Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 10/3/2007 6:33:20 PM EST
Does anyone know what the status is with the SCAR? I havn't heard much about it lately.
Link Posted: 10/3/2007 7:24:28 PM EST
The last time I e-mailed FN about it, they replied that they hoped to have it on the market in late 2008.........I hope sooner, as I would like to have one



Originally Posted By flash22:
Does anyone know what the status is with the SCAR? I havn't heard much about it lately.
Link Posted: 10/4/2007 3:06:19 PM EST
We just wont know for certain until SHOT 08'.

The word on the street though is late 2008.

They have the SCAR going though its final stages (we hope) of SOCOM testing right now. In fact, I'm pretty sure they should be done with the SOCOM tests around January 2008. So unless there is something that SOCOM doesn't dig the SCAR version that is up right now will be the final Gen Prototype and production will start. That will be good news for everyone including us civilians and LEOs.

As soon as you hear they got SOCOM approval look for an announcement at SHOT 08'.

The great thing is that unlike the XCR that came out with 5.56 and months later the 6.8 and is still waiting for the 7.62x39 the SCAR will be ready to go with both the SCAR L and H right out the gate.

Link Posted: 10/4/2007 7:48:17 PM EST
I will be glad when we find out.........I am jonesing for a SCAR-L and will probably buy it over the other choices out there.........just hope it isnt an arm and a leg expensive


Originally Posted By SilentType:
We just wont know for certain until SHOT 08'.

The word on the street though is late 2008.

They have the SCAR going though its final stages (we hope) of SOCOM testing right now. In fact, I'm pretty sure they should be done with the SOCOM tests around January 2008. So unless there is something that SOCOM doesn't dig the SCAR version that is up right now will be the final Gen Prototype and production will start. That will be good news for everyone including us civilians and LEOs.

As soon as you hear they got SOCOM approval look for an announcement at SHOT 08'.

The great thing is that unlike the XCR that came out with 5.56 and months later the 6.8 and is still waiting for the 7.62x39 the SCAR will be ready to go with both the SCAR L and H right out the gate.

Link Posted: 10/7/2007 6:41:46 PM EST
After getting to shoot one of the earlier versions I can say that if the price is right I would love to add one to the collection. I remember the FN rep saying they were already filling orders to some military. For the life of me I cant remember which group it was.

They had said they hoped for late 08 availability for the civi guns. The sooner the better.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 11:14:09 AM EST

Originally Posted By ALASKANFIRE:
After getting to shoot one of the earlier versions I can say that if the price is right I would love to add one to the collection. I remember the FN rep saying they were already filling orders to some military. For the life of me I cant remember which group it was.

They had said they hoped for late 08 availability for the civi guns. The sooner the better.


They've been making a few here and there for testing and evaluation by not just the official SOCOM testing group, but individual units for feedback. I believe they have gone through three generations of the SCAR so far changing things to please the special ops folks.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 11:30:35 AM EST
Now the big question for me is SCAR or Masada...
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 11:35:15 AM EST

Originally Posted By Brock29:
Now the big question for me is SCAR or Masada...

"Get Both"

At least from the SHOT'07 impression, both have a lot going for them.
Link Posted: 10/10/2007 3:50:34 PM EST

Originally Posted By Gamma762:

Originally Posted By Brock29:
Now the big question for me is SCAR or Masada...

"Get Both"

At least from the SHOT'07 impression, both have a lot going for them.


Well, I get about one major rifle purchase a year. It will all depend on which one comes out when for me. I will most likely wait for reports of the Masada before I act, but the SCAR while maybe sporting less features than the Masada will have the benefit of being a sure thing in terms of reliability (or at least as close to a sure thing as you can get). The intense SOCOM testing and years of redesigns and careful feedback gives the SCAR a serious advantage in my opinion.

Link Posted: 10/10/2007 4:20:19 PM EST
For me it's the Masada then the SCAR and that's unless Sig puts out the 550 (yeah right).
Link Posted: 10/11/2007 8:13:02 AM EST
Scar or Masada?

Lets see, buy a gun from a proven gun manufacturer that has a track record of cutting edge reliable weapons, or buy a gun from a company thats never made anything more complicated than a stock who came about from selling a gimmicky rubber nothing? Pretty much a no brainer............


