User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/8/2018 12:56:02 PM EDT
I've got a KAC SR25 ECC, and I really like the gun. Lately I've been tossing around the idea of selling it or trading it off for a SCAR 17 (if traded it would be a +cash or multigun trade) but I've never shot a SCAR and all of my friends with guns don't own a SCAR.
If you have both, or at one time owned either one which one do you prefer? Hows the recoil impulse compared between the two, I know the SCAR has reputation of damaging optics but have also heard if you are using a quality optic it isn't an issue and largely over blown. I do like that the base weight is lower than my ECC which is 12ish lbs empty with a Leupold MK4 4.5-14 on it. I also like that I have an option to SBR it. I don't necessarily like the reciprocating charging handle, but I can deal with it (and hopefully FN will release their non-reciprocating stuff in the future but I'm not optimistic about that). I've never owned a FN produced gun, so I can't speak for the overall quality but my KAC has been flawless and I assume the FN would be as well. Let me here your opinions 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2018 4:19:26 PM EDT
[#1]
I used to have an Sr25 ECC and currently own 2 Scar 17s.
I really liked my ECC. The quality was beyond anything I have seen in an AR platform. It was sub MOA accurate with FGMM or similar premium ammo. I think they were designed to run m80 ball ammo, and I have heard reports of them being finicky with certain ammo, most cheap stuff, although I personally never had an issue. I got rid of it because I had so much money invested in it between the rifle and the CQBSS scope. To me the ECC is a precision gas gun that can also be used as a run and gun type rifle, but it is a less than ideal for that task. I wanted more of a battle rifle for run and gun type use. I currently have a 17s with a cut and pinned Dead Air FH that I run with a TA11E-G and a Sandman K. I have another setup with the stock barrel. Both have grip stops, and KDG short handguards. They are lighter than the ECC was stock, but when adding the KDG rails the weight difference is still there, but not a huge difference. One big advantage of the Scar platform is the ability to change the gas jets to really fine tune them for different barrel lengths and different suppressors. Both are soft shooters for a 308, but the Scar definitely gets the edge here for me because of the ability to really fine tune the gas system to your liking. My 17s shoot sub MOA at 100 yards using 168gr TAP AMAX ammo. I have run a wide variety of cheap ammo hard and fast through it and never had a hiccup. I believe the Scar platform will eat anything you can feed it, and probably run more reliably when dirty and gunked up compared to an sr25. They are both awesome rifles for their intended purposes. To me the ECC is more geared towards a precision rifle, that can perform CQB duties, although not ideally. On the other hand the Scar 17 is a lightweight battle rifle that just happens to have above average accuracy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2018 4:32:59 PM EDT
[#2]
You will find pros and cons to support both. The truth is that you need to shoot both and decide which you prefer. If you can afford to do so, I recommend that you buy a SCAR17, set it up and shoot both for awhile. Then make your decision and sell the one you like less.
I have a SR25 APC with NF ATACR 1-8. A friend has a SCAR17 with kdg rail, geissele trigger, and NF ATACR 1-8. They are both awesome. The SCAR allows you to dial in your gas jet to your particular suppressor, which is great. Only you can decide what you prefer after shooting side by side. Internet research isn’t going to cut it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2018 4:48:58 AM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
I've got a KAC SR25 ECC, and I really like the gun. Lately I've been tossing around the idea of selling it or trading it off for a SCAR 17 (if traded it would be a +cash or multigun trade) but I've never shot a SCAR and all of my friends with guns don't own a SCAR. If you have both, or at one time owned either one which one do you prefer? Hows the recoil impulse compared between the two, I know the SCAR has reputation of damaging optics but have also heard if you are using a quality optic it isn't an issue and largely over blown. I do like that the base weight is lower than my ECC which is 12ish lbs empty with a Leupold MK4 4.5-14 on it. I also like that I have an option to SBR it. I don't necessarily like the reciprocating charging handle, but I can deal with it (and hopefully FN will release their non-reciprocating stuff in the future but I'm not optimistic about that). I've never owned a FN produced gun, so I can't speak for the overall quality but my KAC has been flawless and I assume the FN would be as well. Let me here your opinions I feel that AR's have a smoother recoil impulse. I would not say that the Scar recoils more per say, only that its a lighter platform and feels as such in the recoil. in regards to damaging optics, Possibly, Have not seen anything recently but optics have gotten better since the Scar was released. The Scar is a good weapon, but if I had to grab one, I would grab my MWS over my Scar. Its smoother, more accurate, has far more range, if i drop my 6.5CM barrel on it. Doesnt make the scar a bad weapon, just that i can do alot more with the MWS and the only penalty is being able a half lb heavier than my Scar If your considering a Scar, I would think about how you want to use the rifle and go from their. if you are more precision oriented shooter, I feel your ECC would suit you very well, but if you are more of a shooter that does alot of moving around like hunting and or 3 gun, the Scar is an excellent choice. If you can, get both, they both have their place in the toolbox 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2018 9:26:39 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I have an MWS and Modded Scar 17, but have shoot SR25/M110's. I feel that AR's have a smoother recoil impulse. I would not say that the Scar recoils more per say, only that its a lighter platform and feels as such in the recoil. in regards to damaging optics, Possibly, Have not seen anything recently but optics have gotten better since the Scar was released. The Scar is a good weapon, but if I had to grab one, I would grab my MWS over my Scar. Its smoother, more accurate, has far more range, if i drop my 6.5CM barrel on it. Doesnt make the scar a bad weapon, just that i can do alot more with the MWS and the only penalty is being able a half lb heavier than my Scar If your considering a Scar, I would think about how you want to use the rifle and go from their. if you are more precision oriented shooter, I feel your ECC would suit you very well, but if you are more of a shooter that does alot of moving around like hunting and or 3 gun, the Scar is an excellent choice. If you can, get both, they both have their place in the toolbox https://preview.ibb.co/fZ3VvV/20181121-220032.jpg I own an mws, a scar 17, and scar 20. I have also shot JoshNC's sr25 apc several times. JoshNC also had an mws. The mws has a very harsh, stout recoil compared to the scar and sr25. Plus it is an absolutely terrible suppressor host. Amongst my group of friends there have been four mws, with multiple barrels to include the normal chrome lined, lightweight chrome lined, and stainless offerings. With effort some of them could achieve sub moa accuracy, but none of them were easy to shoot well. The sr25 is the epitome of a 7.62 AR. The latest versions shoot soft and run fine suppressed with low back pressure cans (surefire). Another option is the larue obr or predatobr. I have the 16" and 13" barrels for my scar 17, and along with my 20s, both guns are shooting CBC 168 smk under 1" at 100 yards without much effort, and the recoil impulse is much smoother and softer than my mws. I have also run some 118lr through it and had even better results. With proper gas jet selection the 17 is an excellent suppressor host, and out of the box the 20s is gassed perfectly for my surefire cans. This is just my experience, but after having owned or used multiple samples of all these guns the mws is nowhere near as refined as the sr25 or scar. