I’ve been pretty set on picking up an m4 rifle as a defensive/training weapon, the primary reason being cost.
I’m in a situation where money is less of an issue and I’m re-examining picking up a .308 semi auto, particularly the scar 17.
My sense is that the scar is much more versatile than an m4. For a manageable trade off in weight you get a round with better range, barrier performance, and terminal ballistics while still seeming to be adequate for close-in work.
Is the scar 17 a more versatile platform than the m4? What does the scar give up beyond cost and weight?
First off I have and really like the SCAR 17s. I have used my 17s in competitions and a couple of classes. I think its the best light wieght .308 on the market. It has a great balance of accuracy, reliability, and wieght.
That being said for a defensive weapon get an M4 or SCAR 16s first. I can run my SCAR 17s pretty darn fast, but not as fast as I can run a 5.56 carbine. Sure the 17s would work fine as a defensive carbine but there are better options. A 5.56 carbine is faster shot to shot more controlable and going to have a larger ammunition capacity than a SCAR 17s. .308 is not a magic caliber. Yes it will do things that 5.56 wont, but it comes at a cost of higher recoil, wieght, and size. Contrary to popular belief it does not vaporize targets on contact.
Personally I perfer the SCAR platform over the AR platform, but I feel that for a first “Black Rifle” a person should get a good AR (Colt, BCM, LMT, Noveske). There is way more support for the AR platform in parts, knowledge, and training to not go with that as a first rifle plus you can buy one for almost half the price of admission to a SCAR. If you have your mind set on a SCAR then I would recommend the 16s first and learn the basics on that.
I would recommend the SCAR 17s as a first rifle in only two scenerios. “A” you only want one rifle for a defensive weapon AND hunting weapon. “B” you really really want a SCAR 17s. If that’s the case then get what you really want… its America!
Generally your posts are more informative than this. Innuendos have little value. I respect what you have to say and agree with you 90% of the time so if you have some intel on the SCAR 17s I’d love to hear what you have to say.
I don’t mean to be secret squirrel, but NDAs prevent disclosure of specifics.
What I can say is that they frequently break optics and have shown some parts failures.
I’m not saying that the gun is junk, simply pointing out that there is a reason for the cost disparity between the 17 and the M110 variants. Given a few decades of refinement, I’m sure that the 17 will be a pretty nice platform.
Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.
I think the optic issue is pretty well known, but is there anything you can share on parts failures beyond the plastic latch issue?
There are a fair number of SCAR17s out in the wild and reports of significant issues seem almost non-existent. Other than people bitching about charging handle placement I haven’t really seen more than a couple. Contrast that with the SR25, which is probably in far fewer hands, and the proportion of people who’ve had reliability issues seem significantly higher. I’ve also seen a few credible reports of issue M110s having problems (I’d really have to dig to find them as it’s been awhile). It’s a bit tough to reconcile this data with what your’e saying, not being privy to the information you have.
Is the reliability (and lack of reliabillty of the SCAR) a recent thing? LAV made the following comments (from a class you were in) saying:
The KAC SR25 carbines in the class not only were accurate but reliable - the only two stoppages out of 4000-5000 rds shot thru 10 different guns was an over insertion of a PMAG and a failure to feed from a PMAG ( both mag related IMO) ;I was extremely impressed. KAC has really put serious effort into making that carbine accurate and reliable. Trust me just a few years ago the results would have been different .
That makes it seem like a relatively new development.
I would say the SCAR-H is still one of the best 7.62 battle rifles. The M110 line has had numerous relibility issue reports.
Actually until recently the SR-25 was not that reliable, though LAV’s recent class seems to show they finally figured it out after all these years.
You have to understand that the M110 is an evolving platform. The current guns are a result of decades of use, input, and refinement. The ECC/M110K1 is not a Mk11 mod 0. Further, there are far more M110s in service than Mk17s/Mk20s. They have a wide user base of competent professionals, where the 17 has a much smaller, much more private user base (with essentially only 1 user group).
Typos brought to you via Tapatalk and autocorrect.
But M110 guns are also subject to the military’s crappy maintenence issues. Also it should be taken into account that on the M110 system:
The bolt carrier is different. (Closer to LMT’s Enhanced on the new SR-25s.)
The buffer system is slightly different.
The gas port is different.
It’s a totally different animal, IMHO. It’d be like comparing a Mk. 12 to the AK. Both are good guns, but it’s not really fair to compare them in any way.
KAC needs to bring back the ambi controls on the SR-25 though. I can’t see why they phased 'em out.
