Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25

Thread: Why the SCAR in 5.56 (MK16) was not adopted by U.S. Special Forces to replace the M4.

  1. #11
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    N. Alabama
    Was there ever any announcement as to whether the older SCAR civilian guns will be retrofittable to the non-reciprocating mode? Or do I just need to sell my old gun and buy a new one?

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by RAM Engineer View Post
    Was there ever any announcement as to whether the older SCAR civilian guns will be retrofittable to the non-reciprocating mode? Or do I just need to sell my old gun and buy a new one?
    There will allegedly be retrofit kits available. Though even if they are made available, who knows what availability will be like, nor cost.

  3. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Central PA
    Looking at how it works, I cant see a retrofit for existing SCARS.

  4. #14
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by shane45 View Post
    Looking at how it works, I cant see a retrofit for existing SCARS.
    To clarify, there is a retrofit kit which FN produced for the .GOV/.MIL several years ago But they have never made it commercially available.

    Based on open source information the non-reciprocating charging handle in the current commercial NRCH models is both different from the .GOV retrofit kit and not compatible with earlier commercial models.

    Intel gaps : Does FN still has any of the dot GOV retrofit kits? Is FN willing to sell them to the public? Are they are compatible with semi auto scars ?

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by shane45 View Post
    Looking at how it works, I cant see a retrofit for existing SCARS.
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill
    Alright, Cliffs Notes:-All new SCARs will be NRCH models
    -conversions will be available, but I anticipate they'll be available like spare barrels for the time being
    -Aftermarket CHs will no longer work
    -Aftermarket endplates will have to be modded or swapped
    -Drops into all Mk20s with no further mods
    Full conversion from the old-standard 16/17 takes a torque wrench, a heat gun (or MAPP gas), and about ten minutes.
    Source: https://www.facebook.com/groups/9299...83627271740644

    I would assume that Dave is a solid source, as he is one of the editors at Recoil.

  6. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    We had some in Afgh circa 2013-2014.

    Reliability was not very good so they mostly sat in the arms room. The 7.62 versions were very reliable 🤷

    I don't know anyone that gave a shit about the charging handle.

  7. #17
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by Thebean View Post
    I have a feeling the price had a large part in it also... Aren't they 3x more than a normal M4??
    Not at GOV contract pricing.

    The price of commercial semi auto SCARs is inflated due to the need to import them in a ban compliant configuration and then re-build them to original configuration.

  8. #18
    I did the NET training with FN reps when we were issued SCARS in 2010. I remember our guy being openly frustrated over the 90 degree selector. The issues I had with the SCAR were more or less similar to others here.

    The weak side mag release hitting kit and dropping the mag. FN did their best with the design, but it’s a dumb idea that the committee must have had.

    No PMags WTF. The FN mag bases liked to slide forward on the mag body. Everyone just used USGI.

    The “quick change” barrel idea is a design red herring. The AR got it right where you have a whole quick change upper complete with zeroed optics/laser/irons. 2 pins and you’re gtg. I don’t care what anyone says: if you change a barrel you need to re-zero. Also consider that a complete AR upper including the BCG costs less than a SCAR barrel.

    I never had issues with the stock or the reciprocating charging handle unless I was shooting rollover prone.

    At the end of the day nobody felt like the 16 was better than our M4s. The Mk 17 was similar to the 16 but it brought a light, reliable, accurate 7.62 which was worthwhile.

  9. #19
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by Super77 View Post
    I did the NET training with FN reps when we were issued SCARS in 2010. I remember our guy being openly frustrated over the 90 degree selector. The issues I had with the SCAR were more or less similar to others here.

    The weak side mag release hitting kit and dropping the mag. FN did their best with the design, but it’s a dumb idea that the committee must have had.

    No PMags WTF. The FN mag bases liked to slide forward on the mag body. Everyone just used USGI.

    The “quick change” barrel idea is a design red herring. The AR got it right where you have a whole quick change upper complete with zeroed optics/laser/irons. 2 pins and you’re gtg. I don’t care what anyone says: if you change a barrel you need to re-zero. Also consider that a complete AR upper including the BCG costs less than a SCAR barrel.

    I never had issues with the stock or the reciprocating charging handle unless I was shooting rollover prone.

    At the end of the day nobody felt like the 16 was better than our M4s. The Mk 17 was similar to the 16 but it brought a light, reliable, accurate 7.62 which was worthwhile.
    When DOD surpluses out the 16’s we got a bunch for our SRT teams. We evaluated them and found they didn’t do anything the M4s didn’t do. The other sore point was they all came as kits with two barrels (10” and 14.5 or 16”) and two optics (EoTech and ACOG) but our national armory was only going to give us the EoTechs and 10” barrels rather than the full kit.

    A few teams ran them for a while. AFAIK they wound up going to other smaller Fed agencies. CBP OPR got some, as did the U.S. Supreme Court Police.

  10. #20
    I think one of the big things that stuck out to me was the lack of ejection port cover. I know some people say it doesn't matter but in my mind any serious rifle should have a was to seal the system. I know rifles that don't have one work( ak, etc) but I want a sealed system. I am religious about closing my dust cover.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •