Scars fad or not?

[turbomilton]

Im just wondering if i am the only person that feels that Scars are over rated since for the price you spend on one, you can get a lot of other great manufactured rifles. Both in 5.56 and 7.62.
Im not trying to start any arguments, just wanting to get some other opinions.

 

[Grimm]

Re: Scars fad or not?

IMHO. The scar will be a fad, but it shouldn't have been. The popularity of the AR prevails in a market flooded with images of the platform in the hands of police nad law enforcement world wide. Aftermarket parts and extremely competent gunsmiths are everywhere for the AR platform. And finally tacticool, if it's not on a recruiting poster its just not cool enough.

 

[Flynn]

Re: Scars fad or not?

The FN Scar is a fine weapon and I was close to buying one. However, the availability and cost of spare parts kept me away...

 

[marduk185]

Re: Scars fad or not?

its plastic junk, give us back the m14...oh wait, uncle gave them to china,oops. sorry

 

[shane45]

Re: Scars fad or not?

I dont think its a fad at all. My equally equiped ar's are pretty close in price to what I paid for my SCAR. I do not care at all for piston conversion ar's and prefer a weapon designed as a piston driven platform from the ground up. I think the SCAR, although not perfect, is the best piston driven weapon currently available. I think there is a lot of solid engineereing in the platform that offers significant benefit. There was a good article done by hootiewho here on the hide from an engineering standpoint of the platform.

 

[stiletto raggio]

Re: Scars fad or not?

I've never bought into the whole "direct impingement is a horrible system" argument. It is less than ideal for suppression and it does require cleaning, but the weaknesses of teh system are overblown. I think the basic AR platform has acheived such dominance that it will be generations before it is truly replaced on the civilian side. It is simply an issue of industrial inertia. Everyone and their brother makes ARs and AR parts. The massive aftermarket industry is based on the standardization of the basic AR design, and any variation from that design is done as a proprietary design. To me and the great majority of shooters the cost and complexity of adopting a gas-piston system greatly outweighs the real or perceived benefits. The SCAR, which is mostly proprietary, will find little civilian use outside a narrow portion of shooting enthusiasts. One company makes the SCAR.

I am not entirely opposed to owning something proprietary--I really like the MSAR STG 556--but for a number of reasons I do not see it replacing my ARs. Would I buy a SCAR? Not at the prices they are asking. At $1000-1200 I could see getting one for sheer novelty.

 

[poke5353]

Re: Scars fad or not?

FAD!!!!!

 

[oneshot onekill]

Re: Scars fad or not?

Well, I'll let y'all know a little more about it when I get mine in a week or so. I opted for the 7.62 version simply because that's what I have the brass and reloading equipment for. As far as being a "fad"... I think, unfortunately, it will fall on those who make the decisions on what the Military adopts. My understanding is that it's already being used on a limited basis in the current conflicts. That's certainly what I would call the proverbial "foot in the door". As far as I'm concerned, I'm also getting it because it's different and claims decent accuracy for a semi-auto.

 

[turbomilton]

Re: Scars fad or not?

The Scar is in current use with tier one units but they are scar 17s. The army is planning on getting a large number of scars through out the next couple of years. With that Tier one is also using hk 416 and 417s. I dont doubt it is a good gun cause i have talked to people using it that like it although i have heard about just as many that dont (all used in the field). Im talking more for civilians because of the price.

 

[1stIDvet]

Re: Scars fad or not?

I dont think its a "FAD", the SCAR weather 16 or 17 is a step in the right direction for future rifles. Our military likes the 17(H) and is currently using it. I love my 16 and shoot it more than my AR or M1A, that might be because its newer to me, but I get a lot of enjoyment out of shooting it.

