• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Scar 17s eat optics and accessories

Or you could just not buy rifle that breaks shit....just saying

Or you can ignore this clown and buy what you want. Just saying.
Scar is a great rifle, while I believe they can break optics it’s More of an exception rather than a rule. Thousands of rounds through two different scars, three different optics and never had a problem
 
  • Like
Reactions: N-C
I killed a Nighforce in Sphur mount and a Acog. Ran it with a short dot (approx 2k rounds and it was fine) but decided I would rather not kill the short dot which resulted in the sale of my Scar17
 
Its a great mount. That is the mount I use on most rifles I have. In particular on the SCAR as it allegedly has been confirmed it generates some odd harmonics. But aside from that my personal feeling is that the heavy bolt carrier slinging back and forth could induce a little extra whip in a cantilever mount so I don't use a cantilevered mount on my SCAR. I have had a number of optics on my SCAR and I have not had any fail. Round counts for each are low for full disclosure but it has ranged from Aimpoints to TA11's to USO 1.5-6 to S&B Short Dot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N-C
@Rudy Gonsior - do/will the Elcan Spectres hold up & survive on the Scar? What optics(if any) have you found will hold up without issues on the Scar? I'd think fixed power stuff would do better than variables and electronic stuff but I don't know.
What's your overall opinion of the rifle? Would you choose something different for that particular role if it were up to you?
 
I've never seen an Elcan Specter DR go down on a SCAR, I think its design lends its self well and I'd have no worries running one. Never seen any of the S&Bs go down either but I'm not sure I'd be willing to risk my own money on it without understanding the exact physics of whats going on. I kinda think any of the traditional tube and erector designs might be at risk, so I'm not sure a fix power would be ok but less moving parts is probably better off. Someone mentioned Springer air rifles earlier and their unique recoil properties and I'm thinking something similar could be at play.

Over all I'm a big fan of the SCAR-H in terms of reliability and accuracy. Its not un common to see SCARs shoot M80 ball in the 1-2 MOA range and M118LR in the 0.75 to 1.5 MOA range. I hate the buttstock though, the plastic latch has broken on me a few times with rough mishaps like dumping dirt bikes and landing on top of it. Plus I don't care for the cheek piece, my face is always low and while I can adjust it enough to get a good sight picture after a few hundred rounds that angle really beats the shit out of my face but running suppressed helps a lot.

I think as a DM the SCAR-H running a Specter DR 1.5-6x is great, I actually ran one as a SASS for a while (before having issues with the NF and Leupold) as a urban sniper platform. The shorty barrel/suppressed with a 3-15x optic was a super handy rifle out to 600m. Obviously the Mk20 makes for a slightly better platform but that was a fun little setup until the optic issues set in.
 
No optic is immune to the evil recoil of the scar. I’ve heard stories of all optics failing on the scar , including the elcan. I remember reading something about elcans having issues on the scar overseas. As a civilian,the elcan warranty is a one year guarantee, which puts you out of luck if your scar takes it out.
However, again it seems to be more the exception than the rule.
If you wan to be safe, just put optics with good warrantys and call it a day.
So far I’ve run the following optics on my scars: leupold 1-6, Schmidt Bender 1-8, vortex razor 2 3-18, and now the acog ta11. Thousands of rounds never a problem



Finally Just Got my FN SCAR 17S Today :ROFLMAO:

With Trijicon T
I've never seen an Elcan Specter DR go down on a SCAR, I think its design lends its self well and I'd have no worries running one. Never seen any of the S&Bs go down either but I'm not sure I'd be willing to risk my own money on it without understanding the exact physics of whats going on. I kinda think any of the traditional tube and erector designs might be at risk, so I'm not sure a fix power would be ok but less moving parts is probably better off. Someone mentioned Springer air rifles earlier and their unique recoil properties and I'm thinking something similar could be at play.

Over all I'm a big fan of the SCAR-H in terms of reliability and accuracy. Its not un common to see SCARs shoot M80 ball in the 1-2 MOA range and M118LR in the 0.75 to 1.5 MOA range. I hate the buttstock though, the plastic latch has broken on me a few times with rough mishaps like dumping dirt bikes and landing on top of it. Plus I don't care for the cheek piece, my face is always low and while I can adjust it enough to get a good sight picture after a few hundred rounds that angle really beats the shit out of my face but running suppressed helps a lot.

