Is the SCAR Ugly?

All of these modern tactical rifles look ugly (and for the fanboys that means the AR too), but that's besides the point. They're utilitarian. The last good looking military rifle was the m14.

REALLY?!?!

You guys think it looks like a fish?

Excellent work Kind of Blued

It's terribly ugly, but it's sort of growing on me. The pics NC-Mike put up are the first ones I've seen with the stock adjusted at all. The way the stock is pulled out and the cheek weld(if that's what it is) angled back makes it look a little better. I'd still say ugly though.

It's available in black! Now I like it MUCH better

You know that a Duracoat fish scale motif kit is an aftermarket inevitability now...

Very ugly. Almost AR ugly.

But I see it being very popular in video games.

Excellent work Kind of Blued

Click to expand...

I didn't do the photoshop work. I stumbled across that photo quite a while back. I'd credit the individual if I could. Anyway, I enjoyed it a lot.

Fugly is a good description; The features are great though.

The SCAR-H is in two games I know of, MGS4 and Vegas 2.

I don't think it's ugly, but the buttstock is pretty ugly...ugliness aside, what exactly does this have on a G36?

Doesn't melt during sustained firing . . .

the buttstock is what really makes it look ugly to the eye.

The price tag just makes me not want to forgive any superficial problem I have with it, though. Bring it down to $1500 or so and I'll think about it.

Ugly or beautiful in firearms terms is relative and in the eye of the beholder. Some people actually think Glocks and Highpoints are beautiful.

I think the SCAR is really not a bad looking weapon. It's way overpriced, but as with ALL firearms now, that is the norm. Especially with military style rifles, even if they're civilian versions.

Remember, somebody even thinks you're beautiful!

It looks terrible.....and then you should pick one up. Really light for what it is, really naturally ergonomic as well.

Not crazy about that tan color, though......there's a serious lack of deserts in KY, and anyone who says "the tan will still be camoed" is crazy or selling something.

If the ACR is half as comfy, ever comes out, and isn't near as expensive, I know what I'll be buying. In the meantime....my AR's adaptable

Not crazy about that tan color, though......there's a serious lack of deserts in KY, and anyone who says "the tan will still be camoed" is crazy or selling something.

Click to expand...

You're always just a couple cans of Krylon away from perfect camouflage where ever you live . . .

I would think, though, that for what they want for them price wise, they should come in any color you want.

Its a DORK FISH

Actually I think the black one looks worse than the tan version. Not that the tan version will win any beauty contests.

Yes, I want one anyway, but not for $4000. I'd rather by 3 ar-15s.

All these new school rifles are starting to look to same don't you think? The Masada/ACR, the SCAR, and even the Beretta ARX-160 all seem to come from the same fish minded/ megaman foot buttstock crowd of designers. Ergos are one thing, but whatever happened to classic lines and simple engineering?

It is very ugly, this is what a pretty gun looks like

Like, oh... my... God... grody. I wouldn't be caught dead wearing that! What would the girls say?

That's what pretty guns looked like in the 40's.

As butt.

I always thought the butt stock looked like a stormtrooper's foot.

Just when you thought it couldn't get any uglier...