PDA

View Full Version : SCAR for the Army!


MrPlink
02-28-2012, 3:29 PM
Ok, so I know the idea of replacing the M4 for the Army is nothing new, but I just thought I would share FN's latest entry into the carbine program, which is a slight variation of the SCAR-L.
http://cdn5.thefirearmsblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/fnac_fn_advanced_carbine-tfb1.jpg

Biggest difference (enter the ACR crowd :D) is this version does NOT have a reciprocating charging handle, as required by the Army. Outside of that for those familiar with the SCAR platform the differences should be obvious, different backup sight configuration and the upper receiver is lacking a few of the vents.
You can read the full article on the firearm blog here:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2012/02/20/fnac-fn-advanced-carbine/

And in related news (no pix or links) a good buddy of mine who is a retired "operator" but still works in the "community" told me as of late he has seen a surge of a lot of the CAG guys training with the SCAR platform as well

cntrolsguy
02-28-2012, 3:35 PM
:drool5::tt1:

frankm
02-28-2012, 3:37 PM
Why don't we look at the Mexican Fire Serpent, seems like a good weapon to me? We could build them here under license.

resident-shooter
02-28-2012, 3:38 PM
AK 47 is forever the best and should be adopted.

MrPlink
02-28-2012, 3:44 PM
Why don't we look at the Mexican Fire Serpent, seems like a good weapon to me? We could build them here under license.

the FX5? Isnt that thing just a G36 knock off?


AK 47 is forever the best and should be adopted.

eh, maybe the AKM or AK74 ;)

tuna quesadilla
02-28-2012, 3:44 PM
What does that do that an M4 (or for that matter a modernized AK, or a G36, or an HK93, etc etc..) doesn't? This strikes me as a step to the side, not to the front. o_O

Zippiot
02-28-2012, 3:45 PM
AK 47 is forever the best and should be adopted.

Even Russia stopped using AK's :facepalm:

alfred1222
02-28-2012, 3:47 PM
Even Russia stopped using AK's :facepalm:

THIS!!!! finally someone said it. and i full believe that the ACR dominates

HK Dave
02-28-2012, 3:47 PM
Even Russia stopped using AK's :facepalm:

LOL agreed with the... :facepalm:

bender152
02-28-2012, 3:49 PM
It'll be interesting to see how they get around the reciprocating charging handle.

Revolver Ocelot
02-28-2012, 3:51 PM
Even Russia stopped using AK's :facepalm:

I could have sworn the 74M was still the standard issue rifle.

Zippiot
02-28-2012, 3:52 PM
Be honest, how many of you have actually carried a rifle into combat?
Now of those that dragged an M16/4 249 etc etc around a desert or mtn for a year, was it really that bad?
My old M4 weighed nothing compared to what I have to carry now, and it was solid metal!

I love ACR's, SCAR's, the lot... and one day they will fix some minor issues with our M4's.

But the fact of the matter is it will and is much cheaper for the Army, Marines and the entire DoD to upgrade M4's into venerable platforms comparable to SCAR's etc for less than 10% the price of a new rifle.

Think about all that goes into a new weapons system
-you need to retrain with the weapon (goes well beyond just range time these days)
-you need tech's to fix them
-supplies for maintenance and care
-update the NSN system and figure out distribution
-prove over a long period that it is vastly superior to justify project costs

And Im sorry but for the avg infantry soldier getting a brand new SCAR isnt gonna happen before the end of my contract...

On top of all this the Army just bought another batch of M9's because they figure by the time they can implement a new pistol our M9's would have dissolved from stress...

Zippiot
02-28-2012, 3:54 PM
I could have sworn the 74M was still the standard issue rifle.

they still have them but have been looking for a replacement and were quoted saying something like: the next design we choose will be entirely new, showing little resemblance to the ak-series (I think he said 101 in the article)

J.S.Riesch
02-28-2012, 3:55 PM
what is CAG?:hide:

MrPlink
02-28-2012, 3:55 PM
What does that do that an M4 (or for that matter a modernized AK, or a G36, or an HK93, etc etc..) doesn't? This strikes me as a step to the side, not to the front. o_O


Im fairly sure this is a rhetorical question, but for those who may not know here goes:

(and guys dont get me wrong, Ive got AKs and ARs, and like them just fine..)