 

[Grimm]

Re: Scars fad or not?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Turbomilton</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Scar is in current use with tier one units but they are scar 17s. The army is planning on getting a large number of scars through out the next couple of years. With that Tier one is also using hk 416 and 417s. I dont doubt it is a good gun cause i have talked to people using it that like it although i have heard about just as many that dont (all used in the field). Im talking more for civilians because of the price. </div></div>

I guess that depends on your definition of "large numbers" the overall RFP for what became SCAR was from the SOCOM, not the Army, and the contract awarded was for a maximum of 150,000 rifles that sounds like a lot until you look at procurement numbers for just the Army in the IC competition: over 500,000 in the first major fielding push and topping out at over a million if the Army opts to incrementally reequip combat service and combat service support units. So 150,000 weapons between three services isn't much at all.
In terms of civilian application, the expense and support structure available make the SCAR little more than a passing fancy or an expensive toy. There are similar platforms in similar price ranges with similar cool factor. The 556 assault rifle market is stiff competition these days.

 

[TOPO-sniper]

Re: Scars fad or not?

RFP out for new Army carbine....

http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...095#Post2526095

 

[Powder_Burns]

Re: Scars fad or not?

ISSC put out a .22lr version of the SCAR.

 

[Grimm]

Re: Scars fad or not?

I do not know if there is a newer RFP than the draft dated 30 Jan 11 but what's in that link and what's in W15QKN-11-R-F003 does not specify quantity but allows for three IDIQ contracts. A new battle rifle implies directly that front line combat troops will be equipped, which is not 70-100k. With no sarcasm intended or implied I have no idea where that article gets it's numbers from, since the RFP states IDIQ without an LRIP listed. And by now this thread is officially jacked, my bad

 

[shane45]

Re: Scars fad or not?

If rifles bought based on monkey see monkey do designates a fad, well than I think AR's would equally qualify and maybe more so since most anyone can come up with 600 bucks. In my own circles, the only people that I see pony up the coin for a SCAR or a tier 1 ar for that matter are people that run them MUCh harder then the average shooter I see at the range that shoot their AR once or twice a year...

 

[johngfoster]

Re: Scars fad or not?

I think that for the average shooter, the benefits of the SCAR are largely theoretical. Very few ever run their ARs hard enough where a SCAR would make a noticable improvement. Accuracy is equvalent, and aftermarket support is MUCH better for the AR platform. When has a DI operated rifle EVER had real problems that caused a poor outcome in an engagement that a piston operated weapon would have made a difference for the better? I haven't heard of any.

 

[Saito]

Re: Scars fad or not?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: johngfoster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think that for the average shooter, the benefits of the SCAR are largely theoretical. Very few ever run their ARs hard enough where a SCAR would make a noticable improvement. Accuracy is equvalent, and aftermarket support is MUCH better for the AR platform. When has a DI operated rifle EVER had real problems that caused a poor outcome in an engagement that a piston operated weapon would have made a difference for the better? I haven't heard of any. </div></div>

I'd have to say Vietnam? Should have been using M14s and AR180s... or just picked up AKs...

On topic now, fads are usually affordable right? So everyone can jump on the band wagon? I like my SCAR17S and I may buy a 16 as well but not in the near future. I sure didn't buy my 17 to show it off at the range or fit in with a certain clique....oh and you can't bump pee-pees with the elite here unless you're an ACR hater/SCAR proponent. You don't even have to have shot or own an ACR, you can just hold or see one in a gun shop, then talk shit about it on the netz...cuz ACR hatin' is the real fad. LOL

 

[dmg308]

Re: Scars fad or not?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Saito</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: johngfoster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think that for the average shooter, the benefits of the SCAR are largely theoretical. Very few ever run their ARs hard enough where a SCAR would make a noticable improvement. Accuracy is equvalent, and aftermarket support is MUCH better for the AR platform. When has a DI operated rifle EVER had real problems that caused a poor outcome in an engagement that a piston operated weapon would have made a difference for the better? I haven't heard of any. </div></div>

I'd have to say Vietnam? Should have been using M14s and AR180s... or just picked up AKs...

