Let me start off with a few facts. First, I am not an employee of Handl Defense. I have advised them and have tested their products. They have never ever paid me a single damn cent.
Second, I am not an attorney, my opinions are not to be construed as such.
Third, this is a truthful recollection of events as I saw them, I would bet my 22 year military career, 18 in SOF, on the absolute truth of what I am saying here.
Fourth, what I saw was so completely without honor or integrity, I just can’t let it go.

About 6 years ago I got my first opportunity to shoot the SCAR platform. I saw it as what could be the future of small arms. I thought it was great, with a few small quirks. I’ll say that again, I like the gun, a lot.
The issues I’ve seen personally (outside of Handl’s testing) are breaking buttstock hinges/buttons, magazines that would come completely apart when dropped on concrete, cracking trigger modules, and one particular Mk.17 that would not function no matter what we did. These issues were rare but they were there.

My experiences were echoed by others, there was a very vocal dislike of the SCAR.

Late 2011/early 2012, I ran into Alan Handl, and a few of his employees. I came away impressed, later that year I began to volunteer my time in advising him. I am one of several members of SOF to volunteer time on his program.  Through that network, information on concerns with SCARs was collected from other end users. This feedback is the genesis of the Mk.17/Mk.20 improvement program.

I bought one of the first 300 civilian lowers in September 2012, then joined FnFourms. The bias against Handl Defense was pretty obvious early on.  People were complaining about issues without ever having installed parts or put the trigger module on the gun (it leaves index marks).

Alan personally looks at all returns, all are test fired, many are videoed, and some are even scanned and checked against the CAD files.  The excessive and partially contrived scrutiny had the following effects.

First, the QA and QI process has been refined to a point where complaints went from about 5% of the first 300 (which were replaced for free) down to a point where it is less than 1% per thousand (most of those are improper installation).

Second, the return policy of immediately replacing any part found to have any manufacturing defect was put in place, there haven’t been many.

WHAT WAS DEMONSTRATED: That many of the complaints coming from FNFourms were based on either errors in the index (20-30 of the very first run) error in installation (a few) or malice intended to actively undermine Handl Defense (most).

One prime example is where I promised to goto Handl Defense and video tape the issues with another guys lower. I wanted to know, I had been shooting e-mails up and down the entire force modernization CoC, to include the project lead about Handl, I did not want to look like a jackass. I took his issue as a personal mission and this is the response I got. http://fnforum.net/forums/fn-scar-17s/44532-joeyhp-feedback-your-handl-lower.html

A while later, that member of FNForums made his own competing product. By openly reverse engineering the Handl lower. This information was publicly shown with measurements.

On top of this Handl's primary competition (Jim Elmazi - Stryker ent.) routinely posted negative comments in thread where Handl Defense was trying to solve CS issues. On top of this he routinely asked for close up pictures of where he had specific issues. This information included with the measurements posted up gave the complete picture to move forward with their competing product. (notice its substantial delay)

The more any advocate of Handl Defense tried to defend the product or its attributes. The more they were attacked and suppressed. One prime example of this is where a guy in NSW did a review from OCONUS.  Still not good enough http://fnforum.net/forums/fn-scar-17s/53195-nsw-reviews-handl-defense-lower.html

Another review was done where a guy who initially thought the Handl was a POS, because FNfourm told him it was. He got all the SME contact he could handle and FNFourm had this response  http://fnforum.net/forums/fn-scar-17s/53350-my-review-handl-defense-lower-get-cup-take-seat.html

Once Handl Defense figured out that they were being defamed, they confronted the administration of FNFourms with the evidence.  The response: Handl Defense had their account terminated. Handl Defense was advised to contact the FBI’s IPRC, I know this, because I wrote a statement on what I had seen, and I was shown the FBI response.  They stated that they found rev-engineering of Handl Defense products.

In my opinion without the libelous actions of FNForums, a few of its members  and sponsors, a very large number the SCAR17s would have Handl’s trigger module. Who knows what the effect on their submission to SOCOM has been.

So now you know why I take such an aggressive stance in defending Handl Defense. What has been listed is just the tip of the iceberg. There is layer upon layer that support my position. No one single sponsor in this site wants this kind of activity coming here.

Let this serve as a warning, if these people are not contained, it will spread, ask IWC, ask CAV, ask DSA. There is a reason I compare them to Islamists, they operate the exact same way.

I am willing to testify in a court of law that these statements are true.

Rant, not a tech thread