SCAR 16 thoughts

[bikemutt]

I absolutely love to shoot my SCAR 17 and have been considering adding a SCAR 16 to the stable. I'm not a huge fan of 223/556 but I do enjoy the caliber when I can. Right now I have a PWS piston AR15 which I'd trade or sell for the SCAR 16.

Thought I'd ask what the experts at THR might throw in to help me decide.

 

[henschman]

I don't think there is any advantage in a SCAR 16 over a high quality direct impingement AR-15. The AR will be much more adaptable to suit your ideal setup, will have much more readily available replacement parts, and will cost a lot less.

Now the SCAR 17 is a different story. A reliable .308 battle rifle that is lighter than anything in the same class, yet recoils like a 5.56? What's not to like!

I guess you might just want the 16 due to the same manual of arms applying to it and the one you already have.

 

[Hyrulejedi86]

Can't go wrong with a scar even in 223. A great complement in my opinion to the 17. It shoots just as awesome as the 17.

Sent from my DROID RAZR

 

[Medusa]

SCAR is good. But it depends. Running it bone stock might not give enough advantage over AR-15. Perhaps suppressed use is another story, since the SCAR is made ground up to be a piston gun.

But again, if you like same manual of arms, then it would be reasonable to have the SCAR in both 17 and 16 instead of .308 in one and .223 in another platform. I personally would go for the SCAR 17 only and run it to the ground (carbine classes, precision shooting as a DMR etc), I do like it as a battle rifle for before mentioned reasons, plus the over the average accuracy) but could live with the AR also.

As being an European, the AR "thing", so to speak, has somehow avoided me, but I have had my hands on both the SCAR and M16A1 and would prefer the FN rifle. I have understood, though, that the FN's stock is a bit more flimsy and prone to rattle, compared to a good Magpul and AR one.

 

[briansmithwins]

I don't think there is any advantage in a SCAR 16 over a high quality direct impingement AR-15. The AR will be much more adaptable to suit your ideal setup, will have much more readily available replacement parts, and will cost a lot less.

You're right.

Besides the quick change, free float barrel, short stroke piston that keeps gas out of the action, robustly designed bolt, huge extractor, adjustable gas regulator, monolithic fully railed receiver, complete ambidexterity, folding stock with adjustable cheek height, and debris shielded trigger group there just aren't many advantages a 556 SCAR has over a standard AR.

BSW

 

[JustinJ]

Besides the quick change, free float barrel, short stroke piston that keeps gas out of the action, robustly designed bolt, huge extractor, adjustable gas regulator, monolithic fully railed receiver, complete ambidexterity, folding stock with adjustable cheek height, and debris shielded trigger group there just aren't many advantages a 556 SCAR has over a standard AR.

As of yet, the "quick change" SCAR barrel isn't much of an advantage. Most of the other stuff I agree with though.

 

[as37692]

I personal started out with the SCAR 16s and now I’m gathering all the little upgrades and lots of Magazines for when I get my SCAR 17s. Overall I have run the Light with multiple types of Ammunition though the rifle and accurse and reliability have been outstanding.

 

[henschman]

You're right.

Besides the quick change, free float barrel, short stroke piston that keeps gas out of the action, robustly designed bolt, huge extractor, adjustable gas regulator, monolithic fully railed receiver, complete ambidexterity, folding stock with adjustable cheek height, and debris shielded trigger group there just aren't many advantages a 556 SCAR has over a standard AR.

BSW

You can free float an AR barrel by swapping out handguards... which is incidentally not an option on the SCAR. No big deal as long as you like stubby little carbine length quad cheese grater handguards and sight radius... except that most people don't. Quick change barrels are cool, except for how you could buy an entire AR-15, never mind just a barreled upper, for what an extra SCAR barrel assembly costs. And with the AR, you have a many times greater selection of barrels. With interchangeable uppers on an AR, you can put whatever handguards you want over your barrel. You can have dedicated optics mounted on each upper that are zeroed and ready to go. No gas in the receiver, and heavier bolt and extractor are not necessarily improvements if the AR design works reliably like it is... which it does with quality parts. Excess gas when suppressed can be remedied by a gas buster charging handle and/or adjustable gas block. The trigger on a SCAR isn't any less prone to debris getting in it than an AR -- a popped primer could hang up either one of them. Oh and there is the reciprocating thumb whacker on the SCAR.

