors. They do fullauto elsewhere but there qaccuracy testing and long range stuff is still at my club occasionally. I so hope I say an ACR there someday.

I'm sure you built over a thousand AR in your life time.

Piston doesn't reduce fouling in a gun. It change where the fouling is located. The fouling doesn't magically disappear in piston gun. I shot my AKs and you know where all the fouling is located? The piston and the piston tube.

The SCAR use a modified AR18 action. It's nothing new. Just a different stock.

I own four complete Ar15. I have six complete lowers and four complete uppers. I have tones of AR15 strip lowers. I have built a lot of AR for friends and relatives, but not in the "thousands".

I shoot a lot and have a lot of different type of firearms in my collection. I been shooting since I was a kid.