SCAR first impressions...
 

I recently had the opportunity to check out the SCAR-L and SCAR-H. I didn't get to fire it, and only had a few minutes to handle it and look it over before someone with a heavier collar than me got a presentation on the system. I have seen all the internet buzz, but I was wondering if any of you guys had the chance to fire it, or had any favorable/unfavorable impressions of the SCAR system. I didn't like the stock, it is very bulky but does have a good range of adjustment, and provides a decent cheek weld. There was a thread on SOCnet where it was discussed, but I didn't get the impression that anyone had actually messed with it yet at that time. I like the familiarity of having the same manipulation process for both the 7.62 and 5.56 weapons. Any other impressions/ideas/opinions?

For what its worth I sat in on a group Q&A discussion with the USASOC CSM and got the impression that the USASOC preference is for the HK entry.

I have handled both as well, and still prefer the HK 416 and its 7.62 big brother over the jazzed up FNC.

Sorry to see the SASS project go the way it did.

TR

No experience with it, but I am interested - civilian version said to be out in a year. As for the HK416, the video review of the Blackwater shootout... all the reviewers gave it a thumbs up. I was impressed with what I saw in it, clean running and reliable. Last I heard HK wasn't selling to us civilian dogs though. :boohoo Maybe they'll at least sell us uppers in the future...

I'm stashing some re-up money in hope of getting a 416. If not, I won't be heartbroken if I have to get a Leitner-Wise.

I wouldn't play wiht a SCAR even if TR gave it to me. :D

Agree on the SASS contract 100% TR, wish it had gone another direction.

Can't say I was impressed with it either. Time look at the HK416 or the POF. TR and I spoke with some friends this afternoon who praised the Sig - I'll have to do some research on that one. Anyboby want to start a pool about whether or not the contractor can fill the SASS contract with guns that meet spec? :munchin Peregrino

Which Sig? the 556 or the new .308?

Is there some major flaw that makes the SCAR suck, functionally? I trust you guys more than the powerpoint on how much SOCOM says it's great. I didn't care too much for the ergonomics, but all I've done is hold the thing.

Also, just out of curiosity, what would you like to have seen in the SASS?

Hell no, they are already almost a year behind on another contract. :D

SCAR is being pushed by a few but most recognize it as a piece of crap. It is not ready yet, about 80% finished, and it sucks ergonomically. The picatinney rails are add ons becasue they wanted to go to a propreitary bouble prong system that would have made all of the mounts presently used useless. Anyone want to guess on who would do the upgrade on the present mounts? :munchin

There is a small history with the SASS contractor. I'll let others fill that one in.

Would have like to have seen an accurate semi that is not restricted to 25 to 50 rounds a day. A contractor with a good rep for delivering on time. I can't help but think that if the 417 had been part of the test and if there was a hefty penalty for late delivery, someone would not have been involved.

My two cents on that one.

Concur on all counts.

The SCAR may be functional, but FN has not designed an ergonomically friendly weapon since the SAW. Probably all of the French fashion designers working there.

Consensus at the user/operator level is that the maker of the SASS will eventually deliver a product that will be very late, less accurate than the prototypes, less reliable, fragile, finnicky, and extremely expensive to own and maintain. Time will tell.

I agree the 417 would have been worth waiting for. At least one unit has a few now, but as I understand it, they were incredibly expensive.

Just my .02, YMMV.

TR

The USASOC CG and CSM came to my ANCOC class and somebody asked about the SCAR. The CG said that the SCAR was on hold and that they were leaning toward the HK. Unfortunately he has a nasty habbit of talking in circles so I am not sure exactly what the status is.

SFC W

Thanks for the info, good to know. I have talked to guys using the 416 currently are pretty happy with it. The less change the better, so the 416 fits the bill in that regard. The learning curve is virtually nonexistant since it's a drop-in replacement for the M4 upper. The 417 looks like a good system as well, I wouldn't mind getting my hands on one for a range session.

There is a reason why Reed Knight has one of the biggest (expensive) private machinegun collections in the world.

I have two 416's assigned to me. I have a 10in and a 14.5 inch. They both run like a dream.

I went to Germany for the HK armorers course reciently and during the 416 class I admitted that it was the first time that I had taken the handguard off of a 416. I had been issued my 10 inch 10 months prior and the gas piston system is under the hand guards.... so I had NEVER cleaned my operating system!:eek:

I did not purposefully ignore it, I guess it was just muscle memory from the M-4A1 and NOT removing the RIS/RAS.

So I had fired thousands of rounds (5-10,000) and deployed to sandy places twice in 10 months and the only stoppages that I ever had on my weapon were magazine related.

