SCAR worth the $$$ ? - Page 2
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Long Guns > Auto & Semi-Auto Discussion > SCAR worth the $$$ ?

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-18-2012, 04:02 PM   #11
Moderator
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
JonM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Rochester WI,Rochester WI
Posts: 17,404
Liked 5506 Times on 2874 Posts
Likes Given: 357

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus View Post
One of the desireable things about my Colt 6940 is that it DOESN'T have a useless piston to add weight and more parts to break.
The scar17 i have is ver well balanced. Its not in anyway related to an ar15 or ar10 series. The only part semi-interchangeable is the pistol grip and front sight post. So since they were designed from the ground up as piston guns they work without the issues of the typical ar15 conversions.

I still think that the scar16 is no real advance over the ar15 as there are a lot of ar15 that do the same job with the same reliability and accuracy of a scar16. In that i think its not worth it.

For the scar17 equivelant competition in the price range just doesnt come anywhere close even the cheaper and more pricey guns in 308 dont come close. The scar17 is worth its price
__________________

"Gun control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound." — L. Neil Smith

The problem with being stupid is you cannot simply decide to stop doing dumb things...

JonM is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2012, 07:54 PM   #12
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Quentin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Idaho
Posts: 6,520
Liked 980 Times on 689 Posts
Likes Given: 982

Default

All excellent points, kbd512, and well stated. I'm also a fan of the Colt 6720 and pencil barrels in general. The only reason I didn't go with Colt was I prefer a 16" in midlength gas. Feel free to jump in anytime ... again, well stated opinions.

Like locutus, the extra weight, complexity and cost of a piston AR are negatives for me. I'd take a DI Colt, BCM, PSA, Daniel Defense over the SCAR 16 then take advantage of the leftover $1K.

__________________

______
The biggest issue with assembling an AR isn't so much getting the parts together right - it's getting the right parts together. You'll remember the quality of a gun long after you forget how much you paid for it.
________________________________________
US Army 1966-69, VFW Life Member, Retired Geek

Quentin is offline  
JonM Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 05:36 AM   #13
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,630
Liked 1052 Times on 586 Posts
Likes Given: 441

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by climate17 View Post
I'm going to go the other way with this. In order for you to get a weapon as good as the scar in an AR 15 you need one of these guns LWRCI M6 series (1800-2400) a POF (2200-2600) or a hk mr556 (3295) so any one talking about how there stock AR stacks up doesn't have one of these, and they probably aren't even gas piston AR's like the ones I mentioned are. So they aren't comparing apples with apples. The answer is yes scars are worth every penny, no matter if it's the 16 or 17. They ARE worth it.
With respect to stock AR platforms being as good as stock M6 or MR556A1, it would be helpful to quantify what you mean by "as good as". Are we talking reliability, weight, balance, ergonomics, access to plentiful replacement parts and accessories, or something else? Who leaves any fighting rifle stock?

Reliability:

How reliable is reliable enough?

John Moses Browning created a M1917 machine gun that fired for something like 45 minutes without cessation of firing or failure of any kind, but the gun weighed more than a M2HB machine gun.

I'm not willing to sacrifice 2 pounds of weight, the equivalent of a 30 round stick and all the accessories on my rifle, for more reliability than I already have.

I'm a civilian and I don't jump out of airplanes, assault any beaches, or wade through any mud pits. If you are SOF, infantry, or law enforcement, I understand the need for a heavy duty carbine that is more tolerant of filth. In the worst realistic scenario I can think of, I might have to patrol the neighborhood after a hurricane or flood. In all honesty, it's improbable that the carbine will see use much further than my front doorstep. For those realistic use scenarios, the weight, balance, and pointability features are more important to me than ultimate reliability.

From experience, my personal AR's have had very few problems not related to crappy or damaged USGI magazines and no problems that couldn't be immediately corrected. I do have to replace parts and use quality magazines and ammo, but the gun functions as designed. If that were not the case, I would not use it.

Weight:

All piston guns based on the AR platform are heavier than DI guns with one exception that I know of. All piston guns designed from the ground up as piston guns are heavier than DI guns period because they are designed to be machine guns. Part of what made the M1917 machine gun reliable was the weight of the bolt, its design, and method of operation. All current piston combat rifles and carbines that an operator will carry in his or her hands for an extended length of time have been built for full auto. The requirements for full auto are different than for semi-auto. Lighter weight parts could be made, but it would adversely affect cost, service life, and/or reliability.