On topic now, fads are usually affordable right? So everyone can jump on the band wagon? I like my SCAR17S and I may buy a 16 as well but not in the near future. I sure didn't buy my 17 to show it off at the range or fit in with a certain clique....oh and you can't bump pee-pees with the elite here unless you're an ACR hater/SCAR proponent. You don't even have to have shot or own an ACR, you can just hold or see one in a gun shop, then talk shit about it on the netz...cuz ACR hatin' is the real fad. LOL </div></div>

DI was not the problem in Vietnam no matter how much the hatters want to make it so.Non chrome lined barrels,not issued cleaning kits and the use of incorrect powder were the cause.

 

[Saito]

Re: Scars fad or not?

Oh I don't think there is a single thing wrong with Direct Impingement, but the M16 did have some major teething problems and DI sure didn't help matters. IMO it would have been better to use M14s/AKs in Vietnam.... did the VC's AKs have chrome lined barrels? Don't get me wrong, I love the system and it wouldn't be in service today if it was inherently flawed.

 

[shane45]

Re: Scars fad or not?

I believe the bolts were chromed on VC era AK's, not sure about the barrel but im betting likely it was.

 

[lightwind]

Re: Scars fad or not?

I have to jump in to say that my SCAR-17s is a very nice piece of equipment that I thought long and hard about buying. The bottom line for me was that it is a very well built and well designed rifle. It supplements my AR for a longer-reach system. Accuracy wise, it gives me 1 moa with a 16.5" barrel and with a terrible trigger that I changed out tonight. I didn't see it as a fad when I got it and I don't see people jumping over each other to get one either. I think it is a specialized rifle that only some will want. I guess the same can be said for any quality piece of equipment. Why are there so many manufacturers and so many rifles? Because there are so may different people. No fad from my view, just different strokes for different folks.

 

[taseal]

Re: Scars fad or not?

fad I think...

funny I see this post, cuz I was thinking about this today (which was random)

my AR15 when bare was I think 260 for the lower, and I paid 750 or 850 on rainier arms for the upper. it's actally the LH version with a full length rail. not too neccessary. you can get a decent AR15 for about 1000 right I think.

the SCARs cost way more (for now)

i'm sure if colt was the only one making the AR15, they'd be up there with SCAR but they have competitition... there are hundreds of AR names out there, and all are reliable. my stag has had it's fair share of jams, but it still works just fine. maybe 5 jams in it's 3-4 year lifespan with thousand rounds...

the AR15 can do everythign scar can. why pay more? I just don't get it.

 

[taseal]

Re: Scars fad or not?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lightwind</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have to jump in to say that my SCAR-17s is a very nice piece of equipment that I thought long and hard about buying. The bottom line for me was that it is a very well built and well designed rifle. It supplements my AR for a longer-reach system. Accuracy wise, it gives me 1 moa with a 16.5" barrel and with a terrible trigger that I changed out tonight. I didn't see it as a fad when I got it and I don't see people jumping over each other to get one either. I think it is a specialized rifle that only some will want. I guess the same can be said for any quality piece of equipment. Why are there so many manufacturers and so many rifles? Because there are so may different people. No fad from my view, just different strokes for different folks. </div></div>

what does it do that the AR15 can't?

 

[Tomcat]

Re: Scars fad or not?

They just seem kind of bulky to me, I dont like how low the grip sit below the barrel line.
They are not my personal preference, I do like how a AR chassis is slim and efficient.
We'll see in about 5 years.

 

[okiefired]

Re: Scars fad or not?

After all these years we finally figured it out right here on the Hide, they didn't have chrome lined barrels. Damn.

okie

 

[shane45]

Re: Scars fad or not?

