What went wrong?

>Scar-L suffers from accuracy issues all polymer rifles suffer from
Please, do tell how the poly lower affects accuracy.

Whoa. I never thought anyone could be more of a faggot than OP. But you uh.... just won that award..

How do SCARs mangle optics?

BEAST. DUDES A BEAST. THIS THING IS A BEAST.

B E A S T
E
A
S
T

FUCK DUDE BEAST

"The appropriate amount of high explosives can solve any problem"

Dear Gawd, such faggotry!

I wonder the same thing. I put an acog on mine when I bought it and it’s been fine ever since.

It’s out of reach to poorfags, I’d say that’s a feature not a bug.

Attached: E7D323C3-31CD-4556-9195-E502E56D5516.jpg (4096x1423, 304K)

>overpriced by about $2000
>flawed design causing inaccuracy
>receipricating charging handle
>beats up optics and they lose zero
>FN

It's a colossal POS

Attached: DE1F8F6C-7F0A-4E63-B91F-5DC27E6365BD.jpg (3892x2354, 2.11M)

Imagine being this upset. Thinking the Scar 17 should only cost him $800. Thinking the Scar 17 is innacurate. Poorfag tears are delicious. Let me guess, your PSA AR-15 is just as good?

I enjoy the reciprocating charging handle, and my acog hasn’t lost its zero over about 1500 rounds

But have we seen any PROOF of optics mangling?

>not knowing .308 is a scope killer
>not knowing reciprocating charging handles reak havoc on optics

G3, FAL, and Scar all do this. Theres a reason they're generally fielded with just irons, and if they aren't, the person that has it knows what they're doing

He asks for proof that something happens and you just once again repeat that it happens. I own a scar with an optic and haven’t had any issues.

>needs proof for something that is common knowledge

What kind of glass do you have? At what ranges do you shoot and how often? Because literally nobody that shoots .308 with any type of intensity and at the ranges its meant for uses optics

Still not showing proof. The range you shoot the gun at has no bearing on how much the optic gets hurt by the gun operating. It’s an acog and I shoot it 50-300 yds.

HAHAHAHAH POST A GROUP FAGGOT

if it isnt at least 1moa at 300 sell your fucking guns. Its working for you because you don't use it as intended

also >dropping gun can massively upset zero
>doesnt think a heavy ass bolt on short recoil slamming foward each shot will hurt

>.308 is scope killer
>Lists one or two rifles that had massive bolt carriers, lurchy and awkward recoil forces
>and scar
I don't need proof that the G3 and FAL do it. That's already been shown, because again, they had MASSIVE fucking bolts and awkward recoil impulses. In relative contrast to the scar, which has a smooth recoil impulse and a comparatively light bolt carrier. Then again, modern scopes seem to hold up to even the FAL quite well. So I'm gonna need proof of this event beyond "lol, it's common knowledge."

consider gassing yourself

Attached: IMG_1217.jpg (451x320, 44K)

What’s not working for me? What am I doing not as intended? Is my Scar a 1000 meter iron sights only gun? Sorry

+1
I put a poorfag tier strike eagle on my 17, and it still shoots 1moa after 1000 rounds

Here’s two 3 shot groups at 100 from when I sighted it in

Attached: 2579C599-AEA6-48F3-9783-6638A9BDFE50.jpg (4032x3024, 2.09M)

Top tier retardation
>Hurr Durr my gun with a massive monolithic top rail and folding irons wasn't meant for optics

Nice. Here's another dude having this same conversation literally half a decade ago.

Attached: file.png (1920x1080, 349K)

That guy is an idiot, but the phenomenon of SCAR-H's being harsh on electrooptics is a well documented occurrence. CRANE/NAVSEA has a published list of CAR-hardened items that are approved for use with the Mk17 after several manufacturers like Elcan and Insight had to reinforce their devices.

The issue stems from the large moving parts assembly returning to battery producing a large forward G impulse that most traditional optics are not designed to handle. It's the same manor in which air rifles are notorious for destroying expensive scopes.

Completely not a problem so long as your optic and accessories are built to the task, your ACOG being among them. People like to spend an exorbitant amount on the SCAR and then complain when their cheap Barska scope shits the bed. Yeah right, definitely the guns fault...

Mk17 accuracy standard is NTE 1MOA over ammunition baseline before the barrel is deadlined. The SCAR is a very capable system and I realize you're just shitposting but it comes off as very petulant. Why are so you upset? Where did the bad SCAR touch you?