You had it right with your first sentence.

 

[JustinJ]

You can free float an AR barrel by swapping out handguards... which is incidentally not an option on the SCAR. No big deal as long as you like stubby little carbine length quad cheese grater handguards and sight radius... except that most people don't. Quick change barrels are cool, except for how you could buy an entire AR-15, never mind just a barreled upper, for what an extra SCAR barrel assembly costs. And with the AR, you have a many times greater selection of barrels. With interchangeable uppers on an AR, you can put whatever handguards you want over your barrel. You can have dedicated optics mounted on each upper that are zeroed and ready to go. No gas in the receiver, and heavier bolt and extractor are not necessarily improvements if the AR design works reliably like it is... which it does with quality parts. Excess gas when suppressed can be remedied by a gas buster charging handle and/or adjustable gas block. The trigger on a SCAR isn't any less prone to debris getting in it than an AR -- a popped primer could hang up either one of them. Oh and there is the reciprocating thumb whacker on the SCAR.

Mechanically speaking, the SCAR has a distinct advantage in the reliability department. Will the average civilian user ever experience the difference? Highly unlikely, but it is still there. The beefier bolt is also a distinct advantage to durability and reliability. Regarding the handguards, there is a rail add on which will extend them significantly. Regarding the shorter sight radius, who cares? Irons have been relegated to BU status for a while now and that isn't likely to change.

Now, yes, the AR is far more modular. This is due to availability, not modularity of the system. Today, if one wants a precision SDM type rifle the AR wins. If a SCAR bull barrel ever becomes available this gap could narrow. If FN ever releases a precision version in 5.56, then its a different story. But really, for practical range of the 5.56 the SCAR is more than adequate enough.

 

[CharlieDeltaJuliet]

I personally am impressed with the SCAR. I am a fan of piston systems and this a good version on that. They are dependable and accurate. I personally like the balance of the SCAR 16. To me it isn't too front heavy. It has earned it's place for a great all around rifle.

 

[bikemutt]

Oh and there is the reciprocating thumb whacker on the SCAR.

Been there, done that, ouch! But, being a smart, pain-averse human, I've learned where not to place my thumb while shooting my SCAR 17

The first thing I did with the 17s is a drop-in Timney trigger which really turned a sweet rifle into a great rifle for me, but it is a $300 drop in.

Thanks for all the responses, given the portion of my shooting budget I can allocate to .223/.556, I think I'll keep the PWS AR15 for now. It shoots great and it's paid for, lot to be said for that.

 

[JustinJ]

Thanks for all the responses, given the portion of my shooting budget I can allocate to .223/.556, I think I'll keep the PWS AR15 for now. It shoots great and it's paid for, lot to be said for that.

The PWS is a sweet rifle, especially the newest version. A PWS SBR is on my short list. I really dig the design of the long stroke gas system.

 

[henschman]

I haven't seen any studies to the effect that the SCAR is significantly more reliable than the AR. A quality AR is just so damn reliable that it is almost a moot point. I mean, at what point do you need more reliability than firing 14,000 rounds without cleaning and still going strong, like filthy 14?

I'm glad the OP has made his decision, but we can still debate this dammit!

 

[briansmithwins]

Filthy 14 has had several parts replaced, including the bolt, which broke.

http://www.slip2000.com/blog/s-w-a-t-magazine-filthy-14/

At Prairie du Chien, Wisconsin, in May 2009, it had several failures to extract, and the extractor spring was replaced at 13,010 rounds. This is far beyond the normal extractor spring life under these conditions.

]At Wamego, Kansas, in June 2009, two bolt lugs broke at 16,400 rounds. We replaced the BCG. Considering the firing schedule, this is within normal parameters.

At Columbus, Ohio, in November 2009, we had several failures to extract at 24,450 rounds. The shooter gave it a field cleaning and replaced the extractor and extractor spring

BSW

 

[JustinJ]

I haven't seen any studies to the effect that the SCAR is significantly more reliable than the AR.