I think that there a millian SCAR VS AR threads to review. But I will say this. Although neither my Colt 6940 or my SCAR have failed me, if I had to grab one to run out and face the zombie hoard, with no lube or cleaning kit in sight, Id likely grab the SCAR. If I had to go shoot in a situation where speed was king, Id grab my Colt as I shoot that rifle faster and more accurately than anything else I own.

I think there is some merit to the statement made previously that some of the advantage of the SCAR is likely theoretical for the avg user. But for me I like to know it can even if I never have to.

 

[Swift]

Re: Scars fad or not?

Kinda makes you wonder what will eventually dethrone the might AR. I mean, it's gotta be replaced at some point, right?

 

[Grimm]

Re: Scars fad or not?

"who will dethrone the mighty AR"
It seems the mighty AR itself. The DI system on the M4 is flawed, not unworkable, but flawed. To overcome the myriad problems caused by shortening the barrel and thus what pressure and time the DI system engages too many stop gap fixes have been applied. BUT in feel and function the AR remains king in many circles. Despite the XM8 outperforming all comers in that sand test a few years back and being wildly popular with the guys who actually took them to the box HK seems to have pulled all support from that weapons system to focus on obtaining contracts with the 416. An M4 with all the inherent strengths and few or none of it's weaknesses: yes please. In truth the SCAR 16 is a worthy submission and a fantastic weapon, but it's popularity seems to already be fading and I personally feel it's star is falling.

In the more fluid world of 7.62 rifles though all bets are off. The SCAR 17 and 21 are a phenomenal step forward in a class of rifle that has been dominated by the G3 and FAL variants rather than the AR 10. In the 30 cal world the SCAR has a much better chance to gain a foothold among loyal buyers, but only if they lower thier price point to compete wit other platforms.
I continue to say fad, but I guess I can make the argument that the 556 SCAR is more fad worthy than the 762

 

[eoperator]

Re: Scars fad or not?

My SCAR 17s with leupold mark4 MRT,rings & empty mag weighs in at just over 9 lbs. Groups 1moa all day long with lake city m80. Thats with a very bad trigger and the worst barrel crown i have ever seen. Also puts more lead on target off hand than any other rifle I have shot [must be the balance or something]. Their high price makes most civillians turn away from what could be the best 762 semi auto in my opinion.

 

[shane45]

Re: Scars fad or not?

Grimm, what I think you will see here is the convergence. FN already has a SCAR reciever that can accomodate 5.56 and 7.62. In my view, this is why 5.56 purchases stopped. This is a trend also picked up by Colt. Im sure both have pursued this avenue because of Mil wants and needs and I'm assuming the percieved civy market. I can see the merits of this direction for logistics reasons for the military, not so much on the civy side. But that just may be my preference. I like individual rifles. I have tried a number of multi caliber systems and although it sounds good on paper, I never seem to use the feature and always drift toward individual rifles.

 

[shane45]

Re: Scars fad or not?

Eop, I liked my SCAR17. With Elcan Specter Dr it was right around 9 lbs. Very handy. However, compared to my MWS with the same optic, I ran my MWS better/faster. I think the thing that plagues (at least me) with the SCARS is that massive bolt moving back and forth. Even though recoil is mild, I always feel that big bolt rocking the rifle, especially in less than ideal shooting positions. I found this true in both the 16 and 17 platforms and find my times to always be faster with AR type rifles. As usual, there is always a trade off. With that being said, the MWS was just to heavy for what I wanted. So I sold them both and bought a KAC EMC. Im hoping that it has the accuracy/speed of the MWS and the weight/handling of the SCAR. We will see.

 

[Chris@InterstateGuns]

Re: Scars fad or not?

+1 for the fad....but how long will the fad last one might ask?

 

[mstennes]

Re: Scars fad or not?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shane45</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I believe the bolts were chromed on VC era AK's, not sure about the barrel but im betting likely it was. </div></div>

The Chinese AK47 I have inspected did have a chrome lined barrel, and yes it is a real AK, milled reciever, chrome bolt, barrel. This was a bring back that was granted amnisty in 68. I like how it has the infinty symbol for full auto.