M6 is slightly lighter than the SCAR 16S, the MR556A1 weighs almost as much as a loaded SCAR 17S, and the POF is slightly lighter than an unloaded SCAR 17S. All weapons listed are equivalent to or heavier than a loaded 6721 with accessories. The MR556A1 is so heavy it's more near a DMR or battle rifle than it is a carbine. HK should have put their rail system on a diet. You can easily get yourself into an 11 pound gun with that platform. The M1 rifle weighs between 10 and 11 pounds, given different stock materials. Not my cup of tea for something I actually have to carry.

Balance:

All piston guns apart from bullpups have the weight of the piston mechanism in front of or near the front of the operator's support hand. Humans, to include Navy SEAL's and Delta Force, experience muscle fatigue. Physical fitness helps, but all humans fatigue and dexterity suffers.

The DI platform places more weight nearer to the operator's fire control hand. Any static weight in front of or behind your hands you'll constantly fight against as long as the weapon is in your hands. After about three hours of actually holding an 8 to 9 pound gun in my hands and ready to use, I determined that heavy and/or muzzle heavy guns were not for me. Slings and weight distribution help, but all other factors being equal a lighter weapon with better dynamic weight distribution will serve you better in situations where movement is involved and/or mother earth isn't helping you hold your weapon.

Shoulder your fully equipped M6, MR556A1, or SCAR 16S with one hand and see how long you can keep it there. Then repeat the test with a 6720 or other pencil barrel AR. Keep the weapon shouldered in a firing position and pointed at a target like a screw on a wall-mounted light switch from say 15-25 feet. Let me know how that goes.

Ergonomics:

There isn't much difference between the M6, MR556A1, SCAR 16S, and a Colt. The SCAR requires an aftermarket charging handle to clear optics and so do the AR designs. I guess the manufacturers of the "improved" weapons didn't take charging the weapon into account. Of all the rifles listed, only the LWRC has true ambi controls from the factory. If mirrored controls are important, then LWRC has the best controls. The POF's only have a bolt release on the ejection port side, if memory serves. The SCAR has ambi mag release and selector lever, but no ambi bolt release. If you leave your charging handle on the left hand side, that isn't a problem. I like not having to leave fire control for bolt manipulations. MagPul provides that functionality on a stock Colt for less than 20 dollars.

I've never had a problem with reciprocating charging handles but some people don't like them. I think it's a useful feature for malfunction clearing, but to each his own.

All the other designs except the Colt have fold down front sights. I don't like crap in the way of my red dot. Perhaps it is simpler, but it isn't ideal. If Colt wanted to improve the 6720, they'd make the carbine more optics friendly with a dovetail gas block with sling mounts and a pic rail below for a light in lieu of the stupid bayonet lug so no rail system would be necessary.

Parts and Accessories:

While all the lights, lasers, and optics work with all aforementioned platforms, the continuous optics rails of the piston platforms are better than the Colt. The SCAR 16S has the best side rail layout, in my opinion, and it still has too much rail. I just think it's dumb to have pic rail where your hand goes. I've never seen anybody with half a clue mount a light or other accessory, apart from a sling mount, on a side rail where they have to place their support hand. It looks really cool, but it serves no purpose. The POF, LWRC, and MR556A1 all have this cool and useless feature that adds needless weight and bulk.

All of the aforementioned platforms have proprietary parts that are not present in the DI guns. Most are more expensive than parts for the DI guns and availability may be an issue.

Final Thoughts:

For users who require full auto and go over the beach, the "better" guns may be "better". To me, they're all just heavier, have poorer balance, are more complicated, and much more expensive.

If Colt wanted to make the 6720 "better", they could do the following:

1. Dovetail gas block with side sling mounts and bottom picatinny rail for a folding front sight and weapon light

2. Rugged plastic lower receiver with steel or aluminum reinforcement where necessary to reduce weight

3. Better trigger

4. Full ambi controls

5. MagPul CTR stock and MOE or MIAD grip

6. CHF barrel with vortex style flash suppressor EDM'ed into the barrel versus threading the muzzle

7. Nickel-Boron plating for the bolt, carrier, and barrel extension

If Colt did all that to their 6720 and charged no more than perhaps 1500 for it, I think you'd be hard pressed to justify the weight and expense of a piston gun if you were not a government user.
__________________
kbd512 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 02:28 PM   #14
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
climate17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 39
Default

Stock colts weigh in at around 6.8-7.1 lbs no piston

Lwrci m6a2 spr is 7.1 lbs with piston

M6a2 spr weight distribution is at the fire control end.

