As my reply to Graham, my information does not come from the internet, although you can find related material if you look (check earlier in this thread). I'm just putting out what I personally know, have seen in addition to the white papers (that are not classified in any way, you could probably find them through the Pentagon-US SOCOM- freedom of information act) you can use it to help make a decision or disregard it all together...I don't care.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Rifle Scopes Need opinions on most rugged scopes..
- Thread starter Flynn
- Start date
As my reply to Graham, my information does not come from the internet, although you can find related material if you look (check earlier in this thread). I'm just putting out what I personally know, have seen in addition to the white papers (that are not classified in any way, you could probably find them through the Pentagon-US SOCOM- freedom of information act) you can use it to help make a decision or disregard it all together...I don't care.
It is vibration energy that is being referred to. I did exactly that to my SCAR 16, put accelorameters on it comparing the recoil impulse to other common weapons. This info can be found in the document SCAR vs AR; A detailed look, you can google it.
The 17 has a resonance issue IMHO. Think tuning fork. I think when two or more amplitudes of vibration from firing/cycling happen to get in phase it causes a steep increase in amplitude causeint the optic issue seen in some guns. Think barrel whipping and bolt carrier shutting at the same time just right so that it causes an increased ping if you will in the upper. Finding a way to keep those forces out of phase with each other would probably be the fix, that or do what has been done and beef up certain optics.It is not so much it beats up optics, but that optics that were put on it were not build around the recoil impulse of this rifle compared to the M4. I think it is several things coming together in a perfect storm that causes the issue and I believe it is not something that happens on every shot. The 17 is a solid battle rifle, not perfect but solid. If I knew I needed a 762 battle rifle that needed to run like a raped ape to wage war with, the 17 or the SR25 ECC would be my choice.
This is coming from 15+ years in a reliability engineering position diagnosing machinery problems using the same type of testing equipment needed to find out what the 17 is doing.
The 17 has a resonance issue IMHO. Think tuning fork. I think when two or more amplitudes of vibration from firing/cycling happen to get in phase it causes a steep increase in amplitude causeint the optic issue seen in some guns. Think barrel whipping and bolt carrier shutting at the same time just right so that it causes an increased ping if you will in the upper. Finding a way to keep those forces out of phase with each other would probably be the fix, that or do what has been done and beef up certain optics.It is not so much it beats up optics, but that optics that were put on it were not build around the recoil impulse of this rifle compared to the M4. I think it is several things coming together in a perfect storm that causes the issue and I believe it is not something that happens on every shot. The 17 is a solid battle rifle, not perfect but solid. If I knew I needed a 762 battle rifle that needed to run like a raped ape to wage war with, the 17 or the SR25 ECC would be my choice.
This is coming from 15+ years in a reliability engineering position diagnosing machinery problems using the same type of testing equipment needed to find out what the 17 is doing.
Here is the first result for that search term:
SCAR vs AR; A detailed look...
Nice work. What I'm not seeing from your data - and maybe I'm just not smart enough to see it - is evidence of substantially increased recoil impulse compared to an M4 (in fact, to my inexperienced eyes, the LWRC M6 looks to be worse, and the Norinco AK was none-too-pretty). So would you conclude that the positive reinforcement of multiple vibration impulses to be essentially a random event, or is there perhaps something operator-induced that causes problems under particular conditions, or something different altogether?
Thanks for linking it. That data was for the SCAR 16s. I have some for the 17 but have yet to do a formal write up. I am waiting on a SR25 ECC to base the comparison on as I feel these 2 are the top of the modern battle rifle game. The 16S is one of the smoothest firing rifles out there by the data I came up with, especially suppressed.
There's a great dude that's user name on most forums is SeanM. He is VERY experienced with the SCAR family and has writtenthe most honest, non-sugar coated feedback about the 17 that I have seen. When I finally get the 17 comparison done I will post it here.
There's a great dude that's user name on most forums is SeanM. He is VERY experienced with the SCAR family and has writtenthe most honest, non-sugar coated feedback about the 17 that I have seen. When I finally get the 17 comparison done I will post it here.
I personally know a guy who's Nightforce broke atop his Barret .50 BMG one day at the range.
No, this does not mean that Nightforce scopes are not rugged, but I'm just making the point that heavy hitting rifles will always have the potential to make glass and lots of little mechanical components fail. It's always a possibility and it doesn't matter if it's a $300 SS or a $2500 Nightforce.
No scope is perfect forever.
On another note - these guys wouldn't be using Super Snipers if they kept failing all the time on their rifles (heavy hitting M-14s too):
So, if an M-14/M1A can handle it, why couldn't a SCAR?
Yeah, I hear you and any manmade product can break.
But I have several SS's and NF's and without a doubt I would go NF. No questions asked. I'm not saying that SS is crap and I dnt like em cause I do but I would trust my NF's more if the chips are down.
I believe they have been tested much more and when I buy a NF I am buying to have 100% confidence in it. If I don't get what I want I move on. So far I've had at least a dozen NF's that were not babied and none have ever given me the first bit of trouble. Knock on wood LOL.
