Armory Sponsor
Posted: 8/5/2010 8:50:17 AM EDT
I'm getting ready to purchase a new assault rifle, and can't decide between the SCAR and the ACR. Its been a while since I've been on ARFCOM and remember all the negativity about the ACR before they hit the market. I know the SCAR is an awesome rifle but what does the hive think of the ACR now? I've also had my eye on an XCR. What to do? 
|
|
Quoted: I'm getting ready to purchase a new assault rifle, and can't decide between the SCAR and the ACR. Its been a while since I've been on ARFCOM and remember all the negativity about the ACR before they hit the market. I know the SCAR is an awesome rifle but what does the hive think of the ACR now? I've also had my eye on an XCR. What to do? How quickly do you want to be able to purchase an extra barrel and spare parts? Do you fancy 7.62? Is a reciprocating charging handle an issue? How important is it that everything be ambi? Is money an object? What kind of optic are you thinking of using? |
|
Personally, I wouldn't spend my money on any of the 3 but if I had to buy one of them, I would probably go with the XCR followed by the SCAR in a very distant second place.
I'm so disgusted with what the Cerberus group did with the ACR that I wouldn't want one now even if they cut the price in half |
|
I was all for the ACR when it was under the design of Magpul, at that time both the FN SCAR and Magpul Massada were just pictures on the internet.
When the FN was released to the public I thought it was an ugly rifle, but felt great, very innovative but not worth the $2,700 price tag. Then when the Bushmaster ACR was released I was very disappointed with the final product and extremely disappointed with the final price tag. That was the whole appeal of the Massada / ACR because the Magpul rifle was offering all of the features of the SCAR with a quick change barrel / caliber conversions for half the price of the FN SCAR. Well, the ACR has hit the gun stores and after both the ACR and the FN SCAR in person the SCAR is the hands down winner. The Bushmaster ACR cost more than it should, weighs more than it should, and IMO does not feel as rugged as the FN SCAR. Check out David Fortier article on the FN SCAR and his 3.75" group at 500 yards. http://www.tacticalgunfan.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=555&Itemid=1 |
|
I handled the ACR the other day and I'd like one but for half the price they list it at. Its ridiculous at the price offered though not as heavy as people complained. I have a bushy AR which was great so I'm not bashing the compay and I have no issues with 1:9. I'm not excited about the SCAR and would place it under the ACR where I to make a list. I have an XCR and honestly it does all of the things the ACR does at a reasonable price but do what makes you happy. I've handled at of the OMG rifles lately so heres my list not pooping on any of these rifles all will serve you well I'm sure.
Robarm XCR ( all the cool features half the price) Bushmaster ACR (ridiculous price tag but a good rifle underneath) A Good AR ( The old stand by ,nothing wrong with it) FN SCAR (Crappy feeling stock, not modular besides bbl lengths) MSAR (If you dont worry about shooting from both shoulders then bump this up under the ACR) Sig 556 ( If they would have given us a 550 I wouldnt be upset, I shouldnt have to trade out shitty parts on a rifle over $1500) Your mileage may vary |
| ACR is a great rifle, solid build, runs dry, accurate. Your question was between an ACR and a SCAR and that's a close race. It will come down to more of your preference rather than which one is a better rifle. No wrong choice here, I think as time moves on parts and upgrades for the ACR will be easier to obtain. |
|
Quoted: Who is buying ACRs? Every dealer here has them sitting on the shelves. They never move. Even Gander Mountain has one... Not I. Something about spending $2,000 on a rifle classified by the manufacturer as "basic" just doesn't seem right to me.  If the advanced sold for what the basic does and the basic sold for $1,500 I'd reconsider. In this economy with the uncertainty of it spending that much on a rifle when there are less expensive alternatives just doesn't seem wise. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Who is buying ACRs? Every dealer here has them sitting on the shelves. They never move. Even Gander Mountain has one... Not I. Something about spending $2,000 on a rifle classified by the manufacturer as "basic" just doesn't seem right to me.
If the advanced sold for what the basic does and the basic sold for $1,500 I'd reconsider. In this economy with the uncertainty of it spending that much on a rifle when there are less expensive alternatives just doesn't seem wise. basic is around $1700 now |
|
There is no future in the ACR, its already a dead/civilian-only system. IMO, the rifle to get would be a new Mk17 and then learn to love it in 7.62 NATO until 5.56 conversion kits become availible in the next 5+ years.
