The L failed because it'd blow thumbs off.
The H failed because it's benefits wasn't worth the added logistics of having a unique spec battle rifle when most are M4s in 5.56
If the L never had a reciprocal bolt we would've seen both of these in modern war.
The H saw more service because a modern 7.62 rifle was a needed niche in Afghanistan and the SCAR was and is a very reliable gun in spite of its flaws. The L saw little to no use because it was moronic and didn't do anything the M4 couldn't.
Cool bro, so you're just moronic. Very nice piece regardless.
The H saw more service because a modern 7.62 rifle was a needed niche in Afghanistan and the SCAR was and is a very reliable gun in spite of its flaws. The L saw little to no use because it was moronic and didn't do anything the M4 couldn't.
>L can't do what M4 can
Idk man, I think it was better by ergos and mechanism but that reciprocal bolt nuked any chance for SCARs to go mainstream.
The L isn't any more accurate than an M4. The ergos are very similar and a wash. The SCAR can run a very very long time without pasts breakages, probably its best quality. But that's offset by the huge cost. The gas system is stupid and undos part of the advantage of a short stroke system. It uses a stupid gas plug. They've since fixed that and newer ones have adjustable regulators. I don't remember if that was another stupid requirement or not. Oh yeah, it also kills scopes.
The SCAR is mainstream though. By what metric is it not?
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
>By what metric is it not?
Usage. It's mainstream in videogames, that's about it. But the HK416 and AR-15 pretty decidedly stomped it as a service rifle.
>Why did they fail?
The SCAR 16 and 17 are both very popular rifles for both civilian consumers and militaries all over the world, even if they are grossly overpriced and less successful than they could have been.
>And yet the Army apparently now in 2024 wants to give ~~*SIG*~~ money
ftfy
>buys $1,000 dollar screws and bolts
When will /k/ learn that the MIC doesn't operate on what is best but on what will make the best profit for ourselves?
>Extruded aluminum upper /misc/ymer lower receiver rifle somehow costs 3x as much as a Colt with forged aluminum receivers >swapping barrels is rarely if ever actually done >The reciprocating charging handle is too high and can lead to busting knuckles on optic mounts >The charging handle reciprocates (ironically this was a SOCOM demand but it turns out that it's a shitty feature) >SCAR-17 kills optics (possibly a vibration/harmonics issue stemming from the extruded upper)
Some youtube shill having a VCOG go down doesn't indicate anything. It is a sample size of 1 and the VCOG is not "one of the most rugged LPVOs"....
Trij generally doesn't make very solid magnified optics. Larry Snickers had a VCOG's zero start wandering after fewer rounds and not on a SCAR. Despite that, plenty of guys have put plenty of rounds down SCAR 17s with VCOGs on them and been fine.
X gun kills optics is always fuddlore. People have, and you can too, put accelerometers on them to compare against pretty much any other similar gun in a similar chambering to show their recoil traces are essentially the identical.
yeah except for all the ones with rail extensions and stuff
and this guy
https://i.imgur.com/RPS6c1W.jpeg
yep fully stock config, never any modifications were made to these things
and pic related are people who don't shoot at all so their optics and lasers survive on a SCAR 17, but you and that youtube shill know a whole lot better?
Post your SCAR.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
Correct. Hence why the scar got dropped and literally nobody uses it
Reciprocating charging handle is a good thing if it's not too far forwards like on the scar.
It should be positioned on the receiver, on the right side of the gun. It's not in the way, and can be used when necessary and provides simplicity.
>Cost
The Army buys M4s for less than half the cost >Value add
Just wasn't there. Its not worth the cost to adopt >Stupid requirements
like the gay ass reciprocating charging handle in a great place to hit your hand.
The Army being mad over the shit features despite them being the ones asking for them is like the people at McDonald's kiosks mad they received an awful hodgepodge of food when that is exactly what they ordered
It is moronic, but it just goes to show that often the customer doesn't know what the frick they want. It reminds me of the German semi auto rifle competition. The Wehrmacht demanded the ability to use it as a bolt action. moronic. Mauser did so and it was shit. Walther ignored that requirement and the G43 was adopted.
