imfdb.org  

Go Back   imfdb.org > The Forum > Just Guns

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-18-2009, 05:29 AM
jdun jdun is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 101
Default

SOCOM finally place an order for the SCAR. 600 SCAR rifles for the 75th Ranger Regiment.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/0..._scar_051109w/

The SCAR is an AR18/SA80/G36/XM8/etc in a different body. The funny thing is that SOCOM was so terrified of the XM8 (almost 40 million in development) that they created the SCAR program. They didn't want to end up with a rifle that melted. In the end they end up with a rifle that is almost the same but different looks. I would be surprise if the SCAR didn't melt in Afghanistan or Iraq.

Last edited by jdun; 05-18-2009 at 05:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-18-2009, 02:11 PM
MT2008's Avatar
MT2008 MT2008 is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,619
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jdun View Post
I would be surprise if the SCAR didn't melt in Afghanistan or Iraq.
I agree, and this is something to watch for. That being said...

(1.) The SCAR has been tested pretty extensively already...have there been any reports of melting? The issues with the XM8's forearm melting were noted pretty early on, while the SCAR hasn't had any such issues that I'm aware of.

(2.) The melting handguard wasn't the only reason that the XM8 died; there was also the issue of H&K having no U.S. factory, and the fact that it didn't have Picatinny rails (plus it wasn't designed with them in mind). Not to mention that it would have been quite expensive for us to switch service rifles while involved in two huge, expensive wars.

But we'll have to see. Now that there are SCARs in civilian hands, we'll have a chance to determine for ourselves whether SOCOM made a good choice.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-18-2009, 09:44 PM
jdun jdun is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 101
Default

Personally the SCAR isn't a good design. A backward step IMO. There too many negatives in the rifle.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-18-2009, 10:41 PM
MT2008's Avatar
MT2008 MT2008 is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,619
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jdun View Post
Personally the SCAR isn't a good design. A backward step IMO. There too many negatives in the rifle.
What are the negatives? (Again, not saying you're wrong, just curious to hear.)

As far as the SCAR being a step backwards, I dunno. But it certainly isn't a huge step forward. That is, I think, fairly evident.

I do understand your skepticism towards the design and agree that people shouldn't get excited about new small arms designs by reflex, simply because the weapon is being marketed as "state of the art", or because it appears in the latest "Call of Duty" game.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-18-2009, 11:19 PM
Excalibur's Avatar
Excalibur Excalibur is offline
IMFDB Admin
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 3,842
Send a message via AIM to Excalibur Send a message via MSN to Excalibur Send a message via Yahoo to Excalibur
Default

When I first saw the specs to the then called Magapull Masada, I noticed it has similar features to the SCAR. The charging handle, top rail, folding adjustable stock. The only other difference is the slide release for the Bushmaster ACR now as it is called is the slide release next to the trigger, which is like the one the XM8 had.

To me the whole shape of the SCAR seems a bit too rough
__________________

"There's a fine line between not listening and not caring...I like to think I walk that line everyday of my life."

Blessed be the LORD, my rock, Who trains my hands for war, And my fingers for battle
Psalm 144:1

“It is always wrong to use force, unless it is more wrong not to.”
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-18-2009, 11:38 PM
jdun jdun is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 101
Default

They are similar because they came from the same family, the AR18.

Magapull Masada/ACR was suppose to come out last year. Bushmaster had everything that was needed to start production but hold off because of the new military small arms competition.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.