7.62 semiauto--SCAR-17 vs. ???

jvencius

jvencius

Member
Having met my initial weight-loss goal by dropping 26 lbs since 1/1/15 (goal was to drop 25), I'm now in the market for a semiauto 7.62 and while I have all but decided on a SCAR-17 I'm wiling to take a second look at other rifles in that category before spending a big pile of moolah on a new gun. I'd be joking if I said I had a "mission" for this gun beyond punching paper/smacking steel but a "battle rifle" is one of the niches in my safe that isn't filled yet. For a time I thought about a FAL but my cheekbone remembers the one time I shot one quite unpleasantly. The G3 intrigued me for a bit as well but since I reload I don't want to buy a rifle that trashes the brass and a true HK-made 91 (or even the HK-41) is both heavy AND pricey for what you get (a somewhat niche-y legacy platform). The M-1A or any of it's variants is right out so save your breath... While an AR-10 platform would keep a lot in common with my small-frame AR's, i.e. the manual of arms, I'm not a fan of the lack of standards as exist for smallbore AR-15's. Some weeks ago I got to handle a LWRC REPR at a LE-centered gun shop just south of here and was impressed with the handling despite the REPR's notable weight but nailing a side-charging handle onto an AR just doesn't seem "right" (for whatever that's worth) since it's like an AR but just different enough to screw up manipulations. Given that cost isn't something I can completely overlook, the HK MR762 is pretty much off the table, lol...

So, with all that, in thoe price range I'm looking at (+/- a few bucks around $3K, with lesser=better), is there anything that really compares with the SCAR-17 for reliability and "shootability"?
 
B

Barry in IN

Amateur
I've had examples of the usual .308 suspects, plus have shot some unusual ones like the Sig AMT. The SCAR is my favorite of the bunch.

You've more or less eliminated the M14-types and AR-types so I won't go into them aside from saying I agree with your reasoning on them.

The HK91 might be the most reliable and durable, but it's probably my least favorite of the bunch. The safety is clumsy unless you have orangutan thumbs. The mag catch is little better. Recoil almost seems to be magnified by its system. Accessories are either goofy, expensive, or simply not made, and then they don't always do what you'd like (optics mounting for example). The sights bed a special tool to adjust. And the trigger is awful is every respect. I honestly think AKs are more user friendly.

To the good, the HK is accurate. It's just harder to get that accuracy out of it with the trigger.
I think they may be indestructible. The brass issue isn't as bad as it is sometimes made out to be. Mine has been gone for ten years and I'm still reloading brass that had been through it.

The FAL has always been the "better than most" rifle to me. It's not the most ergonomic, but may be second. Accuracy is not the top, but pretty good. If I continued to rank it category by category, it would probably have a string of second place rankings. It used to be my favorite overall without being the best at anything. The SCAR has taken over first spot now, and it does it by being excellent in most areas instead of just better than most.

I like the SCAR. It is one of the few rifles I've had that I can't really complain. Sure, a longer forend would be nice, but my arms aren't that long and I can manage. Fixes for that are a couple hundred bucks away. People complain about the trigger, but they seem to vary so I shopped around and bought the one with the best trigger. Honestly I think SCAR triggers are about on par with the average AR. Sling attach points could be better, but are still ahead of most. Again, fixes for that are cheap enough if desired.

Everybody who has shot mine either smiled or laughed after a shot or two. That's how nice it shoots. It eats any ammo. It shoots smaller groups than the heavy barreled AR-10 I had (while weighing a few pounds less). The iron sights are fine. Optics mount easy and the stock lets you use them well. Ergonomics are great.

Probably the best thing is that it does all of this while weighing so little. One of the first things I did when I got mine was weigh it, because published figures at the time never seemed to agree. My old Colt 20" SP1 AR happened to be handy, so I put it in the scales too. The SCAR was only eight ounces more. Eight ounces more than a rifle people whose light weight some people still marvel over. That still amazes and impresses me.
 
jvencius

jvencius

Member
JV now owns hisself a SCAR-17... I stopped by a local LE-oriented shop and while I join totally wanted a FDE version (b/c that's what all the cool kids shoot), the difference between what they're going for and what I paid will buy A LOT of Aervoe so I went home with a black rifle. It's far lighter than the LWRC REPR they had on the rack and while the Colt 901 they also had was fairly light, the SCAR's ergonomics and folding stock tipped me toward the SCAR and at least initially, I'm very pleased with the rifle. It'll probably be a bit until I can get to the range to work the rifle some, but for now making "pew pew pew" noises at the computer screen will have to do, lol...
 
