Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Military Approves FN SCAR System for Full-Rate Production

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by chieftain, Aug 17, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. chieftain

    chieftain Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,264
    Location:
    The Free State of Arizona
    For your consideration:

    Fred
     
  2. docnyt

    docnyt Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,284
    Location:
    HeArT of DiXiE
    Hopefully FN lowers the price for civilians.
     
  3. Ragnar Danneskjold

    Ragnar Danneskjold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    3,703
    Location:
    Arlington, Republic of Texas
    SOCOM authorizing the rifle for their troops and "military full rate production" are not the same thing. Regular 11B and 31B soldiers aren't getting SCARs.
     
  4. fireman 9731

    fireman 9731 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Messages:
    2,178
    Location:
    Kentucky
    I wonder if the dancing pony will be able to stay in business now...
     
  5. nwilliams

    nwilliams Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Messages:
    4,452
    Location:
    Santa Fe, NM
    delete
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2010
  6. Medusa

    Medusa Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2005
    Messages:
    942
    Location:
    EE, Europe
    I like the SCAR. I have had the pleasure to handle the Mk.17 with GL under it a little, when FN representatives had a presentation here. The whole deal with the GL was lighter than our main .308 cal Swedish HK G3 clone as a blank. Not to say more ergonomic and easier to use (I mean loading, working the charging handle etc. I've also understood that the SOCOM likes the .308Win cal SCAR more, since it's a more bigger improvement than .223 version over the M16/M4. Cannot comment on accuracy or reliability, as I haven't shot one that much. But I am looking forward to the instance when the FN would decide to sell SCARs in Europe too, I'd be happy with the civilian .308 model and 20' barrel, even.
     
  7. TexasBill

    TexasBill Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,126
    Location:
    Texas Gulf Coast
    Dream on: Now the price will probably get even more ridiculous. :cuss:

    I think I will just be happy with my FNP-9, which I still think is one of the best 9mm pistols on the market today.
     
  8. crossrhodes

    crossrhodes Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2009
    Messages:
    624
    Location:
    Northeast Kingdom
    That SCAR is nice! but for a range gun and safe queen it's a little to much $$$. I'll stick with the AR platform for now. My preference would be the H&K 417, but again, to much $$ for a range or a 3 gun match rifle.
    I'm just wonering why Colt didn't put the gas piston rifle out, they develop it and then put it on the back burner about 3 years ago.
     
  9. Tirod

    Tirod Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,454
    Location:
    SW MO
    Gotta ask, what is full rate production when SOCOM amounts to a few thousand soldiers? It's not like a DOD contract for 400,000 units over 5 years, with follow ups over the next 15.

    Don't get too worked up over it. It's FN's announcement, and sounds more like hype and damage repair for SOCOM dropping the MK16, a decision that seems to still stand.

    Don't forget, SOCOM's reasoning was 1) the MK16 doesn't do anything remarkably better than the M4, and 2) Whatever DOD issues is what their soldiers bring to shoot. SOCOM bears the expense of retraining. The Army is going through the Improved Carbine trials now, with results later. No since spending money for a potential orphan. SOCOM can wait.
     
  10. Hatterasguy

    Hatterasguy Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,604
    Cool, now they will be even more expensive. Should have bought one sooner.
     
  11. sonrider657

    sonrider657 Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2010
    Messages:
    62
    Not impressed.
     
  12. LeonCarr

    LeonCarr Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Messages:
    3,819
    Location:
    At The Range
    The old questions still have to be answered. What does the SCAR do that the AR15/M16/M4 doesn't do?

    What makes it that much better a rifle than the current one?

    Just my .02,
    LeonCarr
     
    Last edited: Aug 18, 2010
  13. billfrombyron

    billfrombyron Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    25
    Fan boys are now stroking their rifles quietly by their self's over the triumphant news.......... J/K :neener:

    But on a serious note, its too expensive for what it is in my opinion for the civilian market.

    It will defiantly impress a few at a range, but for 2,500 bucks I could buy my weight in Mil Surps and feed them at the same time. :rolleyes:

    I might bite at about 1K to 1400, but 2500? No way.


    It seems to me not to be the penultimate answer to a question of improving battlefield survivability and firepower superiority. Yes its cool, yes its modular and yes to many it even feels good. But are those factors enough to pry the mean green away from Eugine Stoner's creation? Most likely not any time soon.

    The regular army will stick with the M16 family because it works and still fulfills the role for which it was intended.


    -Bill
     
  14. Justin

    Justin Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,285
    Location:
    THE CHAIR IS AGAINST THE WALL
    For the cost of a civilian-legal SCAR, you could buy a JP-15, easily a much better rifle.

    I've handled the SCAR, and, for the price, find it to be unimpressive.
     
  15. Zerodefect

    Zerodefect Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2009
    Messages:
    4,381
    Location:
    Yakutsk, Sakha Republic
    Why is the SCAR foreend so darn short? Are SOCOM guys midgets or something?
     
  16. KW

    KW Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2003
    Messages:
    280
    The foreend is short so you can interchange a shorter barrel - 10" for the SCAR-L and 13" for the SCAR-H.
     
  17. PvtPyle

    PvtPyle Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    733
    Location:
    Draper UT
    They may be going into full production, (yeah, ok) but there is no money in the 2011 SOCOM budget to buy them, and the fielding for SF Groups has been postponed indefinitely. So they can make all they want, there is no money for them.
     