Reaper, REF the 417: You are correct that current PROTOTYPES that are hand built are STUPID expensive! Each of these weapons is hand made to ensure the capability of redesigning the production line if any major ergonomic issues arise during developmental testing with the selected users.

Once that gun goes into full production, we are thinking that it will be only 20-30% of the cost of the weapon now.

My last MK-11 from Crane cost me $10,000.00 anyway, so what is really expensive?! :D

Ah Reed Knight and KAC...... we could talk for days, but in the end the conventional boys have no SASS capability currently and despite the XM-110's "issues" I believe that it will eventually work itself out. I hope that soldiers don't have to die to make that happen.

SCAR: I have friends and former co-workers that shot it at the down select for Crane. They said that it was the ONLY game in town (there was no HK submission). I was on the phone daily with them while they were in Cali for the "over the beach BS" and they continued to praise the "gun that was running circles around everything else out here". They could not tell me which gun it was but they said that from the first day that they started shooting that there was a single weapon that stood out above the rest.

I concur with the "manprint" (ergonomics) issues of the SCAR but much like the AK-47.....that bitch will run for days.

Good discussion guys. Thanks for letting me play.

Basic,
Is there a quick way to get the handguards off, with no tools, etc? Or is it a more involved process. I was just wondering if it can easily be done in the field.

Yeah its totally easy. you use any flathead screw driver OR the locking lugs of your bolt (as shown by HK) and un screw the single screw on the handguard. The 417 will have two screws, one above and one below the barrel.

HK promises (and I have seen nothing to refute their claims) that removal and replacement of the handguards will not shift Point of Impact (POI) more than 1 MOA for any laser (or optic if you are a Seal) that is mounted on the handguard. Also since the handguard is a single shroud, there is no interference with your pressure switches on your top mounted laser that might be routed down to your forward hand grip.

So I was pretty much told in Armorer's course that I was a puss for not taking my handguard off for fear of jacking up my PEQ-2A/ATPIAL zero.

I've got a picture of RGR Gordo taking one apart downrange floating around on my work lap top. I'm on vacation now, but I'll find it when I get a chance and see about posting it.

Enjoy the break, stay out of trouble in Daytona.

I know im late to this discussion but i thought i would throw in my .02. i was able to shoot both the SCAR-L and SCAR-H when FNH came out to mckellers lodge one morning last year. it was pretty much all SF guys checking the wpns out and we all came up with a few common complaints. The FNH guys had the setup though, they knew what we liked and brought coffee and doughnuts from good ole krispy kreme. gotta love em for that.

one gripe was the charging handle, it comes back as the wpn fires and can be a pain in the butt.

another like stated above was the way the wpn felt in your hands. ergonomically incorrect is how I would put it.

we did like the m203 attachment though, it extends and cants either way making it a little easier to reload. i guess the regular m203 on an m4 works just fine though.

the SCAR-H felt good as it fired I thought. it really didn't have a terrible recoil at all but it still had the uncomfortable feel while holding it.

for any other scuba guys out there, the FNH guys said they tested it in UW ops and said when the divers broke the surface the wpn would fire accurately w/o shotgunning it as u might have to do occasionally with an m4 to clear the gas tube. I would rather just stick to my m4 personally, and when i need to reach out to touch something then i will grab an SR 25. Of course that is just my .02

jr

When I was at SWC I saw the way People up at USASOC G-8 and FORMOD; that had no IDEA of what need to be "Pushed" or funded. They made choices over what the Force would be getting and that didn't even have a SF Tab. Regular Army Officers (Nothing Worng with them) Branched out making choices over what would go before Big DA for funding and what would be USASOC Funded. AT times never went down to the two SF Group and SWC to ask "Hey guys what do you think about getting this item funded" I saw it with different 18B & 18B stuff.

Once a Officer gets that Bug put into his window(what needs to be funded) they seem to run with that one choice and never see anything else. So, we the end user lose out. The SCAR sucks, everyone knows this. But We (USASOC) have pushed it and over funded it and now we have it in Army Times and we basically can't turn back from it.

My Box ..& .02

The SCAR was originally a SEAL requirement, specifically they wanted a weapon that would fire immediately upon breaking the surface of water, as stated above it can do.

The main impetus behind the SCAR has not been USASOC, which they have not helped, but the main push has been SOCOM all along. Specifically an Infantry COL who is the PM down at Tampa. More recently, the Dpty G8, USASOC (18A) has been pushing it, going so far as to making the statement, "We are ready to accept the SCAR right now, and turn in our M-4's to get it," at the last SOCOM Weapons Integrated Product Team (IPT) meeting.

This is NOT the position held at USASFC, which is more fix its problems, prove it works and then we'll move forward. MG Csrnko, CG, USASFC was briefed on the SCAR about two weeks ago. The VTC included all the Groups, USASFC, USASOC and USSOCOM, mainly represented by the O-6 PM.