So how I the colt an advantage?

Listen I get that the colt is cheaper but it has no piston. Say what you will but you have to compare apples with apples di guns are NOT as rugged as piston guns.

Even socom uses piston guns. I site the m27 it's basically an hk 416d.
There ar10 is the scar17. So am I missing something, no. The discussion is this are scars worth the price when compared to a similar product, yes. Is a di gun a similar product? No it is not.

Is the di the better more economical chose for a civilian, yes. But if you have the means why wouldn't you want the piston gun? For the difference in weight? There isn't any difference if you configure it correctly. For the balance? Again correctly configured the piston gun is still as balanced as the di gun. And after the scar is much more ergonomic. the weight on the scar is a nominal difference and I site numerous three gun competitors using the scar the balance is wonderful. It's not a bad thing to have weight on the front of a gun especially when transitioning between targets it helps your swing. Trap shooters add weight to the barrel side of the gun to help with this all the time. I don't understand people's aversion to piston guns they don't break down that's a ludicrous argument. And better yet they don't foul. Shoot five hundred rounds through a di gun and a piston gun and then pull the bolt carrier group then tell me di guns are better.

__________________
climate17 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 03:00 PM   #15
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
locutus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,121
Liked 5538 Times on 3134 Posts
Likes Given: 4818

Default

Eugene Stoner knew more than I do.

And his design is proven on battlefields all over the world for the last 50+ years.

I'll stick with Stoner.

Which weapon would I choose if going into battle today??

U.S. rifle, cal. 5.56X45MM NATO, M-4.

__________________
“We sleep safely at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would harm us.”


Winston Churchill
locutus is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 06:38 PM   #16
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,630
Liked 1052 Times on 586 Posts
Likes Given: 441

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by climate17 View Post
Stock colts weigh in at around 6.8-7.1 lbs no piston

Lwrci m6a2 spr is 7.1 lbs with piston

M6a2 spr weight distribution is at the fire control end.

So how I the colt an advantage?
The Colt 6720 (pencil barrel) weighs approximately 1 pound less than the Colt 6721 (heavy barrel). Colt includes the weight of the detachable carry handle in the weight of the gun. The Colt 6721, which I have previously owned, weighed right around 9 pounds with the following accessories:

1. SureFire M73 rail

2. SureFire X300 weapon light

3. MagPul MIAD pistol grip

4. MagPul CTR stock

5. MagPul sling plate

6. Fully loaded 30 round MagPul magazine

7. Aimpoint Comp M3 in Larue Lever Mount

8. Aimpoint Magnifier in Larue Lever Mount

I know this because I actually put the gun on a scale. I don't care what Colt's website or anyone else says about the weight of the carbine. I use my own scale and I weigh things myself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by climate17 View Post
Listen I get that the colt is cheaper but it has no piston. Say what you will but you have to compare apples with apples di guns are NOT as rugged as piston guns.
The current piston AR's are just refined solutions to problems that have already been solved, in my opinion. All of the piston design stuff was researched, proposed, and ultimately rejected by the US Army back in the late 60's to mid 70's. All of the piston designs, except for the new ICE-15 design, weigh more than DI guns. Weight can be a good thing for a machine gun, but for a semi-auto carbine designed for a man to carry on foot it doesn't add any benefit. The ICE-15 is the only example of a piston system that weighs less than the DI system. It is possible because half the mass of the bolt carrier was removed from the design and the gas port has been redesigned. Eugene Stoner and friends designed a piston platform, the AR-18 - a gun meant for mass production, not too long after he designed the AR-15 series. The design was presented to the US Army, they were ordered to test it, and they then rejected the design.

Quote:
Originally Posted by climate17 View Post
Even socom uses piston guns. I site the m27 it's basically an hk 416d.
There ar10 is the scar17. So am I missing something, no. The discussion is this are scars worth the price when compared to a similar product, yes. Is a di gun a similar product? No it is not.
Are you in SOCOM or infantry? If so, then you might need a piston gun. SOCOM also asked for the MK23 pistol and then complained that the weapon was too big and stopped using it. The Navy SEAL's used the MP-5 for boarding operations for quite some time. See many operators using MP-5's anymore? SOCOM rejected the implementation and use of the Mk16 and left the decision to the subordinate commands. They decided to use the Colt M4 with a heavier barrel. The M4 with the heavy barrel still weighs less than the Mk16 with the pencil barrel. Those are facts, not opinions. Apparently SOCOM agrees with me on this point.

