SCAR Family of Weapons

[.308holes]

Figured I would kick this off and get some information up here and a viable place to get SCAR information...

As you read on, take into consideration, these were built from a requirement document drafted by memebers of SOCOM, evaluated and tested by members of SOCOM. We (FN) did what was asked of us as a manufacturer with the suggestions (ECP's) from the EUA's and the consensus was the FN rifle was adopted.
The rifles now in place have reached the initial requirement of "single upper extrusion capable of being converted to several different calibers" They arrive as a 7.62 / MK17 and can be converted to 5.56, 6.8, 7.62X39 and a conceptual 300BLK. The manufacturer also has a PIP for the non-reciprocating cocking piece for those that have been wishing for those, even those who don't understand or haven't been trained or had the reasons for the design explained to them. I recently had a long conversation with a retired unit guy who I have know since the contract EUA's for the SCAR who didn't necessarily "care" for it. Once we discussed it, he was going to go back and re-evaluate how he looked at it.

Not every gun is for every dude...think about that, you don't own some guns because you don't like them for some reason, I am the same way.

Also think about the fact that here we are in 2015 and the government and civilian market is STILL making changes and improvements on the initial Stoner design from the 1960's, and the SCAR platform is 11 years old.

Seek education and experience, not second hand complaints.

Enjoy, lets make this a place for education and a hog board, if you have run it and don;t like it, groovy, share your thoughts. If you want to learn about the program, design attributes, history and end user thoughts, this is where we can all learn, myself included.

Original Aluminum Trigger module guns....



Testing the original SCAR LB Sniper variant.... before the SSR / MK20 was requested.




The first SSR (Sniper Support Rifle) Later designated the MK20.

 

[Barry in IN]

Thanks for the info. I've had my 17S about 3 years but have only used it in a couple of short classes and several matches, but I love it. It's the closest to a do-everything (that I need) rifle I've ownded. I've had all the usual suspects in .308 semiautos, and easily prefer the SCAR over any of them.

 

[.308holes]

A couple of the best MODS you can put on a SCAR is a Geissele Super SCAR trigger and a buttstock MOD. VLTOR makes the best option on the market currently, but Kinetic Development Group has some stuff coming for the SCAR, and a stock is one of their items they will bring to the market.

 

[Barry in IN]

I have been looking at the VLTOR stock a lot recently. Mostly, I want the storage space to keep a few spares in.

For the most part, none of the earlier SCAR rail extensions have looked right for me. They're either too heavy, or too fat, or the wrong this or that. The KDGs have been looking good. Thanks for confirming that suspicion.

Thanks again for the info.

 

[Default.mp3]

.308holes, I was wondering, are you aware of any way to attenuate the harmonics/shocks that have such a negative impact on VASes? For example, would mounting a DBAL-A3 (which I assume isn't considered a CAR hardened VAS) on a rail extension instead of on the integrated top rail extend its life? What about Handl's claims of how their lower/stock hinge increases the rigidity of the chassis, and thus reduces the optic-killing impulses?

On a related note, do you feel that the SCAR-L has any future, or is it now more or less a dead-end?

 

[AresGear_Jake]

As an aside, Handl's claims on anything should be taken with a shaker of salt. Their lower didn't fit my Scar without serious work, and even after I had filed it to fit, it didn't function properly (locked bolt back before mag empty). When I contacted them about it, I was told that the Gen2 would fix those things, and I'd have to buy one of those. So I had a $400 paperweight.

I bought the Cav lower instead (and gave the Handl to a friend who was willing to play with it). The Cav lower has been flawless since day 1.


- Jake

 

[adam_s]

.308holes: I've heard that the SCAR-17(s) can be converted to other calibers, but the actual availability of these have been rather lacking it seems. Am I missing something, or is this still something coming, "soon"?