Without fueling the flames too much: over the M4: 1 it is a piston system. Ambi controls, with a folding and collapsing stock. A feature this version may not have, which would probably be lost on big Army anyways is the easily changed barrel (which holds ZERO).

Better precision than a AK, lighter as well as one that is all tacticooled
Nevermind the political and logistic impossibility of the USA adopting the AK on a large scale level. Only way something like that might ever happen is if it gets dressed up and we pretend it is something different, ala Galil.

G36, I cant really speak to, but who here can? What is the closest any of us here would have? A hacked up SL8?

HK9 patterns rank among my all time favorites, but practically speaking they are old, heavy and outdated.
Even Russia stopped using AK's :facepalm:

nothing could be further from the truth, if you are going to site the Nikinov I recommend not getting your firearm info from video games.

SoCalSig1911
02-28-2012, 3:56 PM
AK 47 is forever the best and should be adopted.

With that said I will also throw out my Ipod and go back to cassettes! LOL

MrPlink
02-28-2012, 3:57 PM
what is CAG?:hide:

in simple terms "Delta Force"



and back to the topic: I knew this was gonna immediately spark debate.... ha ha oh well.

Do not fear progress. I wonder if people are aware that in early WWII there were a ton of Marines that were pissed about having to give up 03 for the M1.
Heck, Im sure if I did some homework I could find instances of the old guard wanting to keep the Krags around!

m03
02-28-2012, 3:59 PM
Even Russia stopped using AK's :facepalm:

They were still using them as of yesterday :rolleyes:

they still have them but have been looking for a replacement and were quoted saying something like: the next design we choose will be entirely new, showing little resemblance to the ak-series (I think he said 101 in the article)

Err, if you're referring to the AK-12, it may be different to someone, but it still looks and operates a lot like an AK.

segfault
02-28-2012, 4:00 PM
In this case, looks like its stock can fold, unlike the M4 :)

There was some test with the M4 having significantly higher misfire rates; surely they'll run the test again with the latest batch of competitors.

The cleaning procedure can definitely be improved with a gas-piston.

J.S.Riesch
02-28-2012, 4:03 PM
They were still using them as of yesterday :rolleyes:



Err, if you're referring to the AK-12, it may be different to someone, but it still looks and operates a lot like an AK.

Here...

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=505440

segfault
02-28-2012, 4:04 PM
they still have them but have been looking for a replacement and were quoted saying something like: the next design we choose will be entirely new, showing little resemblance to the ak-series (I think he said 101 in the article)

If they adopt the AK-107, it'll be the Alexandrov Kalashnikov, but still retain the "AK" abbreviation.

wikioutdoor
02-28-2012, 4:04 PM
anyone betting against the upgraded colt doesn't know just how cheap and lazy army procurement is in relation to long guns for grunts really is. If they were really concerned about it we'd be talking about new rounds as well.

Zippiot
02-28-2012, 4:09 PM
In this case, looks like its stock can fold, unlike the M4 :)

There was some test with the M4 having significantly higher misfire rates; surely they'll run the test again with the latest batch of competitors.

The cleaning procedure can definitely be improved with a gas-piston.

The first M4 test was disregarded, the crazy high rate of misfires (mid 800's iirc) was unexplained but the test was done in winter and a summer test showed minor differences compared to modern designs.
now the term "minor" means something completely different to a guy who just had his weapon jam as the enemy approached, but out of 10000 rounds to have a range of 220-330 failures across the spectrum of weapons can be attributed to standardized agreement magazines and ammunition (NATO STANAG) more so than individual weapons supremacy.
Truth be told, consistently the piston driven weapons jammed less. Worth the differences, ask the soldier who's life depends on it

docsmileyface
02-28-2012, 4:14 PM
As much as I love the SCAR and would love the Army to adopt this new FN carbine, we're probably going to have M4s until someone invents a plasma rifle with a 40 watt range capacity.