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2018 2:30:12 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Your experience with the mws is so incredibly different than mine and all of my friends that own or have owned one. I own an mws, a scar 17, and scar 20. I have also shot JoshNC's sr25 apc several times. JoshNC also had an mws. The mws has a very harsh, stout recoil compared to the scar and sr25. Plus it is an absolutely terrible suppressor host. Amongst my group of friends there have been four mws, with multiple barrels to include the normal chrome lined, lightweight chrome lined, and stainless offerings. With effort some of them could achieve sub moa accuracy, but none of them were easy to shoot well. The sr25 is the epitome of a 7.62 AR. The latest versions shoot soft and run fine suppressed with low back pressure cans (surefire). Another option is the larue obr or predatobr. I have the 16" and 13" barrels for my scar 17, and along with my 20s, both guns are shooting CBC 168 smk under 1" at 100 yards without much effort, and the recoil impulse is much smoother and softer than my mws. I have also run some 118lr through it and had even better results. With proper gas jet selection the 17 is an excellent suppressor host, and out of the box the 20s is gassed perfectly for my surefire cans. This is just my experience, but after having owned or used multiple samples of all these guns the mws is nowhere near as refined as the sr25 or scar. With that being said, I began to tweak things a bit, went with a heavier spring and buffer combo. Went to the latest gen FA BCG, and got a low back pressure can, and the rifle is awesome. I think alot of the issues that come up in the MWS can be traced back to lmt shipping overgassed guns with h2 buffers for a number of years. I think they should of had better information on the impact of higher pressure cans on the operating system. I think that they waited way too long to adopt mloc, So absolutely, it's not a refined as a KAC, Is it as refined as a CC or PC, no it's not, but that CC or PC will never be a 13.5 or a 6.5CM. I am willing to give up that last bit of refinement for that capability. Accuracy with both my 13.5 in SS and 20 in 6.5 is in line with the Noveske, Krieger, Kac factory barrels that have been on my previous large frame AR's. It will group around MOA in 308 with trijicon 1-8. It will group around .75 in 6.5 with a mk6 3-18. In regards to the ops question My MWS, feels smoother to me than my scar. Even thinking back to M110's compared to Mk17CQB's Scars were never really pleasent to shoot for me. They weren't Bad per say, but struck me more as utilitarian than pinnacle of shot impulse. Not exactly a valid criticism. Bit more of an observation. Of course one was a heavy sniper rifle and the other was a bone stock CQB with AAC FH. If the op wants to trade me his ECC for my Scar I would probably would make that trade with little hesitation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2018 6:21:24 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I do believe your experience with the mws's that you shot. When I was running mine with h2 buffer and was using my gemtech gmt-300wm can, recoil was HARD with my 13.5 and 16cl. Like God Damn! HARD. With that being said, I began to tweak things a bit, went with a heavier spring and buffer combo. Went to the latest gen FA BCG, and got a low back pressure can, and the rifle is awesome. I think alot of the issues that come up in the MWS can be traced back to lmt shipping overgassed guns with h2 buffers for a number of years. I think they should of had better information on the impact of higher pressure cans on the operating system. I think that they waited way too long to adopt mloc, So absolutely, it's not a refined as a KAC, Is it as refined as a CC or PC, no it's not, but that CC or PC will never be a 13.5 or a 6.5CM. I am willing to give up that last bit of refinement for that capability. Accuracy with both my 13.5 in SS and 20 in 6.5 is in line with the Noveske, Krieger, Kac factory barrels that have been on my previous large frame AR's. It will group around MOA in 308 with trijicon 1-8. It will group around .75 in 6.5 with a mk6 3-18. In regards to the ops question My MWS, feels smoother to me than my scar. Even thinking back to M110's compared to Mk17CQB's Scars were never really pleasent to shoot for me. They weren't Bad per say, but struck me more as utilitarian than pinnacle of shot impulse. Not exactly a valid criticism. Bit more of an observation. Of course one was a heavy sniper rifle and the other was a bone stock CQB with AAC FH. If the op wants to trade me his ECC for my Scar I would probably would make that trade with little hesitation. I agree the 13" scar 17 isn't quite as soft shooting as the 16" (socom 762 mini 2 with appropriate gas jets). But the 20s with factory jet has so little recoil it's surprising. I'm sure the additional 4 lbs plus heavier glass on top is a contributing factor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2018 12:52:02 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My mws came with an h3 and latest gen BCG. Suppressed it kicked like a mule. I tried a slash buffer and his recommended armalite spring, but it didn't make a difference. Snagged one of the hard to find gemtech 308 carriers only to find the mws firing pin didn't fit it. Considered an adjustable gas key, but finally got tired of mucking with the platform. I agree the 13" scar 17 isn't quite as soft shooting as the 16" (socom 762 mini 2 with appropriate gas jets). But the 20s with factory jet has so little recoil it's surprising. I'm sure the additional 4 lbs plus heavier glass on top is a contributing factor. I definitely dont blame you kind of being done with messing around with it, only that with the slashes buffer and spring combo, new BCG, and a low back pressure can, its incredibly nice to shoot. The Mk20 is the only variant of the Scar that i have not had a chance to mess around with, has there been any range reports yet. I would love to grab one of their stocks for my Scar. just looks at more comfortable than the current options. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2018 9:48:32 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Your experience with the mws is so incredibly different than mine and all of my friends that own or have owned one. I own an mws, a scar 17, and scar 20. I have also shot JoshNC's sr25 apc several times. JoshNC also had an mws. The mws has a very harsh, stout recoil compared to the scar and sr25. Plus it is an absolutely terrible suppressor host. Amongst my group of friends there have been four mws, with multiple barrels to include the normal chrome lined, lightweight chrome lined, and stainless offerings. With effort some of them could achieve sub moa accuracy, but none of them were easy to shoot well. The sr25 is the epitome of a 7.62 AR. The latest versions shoot soft and run fine suppressed with low back pressure cans (surefire). Another option is the larue obr or predatobr. I have the 16" and 13" barrels for my scar 17, and along with my 20s, both guns are shooting CBC 168 smk under 1" at 100 yards without much effort, and the recoil impulse is much smoother and softer than my mws. I have also run some 118lr through it and had even better results. With proper gas jet selection the 17 is an excellent suppressor host, and out of the box the 20s is gassed perfectly for my surefire cans. This is just my experience, but after having owned or used multiple samples of all these guns the mws is nowhere near as refined as the sr25 or scar. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: I have an MWS and Modded Scar 17, but have shoot SR25/M110's. I feel that AR's have a smoother recoil impulse. I would not say that the Scar recoils more per say, only that its a lighter platform and feels as such in the recoil. in regards to damaging optics, Possibly, Have not seen anything recently but optics have gotten better since the Scar was released. The Scar is a good weapon, but if I had to grab one, I would grab my MWS over my Scar. Its smoother, more accurate, has far more range, if i drop my 6.5CM barrel on it. Doesnt make the scar a bad weapon, just that i can do alot more with the MWS and the only penalty is being able a half lb heavier than my Scar If your considering a Scar, I would think about how you want to use the rifle and go from their. if you are more precision oriented shooter, I feel your ECC would suit you very well, but if you are more of a shooter that does alot of moving around like hunting and or 3 gun, the Scar is an excellent choice. If you can, get both, they both have their place in the toolbox https://preview.ibb.co/fZ3VvV/20181121-220032.jpg I own an mws, a scar 17, and scar 20. I have also shot JoshNC's sr25 apc several times. JoshNC also had an mws. The mws has a very harsh, stout recoil compared to the scar and sr25. Plus it is an absolutely terrible suppressor host. Amongst my group of friends there have been four mws, with multiple barrels to include the normal chrome lined, lightweight chrome lined, and stainless offerings. With effort some of them could achieve sub moa accuracy, but none of them were easy to shoot well. The sr25 is the epitome of a 7.62 AR. The latest versions shoot soft and run fine suppressed with low back pressure cans (surefire). Another option is the larue obr or predatobr. I have the 16" and 13" barrels for my scar 17, and along with my 20s, both guns are shooting CBC 168 smk under 1" at 100 yards without much effort, and the recoil impulse is much smoother and softer than my mws. I have also run some 118lr through it and had even better results. With proper gas jet selection the 17 is an excellent suppressor host, and out of the box the 20s is gassed perfectly for my surefire cans. This is just my experience, but after having owned or used multiple samples of all these guns the mws is nowhere near as refined as the sr25 or scar. The LMT is nice if you want an AR based large frame. But the SCAR is the better gun. I haven't shot a SR-25 but that is one I would love to shoot. Only hear good things about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/10/2018 11:04:24 AM EDT
[#9]
If you are serious - friend has a nib FDE 17 he is bringing to the Jonesboro Road show this weekend.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2018 1:38:11 PM EDT
[#10]
Yes; ACC and SCAR17. They compare pretty directly in usage intent and weight.