That's not the most moronic part of that story, it's Germany wanting a rifle that's not gas operated but also not roller locked/ roller delayed. Again Walther ignored that requirement while mauser spent precious man hours coming up with a solution that fit that bill. As it turns out the customer is rarely right, more often than not you need to lead them by the reins to what they actually want. Too many days wasted in customer service has beaten that lesson into me
>just goes to show that often the customer doesn't know what the frick they want
The people who write the spec aren't the customer. This is always true of modern military procurement and it puzzles me why people still think adoption is some sort of confirmation of what is "best". They must don't know how it works.
Of course they are, they are representatives of the government and the government is the customer. >But they aren't the actual 18 year old infantrymen who will use the rifle!
Nobody claimed that.
AR-15 sure, but AR-10s really aren't the same story. You can basically immediately dismiss any and all DPMS pattern AR-10s as civilian tier garbage that will invariably break in harsh conditions, when fired suppressed, or shot more than $100 worth of ammo.
Even of the military grade ones KAC SR25/M110 are temperamental little b***hes and they weigh a whopping 10+ lbs. My experience with LMTs is good and Brit's I've worked with seem to like them, but those weigh the same or more depending on configuration. I know frick all about proper LaRue AR10s but nobody uses those anymore anyway.
Meanwhile a SCAR-17 weighs 8lbs and just works. The AR-10 needs some work before it can really be called perfection.
SR-25s were temperamental early on but they aren't anymore. They were also designed from the start to be fancy precision rifles, not battle rifles like the scar. I don't think its fair to compare 90's KAC making a niche precision rifle for delta to 2000's huge FN making a battle rifle for GWOT bloated SOCOM.
>SR-25s were temperamental early on but they aren't anymore.
I only have experience with the temperamental ones. If they've fixed them, great. >I don't think its fair to compare 90's KAC making a niche precision rifle for delta to 2000's huge FN making a battle rifle for GWOT bloated SOCOM.
Well both are in inventory and are therefore direct competitors. Sure you can argue the KAC is a semi-automatic sniper rifle and the SCAR is a battle rifle, but there's kinda a lot of overlap in actual capability, we're talking two roughly 1 MOA capable rifles firing the same caliber.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
I wish I could get a SR-25 but it's unobtanium. SCAR-H is easy as frick to get though, every LGS has a bunch. Weird how that turned out!
They didn't. The L was dropped for being too similar to the M4, since the PIP upgrades to the M4 fixed the issues that spurred the creation of the SCAR in the first place. The H is still in inventory, basically unchanged. Interesting that larpers claim you need to spend several grand on upgrade parts to make it "usable", yet when SOF take it out to actually kill people there's not a single rail extension or stock adaptor to be seen; still in its factory configuration from 2009. The SCAR was so good in .308 that Socom adopted the Mk20, a dedicated sniper version, and it was again so good that the French adopted that as their DMR instead of the 417; in spite of already using the 417 in some roles. Overseas its the service rifle of several countries; who is far above and beyond what could have been expected of the rifle only expected to be sold to the smallest branch of a single military, and on the civilian side they're perpetually sold out in spite of the price. If thats what you call a failure, Idk how you would handle an actual failure, like the Masada or the HK433.
Do you feel the standards of service rifle trails would be less stringent in Portugal or Belgium than in other countries?
>By what metric is it not?
Usage. It's mainstream in videogames, that's about it. But the HK416 and AR-15 pretty decidedly stomped it as a service rifle.
>But the HK416 and AR-15 pretty decidedly stomped it as a service rifle.
What a weird rationale, not being first place doesn't make something obscure. Would you consider the Tavor or ACE to be mainstream? I only ask because both those rifles are some of the biggest sellers of the last 15 years and probably outstrip both the SCAR and 416 combined in sales, just not to European countries.
>Do you feel the standards of service rifle trails would be less stringent in Portugal or Belgium than in other countries?
