User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:06:07 PM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
Anyone else see the "ghost' with green eyes on the far left? Hey, that's the dude from Splinter Cell! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:08:17 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Still hate the 'boot' stock! No kidding, if they just got rid of that ugly ass boot stock, the rifle would look a whole lot better That's right. Let's not forget rule #1. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:09:06 PM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
What is this rifle supposed to do that a regular M4 won't do? It sure looks a lot heavier, which seems to be the in thing nowadays, but other than that...? The SCAR-L has several advantages. Stock folds as well as telescopes and has an adjustable cheek piece. upper is a monlithic design for strength and weight reduction. Compared to a similarly outfitted M4 the SCAR is lighter. SCAR is also more modular (i.e. swap out the barrels in a couple minutes to change length or caliber for a particular mission. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:10:45 PM EDT
[#4]
US CBP & BP just replaced the M14's we have been using on the borders for the .308 SCAR
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:10:55 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Still hate the 'boot' stock! No kidding, if they just got rid of that ugly ass boot stock, the rifle would look a whole lot better I'm sure the people who are shooting it, or getting shot by it, really care how it "looks". The "boot" stock is there for a reason, and it's the same reason the XM8, the Beretta ARX160, the ACR/Masada, and other modern rifles have similar stock designs. A simple look at how the stock adjusts for length is all you need to understand why they are made the way they are. The fixation on the aesthetic appeal, or lack thereof, of the SCAR is simply ludicrous. I said years ago that the -H version would see use regardless of how the -L version ended up working out in comparison to the M4 or derivatives. There's a need for a modern 7.62x51 combat rifle especially with the SOCOM folks. There's a lot of things the -L does better than the M4 but that's neither here nor there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:12:12 PM EDT
[#6]
Quoted:
Quoted:
SCAR-H 
DO WANT! How much are they, $2500? Civi price will be in excess of 3K probably by a noticeable margin, and I'd hazard a guess the proprietary mags will be at least $50 per. $3200 here and that was a discounted price. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:13:17 PM EDT
[#7]
I dont think those guys are Rangers. Just me though.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:14:48 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
What is this rifle supposed to do that a regular M4 won't do? It sure looks a lot heavier, which seems to be the in thing nowadays, but other than that...? Just handled one at the local fun store... weighs LESS than an M4... like ridiculously... feels like a toy |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:15:14 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Still hate the 'boot' stock! No kidding, if they just got rid of that ugly ass boot stock, the rifle would look a whole lot better I'm sure the people who are shooting it, or getting shot by it, really care how it "looks". The "boot" stock is there for a reason, and it's the same reason the XM8, the Beretta ARX160, the ACR/Masada, and other modern rifles have similar stock designs. A simple look at how the stock adjusts for length is all you need to understand why they are made the way they are. The fixation on the aesthetic appeal, or lack thereof, of the SCAR is simply ludicrous. I said years ago that the -H version would see use regardless of how the -L version ended up working out in comparison to the M4 or derivatives. There's a need for a modern 7.62x51 combat rifle especially with the SOCOM folks. There's a lot of things the -L does better than the M4 but that's neither here nor there. I didn't say a word about the SCAR being a bad rifle, I just think it doesn't look very atheistically appealing |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:15:15 PM EDT
[#10]
The photo reminds me of this:
Obviously, both are legitimate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:16:31 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What is this rifle supposed to do that a regular M4 won't do? It sure looks a lot heavier, which seems to be the in thing nowadays, but other than that...? heavier where? its mostly plastic Basic SCAR is heavier then basic M4. I just handled a SCAR at the shop, I call bullshit on that... or it FEELS lighter. Didn't actually weigh it, but it sure as shit felt lighter than an M4 ETA I stand corrected, somebody posted the numbers on page 1... sure felt lighter than an M4, not a pound and a half heavier... very strange |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:17:21 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted: I dont think those guys are Rangers. Just me though. Care to elaborate? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:18:37 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:
I'm sure the people who are shooting it, or getting shot by it, really care how it "looks". The "boot" stock is there for a reason, and it's the same reason the XM8, the Beretta ARX160, the ACR/Masada, and other modern rifles have similar stock designs. A simple look at how the stock adjusts for length is all you need to understand why they are made the way they are. The fixation on the aesthetic appeal, or lack thereof, of the SCAR is simply ludicrous. +1 and "In Before Garand Guy Posts Up to Tell Us How A Combat Rifle Should Look." |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:18:40 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted: The photo reminds me of this: http://bloggingexperiments.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/patterson_bigfoot.jpg Obviously, both are legitimate. hahaha |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:20:07 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I dont think those guys are Rangers. Just me though. Care to elaborate? Yes, please regale us with your knowledge of multicam wearing, SCAR using, clean shaven folks in Khowst province. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:20:20 PM EDT
[#16]
i will take my SCAR in black and in .308 please
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:27:01 PM EDT
[#17]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What is this rifle supposed to do that a regular M4 won't do? It sure looks a lot heavier, which seems to be the in thing nowadays, but other than that...? heavier where? its mostly plastic Basic SCAR is heavier then basic M4. 5.9 lb (2.68 kg) M-4 Carbine. Guess the Rangers and all Spec ops Can handle that Actually pound in a half gain Wow big #'s 
Weight: 6.99 lbs. empty (CQC) SCAR-L 10 inch Version Weight: 7.24 lbs. empty (STD) SCAR-L course that be the 16 inch Version Weight: 7.74 lbs. empty (LB) SCAR-L 18 inch Version big thing is here in the 7.62x51mm land notice the Weights of and recoil is still minimal. Weight: 7.69 lbs. empty (CQC) 13 inch Version Weight: 7.91 lbs. empty (STD) 16 inch Version Weight: 8.23 lbs. empty (LB) 20 inch Version I hear what your saying but the Military is currrently undergoing a large initiatve to reduce the weight that soldiers are carrying to make them more agile in theaters like Afganistan. Add weight no matter how seemingly trivial is going in the wrong direction. Small weight gains are amplified once you get above a tree line 5.9 lbs is a bare bones M4 with plastic handguards. Notice any SOCOM operators using such a beast? Now add .7 lbs for a carbine length FF rail (KAC) and now the M4 is at 6.6 lbs, oh wait you'll need a BUIS so add another .14 lbs for a KAC 600m; we're now at 6.74 lbs. Upgrade the stock for the better cheekweld to the LMT that's another .25 lbw; we're now at 6.99 lbs and our stock still doesn't fold. Upgrade the charging handle so it's easier to operate with only the off hand that's another .02 lbs, now we're over 7lbs. Add in the difference from the M4s 14.5" barrel to it's 16" profile (comparing apples to aples) that's another 0.2 lbs, we're now at 7.21lbs for a M4 carbine configured the way the SOCOM operators use it. Want that carbine to be piston operated (the SOCOM guys seem to like the H&K upper) and wham you've got a carbine at or above what a SCAR is off the rack. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:30:20 PM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
I dont think those guys are Rangers. Just me though. Yep. I think it is just you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:33:05 PM EDT
[#19]
Quoted:
Still hate the 'boot' stock! The SCAR stocks I felt at SHOT were probably the flimsiest stocks I've ever handled. I don't know if the rifles coming out now have a better feel, but at last years SHOT, they were pure shit in my book. Otherwise I dig the gun. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:36:22 PM EDT
[#20]
Quoted:
Quoted:
What is this rifle supposed to do that a regular M4 won't do? It sure looks a lot heavier, which seems to be the in thing nowadays, but other than that...? In this case shoot a 7.62, which an M4 cannot do. Have you ever held one? Because the SCAR-L isn't appreciably heavier than an M4. SR-25 Can though |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:39:07 PM EDT
[#21]
Quoted: Using SCAR H's should stir the shit with the 5.56 apologist.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:43:02 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted:
I gotta admit, if I were over there fighting and my life depended on taking someone out without a doubt, I would want the .308 also. Some here may disagree, but to each his own. +1 on this one, especially at the ranges involved in Afghanistan. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:47:18 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: Quoted: I gotta admit, if I were over there fighting and my life depended on taking someone out without a doubt, I would want the .308 also. Some here may disagree, but to each his own. +1 on this one, especially at the ranges involved in Afghanistan. I'll probably get flamed for this, but I was an infantry, I have served in Iraq. I have other friends that served with me. Me and my buddies all agreed we'd take an M14 over an M4 anyday of the week over there. Highly reliability, 7.62 NATO Goodness, and very accurate. Not saying the M4 sucks, because it worked great for us, but I would and several of my friends who are still serving would rather be carrying a M14 or 7.62 NATO rifle. America has FINALLY caught up with the modern era. With the designated marksman. I don't like the idea of "one caliber for all" that the fucking idiots like McNamara thought. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:48:28 PM EDT