I think as a DM the SCAR-H running a Specter DR 1.5-6x is great, I actually ran one as a SASS for a while (before having issues with the NF and Leupold) as a urban sniper platform. The shorty barrel/suppressed with a 3-15x optic was a super handy rifle out to 600m. Obviously the Mk20 makes for a slightly better platform but that was a fun little setup until the optic issues set in.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sako man and N-C
ELCAN Specter DR 1.5x/6x for 3 years no issues at all but not surprised since the ELCAN is built like a brick s*%^house.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N-C
I read a report from either Crane or Picatinny a few years back in regards to SCAR-H recoil. The fact that they were aware of an issue and trying to find the cause would be what some would call a "clue". At any rate, there were charts comparing the recoil forces over time of the SCAR-H and a few other rifles like the M-4 and I think the M-110. I was surprised that the SCAR-H max recoil force wasn't much higher than the M-4 at about 20% more. The G force on the other hand had a bit more abrupt a transition for the SCAR than the other rifles.

As for personal experience, I have a couple thousand rounds through the SCAR and had an EOTech die on one. Another guy on my team ran a SCAR for a deployment. It killed the PVS-24 that he had on it even though we have put lots of rounds through M-110s with PVS-24s without an issue. Prior to this, I had a different guy on my other team kill an LA-5 that was on his SCAR. A while later we were issued LA-5Es that were specifically hardened to help handle the recoil of the SCARs. Once again, an indication something is afoot when the military is procuring more resilient equipment to overcome issues with attachments for the weapon system.
 
^ nope all wrong. Just coincidences. Everyone knows the scar kicks less than other rifles
Also
"Use quality optics you won't have problems"
"Use non cantilever mounts you won't have problems"
"Full auto is what kills the optics"
 
  • Like
Reactions: McCrazy
Didn't have problems with my Trijicon in a LaRue - 1000 rounds or so - buy as a prior post mentioned this is likely a drop in the bucket for the pros. I'm going with this set up for now...
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1030.JPG
    IMG_1030.JPG
    392.7 KB · Views: 137
  • IMG_1031.JPG
    IMG_1031.JPG
    435.8 KB · Views: 129
My personal experience. Already got crapped on in another thread by a SCAR fanboy for noting my experience with both my expensive and very good NF and CQBSS. Thankfully both companies are great for customer care.

I wouldn't be surprised if there are some here who still believe the earth is flat because they have never seen it's curvature.
 
What Nightforce and what broke on it?

My ATACR F1 4-16x MIL-C

I have had three ATACR's F1, Two of them 4-16s, both phenomenal optics, the one I put on my SCAR went haywire. My other 4-16 MIL-R has been on my Larue with no problems what so ever. I believe these to be premium optics and it's not the optics fault. Love the rifle, a big fan, just need to figure out what optic to put on next, might be an Elcan or Vortex 1-6?
 
  • Like
Reactions: deersniper
My personal experience. Already got crapped on in another thread by a SCAR fanboy for noting my experience with both my expensive and very good NF and CQBSS. Thankfully both companies are great for customer care.

I wouldn't be surprised if there are some here who still believe the earth is flat because they have never seen it's curvature.

Personally, i really the acog with rmr. Keeps it lightweight, can easily make shots quickly to 500-600 yards, and the transition to the rmr is faster than the elcan going from four to one power. I see a lot of guys with elcans run an rmr on top, which in that case, just run the acog rmr.

If you do decide to go elcan, many places including europoptics are running great deals on them, as they are running out old inventory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sako man
Personally, i really the acog with rmr. Keeps it lightweight, can easily make shots quickly to 500-600 yards, and the transition to the rmr is faster than the elcan going from four to one power. I see a lot of guys with elcans run an rmr on top, which in that case, just run the acog rmr.

If you do decide to go elcan, many places including europoptics are running great deals on them, as they are running out old inventory.

great advice, I would probably have to go the cheeper route and do the $1200 ELCAN and not the higher end version. But for a similar price I can have the ACOG, which would have some weight savings.
 
Last edited:
Ive owned 2 SCARS, went from an ACOG to a NF 3-9X42 SHV. The ACOG maybe saw 500-700 rounds before it was replaced with the NF. I never had a problem with the ACOG. The NF saw well over 700 rounds on the first SCAR, and maybe 300-400 rounds on my second SCAR, no problems with the optic. It is mounted with an ADM RECON mount, think the "S" model but I would have to double check. Using the factory torque specs, the optic originally slid in the mount. ADM sent me replacement solid rings to try and I over-torqued the rings (not recommenede) and the scope stopped moving. The SCAR destroyed my buddy's Vortex PST Viper, took maybe 500 rounds. My 2 cents....
 
