AR-15 -----> FN SCAR?

[DavidCBaker]

You AR-15 and variant folks, what do you think of the FN SCAR? I don't have either and don't plan to get either, but I'm curious about whether or not we're at the beginning of a sea change in terms of migrating from one platform to another, or is the current lot of AR-15 and variants so entrenched (and economical) that they'll exist alongside each other for decades?

[TGO David]

If I had the money right now, I would already own an FN SCAR. That being said, you aren't going to see a mass exodus to the SCAR in civilian or military circles for some time to come. The AR is indeed very well entrenched. It's my understanding that the SCAR is only being fielded by certain elements in the SpecOps community and that rolling it out to the average foot solider isn't even on the table as an option right now.

[Guest Plainsman]

Why did they have to make the stock on those things so darn ugly?

[DavidCBaker]

If I had the money right now, I would already own an FN SCAR. That being said, you aren't going to see a mass exodus to the SCAR in civilian or military circles for some time to come. The AR is indeed very well entrenched. It's my understanding that the SCAR is only being fielded by certain elements in the SpecOps community and that rolling it out to the average foot solider isn't even on the table as an option right now.

That's what I understood, too. Though apparently if the trials go well, it'll be rolled out steadily.

It'll be interesting to see how much the pricing drops. Right now they're crazy stupid expensive, though I see them in the low $3 thousands.

[nightrunner]

i personally HATE olive drab or dark earth brown on MY weapons so until they come out with a black one i have no desire for one. just like i had no desire for a chey-tac M200 intervention until it was released in black

[TGO David]

Why did they have to make the stock on those things so darn ugly?

Adjustable height of comb, adjustable length of pull and side-foldable. I think function pretty much dictated form on that one and it turned out looking like the boot off of a pair of hip waders.

[TGO David]

i personally HATE olive drab or dark earth brown on MY weapons so until they come out with a black one i have no desire for one. just like i had no desire for a chey-tac M200 intervention until it was released in black

Until we stop having to kick ass in arid, desert locations or until all of the jihadists go color blind... you can pretty much count on FDE being the color of the day.

[nightrunner]

oh i absolutely understand the military having them in that configuration(function over form) but i would have thought that they would have made at least the civilian version AVAILABLE in black.

[Metalhead]

Speaking of which, we got three of em in yesterday.

[Guest Dean_JC78]

I hate the stock on the Scar. Its so fugly they should pay you a little something to take it.

Joking aside, I just don't think it is worth the money its selling for right now.

[Guest JHatmaker]

Franklin Gun has a 16s right now for like $5999. I'd love to get one but "settled" on an FS2000. It's a kick a$$ gun, but I'd rather wait (and wait, and wait some more) for the 17s to become available to the public. I figure if you're going to get such a hoss of a weapon, you might as well get it in something powerful. But that may never happen.

[Jasongar8]

From everything I know/heard about the SCAR, it is a great rifle. But as others have said I cant see paying what they are going for right now. Another thing, until there have been 1000's and 1000's of them shipped to civilians you really dont know if they are going to last. Anything new is always going to be hot. But if they are still selling for $2000+ in a few years I really dont know if they are here to stay.

-Jason G

[hkusp40cal]

Lowest I have seen them advertised is $2900 + shipping.

[TGO David]

Franklin Gun wants how much?!?

[Guest JHatmaker]

Franklin Gun wants how much?!?

Couldn't believe it. Went in there today to get a TriPower and they had a SCAR in a glass case so I walked over to take a look. Saw a 5 as the first # and just shook my head.

[56FordGuy]

At a Smyrna gunshow not too long ago, I believe Specialty Arms had one for 7000 or or, might have been 7900. It's been a while.

[Smith]

In the pictures I've seen they look huge and unwieldy. Evidently they aren't, but I still don't understand why a bullpup design is not more prevalent ala Tavor, AUG, etc.

[Guest BillOfRightsFan]

The SCAR has a number of improvements. The question is, what are you paying for? In my life those improvements are not enough to justify the cost. I could not imagine paying someone $1,000 to clean my AR-15 for me and yet that is what the cost differential is for the Gas Piston system and it's value to the owner. I also can't see paying extra for the bull-pup design at those levels. If you bring the price down to within 10% of AR-15 prices and I'll never touch an AR again.

In the field the cost is justified. Higher reliability only needs to save 1 soldier to pay for a lot of those guns. The time gained not cleaning the gun so often is time that could be spend doing other important things like getting some sleep. I can understand the military need for these improvements. But I only shoot 2000 rounds a year. There is no justification for me.

Now, if you like the look of the gun and want something that performs at the top of the line and you have enough income to justify it then the personal justification is there. Just the same as buying a sports car even though you'll never use the speed or be able to haul groceries in it or take the kids to camp. The value is personal not practical.

Just my $0.02

Pete

[LA_357SIG]

IMO The SCAR isn't worth it for civilians other than the coolness factor. What I don't get is all the new .mil battle rifles that come out now are all designed around the weakest link on current rifles: the G.I. magazine. I would like to see a new magazine design, fewer and thicker bolt locking lugs, different bolt design w/o cam hole and better self lubing finishes on contact and moving parts. (like teflon)

.....But I only shoot 2000 rounds a year. .....Pete

Wow. My 8 y/o son shoots more than 2000 rounds a year. Mostly .22lr, 9mm and when he does really good some 6.8SPC and 5.56.

Edited June 28, 2009 by LA_357SIG

[Volphin]

Gotta call it straight on this one guys. That's one ugly rifle. I really didn't know PlaySkool made gun stocks. Sheesh. Give me an old fashioned Armalite AR-10 and day over that unit.

[Guest BillOfRightsFan]

Gotta call it straight on this one guys. That's one ugly rifle. I really didn't know PlaySkool made gun stocks. Sheesh. Give me an old fashioned Armalite AR-10 and day over that unit.

What is funny is when the M-16 was first issued the joke was to flip it over looking for the "Mattel" sunburst logo.

Ugly it may be but all that matters is function. In the field it will get abused in ways the manufacturer would never think of. Ignorance, environment and strange rituals tend to make every gun ugly in the field.

Is it really any better than the HK-416? Sexy guns don't seem to make it (the XM-8 being the latest example.)

[Jasongar8]

Is it really any better than the HK-416? Sexy guns don't seem to make it (the XM-8 being the latest example.)

I dont think it is. But then again when I first messed with a HK-416 I just knew it would be a "do all, end all" for the military. But then they decided to stay with the M16/M4. Shows what I know.

-Jason G

[Guest Dean_JC78]

Always like the guns made by the lowest bidder.