|
|
#1
04-29-2009, 04:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Fn scar
I know some of you like the SCAR. Here are some detail pictures of the SCAR on AR15.com. Page 1, 3, and 4 contains images.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.htm...=277877&page=1 
|
|
#2
05-17-2009, 03:49 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I'm surprised nobody responded to this topic earlier. Thanks for this.
So far, I haven't seen the SCAR 16S at FFLs anywhere. I'm not sure who has them for sale, but I know they're very expensive due to the importation costs (apparently, they can't be made for civvie sales in this country) and the rising costs of AWs due to Obama's presidency. On THR, somebody linked to an auction where a SCAR 16S was going for $4,000, even though the MSRP is supposedly $2,500.
|
|
#3
05-17-2009, 05:50 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The only "experiance" I have with this gun is in Rainbow Six: Vegas, so I can't truly give my opinion on it until I hold one. Based on what I've seen I think it is ugly, but I'm sure it works fine.
__________________
|
|
#4
05-17-2009, 10:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I got to handle one at a special show here in Minnesota. I found it be be pretty ergonomic. I'd like one but it's def. way out of my price range, for now at least. In a way I'm still holding out for the ACR, if it ever comes out that is.
|
|
#5
05-18-2009, 12:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Were I to buy a rifle, I'd probably go with full stock AR type. Not picky other than that, I just like the big long rifles. In fact, M16A1 with triangular handguards are nice.
|
|
#6
05-18-2009, 01:41 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
SCARs are okay, but they look bulky to me, especially when mated with their grenade launchers. Same thing with the army's new UGL.
Part of me suspects it'll go the same route as the Mark 23 and get more use in video games and movies than it will in actual military operations...
__________________
"Everything is impossible until somebody does it - Batman RIP Kevin Conroy, the one true Batman
|
|
#7
05-18-2009, 05:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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.
|
|
#8
05-18-2009, 02:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
(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.
|
|
#10
05-18-2009, 10:41 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
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.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