ACC is a more refined platform and needs nothing out of the box. Beautiful recoil impulse for an AR10, great balance, shoots everything well enough. Tuned so well that unlike any other AR10 I never felt the need for adjustable gas or real tuning work. Cheaper magazines that don't crack at the feed lip so easily, or more expensive magazines that are excellent if you buy KMC magazines. SCAR folds, easier to work on in the sense that everything can be taken apart with a torch and a few allen wrenches; easy barrel replacement. Adjustable gas regulator is nice. Recoil impulse is not really heavier but is not 'unitary' like the SR25...it feels like several different impulses spread out over a longer time, and rifle is consequently a little harder to control. Has a propensity to beat itself up a little more if consistently run overgassed but the gas regulator mitigates this somewhat. Both shoot about the same in truth, and very well for the lightweight battle rifles they are, but the scar is a little harder to keep on target if you're shooting mid range. I have had no problems with 175gr SMK in the SCAR 1:12, 16" barrel, but have not tried other longer 175grs like the TMK or RDF. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/23/2018 4:21:15 PM EDT
[#11]
Realistically I don't use my ECC for much precision stuff, I've had it to 400 yards once or twice. I dont shoot it a whole lot, but I carry it a ton.
I have also hunted with it for the last 6-7 years and finally went to a lightweight bolt gun this year because I didn't want to jump that heavy rifle for 12 hours a day. I want something I can throw a non magnified optic on and run some drills and do some basic "battle rifle" stuff and also have the ability to use a magnified optic and make shots at 400-500 yards. I also for some stupid reason want a SBR'd .308 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/7/2019 2:27:33 AM EDT
[#12]
Unless you really don’t like the ECC I would not make that trade or sell it. I sold my EMC and bought a SCAR. Unless you suck it up and keep the brake, the SCAR has a more abrupt recoil that disturbs the sight picture more. It has a silly 1:12 barrel that may or may not stabilize 175gr or heavier bullets. FN will void the rifles warranty if you use a suppressor on it, and a gas jet swap is absolutely necessary when shooting suppressed with most cans. The rifle can more easily damage itself if shot overgassed than other platforms. The barrel profile requires a barrel shoulder ring for most muzzle devices. The stock trigger is absolute garbage. Just too many little things that go from minor individual annoyances to one major annoyance over time.
I sold the SCAR and picked up an LMT MWS. It’s a little better than MOA rifle with chrome lined barrels and very tame to shoot. LMT’s barre offerings are substantial from LW to standard profile to SS to chrome lined. I like the flexibility it offers a lot, but still regret selling the EMC. The MWS will get SBR’ed shortly so I can use 13.5” barrels as well. I have a Leupold MK6 and TA-11 ACOG in QD mounts I swap depending on the barrel setup. The SCAR is a great run and gun battle rifle, but does not do the DMR thing very well. If you want one then get one, but I wouldn’t sell the ECC for one looking back on my experiences. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2019 2:59:15 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Unless you really don’t like the ECC I would not make that trade or sell it. I sold my EMC and bought a SCAR. Unless you suck it up and keep the brake, the SCAR has a more abrupt recoil that disturbs the sight picture more. It has a silly 1:12 barrel that may or may not stabilize 175gr or heavier bullets. FN will void the rifles warranty if you use a suppressor on it, and a gas jet swap is absolutely necessary when shooting suppressed with most cans. The rifle can more easily damage itself if shot overgassed than other platforms. The barrel profile requires a barrel shoulder ring for most muzzle devices. The stock trigger is absolute garbage. Just too many little things that go from minor individual annoyances to one major annoyance over time. I sold the SCAR and picked up an LMT MWS. It’s a little better than MOA rifle with chrome lined barrels and very tame to shoot. LMT’s barre offerings are substantial from LW to standard profile to SS to chrome lined. I like the flexibility it offers a lot, but still regret selling the EMC. The MWS will get SBR’ed shortly so I can use 13.5” barrels as well. I have a Leupold MK6 and TA-11 ACOG in QD mounts I swap depending on the barrel setup. The SCAR is a great run and gun battle rifle, but does not do the DMR thing very well. If you want one then get one, but I wouldn’t sell the ECC for one looking back on my experiences. Since you mentioned a DMR, enter the SCAR DMR option. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/10/2019 12:57:06 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah the SCAR-H/Mk17/17s, is more of a battle rifle. Not really a DMR rifle. But the fact that it keeps getting compared to DMR setups like the LMT and KAC just shows how good of a rifle the SCAR is. Since you mentioned a DMR, enter the SCAR DMR option. https://fnamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/FN_Scar_20s_Rotators-1800x750.png |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/12/2019 11:37:05 AM EDT
[#15]
Scar16 is the first rifle I bought, and SR-15 is the second. I’m now in the process of selling my Scar, buying another SR-15, SR-25 and SR-30.
My best friend purchased both Scar 16/17 and is in the process of selling them both for an SR-25 and 2 more SR-15’s. While the Scar is a great platform and has been reliable and accurate for us, most people generally hate the rail system, and pay $2-300 to replace it, another $300 to replace the stock, another $3-400 to replace the trigger. We opted to stock our entire line with Knights rifles. While we may pay more overall, the quality is worth it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2019 11:28:39 PM EDT
[#16]
Part 1
I have both an ACC and a 17S. I've form 1'd my SCAR but have yet to drop the $1K for the 13" barrel. First off, I like them both. Even though they are in the same class, they are very different rifles. Everybody talks about how they have to sink a bunch of money into the SCAR to get it up to "their standards". Give me a break. The only thing that really needs an upgrade is the trigger. Everything else is personal preference (stocks, rails, etc...). Yes some stock latches have been broken, but after action reports aren't awash with these failures. They're rare. While I'm glad to see alternatives to the 1913 rails, M Lok and such, I don't need it longer. For me longer just means more weight, so I'm not in love with full length rails. I can always make my SCAR's rail longer, but I can't make my SR-25's rail shorter. Shorter rail also facilitates the flexibility to add the shorter 13" barrel. The gun has been totally reliable, suppressed or not (and I like the adjustable gas block/jets). *** ETA, Haha, I guess that April of 2006 is still a "new account" to Arfcom. New account 2000 word limit means that I'll have to break this up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/13/2019 11:29:16 PM EDT
[#17]
Part 2
The SR-25 is just a magical piece of equipment. Everything just feels really good, from the tactile feel of the controls to the smoothness of the way safety rolls on/off. Everything levers, latches, and buttons has that smooth "bar of soap" feel to in. While the rail is full length, it's is very light weight M Lok. It's not like the 17S is "harsh" in the ergos department (well, the stock trigger is balls, and 1913 is 1913), it's just not as "smooth" and tactile. So yes, the SR-25 is more refined, but it's also more expensive by a factor of 1.5. Mags are more expensive by a factor of 2 as well. P-Mags don't count, if you're gonna spend the money on an SR-25, you have to buy a bunch of the KAC mags. After you've got a sufficient quantity of KAC mags (for me, the number is 10), then buy all the P-Mags you want. This gun has been totally reliable as well, though I have not bothered to run it suppressed. I'm on the fence about whether to run one of my SiCo, AAC, or Surefire cans on it or break down and buy a QDC. I think subconsciously, I know the answer. The above mentioned qualities of the SR-25 convinced me that I needed an SR-15 CQB as well, so KAC is expensive and habit forming as I'll probably need a QDC for that rifle as well. Honestly, I have no data to support the following claim as both of my rifles have lived a charmed life, but in a traditional battle rifle role, I have more confidence in the SCAR's ability to operate in and through austere conditions. It's just got sloppier tolerances, like an AK. If the environments are more "urban", the SR-25 may be the superior choice. I'd like to wring them both out and test them with high round count sessions (~1000 rounds each), and hope the SR-25 proves me wrong, but so far work/life gets in the way... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2019 3:57:46 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Part 1 I have both an ACC and a 17S. I've form 1'd my SCAR but have yet to drop the $1K for the 13" barrel. First off, I like them both. Even though they are in the same class, they are very different rifles. Everybody talks about how they have to sink a bunch of money into the SCAR to get it up to "their standards". Give me a break. The only thing that really needs an upgrade is the trigger. Everything else is personal preference (stocks, rails, etc...). Yes some stock latches have been broken, but after action reports aren't awash with these failures. They're rare. While I'm glad to see alternatives to the 1913 rails, M Lok and such, I don't need it longer. For me longer just means more weight, so I'm not in love with full length rails. I can always make my SCAR's rail longer, but I can't make my SR-25's rail shorter. Shorter rail also facilitates the flexibility to add the shorter 13" barrel. The gun has been totally reliable, suppressed or not (and I like the adjustable gas block/jets). *** ETA, Haha, I guess that April of 2006 is still a "new account" to Arfcom. New account 2000 word limit means that I'll have to break this up. What it means is that people are forgetting that the scar was developed 15 years ago as a low cost/modular replacement for the M4. The DOD said, cool rifle, we will take a few and that's really about the end of scar development. People are attributing the 3000 dollar price tag as a premium rifle. The scar is not really that different from the CZ Bren or berretta ARX. The cz has better fit and finish for about half the cost The arx monstrosity has the same functionality for about a third the cost of a scar. Both CZ and beretta turn a profit at those price points. At 3k, the scar should equivalent to B&T. It shouldn't require a total refit. At the very least, even if they still standby their decision to run circa 2004 furniture or their flagship, they should of absolutely done something to address the tapco quality trigger as I have felt better triggers from dpms. The Scar is a great rifle, but it is still the low cost modular rifle that came out in 2004. Their has never been a mod 1 or 2 or block 1,1.5,2.0 ect... But due to an artificial limited supply they will sell every single rifle they import. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2019 4:20:46 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Part 2 The SR-25 is just a magical piece of equipment. Everything just feels really good, from the tactile feel of the controls to the smoothness of the way safety rolls on/off. Everything levers, latches, and buttons has that smooth "bar of soap" feel to in. While the rail is full length, it's is very light weight M Lok. It's not like the 17S is "harsh" in the ergos department (well, the stock trigger is balls, and 1913 is 1913), it's just not as "smooth" and tactile. So yes, the SR-25 is more refined, but it's also more expensive by a factor of 1.5. Mags are more expensive by a factor of 2 as well. P-Mags don't count, if you're gonna spend the money on an SR-25, you have to buy a bunch of the KAC mags. After you've got a sufficient quantity of KAC mags (for me, the number is 10), then buy all the P-Mags you want. This gun has been totally reliable as well, though I have not bothered to run it suppressed. I'm on the fence about whether to run one of my SiCo, AAC, or Surefire cans on it or break down and buy a QDC. I think subconsciously, I know the answer. The above mentioned qualities of the SR-25 convinced me that I needed an SR-15 CQB as well, so KAC is expensive and habit forming as I'll probably need a QDC for that rifle as well. Honestly, I have no data to support the following claim as both of my rifles have lived a charmed life, but in a traditional battle rifle role, I have more confidence in the SCAR's ability to operate in and through austere conditions. It's just got sloppier tolerances, like an AK. If the environments are more "urban", the SR-25 may be the superior choice. I'd like to wring them both out and test them with high round count sessions (~1000 rounds each), and hope the SR-25 proves me wrong, but so far work/life gets in the way... From the mk11 to the M110k1, and from the sr25 match to the ecc/ecm/acc/pc/cc/ect... KAC has always tried to get a little more out of their guns, be it handling, recoil, reliability and it shows in their products. It's part of the reason they push 5 grand these days, but there are a ton of development and testing that goes into each new rendition. Littles all add up. In comparing the two objectively. The kac Handles better Has a way better trigger Is more accurate Has a smoother recoil impulse Has some multi caliber support from the factory. Has better fit and finish Has factory suppressor options. The scar, might be a hair lighter. Has a folder, Does not warranty use of non fn cans Will not sell fn cans Third party gas jets are largely a buy a few a try experience Does not support multicalible options Looks like a modern day Russian capture k98 with no consistancy in tones of FDE. The scar has the potential to be an awesome rifle. Just from the factory it's pretty rough compared to its pears |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2019 9:59:57 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Scar is a great rifle, but it is still the low cost modular rifle that came out in 2004. Their has never been a mod 1 or 2 or block 1,1.5,2.0 ect... But due to an artificial limited supply they will sell every single rifle they import. Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Scar is a great rifle, but it is still the low cost modular rifle that came out in 2004. Their has never been a mod 1 or 2 or block 1,1.5,2.0 ect... But due to an artificial limited supply they will sell every single rifle they import. Should have been around for the early FNs......... But NDAs prevent any detailed discussion. Your H's are about Gen 7, if not later. Just saying, first Gen anythings rarely do what they were supposed to. Why I never buy a first model car, tv, gun, optic, or other high dollar item. I'll let someone else beta test on their dime. I'll get something more comprehensive down in a day or two when I have my laptop and not just an iPhone.
As for the trigger, I can manage the factory trigger fine. But for that kind of money, it should come with something better. Pred came with a Geisselle. Still, the H is capable of sub MOA groups at 1k off the rack in "service grade" configuration. Also remember that it was conceived, designed, and built as a battle rifle...... That it has the kind of accuracy it does is a gift of quality engineering and construction......it wasn't until well into about Gen 6 or so that its application as a precision rifle was explored. Also limited supply is not artificial when dealing with Belgium labor strikes and issues as well as military/law enforcement contracts. Those always get priority over civilian commercial sales. Not just FN that does that. Colt. LMT. KAC. They all prioritize their military and law enforcement contracts over us. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2019 1:39:45 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: While I feel that Kac's are a little overpriced for what they are. They feel "magical" because they have spent the last 2 decades developing their flagship. From the mk11 to the M110k1, and from the sr25 match to the ecc/ecm/acc/pc/cc/ect... KAC has always tried to get a little more out of their guns, be it handling, recoil, reliability and it shows in their products. It's part of the reason they push 5 grand these days, but there are a ton of development and testing that goes into each new rendition. Littles all add up. In comparing the two objectively. The kac Handles better Has a way better trigger Is more accurate Has a smoother recoil impulse Has some multi caliber support from the factory. Has better fit and finish Has factory suppressor options. The scar, might be a hair lighter. Has a folder, Does not warranty use of non fn cans Will not sell fn cans Third party gas jets are largely a buy a few a try experience Does not support multicalible options Looks like a modern day Russian capture k98 with no consistancy in tones of FDE. The scar has the potential to be an awesome rifle. Just from the factory it's pretty rough compared to its pears FN just introduced US manufactured SKUs for the SCAR 16s/17s so we will have to wait and see what that does for availability. Importing them from Belgium is a pain in the ass. Note the 20s is made here already. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2019 2:13:04 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There are a lot of reasonable criticisms of the SCAR platform. However you managed to miss most of them. I'm sorry but comparing a DMR to a straight up battle rifle is a touch wonky. Then talking cost $4900 vs $3500 (MSRP), and your comparison list? You can rejet the SCAR, and drop in a Super SCAR (or ShootingSight) trigger for a shit load less than $1400. I think comparisons between the SR25, and SCAR 20S are perfectly valid. FN just introduced US manufactured SKUs for the SCAR 16s/17s so we will have to wait and see what that does for availability. Importing them from Belgium is a pain in the ass. Note the 20s is made here already. When comparing a 20S to a SR25, most of these complaints are invalid. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2019 3:07:00 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There are a lot of reasonable criticisms of the SCAR platform. However you managed to miss most of them. I'm sorry but comparing a DMR to a straight up battle rifle is a touch wonky. Then talking cost $4900 vs $3500 (MSRP), and your comparison list? You can rejet the SCAR, and drop in a Super SCAR (or ShootingSight) trigger for a shit load less than $1400. I think comparisons between the SR25, and SCAR 20S are perfectly valid. FN just introduced US manufactured SKUs for the SCAR 16s/17s so we will have to wait and see what that does for availability. Importing them from Belgium is a pain in the ass. Note the 20s is made here already. In reality, while the mk20 is cool, the PR will outperform it since its actually available in 6.5cm. To bring the scar into 2019 to be commparable with the ACC, you are going to need, a handguard, stock, trigger, and jets. So at that point what's the difference, 500? then you are going to have rifle that that has a half dozen shades of FDE and be restricted to odd ball mags. I like the scar, i have one. The scars has a ton of potential is why I own one. But from the factory, its rough |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2019 3:26:35 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is what I've been thinking the whole time this thread has existed. A parallel comparison could, perhaps, be comparing a Mk18 to a Mk12. The 17 and SR25 seem to fill very different roles, although they are the same caliber. When comparing a 20S to a SR25, most of these complaints are invalid. A mk18 is a 7lb 10 inch 556. A mk12 is a 10lb 18 inch 556 A ACC is a 8.3lb 16inch 308. A scar 17 is a 8lb 16 inch 308 Really not much difference there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2019 5:08:04 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not really. A mk18 is a 7lb 10 inch 556. A mk12 is a 10lb 18 inch 556 A ACC is a 8.3lb 16inch 308. A scar 17 is a 8lb 16 inch 308 Really not much difference there. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
This is what I've been thinking the whole time this thread has existed. A parallel comparison could, perhaps, be comparing a Mk18 to a Mk12. The 17 and SR25 seem to fill very different roles, although they are the same caliber. When comparing a 20S to a SR25, most of these complaints are invalid. A mk18 is a 7lb 10 inch 556. A mk12 is a 10lb 18 inch 556 A ACC is a 8.3lb 16inch 308. A scar 17 is a 8lb 16 inch 308 Really not much difference there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2019 5:09:17 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: But the thing is that the ACC/CC is not a DMR. It does "battle rifle" better than a pure battle rifle without 3rd party support. In reality, while the mk20 is cool, the PR will outperform it since its actually available in 6.5cm. To bring the scar into 2019 to be commparable with the ACC, you are going to need, a handguard, stock, trigger, and jets. So at that point what's the difference, 500? then you are going to have rifle that that has a half dozen shades of FDE and be restricted to odd ball mags. I like the scar, i have one. The scars has a ton of potential is why I own one. But from the factory, its rough |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/18/2019 11:59:36 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The stock, and hand guard are just fine. I mean people do what they like, but even the stock trigger isn't any worse than a milspec AR-15. I get you like the KAK, I do too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2019 12:37:42 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The stock, and hand guard are just fine. I mean people do what they like, but even the stock trigger isn't any worse than a milspec AR-15. I get you like the KAK, I do too. I am sorry but for 3k, I just expect for it to have a better trigger than a rack grade M4, and not have plastic side rails. that's some bargain basement, Beretta ARX 100 bullshit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2019 12:50:23 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The suppressed issue alone is a non starter. We dont warrant use of non FN suppressors. Ok, no worries, can i order one. NOPE. but I would like to run a can on it, is there anything I can do Stop stop talking like a fag. .... Thats the thing, FN can resolve the issue by selling their cans, making available alternate gas jets, or creating a new gas plug with a new setting to accommodate non FN cans, But just like with the Plastic side rails and squishy trigger, its not worth addressing the issue. I mean there isnt enough shoulder to mount most muzzle devices without an aftermarket shoulder ring. I love FN but they should take some pride in the weapon system. If the FN was priced the same as other Euro Scar clones such as the CZ and Beretta, I would have zero criticism |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2019 12:58:28 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Its just wierd. We dont warrant use of non FN suppressors. Ok, no worries, can i order one. NOPE. but I would like to run a can on it, is there anything I can do Stop stop talking like a fag. .... Thats the thing, FN can resolve the issue by selling their cans, making available alternate gas jets, or creating a new gas plug with a new setting to accommodate non FN cans, But just like with the Plastic side rails and squishy trigger, its not worth addressing the issue. I love FN but they should take some pride in the weapon system. Also, even with reduced size gas jets people have had issues with their bolt carriers and receiver torx screws canting. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2019 12:59:10 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I get what you are saying, and as the low cost/modular replacement for the M4 that is was designed as, it would of been awesome. I am sorry but for 3k, I just expect for it to have a better trigger than a rack grade M4, and not have plastic side rails. that's some bargain basement, Beretta ARX 100 bullshit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: The stock, and hand guard are just fine. I mean people do what they like, but even the stock trigger isn't any worse than a milspec AR-15. I get you like the KAK, I do too. I am sorry but for 3k, I just expect for it to have a better trigger than a rack grade M4, and not have plastic side rails. that's some bargain basement, Beretta ARX 100 bullshit. It is similarly priced or cheaper than similar offerings from HK, LMT, KAC, Noveske...etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2019 1:04:54 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Price is 'expensive' because of European labor costs, inport costs, finish work here in the States to get it to the version we buy, recoup costs from SCAR trial, FN is in it to make money and not be a charity, high demand that is higher than supply. It is similarly priced or cheaper than similar offerings from HK, LMT, KAC, Noveske...etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2019 2:34:04 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Price is 'expensive' because of European labor costs, inport costs, finish work here in the States to get it to the version we buy, recoup costs from SCAR trial, FN is in it to make money and not be a charity, high demand that is higher than supply. It is similarly priced or cheaper than similar offerings from HK, LMT, KAC, Noveske...etc. If one would take a quick look at the Labor cost index one would see Belgium at 111 Germany at 115 Italy at 107 Czech Republic at 114 US at 109 CZ makes a better scar, which is more modern, without having most of its T&E phase sponsored by SOCOM, utilizing higher cost labor and the same import cost. What cost for the SCAR Trial, SOCOM paid for everything. the only cost associated with testing are generally the cost of x amount of test guns which can range anywhere from 5 to 20 samples. the Ammo, the ranges, the personnel to test are all paid for by ATEC/SOCOM/what ever agency wants the system evaluated. I have no problem with making money. Fuck, Fix the shortcomings and charge me 4k. I am critical of FN still utilizing a piss poor trigger and plastic side rails for almost twice the cost of their closest competitor. Thats never stuck anybody as odd, plastic rails on a $3000 plus firearm? FN is better than that. The scar is the personification of untapped potential. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2019 9:55:03 AM EDT
[#34]
Owned an ECC, sold it and own APC M-Lok now.
Honestly both the KAC and SCAR are top-notch rifles, just very different. If you want the best battle rifle currently on market, get the SCAR. If you just shoot “long range” from a bench, god no, keep the ECC. However if you fall in the later and want to do a bit more run n gun, consider selling the ECC and buy a ACC. I always thought the ECC was the grail gun to I owned one and realized it’s a bit heavy, rail is thick, and although the overhang rail look at the front is sick looking, it’s not very practical. The ACC really is a dual purpose gun. Only reason I have an APC is because I won’t pay retail and look from deals on the EE. For what I use it for and the $1500 I saved, I can deal with the extra half pound. I also purchased the ECC second hand and made $600 selling it. Dare I say my APC cost me $2500 |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2019 10:02:22 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: An MWS is a full $1000 cheaper. That’s a lot of optic or ammo. The Bren 2 BR will kill SCAR sales once it is released, and it will guaranteed be priced $500 less. Bren 2 5.56 is showing up under $1500. As long as it is reliable it will destroy the SCAR as it’s a better refined rifle in every way. Always thought the SCAR 16 $2500 pricing was an utter joke. It’s a dated 2004 gun priced at refined modern SR-15 prices |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2019 12:21:06 PM EDT
[#36]
ETA what a weird double tap
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2019 12:44:30 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not really If one would take a quick look at the Labor cost index one would see Belgium at 111 Germany at 115 Italy at 107 Czech Republic at 114 US at 109 CZ makes a better scar, which is more modern, without having most of its T&E phase sponsored by SOCOM, utilizing higher cost labor and the same import cost. What cost for the SCAR Trial, SOCOM paid for everything. the only cost associated with testing are generally the cost of x amount of test guns which can range anywhere from 5 to 20 samples. the Ammo, the ranges, the personnel to test are all paid for by ATEC/SOCOM/what ever agency wants the system evaluated. I have no problem with making money. Fuck, Fix the shortcomings and charge me 4k. I am critical of FN still utilizing a piss poor trigger and plastic side rails for almost twice the cost of their closest competitor. Thats never stuck anybody as odd, plastic rails on a $3000 plus firearm? FN is better than that. The scar is the personification of untapped potential. If you want a 7.62 BR the 17 is hard to beat. Though the Bren 2 when offered is a great gun. If you want a DMR the 20, and SR25 are both great options. Side by side testing show them similar in performance until you get up to 175gr loads which the SCAR barrel isn’t really great for stabilizing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/23/2019 4:21:58 AM EDT
[#38]
The SCAR is great at a lot of things and perfect at nothing.