I do, completely unironically. Belgium makes the gun and is biased. Portugal is a stupid shit rectangle that always adopts meme guns like the original AR-10. Their judgement is not to be trusted. Above all else both those countries know they will never actually have to use the guns so it doesn't matter what they do. >probably outstrip both the SCAR and 416
Almost certainly surpass the SCAR, but I highly doubt they do the 416. While the Galil and Tavor are indeed used by a whole lot of third world shitholes, they are usually small orders. I wouldn't be surprised if the France 416 contract is larger than a half dozen Galil contracts put together.
>Just gotta use Mk17 specifically rated optics, laser
Which is massively limiting given that advances in optics and electronics are so prevalent these last years
>HK433
Nobody wanted the HK433 because they already had an AR to do its job. The HK437, however, got some procurement because it offered some .300 action in a piston gun package
AR-15 sure, but AR-10s really aren't the same story. You can basically immediately dismiss any and all DPMS pattern AR-10s as civilian tier garbage that will invariably break in harsh conditions, when fired suppressed, or shot more than $100 worth of ammo.
Even of the military grade ones KAC SR25/M110 are temperamental little b***hes and they weigh a whopping 10+ lbs. My experience with LMTs is good and Brit's I've worked with seem to like them, but those weigh the same or more depending on configuration. I know frick all about proper LaRue AR10s but nobody uses those anymore anyway.
Meanwhile a SCAR-17 weighs 8lbs and just works. The AR-10 needs some work before it can really be called perfection.
>DPMS pattern
Why? >weigh 10+ pounds
I just chock this up to the bigger cartridge. Only so much you can do to have semi auto + removable mags + 16 inch + barrel. Everything gets sized up.
>Why?
He doesn't know, he just knows he's heard that AR10s are shitheaps, or is nitpicking about shit that has no effect on function like fit and finish.
DPMS hate is strange and always has been. It's a shame PSA's parent company owns the IP for the DPMS gen.3 pattern and refuses to do anything for it or update it. >chock this up to bigger cartridge
Partially correct. Designers build a rifle with the caliber's recoil in mind, weighed against the human reliability factor. If people could handle a 25 pound weapon as easily as a 7 pound ar15, the AR10 would have weighed exactly that.
Picrel a comparison of recoil energy between a 10 and 25 pound ar10 and an ar15
DPMS was/is supposed to be PSA's retail brand for brick and mortar to stock. Seems like PSA forgot about it, which they seem to do to everything that isn't the latest hyped product from them.
DPMS was damn near the standard back in the early 2000s, far fewer people in general were chasing rollmarks back then and there's nothing really wrong with DPMS receivers aside from high/low rail autism from what I recall. Remember Instagram and /arg/ didn't exist, and the AWB had just expired, so people were happy to have anything that didn't rely on grandfathered M14 mags.
This is all a massive cope for >cheap AR10s are totally good!
But they're not. They all suck, and if you throw a suppressor on they will die.
DPMS was damn near the standard back in the early 2000s, far fewer people in general were chasing rollmarks back then and there's nothing really wrong with DPMS receivers aside from high/low rail autism from what I recall. Remember Instagram and /arg/ didn't exist, and the AWB had just expired, so people were happy to have anything that didn't rely on grandfathered M14 mags.
DPMS was always dogshit and made shitty guns. The first cheap AR-15 that didn't suck ass was the M&P 15 Sport. Bushmaster, Olympic Arms, DPMS, Delton, all that shit sucked.
I have an old Bushmaster with tens of thousands of rounds through it and only a handful of malfunctions, all related to cheap steel case ammo. You are a moron. Post your $4k KAC.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
My KAC cost me slightly less than thjat.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I bought my Bushmaster right after the first Obama panic and even adjusted for inflation it was less than that upper. I just don't see the justification for spending that much on a 5.56 AR, and without the rollmark on the lower you will instantly die anyway according to /arg/stagram, so what's the point?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>so what's the point?
to see firsthand how big a deal the improvements KAC made are and if it matters. >and without the rollmark on the lower you will instantly die anyway according to /arg/stagram
that's why it goes on an Aero lower, so that /arg/ can stay mad. It could go on an LMT lower, but that's not fun.
I'm glad your gun is good but it was my genuine experience that all the not Colt cheapo shit that existed prior to the M&P sport sucked ass. It and then especially PSA changed the game.