But I do believe if anybody's rifle has a shot at getting accepted by the Army, its FN's entry. They've got a very long history supplying the Army with M16s, M249s, M2s and M240s and more recently the SCAR to SOCOM. They know how to win government contracts.

jonc
02-28-2012, 4:31 PM
I want...:eek:

Richard Erichsen
02-28-2012, 4:41 PM
Ok, so I know the idea of replacing the M4 for the Army is nothing new, but I just thought I would share FN's latest entry into the carbine program, which is a slight variation of the SCAR-L.
http://cdn5.thefirearmsblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/fnac_fn_advanced_carbine-tfb1.jpg

Biggest difference (enter the ACR crowd :D) is this version does NOT have a reciprocating charging handle, as required by the Army. Outside of that for those familiar with the SCAR platform the differences should be obvious, different backup sight configuration and the upper receiver is lacking a few of the vents.
You can read the full article on the firearm blog here:
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2012/02/20/fnac-fn-advanced-carbine/

And in related news (no pix or links) a good buddy of mine who is a retired "operator" but still works in the "community" told me as of late he has seen a surge of a lot of the CAG guys training with the SCAR platform as well

Why no reciprocating handle? It's a smart and simple way to see exactly where the bolt is and doubles as a handy "forward assist" to the extent that bit of gadgetry was ever needed on the M16/M4 in the first place.

Complaints about catching thumbs and so on nothwidthstanding, there are a few popular firearms with a similar arrangement and the simple response to hurting ones thumb on the reciprocating handle would be "then don't put your hand there!"

Given budgets, purchasing/acquisitions, sparing, logistics, training programs and all the rest, I'd put real money on little more than an incrementally improved M4 getting through this process.

R

Dhena81
02-28-2012, 4:45 PM
I was going to post this last week but I was busy selling my SCAR :) I figured it would be bad for business even though this won't be in our hands anytime soon if ever. I'm actually really interested to see what the Remington ACR has coming to the table also since the ACR has much better ergos and apparently has about 2lbs shaved off it now making it as light or lighter than the SCAR.

Dave07997S
02-28-2012, 8:00 PM
Don't be surprised that soldiers that join today will find themselves 20 years from now still using an M16/M4 variant. I wouldn't be surprised.

Dave

smle-man
02-28-2012, 8:13 PM
The M16/M4 series will join the Brown Bess long land pattern musket as one of the longest serving military weapons in first line service in history before the last of the M4 series is gone (1722-1838 as first line issue for Great Britain 118 years/1965 - ? for the U.S...47 years and still going). I think we have the M4 type until rail guns are issued to infantry.

SpunkyJivl
02-28-2012, 8:30 PM
There is nothing wrong with the M4 or the M9. They are both fantastic combat weapons that have been battle proven. My life depended on both of them in Iraq, I would still trust both implicitly 9 years later.

But I do LOVE the SCAR. Its an amazing new generation battle rifle.

SuperSet
02-28-2012, 9:02 PM
Love the SCAR but that short handguard sucks.

romeo26
02-28-2012, 9:16 PM
Why no reciprocating handle? It's a smart and simple way to see exactly where the bolt is and doubles as a handy "forward assist" to the extent that bit of gadgetry was ever needed on the M16/M4 in the first place.

Complaints about catching thumbs and so on nothwidthstanding, there are a few popular firearms with a similar arrangement and the simple response to hurting ones thumb on the reciprocating handle would be "then don't put your hand there!"

Given budgets, purchasing/acquisitions, sparing, logistics, training programs and all the rest, I'd put real money on little more than an incrementally improved M4 getting through this process.

R

so we don't have thumb-less people on the front lines. but never lost a thumb to my 17 yet. I wonder how are they going to take out the gas piston.

cbaer5
02-28-2012, 9:40 PM
geat maybe Ill hold off on buying a scar now. thanks for posting

starsnuffer
02-28-2012, 10:08 PM
I'm not sure how many of you have been paying attention to the Army's budget and force drawdown, but no, this PIP won't ever happen, much like the last few dozen.

At least the platform will get some additional testing and refinement.

-W

TheHammerOfTruth
02-28-2012, 10:17 PM
AK 47 is forever the best and should be adopted.

Is the weather nice in your dreamland? How about the price of gas?

HKDoc
02-29-2012, 10:26 AM
The whole thing is so crazy. Buy 4 or 5 fewer f35 planes and the new rifles are paid for.

Zippiot
02-29-2012, 11:21 AM
The whole thing is so crazy. Buy 4 or 5 fewer f35 planes and the new rifles are paid for.

