Not too impressed with the FN SCAR

P

Palmetto-Pride

New member
So I always thought the SCAR looked to be a pretty impressive rifle from what I have read and heard. So yesterday I pick one up for the first time and I was totally unimpressed/disappointed. First I didn't realize the lower receiver was made of plastic and the ergonomics were horrible I thought. I can't believe the price they go for. I bet if you were to take 5 people who didn't know a thing about guns and hand them a SCAR and a AR-15 and ask them which gun they thought was more expensive all 5 would pick the AR. Anyone else have the same observation?
 
the sf guys had a position close to me in afgan, i know they really did not like the reciprocating charging handle caused alot of guys to loose some skin on the thumb. i think that the only reason they were using the scar was cause they wanted a semi auto .308 the scar was the way they could do it.
 
The SCAR just doesnt do it for me. And trust me I'm a total hewer when it comes to having what the cool kids have and normally I would be a total sucker for " the new SF rifle ". But I don't know why and cannot explain it but I feel no attraction whatsoever to the SCAR.


And Good Lord willing , at some point this year a WC lawsuit of mine will settle and I'll get some change. And I'm hoping to add a few boomers to the portfolio , including at least one of some sort of showpiece. And I think I'd take an ACR over the SCAR to be honest.
 
from what i understand the acr has issues with accuracy as well, personally i just dont see a point to paying the money for either rifle when im not going to get the use out of it. i can see a swat team or sf team needing the ability to take a rifle from an entry carbine to DM rifle as the misson changes to cut down on costs and armorer turn around time where basicly all mantince can be done at the operator error. however i just dont see the point for personal use. by all means dont get me wrong if you want one and you got the money go a head. for my money though there are better options.
 
To me, the SCAR feels like a brick with a barrel. Even the 5.56 version is clunky.
The ACR and XCR are a little better, but not much.
 
I've used the 17 a good bit and really like it. It may be my favorite semi-308 out there. The accuracy is great for a non bolt gun, recoil is very tame, and I've never had a malfunction with it. That said, it's not worth the money for the 556 version IMO.
 
I've pretty much thought the same about any of the modern combat rifle designs I've tried. just too much plastic used for for a $2000 rifle and nothing is in a place that fosters either ambidextrous or tactical use. I could make better use of a Remington 700 in a combat environment than many of these new designs. but that's just me, I'm sure 15 different people are about to explain why the bushmaster ACR and FN SCAR are superior to an M16/4 but I've found that for how much the design is knocked, it has been used for over 40 years and I can do everything from make ready to reload without ever taking my eyes off the target or my firing hand off the gun. try doing that with a Steyr AUG or SIG 556.
 
try a Robinson Arms XCR.

Charging handle does not reciprocate (and if you are nuts enough to do it acts as a forward assist, but the nice thing is you don't have an appendage of the forward assist like the AR)

Bolt is like an AK. Stock folds.

Its simple (amazingly simple, no small parts to loose).

Fantastic ergonomics. All the stuff is in the right place. I have handled and own AK and AR (as well as handled the SCAR and the Sig stuff).

XCR is really really good. Not as refined as the AR, but works very well, solid, well built.

I think it would be the basis for an outstanding rifle to replace the M16/M4
 
Agreed. The scar is nothing to write home about. For as much as they wanna charge for them it feels cheap. I prefer the acr to the scar and m4
 
I sure like my SCAR 16s it's a great shooting rifle and it's accurate. I have my 3.5x35 T11F ACOG mounted on it and where i aim i hit.
It's so simple to clean sure beats my ARs and the bolt is a solid monster with a really good extractor. Not a bunch of wimpy hardware in use by FN.
Hey if people don't like the SCARs thats for them to decide, but i really like mine.:)
 
I owned an ACR, briefly. Until Bushmaster or Remimgton decide to release the ACR V2, not worth it. There's absolutely no reason for a rifle with so much plastic in it to weigh 2lbs more than a comparably equipped M4gery. It's just too dang heavy, like a few ounces less than an M1A. Also the lever attached to the barrel nut sheared off on me after only having the rifle a few months. Add to that the fact that Bushy never came out with the caliber change kits and the QD barrel is pretty darn useless. The trigger is pretty terrible, worse than the one on Uncle Sam's M16A4. If you don't like the grip, too bad you're stuck with it. Forget mounting a 1-point if you're a lefty. Bushmaster crapped the bed so bad on the ACR it almost seems like they meant to.
 
Too each their own, but after buying the 17, liked it so much I had to have the 16....they're among my very favorite rifles:
-plastic lower is more durable and lighter than an aluminum one....akin to the plastic magazines in an X bolt (which I'm a fan of as well)
-reciprocating handle....I keep my thumb OUT OF THE WAY....I find that very simple....also much more ergonomic than any of my at-15 platforms
-accuracy is excellent....17 shooting less than 1" and the 16 shot 5/8" groups last time I had it out (recently got my suppressor that runs on both and think it did improve accuracy, but that's as well as any of my rifles shoot, including bolt guns).
-runs extremely clean (I have a tavor, m1a so ok, Barrett rec 7, Daniel defense that was converted to 300 blackout after getting the 16 because it became a dust magnet after, m&p 10, stag model 6....the only of these that I'd give an edge on this is the Barrett)
-very soft shooter (before suppressor...with the OSS the 17 shoots not much more recoil than an ar and the 16 about like a 22...that's not exaggeration either, amazing).
-ease of breaking it down/maintenance
-oh, they also look as cool as anything out IMO ....(why else would they be so often used in movies?)

The only downsides are they yes, they are expensive and the 17 I suppressed is LOUD
 
Yup, I have said since I first held one that they are extremely overpriced for what is actually offered.
I think they are cool guns, but in my opinion there is about 1/2 the amount of workmanship in a SCAR as there is in an FAL or an AR.

If we can buy ARs out the door at about $950 SCARS should sell for about $550 to $600, but I have seen them offered to unknowing buyers (and some actually find men willing to pay) for up to $3200.

Rip off artists are everywhere, but it all starts with FNs price which is FAR too high for what they are actually making.
 
Well people can decide if FNs pricing is to high and not buy the SCARs,but if you look at the major parts in a standard AR-15 and compare them to the SCARs, you will quickly notice their a lot bigger and better Engineered then the ARs.
The ARs bolts have had breakage problems for years,also the extractors have always caused problem.
The FN SCARs have the best bolts and their piston system is better then other piston rifles systems, they really do a good job, and they run a lot cleaner then many of the others piston systems in use.

Again no one is forcing anyone to buy a SCAR, but they are sure selling well even at their higher prices then many other rifles.
 
you will quickly notice their a lot bigger and better Engineered then the ARs[/QUOTE
Agreed and that doesn't come from holding one and thinking it's too expensive, you have to get into it to see that difference.

Of the guns I have, the only 1 I may put above as far as engineering and fit/finish, would be the Barrett Rec 7.

Many choose to bash other guns they don't own and in most cases, have never operated-I suppose they have their reasons for doing so but I've never seen any reason to do so, even on ones I've had that I traded towards something else....
Especially if I have no personal in depth knowledge of another gun.
Click to expand...
 
In the SCAR price range, I'll take an LMT with a Mike Rock barrel. Much more accurate than the typical SCAR, and the two I've owned have collectively accounted for 1 failure in about 10,000 rounds. It was out-of-spec ammo that blew a primer down into the trigger group.

But I wouldn't think someone had made a mistake by any means if they bought a SCAR.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top