AR Sponsor
Posted: 11/18/2005 9:44:43 PM EDT
|
|
That gun sure is fugly. Weighs more than the M16 too...why would they replace the '16 with that? Is it more reliable? Why wouldn't they go with the XM8 over the SCAR? Sorry bout the ignorance. I'm not real up on the SCAR and XM8...hoping they won't switch over to one of them. 
|
|
This is getting old, so I will try to condense all of the reasons why the SCAR is "seen to be by some members of the SOF community" to be a superior platform to and the logical evolution of the Stoner system: The recoil buffer/return spring is eliminated from the buttstock. The new buttstock can fold, has adjustable jength and adjustable cheek pieces. Upper receiver is constructed as a monolitic rail platform. Caliber interchangability with a swap of barrel, bolt and magazine. Polymer lower - sorry guys, this is the wave of the future. Ergonomically superior selector moving through 90 degrees instead of 180. Commonality between SCAR-L and SCAR-H. Short-stroke piston operation. bolt lug design is still up in the air, I have heard M16 type and I have also heard large two-lug Kalashnikov type. Thought to enhance reliability and to be less sensitive to ammo and barrel length considerations. Adjustable gas system, just in case. Truly ambidextrious controls. BTW - that poster is an old PhotoShop, here is the latest version:  
|
It will be ambidextrous like any other ambidextrous rifle such as the CX4 or HK SL8- you will probably have to decide before you put it back together and go to the range and it won't be something you'd do if you wanted to switch hands while moving around a corner 
|
|
I love how everyone here bitches at guys who go "oh poo poo, a scratch" by saying "shut up faggot, who cares what it looks like"...but all they can say about the SCAR is, "fugly." Who cares what it looks like. Oh yeah, XM8 sucks donkey balls. BUIS were like folding GI-Joe arms; stock only collapsed (why not take advantage of ability to make a folder as well, like the FN SCAR?); proprietary attachment system means only HK mounts can be used, unlike FN SCAR which uses 1913 Picatinny rails just like what we have now, allowing us to retain current optics, lights, lasers, etc. AND, mags are just like what we have now, which means we don't have to replace TONS of TA50/Molle/whatever you want to call it. With the different mags of the XM8, we'd need tons of new gear just to carry that shit. Piss on XM8. |
|
I've always been able to look at anything new and unfamiliar and not associate it with the word "ugly" like most people do. I've learned that there are people out there smarter and more intuitive than I am and that they know what the future holds better than I do. Until someone gives me reason, I'll believe that what's gone into producing the SCAR and making it better than the M16 is also what makes it look the way it does. |
You owe me new pants asshole! 
|
That's pretty much what I was getting at. I am work, though, which generally turns me into a person of less than average intelligence. That's why I sounded like a moron when I previously posted. |
|
As a person that uses guns in their day to day occupation, I have to say I never really concern myself with how a gun looks. As long as it is durable, reliable, accurate and ergonomic then it passes my seal of approval I have no doubt the next-gen guns will have all the above mentioned features, my main concern is ergonomics and weight. The controls should has an intelligent and have a intuitive layout, and the weight should be where the gun can be handled comfortably for several hours before weight and recoil hampers its use. Looks are far down on my list of desired features. And compared to my Garand, Thompson and M1 Carbine collection, my AR15 is the ugly stepchild. |
I was thinking the same thing when everyone started crying "fugly". What do you think the ol' boys said when Eugene showed that first Stoner? It ain't no M1 or M14, that's for damn sure. |
|
The more I look at it, the more I like it. Especially the H with short barrel. Can't wait to shoot one. I hated the "new" Ram truck, 94 Mustang (first of the round bodies) and the 93 Camaros when they came out too. They all were better than the previous models but I hated the "looks" of them. Took me a while but I got used to them. |
I've seen pics of the SCAR-L with an A2 pistol grip. It also had a "fence" around the mag-release- which makes me think it was a later model than the one in the picture. |
#1 That sums it PERFECTLY... and in that order. I don't care what it looks like. #2 I am hoping they did NOT go with an AR bolt design... and elected to stay with a more-AK-like bolt design.. Switching to a gas piston system does not do away with ALL the issues of the AR design. You still have bolt, bolt carrier, extraction & ejection issues as well. This new weapon allows a fresh start, with a clean piece of paper.... I hope they didn't transplant some of the old weaknesses into this one. Kinda like building a new Ferrari and then saying... "well, let's just use the engine from a Dodge Aries K" heh heh. S |
You have some incorrect information there. It's not a short stroke piston, it's a gas tappet with operating rod integral to the bolt carrier. A lot of misinformation about the ARM (SCAR) came about because it was assumed that it was a derivative of the FNC, when in reality the operating mechanism is all new. I believe they used a modified FNC lower originally but that has been changed now as well. To answer another question, charging handle is switchable from right to left. I don't know if you could run two or not, I doubt it from looking at the pics I have seen. ETA:
It is a multi lug bolt but if I remember correctly from the photos it's fewer lugs than an AR bolt. 6 lugs IIRC with a much stouter looking extractor. Cyclic rate is much slower than the M4 as well, with the totally different operating system it should not have the kind of extraction issues that the shorter AR types sometimes have. |
|
Here's what I just learned. I've done alot of research on the SCAR/ARM, and this thread just taught me everything else I need to know. -It's an M16 in a new plastic shell. -It's ugly, so it must be incapable. -The XM8 was a better option. -SOCOM really gives a fuck about what civilian shooters think of the looks. BTW: If you can't sense my sarcasm, I feel desperately sorry for you.
|
I couldn't until halfway through the first point... I think the MIAD would look helluh rad on it dude! 
|
I never want to fire one. How short is the barrel on that sucker? Someone in the FAL forum made one with a really short barrel and he said the concussion is horrible, as is the noise, and he was wearing ear-muffs. Besides, how good is the 7.62 gonna be out of that short of a barrel? I think I'll wait until they come out iwht one that has a longer barrel. |
A lot better than 5.56 out of a short barrel. WIZZO |
That's what the Noveske FHs are for! |
Man I love that folding stock design. Never seen anything like it, I think it is awesome looking at the very least. For the record, I only posted the wallpaper because I know some guys like this new weapon/design and I thought the wallpaper was high-quality looking. I really wasn't trying to start a huge discussion on whether the product was good/bad/etc. Personally I like anything new... if I can get my hands on it and it offers improvements in some areas. That's the thing you have to love about AR15's and Stoner... the platform is able to be modded to hell and back. As long as it's offered in 556 I'm happy. I'm not big on caliber changeups because it saps my funds trying to get ammo since the vendors always gouge the hell out of the prices. - rem |
AR Sponsor