I would rather there are an extra 5 F35's over my head than have a SCAR in every soldiers hands....

My opinion to make a difference for the future, combine the functions of many attachments into 1 simple to use and easily mountable Optic.

Infact thats what made the XM8 lighter than the M4 SOPMOD, it was just the multi-purpose optic on the top.

Buttstock mounted battery pack can power a myriad of devices, from thermal to NVO to lasers, range finders and wind speed trackers. Build all of them into 1 thing, could even go as extreme as to have the electronics flip-side mounted and the regular optics fixed in position...

sd_shooter
02-29-2012, 11:41 AM
Is the weather nice in your dreamland? How about the price of gas?

I'm sure he was kidding :p

Some kind of ARAK would be ideal. AR on the outside, AK on the inside.

MilitaryArms
02-29-2012, 11:45 AM
they still have them but have been looking for a replacement and were quoted saying something like: the next design we choose will be entirely new, showing little resemblance to the ak-series (I think he said 101 in the article)
They've already picked the replacement, the AK12.

It's just a fancy AK.

http://militaryarms.blogspot.com/2012/01/new-russian-service-rifle.html

So, it would appear, for the foreseeable future Russia will stick with the AK.

MilitaryArms
02-29-2012, 11:49 AM
Why no reciprocating handle? It's a smart and simple way to see exactly where the bolt is and doubles as a handy "forward assist" to the extent that bit of gadgetry was ever needed on the M16/M4 in the first place.

Complaints about catching thumbs and so on nothwidthstanding, there are a few popular firearms with a similar arrangement and the simple response to hurting ones thumb on the reciprocating handle would be "then don't put your hand there!"

Given budgets, purchasing/acquisitions, sparing, logistics, training programs and all the rest, I'd put real money on little more than an incrementally improved M4 getting through this process.

R
It's a bad idea to have it reciprocating. One doesn't need a visual cue on the left side of the receiver to see the status of the bolt. We already do that, we look at the bolt carrier on the right side. Plus, checking the location of the charging handle doesn't tell you why it's not in the right place. By looking at the ejection port you can see the nature of the malfunction. A well designed non-reciprocating charging handle can also be used as a forward assist. But as most of us know who have used the M16 in cruddy conditions, if you have to pound your bolt carrier home the gun isn't going to work most likely.

The non-reciprocating charging handle doesn't just bite thumbs, it causes malfunctions. Sure, we could spend a few million extra bucks trying to train troops to keep everything from their thumbs, gear and cover from contacting it, but most agree simply making it non-reciprocating is a simpler and ultimately better solution.

MilitaryArms
02-29-2012, 11:55 AM
the FX5? Isnt that thing just a G36 knock off?


No. While it looks like a G36 externally, it's quite different internally. It's actually overly complicated IMHO. It has a mix of a AK gas system coupled with a roller delay system.

The Mexicans were going to adopt the G36 but decided to field their own design. Since they already use the G36 in their country, they made their home brew design look similar externally. HK got peeved and started to sue them, but then after realizing the Mexicans went their own way with the internal design they backed off and didn't sue.

frankm
02-29-2012, 12:14 PM
The FX5, according to some, is superior to the G36. It's a design worth considering imo. And it's available in 6.8.

Displacement
02-29-2012, 1:54 PM
I've used the SCAR-L, SCAR-H, and M4 in combat. The SCAR-L isn't an improvement at all. It still jams if you use bad magazines and it makes a metallic ringing when it shoots (maybe that was just mine). The SCAR-H is the only rifle that has any advantage over the M4 and even then it's just a little bit more power and distance but the ammo weighs more.

The SCAR, ACR, and all of the other new enhanced and optimized battle rifles are solutions to a problem that doesn't exist.

AVID HUNTER
02-29-2012, 2:25 PM
I would rather there are an extra 5 F35's over my head than have a SCAR in every soldiers hands....

My opinion to make a difference for the future, combine the functions of many attachments into 1 simple to use and easily mountable Optic.

Infact thats what made the XM8 lighter than the M4 SOPMOD, it was just the multi-purpose optic on the top.

Buttstock mounted battery pack can power a myriad of devices, from thermal to NVO to lasers, range finders and wind speed trackers. Build all of them into 1 thing, could even go as extreme as to have the electronics flip-side mounted and the regular optics fixed in position...

