In the midst of Wittgensteinian musings, the following thoughts seem to emerge:

1.]  FN will market the SCARS for civilians just like gun stores are full of FN AR15s even this very moment!!

2.]  If a rifle has an AR M4 type lower with a non-folding SCARS type telescoping stock, it is still an AR lower, right?

3.]  If a SCARS type "modular" upper, was engineered to attach to the AR Lower w/ AR bolt carrier and all, would not the rifle still be an AR 15 which simply looks like a SCARS, therefore legal AND NOT IN VIOLATION OF PATENT LAWS?  Would this still be true even if the upper utilized a FN type quick-change barrel [this wouldn't really be necessary, because the lower AR receiver would be limited to .223 or 6.8]?

4.]  Considering that it looks as though there will never be any fully transferable SCARS, this may be the closest thing to a SCARS full auto that most of us will ever come to owning.

Good Lord, please let Sig release the 55x so we can all rest easier.

Quoted: In the midst of Wittgensteinian musings, the following thoughts seem to emerge: 1.]  FN will market the SCARS for civilians just like gun stores are full of FN AR15s even this very moment!! 4.]  Considering that it looks as though there will never be any fully transferable SCARS, this may be the closest thing to a SCARS full auto that most of us will ever come to owning.

1) FN is not allowed to make AR15's because of their government contract. It is specifically outlined that they cannot sell in the commercial market with the info contained inside the TDP.

4) You can blame the Gubment for that

WIZZO

Quoted: In the midst of Wittgensteinian musings, the following thoughts seem to emerge: 1.]  FN will market the SCARS for civilians just like gun stores are full of FN AR15s even this very moment!! 2.]  If a rifle has an AR M4 type lower with a non-folding SCARS type telescoping stock, it is still an AR lower, right? 3.]  If a SCARS type "modular" upper, was engineered to attach to the AR Lower w/ AR bolt carrier and all, would not the rifle still be an AR 15 which simply looks like a SCARS, therefore legal AND NOT IN VIOLATION OF PATENT LAWS?  Would this still be true even if the upper utilized a FN type quick-change barrel [this wouldn't really be necessary, because the lower AR receiver would be limited to .223 or 6.8]? 4.]  Considering that it looks as though there will never be any fully transferable SCARS, this may be the closest thing to a SCARS full auto that most of us will ever come to owning.

What wizzo said about FN and the restrictions to sell to civilians is totally right. FN's hands are tied by the government and Colt

As for SCAR, no matter what you do to an AR15 it will NEVER be SCAR spec. You would need to dramatically gut the base AR15 platform and at that point it isnt an AR15 anymore and odds are it will cost double the amount of real SCAR spec weapons like the XCR and FN ARM

Off the top of my head you would need an LMT MRP, MGI modular lower that could take FAL/AK/6.8 mags and LMT/POF piston, and you're still left with the 1950's buffer tube that prevents having a folder

For some reason people think SCAR is all rails and pistons and viola done. Not quite. Read the requirements, and if you're still interested wait for the FN or the XCR because that is as close as you're going to get

FN has already said clearly they are making SCAR for civilins and robinson is sitting on their design for some reason, but they are coming so there is no need to "fake it" with a dressed up AR15

Quoted: Good Lord, please let Sig release the 55x so we can all rest easier.

saving for it this very second

I would LOVE a SIG 55x...local SWAT boys carry them and I got to play with one after a 3gun match.  It was my baptism of fire, no pun intended.  


A SCAR would be nice though.

Quoted: Good Lord, please let Sig release the 55x so we can all rest easier.

New SIG info towards the bottom of page 3: ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=265115&page=3