Vibration (harmonics) along the rail. If your optics aren't installed with vibration dampeners or aren't rated for use on a SCAR they will eventually be shaken to death after enough rounds.

>Why are so you upset?
The poor fags
They cant handle the SCAR
Next they will tell you something about a polymer lower

>I enjoy moving parts that get caught on objects during a fire fight

More people have died from being shot by a scar than you have met in your entire life. I guess those were all accidents.

How many firefights have you been in where that became an issue? Doesn't seem to be a problem for the SCAR, or literally any other rifle in service with a reciprocating charging handle over the past century for that matter.

Attached: SCAR-in-Service.jpg (510x510, 53K)

Don’t you know that all AKs are bad because they have reciprocating charging handles? Every time someone tries to use one it gets all tangled up

it's not over price it costs less for the military to buy a SCAR from FN than it does to buy an m4 from FN

Nobody has died from an AK

People have been shot and killed by bad guns. That's not news.
The special forces rejected the SCAR for this exact issue. They've been in a lot more firefights than you ever will be.

>The special forces rejected the SCAR for this exact issue.
No my friend you have it backwards. They specifically requested it

See this The SCAR underwent several end user evaluation cycles where operator feedback was collected and input into the design of the rifle. Preference between reciprocating and non-reciprocating handle went back and forth, but in the end, it was specifically chosen to be that way by the very same people that would eventually be issued the weapon.

Individual preferences vary, and that's fine. But your speaking matter of fact when you're so out of your depth here it's embarrassing.

>out of your depth
Its the depth of his wallet that feeds his salt

>Premier sniper round for NATO for half a century
>Hurr Durr 7.62x51 destroys optics
Shut up you dumb nigger

Scar bcg weight = 27 oz
Fal = 22oz

What did he mean by this?

Because this is the same as threepers and their "my budget ar works for me" albeit the rich fag version. I have no doubts an ACOG will hold up fine but two very reputable companies literally redesigned optics to make them better suited to the Scar, so there obviously is/was a problem. Any long range shooter knows your zero has to be reliable, just because its shooting dead on at 300 doesn't mean it will at 800, when zeroing and user error become a lot more prominent

Which in turn means its going to shock the hell out of your optic

>t. Have ruined two prostaffs on a fucking monolithic AR upper

Scar-L suffers from accuracy issues all polymer rifles suffer from at a way higher price than alternatives.

Bullshit, it’s as accurate as my former FNC M1.

Sniper rifles are generally bolt guns. Which by design are much more solid and have no moving parts that causes the problems inherent to semi auto 308 platforms. Which means they do not see the same round counts as the scar that grunts magdump. Which means.. Next

>What is the M21
>What is the SR25
>What is the M110
>What is the G28
That's just off the top of my head.

A DMR that *wants* to be a sniper rifle isn't a sniper rifle.

Every rifle I listed has been issued or was issued for years as a primary snipers weapon. Either way, those rifles don't kill optics like you claim semi auto .308s do so where's your argument? Like I said, fuck off nigger.

Probably because they don't see the same round counts and because the recoil systems are different. Not to mention these were made AFTER the problems with 308 were known. They're literally fucking designed to help counter these problems. Fucking idiot

>two very reputable companies literally redesigned optics to make them better suited to the Scar, so there obviously is/was a problem

It's not a problem with the optics and it's not a problem with the weapon.

It's a problem with the end user attempting utilize equipment designed for one particular set of environmental parameters and expecting it to work exactly the same on a completely different system with its own unique mechanical characteristics.

Incompatibilities were identified. Accessory manufacturers took corrective action to ensure reliable operation of their devices. There is no issue here. Perhaps only if you're looking for something to justify your poorfag angst, but even then you're bending backwards so far you're up your own ass.

Not poor I just wish FN made stuff worth spending my money on

Yall can have your 10 lb monstrosity

>the fucking bolt weighs 2lbs itself weez.jpg

Attached: Snapchat-1250062434.jpg (720x1280, 139K)

>not poor
>those guns
Yeahhhh

>doesnt post his guns

The state of Jow Forums is terrifying.

I literally have a single handgun worth more than your entire "collection"

>doesnt post

I don't get it, are we're supposed to be impressed?

Obviously you're entitled to make your own purchase decisions, certainly nobody is forcing you to own a SCAR.

Attached: scarhright.jpg (3840x2160, 2.61M)

No, I just think its funny that you guys dont own any guns

Tfw paying off an authentic hk91 next week

Attached: 1534483686351.jpg (498x588, 50K)

>price
yeah they also increased it recently, shit is way too much
>hideous stock
also yes, but works well
>bad trigger
not really. if youre used to a geissele then yeah itll feel different
>destroys optics
optics used to be complete shit and not account for its forward recoil, anything worth a damn on the market today will not be adversely affected

Umm, ok. I mean, that was my SCAR that I posted. Here have another.

