SCAR
- Thread starter shootist2004
- Start date
Re: SCAR
And this surprises who?
Will be interesting to see if civilian acquisition will remain possible with the civilian version of this weapon, and if the price will now go down.
And this surprises who?
Will be interesting to see if civilian acquisition will remain possible with the civilian version of this weapon, and if the price will now go down.
Re: SCAR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: HateCA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And this surprises who?
</div></div>
Not me... That money will be spent where it's really needed: endless welfare
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: HateCA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And this surprises who?
</div></div>
Not me... That money will be spent where it's really needed: endless welfare
Re: SCAR
Funny timing.
I just opened up my new copy of Guns & Ammo and saw the article "FNH SCAR APPROVAL."
"FNH USA received notification from the USSOCOM Program Executive Officer-SOF Warrior (PEO-SW) thet the SCAR Acquisition Decision Memorandum (ADM) was approved and signed on April 14, 2010. This decision authorizes the production and deployment of the Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle (SCAR) MK 16 and MK 17.... The SCAR is the first new assault rifle procured by the US military through full and open competition since the M16 trials were held in the mid 1960's."
Funny timing.
I just opened up my new copy of Guns & Ammo and saw the article "FNH SCAR APPROVAL."
"FNH USA received notification from the USSOCOM Program Executive Officer-SOF Warrior (PEO-SW) thet the SCAR Acquisition Decision Memorandum (ADM) was approved and signed on April 14, 2010. This decision authorizes the production and deployment of the Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle (SCAR) MK 16 and MK 17.... The SCAR is the first new assault rifle procured by the US military through full and open competition since the M16 trials were held in the mid 1960's."
Re: SCAR
For all practical purposes it looks like FNH/USA got stroked then let down hard. It musta been the 'melty' thing the rifles did in testing
For all practical purposes it looks like FNH/USA got stroked then let down hard. It musta been the 'melty' thing the rifles did in testing
Re: SCAR
I just read in Army times that the Mk16 is not being adopted, but mentioned nothing about the Mk17, except that there is a kit that can make a Mk17 shoot 5.56
So, maybe they are just picking up Mk17s...?
Might also be a budget thing as purchasing the Mk16s would come form SOCOM's budget, not big Army's budget as the Army already provides SOCOM with M4s.
I just read in Army times that the Mk16 is not being adopted, but mentioned nothing about the Mk17, except that there is a kit that can make a Mk17 shoot 5.56
So, maybe they are just picking up Mk17s...?
Might also be a budget thing as purchasing the Mk16s would come form SOCOM's budget, not big Army's budget as the Army already provides SOCOM with M4s.
Re: SCAR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: El Shavewa</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Funny timing.
I just opened up my new copy of Guns & Ammo and saw the article "FNH SCAR APPROVAL."
"FNH USA received notification from the USSOCOM Program Executive Officer-SOF Warrior (PEO-SW) thet the SCAR Acquisition Decision Memorandum (ADM) was approved and signed on April 14, 2010. This decision authorizes the production and deployment of the Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle (SCAR) MK 16 and MK 17.... The SCAR is the first new assault rifle procured by the US military through full and open competition since the M16 trials were held in the mid 1960's." </div></div>
Yep, that was funny. I was going through that myself.
SB, what is the "melty" thing? The plastic/polymer was getting soft under the heat coming from the metal components?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: El Shavewa</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Funny timing.
I just opened up my new copy of Guns & Ammo and saw the article "FNH SCAR APPROVAL."
"FNH USA received notification from the USSOCOM Program Executive Officer-SOF Warrior (PEO-SW) thet the SCAR Acquisition Decision Memorandum (ADM) was approved and signed on April 14, 2010. This decision authorizes the production and deployment of the Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle (SCAR) MK 16 and MK 17.... The SCAR is the first new assault rifle procured by the US military through full and open competition since the M16 trials were held in the mid 1960's." </div></div>
Yep, that was funny. I was going through that myself.
SB, what is the "melty" thing? The plastic/polymer was getting soft under the heat coming from the metal components?
Re: SCAR
Oh, I could tell you all about the SCAR, what it's good for, where and with what attachments...
..if we were talking Call of Duty. :\ Failure, I am.
Oh, I could tell you all about the SCAR, what it's good for, where and with what attachments...
..if we were talking Call of Duty. :\ Failure, I am.
Re: SCAR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: HotIce</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: El Shavewa</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Funny timing.
I just opened up my new copy of Guns & Ammo and saw the article "FNH SCAR APPROVAL."
"FNH USA received notification from the USSOCOM Program Executive Officer-SOF Warrior (PEO-SW) thet the SCAR Acquisition Decision Memorandum (ADM) was approved and signed on April 14, 2010. This decision authorizes the production and deployment of the Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle (SCAR) MK 16 and MK 17.... The SCAR is the first new assault rifle procured by the US military through full and open competition since the M16 trials were held in the mid 1960's." </div></div>
Yep, that was funny. I was going through that myself.
SB, what is the "melty" thing? The plastic/polymer was getting soft under the heat coming from the metal components?