2008-2009 Democrats win election and start passing bills
2010 All SCAR variants pass Milestone C: Operationally Suitable/Sustainable
Dem's bills enacted. 15% budget cut across SOCOM w/ Extra Battalion at every Group that needs to be trained and equipped.
Now short on cash, SOCOM removes funding from Mk16 and allocates to remaining SCAR components.
SOCOM tells media that the SCAR-L didn't do enough over the M4 when limited funds are taken into consideration. Lying through omission that they had a massive budget cut or that all the SCAR variants met their moving goalposts.
FNUSA starts to fight back. Releasing their own press releases that the SCAR passed Milestone C and all of SOCOM's requirements.
FN Belgium HQ tells FNUSA to stand down. SOCOM plays dirty politics like anyone else. Even if FN fights and wins, it will put any current and future contracts in jeopardy.
The big takeaway is that despite meeting all of SOCOM's requirements... ANY rifle that became the SCAR would have been kneecapped when that budget cut hit. SOCOM always had the option to get 'free' M4s and M16s from the other service branches at any time while the SCAR's funding came directly from SOCOM's budget.
>seethe
i am so tired of seeing that word on PrepHole. its literally just 'umad' spelled differently. every popular meme on PrepHole is just a new way to imply someone is mad or that they are undesirable.
>its literally just 'umad' spelled differently
I am aware, but it really does make people mad, and I was curious why. Squid may have trolled poorgays here with one back in the day, but that doesn't explain the SCARs fairly widespread hatedom across the internet when the rifle itself is pretty damn good.
I have a similar setup but with an acog. How is shooting with that scope? Looks cool, anon.
>seethe
i am so tired of seeing that word on PrepHole. its literally just 'umad' spelled differently. every popular meme on PrepHole is just a new way to imply someone is mad or that they are undesirable.
>about to respond "u mad bro?" >haha, 2004 was just a few years ago >wait
I hate that you've reminded me of this
That old Accupoint 2.5-10x is heavy, but has pretty generous eye relief so it's a pretty good setup, however I never fully trusted that Burris PEPR mount after a bad experience on a different rifle. Eventually swapped the scope and mount out for a TA11 and then an Eotech/magnifier combo since I live in the Northeast and rarely shoot much beyond 100 yards here. Maybe that will change, as I recently bought a house with a few acres (in New Hampshire, frick my wallet) and should be able to shoot out to 400 yards if I can clear that much.
2500? This is the world famous SCAR! Known from video games! What do you mean 3000 is too expensive for you? I expect 3500 dollars from you. Don't think you can get such an iconic gun for anything less than 4000 dollars!
FN Markup, beats up optics, suppressors invalidate the warranty, reciprocating charging handled addressed too late. Sucks because its a cool gun that shoots smoothly otherwise.
Disclaimer: Not buying one until the fix their frickup with the aluminum type they used for the receiver and use billet because I don't want a gun that shreds it's receiver just from brass
iirc psa wanted as close of a clone as possible as a "frick you" to fn.
Honestly, if they get the metallurgy worked out they might do a clean sweep, t-rex arms said it was decent over 5k rounds minus the brass deforming the ejection port.
Ugly ass ugg boot
Nobody wants to pay 3500 dollars for a 1500 dollar rifle.
Oy vey, $3500?? No, these are $3800 rifles. Goyim need to stop kvetching and fork over the $4000 for this rifle
The L failed because it'd blow thumbs off.
The H failed because it's benefits wasn't worth the added logistics of having a unique spec battle rifle when most are M4s in 5.56
If the L never had a reciprocal bolt we would've seen both of these in modern war.
>I can't afford something so its da jooz
The H saw more service because a modern 7.62 rifle was a needed niche in Afghanistan and the SCAR was and is a very reliable gun in spite of its flaws. The L saw little to no use because it was moronic and didn't do anything the M4 couldn't.
But I can afford it.
Cool bro, so you're just moronic. Very nice piece regardless.
>L can't do what M4 can
Idk man, I think it was better by ergos and mechanism but that reciprocal bolt nuked any chance for SCARs to go mainstream.
