SCAR 17s: Review with Accuracy Report

Awesome. I've seen a lot of groups from MK16s in the .5inch range with match ammunition so I'd be willing to be the 17S would probably do the same with the right optic.

I'd like to see how manageable the recoil is with a suppressor if you ever feel compelled to mount one.
 
Yeah, I think the optic will definitely make a difference. I mean heck, three of the rounds went through the same hole. With the 4x ACOG I couldn't see enough of the bullseye to get it perfectly aligned for each of the 5 rounds fired. If I were at 10x or more, it would be been easier to line things up and obviously would have brought the groups down in size even more. I think 3/4" or 1/2" groups at 100 yards are obtainable.
 
How are the 17's magazines? Do they seem sturdy? As in, will take a hammer blow sturdy?

One thing about the some of the older battle rifles is that they have a nice sturdy mag. I'd hate to hear that FN just upsized a m16 mag and all its problems.




One bit of criticism: I thought this video was a little too infomercially at times. I like in your videos that you just seem to be a guy commenting honestly on his guns. Maybe there is simply nothing bad to say about the SCAR 17 - but like I said, this came off more as a slick commercial than a user review.

Anyhow, keep up the good work!
 
Willie D, sounds like a production issue. I will not say I can do any better as I do not make videos like this.

That being said, it is true. I can't think of anything bad to say about the MK16 or 17 and the 16s/17s are probably exactly the same.

This design did after all win the SOCOM contract for the SCAR competition. Although 16 procurement has ceased (budget decision as there are still many good-enough new M4s circulating around), procurement of the 17 continues.
 
Sturmgewehre, I have to say you make a great video--very well produced.

What glass would you ideally have on the 17s? Also, do you think that the 16" barrel greatly underserves the 308?

I don't know about you guys, but I'm currently torn between purchasing a 16s, 17s and ACR... I currently own 2 ARs (16" and 20") and an M1A, but would really like to pick up a single, low-maintenance, long-life battle rifle to replace the others (or at least a couple of them) and reduce the number of different calibers of ammo to stock. I just wonder if the 17s is the perfect do-all, lightweight knock-down weapon we have all been waiting for for so many years. As much as I love my M1A, how can you beat the folding stock and integral scope rail!

Anyhow, I greatly appreciated the video and look forward to any sequels.
 
What glass would you ideally have on the 17s? Also, do you think that the 16" barrel greatly underserves the 308?
Click to expand...
That's a great question. I will take my chronograph out and get some velocities on various ammo (mil-surp to match) and see just how much velocity is given up in the 16" barrel. Watch for an update video.

I don't know about you guys, but I'm currently torn between purchasing a 16s, 17s and ACR... I currently own 2 ARs (16" and 20") and an M1A, but would really like to pick up a single, low-maintenance, long-life battle rifle to replace the others (or at least a couple of them) and reduce the number of different calibers of ammo to stock. I just wonder if the 17s is the perfect do-all, lightweight knock-down weapon we have all been waiting for for so many years. As much as I love my M1A, how can you beat the folding stock and integral scope rail!
Click to expand...
I have two SCAR 16s's and one 17s. I am a convert. I used to buy AR's, that has stopped and now all I do is eyeball more SCARs. I want a FDE 17s that I will bob the barrel on to 14" and stick on a AAC flash suppressor (have it pinned of course). I'm going to send off one of my 16s's for the same treatment.

I have only spent some range time with the ACR and between the two, I much prefer the SCAR. The ACR is very front heavy and the stock is kind of strange. But that's a matter of personal preference. That, and Bushmaster doesn't have a very good reputation for attention to detail and quality, if you believe what you read on places like AR15.com. I personally didn't see any obvious flaws in the ACR's I've spent time with, so I can't really say.

Again, it's personal preference. You would have to play with each one and decide which one trips your sear.

Anyhow, I greatly appreciated the video and look forward to any sequels.
Click to expand...

Thank you, much appreciated.
 
I'd like to see how manageable the recoil is with a suppressor if you ever feel compelled to mount one.
Click to expand...
If I get a second one, I will put a AAC flash suppressor on it... and bob the barrel. But I'm pretty confident the PWS compensator plays a pretty big role in taming the recoil. For that reason I'm reluctant to remove it because it helps to make the rifle extremely pleasant to shoot.
 
One bit of criticism: I thought this video was a little too infomercially at times. I like in your videos that you just seem to be a guy commenting honestly on his guns. Maybe there is simply nothing bad to say about the SCAR 17 - but like I said, this came off more as a slick commercial than a user review.
Click to expand...
I can see where you're coming from.

I was playing with a slightly different style of shooting. I was getting tired of the static behind the table reviews and wanted to try my hand with something a little different.

As for the content of the video, I'm 100% sold on the SCAR platform now. I've spent some time with the 16 and 17 and honestly, I've never handled a better 5.56 and .308 rifle. While the 16 isn't all that more advanced or even improved over a high quality AR, the 17 is a major step forward in .308 military rifles IMHO.

Thanks for the honest feedback though!
 
Do they seem sturdy? As in, will take a hammer blow sturdy?
Click to expand...
They seem to be made of steel, perhaps it's an alloy. But as far as taking a beating from a hammer, I have no idea and I probably won't test it out given how scarce magazines are right now. :) But I would say they look more durable than your typical NATO M16 magazine and not quite as beefy as a military surplus FAL magazine, but close.
 
Jesus--is that really a 1 MOA group?
Click to expand...
Every group I fired with Federal Gold 168's was 1" or less that day. The 175 Black Hills was 2.5". I would say the rifle really likes the FGM 168's.

With a more powerful scope (the ACOG is only 4x) I'm sure the rifle will easily do 3/4" or better consistently. It's amazingly accurate for what it is.
 
Does anyone know if the 17s magazines are unique? I'm under the impression that they are specific to this rifle...
 
I decided to give the Vortex Viper PST 4-16x50 a try. They're new comers to the long range scope market but they have a great lifetime warranty and I've yet to find a bad review of them. Everyone says they're worth twice as much as they sell for. I paid $699 with shipping from Optics Planet. I will mount it via a Larue 104 quick detach mount.

I'm an old Leupold fan and I've also been a fan of Nightforce... I gave them a try when they were relative new comers years ago and they turned out to be top of the line. I'm hoping Vortex follows a similar path.

The PST has a zero stop and illuminated reticule which are features on scopes costing much more than I paid.

I'll let you guys know how the scope works out and how the SCAR shoots with proper glass on it.
 
I would like to see a vid of it SxS with some competitors. Throw in the RFB for an economical choice (sad when $1200 is economical :() Just a thought.

Beentown
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top