The M27 is not the same as the MR556A1. The MR556A1 has too many goofy "features" to be to my liking. The gun is just too muzzle heavy, mostly because of the rail system and barrel that's actually heavier than the M27 barrel, and quite simply too heavy. You need a tool to push the pins out, the buttstock pad unlocks if you cant the weapon while it's shouldered, and it doesn't even come with iron sights in the versions I've seen in my local gun shops. The taper bore and lack of a chrome lining are really puzzling to me. I live in an area with high humidity, but maybe you don't. The only "feature" that I really liked was the cheek weld.

The DI semi-automatic carbines are competing products intended for the same role as piston semi-automatic carbines. The DI guns happen to weigh less than the piston guns, have better balance, and are cheaper to manufacture. The piston guns you listed have all been around for less than 10 years and only the HK design was actually selected for military use as an automatic rifle BECAUSE THE SAW WAS TOO HEAVY FOR INFANTRY ENGAGEMENTS REQUIRING HIGH MOBILITY! Imagine that, the USMC of all services admitting that weight, balance, and ergonomics matter. BTW, I'm doing the same thing here in all of my posts to this thread - attempting to tell people that weight, balance, and ergonomics matter.

The DI guns have been around since the Viet Nam War and have more design and development time and money incorporated into them for improved reliability and parts longevity. When the ICE-15 comes to fruition, I will purchase one. Until that time, I see no tangible benefits to proprietary semi-auto piston carbine designs for civilian use.

Is a SCAR 16S worth the money to me? No. I have a SCAR 17S. The SCAR 17S is lighter and has better ergonomics than any comparable M1, M14, FAL, or G3 derivative. That's why I have one. I don't have a bone to pick with the FN SCAR 16S design, the HK MR556A1 design, or the LWRC M6 design. I am noting that those designs were primarily intended for full auto, weigh more as a consequence, and full auto guns have been restricted to government entities since 1986. If I could have a full auto gun, I would have the heavy barrel variant of the FN Mk16.

Quote:
Originally Posted by climate17 View Post
Is the di the better more economical chose for a civilian, yes. But if you have the means why wouldn't you want the piston gun? For the difference in weight? There isn't any difference if you configure it correctly. For the balance? Again correctly configured the piston gun is still as balanced as the di gun. And after the scar is much more ergonomic. the weight on the scar is a nominal difference and I site numerous three gun competitors using the scar the balance is wonderful. It's not a bad thing to have weight on the front of a gun especially when transitioning between targets it helps your swing. Trap shooters add weight to the barrel side of the gun to help with this all the time. I don't understand people's aversion to piston guns they don't break down that's a ludicrous argument. And better yet they don't foul. Shoot five hundred rounds through a di gun and a piston gun and then pull the bolt carrier group then tell me di guns are better.
In your first sentence you came to the same conclusion that I did. Then you asked the question, "If money were no object, why wouldn't you want a piston gun?". If money was no object, why bother to ask the question? Get all the guns you want. After all, the money's not an issue. I've tried to answer the question of why you would not want a piston in a lightweight semi-automatic carbine designed for civilian versus military use, but apparently all facts concerning cost/weight and evidence of DI reliability are not enough to dissuade some people from buying semi-automatic piston carbines.

Noting that 3 gun competitors use the SCAR doesn't dissaude me from my opinion. Do the 3 gun competitors carry their SCAR in their hands for several hours or more at a time? Have any of them ever attempted to use their SCAR with one hand? You noted that a properly configured piston carbine balances just as well as a DI carbine. You really mean that by adding even more weight to a gun that's heavier to begin with on the other end, the piston carbine balances as well as a DI carbine. A SCAR equipped like my aforementioned 6721 would weigh around 9.5 pounds. You can always delete capability and the weight associated with it, but I think a red dot and white light are required accessories. If you really want a carbine that weighs as much as a battle rifle, go for it.