Ive owned 2 SCARS, went from an ACOG to a NF 3-9X42 SHV. The ACOG maybe saw 500-700 rounds before it was replaced with the NF. I never had a problem with the ACOG. The NF saw well over 700 rounds on the first SCAR, and maybe 300-400 rounds on my second SCAR, no problems with the optic. It is mounted with an ADM RECON mount, think the "S" model but I would have to double check. Using the factory torque specs, the optic originally slid in the mount. ADM sent me replacement solid rings to try and I over-torqued the rings (not recommenede) and the scope stopped moving. The SCAR destroyed my buddy's Vortex PST Viper, took maybe 500 rounds. My 2 cents....

Yeah, I had my NF in a ADM RECON mount, great mount by the way. SCAR will eat what SCAR like, it does have expensive tastes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TKO
I talked to an employee at scopelist while inquiring about the longevity of a 1-8 shortdot on my 17S and he allowed the an FN rep told him they have narrowed it down to the bolt being slammed forward without a loaded mag. Whether or not that’s true I have no idea but food for thought atleast.
 
I talked to an employee at scopelist while inquiring about the longevity of a 1-8 shortdot on my 17S and he allowed the an FN rep told him they have narrowed it down to the bolt being slammed forward without a loaded mag. Whether or not that’s true I have no idea but food for thought atleast.

Sounds a lot like FN trying to point the finger at everyone else but themselves. This claim does nothing to explain the higher g-forces encountered during the firing of the weapon as mentioned in the study I spoke of earlier.

Also, the SCARs I have messed with were for military use and we don't waste a lot of time slamming bolts forward on empty chambers and then making "pew, pew" noises to satisfy our desire to be bad asses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Craigj56 and THEIS
Hi,

LOL so the slamming backwards under gas pressure with immediate style super G force stop doesn't bother the optics but the bolt carrier closing without being eased closed by loaded magazine is the problem? LOLOL.

When FN figures out how to gradually slow the bolt carrier down in it's rearward motion without affecting the cycling then they will have fixed the problem. Everything else is just finger pointing and masking the problem.

"Hardening" equipment/attachments is everyone else fixing something that is not their fault lol.

Sincerely,
Theis
 
Yeah that’s kinda what I thought but that was his explanation atleast. I’ve been running a cqbss and can tell it’s shaking the shit out of it because my dials keep rattling loose, I’m about to say fuck it and just run irons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sako man
Anyone use a Trijicon thermal in a Scar17? I want to buy the rifle but am leery of screwing up the thermal. Contacted Trijicon and the guy said it might go dark for a moment with recoil but that I couldn’t ‘hurt it’. I’d feel better with that advice in writing but it is what it is. Having had a shitty experience with CS at Flir over a thermal, I’m scared to take the chance....but really want that rifle! And FWIW, Trijicon CS has always been first rate in my experience so there’s that.
 
Anyone use a Trijicon thermal in a Scar17? I want to buy the rifle but am leery of screwing up the thermal. Contacted Trijicon and the guy said it might go dark for a moment with recoil but that I couldn’t ‘hurt it’. I’d feel better with that advice in writing but it is what it is. Having had a shitty experience with CS at Flir over a thermal, I’m scared to take the chance....but really want that rifle! And FWIW, Trijicon CS has always been first rate in my experience so there’s that.
Why take the chance? Just get a light .308 if that’s what you want like a POF Revolution. Or Gii

I have a 17 and won’t put any thermal on it. I have good military hardened thermals
 
I was in your position a couple years ago. I wanted a scar17 to put my Pulsar thermal on. Couldnt find a scar17 in stock, and I didnt want another (AR) platform. I never knew about the POF revolution until I googled lightest AR10 on the market. And when I read up on the Revolution I felt that it was right for me. Its actually lighter than a scar17. So needless to say I bought it, put my Pulsar thermal and suppressor on and never looked back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: deersniper
Thanks. I looked online at that and stumbled on the Rogue pistol. Having never fired a 308 pistol, what are thoughts there? It's only slightly lighter than the rifles but I have a suppressor and it being more compact may be helpful when hunting.
 
Only times I wish my Revolution 308 had a shorter barrel is when Im getting in/out of a UTV. We do alot of hog hunting from these vehicles so im always having to manipulate the rifle cause my suppressor seems to catch everything.

A short barrel 308 does sound interesting though
 
Well, thank for posting those videos. I much as I like Lucas cinematography, watching an amateur gunfighter run around for 60 seconds doesn't lend much to the conversation.