If the Masada is ever really made, i'll prolly pick one up, but other than looks, it has nothing on a SCAR.

I'll bet my house the Scar will be out way before the masada as well........ 12 months and a lower is still not abailable anhd 14 months and the UBR still ain't shipping...............3 years from now the masada will be out, and produced by a company other than magpul......
Link Posted: 10/11/2007 11:01:36 AM EST
Well,

I have heard Magpul say that they will work on a 7.62x51mm version that will be modular with some of the Masada parts much like the SCAR L and H.

HOWEVER, Ridley is right in so far as Magpul is not a HUGE company by any means. They make great stuff and I"m sure the Masada will be great, but I would seriously bet that all caliber conversions will not be available at once.

I see the Masada going down just like the XCR in that you'll have the .223 first with months later the 6.8 SPC and probably a year or two later the 7.62x39mm version. Heck the 7.62x51 Masada could be five years after the .223 comes out. Whereas with the SCAR you'll have the L and the H come out at either the same time or very close together, because both are being developed at the same time and being trialed now.

I like .223 of course and 6.8 SPC is nice, but I'd rather have the full 7.62x51mm option and not have to wait until I'm old and grey (well more grey) to have it.

Link Posted: 10/11/2007 11:42:55 AM EST



I like .223 of course and 6.8 SPC is nice, but I'd rather have the full 7.62x51mm option and not have to wait until I'm old and grey (well more grey) to have it.



AMEN
Link Posted: 10/19/2007 9:28:04 AM EST
I spoke to the FN guys Tuesday at the International Association of Chiefs of Police convention in New Orleans. They had all 4 models of the SCAR, the light, light CQB, heavy and heavy CQB. They said they are hoping to begin shipping on the civilian end in approximately 18 months. The LE market will have first dibs. They are looking to get 4000 available to agencies by the end of the first quarter of 2008.
Link Posted: 10/19/2007 9:34:20 AM EST

Originally Posted By ta2d_cop:
I spoke to the FN guys Tuesday at the International Association of Chiefs of Police convention in New Orleans. They had all 4 models of the SCAR, the light, light CQB, heavy and heavy CQB. They said they are hoping to begin shipping on the civilian end in approximately 18 months. The LE market will have first dibs. They are looking to get 4000 available to agencies by the end of the first quarter of 2008.

See anything about the (supposed) sniper/sniper support variant with longer handguard?
Link Posted: 10/19/2007 2:11:05 PM EST
18 months? what are they going to offer a Premier Klinton version? you know, before she bans them.

I wish all the big companies would just come out and say that in order to produce the weapon for the Mil, that civilians must be able to own them as well. pipe dream yes, but it would be cool
Link Posted: 10/19/2007 2:42:42 PM EST

Originally Posted By m4hk33:
18 months? what are they going to offer a Premier Klinton version? you know, before she bans them.

I wish all the big companies would just come out and say that in order to produce the weapon for the Mil, that civilians must be able to own them as well. pipe dream yes, but it would be cool


Relax.

We've got over 12 months until the 2008 Presidential Elections and IF Clinton wins (which I think is the 6th Sign of the Apocalypse) she wont be sworn into officer until Mid January some 14 months from now and she'll be so busy with pulling us out Iraq early on that it will be at least four months before an AWB could make it out of Committee. We've got worse case scenario a little under two years. So when they do come out and Clinton is President (God Help Us All) buy them up double quick, but we should have about three to four months to purchase them.



Link Posted: 10/19/2007 4:10:40 PM EST

See anything about the (supposed) sniper/sniper support variant with longer handguard?


They did not have it out there but they did say it was "under development", whatever that means.
Link Posted: 10/19/2007 4:48:19 PM EST
yeah thats what i was thinking, about a three month window for the SCARs for civilian purchase.

while i am greatful for what FN will sell us, i think they and any other manufacture who choses to sell to the LEO market is making an enormiously idoitic move.

for one, the leo market is allways going to be there, and two, they could probaly sell more on the civiy market(or ARFCOM alone) then what LEO only sales could generate.
Link Posted: 10/19/2007 5:42:16 PM EST
height=8
Originally Posted By Gamma762:
height=8
Originally Posted By Brock29:
Now the big question for me is SCAR or Masada...