As for "swing" weight, an understanding of basic physics should tell you that a gun that is less muzzle heavy and less heavy period is easier to "swing" onto target. The only question is whether or not you have the fine motor control required to stop precisely where you meant to. That is probably why people like Kyle Lamb have rifles that are very light out front with a very long handguard. I've never heard anyone call him slow at target transitions. If you don't have the fine motor control from actually practicing weapon presentations, it won't matter how heavy or light your carbine is.

I could keep going on, but I think I've made my points about as well as I can make them. If you just like piston guns, get a SCAR 16S, LWRC, MR556A1, or whatever else strikes your fancy. If you want something that you and your wife or girlfriend might actually be able to carry and use for an extended length of time, get a Colt 6720 or something similar from BCM or Daniel Defense.
__________________
kbd512 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 07:03 PM   #17
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,630
Liked 1052 Times on 586 Posts
Likes Given: 441

Default

I should add that I have no emotion invested in my Colt carbine. The Colt carbines are of sufficient quality to do the job and that's about it. The Colt carbines are not the "best" weapons out there and probably never will be. The pistol I learned to shoot with was as a kid was a Colt M1911-A1. I have owned two of them and retain only one now for recreational purposes only. I will never buy another for carry use. I have never had a Colt 1911 go 5k rounds before a major parts failure of some kind. Extractor tension, front sight fell off from poor staking, or firing pin shearing. I carry a Glock now. I will sell the 6720 when something tangibly better, to me, comes along. To me, "better" means less weight, better balance, and improved or mirrored controls and/or other ergonomics enhancements.

__________________
kbd512 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 08:04 PM   #18
Welcoming Committee/ Resident Pellet Gunner
FTF_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
FullautoUSA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Marxachusetts
Posts: 2,627
Liked 625 Times on 476 Posts
Likes Given: 1111

Default

I rented the SCAR 16 and it was great

Pros-
•Collapsable and folding stock with cheek riser
•Great ergonomics
•Lightweight
•Looks really cool
•Made by FNH
•Reliable
•Excepts STANAG magazines
•Nice tactical configuration
•Very little recoil
•Uses A2 style pistol grips so I think it uses any AR pistol grips
•Overall great gun

Cons-
•Does not except Pmags
•The one I used had a heavy trigger pull
•The one I used had some problems chambering the rounds, but it only happened 3 times and I fired 100 rounds, they were still able to be fired the bolt just hit the case and dented them
•Pricey

Overall worth the money if you can afford it.

__________________
LIVE FREE OR DIE

[COLOR="Blue"]See my pellet guns here: http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/groups/ftf%20pellet%20gunners/air%20gun%20picture%20thread-149/

RESIDENT AIR GUN GUY
FullautoUSA is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 06:03 PM   #19
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
locutus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,121
Liked 5538 Times on 3134 Posts
Likes Given: 4818

Default

I keep reading posts about SpecOps troops using HK and SIG rifles, M14s, etc, and .45 pistols.

I've read a half dozen books written by SEAL and SpecForces operators, and they all used M-4s, Mk 12s and Berettas.: confused:

__________________
“We sleep safely at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would harm us.”


Winston Churchill
locutus is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 06:16 PM   #20
Moderator
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
JonM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Rochester WI,Rochester WI
Posts: 17,404
Liked 5506 Times on 2874 Posts
Likes Given: 357

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus View Post
I keep reading posts about SpecOps troops using HK and SIG rifles, M14s, etc, and .45 pistols.

I've read a half dozen books written by SEAL and SpecForces operators, and they all used M-4s, Mk 12s and Berettas.: confused:
the adoption of the scar17 is new to socom. any real world use is under strict nda terms. with obama cracking down on navy seals for just letting cod black ops take pics of their socks its unlikely your going to hear about any scar17 usage anytime soon
__________________

"Gun control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound." — L. Neil Smith

The problem with being stupid is you cannot simply decide to stop doing dumb things...

JonM is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Scar DSG Auto & Semi-Auto Discussion 5 08-30-2012 06:49 AM
SCAR or ACR? Broke124 AR-15 Discussion 95 12-17-2011 01:59 PM
ACR or SCAR-H? shon0331 Auto & Semi-Auto Discussion 5 12-03-2011 04:50 PM
Scar? stiletto407 AR-15 Discussion 2 08-10-2010 08:04 PM
Fn scar ronl Auto & Semi-Auto Discussion 1 12-14-2009 07:00 AM



Newest Threads