I probably have 10,000+ rounds through a couple different SCAR-L/H and Mk20s now as a professional shooter, and I've spent the last 6 years as a instructor watching SCAR-Hs trickle though SDM/Sniper courses, so maybe add another 20,000 - 30,000 round on to that. Still 30,000 - 40,000 rounds isn't much more than a drop in the bucket and is arguably anecdotal. Baring empirical data, as I only bothered noting trends, the SCAR-H (Mk17 MOD 0 to be exact) have shown a tendency to break optics at rates higher than other platforms. The theory among my peers and one that seems plausible to me, is that the SCAR-H exhibates a resonating recoil impulse though the upper receiver that induces forces on optics that are not typically seen when mounted on other platforms.

Again I don't have data, I don't spend my day in the lab but as a professional shooter and instructor I do spend enough time doing this stuff to know when something is off. Ballpark failure rate from my perspective is hard to nail down, but Crane has crunched some numbers and apparently felt the need to put out guidance on optics and lasers. Yet here we still have people who bother with commenting "My Vortex whatever the fuck, has been running great for the last 4 years with 1k rounds". There have been training days durning pre-mission train ups where 1K is what I've shot before lunch.

^^this

I was in C Co 1st Ranger Battalion in 2009-10. Our company tested the Scar L/H and EGLM grenade launcher for the whole training cycle and deployment for adoption to all of 75th. Both platforms had some minor issues, mainly with the barrel change system and the mags provided with the guns. That being said, the Heavies were not nice to equipment. Its always hard to tell in that setting though what exactly is causing issues with optics or lasers/lights, etc. Was it the dragging my Mk48 across rocks trying to scale a 50-60 degree hill overseas? or the full auto mag dumps at the range with a 12.5" barreled SCAR Heavy lol.

Most of the Heavies(17's) that our company had guys were running ELCANs on. The other choice was Eotechs, which I think a couple guys had because our company also purchased some 3x magnifiers for them as well. The ELCAN's are fucking tough optics... they ran on our Mk48 relentlessly. I was never in the Arms room so I can attend to exactly how many issues we had, but I definitely remember some of the EOtechs having issues, and a few LA-5's here and there. The heavies are badass rifles, but for sure hard on stuff.

75th ended up not adopting the Scar lights, but did keep Scar Heavies around as SDM's and SL/TL weapons. Our battalion ended getting Daniel Defense uppers, and kept a portion of the Scar Heavies...
 
I had an Eotech on my 17 S for two years without any problem. Have had an ACOG for the last 3 years, again without a hitch. I wonder if the Select Fire on the military 17 H is where the problems arise.
 
I had an Eotech on my 17 S for two years without any problem. Have had an ACOG for the last 3 years, again without a hitch. I wonder if the Select Fire on the military 17 H is where the problems arise.

No, you just have a small sample size and higher quality optics (some might question the EOTech hah). Go slap a NC Star on there and see what happens in short order. It also depends on how much you shoot, and random chance. I've never had an optic failure on mine, either, but it's had Nightforce, ACOGs, Aimpoints, and ZCO scopes on it. Most of the failure reports are with low/mid-tier optics, or higher round counts. A few hundred or thousand rounds is unlikely to break anything with decent quality, but after that, it's a crapshoot unless you're in the tank-like optic category.
 
Very interesting thread... and probably saved me from FUBAR-ing my PEQ-2a. Was going to put it on SCAR-17S for a bit of night shooting and decided to look at mounting options... which took me to here.

So far my USO SN-3 1.8 - 10 ERGO/EREK has shown no issues. It's ruggedly mounted and those scopes are pretty overbuilt.

But definitely won't be running my current IR laser/illuminator on the SCAR. Sounds like there is enough material out there to think that one should be cautious with any optics/accessories mounting on SCAR 17 platform.

I tend to think that the forward movement of the large bolt carrier/bolt could be a factor as mentioned above. It's well-known that powerful spring-piston air rifles destroy scopes, which are often designed for rearward impulse... not forward impulse! And it does make sense that if not stripping a round from a magazine (which definitely acts as a buffer, absorbing some energy and slowing the bolt) that the forward impulse of the bolt could be problematic. New SOP with SCAR... don't release the bolt catch on an empty mag well! Lower it... whether it makes much of a difference or not, who cares? It's cheap insurance and not hard to do.

Thanks for the very useful thread and some very good insight from folks using them heavily.