"Get Both" he


I knew that was coming he
On a side note, H&K really screwed up...they should have civy marketed the 416/417 early on. Now everybody's ticked and most won't buy. My thoughts anyway...
Link Posted: 10/20/2007 5:17:10 PM EST
The Nov issue of S.W.A.T says 08 also.I'm going to waite and see.I'm liking the idea of a 7.2 pound 308 with 19" barrel .
Link Posted: 10/22/2007 5:59:20 AM EST
I will get both the L and H if and when they arrive.
Link Posted: 10/22/2007 12:47:36 PM EST
I have no real need or want for a 5.56mm rifle. If the SHTF there will plenty laying around anyways. I will be getting a SCAR-H, even if I have to sell my first born child for it! J/K.
It is really the only rifle coming down the pike that gives me serious wood.
Link Posted: 10/22/2007 4:21:18 PM EST
I have been following the SCAR closely...visited the FN plant in SC a couple of times...great people with a lot of pride in their work. I hope the SCAR is available in 7.62x39 w/o having to buy the 5.56 components...putting off a 7.62x39 AR in favor of the SCAR...hell, it's all good! v/r W
Link Posted: 10/22/2007 4:21:45 PM EST
The Beauty of the SCAR H is that it shares something like 60% of the SCAR L's parts.

You could purchase the L or the H and then get the conversion kit for less than the cost of a new rifle. Bamn, you've got two rifles.

The 7.62x51mm H is amazing though as it is going to be so ergonomic and battle ready after SOCOM tests for years.

The SCAR should be darn near able to take a nuclear strike and keep firing after all the testing and redesign its gone through.
Link Posted: 10/22/2007 7:09:47 PM EST

Originally Posted By WaltK:
I have been following the SCAR closely...visited the FN plant in SC a couple of times...great people with a lot of pride in their work. I hope the SCAR is available in 7.62x39 w/o having to buy the 5.56 components...putting off a 7.62x39 AR in favor of the SCAR...hell, it's all good! v/r W


The 7.62x39mm is based off of the H platform, not the L.
Link Posted: 10/23/2007 12:35:50 AM EST

Originally Posted By killswitch1982:
The 7.62x39mm is based off of the H platform, not the L.


That's old information. The way it's configured now there's one common upper receiver, with dedicated lowers for 7.62x51, 5.56 and 7.62x39. I don't know what the x39 lower is designated as however.
Link Posted: 10/23/2007 3:33:39 AM EST

Originally Posted By kemp:

Originally Posted By killswitch1982:
The 7.62x39mm is based off of the H platform, not the L.


That's old information. The way it's configured now there's one common upper receiver, with dedicated lowers for 7.62x51, 5.56 and 7.62x39. I don't know what the x39 lower is designated as however.


The SCAR is currently still two separate (yet nearly identical) platforms... Development has begun on the "Common Receiver", but at this time it is still in the design / engineering phase.

Hope this helps,
Clint
Link Posted: 10/23/2007 7:30:20 PM EST

Originally Posted By havoc:

Originally Posted By kemp:

Originally Posted By killswitch1982:
The 7.62x39mm is based off of the H platform, not the L.


That's old information. The way it's configured now there's one common upper receiver, with dedicated lowers for 7.62x51, 5.56 and 7.62x39. I don't know what the x39 lower is designated as however.


The SCAR is currently still two separate (yet nearly identical) platforms... Development has begun on the "Common Receiver", but at this time it is still in the design / engineering phase.

Hope this helps,
Clint


[AR15.com know-it-all outsider]No, no Clint. You are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!![/AR15.com know-it-all outsider]
Link Posted: 10/23/2007 7:41:16 PM EST

Originally Posted By SilentType:
The Beauty of the SCAR H is that it shares something like 60% of the SCAR L's parts.

You could purchase the L or the H and then get the conversion kit for less than the cost of a new rifle. Bamn, you've got two rifles.

The 7.62x51mm H is amazing though as it is going to be so ergonomic and battle ready after SOCOM tests for years.

The SCAR should be darn near able to take a nuclear strike and keep firing after all the testing and redesign its gone through.