jvencius

jvencius

Member
Thanks--even without a SCAR as a reward for meeting goal #1, feeing so much better (ie my knees don't hurt quite as much after a shift on my feet for 12 hours at work) is worth the work/dietary changes to cut weight. When I got on the scale New Year's Day and my first thought was "oh shit, that isn't good" I knew I had to make some changes and they're really paying off.
 
A

adam_s

Regular Member
jvencius said:
JV now owns hisself a SCAR-17... I stopped by a local LE-oriented shop and while I join totally wanted a FDE version (b/c that's what all the cool kids shoot), the difference between what they're going for and what I paid will buy A LOT of Aervoe so I went home with a black rifle. It's far lighter than the LWRC REPR they had on the rack and while the Colt 901 they also had was fairly light, the SCAR's ergonomics and folding stock tipped me toward the SCAR and at least initially, I'm very pleased with the rifle. It'll probably be a bit until I can get to the range to work the rifle some, but for now making "pew pew pew" noises at the computer screen will have to do, lol...
Click to expand...

Don't you know the black versions have 393.44444% moar deth powers? That's why I went with that, as opposed to FDE at least.

I jest-but-seriously speaking, congrats on the weight loss, and the new toy. The weight loss will give you plenty of years of being able to enjoy your new blasters.

When the modification bug hits you (and it will), I heartily recommend the KDG MREX rail.
 
jvencius

jvencius

Member
Mods/add-ons to be done are (roughly in order):

1) Sling
2) couple (2-3) moar mags
3) Optics (thinking a 1-6, just can't decide on which one)
4) Geissele trigger
5) MREX rail extension
6) Cav Arms lower to run PMAGs
 
B

Barry in IN

Amateur
1-6X? What? What!?! No, no, no, you have to put a 5-25X on it to "take full advantage of the SCAR's accuracy". Or so I'm told on the Internet.
Then you must- MUST- add an Atlas bipod.

Never mind that it turns the handy, quick-handling, 7.6 pound rifle into a 12.5 lb 16" barreled rifle.
And spend as much as an AI bolt gun doing it. Still, I bet over half end up as I just described.
 
A

adam_s

Regular Member
I'm waiting for Bushnell to get around to releasing their new dual-focal plane 1-6.5x optic. The reticle sits in the first focal plane, while the dot is in the second. It was SUPPOSED to be out a few weeks ago, but has been delayed.
 
dont_tread_on_me

dont_tread_on_me

Regular Member
As far as the optics my untrained self got to eyeball the new Trijicon offering, the Vortex razor HD, and the vaunted Leupold CQBSS at the NRAAM. The eye relief wasn't as good on the CQBSS as I was expecting for the $. I think the new Trijicon is supposed to go for ~$100 more than the Razor, is lighter, and has the light pipe bonus.
 
jvencius

jvencius

Member
I've also given some serious thought to going with a T-2 and more ammo/range time to learn (and practice) hold-overs at distance since that would keep the -17 light and fast-handling vs bogging it down with all manner of accessories...
 
J

Jon C

Bo staff skills
SCAR-H is a great gun.

I would skip the SR-25 conversion lowers. All of them have fleas. As much as I would like to tell you to do it so I can sell more PMAGs, I wouldn't use any of the ones I have seen, measured, and tested (i.e. all of them). Until FN or another competent company molds one, I'd pass. FWIW, the Cav Arms one seems to be the best, but it has more sharp edges than a 1st run Colt Rail Gun. It's like someone sat down and said "all angles must be right angles" before the design.

I like the Leupold 1-6, and the CMR-W 7.62 reticle would be a good choice for a battle rifle setup. The TMR is a good choice too if you don't want to roll the dice on a BDC reticle. It's pretty light compared to other 1-6s.

MREX rail is best rail. Makes it feel like a different gun altogether, in a good way. Same thing with the Geissele trigger.
 
jvencius

jvencius

Member
Oh...my... I do believe that a Cav Arms or other SR-25 mag conversion lower is off my radar for a while...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top