The L isn't any more accurate than an M4. The ergos are very similar and a wash. The SCAR can run a very very long time without pasts breakages, probably its best quality. But that's offset by the huge cost. The gas system is stupid and undos part of the advantage of a short stroke system. It uses a stupid gas plug. They've since fixed that and newer ones have adjustable regulators. I don't remember if that was another stupid requirement or not. Oh yeah, it also kills scopes.
The SCAR is mainstream though. By what metric is it not?
>By what metric is it not?
Usage. It's mainstream in videogames, that's about it. But the HK416 and AR-15 pretty decidedly stomped it as a service rifle.
bro we can see where the money ran out
Already owned the optic
I'm waiting for it to die to get an LED ACOG and sell the replacement warranty Vortex
>yes I agree, the money ran out
bro don't be on here trying to say you can afford stuff when we can all see you can't
Wash your fricking baseboards, dude.
Wat not him but they look clean
And yet the Army apparently now in 2024 wants to pay $4370-4650 for a rifle (with a suppressor at least)
Addendum: nobody but the moronic homosexual government wants to pay 3500 dollars for a 1500 dollar rifle.
And yet the government cancelled their SCAR contract before accepting even 1000 guns.(outside of a few small buys for special ops groups)
If you want to argue with someone call a suicide hotline, stop arguing with me.
i'm just pointing out it's more than the price.
>government is shit with money
news
>procurement contracts are wildly overpaid, regardless if it is for nuts and bolts, or AMRAAMs
news
>~~*Cohen*~~ gets in charge of SIG USA, suddenly the military needs rifles
breaking news
>Why did they fail?
The SCAR 16 and 17 are both very popular rifles for both civilian consumers and militaries all over the world, even if they are grossly overpriced and less successful than they could have been.
>And yet the Army apparently now in 2024 wants to give ~~*SIG*~~ money
ftfy
Yes
Price
>buys $1,000 dollar screws and bolts
When will /k/ learn that the MIC doesn't operate on what is best but on what will make the best profit for ourselves?
They used to be $2500, and they only went up from there. I don't get how FN consistently makes shit more expensive.
>Extruded aluminum upper /misc/ymer lower receiver rifle somehow costs 3x as much as a Colt with forged aluminum receivers
>swapping barrels is rarely if ever actually done
>The reciprocating charging handle is too high and can lead to busting knuckles on optic mounts
>The charging handle reciprocates (ironically this was a SOCOM demand but it turns out that it's a shitty feature)
>SCAR-17 kills optics (possibly a vibration/harmonics issue stemming from the extruded upper)
>SCAR-17 kills optics
Fuddlore
It's not fuddlore.
SCAR kills one of the most rugged LPVOs on the market in under a thousand rounds. It kills optics. It kills lasers too.
Some youtube shill having a VCOG go down doesn't indicate anything. It is a sample size of 1 and the VCOG is not "one of the most rugged LPVOs"....
Trij generally doesn't make very solid magnified optics. Larry Snickers had a VCOG's zero start wandering after fewer rounds and not on a SCAR. Despite that, plenty of guys have put plenty of rounds down SCAR 17s with VCOGs on them and been fine.
X gun kills optics is always fuddlore. People have, and you can too, put accelerometers on them to compare against pretty much any other similar gun in a similar chambering to show their recoil traces are essentially the identical.
Cope post.
Ah yeah cope.
So this guy
and this guy
and pic related are people who don't shoot at all so their optics and lasers survive on a SCAR 17, but you and that youtube shill know a whole lot better?
Post your SCAR.
Correct. Hence why the scar got dropped and literally nobody uses it
NTA but this is a commonly reported problem. The way it handles energy has made many new SCAR owners unexpectedly ruin their optics.
Now it can be argued that fudds are the ones buying them.
Reciprocating charging handle is a good thing if it's not too far forwards like on the scar.
It should be positioned on the receiver, on the right side of the gun. It's not in the way, and can be used when necessary and provides simplicity.
>Cost
The Army buys M4s for less than half the cost
>Value add
Just wasn't there. Its not worth the cost to adopt
>Stupid requirements
like the gay ass reciprocating charging handle in a great place to hit your hand.