I'd rather have a few more bombs and a president that has the balls to drop them as opposed to putting troops on the ground. Just my .02, and I know I am wrong in the humane factor, but I only care about American lives.

MrPlink
02-29-2012, 4:58 PM
The SCAR-L isn't an improvement at all. It still jams if you use bad magazines



and what magazine fed gun is that not true of?

Quiet
03-02-2012, 2:33 AM
The US Navy is looking to acquire more SCARs for NSW.

Order placed on 12-09-2011, for Mk 16 Mod 0 (SCAR-L), Mk 17 Mod 0 (SCAR-H), Mk 20 Mod 0 (SCAR-H SSR) and Mk 13 Mod 0 (EGLM). (https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=25398bbee12496a7a88b87b3123b2d3e&tab=core&_cview=0)

Interesting that they are requesting the Mk 16 Mod 0 (SCAR-L).
Guess it's not as dead as the internet says. :p

MrPlink
03-02-2012, 2:53 AM
The US Navy is looking to acquire more SCARs for NSW.

Order placed on 12-09-2011, for Mk 16 Mod 0 (SCAR-L), Mk 17 Mod 0 (SCAR-H), Mk 20 Mod 0 (SCAR-H SSR) and Mk 13 Mod 0 (EGLM). (https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=25398bbee12496a7a88b87b3123b2d3e&tab=core&_cview=0)

Interesting that they are requesting the Mk 16 Mod 0 (SCAR-L).
Guess it's not as dead as the internet says. :p



just gotta get the Marines and maybe some CCTs on board :cool:

problemchild
03-02-2012, 5:06 AM
This is crap!

I have an old bushmaster and a new DD rifle and they NEVER jam. I can run thousands of rounds WITHOUT cleaning for months on end and NO jams.


The first M4 test was disregarded, the crazy high rate of misfires (mid 800's iirc) was unexplained but the test was done in winter and a summer test showed minor differences compared to modern designs.
now the term "minor" means something completely different to a guy who just had his weapon jam as the enemy approached, but out of 10000 rounds to have a range of 220-330 failures across the spectrum of weapons can be attributed to standardized agreement magazines and ammunition (NATO STANAG) more so than individual weapons supremacy.
Truth be told, consistently the piston driven weapons jammed less. Worth the differences, ask the soldier who's life depends on it

scobun
03-02-2012, 5:52 AM
****, now we'll have to start a new tier.

E__WOK
03-02-2012, 10:03 AM
I've used the SCAR-L, SCAR-H, and M4 in combat. It still jams if you use bad magazines and it makes a metallic ringing when it shoots (maybe that was just mine).

Is the metallic ringing louder than the suppressed or unsuppressed sound the round makes when it is fired?

Sturnovik
03-02-2012, 11:20 AM
There is nothing wrong with the M4 or the M9. They are both fantastic combat weapons that have been battle proven. My life depended on both of them in Iraq, I would still trust both implicitly 9 years later.

But I do LOVE the SCAR. Its an amazing new generation battle rifle.

Good to here they worked for ya, thanks for your service.


and what magazine fed gun is that not true of?

+1.


The new SCAR looks neat, but non-reciprocating charging handle aside, they stopped buying the light model in big numbers or at all, or atleast thats what it said in this press release. Granted its SOCOM were talking about here,

"On June 25, 2010 SOCOM announced that it was canceling the acquisition of the MK-16 citing limited funds and a lack of enough of a performance difference in another 5.56mm rifle to justify the purchase. Remaining funds would be expended for the MK-17 7.6251 mm version and the MK-20 sniper variant"

Does the new one offer internal improvements or something that made the army more interested?

MrPlink
03-02-2012, 11:46 AM
Good to here they worked for ya, thanks for your service.




+1.


The new SCAR looks neat, but non-reciprocating charging handle aside, they stopped buying the light model in big numbers or at all, or atleast thats what it said in this press release. Granted its SOCOM were talking about here,

"On June 25, 2010 SOCOM announced that it was canceling the acquisition of the MK-16 citing limited funds and a lack of enough of a performance difference in another 5.56mm rifle to justify the purchase. Remaining funds would be expended for the MK-17 7.6251 mm version and the MK-20 sniper variant"

Does the new one offer internal improvements or something that made the army more interested?
Yes, SOCOM stopped purchasing the Scar L, but the Navy did not.