If you want a DMR, get the SR25 |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2019 1:46:39 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
An MWS is a full $1000 cheaper. That’s a lot of optic or ammo. The Bren 2 BR will kill SCAR sales once it is released, and it will guaranteed be priced $500 less. Quote HistoryQuoted:
An MWS is a full $1000 cheaper. That’s a lot of optic or ammo. The Bren 2 BR will kill SCAR sales once it is released, and it will guaranteed be priced $500 less. 
 The Bren 2 BR will not kill the SCAR sales. I heard that when the IWI Galil ACE 308 was released how it would kill off the 17s. It didn't. The SCAR 17 is the OG and with that comes the demand for it. Why do you think it retails its value so well in the used market? Why do you think FN sells out of each and everyone they import from Belgium? Because it is the OG SOF Combat Assault Rifle. Also the Bren 2 BR hasn't even been proven in the real world yet. Hasn't even been announced if or when it would be brought over here. So hold the horses there. Quoted: Not really If one would take a quick look at the Labor cost index one would see Belgium at 111 Germany at 115 Italy at 107 Czech Republic at 114 US at 109 CZ makes a better scar, which is more modern, without having most of its T&E phase sponsored by SOCOM, utilizing higher cost labor and the same import cost. What cost for the SCAR Trial, SOCOM paid for everything. the only cost associated with testing are generally the cost of x amount of test guns which can range anywhere from 5 to 20 samples. the Ammo, the ranges, the personnel to test are all paid for by ATEC/SOCOM/what ever agency wants the system evaluated. I have no problem with making money. Fuck, Fix the shortcomings and charge me 4k. I am critical of FN still utilizing a piss poor trigger and plastic side rails for almost twice the cost of their closest competitor. Thats never stuck anybody as odd, plastic rails on a $3000 plus firearm? FN is better than that. The scar is the personification of untapped potential. The cost of engineering and design of the SCAR. SOCOM might have paid for the SCAR trial and all the testing. But FN had to get their submission there in the first place. If you are pissed off about the trigger, replace it. Replace the plastic side rails if those bother you too. Replace the stock if that bothers you. You will still be under your $4,000 price point. Quoted:
Yep. Bren 2 5.56 is showing up under $1500. As long as it is reliable it will destroy the SCAR as it’s a better refined rifle in every way. Always thought the SCAR 16 $2500 pricing was an utter joke. It’s a dated 2004 gun priced at refined modern SR-15 prices We still don't know when the Bren 2 5.56 is going to come to us or what pricing will be. Not to mention we have no word on the availability or pricing of the Bren 2 BR at all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/24/2019 9:46:24 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A LMT 308MWS is not $1000 cheaper than a 17. You can find a 17 new for $2800-2900 range new from a dealer. A LMT 308MWS new from a dealer is in the $2500-2600 range. Unless you know of a new LMT 308MWS from a dealer for $1800-1900? https://i.imgur.com/qQanzGm.png https://i.imgur.com/GBAJdgL.png The Bren 2 BR will not kill the SCAR sales. I heard that when the IWI Galil ACE 308 was released how it would kill off the 17s. It didn't. The SCAR 17 is the OG and with that comes the demand for it. Why do you think it retails its value so well in the used market? Why do you think FN sells out of each and everyone they import from Belgium? Because it is the OG SOF Combat Assault Rifle. Also the Bren 2 BR hasn't even been proven in the real world yet. Hasn't even been announced if or when it would be brought over here. So hold the horses there. The CZ Bren 805 is not better than the 16s. I have owned both, only own the 16s currently. The Bren 805 wasn't a bad rifle at all. But it wasn't up to the 16s. The cost of engineering and design of the SCAR. SOCOM might have paid for the SCAR trial and all the testing. But FN had to get their submission there in the first place. If you are pissed off about the trigger, replace it. Replace the plastic side rails if those bother you too. Replace the stock if that bothers you. You will still be under your $4,000 price point. Bren 2 5.56 is not showing up under $1500. First of all, the limited release of the 'military version' by Bill Hicks that was brought over has been sold out long ago. They were going for $1700-1900 for just the 5.56 pistol. There were some dealers that were throwing on the SBA3 pistol brace on the 5.56 pistol for the upper end of that price range (Preppers). We still don't know when the Bren 2 5.56 is going to come to us or what pricing will be. Not to mention we have no word on the availability or pricing of the Bren 2 BR at all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2019 12:01:11 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
SCAR’s are still $3000+ from most sources. My buddy just picked up a new LMT 6.5 CM Long Range 24” for $2099 shipped on GB. Close enough. The SCAR just plain isn’t worth it anymore. They can’t even put a proper twist barrel on it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: A LMT 308MWS is not $1000 cheaper than a 17. You can find a 17 new for $2800-2900 range new from a dealer. A LMT 308MWS new from a dealer is in the $2500-2600 range. Unless you know of a new LMT 308MWS from a dealer for $1800-1900? https://i.imgur.com/qQanzGm.png https://i.imgur.com/GBAJdgL.png The Bren 2 BR will not kill the SCAR sales. I heard that when the IWI Galil ACE 308 was released how it would kill off the 17s. It didn't. The SCAR 17 is the OG and with that comes the demand for it. Why do you think it retails its value so well in the used market? Why do you think FN sells out of each and everyone they import from Belgium? Because it is the OG SOF Combat Assault Rifle. Also the Bren 2 BR hasn't even been proven in the real world yet. Hasn't even been announced if or when it would be brought over here. So hold the horses there. The CZ Bren 805 is not better than the 16s. I have owned both, only own the 16s currently. The Bren 805 wasn't a bad rifle at all. But it wasn't up to the 16s. The cost of engineering and design of the SCAR. SOCOM might have paid for the SCAR trial and all the testing. But FN had to get their submission there in the first place. If you are pissed off about the trigger, replace it. Replace the plastic side rails if those bother you too. Replace the stock if that bothers you. You will still be under your $4,000 price point. Bren 2 5.56 is not showing up under $1500. First of all, the limited release of the 'military version' by Bill Hicks that was brought over has been sold out long ago. They were going for $1700-1900 for just the 5.56 pistol. There were some dealers that were throwing on the SBA3 pistol brace on the 5.56 pistol for the upper end of that price range (Preppers). We still don't know when the Bren 2 5.56 is going to come to us or what pricing will be. Not to mention we have no word on the availability or pricing of the Bren 2 BR at all. Your buddy got an amazing deal and I would grab a LMT 6.5 CM Long Range 24” for $2099 shipped in an instant myself. That dealer have any more. Since you want to post your n of 1, I will post my n of one as well. $2,299.95 shipped for a factory new SCAR 17s. Are we going to say that is the normal market value for one because GB had one listing like this?  The SCAR 20 does just fine with its twist rate. You can get an aftermarket 6.5 CM barrel if you want for the SCAR as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2019 7:12:09 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Good grief. You have been around long enough to know you can't take Gunbroker as the barometer for what the market value is based on just one item. n sample size of 1 tells you nothing about it. Your buddy got an amazing deal and I would grab a LMT 6.5 CM Long Range 24” for $2099 shipped in an instant myself. That dealer have any more. Since you want to post your n of 1, I will post my n of one as well. $2,299.95 shipped for a factory new SCAR 17s. Are we going to say that is the normal market value for one because GB had one listing like this? https://i.ibb.co/X5SgNVq/Screen-Shot-2018-12-14-at-6-33-31-PM.png The SCAR 20 does just fine with its twist rate. You can get an aftermarket 6.5 CM barrel if you want for the SCAR as well. FN hasn’t updated the SCAR in years. They’re still displaying a SCAR H at SHOT show with an 18T AAC flash hider for christ’s sake. The mil isn’t buying anymore...so update the rifle (trigger/barrel) a little. Sell us the FN suppressor if FN won’t warranty the rifle for use with other cans. FN is pulling an HK here. We are their primary market for the SCAR and they really don’t care either way. I’ll give you the price difference. The LMT averages $500 less than the SCAR...but the SCAR has essentially zero barrel and caliber options as well. Want a longer 20” in a still too slow twist rate? That’s $1100 please. Want a 13” barrel$. That’s $1100 please. If you’re willing to sacrifice your front sight and have a cheesy DPMS looking gas block I guess a Deadshot barre is an option at $1000+ as well. The MWS is far better supported in barrel lengths, calibers, and construction. Not to mention they’re less than half the cost of a SCAR barrel. If you want a good battle rifle to replace a legacy rifle (M14/G3/FAL) then the SCAR is perfect. If you don’t need a quick change barrel just about any large frame AR is better suited for a DMR role. There are plenty of good options. I’ve owned them all. The SCAR was disappointing and the least accurate even after going back to FN to have a bad crown fixed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2019 9:59:30 AM EDT
[#43]
My local gun shop (big name) had two 17S in stock last week for $3149 IIRC. Got to handle them next to a Savage MSR-10 Hunter in 308.