Anyone got recommendations on IR laser/illuminator that is SCAR 17 rated? The Internetosphere is loaded with conflicting info, hokum and sheer silliness. At least this is a trusted community.

Cheers,

Sirhr

PS: Learned an interesting little factoid last week... which is that a PVS-14 is NOT rated for .308 recoil. It should not be mounted on a rifle larger than 5.56. A few years ago, I had my -14 mounted on the rear of a USO scope with a clip-on adapter. Fired maybe about 40 shots total at a couple of schools. Worked like a charm. But the unit failed about a year ago... simply would not turn on. The night shooting is *probably* not why it failed. Sounds like power supply and/or corrosion issues. But it could have been an expensive lesson if the tube was damaged and (so far) it does not appear to have been. So far. Anyway, in talking to the company servicing it, I^2, they were very clear that even on my heavy Sako rifle with a very heavy USO 5 x 25 scope... a PVS-14 is not going to hold up on a .308! Anyway, be sensitive to shock and optics! This thread helps! (Thanks @TheGerman for your recommendation of I^2 for getting my PVS-14 repaired. Great guy! Amazing customer outreach and very knowledgeable!)
 
  • Like
Reactions: deersniper
^ maybe is mentioned already in this thread, there’s a .mil poster that has all the scar hardened optics listed. I think it is block ii it something.

I think a POF Revolution it DPMS Gii will replace mine
 
@sirhrmechanic

The military introduced the LA-5E series of recoil-resistant lasers in order to help mitigate the failure rate of earlier LA-5s on the SCAR-Hs. I'm not sure what the civilian equivalent would be or if there even is one.

I do agree with you that part of the problem is the combined mass of the bolt and rather large bolt carrier slamming forward. Additionally, there is a rather small spring controlling the bolt and bolt carrier's rearward movement; plus all that force is imparted on the bolt carrier pretty much instantly via a short-stroke piston with metal to metal contact instead of the comparatively gentle buildup of pressure that the direct gas impingement design uses.
 
Last edited:
Thanks! Good info! And I think it makes a lot of sense from a purely mechanical/engineering point of view. Can't deny physics!

There seems to be some discussion that the Steiner DBAL-D2 will hold up. But nothing empirical. Steiner makes good stuff, though! So maybe I'll put in an enquiry.

Sadly, the LA-5E is now verboten for this retiree ;-)

Cheers and thanks! Sirhr
 
  • Like
Reactions: McCrazy
@sirhrmechanic

The military introduced the LA-5E series of recoil-resistant lasers in order to help mitigate the failure rate of earlier LA-5s on the SCAR-Hs. I'm not sure what the civilian equivalent would be or if there even is one.

I do agree with you that part of the problem is the combined mass of the bolt and rather large bolt carrier slamming forward. Additionally, there is a rather small spring controlling the bolt and bolt carrier's rearward movement; plus all that force is imparted on the bolt carrier pretty much instantly via a short-stroke piston with metal to metal contact instead of the comparatively gentle buildup of pressure that the direct gas impingement design uses.
and i think you can add to that a poly lower which doesn't do anything to help mitigate the recoil impulse via the grip...
glad you mentioned the fragility of the IR devices to this. i wanted to buy one just to be operator af and not because i hunt at night, so i can deduct the price of a steiner something from the cost of the rrs tripod now. :p
 
FWIW I had a Vortex PST 2.5-10x32 fail on a SCAR 17 not once, but twice. Both times in an ADM Delta mount. No problems (though still early) with a NF 2.5-10.
I’ve had an ACOG on my 17 and an Eotech on my 16. I’m not a round counter, but I shoot them about 3x a month since getting them in about 2014. No problems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McCrazy and theLBC
I’ve had an ACOG on my 17 and an Eotech on my 16. I’m not a round counter, but I shoot them about 3x a month since getting them in about 2014. No problems.

In my experience, the ACOGs have been probably the most durable and reliable optics I've seen used. This coming from 20+ years in the Infantry and Special Forces and seeing hundreds of people put hundreds of optics of dozens of different types through their paces on dozens of different types of weapon systems over those years.

The ACOGs don't get much use any more as there are more modern options with better features out there but they are tough. Out of a couple hundred ACOGs that have seen tough duty, I think I've only seen two break and one was literally run over by a fire truck. The other one was probably also abused. When I took the ACOGs for my ODA to get serviced they were all probably about 20 years old and mechanically they all still worked although the tritium had faded. The same could definitely not be said for the much newer EOTechs.