 

[tomahawk84]

Re: Scars fad or not?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: dmg308</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Saito</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: johngfoster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think that for the average shooter, the benefits of the SCAR are largely theoretical. Very few ever run their ARs hard enough where a SCAR would make a noticable improvement. Accuracy is equvalent, and aftermarket support is MUCH better for the AR platform. When has a DI operated rifle EVER had real problems that caused a poor outcome in an engagement that a piston operated weapon would have made a difference for the better? I haven't heard of any. </div></div>

I'd have to say Vietnam? Should have been using M14s and AR180s... or just picked up AKs...

On topic now, fads are usually affordable right? So everyone can jump on the band wagon? I like my SCAR17S and I may buy a 16 as well but not in the near future. I sure didn't buy my 17 to show it off at the range or fit in with a certain clique....oh and you can't bump pee-pees with the elite here unless you're an ACR hater/SCAR proponent. You don't even have to have shot or own an ACR, you can just hold or see one in a gun shop, then talk shit about it on the netz...cuz ACR hatin' is the real fad. LOL </div></div>

DI was not the problem in Vietnam no matter how much the hatters want to make it so.Non chrome lined barrels,not issued cleaning kits and the use of incorrect powder were the cause. </div></div>

Mostly The powder, There was a transition and it didn't burn how the original powder was designed causing poor operation, there wasn't enough powerd in the ammo to reliably cycle the m16.

 

[shoepop]

Re: Scars fad or not?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tomcat</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They just seem kind of bulky to me, I dont like how low the grip sit below the barrel line.
They are not my personal preference, I do like how a AR chassis is slim and efficient.
We'll see in about 5 years. </div></div>

BINGO, we have a winner.

 

[fdkay]

Re: Scars fad or not?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: taseal</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lightwind</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have to jump in to say that my SCAR-17s is a very nice piece of equipment that I thought long and hard about buying. The bottom line for me was that it is a very well built and well designed rifle. It supplements my AR for a longer-reach system. Accuracy wise, it gives me 1 moa with a 16.5" barrel and with a terrible trigger that I changed out tonight. I didn't see it as a fad when I got it and I don't see people jumping over each other to get one either. I think it is a specialized rifle that only some will want. I guess the same can be said for any quality piece of equipment. Why are there so many manufacturers and so many rifles? Because there are so may different people. No fad from my view, just different strokes for different folks. </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000">what does it do that the AR15 can't?</span> </div></div>

How about the ability to change the barrel in the field, depending on mission?

And, yes, the AR is still a tempermantal beast. They have had RECENT problems in heavy, longlasting firefights with functioning.
The lube burns off and the carbon buildup on the bolt is a major problem.

I have an AR, I like it, it does every thing that I want and expect it to.
The SCAR is an evolution of the concept and is a better weapon, the reciprocating op handle can be a pain, but it serves a purpose.

 

[bm11]

Re: Scars fad or not?

I am on my second SCAR now, traded the first to SHANE45 and missed it so much I bought another. This one isn't going anywhere.

I really like the "upgrades" over an AR-15, and neither SCAR has had one hickup. Whether they are here to stay or not, this one certainly is for me. I sent in the Form 1 shortly after I bought it and it will be rocking my name engraved on the side of it, so I am an owner!

 

[Numb_Skull]

Re: Scars fad or not?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: fdkay</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: taseal</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: lightwind</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have to jump in to say that my SCAR-17s is a very nice piece of equipment that I thought long and hard about buying. The bottom line for me was that it is a very well built and well designed rifle. It supplements my AR for a longer-reach system. Accuracy wise, it gives me 1 moa with a 16.5" barrel and with a terrible trigger that I changed out tonight. I didn't see it as a fad when I got it and I don't see people jumping over each other to get one either. I think it is a specialized rifle that only some will want. I guess the same can be said for any quality piece of equipment. Why are there so many manufacturers and so many rifles? Because there are so may different people. No fad from my view, just different strokes for different folks. </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000">what does it do that the AR15 can't?</span> </div></div>

How about the ability to change the barrel in the field, depending on mission?