[#24]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I gotta admit, if I were over there fighting and my life depended on taking someone out without a doubt, I would want the .308 also. Some here may disagree, but to each his own. +1 on this one, especially at the ranges with the cover involved in Afghanistan. A fellow arfcommer, I can't remember his name, uses the sig line "7.62 NATO: Because bad guys tend to hide behind shit when you shoot at them." |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 12:49:58 PM EDT
[#25]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What is this rifle supposed to do that a regular M4 won't do? It sure looks a lot heavier, which seems to be the in thing nowadays, but other than that...? In this case shoot a 7.62, which an M4 cannot do. Have you ever held one? Because the SCAR-L isn't appreciably heavier than an M4. SR-25 Can though What sr25 can? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 1:03:29 PM EDT
[#26]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What is this rifle supposed to do that a regular M4 won't do? It sure looks a lot heavier, which seems to be the in thing nowadays, but other than that...? In this case shoot a 7.62, which an M4 cannot do. Have you ever held one? Because the SCAR-L isn't appreciably heavier than an M4. SR-25 Can though What sr25 can? Shoot 7.62 |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 1:11:57 PM EDT
[#27]
I got to handle one at the local Bob Wards...I didn't like it all that much.
I'd still take a 416 over it...and you all know if HK submitted the 416, the FNH SCAR wouldn't exist. So you can basically thank Bushmaster for the SCAR. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 1:19:24 PM EDT
[#28]
Quoted: I got to handle one at the local Bob Wards...I didn't like it all that much. I'd still take a 416 over it...and you all know if HK submitted the 416, the FNH SCAR wouldn't exist. So you can basically thank Bushmaster for the SCAR. That is one thing about the 416 that beats about all other super modern rifles. I firmly believe the AR15 has THE BEST manual of arms of any military rifle I have ever laid my hands on. The 416 brings in all that, and including a much cleaner, and cooler running weapon. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 1:53:18 PM EDT
[#29]
nevermind
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 2:41:29 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What is this rifle supposed to do that a regular M4 won't do? It sure looks a lot heavier, which seems to be the in thing nowadays, but other than that...? In this case shoot a 7.62, which an M4 cannot do. Have you ever held one? Because the SCAR-L isn't appreciably heavier than an M4. SR-25 Can though What sr25 can? Shoot 7.62 Is anyone using the sr25 right now? Does anyone make a 7.62 ar style rifle reliable enough to field? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 2:51:14 PM EDT
[#31]
Airsoft.
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 2:52:56 PM EDT
[#32]
Australia: Australian Army[1]
Israel: Israeli Defense Forces[citation needed] Poland: GROM[citation needed] United States: Used by Delta Force, SEALs, and the USMC with the designation Mk 11 Mod 0. Is also the basis of the M110 Semi-Automatic Sniper System used by the U.S. Army. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 2:59:36 PM EDT
[#33]
Tag for new background pic
SCAR FTW! Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 3:05:15 PM EDT
[#34]
I agree with the weapon feeling like a toy. Talon Arms had one here in Houston and I did not like the feel of it at all.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 3:17:42 PM EDT
[#35]
Quoted:
I agree with the weapon feeling like a toy. Talon Arms had one here in Houston and I did not like the feel of it at all. Boy the same thing was said about a black rifle about 50 years ago 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 3:21:02 PM EDT
[#36]
Quoted: What is this rifle supposed to do that a regular M4 won't do? It sure looks a lot heavier, which seems to be the in thing nowadays, but other than that...? http://www.fnhusa.com/le/products/firearms/model.asp?fid=FNF022&gid=FNG007&mid=FNM0108 7.24 lbs. according to FNH. Not too shabby. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 3:22:54 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted: SCAR is nice. I typically use mine with a heartbeat sensor and suppressor or acog with gernade launcher. But recently i switched to the ACR. Its a lot more controlable. lol, enemy care package! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 3:24:58 PM EDT
[#38]