The Army being mad over the shit features despite them being the ones asking for them is like the people at McDonald's kiosks mad they received an awful hodgepodge of food when that is exactly what they ordered
It is moronic, but it just goes to show that often the customer doesn't know what the frick they want. It reminds me of the German semi auto rifle competition. The Wehrmacht demanded the ability to use it as a bolt action. moronic. Mauser did so and it was shit. Walther ignored that requirement and the G43 was adopted.
That's not the most moronic part of that story, it's Germany wanting a rifle that's not gas operated but also not roller locked/ roller delayed. Again Walther ignored that requirement while mauser spent precious man hours coming up with a solution that fit that bill. As it turns out the customer is rarely right, more often than not you need to lead them by the reins to what they actually want. Too many days wasted in customer service has beaten that lesson into me
>just goes to show that often the customer doesn't know what the frick they want
The people who write the spec aren't the customer. This is always true of modern military procurement and it puzzles me why people still think adoption is some sort of confirmation of what is "best". They must don't know how it works.
Of course they are, they are representatives of the government and the government is the customer.
>But they aren't the actual 18 year old infantrymen who will use the rifle!
Nobody claimed that.
SR-25s were temperamental early on but they aren't anymore. They were also designed from the start to be fancy precision rifles, not battle rifles like the scar. I don't think its fair to compare 90's KAC making a niche precision rifle for delta to 2000's huge FN making a battle rifle for GWOT bloated SOCOM.
>SR-25s were temperamental early on but they aren't anymore.
I only have experience with the temperamental ones. If they've fixed them, great.
>I don't think its fair to compare 90's KAC making a niche precision rifle for delta to 2000's huge FN making a battle rifle for GWOT bloated SOCOM.
Well both are in inventory and are therefore direct competitors. Sure you can argue the KAC is a semi-automatic sniper rifle and the SCAR is a battle rifle, but there's kinda a lot of overlap in actual capability, we're talking two roughly 1 MOA capable rifles firing the same caliber.
I wish I could get a SR-25 but it's unobtanium. SCAR-H is easy as frick to get though, every LGS has a bunch. Weird how that turned out!
looks liek a fish.
no moar fish guns
they are not wanted
fish
>ffffffiiiiiiiiiiissssshhhhhhhhhhh
pewpewpew
which one?
small hand? lower one
big hand? upper one
Not enough charging handles
lel
Because they're Belgian morons
They didn't. The L was dropped for being too similar to the M4, since the PIP upgrades to the M4 fixed the issues that spurred the creation of the SCAR in the first place. The H is still in inventory, basically unchanged. Interesting that larpers claim you need to spend several grand on upgrade parts to make it "usable", yet when SOF take it out to actually kill people there's not a single rail extension or stock adaptor to be seen; still in its factory configuration from 2009. The SCAR was so good in .308 that Socom adopted the Mk20, a dedicated sniper version, and it was again so good that the French adopted that as their DMR instead of the 417; in spite of already using the 417 in some roles. Overseas its the service rifle of several countries; who is far above and beyond what could have been expected of the rifle only expected to be sold to the smallest branch of a single military, and on the civilian side they're perpetually sold out in spite of the price. If thats what you call a failure, Idk how you would handle an actual failure, like the Masada or the HK433.
>Overseas its the service rifle of several countries
Oh boy, Portugal and Kenya, what a glowing endorsement lmao
Do you feel the standards of service rifle trails would be less stringent in Portugal or Belgium than in other countries?
>But the HK416 and AR-15 pretty decidedly stomped it as a service rifle.
What a weird rationale, not being first place doesn't make something obscure. Would you consider the Tavor or ACE to be mainstream? I only ask because both those rifles are some of the biggest sellers of the last 15 years and probably outstrip both the SCAR and 416 combined in sales, just not to European countries.
>Do you feel the standards of service rifle trails would be less stringent in Portugal or Belgium than in other countries?
I do, completely unironically. Belgium makes the gun and is biased. Portugal is a stupid shit rectangle that always adopts meme guns like the original AR-10. Their judgement is not to be trusted. Above all else both those countries know they will never actually have to use the guns so it doesn't matter what they do.