If you want an ACR, get Modern Warfare 2. If you want a proper, real-world weapon get a Mk16/17. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Who is buying ACRs? Every dealer here has them sitting on the shelves. They never move. Even Gander Mountain has one... Not I. Something about spending $2,000 on a rifle classified by the manufacturer as "basic" just doesn't seem right to me. If the advanced sold for what the basic does and the basic sold for $1,500 I'd reconsider. In this economy with the uncertainty of it spending that much on a rifle when there are less expensive alternatives just doesn't seem wise. basic is around $1700 now Where can a regular Joe get an ACR basic for around $1700? The lowest they've got on Gunbroker right now is around $1,899 for a "buy now." |
|
Quoted:
There is no future in the ACR, its already a dead/civilian-only system. IMO, the rifle to get would be a new Mk17 and then learn to love it in 7.62 NATO until 5.56 conversion kits become availible in the next 5+ years. If you want an ACR, get Modern Warfare 2. If you want a proper, real-world weapon get a Mk16/17. Why does a rife have to be Military accepted or tested or it's a dead platform? I own both and the scar feels like a handling a toy to me but I still like it, ACR feels like a tank....no not as heavy as one but built like one. Now me, I personally do like both about equal for different reasons, but the ACR is not a doomed platform just because it has not been picked up by the military yet... or not real world superior weapon like the SCAR. Ahahaha! You guys crack me up. Well I’m off to play MW2 now as soon as I find my helmet ! |
|
Quoted: Played with a SCAR 16s today. Hands down it beats the ACR. Its like night and day for me. This is why I bought my SCAR, and have the .308 SCAR on order. My father, a Vietnam vet, shot my SCAR last weekend and is ready to get rid of his ARs and get a SCAR...he loves it! It's a great rifle, and you can't go wrong with it. |
| Sorry, but the SCAR feels and handles like an overpriced Hi-Point. I'll trust Magpul's expertise with polymer any day over FN's track record of fucking up polymer firearms. I've seen too many FS2000s, FNPs, and 5.7s with plastic parts breakage from normal use, and already heard of the same from the SCAR. Magpul actually has experience making a product that's ergonomic and durable, and at the end of the day they still have a large role in the ACR. IMO, there's simply no comparison in ergonomics between the two. |
|
Quoted:
Sorry, but the SCAR feels and handles like an overpriced Hi-Point. I'll trust Magpul's expertise with polymer any day over FN's track record of fucking up polymer firearms. I've seen too many FS2000s, FNPs, and 5.7s with plastic parts breakage from normal use, and already heard of the same from the SCAR. Magpul actually has experience making a product that's ergonomic and durable, and at the end of the day they still have a large role in the ACR. IMO, there's simply no comparison in ergonomics between the two. Have not shot either. Only handled them side by side at a local gun shop. My impression is that the ACR feels a little cheap. Some of the controls seem like they'd be better rendered in metal parts, like the safety/selector, bolt release and charging handle. I know they actuate actual metal parts, but I'd like those pieces to be all metal, or just feel more substantial. The SCAR's stock did not feel as cheap as it looks. I think the SCAR has to be at least 1.5 lbs lighter, and it feels handier. The ACR felt kinda bulky. Both of them were priced at a point that I won't buy anyway, but if they were the same price I'd go for the SCAR for its lighter weight. I can handle the reciprocating charging handle, as I have plenty of AK's. The weight/bulky feeling of the ACR are turnoffs. The steadily-decreasing price gives me hope. One last thing. SOCOM did cancel the 5.56 SCAR for budget and performance reasons. I think the ACR would have been canceled for the same reason if it had somehow been created and selected years back. Neither the SCAR, nor the ACR offer anything extra when it comes to hurling 5.56 rounds down range. When firing the same round, there is really no difference between the M4, SCAR, or ACR when it comes to terminal performance. |
|
Pick up a SCAR-17s and be done with it. Eventually you'll be able to shoot 5.56 out of it and you get more. The ACR is nice but as others have said it is heavier than most people expected it to be and Bushmaster can't get the hint when they toss a 1:9 twist M4 barrel on the damn thing.