Quoted: USMC fields the MK11 for sniper units. Very nice weapon system. Obviously not everyone gets them, but they are out there.Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: What is this rifle supposed to do that a regular M4 won't do? It sure looks a lot heavier, which seems to be the in thing nowadays, but other than that...? In this case shoot a 7.62, which an M4 cannot do. Have you ever held one? Because the SCAR-L isn't appreciably heavier than an M4. SR-25 Can though What sr25 can? Shoot 7.62 Is anyone using the sr25 right now? Does anyone make a 7.62 ar style rifle reliable enough to field? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 3:25:56 PM EDT
[#39]
Quoted:
Still hate the 'boot' stock! So functional and nice. That said yes it is ugly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 3:30:56 PM EDT
[#40]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
why? its one Scar-H and most likely a designated marksmen, just like the M14's
Using SCAR H's should stir the shit with the 5.56 apologist. Actually, there's two and they're 'assaulting' a compound. yup nothing says Fuck you better than a SCAR on steroids .308 will do massive penetration / damage to them mud huts and terrorists. No nothing thats man portable says fuck you better than this. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 3:35:18 PM EDT
[#41]
with no reflection on the fine men in the photo, my 3 year old cell phone takes better pictures than whatever the hell that photographer used.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 3:37:10 PM EDT
[#42]
Quoted:
What is this rifle supposed to do that a regular M4 won't do? It sure looks a lot heavier, which seems to be the in thing nowadays, but other than that...? My son owns a SCAR L. It is a bit heavier than a bare bones M4. It is accurate, easy to maintain, takes all mags and shoots very comfortably. The trigger is nice and the recoil nil. The action of the piston is different. You know you're not shooting an M-16 derivative. Small profile with the stock folded up. A very nice weapon...but personally, I like my bare bones Stag 2L. It is my most accurate rifle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 3:37:31 PM EDT
[#43]
about 5 more pictures over on that military website that has lots of photos
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 3:41:05 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted:
Still hate the 'boot' stock! It's not the original, but so what!!! It's also a great shoe stretcher... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 3:42:52 PM EDT
[#45]
Quoted:
I gotta admit, if I were when I was over there fighting and my life depended on taking someone out without a doubt on not dropping due to heat exhaustion, I would want the .308 also. the lightest gun with the lightest ammunition I could use effectively.. Some here may disagree, but to each his own. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 3:44:44 PM EDT
[#46]
I know the Army is fielding Multicam with a unit in Afghanistan right now.
Special Forces, SEALs, DEA, and some Ranger units have been wearing it as well. I've also seen SAS or SBS (hard to say for sure), and possible British Airborne units. Plus Croatian spec ops have been pictured in it and of course GROM has their own Polish version. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 3:46:13 PM EDT
[#47]
Quoted:
I know the Army is fielding Multicam with a unit in Afghanistan right now. Special Forces, SEALs, DEA, and some Ranger units have been wearing it as well. I've also seen SAS or SBS (hard to say for sure), and possible British Airborne units. Plus Croatian spec ops have been pictured in it and of course GROM has their own Polish version. This is in Khowst. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 3:47:19 PM EDT
[#48]
With the increased distances they shoot at in Afghanistan you need a .308 like the MK17 SCAR H. Match that up with an ELCAN and you've got the ideal rifle for Afghanistan.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 3:49:19 PM EDT
[#49]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I know the Army is fielding Multicam with a unit in Afghanistan right now. Special Forces, SEALs, DEA, and some Ranger units have been wearing it as well. I've also seen SAS or SBS (hard to say for sure), and possible British Airborne units. Plus Croatian spec ops have been pictured in it and of course GROM has their own Polish version. This is in Khowst. Any chance the pic was taken around May? Hell of fight there last May something like a dozen suicide bombers. EDIT. Just rechecked it and it's from November. Guess the place is as big a shit hole now as it was earlier this year. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/23/2009 3:51:22 PM EDT
[#50]
Quoted:
I know the Army is fielding Multicam with a unit in Afghanistan right now. Special Forces, SEALs, DEA, and some Ranger units have been wearing it as well. I've also seen SAS or SBS (hard to say for sure), and possible British Airborne units. Plus Croatian spec ops have been pictured in it and of course GROM has their own Polish version. There was an article a while back that said the Army sent one BCT over with multi-cam, and one BCT over with a modified version of the ACU-PAT... |
|
|
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.
.jpg)
