SCAR Reaches Milestone C

General Firearms Other Semi-Automatic Rifles
1

Soldier Systems has an excellent report and commentary on the recent SCAR Milestone C

http://soldiersystems.net/2010/05/11/scar-reaches-milestone-c/

So you’re asking yourself, what is this “Milestone C”? Programs of record are structured with several milestones that they must reach in order to progress from good idea to fielded piece of equipment. In the case of milestone C, it is the decision to “authorize” full production and fielding. And in this case in particular, it is intriguing choice of words. SOCOM and Crane have remained mum on this decision but have been talking in general terms about a forthcoming milestone C decision for years.

2

Good Read.

I like the SCAR. I’d like to see its adoption expanded to the extent where FN commits to the platform fully so on the civilian side we get spare parts and barrel options.

I maintain the SCAR is the most significant carbine released to civilians in the last ten years, if not longer

On the military side, I wouldn’t mind having one issued to me, but I am fine with the M4A1 as well.

3

What…you…you mean it’s not obsolete and the stock’s aren’t falling off? :wink:

Good read thanks for posting it.

4

I really beg to differ. IMHO, it has no major improvements. A reciprocating handle? Maybe in the 1940’s, but not today. And the lack of additional controls on the lower is a big issue. There’s no reason why you can’t have an ergonomic bolt hold open/release located within reach of the firing hand. The ACR might not end up as all its cracked up to be, but at least the receiver offers an actual increase in functionality over an AR. The SCAR strikes me as a “beater” gun, with improved controls taking a back seat to parts being as uncomplicated as possible and least likely to break. If someone wants that out of their gun, fine, but I’d rather have something that I gives me a more tangible advantage, like being able to manipulate the gun identically off of each shoulder, or reload/fix malfunctions faster.

But, to each his own (unless you get issued one :wink: ) personally, I think the AR is still king.:smiley:

5

All I can think when I see a post like this is…

This guy has not given a SCAR a good test drive with an open mind.

And if you have and still don’t like it then I think that’s fine too.

I do understand that many folks are very happy with the way they are comfortable with an AR (or their preferred platform) and don’t want to pay the fee to try a SCAR. There is a good market of folks that like the SCAR, and see benefits in the way it is set up.

When I fist got the SCAR it took a couple thousand rounds to start to get use to the differences. Now I am very comfortable with it and prefer it in some ways.

That (of course) doesn’t mean that everyone will see advantages in the SCAR, but some folks will. There is room for more firearms that run with different controls since we are all a little different and prefer different things. Many folks could be quicker/better on a platform other than an AR.

I also believe that one of the major issues that’s always overlooked is that this is how the SCAR was requested from the group who fields it. They may look for changes to the platform now that operators are actually using them, but they came originally as requested.

As you stated - to each their own and I’m not selling my ARs, they just don’t get to come out as often now that a SCAR is in the mix.

6

Are you assuming that the SCAR in its current form is made to the specifications that the end users requested?

7

No, my post says exactly the opposite.

8

Guns like the SCAR are a rarity for civilians. The fact that it was released to civilians so close to when SOCOM got theirs is in itself a miracle.

As for the ACR, I am seeing the same phenomena as LWRC. People/fans are putting the cart before the horse. Slick marketing, and being featured on future weapons doesn’t give you street cred. Having nice pics of guys in multicam holding it, doesnt make the ACR a combat class weapon either. Cozying up to Pat Rogers, Magpul Dynamics or other instructors is not the same as being fielded by SOCOM. Modern Warfare 2 is not Afghanistan.

I say this as a person that likes LWRC, and wants an ACR.

There is a reason why ACR’s are struggling commercially, and the first SCAR’s went for over $10,000. It’s significance and panache cant be bought…even by cerebus :stuck_out_tongue:

9

I don’t care for the ACR, too heavy imho. But to call the SCAR a great leap forward is a flat out lie. It doesn’t even make the relatively simple improvements to weapon controls that the ACR has. Its a nice rifle to be sure, but its hardly a step forward, just a remarrying of existing technology, combining the existing AR lower design with a piston operating system and a folding stock does not innovation make.

On the other hand, redesigning a lower receiver to make a product that offers obvious functional advantages to the end user (faster reload speeds, true ambi capability, etc) are actual steps forward. I don’t like either the ACR or the SCAR, but at least the ACR offers an instantly noticeable advantage. To say otherwise is to say “yeah, I’m okay having a slower reload speed than the other guy” or “eh, who cares how long it takes to clear malfunctions with the stock bolt release”.

10

Where did I say the SCAR was a leap forward?

11

I tire of the “great leap forward” comments. What are you looking for, exactly, stun capability? Lasers? Photon-firing carbines? Unobtanium construction, too?

It’s a shoulder-fired rifle or carbine shooting existing cartridges. It combines a lot of different technology into one package. That’s a win from an engineer’s perspective. Remington has done a good job. I only wish the “Tactical” variant was released first and, yes, it could have been slightly lighter in weight. But I can live with that. I cannot afford to purchase luxurious items - of which newfangled carbines are imho - so here I sit. :smiley:

12

My carbine shoots Photons…it has a Surefire Light:D

Now a Photon Torpedo launcher would be cool. What is danger-close for a minature matter/anti-matter warhead anyway?

Imagine a Davy Crockett without the nasty Rads!

13

Let’s bring the discussion in this thread back up the level appropriate for M4C.

14

Sorry for using those exact words, but I do not think that its the “most significant carbine released to civilians in the last ten years”, to be more precise.