CMS |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sorry, but the SCAR feels and handles like an overpriced Hi-Point. I'll trust Magpul's expertise with polymer any day over FN's track record of fucking up polymer firearms. I've seen too many FS2000s, FNPs, and 5.7s with plastic parts breakage from normal use, and already heard of the same from the SCAR. Magpul actually has experience making a product that's ergonomic and durable, and at the end of the day they still have a large role in the ACR. IMO, there's simply no comparison in ergonomics between the two. Have not shot either. Only handled them side by side at a local gun shop. My impression is that the ACR feels a little cheap. Some of the controls seem like they'd be better rendered in metal parts, like the safety/selector, bolt release and charging handle. I know they actuate actual metal parts, but I'd like those pieces to be all metal, or just feel more substantial. The SCAR's stock did not feel as cheap as it looks. I think the SCAR has to be at least 1.5 lbs lighter, and it feels handier. The ACR felt kinda bulky. Both of them were priced at a point that I won't buy anyway, but if they were the same price I'd go for the SCAR for its lighter weight. I can handle the reciprocating charging handle, as I have plenty of AK's. The weight/bulky feeling of the ACR are turnoffs. The steadily-decreasing price gives me hope. One last thing. SOCOM did cancel the 5.56 SCAR for budget and performance reasons. I think the ACR would have been canceled for the same reason if it had somehow been created and selected years back. Neither the SCAR, nor the ACR offer anything extra when it comes to hurling 5.56 rounds down range. When firing the same round, there is really no difference between the M4, SCAR, or ACR when it comes to terminal performance. The SCAR weighs 7.25 pounds. The ACR weighs 8.2 pounds (generic weight as per Bushmaster's press release, so probably the Enhanced weight). An extra pound is definitely a difference, but how much of one? Considering that half of Arfcom is going to put on an Eotech/Aimpoint/ACOG, then a backup optic or magnifier, VFG, tac light, laser, sling, and a kitchen can opener attachment, I find it lol-worthy to hear so many gear queers out there bitching about the weight. The Sig 556 weighs 8.2 pounds (sound familiar), and they've sold upwards of 50,000 of them so far at prices ranging from $1500 to $2500+. If people are really concerned about weight, they'd be slimming down on the trimmings, rather than focus on the base rifle weight itself. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sorry, but the SCAR feels and handles like an overpriced Hi-Point. I'll trust Magpul's expertise with polymer any day over FN's track record of fucking up polymer firearms. I've seen too many FS2000s, FNPs, and 5.7s with plastic parts breakage from normal use, and already heard of the same from the SCAR. Magpul actually has experience making a product that's ergonomic and durable, and at the end of the day they still have a large role in the ACR. IMO, there's simply no comparison in ergonomics between the two. Have not shot either. Only handled them side by side at a local gun shop. My impression is that the ACR feels a little cheap. Some of the controls seem like they'd be better rendered in metal parts, like the safety/selector, bolt release and charging handle. I know they actuate actual metal parts, but I'd like those pieces to be all metal, or just feel more substantial. The SCAR's stock did not feel as cheap as it looks. I think the SCAR has to be at least 1.5 lbs lighter, and it feels handier. The ACR felt kinda bulky. Both of them were priced at a point that I won't buy anyway, but if they were the same price I'd go for the SCAR for its lighter weight. I can handle the reciprocating charging handle, as I have plenty of AK's. The weight/bulky feeling of the ACR are turnoffs. The steadily-decreasing price gives me hope. One last thing. SOCOM did cancel the 5.56 SCAR for budget and performance reasons. I think the ACR would have been canceled for the same reason if it had somehow been created and selected years back. Neither the SCAR, nor the ACR offer anything extra when it comes to hurling 5.56 rounds down range. When firing the same round, there is really no difference between the M4, SCAR, or ACR when it comes to terminal performance. The SCAR weighs 7.25 pounds. The ACR weighs 8.2 pounds (generic weight as per Bushmaster's press release, so probably the Enhanced weight). An extra pound is definitely a difference, but how much of one? Considering that half of Arfcom is going to put on an Eotech/Aimpoint/ACOG, then a backup optic or magnifier, VFG, tac light, laser, sling, and a kitchen can opener attachment, I find it lol-worthy to hear so many gear queers out there bitching about the weight. The Sig 556 weighs 8.2 pounds (sound familiar), and they've sold upwards of 50,000 of them so far at prices ranging from $1500 to $2500+. If people are really concerned about weight, they'd be slimming down on the trimmings, rather than focus on the base rifle weight itself. You are right. People are going to add things, which makes a heavy base gun into an even heavier gun with optics etc. I have no idea how many people out there care about the weight of their guns, but I can't imagine people wanting their guns to weigh more. I hope you aren't accusing me of being a gear queer, either. I use an M4A1, the M249, M240B and whatever else might be required at work. Nobody I work with wants anything they carry to weigh more, especially if they have to dismount with it. I am not interested in a boat anchor dipped in plastic that shoots 5.56, regardless of whether I would use it at the local range or on a 2-way range. The OP asked for people's preferences between the ACR and SCAR. Don't start lumping those who criticize the ACR into the gear queer category. Chances are pretty good that many ACR owners fall within that category themselves. |
|
Ive always been a fan of Bushmaster and have owned the XCR. I now have a SCAR and picked it over the ACR because the basic model was too expensive. Even now that basic model prices are closer to what I paid for my SCAR I still have more rifle I believe for the money. The weight was my biggest gripe about the ACR. Its a valid gripe. The XCR is a great rifle but shoot it after a SCAR and tell me which one you prefer? I would have kept mine if I could have afforded both. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sorry, but the SCAR feels and handles like an overpriced Hi-Point. I'll trust Magpul's expertise with polymer any day over FN's track record of fucking up polymer firearms. I've seen too many FS2000s, FNPs, and 5.7s with plastic parts breakage from normal use, and already heard of the same from the SCAR. Magpul actually has experience making a product that's ergonomic and durable, and at the end of the day they still have a large role in the ACR. IMO, there's simply no comparison in ergonomics between the two. Have not shot either. Only handled them side by side at a local gun shop. My impression is that the ACR feels a little cheap. Some of the controls seem like they'd be better rendered in metal parts, like the safety/selector, bolt release and charging handle. I know they actuate actual metal parts, but I'd like those pieces to be all metal, or just feel more substantial. The SCAR's stock did not feel as cheap as it looks. I think the SCAR has to be at least 1.5 lbs lighter, and it feels handier. The ACR felt kinda bulky. Both of them were priced at a point that I won't buy anyway, but if they were the same price I'd go for the SCAR for its lighter weight. I can handle the reciprocating charging handle, as I have plenty of AK's. The weight/bulky feeling of the ACR are turnoffs. The steadily-decreasing price gives me hope. One last thing. SOCOM did cancel the 5.56 SCAR for budget and performance reasons. I think the ACR would have been canceled for the same reason if it had somehow been created and selected years back. Neither the SCAR, nor the ACR offer anything extra when it comes to hurling 5.56 rounds down range. When firing the same round, there is really no difference between the M4, SCAR, or ACR when it comes to terminal performance. The SCAR weighs 7.25 pounds. The ACR weighs 8.2 pounds (generic weight as per Bushmaster's press release, so probably the Enhanced weight). An extra pound is definitely a difference, but how much of one? Considering that half of Arfcom is going to put on an Eotech/Aimpoint/ACOG, then a backup optic or magnifier, VFG, tac light, laser, sling, and a kitchen can opener attachment, I find it lol-worthy to hear so many gear queers out there bitching about the weight. The Sig 556 weighs 8.2 pounds (sound familiar), and they've sold upwards of 50,000 of them so far at prices ranging from $1500 to $2500+. If people are really concerned about weight, they'd be slimming down on the trimmings, rather than focus on the base rifle weight itself. You are right. People are going to add things, which makes a heavy base gun into an even heavier gun with optics etc. I have no idea how many people out there care about the weight of their guns, but I can't imagine people wanting their guns to weigh more. True, but I guarantee that 99% of SCAR and ACR owners aren't going to go humping their rifles twenty miles through the desert either. People go complaining about weight on a rifle that they typically hold for no longer than 2-3 minutes at a stretch when shooting offhand on a square range. If the primary market for either rifle was the mountaintop hunter in Montana, then weight would be a valid complaint, but realistically it's more than arguably irrelevant in a range toy/home defense rifle/patrol carbine. I hope you aren't accusing me of being a gear queer, either. I use an M4A1, the M249, M240B and whatever else might be required at work. Nobody I work with wants anything they carry to weigh more, especially if they have to dismount with it. I am not interested in a boat anchor dipped in plastic that shoots 5.56, regardless of whether I would use it at the local range or on a 2-way range. You'll note that I said "so many" rather than "you must be...". I don't particularly want a plastic boat anchor either. ;) Regardless, though, the primary market for the ACR is indeed the "gear queer". I don't say that because the rifle is necessarily unsuited for combat or serious use, but because at this point in time in the domestic marketplace the majority of purchasers are private citizens buying for their collections or for fun. As someone who sells guns for a living, I can say with certainty that 95% of ACRs and SCARs that have been built right now are basically fancy range toys for private individuals. This is not a knock on the people or their preferences, but a simple cold hard statement of fact. If Bushmaster were cranking them out at $499 for export to third-world countries and/or sale to the big Army, that might be a different story. The OP asked for people's preferences between the ACR and SCAR. Don't start lumping those who criticize the ACR into the gear queer category. Chances are pretty good that many ACR owners fall within that category themselves. They are. But most of them refuse to admit it. The blunt truth of the matter is that most of the ACR hate has absolutely nothing to do with the tangible characteristics or qualities of the rifle, but rather the mob's veiled animosity towards the company that produced it and their policies. People are debating over their emotions of the weapon rather than its actual traits or abilities, and in the process acting ridiculous. Disliking the ACR or the SCAR because of subjective ergonomics is one thing, but the number of people still bitching about the ACR's price even when it's considerably lower than the SCAR is nothing more than an example of cognitive dissonance applied to firearm purchases. |
|
Quoted:
The blunt truth of the matter is that most of the ACR hate has absolutely nothing to do with the tangible characteristics or qualities of the rifle, but rather the mob's veiled animosity towards the company that produced it and their policies. People are debating over their emotions of the weapon rather than its actual traits or abilities, and in the process acting ridiculous. I agree with you. I still have reservations about the ACR, but its saving grace is its modularity. I don't think the basic or the enhanced models are the final product. There will be improvements and refinements. I will wait to see what it like after a year or two. |
Armory Sponsor