</div></div>
If you blaze 10k or so rounds on full auto the foregrip gets a little sticky to the touch
Didn't the XM-8 have the same problem?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: HotIce</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: El Shavewa</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Funny timing.
I just opened up my new copy of Guns & Ammo and saw the article "FNH SCAR APPROVAL."
"FNH USA received notification from the USSOCOM Program Executive Officer-SOF Warrior (PEO-SW) thet the SCAR Acquisition Decision Memorandum (ADM) was approved and signed on April 14, 2010. This decision authorizes the production and deployment of the Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle (SCAR) MK 16 and MK 17.... The SCAR is the first new assault rifle procured by the US military through full and open competition since the M16 trials were held in the mid 1960's." </div></div>
Yep, that was funny. I was going through that myself.
SB, what is the "melty" thing? The plastic/polymer was getting soft under the heat coming from the metal components?
</div></div>
If you blaze 10k or so rounds on full auto the foregrip gets a little sticky to the touch
Didn't the XM-8 have the same problem?
Re: SCAR
i think the scar project was the biggest waste of money EVER. the fact that its taken 6 years to get that gun even remotely in the inventory is a joke. it went back to get fixed god knows how many times and we are still stuck with that stupid recip. charging handle. the piston rod was breaking, then the stocks were breaking, the plastic couldn't take the heat, then it cracked in the cold. my god.
i think the scar project was the biggest waste of money EVER. the fact that its taken 6 years to get that gun even remotely in the inventory is a joke. it went back to get fixed god knows how many times and we are still stuck with that stupid recip. charging handle. the piston rod was breaking, then the stocks were breaking, the plastic couldn't take the heat, then it cracked in the cold. my god.
Re: SCAR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BigJoe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i think the scar project was the biggest waste of money EVER. the fact that its taken 6 years to get that gun even remotely in the inventory is a joke. it went back to get fixed god knows how many times and we are still stuck with that stupid recip. charging handle. the piston rod was breaking, then the stocks were breaking, the plastic couldn't take the heat, then it cracked in the cold. my god. </div></div>
Sounds like they didn't have quality Materials/Industrial engineers on the project if all those things are true.
Either that or they were just in such a hurry they didn't take the time to fully evaluate the materials used. Shame, because Magpul is usually respected in the area of materials selection as far as I'm aware, and I'm certain their initial designs were all well documented.
Boondoggles.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BigJoe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i think the scar project was the biggest waste of money EVER. the fact that its taken 6 years to get that gun even remotely in the inventory is a joke. it went back to get fixed god knows how many times and we are still stuck with that stupid recip. charging handle. the piston rod was breaking, then the stocks were breaking, the plastic couldn't take the heat, then it cracked in the cold. my god. </div></div>
Sounds like they didn't have quality Materials/Industrial engineers on the project if all those things are true.
Either that or they were just in such a hurry they didn't take the time to fully evaluate the materials used. Shame, because Magpul is usually respected in the area of materials selection as far as I'm aware, and I'm certain their initial designs were all well documented.
Boondoggles.
Re: SCAR
The issue is the M4's are simplistic. If one wants to dethrone the M4's one is going to have to K.I.S.S. or the M4's are here to stay for a lot longer then one might think.
The issue is the M4's are simplistic. If one wants to dethrone the M4's one is going to have to K.I.S.S. or the M4's are here to stay for a lot longer then one might think.
Re: SCAR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: COURAGEWOLF</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BigJoe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i think the scar project was the biggest waste of money EVER. the fact that its taken 6 years to get that gun even remotely in the inventory is a joke. it went back to get fixed god knows how many times and we are still stuck with that stupid recip. charging handle. the piston rod was breaking, then the stocks were breaking, the plastic couldn't take the heat, then it cracked in the cold. my god. </div></div>
Sounds like they didn't have quality Materials/Industrial engineers on the project if all those things are true.
Either that or they were just in such a hurry they didn't take the time to fully evaluate the materials used. Shame, because <span style="color: #FF0000">Magpul</span> is usually respected in the area of materials selection as far as I'm aware, and I'm certain their initial designs were all well documented.
Boondoggles. </div></div>
Huh? Did Magpul have anything to do with FN's SCAR? I was under the impression the ACR/Masada was Magpuls deal.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: COURAGEWOLF</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BigJoe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i think the scar project was the biggest waste of money EVER. the fact that its taken 6 years to get that gun even remotely in the inventory is a joke. it went back to get fixed god knows how many times and we are still stuck with that stupid recip. charging handle. the piston rod was breaking, then the stocks were breaking, the plastic couldn't take the heat, then it cracked in the cold. my god. </div></div>
Sounds like they didn't have quality Materials/Industrial engineers on the project if all those things are true.
Either that or they were just in such a hurry they didn't take the time to fully evaluate the materials used. Shame, because <span style="color: #FF0000">Magpul</span> is usually respected in the area of materials selection as far as I'm aware, and I'm certain their initial designs were all well documented.
Boondoggles. </div></div>
Huh? Did Magpul have anything to do with FN's SCAR? I was under the impression the ACR/Masada was Magpuls deal.
