|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Major sense of "blah" is the impression I get from it. See his conclusion:
Quote:
Quote:
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. Last edited by MT2008; 05-31-2009 at 10:40 PM. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
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.... Last edited by k9870; 05-31-2009 at 10:59 PM. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
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. Quote:
Quote:
Not to mention that small arms are pretty much irrelevant to the broader, more strategic picture of American military prowess, anyway. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
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.... Last edited by k9870; 05-31-2009 at 11:29 PM. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
If he is a Ranger he just made them sound like a bunch of idiots that can't transition to another system. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
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. Last edited by jdun; 06-01-2009 at 01:56 AM. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
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. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
|
|