The SCAR is a fine rifle folks, and I don’t have a horse in the ACR race, but from an unbiased observer point of view, the ACR made a leap in one of the only areas where its possible (at least in this point in firearms tech) to make tangible gains, mainly user control features.

The SCAR is great, and the folks at SOCOM certainly are getting a good product with it, when compared to the standard M4. But while the SCAR addressed shortcomings with an existing platform, I think the ACR made improvements, at least from a design perspective, that are the kind of things that are long term trends that hopefully, will be copied by other gun makers, including FN. Hell, if a newer version of the SCAR copied the control features of the ACR, it’d be fantastic.

The ACR might be a steaming pile, but if the ideas and features it introduced live on, even in other platforms, then I think that makes it more influential or “significant” than the SCAR, which although a fine weapon in its own right, really doesn’t do anything that hadn’t been done before on another platform already.

The SCAR is certainly getting fielded in a large scope, and that’s a success for FN in at least getting past the military’s insane procurement system. But the gun itself doesn’t do anything new (maybe combining all the features in one package, but that’s not “new”, its just a recombination of things that already existed previously in different platforms).

The ACR, on the other hand, does seem to do some things that are “new”. And I’m not talking sci-fi stuff “new”, I’m talking simple controls that make even your novice gun guy go “Oh, thats a good idea, why hasn’t anyone done that before?”.

The SCAR is a great rifle, I don’t like it from my handling of it, but I can see where a lot of folks find it an attractive choice, it seems very well built and solid. (I don’t buy into the internet hoopla about stocks breaking, show me the proof) But it didn’t strike me as having anything of its own that would be copied years from now (or for that matter, things that it didn’t copy from somewhere else).

The ACR, however, on my first impression, aside from being unusually heavy, and having a wobbly charging handle, just hit me right in the firing hand grip. You have access to all the functions of the weapon right there, and to make it even better, you just put the grip in your left hand, and surprisingly, nothing changed, all the controls are all there. That’s something that’s instantly noticeable, and if everything else about the gun falls apart and melts, that’s still something I as a shooter am going to want on any future rifle designs.

I didn’t find anything on the SCAR that had me thinking “I’m not going to buy a new design unless they incorporated XYZ”. That’s all I’m saying, and I think that’s where a design’s long term influence comes into play.

15

You might not think so, but it is.

The ACR is an exciting product sure, but it failed to ignite a real fire among consumers on game day for several reasons, not just price.

The SCAR lit the world on fire when it dropped. It’s significance is exemplified by the sheer feeding frenzy that ensued after it was released. Dealers were spending $20k to get 1 SCAR. Consumers were spending between $5k and $10k. The SOCOM guys were rockin the Muhj’s world with SCAR’s only a few months before the civilians got their’s.

When has any other carbine enjoyed that level of success or induced as much hysteria as the SCAR.

The SCAR was a game changer for civilian sales, where true blue combat weapons are rare. On it’s best day the ACR is not a combat weapon, and non-combat weapons do not command a premium price, create hysteria, or become the standard by which all others are measured.

16

Too many cooks in that kitchen, and original specs seemed pulled out of thin air. Asking the end users what they want after spec and selection is too little too late.

17

the amount a gun was price gouged isnt a good indicator of success, that just means supply was no where near demand. The more you get out in civilian hands the better, not how much you can jack up the price. Price gouge is only good for the seller, not the manufacturer. Not to mention price gouge prevents people from getting one that want it for a reasonable price. It only lit the resellers world on fire, not the consumer that had to wade through $10,000 SCARs. Considering the way FN wanted you to buy a bunch of slow selling firearms just to get a SCAR, I can see why supply was artificially low. Wait for the Enhanced, that’s the one most people want. Judging sales on the undesirable Basic is premature.

18

VB- 2 things, one I agree the SCAR is a fine weapon with improvements over the typical M16/M4 system. I’m glad it’s being tested and fielded- our soldiers deserve the best, whatever that is.
That said, I think you are hurting your own arguments- there are 2 sides, the military and civillian, and your statements about the civilian side are off base:

ANY new hyped gun from a big manufacturer will garner attention when released. Dealers were spending that much $$ because FN FORCED them to, with minimums and package deals (you have to buy x number of black ones to be able to buy a tan one), etc. They were released in pathetically small numbers and not all dealers would/could play FN’s purchasing games- that is why consumers were spending so much on gunbroker/etc.

From everything I’ve seen, the ACRs are doing quite well commercially so far. And the fact that they are not going for 4 times retail on gunbroker is because Bushmaster actually released them in quantity and with no minimums so dealers and consumers that want them can easily get them.

Now, before you call me biased, we make the silencers for both new guns, so we win either way. :wink:

Edited to add- sorry for the off topic. Congrats to the SCAR for continuing it’s evolution.

19

That’s a pretty good argument, but I was looking at which gun would be more influential years down the line (like in future designs). But that brings up another point of success for FN, and that’s in actually getting their gun adopted, and THEN selling it to civvies as well. It wasn’t even what, 5 years ago, when NO, nada, none, of the Euro gun makers were in the EBR market for US civvies. And now they’re selling their top-dog mil. design? That’s a pretty big success and its certainly worth mentioning.

Now you’ve got me wondering, does anyone know when the first civvie sales of the AR10 and AR15 took place relative to the mil. testings?

20

Getting way off topic BMFB, might want to start another thread…

But, Colt released the AR15 as the SP-1 in 1964, one year before the “one time buy” by the US Army and USMC for Vietnam. The Airforce had been issuing them to their SP’s for a couple years.

There weren’t any Armalite/Dutch AR-10’s sold commercially to the US civilian population as far as I know.

Now, back to the SCAR.