I haven't seen any studies that a Honda Accord is more reliable than a Ford Model T but it's pretty obvious if one looks at the mechanics of each.

I mean, at what point do you need more reliability than firing 14,000 rounds without cleaning and still going strong, like filthy 14?

A sample size of 1 is not a valid experiment. Nor is it representative of fighting in the desert. I'm not saying the AR is not reliable but you can make just about any machine keep going if you dump enough lube in it.
"It has been lubed generously with Slip 2000 Enhanced Weapons Lube (EWL)."

I agree, a 16" or 20" semi auto AR, especially in civilian applications, is more than reliable enough. But there is room for improvement. Many argue that a modern infantry carbine should not require the degree of maintenance that an M4 does.

 

[Shipwreck]

I considered getting a SCAR again this year - but with this mad rush on stuff - the prices are like close to $3k for the 5.56 version. That's ridiculous. So, I got a Steyr AUG instead

 

[JustinJ]

I considered getting a SCAR again this year - but with this mad rush on stuff - the prices are like close to $3k for the 5.56 version. That's ridiculous. So, I got a Steyr AUG instead

I was looking at a SCAR, LWRC and AUG and went with the latter too. I've been very happy with my purchase although would like to have a SCAR one day. The AUG was a few hundred less than the SCAR until I got 20 mags to go with it. The AUG is the only true quick change barrel system when it comes to carbines.

 

[surfinUSA]

I would like a scar 17 but as far as the 16 goes, I look at it like the military looked at it. It doesn't do anything the AR doesn't do for a lot less money.

 

[fireside44]

I only ask myself if I like to clean weapons or not. No, that's usually my answer, especially if you are spending lots of time using it.

 

[Murphy4570]

I haven't seen any studies that a Honda Accord is more reliable than a Ford Model T but it's pretty obvious if one looks at the mechanics of each.

I contend that the Ford Model T is just as hardy of a vehicle. I have worked on a 1931 Model A, and holy crap it is SIMPLE! You can do damn near any repair with a screwdriver and a hammer! Different design doesn't automatically mean less reliable or robust.

 

[KnekBeard]

If I was going to drop that kind of cash on a 556 rifle, I would get something fully ambi and modular. Maybe LWRC IC or something similar.

 

[JustinJ]

I contend that the Ford Model T is just as hardy of a vehicle. I have worked on a 1931 Model A, and holy crap it is SIMPLE! You can do damn near any repair with a screwdriver and a hammer! Different design doesn't automatically mean less reliable or robust.

Ease of repair is not the same thing as durability. You aren't seriously trying to tell me that a Model T would have fewer mechanical issues than a Honda Accord, given equal mileage and type of driving? Regardless, you get my point. No, different design doesn't mean less reliable. Poorer design does.

 

[Quiet]

Oh and there is the reciprocating thumb whacker on the SCAR.

Been there, done that, ouch! But, being a smart, pain-averse human, I've learned where not to place my thumb while shooting my SCAR 17

GG&G non-reciprocating charging handle kit for the SCAR. (Q4 2013 release time frame)

 

[Shipwreck]

I was looking at a SCAR, LWRC and AUG and went with the latter too. I've been very happy with my purchase although would like to have a SCAR one day. The AUG was a few hundred less than the SCAR until I got 20 mags to go with it. The AUG is the only true quick change barrel system when it comes to carbines.

Yes. I have no plans to buy another barrel - but Steyr apparently put the word out recently that there will be some different length barrels available later this year. At the ranges I shoot, though, I am satisfied with the one that comes with the AUG.

I have 10 mags now... Plan to get 2 more and then I'm done.

 

[briansmithwins]

As regards the reciprocating charging handle, it's a compromise.

The OEM CH is one piece of steel with overmolded plastic that inserts directly into the bolt carrier.

Both non-reciprocating CH designs that also serve as forward assists that I'm familiar with contain upwards of half a dozen parts.

I'd be willing to bet the single peice design is much more robust.

BSW