And, yes, the AR is still a tempermantal beast. They have had RECENT problems in heavy, longlasting firefights with functioning.
The lube burns off and the carbon buildup on the bolt is a major problem.

I have an AR, I like it, it does every thing that I want and expect it to.
The SCAR is an evolution of the concept and is a better weapon, the reciprocating op handle can be a pain, but it serves a purpose. </div></div>

Ya it changes barrels so good they had to develop the Mk 20.

 

[taterxl]

Re: Scars fad or not?

I have put quite a few rounds through a scar and I still prefer an AR over it. Just my opinion.

 

[shane45]

Re: Scars fad or not?

Marcus, your comment makes no sense to me whatsoever...do you have any idea what your talking about?

 

[VKC]

Re: Scars fad or not?

Fad, no because some Army units adopted it, and it will likely get more widespread use. But overpriced, yes.

 

[Dogtown]

Re: Scars fad or not?

One of the most rigorously tested small arms platforms in modern times is a fad? bawhahahaha

 

[jheat308]

Re: Scars fad or not?

Great rifle all around but my thought are the same for the scar and ar10 prices will be coming down like a stone next year and more improvements with that. So being a fad I think yes but only because better rifles are on the way IMO.

 

[shane45]

Re: Scars fad or not?

My prediction is the opposite of yours jheat... I think everything is going to go up.

 

[AtOne]

Re: Scars fad or not?

I picked up my Scar 16 last year. It was a new blemish model that I got for $1,850 shipped.
I've put almost 800 flawless rounds through it and have enjoyed the hell out of it.
Would I buy another unblemished one for the mid $2K price range ? Probably not but I sure won't be selling the one I have anytime soon either.
There hasn't been one time since I've bought it that I thought I should of got a ....Insert brand here... instead.
I think if your wondering whether its a fad or not you really need to go shoot one and decide for yourself if its worth it to you or not.
I don't see prices coming down for much of anything in the future because the cost of manufacturing just keeps going up.

 

[jheat308]

Re: Scars fad or not?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shane45</div><div class="ubbcode-body">My prediction is the opposite of yours jheat... I think everything is going to go up. </div></div>
Very true with inflation and all that will take place in the next 18 months. Cost comparing with other guns that are soon to be released we will see who runs the best deals ( or who can cut the most overhead )

 

[longguntoter]

Re: Scars fad or not?

Is the SCAR a fad? I don't think so. It may change a bit in time, but the weapon is a sound design and a step in the right direction for a replacement for the current M-16. If I am not mistaken, I believe the M-16 has been the longest serving rifle in the American military. Don't get me wrong here, it is a good weapon, but is starting to get long in the tooth and so is the 5.56mm round. JMHO.

 

[samnev]

Re: Scars fad or not?

I bought my SCAR 1 1/2 years ago. Tried very hard to like it more than my Novese Afghan or my LMT but can't. Nice rifle but still favor both the Noveske and the LMT.

 

[NTK]

Re: Scars fad or not?

I hunted with the SCAR heavy this past winter and I had a hard time getting use to it, it just didnt feel right very accurate rig it just wasn't for me. If they ever come down in price I might get one but for now the AR-10 will my choice.

 

[saryan]

Re: Scars fad or not?

I have a student that runs one. Pretty cool rifle. If your using the rifle against a barricade then make sure your paying attention to the charging handle. Besides that it runs like the other AR's do in my classes. If I wanted the barrel change system I would just get a LMT MWS /MRP and stick with the AR series. The SCAR is not a fad, but the excitement around it well dwindle a bit. It will be like the 416, XCR, Sig 556 ect. Another good option for people with different taste buds.