>probably outstrip both the SCAR and 416
Almost certainly surpass the SCAR, but I highly doubt they do the 416. While the Galil and Tavor are indeed used by a whole lot of third world shitholes, they are usually small orders. I wouldn't be surprised if the France 416 contract is larger than a half dozen Galil contracts put together.
Main thing is that it's actually a decent DMR in standard Mk17 configuration.
Useful for jungle, plains, mountains, arctic warfare. Just gotta use Mk17 specifically rated optics, laser
>Just gotta use Mk17 specifically rated optics, laser
Which is massively limiting given that advances in optics and electronics are so prevalent these last years
>HK433
Nobody wanted the HK433 because they already had an AR to do its job. The HK437, however, got some procurement because it offered some .300 action in a piston gun package
yeah except for all the ones with rail extensions and stuff
yep fully stock config, never any modifications were made to these things
picrel another unmodified mk17 just how SOF use them to kill people
We already have AR-10 and AR-15.
No need to mess with perfection.
AR-15 sure, but AR-10s really aren't the same story. You can basically immediately dismiss any and all DPMS pattern AR-10s as civilian tier garbage that will invariably break in harsh conditions, when fired suppressed, or shot more than $100 worth of ammo.
Even of the military grade ones KAC SR25/M110 are temperamental little b***hes and they weigh a whopping 10+ lbs. My experience with LMTs is good and Brit's I've worked with seem to like them, but those weigh the same or more depending on configuration. I know frick all about proper LaRue AR10s but nobody uses those anymore anyway.
Meanwhile a SCAR-17 weighs 8lbs and just works. The AR-10 needs some work before it can really be called perfection.
>DPMS pattern
Why?
>weigh 10+ pounds
I just chock this up to the bigger cartridge. Only so much you can do to have semi auto + removable mags + 16 inch + barrel. Everything gets sized up.
>Why?
He doesn't know, he just knows he's heard that AR10s are shitheaps, or is nitpicking about shit that has no effect on function like fit and finish.
DPMS hate is strange and always has been. It's a shame PSA's parent company owns the IP for the DPMS gen.3 pattern and refuses to do anything for it or update it.
>chock this up to bigger cartridge
Partially correct. Designers build a rifle with the caliber's recoil in mind, weighed against the human reliability factor. If people could handle a 25 pound weapon as easily as a 7 pound ar15, the AR10 would have weighed exactly that.
Picrel a comparison of recoil energy between a 10 and 25 pound ar10 and an ar15
DPMS was/is supposed to be PSA's retail brand for brick and mortar to stock. Seems like PSA forgot about it, which they seem to do to everything that isn't the latest hyped product from them.
DPMS was damn near the standard back in the early 2000s, far fewer people in general were chasing rollmarks back then and there's nothing really wrong with DPMS receivers aside from high/low rail autism from what I recall. Remember Instagram and /arg/ didn't exist, and the AWB had just expired, so people were happy to have anything that didn't rely on grandfathered M14 mags.
This is all a massive cope for
>cheap AR10s are totally good!
But they're not. They all suck, and if you throw a suppressor on they will die.
DPMS was always dogshit and made shitty guns. The first cheap AR-15 that didn't suck ass was the M&P 15 Sport. Bushmaster, Olympic Arms, DPMS, Delton, all that shit sucked.
I have an old Bushmaster with tens of thousands of rounds through it and only a handful of malfunctions, all related to cheap steel case ammo. You are a moron. Post your $4k KAC.
My KAC cost me slightly less than thjat.
I bought my Bushmaster right after the first Obama panic and even adjusted for inflation it was less than that upper. I just don't see the justification for spending that much on a 5.56 AR, and without the rollmark on the lower you will instantly die anyway according to /arg/stagram, so what's the point?
>so what's the point?
to see firsthand how big a deal the improvements KAC made are and if it matters.
>and without the rollmark on the lower you will instantly die anyway according to /arg/stagram
that's why it goes on an Aero lower, so that /arg/ can stay mad. It could go on an LMT lower, but that's not fun.
