Normally I don’t really care to start an “A” vs “B” comparison, but this stemmed from a rather spirited discussion at work so I thought I would put it to the experts:
Is it a fair assessment to say that the SCAR-H is (1) more reliable, (2) more durable, and (3) more accurate than a standard G3?
Being that the SCAR is a fairly recent design and the G3 is an old Cold War workhorse I would think that the SCAR would hold the advantage here, but I have no experience with either platform. I don’t know how they would compare as far as ergonomics, but again one would think the SCAR would come out ahead on that one also.
Is it a fair assessment to say that the SCAR-H is (1) more reliable, (2) more durable, and (3) more accurate than a standard G3?
Unlikely. The G3 is the most Ak-like in reliability of the the battle rifles. When you think of it, they were both developed to work in an atomic Stalingrad. That being said, the SCAR is a fantastically reliable gun.
Seriously unlikely. Again, the G3 is a super tank.
I have owned several G3s and 3 Scars, in my limited experience the G3 is way more accurate than advertized. But, the SCAR is easier to shoot accurately. I don’t believe either is intrinsically more accurate. A williams trigger and claw mount scope will make the G3 into a 1Moa rifle with reasonable load selection. But the SCAR is easier to scope, the trigger is better out of the box and the ergonomics are way better.
The SCAR is likely a better all around rifle today. Mainly because it (1) is much easier to handle (ergos, size, weight, etc), (2) very reliable and (3) much more flexible and easily adapted to AR style innovations. That being said, if I was carrying a .308 rifle into FURY ROAD an HK91 with claw a Hensoldt would be at the top of my list.
My experiences echo the others, the G3/HK91 is a fantastic firearm that can go to hell and back, but the Scar is more modern and is more user friendly.
G3 for the win in all areas except accuracy. Really, the G3 is just harder to shoot accurately.
The mk17 is probably the most accurate/precise non-SR25-based battle rifles there is. I have said that often. Superior ergos make up for some of its drawbacks compared to the G3.
With no real knowledge on an actual G3, gotta go off of the various HK91 clones I’ve played with. (PTR, CETME, etc) The SCAR wins hands down in every regard except the “works after being run over by a tank” category. More reliable, with a less complicated BCG and operating system, more accurate, and lighter give the SCAR the definite advantage. G3s are known for being built like tanks, and are generally pretty sturdy, but there are always the stories of their receivers being dented by one thing or another, and that dent preventing the BCG from cycling properly. I know that most of the Rhodesian soldiers disliked the G3, and preferred their FN FALs.
I don’t own a SCAR and don’t know if I ever will invest in one. I’ve shot one on several occasions and everytime I was like “That’s it?”
I guess if I were toting a .308 up a mountain, it would shine but otherwise nothing I want to spend my own money on.
That said, I have had an HK91 for quite a while. It may not be PSG1 MOA like some folks want to claim, but I’ve rung steel pretty consistently out to 400 yards with one. That’s good enough for me. I still have the stock metal trigger pack it came with. I’m sure it would be easier with a lighter trigger but that’s money I don’t feel like dropping on an almost 40 year old rifle. Mine has never given me any problems. Ever. I sold off two FALs over the years but the HK is one I’m never parting with. That and if I ever ran dry of ammo during the possible future food/welfare/labor/flag/cause of the week riots, it would make a hell of a club/buttstroke device. I don’t know if a SCAR would do that. Stock feels like something on an Airsoft gun, to me anyway.
I likewise have an ECC. I would say that if I could only have one, it would be the ECC. Accurate. Light. Total muscle memory familiarity. At a distance you look like just another guy with just another M4.
Objectively speaking, it may not be fair to compare an HK to a SCAR. Two different rifles from two different eras. The SCAR is current catalog and with the HK, should it ever break down, you have to rely on NOS parts and aftermarket. Mags were cheap for a minute but I don’t know if any more are being made. At one time, an HK91 mag would cost you almost 100 dollars or better. In 90s money.