At that meeting the recurring problems, like the butt-stock breaking, identified over three years ago as an issue, and again found most recently in April (I think it was April, maybe May) at the last User Assement, were highlighted.

MG Csrnko asked some good questions, including, and probably most importantly, has the thing really been tested in anything other than a "sterile range" enviornment, which the answer was no.

So, it has been requested by USASFC that the current "issues" get addressed, for good, and it get tested in a FTX, CTC type enviornment, being used, "like we are going to use it." Until then, we are keeping the M-4A1.

And that's what I know about that.

Why don't they send the dam thing to our range and stop having hissy fits every time we get our hands on one? AS we stated to some personnel on testing, we will let you know exactly what will happen to a weapon in 7 weeks as we put about 7 years worth of rounds through them in realistic situations. :munchin

Instead they get all bent when we play, as we do not play political. :D

I remember when the SEALS sent forwaed a requirement for a SEAL pistol and the USSOCOM "Frankenstein" pistol was born. A few years later the SEALS called and asked if we (I was assigned to USASFC) wanted them......:rolleyes:

If the SCAR was any good other units would already be using them.;)

The former AMU commander asked HK the same thing about the XM8. "Why not let us have a few to try out, and we will give you some honest feedback."

The reply was the same, "Well, it is not quite ready for that, we might consider that later, once we have some more of the bugs worked out."

Meanwhile, the Army was already prepared to sign a big contract for them.

The number of non-SOF people making decisions at USSOCOM to buy gear for the troops is astounding. Some are good, some are not good, and most are somewhere in between.

Agree about KAC as well.

TR

That "pistol" is now back at Crane. NAVSPECWAR Command ordered them all back to Crane. Some of the teams insisted on keeping them so SPECWAR quit issuing .45 ACP ammo. Some team members have actually opted to take them down range and secure ammunition in theater.

Some did enjoy the "pistols" traits for over the beach and as a hidesite weapon. Some are also pissed that a replacement suppressed pistol was not issued prior to the order to return the "pistols" to Crane.

For what it's worth.

And here we go again...
 

http://www.military.com/news/article...ndo-rifle.html
Military.com|by Christian Lowe

Operators Test New Commando Rifle

It's a rifle designed specifically for the special operations community. Modular barrels, ambidextrous controls, a gas-piston operating system, a host of adjustment options -- but you already know that.

So with all the slick marketing language and eye-popping specifications of the SOCOM Combat Assault Rifle, it's a given that operators will embrace the thing wholeheartedly, right?

Well, let's ask them.

"This rifle is awesome," said one Special Forces operator who, like the rest of the Green Berets in this interview, declined to be named for security reasons. "It's spot on."

Now you get an idea of how the men who'll use the weapon in combat felt about it, not just some six-figure marketing guru spewing crafty catch-phrases. But what's most interesting is why they liked the rifle so much.

In an exclusive, Military.com joined a group of about a dozen special operations Soldiers from around the country who traveled to Northern Virginia this summer to test fire the SCAR before their upcoming deployment to the Middle East. Ground rules agreed to between the special operators, the rifle manufacturer and Military.com precluded naming the unit, its members or its deployment destination.

See the Military.com SCAR Demo Slideshow
http://images.military.com/slideshows/scar-demo.htm

The SCAR, which comes in a 5.56mm version and a 7.62mm one, is nearing the end of its field user assessment phase -- the final stage before full-rate production and fielding to units under U.S. Special Operations Command, including SEALs, Green Berets and Air Force Special Tactics units.

The entry of the SCAR into the spec ops community comes as the services, Congress and the Pentagon scuffle over whether or not to replace the current M4 rifle and address persistent complaints over the standard-issued carbine's reported lack of "stopping power" and its need for constant maintenance and cleaning to avoid jams.

But ask the special operations troops firing both the Mk-16 (the 5.56mm version of the SCAR) and the Mk-17, its 7.62mm brethren, and you'll get a completely different response on the rifles' advantages over the venerable M4.

To these hardened commandos, the issue wasn't the new carbine's gas-piston system that many experts agree causes fewer stoppages than the all-gas operated M4 -- they keep their weapons in tip top shape. Instead, some operators appreciated how well the SCAR felt with lead pouring from its muzzle.

"I like it a lot better than the M4," one special operator said after firing a magazine full of 5.56mm through the Mk-16. "There's a lot less recoil."

One Special Forces Soldier applauded the weapon's controls, with safety latches located on both sides of the receiver and situated much closer to the weapon's handle.

"This works better with my stumpy hands," the stocky operator joked.

But by far the feature that most impressed these operators was the SCAR's ability to change from something as small as a submachine gun to a weapon with the reach of a sniper rifle.

Like many competitors to the M4, both the Mk-16 and Mk-17 can be outfitted with barrels ranging from 10 inches for close-quarters battle operations to 18-inch designated marksman barrels.

"That's the best part of this weapon," explained one Special Forces Soldier. "When we deploy, we usually go with just our M4s. But if we're on an operation where we need an overwatch or we're observing at a distance, the M4 doesn't do us much good until it's too late."

With the SCAR, the NCO said, the team could have both the reach and protection of a long gun and the maneuverability and portability of an assault rifle -- all in one.

Both the Mk-17 and Mk-16 have a fully adjustable stock that can be folded to the side to shrink the carbine into the length of a submachine gun. Some of the operators at the test shoot gave the stumpy rifle a try in this configuration, but marksmanship was mixed.

"I'm not sure I'd ever want to fire it like this," one operator said after shooting the Mk-17 with its stock folded. "But it'd sure be nice to fold it up like this for transporting in a vehicle or something."

Officials with FN-USA say that U.S. Special Operations Command has ordered about 18,000 SCAR variants for commandos and a limited run of about 1,200 rifles has already begun.

It's unclear still whether these Special Forces Soldiers will be slinging lead down range with a SCAR pinned to their shoulder on their next deployment, but judging by the pile of spent casings littering the ground during their demo shoot, some of them wouldn't complain if the new rifle wound up in their armory.

NOW there is a test!! :mad:

I have seen those "tests", they are only cosmetic BS, shoot a few rounds and comment on the out come.

I would like to know exactly what Spec Op unit or support unit said that, as most of the actual SF guys I know dislike the weapon immensely.

There is another up or down "actual test" going on now, I will await the outcome. :munchin

July 29, 2008
Military.com|by
Christian Lowe

Christian Lowe is a member of this website.

Christian you may want to answer a few questions concerning your above article.

Christian, I'd especially like to know the creds/name of your supposed "operator".

Yes I'll keep it confidential, unless I find out your operator is actually in SFAS or has a profit motive......:rolleyes:

Team Sergeant

Christian Lowe can be reached @ christian.lowe@military-inc.com

You SF soldiers that have had hands on this weapon might want to drop Christian an email. Or better yet start posting on this thread your issues with the wonderful SCAR that's about to be force fed to you in large doses.

Non-SF'ers feel free to NOT post on this thread.(unless you work for FN and wish to defend your weapon)

It's time to take the SCAR to task.

Team Sergeant

Just recently fired the SCAR-L. Didnt like it much. Weapon made a odd ping noise from the muzzle every round I fired and if you fire right handed with the charging handle on the left side and dont utilize the vertical fore grip its easy to whack your self in the hand which doesnt feel great and also could cause malfunctions in the chambering cycle.

Risking the Team Sgt's wrath, as Im neither SF nor work for FN, but I work in an armory full of SCAR's. ;) I would go out on a limb here and say that the odd pinging your hearing is from that craptastick Flash hider/suppressor mount that it seems is simply tighted down with a wrench, without even loctight, let alone rockset which is IMHO the only way to secure something that is holding a supressor on the end of a gun.

Just got this from the boss. He wants me to take it out to the range and give it test or two.

Any new word on this system?

The word we just got was that the system is on hold and probably scrapped. :munchin

Wow, Thought they were going forward with it. Is there a different weapon in mind or is it back to the drawing board?

I have now heard it is scrapped.

I'll ask around for follow-up/details from our side. In any case - it's about flipping time. Any bets on the next politically motivated solution looking for a problem? :munchin

They are still training and using it here at MARSOC.
Don't know if they are carrying it on op's overseas thou.

K - one of our guys started to take a heavy to the Benning comp and left it behind because it would not perform worth a s**t. He and his partner came in 2d without the boat anchor.

Peregrino - We have been told to prepare to turn all of them in for return to FN.

Last I saw, procurement money for the SCAR had been deleted from the budget.

Great, we get all the way to the production and fielding phase of yet another SOCOM project before someone puts them in the hands of SF soldiers and gets some feedback from actual end users.:rolleyes:

What a huge waste of time and money.:confused:

Of course, given the raging success of SOCOM's Mk 23 Offensive Crew-Served Hand Cannon, who could have predicted this?

TR

I still get a laugh every time I think about the "Walter Mitties" who've spent upwards of $7000.00 (for a rifle projected to cost the gov't +/- $1700.00) to be "the first one on your block with the new SOCOM rifle". "Take advantage of the research and development that is creating the next combat rifle for the new generation of special operations "operator" and get yours now." Etc., etc., ad nauseum.