I'll catch hell for this, but I left the store wondering why I've put the SCAR on such a pedestal. MSR has adjustable gas, better barrel profile, more ergonomic and longer handguard, better furniture, and more parts cross-compatibility with AR-15 and AR-10 stuff. Yes, the SCAR is an awesome rifle (I want one), but the reports we're seeing on the Savage MSR series are quite promising. Heck, if the Savage isn't your cup of tea, there are other AR-10s that perform similarly. Now we just need BCM to come out with a 308 and settle this.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2019 5:48:33 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The SCAR does not do fine with a 1:12 barrel if you’re serious about long range shooting. 168’s have a piss poor BC and relegate you to about 600yds of “effective” consistent range. It will be hit or miss if a 1:12 will stabilize 175’s. Some may....many won’t. 178’s or heavier...forget about it. Would you buy a precision bolt gun in .308 with a 1:12 barrel? It’s a simple fix that FN is too lazy to correct. FN hasn’t updated the SCAR in years. They’re still displaying a SCAR H at SHOT show with an 18T AAC flash hider for christ’s sake. The mil isn’t buying anymore...so update the rifle (trigger/barrel) a little. Sell us the FN suppressor if FN won’t warranty the rifle for use with other cans. FN is pulling an HK here. We are their primary market for the SCAR and they really don’t care either way. I’ll give you the price difference. The LMT averages $500 less than the SCAR...but the SCAR has essentially zero barrel and caliber options as well. Want a longer 20” in a still too slow twist rate? That’s $1100 please. Want a 13” barrel$. That’s $1100 please. If you’re willing to sacrifice your front sight and have a cheesy DPMS looking gas block I guess a Deadshot barre is an option at $1000+ as well. The MWS is far better supported in barrel lengths, calibers, and construction. Not to mention they’re less than half the cost of a SCAR barrel. If you want a good battle rifle to replace a legacy rifle (M14/G3/FAL) then the SCAR is perfect. If you don’t need a quick change barrel just about any large frame AR is better suited for a DMR role. There are plenty of good options. I’ve owned them all. The SCAR was disappointing and the least accurate even after going back to FN to have a bad crown fixed. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: Good grief. You have been around long enough to know you can't take Gunbroker as the barometer for what the market value is based on just one item. n sample size of 1 tells you nothing about it. Your buddy got an amazing deal and I would grab a LMT 6.5 CM Long Range 24” for $2099 shipped in an instant myself. That dealer have any more. Since you want to post your n of 1, I will post my n of one as well. $2,299.95 shipped for a factory new SCAR 17s. Are we going to say that is the normal market value for one because GB had one listing like this? https://i.ibb.co/X5SgNVq/Screen-Shot-2018-12-14-at-6-33-31-PM.png The SCAR 20 does just fine with its twist rate. You can get an aftermarket 6.5 CM barrel if you want for the SCAR as well. FN hasn’t updated the SCAR in years. They’re still displaying a SCAR H at SHOT show with an 18T AAC flash hider for christ’s sake. The mil isn’t buying anymore...so update the rifle (trigger/barrel) a little. Sell us the FN suppressor if FN won’t warranty the rifle for use with other cans. FN is pulling an HK here. We are their primary market for the SCAR and they really don’t care either way. I’ll give you the price difference. The LMT averages $500 less than the SCAR...but the SCAR has essentially zero barrel and caliber options as well. Want a longer 20” in a still too slow twist rate? That’s $1100 please. Want a 13” barrel$. That’s $1100 please. If you’re willing to sacrifice your front sight and have a cheesy DPMS looking gas block I guess a Deadshot barre is an option at $1000+ as well. The MWS is far better supported in barrel lengths, calibers, and construction. Not to mention they’re less than half the cost of a SCAR barrel. If you want a good battle rifle to replace a legacy rifle (M14/G3/FAL) then the SCAR is perfect. If you don’t need a quick change barrel just about any large frame AR is better suited for a DMR role. There are plenty of good options. I’ve owned them all. The SCAR was disappointing and the least accurate even after going back to FN to have a bad crown fixed. If you need more FPS and a bit more accuracy based on its improvements, the Mk20/SCAR SSR/SCAR 20 does just fine as well. You are just making stuff up and just being completely dishonest in this discussion. As I posted before, from someone intimately involved with the SCAR program said this: As for the trigger, I can manage the factory trigger fine. But for that kind of money, it should come with something better. Pred came with a Geisselle. Still, the H is capable of sub MOA groups at 1k off the rack in "service grade" configuration. Also remember that it was conceived, designed, and built as a battle rifle...... That it has the kind of accuracy it does is a gift of quality engineering and construction......it wasn't until well into about Gen 6 or so that its application as a precision rifle was explored. FN makes great barrels. While the 1:12 barrel might seem outdated to you and others that shoot paper targets from a bench on a rest, for real world use the 1:12 does just fine.  Tactical Arms - Scar H (Part 1 of 2)  Tactical Arms - Scar H (Part 2 of 2) You say they haven't updated the SCAR at all, just when they released the SCAR 20 a couple of months ago. There is your new model. Also, FN has updated the SCAR over the years with minor fixes and changes. You can google that question if you want to know all the details. If you are shooting longer distance and want to shoot with a .308, get the SCAR 20. The SCAR 17 isn't designed as a DMR. If you want a 6.5 CM barrel for your 17s you can get that in the aftermarket. Plenty of aftermarket support. https://deadshotbarrels.com/scar-rebarreling You can get a 6.5 CM 20" Shilen barrel for $440 if you send in your old SCAR barrel for them to reuse the barrel extension and gas block. Again this isn't hard, if you want a .308 battle rifle and want the best there is on the market and the most proven, you get the 17s. If you want more of a DMR based setup, look at the SCAR 20. It is priced competitively and in some instances cheaper than the competition from KAC, H&K, LMT....etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2019 7:14:42 PM EDT
[#45]
How many 17’s do you see in the MOA All day challenge. Mine was a 1.5 MOA rifle on its best day (sample size of 1) AFTER FN had to recrown it due to shotgun patterns of 7-8”. Both times with FGMM 168gr. 175’s shot worse. That was with a G Trigger.