I'm glad your gun is good but it was my genuine experience that all the not Colt cheapo shit that existed prior to the M&P sport sucked ass. It and then especially PSA changed the game.
Gross dood
2004 SCAR program starts
2008-2009 Democrats win election and start passing bills
2010 All SCAR variants pass Milestone C: Operationally Suitable/Sustainable
Dem's bills enacted. 15% budget cut across SOCOM w/ Extra Battalion at every Group that needs to be trained and equipped.
Now short on cash, SOCOM removes funding from Mk16 and allocates to remaining SCAR components.
SOCOM tells media that the SCAR-L didn't do enough over the M4 when limited funds are taken into consideration. Lying through omission that they had a massive budget cut or that all the SCAR variants met their moving goalposts.
FNUSA starts to fight back. Releasing their own press releases that the SCAR passed Milestone C and all of SOCOM's requirements.
FN Belgium HQ tells FNUSA to stand down. SOCOM plays dirty politics like anyone else. Even if FN fights and wins, it will put any current and future contracts in jeopardy.
The big takeaway is that despite meeting all of SOCOM's requirements... ANY rifle that became the SCAR would have been kneecapped when that budget cut hit. SOCOM always had the option to get 'free' M4s and M16s from the other service branches at any time while the SCAR's funding came directly from SOCOM's budget.
>M4
>M110
Because it had no point.
Has any rifle generated as much seethe in the modern era as the SCAR?
>seethe
i am so tired of seeing that word on PrepHole. its literally just 'umad' spelled differently. every popular meme on PrepHole is just a new way to imply someone is mad or that they are undesirable.
>its literally just 'umad' spelled differently
I am aware, but it really does make people mad, and I was curious why. Squid may have trolled poorgays here with one back in the day, but that doesn't explain the SCARs fairly widespread hatedom across the internet when the rifle itself is pretty damn good.
because old /k/ was a lot younger and most of the board couldn't buy anything that cost more than 500 bucks.
I have a similar setup but with an acog. How is shooting with that scope? Looks cool, anon.
>about to respond "u mad bro?"
>haha, 2004 was just a few years ago
>wait
I hate that you've reminded me of this
That old Accupoint 2.5-10x is heavy, but has pretty generous eye relief so it's a pretty good setup, however I never fully trusted that Burris PEPR mount after a bad experience on a different rifle. Eventually swapped the scope and mount out for a TA11 and then an Eotech/magnifier combo since I live in the Northeast and rarely shoot much beyond 100 yards here. Maybe that will change, as I recently bought a house with a few acres (in New Hampshire, frick my wallet) and should be able to shoot out to 400 yards if I can clear that much.
2500? This is the world famous SCAR! Known from video games! What do you mean 3000 is too expensive for you? I expect 3500 dollars from you. Don't think you can get such an iconic gun for anything less than 4000 dollars!
They built the rifle to the specs the NAVY wanted, but that made a shit rifle.
They were fixing a problem that didn't exist.
FN Markup, beats up optics, suppressors invalidate the warranty, reciprocating charging handled addressed too late. Sucks because its a cool gun that shoots smoothly otherwise.
Because we were waiting for it's better version
Disclaimer: Not buying one until the fix their frickup with the aluminum type they used for the receiver and use billet because I don't want a gun that shreds it's receiver just from brass
Convergent evolution is so strong. They look so similar.
iirc psa wanted as close of a clone as possible as a "frick you" to fn.
Honestly, if they get the metallurgy worked out they might do a clean sweep, t-rex arms said it was decent over 5k rounds minus the brass deforming the ejection port.
That's clearly a FN MK16
It even has FN Herstal markings
I thought they were reasonably successful sales-wise. Not cost efficient mind, but still sold.
Too dorky
https://twitter.com/S_E_R_J_Serj/status/1677719413167099907
Is this two morons fighting?
Also, the artist flipped the sides of the screen they were on.
Frick the scar, just bring the IWS variant they mocked up for cucknada sof or the rear charging mrgg scar
ew, no thanks. I'd rather pay premium for a scar.
What the most modern choice?