Sturnovik
03-02-2012, 11:48 AM
Yes, SOCOM stopped purchasing the Scar L, but the Navy did not.

Aye ok that makes sense. I read the part that it just didnt offer justifiable performance over the other 5.56 systems, wonder in what ways or just overall reliability (FTF/FTE etc..).

MrPlink
03-02-2012, 12:22 PM
Aye ok that makes sense. I read the part that it just didnt offer justifiable performance over the other 5.56 systems, wonder in what ways or just overall reliability (FTF/FTE etc..).

what most have read into that was that it was really a budgetary issue in that it made more sense to focus their funding on the big boy versions of the scar as they offered significant improvement over what they were intended to replace (the good ol' M14/Mk14 family of riles still being used)

ScottsBad
03-07-2012, 8:00 PM
what most have read into that was that it was really a budgetary issue in that it made more sense to focus their funding on the big boy versions of the scar as they offered significant improvement over what they were intended to replace (the good ol' M14/Mk14 family of riles still being used)

I read your posts and I agree with you. I own a SCAR 17s and a 16s, this is a modern and highly engineered weapon that was well tested (unlike the ACR).

However, I do believe that the reciprocating charging handle could be a slight problem for some operators, BUT it is interesting that the AK fanatics out there never mention the reciprocating charging handle on the AK as being a problem. Hmmm.

And let's face it the charging handle on the M4 is really not ergonomically
optimal.

I also believe that it makes little sense to change rifles, if all you are going to do is slap a gas piston system on a rifle that was never engineered for it. That is why the US military needs a new rifle.

Mr. Plink to strengthen your argument I'll add a link here to another forum (moderator please don't jump ugly on me) that has an engineering analysis of the SCAR vs. a DI AR vs. a Piston AR vs. an AK, if folks read the analysis and still believe the SCAR is not an improvement then they should just read it again until they get it.

As you all will see the analysis describes in detail and with back up data why the SCAR system is superior and has the potential to be much more reliable. The analysis is quite a long, but if you want to understand why modern designs can be superior, read this in detail. And it makes sense that firearm design should improve, it has been a long time since Stoner's design was put into metal. Here is the link to the analysis, enjoy ==> http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=62889

Moonshine
03-07-2012, 8:15 PM
In my opinion we've pretty much taken kinetic energy bullet based weapons as far as the technology will allow at this point in time. Despite all the incredible advances in other areas of technology such as computers, etc many of our infantry weapon systems are still largely based on late 1960s designs.

The information age has given us a lot of interesting new directions with holographic sights, range finders and other equipment that can be rail installed, but until something supplants gun powder as the principle propellent in mass driven infantry weaponry it doesn't seem like substantial advancement is possible. Like someone else said the SCAR is extremely cool but it still seems like a parallel advance and not a leap forward.

Now back when the West Germans were working on the G-11 in the 1980s things got interesting for a bit... and I think with today's technology we really have the opportunity to step outside the boundries and try something out of the box like the G-11 again.

ScottsBad
03-12-2012, 1:36 PM
In my opinion we've pretty much taken kinetic energy bullet based weapons as far as the technology will allow at this point in time. Despite all the incredible advances in other areas of technology such as computers, etc many of our infantry weapon systems are still largely based on late 1960s designs.

The information age has given us a lot of interesting new directions with holographic sights, range finders and other equipment that can be rail installed, but until something supplants gun powder as the principle propellent in mass driven infantry weaponry it doesn't seem like substantial advancement is possible. Like someone else said the SCAR is extremely cool but it still seems like a parallel advance and not a leap forward.

Now back when the West Germans were working on the G-11 in the 1980s things got interesting for a bit... and I think with today's technology we really have the opportunity to step outside the boundries and try something out of the box like the G-11 again.

I agree that there are game changer technologies out there that could one day push way beyond what is available now, but maybe the next really big leap are battlefield robots/drones, and battlefield lasers that do not require operators. OR it could be other particle technologies, or wave technologies that disrupt the cells of a living body.

BUT, this thread is about the SCAR, and it was being compared to the M4. ALL I HEAR IS CRICKETS ON THAT SUBJECT NOW>

Have a nice day.