Re: acr vs. scar
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Snake Plissken</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pros of the SCAR: Vetted in combat, lighter by about a pound. Many ancillary/3rd party parts/upgrades available.
Cons of the SCAR: Reciprocating charging handle, weak/flimsy feeling stock known to shear off at the lugs, does the same thing as an M4 with little improvement, piston design aside. Compatible only with USGI mags and end user modified PMAGs; will be compatible with upcoming. PMAG M3s.
Pros of the ACR: Greater/sleeker ergonomics, with more options in that area as far as the stock and handguards/rails go. Non-reciprocating charging handle. Solid construction, feels built like a tank. Compatible with market available USGI pattern mags and PMAGs.
Cons of the ACR: No fielding whatsoever offers no testament to its overall combat capacity. Unnecessary M4 profile barrel currently offered only in 1/9 twist, although 1/7 twist barrel options are supposed to be available eventually. Flimsy barrel ratchet system. Remington "2.0" improvements to rail handguard, stock, and barrel assembly not known to be available anytime soon. Not many 3rd party/ancillary after market parts available.
Pros of both: Next gen construction and design built from the ground up.
Cons of both: Hard to or next to impossible to acquire spare internal parts. Companies known for difficult to outright crappy customer service and support. Caliber and barrel conversion kits nowhere to be seen on the horizon. </div></div>
Hate to say it, but I've had my ACR 2 years and still hear these empty promises for barrel options and caliber conversions, the hand guard from Remington is not available to civilians and no plans to change that (called 5x to confirm it) and lastly, it's probably another vaporware item for future drooling is a folding charging handle.
So, unless someone starts doing aftermarket options, the Remington ACR upgrades don't apply to the BMI civilianized ACR.
