Are there any complaints about this weapon besides the price tag?

Umm... just about everything.

Colors never matche.

I can hit dimes at 100 yards with my AR. It's been 100% reliable and barely shows wear after 5000 rounds. It cost me $2300 to put together. I could easily buy a SCAR but why would I? You're stupid with your money and that makes you the actual poorfag.

My Glock has a different sight, mag release, added a magwell. My friend has all that plus a different barrel, trigger and slide plus stipling. So yeah, just about everything

From what I've heard the stocks are kinda meh. Tend to break with hard use or some such shit. Other than that, they're pretty damn good guns.

The bolt has been known to crack the back of the receiver/butt stock plate since its polymer. Magazines are known to not be very durable as far as being dropped and not breaking.
Harmonics of the gun will destroy most optics.

Chris Barotcci did a history review of this rifle and explains a few other things about the history and development of the rifle you should check out.

>Tends to break
>pretty damn good gun senpai

>Destroys optics
>Other than that, they're pretty damn good guns.

every spring but the slide lock and mag release, mag release and slide lock themselves, slide release, trigger, and sights

LMAO

>rifle is so shit that the military just torches them once they get a shipment in because they're locked into a contract

Best rifle eva!

Lies. Mine is 100% stock

Attached: 4A56229E-857D-45EB-92A2-00F961F398DC.jpg (2045x2046, 791K)

Removing the piston for cleaning requires you use a cleaning rod, and its a PITA. There are other ways, but its not worth the price tag. Even buying a good used SCAR is spending too much money when you can buy a brand new AR, solid optics, mags and a shitload of ammo.

It looks ugly as fuck.

I'll never unsee that now

You can buy aluminum lowers for them if you really have a need for one. But keep in mind the SCAR's design is such that practically all mechanical stress from cycling the gun occurs within the extruded aluminum upper, unlike the AR15 where it's concentrated against the lower's rearmost lobe.

They eat optics alive

Why the fuck can't these things be $1000?
There is literally no reason except that that is what the market will bear.
This is a thousand dollar rifle at best
So, that's the main reason it causes so much butthurt

For the money I'd rather get an HK 417. It has an ambi bolt release and it's compatible with other AR uppers and lowers.

>you have plenty of money
>I don't approve of how you spend it
>that makes you poor
Ladies and gentlemen this is poorfag logic. If you ever wonder they are poor, it is because their brains don't work properly.

>There is literally no reason except that that is what the market will bear.
Under Capitalism that is the reason everything costs what it costs.

The gun operates perfectly fine, it's well made and properly put together. It's however not even remotely close to as expensive to make as it usually is to buy in the US, they're actually pretty cost effective.
FN could retail these for like $1500 and still make great profits.

Complete fags complain about the charging handle reciprocating, so kits exist for that.
Personally, my complaints (beyond the inflated price), is the ugly meme tan color they frequently come in, and the fugly-ass robot boot stock. These two things can be remedied however.

There is nothing wrong with plastic and you're a fucking mongotard.

Millions of people have stock Glock 17s and Glock 19s.

While we're talking about pricey rifles, can anybody hit me with some firsthand on the LMT MWS? I always wanted one more than the scar because
>muh metal

Attached: 1500162723222.jpg (3833x1285, 1.6M)

In one of the interviews someone had with a battlefield Vegas armorer (Mr.gunsandgear I think) their 16s has gone over 200k rounds and only had to replace the barrel twice and a broken hammer once. And knowing that place I'm sure all those rounds were on auto.

They're rugged if anything.
I'd still rather have a KAC or Barrett brand AR.

> polymer everything
> 50 shades of tan
> doesn't include stump cup

It's a scope killer. No, your $2000 1-6 isn't safe.

>different batches of different types of aluminum anodized in different batches
>different batches of different polymers

hm....................

Attached: 1394422455234.jpg (1280x800, 217K)

This is the only valid answer

The stock is actually comfy, but it rattles and has a very slight cant from the receiver which annoyed me enough to replace it

>2018
>Paying only 3k for a SCAR

I wish buddy

The SCAR cannot abide garbage optics being bolted onto. It literally destroys them.

Good quality scopes it has no quarrel with

My $2000 1-6 is fine

Attached: IMG_20170408_165053302.jpg (3946x1257, 1.8M)

I heard about the harmonics on it. Is it both &16 or just the 17 that does that?

Sometimes the stock jams up and can't be adjusted. I want the stock that's on the Mk20.
Any reccomended replacements?

I've been smoking a pack a day for over 10 years and still no cancer. My lungs is fine

The 17

Not him but would acogs last on a scar?

SCARs beat up cheap stuff because they use cheap epoxy to hold lenses and poorly engineered electronics. ACOG is fine, a bit uninspired, but fine.

Ive seen a 17 eat vortex PSTs and PA scopes. Reticles spin free is the most common failure from what I have seen

CZ 805 Bren vs (556) SCAR

Thoughts?

>I saw pictures online so everyone must do it
I have 4 factory Glocks that I shoot very well

806 Bren 2 > SCAR 16S > 805 Bren > ACR
This is not open to debate.

Get out of your mom's basement and go take an engineering materials course at the local community college. There's a lot of science that goes into making polymer composites that are as strong as steel.
>the cold will mess it up
what the fuck are you shooting this in -20 degrees? no. stfu.

The 806 g2 isnt released. You cant debate an unknown

idiots who want to throw money at their firearm and think it makes it better. If you shot like shit before, a more expensive barrel and trigger aren't going to fix that.

yeah but you also have a highpoint so you're basic af

Not is the (((US))).

Thats a $1500-2000k rifle being sold for $3-3500k. Then another 1k dumped into modifying and adding optics.

If its not here, its not relevant

>$1k on optics
Poorfag

>tfw I can get a SCAR 17 for under 3k before taxes right now
>tfw too broke to buy it

Resonance issues with the upper are HELL on optics and fuck up even high quality scopes so SCAR specific mounts need to be used

The reciprocating charging handle can be a reach bitch and can get hung up on shit.

PMags can't be used, it fucks up the bolt release.

Old school rail is heavy and not space efficient.

Early stocks had massive quality control issues

yeah but it's a dumb one, the stock latch is plastic and breaks if use you abuse the rifle you think 1337 operators would. It's good to go yo, get a metal latch clip for it and it's basically invincible

I was reading an article where a guy put a 3500 nightforce on a Aero rifle. I wish I could be this stupidly rich

Whats the best AR ~3K can buy? Just curious.

In 556 or 308?
308 would be a LMT MWS or a DD5
556? MR223 or an LMT cqb, although CQBs aren’t 3k.

HKmr556 or LMT Ar15 "piston" version.

>PMags can't be used
I’m assuming you’re talking about tge 16. Your statement is incorrect. Gen3 pmags can be used safely

He could save some lert over for an EoTech

Oh shit, dat AR15 hivemind

>plenty of money
>here let me overpay for things and burn money
This is poorfag logic, you're just too stupid to see it. Every wonder what happened when you give a poorfag millions of dollars? They spend it all because hurr durr I've got plenty of money. Actual rich fags are very cornered with as much of their money as possible going into investments, not buying luxury bullshit with every extra dollar they have.

Is that what your Jew masters tell you, mutt?

Im sorry I dont speak Jow Forums

>overpay for things and burn money
poorfag detected.
Let me explain. No one on this board buy guns for professional use. Gun is a hobby for everyone here. A hobby is not evaluated using traditional cost benefit analysis because a hobby's utility is only measured in happiness. Therefore you buy what you want and spend what you can afford. Utility is never truly part of the calculus.

>Actual rich fags are very cornered with as much of their money as possible going into investments, not buying luxury bullshit with every extra dollar they have.
that fucking PROJECTING...just because you have to pinch pennies to afford your next meal doesn't mean we're not capable of buying a bit of luxury and can still afford a comfortable lifestyle.

price tag mainly. i think theyre cool af but theyre just way to expensive.

i remember i played a shit ton of modern warfare 2 before I got into guns and I always used the scar. the gun still gets me hard from my mw2 days desu

Any way to fix that? I love my scar 17.

Between a trigger, rail, scar-rated optics, non-polymer lower, upgraded stock, you have to spend at least another 2 grand on a 3k rifle with a reciprocating charging handle with almost no advantage over an AR

It's just the design of the weapon, nothing you can really do. I've heard that new ACOGs should be g2g though.

I think the box is ridiculous considering the price tag.
Also, I called FN about warranty on their 509 because of the things the manual said about it that were ridiculous. The customer service rep said it's because people leave their SCAR's in the safe,oiled, and complain when they don't work after the oil gets old from sitting for a year.
>what?

100% poorfag way of looking at things, you both are ghetto niggers with more money.

Not a scar fag but they don't want them to match, breaks up the overall outline sort of like painting it camp without painting it camp. The colors "match" they just aren't all identical. Why would you want that?

That's actually what I was looking at. Any reccomended acogs out of the new ones?

>underwhelming trigger
>stock can be flimsy
>proprietary mags

You just don't know what a good rifle is user, also you are probably too poor to buy one so that is why you are looking for faults.

You already got BTFO the last thread. Please stop digging the hole

>no u

actually I'm buying one this summer. I'm just listing off the cons of the rifle.

The negatives of the 7.62 scar is pretty much just the stock and rail.

The 5.56 version it's hard to find anything good about.

>a thread about a weapon
>on Jow Forums

just hide it if it annoys you

AR18 internals are for poorfags, FN was able to market this abomination to richdumbs with limited success based on the meme stock which is actually shit and the lolflatearthdesert finish. Just build an AR..

>The 5.56 version it's hard to find anything good about.
Well, you are paying 2500+ bucks for a completely average 556 rifle with no ammo/optics or anything propping it up. You'd have a complete and amazing AR setup for that price.
I think the 308 scar feels absolutely fabulous for a battle rifle, but not 3000 dollars fabulous.

>completely average 556 rifle
Compared to a good ar15 not so much. SCAR leaves a lot to be desired. Weight being a big thing.

YOU TAKE THAT BACK, FUCKER.

the magazines suck.

they are super heavy steel. the whole point of the gun was to be lightweight but this ruins it. they should have went with a polymer mag. you can tell it was for cost savings as they just modified the fal mag

Attached: scar.jpg (1080x810, 235K)

>a better trigger doesn't increase accuracy

Attached: 1515996823187.jpg (645x729, 81K)

Not him, it's true though.
Guns have been a mature technology for a LONG time. There's nothing new out there that's going to eclipse current well designed guns from the 1950's on up. It'll mostly be personal preference differences at this point that'll decide what the best gun is for you.

The trigger is ass and there's half a dozen guns in the same price range with better triggers than g19s

> Sour grapes: the baitening: electric boogaloo part 2

At the time the SCAR was being made the army had trashed to shit sr25 mags. FN wasn't going to risk it with mags that should had been replaced years ago. And polymer mags were just becoming a thing at the time also.

Ya FN should had still made it SR25 mag compatible but it's understandable why they made the decision.

They offered the military an SR25 lower a few times. They prefer the SCAR mags thats are based the FAL mags.