So, did FN stick with the 'Upper reciever is the gun' that they used for their other weapons?

or is the magwell attached to the LOWER so that you can do AR-style top-half interchange?
Link Posted: 10/23/2007 7:58:16 PM EST

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
So, did FN stick with the 'Upper reciever is the gun' that they used for their other weapons?

or is the magwell attached to the LOWER so that you can do AR-style top-half interchange?

Both. The upper receiver/monolithic chassis is the serial numbered part.

Plastic lower receiver has the magwell.
Link Posted: 10/24/2007 4:46:08 PM EST

Originally Posted By havoc:

Originally Posted By kemp:

Originally Posted By killswitch1982:
The 7.62x39mm is based off of the H platform, not the L.


That's old information. The way it's configured now there's one common upper receiver, with dedicated lowers for 7.62x51, 5.56 and 7.62x39. I don't know what the x39 lower is designated as however.


The SCAR is currently still two separate (yet nearly identical) platforms... Development has begun on the "Common Receiver", but at this time it is still in the design / engineering phase.

Hope this helps,
Clint


Will it be released as is or is FN going to wait for the common receiver design to be completed?
Link Posted: 10/25/2007 3:01:53 AM EST

Originally Posted By Spenser_Burrows:
Will it be released as is or is FN going to wait for the common receiver design to be completed?


The plan is to release it (them) in the current configuration.
Link Posted: 10/25/2007 3:43:14 PM EST
Yup, they are in Gen III already and thats probably the last configuration.

Link Posted: 10/26/2007 4:14:36 AM EST

Originally Posted By havoc:
The SCAR is currently still two separate (yet nearly identical) platforms... Development has begun on the "Common Receiver", but at this time it is still in the design / engineering phase.

Hope this helps,
Clint


My bad, i came across a .gov PPT not long ago that described the common upper mated to different caliber lowers so that's where i got that info from. Guess things aren't moving as fast as i thought
Link Posted: 10/26/2007 4:37:54 AM EST
I will be glad to see these on the market...........funds are ready and so am I


Originally Posted By havoc:

Originally Posted By Spenser_Burrows:
Will it be released as is or is FN going to wait for the common receiver design to be completed?


The plan is to release it (them) in the current configuration.
Link Posted: 10/26/2007 4:39:58 AM EST
BTT
Link Posted: 10/26/2007 4:52:56 AM EST

Originally Posted By kemp:
Guess things aren't moving as fast as i thought


I think the program is running at a phenominal pace, myself...
Link Posted: 10/26/2007 4:55:57 AM EST

Originally Posted By SilentType:
Yup, they are in Gen III already and thats probably the last configuration.



We passed Gen 3 around November 2006 - I'd say we're in the neighborhood of Gen 6.2 by now (most of the changes have been minor / not-so-noticeable).

Stay safe all,
Clint
Link Posted: 10/26/2007 6:35:05 AM EST
I hope FN gets these to market soon!
Link Posted: 10/26/2007 8:43:36 AM EST

Originally Posted By wolver98:
I hope FN gets these to market soon!


Especially with the new AWB that Joe Biden just proposed...


HURRY UP FN! I WANT MY SCAR-H!
Link Posted: 10/26/2007 10:05:57 AM EST

Originally Posted By havoc:

Originally Posted By SilentType:
Yup, they are in Gen III already and thats probably the last configuration.



We passed Gen 3 around November 2006 - I'd say we're in the neighborhood of Gen 6.2 by now (most of the changes have been minor / not-so-noticeable).

Stay safe all,
Clint


Just wondering - has there ever been consideration of a tool-less bbl. changout over the current setup?
Link Posted: 10/26/2007 10:19:44 AM EST

Originally Posted By Master_Blaster:
Just wondering - has there ever been consideration of a tool-less bbl. changout over the current setup?


It was discussed briefly many, many moons ago (when the guns were still ideas on napkins) - but the need for a free-floating barrel and concerns with repeatability and thermal expansion ultimately drove the design you see today. I think each approach (tool-less vs. tool-required) has it's advantages and disadvantages. I like the design, as its architecture lends for a very clean approach to the "barrel module" concept - no field strip required or other parts to remove or replace when exchanging one barrel length / type for another.