You’re missing the point. Some simple improvements would make the SCAR a better rifle. FN fails to recognize that or put any money into said improvements because nobody but us is buying them. I’ve already stated the SCAR is a great battle rifle if you want to shoot M80 ball all day and treat it like a battle rifle. But it’s no DMR, and the 20s is too expensive for having outdated features. Both are too expensive for what they offer. Please let me know where I’m making shit up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2019 8:04:31 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How many 17’s do you see in the MOA All day challenge. Mine was a 1.5 MOA rifle on its best day (sample size of 1) AFTER FN had to recrown it due to shotgun patterns of 7-8”. Both times with FGMM 168gr. 175’s shot worse. That was with a G Trigger. You’re missing the point. Some simple improvements would make the SCAR a better rifle. FN fails to recognize that or put any money into said improvements because nobody but us is buying them. I’ve already stated the SCAR is a great battle rifle if you want to shoot M80 ball all day and treat it like a battle rifle. But it’s no DMR, and the 20s is too expensive for having outdated features. Both are too expensive for what they offer. Please let me know where I’m making shit up. People who know me know that I hate KAC with a (justified) passion. But I'd take the SR25 any day over the SCAR. I'd also take an LMT (whose crappy QC I have personally experienced three times) MWS over the SCAR. I'm 99% sure that 50% of SCAR sales would have never happened if it hadn't ever been in a video game. Someone above asked "why are they selling so many?" Part of the answer is video games. I thought long and hard about a SCAR, though, and I ended up instead going with a premium manufacturer's "AR-10 pattern" rifle that has swappable barrels/calibers, is tremendously accurate, doesn't have a pencil barrel that will heat up and go wonky like the SCAR, and cost just a little more than a SCAR. I haven't regretted my decision for one second. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2019 11:54:44 PM EDT
[#47]
I've had 2 Scar 17s and 2 SR25s. I'm down the 1 Scar 17s and 1 EMC. If I had to chose, The SR25 would go before the Scar. SR25 is an upgrade to the AR10 platform, but the SCAR is the next step. Sorry.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2019 12:55:32 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A LMT 308MWS is not $1000 cheaper than a 17. You can find a 17 new for $2800-2900 range new from a dealer. A LMT 308MWS new from a dealer is in the $2500-2600 range. Unless you know of a new LMT 308MWS from a dealer for $1800-1900? https://i.imgur.com/qQanzGm.png https://i.imgur.com/GBAJdgL.png The Bren 2 BR will not kill the SCAR sales. I heard that when the IWI Galil ACE 308 was released how it would kill off the 17s. It didn't. The SCAR 17 is the OG and with that comes the demand for it. Why do you think it retails its value so well in the used market? Why do you think FN sells out of each and everyone they import from Belgium? Because it is the OG SOF Combat Assault Rifle. Also the Bren 2 BR hasn't even been proven in the real world yet. Hasn't even been announced if or when it would be brought over here. So hold the horses there. The CZ Bren 805 is not better than the 16s. I have owned both, only own the 16s currently. The Bren 805 wasn't a bad rifle at all. But it wasn't up to the 16s. The cost of engineering and design of the SCAR. SOCOM might have paid for the SCAR trial and all the testing. But FN had to get their submission there in the first place. If you are pissed off about the trigger, replace it. Replace the plastic side rails if those bother you too. Replace the stock if that bothers you. You will still be under your $4,000 price point. Bren 2 5.56 is not showing up under $1500. First of all, the limited release of the 'military version' by Bill Hicks that was brought over has been sold out long ago. They were going for $1700-1900 for just the 5.56 pistol. There were some dealers that were throwing on the SBA3 pistol brace on the 5.56 pistol for the upper end of that price range (Preppers). We still don't know when the Bren 2 5.56 is going to come to us or what pricing will be. Not to mention we have no word on the availability or pricing of the Bren 2 BR at all. I can quantify why the Bren is better than the Scar. Better Trigger Smoother action Consistent finish Better machining Less reciprocating mass A design thats bolt does not ride on a race way affexed to the chassis by screws. better factory support to include multi caliber options They Took a FNC lower, took the A180/G36 operating system, dropped into a upper and made the Scar, they didnt reinvent the wheel. Hell Brownells just adapted the same operating system for use on AR's for 800 dollars retail. I dont expect it to be bomb proof but its still the same concept. I would not say that I am Pissed off at FN. Maybe disappointed in the half assed effort that they released as the scar. I like mine and is the reason that I kept it and put a grand into it. Basically what I am saying is while a great weapon from a reliability standpoint, it is an incredibly "cheap" design and when compared to its peers, (CZ/BT) B&T plans to bring their APC 308 to market at the same point as the SCAR 17. There is not a single component on the SCAR that is built to the same standard of quality as the B&T. The Scar is at best a 1500 dollar rifle, retail. The only reason that they garner 3k is its affiliation with Socom, and use in the gaming industry. CZ, B&T,FN,HK all make great weapons, and i think that FN has done more for the civilian market than all their peers combine, but with that being said the Scar has been surpassed by its peers and it takes aftermarket support to bring it to the level the offerings from CZ and B&T Come on man... Lay a B&T next a SCAR and tell me that the Scar is any where close to the quality of the Swiss gun for the same price. it take a good bit of money to equal its peers and is still outclassed by a "DMR" rifle when used as a battle rifle. The ONLY area when the Scar is surpasses the Competition is weight, |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2019 1:04:30 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've had 2 Scar 17s and 2 SR25s. I'm down the 1 Scar 17s and 1 EMC. If I had to chose, The SR25 would go before the Scar. SR25 is an upgrade to the AR10 platform, but the SCAR is the next step. Sorry.  Attached File Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2019 1:23:45 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yes the SCAR 17s/Mk17/SCAR-H does do just fine with its 1:12 barrel. It is sub-MOA and plant accurate for the distances it will typically be used as a battle rifle. If you need more FPS and a bit more accuracy based on its improvements, the Mk20/SCAR SSR/SCAR 20 does just fine as well. You are just making stuff up and just being completely dishonest in this discussion. As I posted before, from someone intimately involved with the SCAR program said this: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?5709-SCAR-17-discussion FN makes great barrels. While the 1:12 barrel might seem outdated to you and others that shoot paper targets from a bench on a rest, for real world use the 1:12 does just fine.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJOhOUNIZeI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZjpxskLG4IYou say they haven't updated the SCAR at all, just when they released the SCAR 20 a couple of months ago. There is your new model. Also, FN has updated the SCAR over the years with minor fixes and changes. You can google that question if you want to know all the details. If you are shooting longer distance and want to shoot with a .308, get the SCAR 20. The SCAR 17 isn't designed as a DMR. If you want a 6.5 CM barrel for your 17s you can get that in the aftermarket. Plenty of aftermarket support. https://deadshotbarrels.com/scar-rebarreling You can get a 6.5 CM 20" Shilen barrel for $440 if you send in your old SCAR barrel for them to reuse the barrel extension and gas block. Again this isn't hard, if you want a .308 battle rifle and want the best there is on the market and the most proven, you get the 17s. If you want more of a DMR based setup, look at the SCAR 20. It is priced competitively and in some instances cheaper than the competition from KAC, H&K, LMT....etc. The Mk 20 is at least 5 years old. why would i consider a 308 for long range, its a marginal long range round at best why do i need to do to do a complete after market overhaul to shoot 6.5 our of a 4000 dollar rifle. from the FN website "Perfectly calibrated for long-range precision fire" It a 308 with a 1:12 twist. nobody in their right mind would configure a long range precision rifle with that caliber/twist combo. I like the SCAR platform but I think that, absent factory support, and the divergence in lines Precision vs carbine the appeal of the Platforms modulararity begins to be lost. I love the idea of a reliability based design that has the ability to go from carbine configuration to precision long range at the user level. I am disappointed that the only way this can currently happen is through the aftermarket. is that a bad thing, absolutely not, just one of the many factors that goes into the viability of the platform. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