Re: SCAR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: HateCA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The issue is the M4's are simplistic. If one wants to dethrone the M4's one is going to have to K.I.S.S. or the M4's are here to stay for a lot longer then one might think. </div></div>
+1. We've had the M4 system for so long now that most soldiers and Marines know it backwards and forwards, can fix issues, and know the limitations. The SCAR is an unknown, a variable, and when my neck's on the line, I'll be damned if I'm carrying something that I don't have full confidence in.
I had a buddy in 1st SFG who was part of the testing for it, and he said it was an alright weapon system, but for the fact that as soon as anyone saw he and his team using it, they stuck out has high value targets to watching eyes. He recommended against its adoption in the end.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: HateCA</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The issue is the M4's are simplistic. If one wants to dethrone the M4's one is going to have to K.I.S.S. or the M4's are here to stay for a lot longer then one might think. </div></div>
+1. We've had the M4 system for so long now that most soldiers and Marines know it backwards and forwards, can fix issues, and know the limitations. The SCAR is an unknown, a variable, and when my neck's on the line, I'll be damned if I'm carrying something that I don't have full confidence in.
I had a buddy in 1st SFG who was part of the testing for it, and he said it was an alright weapon system, but for the fact that as soon as anyone saw he and his team using it, they stuck out has high value targets to watching eyes. He recommended against its adoption in the end.
Re: SCAR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: drmarc</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: COURAGEWOLF</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BigJoe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i think the scar project was the biggest waste of money EVER. the fact that its taken 6 years to get that gun even remotely in the inventory is a joke. it went back to get fixed god knows how many times and we are still stuck with that stupid recip. charging handle. the piston rod was breaking, then the stocks were breaking, the plastic couldn't take the heat, then it cracked in the cold. my god. </div></div>
Sounds like they didn't have quality Materials/Industrial engineers on the project if all those things are true.
Either that or they were just in such a hurry they didn't take the time to fully evaluate the materials used. Shame, because <span style="color: #FF0000">Magpul</span> is usually respected in the area of materials selection as far as I'm aware, and I'm certain their initial designs were all well documented.
Boondoggles. </div></div>
Huh? Did Magpul have anything to do with FN's SCAR? I was under the impression the ACR/Masada was Magpuls deal. </div></div>
Sorry had the two confused for a minute I'm talking out my ass.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: drmarc</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: COURAGEWOLF</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BigJoe</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i think the scar project was the biggest waste of money EVER. the fact that its taken 6 years to get that gun even remotely in the inventory is a joke. it went back to get fixed god knows how many times and we are still stuck with that stupid recip. charging handle. the piston rod was breaking, then the stocks were breaking, the plastic couldn't take the heat, then it cracked in the cold. my god. </div></div>
Sounds like they didn't have quality Materials/Industrial engineers on the project if all those things are true.
Either that or they were just in such a hurry they didn't take the time to fully evaluate the materials used. Shame, because <span style="color: #FF0000">Magpul</span> is usually respected in the area of materials selection as far as I'm aware, and I'm certain their initial designs were all well documented.
Boondoggles. </div></div>
Huh? Did Magpul have anything to do with FN's SCAR? I was under the impression the ACR/Masada was Magpuls deal. </div></div>
Sorry had the two confused for a minute I'm talking out my ass.
Re: SCAR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: COURAGEWOLF</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you blaze 10k or so rounds on full auto the foregrip gets a little sticky to the touch
</div></div>
Hey, maybe that's a feature to avoid losing the grip while your hands are sweating under the heat of the battle
Plastic should not be used in any part besides stock and handgrip IMO (that is, well far from heat sources), but now they masquerade it under the fancy name "polymer" and they think they can make firearms out of it.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: COURAGEWOLF</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you blaze 10k or so rounds on full auto the foregrip gets a little sticky to the touch
Hey, maybe that's a feature to avoid losing the grip while your hands are sweating under the heat of the battle
Plastic should not be used in any part besides stock and handgrip IMO (that is, well far from heat sources), but now they masquerade it under the fancy name "polymer" and they think they can make firearms out of it.
Re: SCAR
Here's an update on the Scar article.
http://kitup.military.com/2010/06/socom-developing-caliber-conversion-for-scar.html
The Scar program is still on just not for a dedicated 5.56
Here's an update on the Scar article.
http://kitup.military.com/2010/06/socom-developing-caliber-conversion-for-scar.html
The Scar program is still on just not for a dedicated 5.56
Re: SCAR
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: AtOne</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's an update on the Scar article.
http://kitup.military.com/2010/06/socom-developing-caliber-conversion-for-scar.html
The Scar program is still on just not for a dedicated 5.56 </div></div>
So what’s the point then? The whole thing still sounds like a huge cluster.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: AtOne</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Here's an update on the Scar article.
http://kitup.military.com/2010/06/socom-developing-caliber-conversion-for-scar.html
The Scar program is still on just not for a dedicated 5.56 </div></div>
So what’s the point then? The whole thing still sounds like a huge cluster.