  18. HorseSoldier

    HorseSoldier Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2006
    Messages:
    5,297
    Location:
    Anchorage, AK
    +1 what PvtPyle said. It's fully approved and basically unfunded, so it doesn't mean much when it's all said and done.
     
  19. chieftain

    chieftain Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,264
    Location:
    The Free State of Arizona
    Exactly how the M4A1 came into existence.

    The SpecOps community received the M4 in drips and drabs. Then suddenly the "BIG ARMY" jumped on board.

    Of course in the SpecOps community at least at one time, when they didn't have the money they needed for gear, they would "acquire" it via the intelligence community funding. Unless someone here knows "absolutely for sure". Otherwise it may still work that way.

    Unlike others here, I cannot read the future. Just a couple months ago the Anti-SCAR crowd cheered that the SpecOps folks were NOT buying anymore Mk16s, just the Mk17's.

    The WAG continue's to prevail.

    Go figure.

    Fred
     
  20. nwilliams

    nwilliams Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Messages:
    4,452
    Location:
    Santa Fe, NM
    delete
     
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2010
  21. AR-15 Rep

    AR-15 Rep Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2007
    Messages:
    216
    I do not think the M4 or M-16 will go away anytime soon, however, There was some foresight for an improved weapon system. The SCAR seems to have been the answer SOCOM has found. The price will likely drop down with time just like others but since this seems to be the latest and greatest I wouldn't expect it in the near future.
     
  22. KW

    KW Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2003
    Messages:
    280
    Does the SCAR really weigh less than an equivalent AR? FN lists their SCAR-L standard (13.8" barrel) at 7.24 lbs, while the M4 (14.5" barrel) is listed at 6.5 lbs by the US Army. The KAC RAS only weighs about 2-3oz more than the M4 handguards it replaces. Obviously different barrels, stocks etc. would have an impact but it seems that in an apples to apples comparison the AR would be lighter.
     
  23. F-Body Demon

    F-Body Demon Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2009
    Messages:
    64
    Location:
    Eastern North Carolina
    .....Posted by Leon Carr "What does the SCAR do that the AR15/M16/M4 doesn't do?".....

    Answer: Fire 7.62.

    In my opinion as long as we adopt a larger cartridge we will be good. I think they just need to pick up the 6.8 SPC already. It was purpose built to fit all of our M16s and M4s, all we need are new uppers. Heck I'd bet they could get by with just the barrel change and bolt change.

    But what I think we REALLY need is this....

    http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/08/marine_iar_080810w/

    ....chambered in 6.8
     
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2010
  24. UniversalFrost

    UniversalFrost Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    Messages:
    317
    Location:
    West Virginia
    F-Body

    I am in total agreement with you on the 6.8, but the m27 is nothing new, just a copy of existing technology from Barret and PRI. I can't remember which developed it, but there is an open bolt AR variant that has a unique ability to accept the 249's belt fed capabilities (and existing belts and carriers),but can also take AR mags. Futureweapons did a review on it awhile back and I even saw a couple of them at one of the weapons expos back in 2005. I personally would like to have had one of those guns (in 6.5 or 6.8) with each squad back in 03, 04 or 05 when I was in the sand box.

    for the common AR the change to 6.8 is simple and easy change over (like when we switched from the old 1:7 barrels to the 1:8 and 1:9 for the "newer" ammo back in the 90's on the old A1's and A2's (one of my master sergeants back at my first posting was one of the folks that got the $25k innovation and cost savings award for recommending this simple swap of barrels instead of new rifles).

    anyway, to convert an AR/M4/M16 to 6.8 you need 3 things : barrel, bolt and mags (the 6.8 mags are stainless steel (to prevent bulging) and have smaller ribs internally and have a different follower. c-products mags which are cheap (and already have an NSN and are on GSA contract for the 5.56 and the 6.8) are good to go and no need to spend 3 to 5 times as much for PRI or barret mags.

    I just built a 6.8 AR (search my threads for the specs and pics) as an intermediate between the FAL and Hk91 that I own in 7.62 and my other AR's in 5.56 ..

    the 6.8 keeps the weight of a "battle rifle" down to AR specs versus the more heavy 7.62 guns, allows the user to have maintainable and controllable full auto fire (only in a military application) and the 6.8 has the mid range capabilities for lethality and ballistics are a good mix of 5.56 and 7.62 plus the 6.8 gives the shooters that are responsible for CQB the advantage of a round than can shoot thru obstacles (like the 7.62) but limits it's lethality to the surrounding immediate area.

    also while the 7.62 is a great long range round the 6.8 loaded with hornady OTM (hollow point boat tail) are doing amazing things on bad guys in the 600yd distances in the real world right now. if the 6.8 would be carried by a majority of the folks in a squad you would open up a whole new ability and limit the need for the SDM's and their m-14's
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2010
  25. ColdDeadHand

    ColdDeadHand Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    136
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    LeonCarr,

    Short stroke piston operation is a serious improvement over the Stoner design. Think VC crawling around in mud tunnels, but their SKS doesn't stop. On the other (our) side you had M16s that had some issues with jungle conditions.

    I love the SKS for its reliability. It's not accurate or far-reaching, but it is a man-stopper. The idea of putting a short-stroke piston on an accurate, high-quality rifle is an advance for our military.

    I will never subscribe to the Stoner idea of routing your gas into your action. I look at that setup and always picture my truck with a hose on it to funnel my exhaust into my air intake. Doesn't take a genius to figure that might gunk something up.

    Stoner fans: Please don't run me out of town. I know it's not his fault about the direct-gas thing.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page