Take care,
Clint
Link Posted: 10/26/2007 1:42:43 PM EST

Originally Posted By havoc:

Originally Posted By Master_Blaster:
Just wondering - has there ever been consideration of a tool-less bbl. changout over the current setup?


It was discussed briefly many, many moons ago (when the guns were still ideas on napkins) - but the need for a free-floating barrel and concerns with repeatability and thermal expansion ultimately drove the design you see today. I think each approach (tool-less vs. tool-required) has it's advantages and disadvantages. I like the design, as its architecture lends for a very clean approach to the "barrel module" concept - no field strip required or other parts to remove or replace when exchanging one barrel length / type for another.

Take care,
Clint


Is it true that you have to remove 6 screws/bolts (3 each side) to quick change the barrel? Do these screws/bolts have a torque spec?

Also, do the screws/bolts thread through the aluminum receiver to pin the barrel extension like set screws or do they thread into the barrel extension?
Link Posted: 10/26/2007 2:41:39 PM EST

Originally Posted By 556Cliff:
Is it true that you have to remove 6 screws/bolts (3 each side) to quick change the barrel?


Yes, there are 6 screws - 3 each side - that must be loosened. They are captured in the receiver and will not fall out, etc during barrel swap.


Do these screws/bolts have a torque spec?


Yes, 7 Newton meters, or 62 inch pounds.


Also, do the screws/bolts thread through the aluminum receiver to pin the barrel extension like set screws or do they thread into the barrel extension?


The screws thread into the barrel extension.

Hope this helps,
Clint
Link Posted: 10/26/2007 4:14:56 PM EST

Originally Posted By havoc:

Originally Posted By Master_Blaster:
Just wondering - has there ever been consideration of a tool-less bbl. changout over the current setup?


It was discussed briefly many, many moons ago (when the guns were still ideas on napkins) - but the need for a free-floating barrel and concerns with repeatability and thermal expansion ultimately drove the design you see today. I think each approach (tool-less vs. tool-required) has it's advantages and disadvantages. I like the design, as its architecture lends for a very clean approach to the "barrel module" concept - no field strip required or other parts to remove or replace when exchanging one barrel length / type for another.

Take care,
Clint


Damn, too bad the quick change advocates didn't win out on that one. Sort of a happy medium I guess and it gives us something to look forward to in the future.

Link Posted: 10/26/2007 4:24:49 PM EST

Originally Posted By SilentType:

Originally Posted By havoc:

Originally Posted By Master_Blaster:
Just wondering - has there ever been consideration of a tool-less bbl. changout over the current setup?


It was discussed briefly many, many moons ago (when the guns were still ideas on napkins) - but the need for a free-floating barrel and concerns with repeatability and thermal expansion ultimately drove the design you see today. I think each approach (tool-less vs. tool-required) has it's advantages and disadvantages. I like the design, as its architecture lends for a very clean approach to the "barrel module" concept - no field strip required or other parts to remove or replace when exchanging one barrel length / type for another.

Take care,
Clint

Damn, too bad the quick change advocates didn't win out on that one. Sort of a happy medium I guess and it gives us something to look forward to in the future.

Personally I don't mind a little more involved barrel swap in exchange for truly rugged construction. Barrel swap with a screwdriver/allen wrench/torx etc seems straightforward enough to me. My only real mechanical concern with the Masada design is the QC barrel mechanism.
Link Posted: 10/27/2007 9:23:46 AM EST
Thanks Clint!
Link Posted: 10/28/2007 12:50:47 PM EST
Will a selective fire version be available to law enforcement ect. ?
Link Posted: 11/5/2007 2:48:02 PM EST
Defenselink.mil posted the following today in its contract announcements:


FN Herstal of Herstal, Belgium, was awarded a 10-year indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract for the development and production of the Special Combat Assault Rifle in support of U.S. Special Operations Command procurement division in November 2004. There have been eleven delivery orders awarded to date for the procurement of Initial Operational Test and Evaluation and Low Rate Initial Production requirements totaling $11,134,096. The production phase of this contract is anticipated to begin in March 2008. The work will be performed primarily in Herstal, and is expected to be completed by 2014. The contract number is H92222-05-D-0001.
Link Posted: 11/5/2007 3:06:42 PM EST
Has there been any confirmation on when civilian-legal variants of the SCAR will be made available?
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top