FN mags are new production and apparently they make a lower that allows use of AR 7.62 mags. And you could swap the stock.
If you were a collector or already had an HK, then yeah you would be about the HK like everyone else, me included. But if you were like some young dude with some deployment/lottery/insane overtime money and wanted just one 7.62 rifle and didn’t want to drop half the cost of a new car on an SR25, then I would probably get an FN, put on a better stock, and practice up with it. It wasn’t bad just not my thing. If I had no choice, I could easily get used to it.
While the G3 was a great battle rifle, it’s not the invincible, super tank AK battle rifle that many believe it to be. There’s a thread over on HKPro debating a similar issue of how the HK33 would stack up against the G36 (an apt comparison to the thread topic). Jim Schatz (a bigger HK proponent, you will find none) weighed in and I feel some of his words apply here:
“There are lots of roller-locked fans on this thread and that is good. However the facts are that the blowback-operated roller-locked bolt system while good in its day (1940-1960’s) is no longer state of the science. It was not selected by its designers because it was more reliable. It was selected because of unique production and assembly concerns during German war time conditions. It is in fact more sensitive to ammo variances and one of the only modern rifle systems that requires problematic chamber fluting. As mentioned HK tec reps traveled the world with MANY (80+) different G3 locking pieces to “adjust” weapon function with different ammo found around the globe.”
In my opinion, the answers to your questions would be:
Yes, over a broader range of adverse conditions and circumstances. (see above)
If the G3 is maintained, it can last a LONG time. However cleaning/maintenance on it sucks (and can be expensive). SCAR gets the edge on maintenance; the fact that you don’t need a 1-ton press and a welding wizard to facilitate a barrel change on a SCAR should be enough.
The G3 is ahead of the curve on traditional battle rifle accuracy, but it does not lend itself to easy customization outside HK parts and a small lot of decent aftermarket parts (discontinued KAC rails, B&T mounts, Spuhr). Even then ergos and controls are not something a shooter from the US would tolerate. HK roller locks can be made to shoot VERY well with a great deal of effort, TLC and often a TON of cash. Technically, I would call this a tie as either can surpass the accuracy standard in what they were designed for. But like above in #2, the SCAR is an easier path to the same result.
The strongest argument for the PTR-91 / HK-91 series of rifles is that they provide probably the best cost::accuracy and cost::durability ratio in the 7.62x51 battle rifle realm. PTR-91s with a welded rail can be found, with patience, for ~$850. Add in the fact that magazines are cheap as can be, and you can get into a 7.62x51mm rifle, with magazines and ammo, for less than half of what buying a SCAR would run you. The aftermarket for parts is also cheaper, though the outlook for availability is getting dicier. FN isn’t going anywhere, but the price of replacement parts for such a cost prohibitive firearm are themselves cost prohibitive in a way.
Point is, you can get most of the utility of the SCAR for a fraction of the cost. Unless you are humping the rifle over mountains on the regular, especially if said mountains infested with Taliban, I see little reason to spend the $$$ unless you either 1) have a ton of income or 2) really fetishize the rifle (which there is no blame for: it is a sexy rifle).
They can be finicky to work on (tuning the rollers takes time, touch, and a bucket of spares), and barrel changes are the kind of thing that make any sane man doubt the very existence of a god, but luckily the PTR stands up to tough use.
I own both. I have shot the G3/41/91 platform since the 70s and have had zero issues with it…One of my HK41s was made in 1966 and has never had rollers replaced…still right in the sweet spot for tolerances and I couldnt count how many rounds Ive put down it. They are relentless shooting machines…nothing comes close in my book. The SCAR is a fine system and my 17S has been very reliable as well. I am leary of the plastic furniture though. The SCAR, typical of more modern designs, is much easier to wring accuracy out of…much better optics mounting platform, adjustable stock etc. I consider the G3 as more of a battle rifle and the SCAR as more of precision platform.