Attached: scarlleft.jpg (3840x2160, 2.84M)

Am I supposed to be impressed or something?

Here you go retard

Attached: 23.jpg (3636x1832, 1.13M)

>not poor
>that collection
Top kek

What's up daddies money

>LMT Defender =$1500
>VP9 = $600
>P09 = $500 something

You tried. Nice gun tho

Anyone with something I can’t afford didn’t work for his money

>Defender
>Railed gasblock
Dont lie about your DPMS oracle to strangers on the internet?

>implying changing a gas block isnt simple

I did it for the sling mount fuccboi

Attached: literally daddies money.png (1394x1025, 234K)

special forces have dropped the scar and it hasn't been a approved rifle for a few years now, too many issues with them.

>a fin on a FN

Funny, but not "haha" funny, just weird.

This thread taught me that only memers support the SCAR and it is therefore a meme gun.

>mfw ive been getting ridiculed by a guy thats autistically dedicated to making SF SCAR clones with his daddies money

Attached: farts-doorknob-3rd-grade-niggas-fart-beats-31491368-1.png (417x281, 185K)

>squid
>daddys money
No you dont understand. Squid is the kind of guy who would eat ramen for a year so he could afford to buy a clone part

Looks like melted chocolate that has bloomed.

...Nice Hiss.

This is embarrassing.

Thats not a defender

>special forces have dropped the scar

Right, I guess that explains why CRANE just extended FN's IDIQ for another five years.

>fbo.gov/index.php?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=3f4b005980d9acd3c05a0a382666054a

>M21
>SR25
>Made after the SCAR
U dumb

>Having to pay off a gun
Lol poor as fuck

1. Too many guys got to help in the design of the thing. They tried to get a bunch of SF guys to give their input. Problem is most SF and Military guys in general aren't gun guys. So they had a bunch of retard suggestions(see reciprocating charging handle).
2. In a bid to save weight they went under that magic point were the savings aren't worth the weight they were trying to save(see stock and stock latch).
3. The 16s was probably a better gun then the M4 in a lot of ways but not enough to switch away from it. Also see politics and lobby money.
Can it be saved? Its an ok weapon system. But no it is what it is. Even if there really isn't anything that the Military is willing to do to change it.

For civilian purchases, retard

>I’m not poor
>can’t even afford to fix the rear sights of his .22
I don’t really even care for scars but come on man.

>see stock and stock latch

What about them? Stock latch teeth snapping was fixed years ago and was a simple geometry change. The boot is probably the most unfairly maligned aspect of the SCAR. It's relatively lightweight, durable, adjustable, folding, offers storage, and is extremely comfortable. I've yet to hear any valid criticism from its detractors besides regurgitated hearsay and fuddlore.

Attached: skelington.jpg (1000x700, 304K)

plastic shit lower is plastic shit
price 4x what it should be
plastic shit lower

I don’t know about you, but I am

Attached: 51CB3C7E-6307-4453-888B-90F7799B2B58.jpg (2048x1536, 729K)

It has a scope, I just took it off for painting and the sights on model 60s arent much to be desired anyways. You're right, its an Armalite SPR. Defender isn't in the pic dummies

Really?
.mil pays like $500-650 (can’t remember last contact) for an M4.
I’d be incredibly impressed if they got scars that cheap.

Seems like an upgrade from an FAL. The FAL is arguably the "cooler" gun but the SCAR will serve you better. I have no opinion on the M1a.

The SCAR is inherently cheap to manufacture. It was designed to take advantage of modern production techniques for maximum efficiency. Those include extruded receivers, injection molder polymers, large simple to machine parts with 80% commonality between calibers. The only issues that inflate cost are real world problems like the high cost of European labor, frequent employee strikes, low volume of production and ridiculous export/import restrictions, etc. The FNMI plant which produces US military SCAR's is able to side step a majority of these barriers and really drive the cost down.

It's expensive as fuck and people like squid used it.

The stock makes for a nice prosthetic though

Attached: 1404512397770.jpg (292x600, 51K)

>complains about expensive guns
>posts picture of cheap gun collection
>gets called out
>b...but I have more expensive guns than what I posted
Sure thing buddy

Please either give a kommando a good deal or don't bother selling and just save.

>Paying off
Whew, just whew