I don’t have a M110K1, but I have both variants of the MK11. If I had a K1, I’d probably carry that. However, I’m not taking a gun to a gunfight with a manufacturer spec’d rate of fire of 5rpm. That’s the first reason I carry a MK17 often. I have had a few negative experiences with the M110/MK11 MOD 2; I’ll carry the MK17 instead. I love the MK11 MOD 0, but in my experience it’s not twice as accurate as a MK17, but about twice the weight, and more bulky. That’s a big reason for it getting left in the box.
The MK17 is not without faults. People have different gripes about it. The stock, especially it’s latch mechanism is an area of contention for many people. Some people either don’t mind or hate the reciprocating charging handle. That’s more of a preference thing. Recoil is obviously going to be more, as it is a very light gun, firing a much bigger round as compared to an M4.
The MK17 has some things going for it. Ambi controls, enough said on that. I know the M110 has them as well. In my opinion and experience, it has a better weight to accuracy ratio as compared to a lot of the .308 “AR’s”.
As to the original question, the MK17 is a great gun. It’s not perfect, but it fills a role very well. That role is for a rifle needed to engage targets beyond the capabilities of an M4. If I had no need for that, I wouldn’t carry it. Don’t be dissuaded into thinking any gun is perfect, because they aren’t.
jc000, I would ignore the KAC vs. FN pissing match written by some of the posters above. Instead, I think the M4 is still more versatile for most users overall than the SCAR-H or any .308 battle rifle. The SCAR-H fulfills a certain duty requirement for a battle rifle with 600-800 yard capability for Spec Ops in Afghanistan who are engaging Taliban in open terrain. 7.62 NATO makes sense in that situation, and the SCAR can still be used in house to house fighting. As the LAV pointed out in his SCAR episode, there are times where troops would find themselves heading out of a house to see Taliban running away 400-500 yards down a road. This is where a .308 battle rifle is nice for obvious reasons.
For civilians like you and me, a M4 should be more than adequate for our go to gun, as the engagements we’ll deal with include either home defense or a worst case scenario zombie apocalypse fought at close range (< 200 yards). 5.56 NATO gets the job done quite nice in that situation. Shot placement is key, and the newer Hornady TAP and barrier blind rounds make the platform quite effective. Besides the factors of cost and weight you listed with the SCAR-H, the SCAR-H’s heavier recoil, larger bulkier magazines, make it a little less nimble than a M4 in such a situation. Try walking around your house with a decked out M4 that has a light attached and then try to walk around carrying the SCAR. <200 yards in, I’m going to prefer the M4 unless my opponents are zombies with class IV body armor
I own both a SCAR-H and a couple of AR-15 variants. I would grab my M4 carbine clone first if I had to defend my home, because it’s lighter, smaller, arguably easier to use (since I am more familiar with the platform) and would do the job just fine.
Am I making any sense? I think it comes down to what you’re using it for. Having said that, think about what you need a .308 rifle for. Do you want a battle rifle or do you have a range where you can practice out to 600-1000 yards? I don’t have a long range within 120 miles of where I live, so I chose the battle rifle (SCAR-H) for collection purposes and for the intent of taking a battle rifle class in the near future. If you want a precision rig, then something like a Larue OBR makes more sense than the SCAR-H.
Wow really great responses here. Appreciate it a lot.
Hunting is definitely a consideration. Now I know I could pick up an m4 and a bolt action .308 for less than a scar 17, but I’d rather focus on one rifle.
I can’t imagine a defensive situation where I’d have any sort of “back-up”. Without armor and machine gun support I think the versatility of the .308 round would serve me well as a defensive and hunting weapon.
That being said, what I was not sure of was whether the benefits of .308 outweighed the deficiencies of the scar against the m4 in terms if cost, weight, close quarters ability, and “handiness”. I am not looking for a precision rig.
In the end, it sounds like the trade off in the .308 round’s versatility doesn’t justify spending 2.5x more than the lighter, quicker m4. I’d like to spend some time lugging around and shooting with the scar as a basis of comparison but i cannot see how ill pull that one off.
I think it comes down to what you’re using it for. Having said that, think about what you need a .308 rifle for. Do you want a battle rifle or do you have a range where you can practice out to 600-1000 yards? I don’t have a long range within 120 miles of where I live, so I chose the battle rifle (SCAR-H) for collection purposes and for the intent of taking a battle rifle class in the near future. If you want a precision rig, then something like a Larue OBR makes more sense than the SCAR-H.