Armory Sponsor
Posted: 7/20/2006 2:04:05 PM EDT
SCAR H      SCAR L  And of course a gratuitous pic of the EGLM, which is ambidexterous:   And the EGLM range finder: 
|
|
thanks a lot for the pics. its good to see them outside of a white photoshop background. im still not buying the ambidexterous bit. i took someone to task over this recently but i was not able to find the thread again to see a response. ill believe it when i see it. |
You can see how it comes out better here. If you look at the other pic, you will see a pegged protusion towards the "mouth" of the launcher. When slide forward, it then stops, swings to the right or left. That said, few people who I've talked to or read their reports say they prefer this system to others (M203 for ex.) |
| im not so concerned with the GL. i am a militant lefty and the M-203 didnt bother me too badly (but the quadrant sight did). i was referring to the system as a whole, specifically the rifle. it was posted in another thread that the SCAR was "totally ambidexterous" yet the ejection appears to be non-reversible, as do the bolt catch/release, charging handle, folding buttstock, rear sling swivel, etc. it appears to have dual selector levers and mag releases, which is ok. i would prefer a modular reversible set but the dual controls dont bother me at all. |
What contact? FN already won the SCAR program. From the time lines that are floating around on the web, they should be close to initial low rate production if they have not started yet. Jason |
|
I sincerely hope that thing never leaves SOCOM, vis-a-vis Mk23... And I'm definately waiting for an unbiased range report... Perticularly with regard to 300m+ accuracy. Like I said, the .mil should NOT purchase a less accurate weapon in persuit of a mythic reliability gain... Given the Army's past history of 'new' weapons systems (XM8) I'm presently not impressed... IMHO, the M16 is still the best there is, for now... We'll see once/if this thing gets into wider circulation (civvie sales, as that will happen before there's any 'next rifle' contract issued)... Also, remember that the Army and Marines are both moving to a SR-25 based sniper rifle... I'd find it strange to FINALLY get an all-AR rifle lineup, and then ditch the 4 or 16... The EGLM is another story... The reason for the side-cock is to allow Mk19 sized rounds to be fired. This is (some reports say) what initially attracted the Army to HK's turd-of-a-rifle (apart from trying to save face when OICW tanked).... That is one product that might be nice to see mass-issued (mounted under M4s, of course) P.S. HK never had a chance with the 416... It wasn't even considered... The purpose of the HK 416 was, from the start, to have a product to offer the LEO market, to try and keep HK's best customers on the bandwagon... PDs were junking their MP5s for M4s, and HK needed a product that they could claim (falsely) was better.... |
|
I love the look....which is a Shallow Hal way to look at it but hey....what can I say. I do have several concerns, the worst bing the perceived height of the sights over the bore axis and also above the rail. Maybe it's because the rear BUIS is so slender. It looks like a hell of a snag hazard. It also looks as if it co wintnesses in the top third. It's probably the pictures. Bomber |
|
Dave A, "The EGLM is another story... The reason for the side-cock is to allow Mk19 sized rounds to be fired. This is (some reports say) what initially attracted the Army to HK's turd-of-a-rifle (apart from trying to save face when OICW tanked)...." You just ment longer 40mm rounds and not MK19 round right? I'm not in the military, but it's my understanding that a high velocity 40mm round (MK19 round) in a low velocity 40mm launcher (M203 and the new HK Launcher the military is buying, XM320 I think) would be a very bad thing. It was also my understanding that EGLM is a low velocity launcher as well, had you seen information that changes that? Jason |
Wrong. The HK416 was developed precisely for certain JSOC assets. It was considered and is being issued by the aforementioned entities, in addition to several others. |
How does .7MOA for the base variants and .5MOA for the SV's sound?
Don't take this offensively, but you have no clue about what's going on if you think there's any similarity between the two, and how they came about.
Agreed. The SCAR has alot better features, but the battlefield will be the final test.
The SCAR rifle is SOCOM only for now. What happens in the future is anyone's guess.
The 416 was considered, just not for the SCAR trials. If the SCAR proves to be as good as CRANE says, I don't see the 416 getting much publicity from SOCOM.
I agree that HK's slipping was probably the reason for developing the 416. Between the G36 being a failure, the majority of agnecies dropping pistol caliber carbines, and the failure of the XM8, HK needed to do something drastic. |
Armory Sponsor