I won't lie, the idea that I could convert my 17 to 5.56mm or .300blk to meet my various needs would be fairly nice. At the same time, if the conversion kit is $1500...it starts being more reasonable to buy/build another AR.
Is this a faulty assumption on my part somewhere, based on something I'm not seeing?
-Adam (aka Ricky Bobby )

 

[jvencius]

8 more pounds to lose and a SCAR-17 will be mine... I told Mrs JV that if I can drop 25 lbs I'm getting a new rifle and since New Year's I've cut 17 out of that 25 so I'm well on the way. Optics will be an interesting decision (am torn between a T2 and a Vortex Razor II 1-6) but I figure that finding the rifle at a decent price (any suggestions on hasn't at end would be welcome), a sling, and some extra mags (seriously, FN--just one magazine with a $2,500+ rifle?) should come first.

 

[AresGear_Jake]

Before you buy extra mags, buy the Cav lower. Then your mags are easier to find and way more affordable.

Friends don't let friends buy Handl.


- Jake

EDITED TO ADD: New Handl lower showed up at my shop on 6/1. Looks perfect. Thank you, Fox33C1.

 

[Barry in IN]

If eight pounds was all that kept me from one, I'd be eating celery for a while then walking to the gunshop wearing a trash bag to sweat off the last couple of pounds.

Between your optics choices, I'd get the Vortex 1-6X. I debated red dot or scope, went with a 1-4X Trijicon, and have no regrets going with the scope. The rifle is so light any added ounces really change its feel IMO, but I still like it. I just don't get the guys that hang two foot long Nightforces on theirs.

 

[jvencius]

Nah, I'd rather go a little slower and drop weight the right way (cleaning up my diet some and increasing cardio) vs sweating it off and then putting it all back on the second I eat a proper meal and drink water. Doing it this way means I'll have the $$$$ saved up for the rifle by the time I hit that weight-loss goal.

I've only casually looked at replacement lowers but they do make some sense, especially if I could use PMAGs. Maybe one of these days I'll sit down with a pencil/paper/calculator and see if I can cypher out how many FN mags I could buy before getting to the cost of a new lower...

 

[adam_s]

JV-Since I'm an Excel nerd, here's the info for your indecision purposes. These are all rough estimates since I didn't want to get too into the weeds doing price averaging, figuring shipping, sales tax, etc.

SCAR17 OEM 20rnd Magazines: $37
PMAG762 20rnd: $19
PMAG762 25rnd: $22

CavArms SCAR17 Lower: $390
(Please don't look at HANDL...please)
Stryker Arms lower: $399

Cost Difference per 20rnd Mag: $18

At that price difference (essentially two-for-one), you're looking at buying roughly 20 SCAR OEM mags before offsetting the cost of buying a new lower.

Of course, this doesn't take into account that you can still keep your OEM lower, in case you ever stumble across a stupid deal on OEM mags. Nor does it take into account that you can get 25rnd PMAGS (versus the OEM 20's).

 

[jvencius]

Thanks--while I can do the math, that saves the few working cells I have left in my feeble little mind. . Since 20 is about the number of mags I'd want to have on hand, knowing that amount would offset the cost of a newer lower makes the decision a lot easier. From all that I've read, the Geissele SCAR trigger is tits so I'd probably get one and install it, plus the ancillary pieces/parts into a Cav lower then keep the OEM unit stock and toss it in the safe as a backup.

 

[Fox33C1]

Gents,

First, This being my first post I wanted to say hello and thanks for letting me in the door.

Second, I just officially became part of Handl Defense today. There has been a substantial reorganization within the company, there is new blood and new money. Some people no longer have the power or position they used to. There is new management and oversight, expect change.

Third, I have made it my personal mission to sort out what has been screwed up. You might never buy a Handl product and that's okay, but we hope to fix what has been broken.

Fourth, Jake- If you are willing please eloborate on your experiences. If you can name people, places, times, and events. I am in a position where I can get things sorted. I apologize for what is an obviously unsatisfactory experience. If you could tell me the details I would appreciate it.

 

[AresGear_Jake]

I bought a Handl lower (at full price) from Rainier Arms. It was too big to fit my SCAR17S lower. I called Handl about it and was told that it was supposed to be snug...after 10 minutes with a mallet and still no fit, I decided we had different definitions of "snug". I filed the outside edges of the lower so that it would actually be to spec (which I called FN to verify).

Once I got it to fit, I moved the lower parts from my FN receiver to the Handl receiver. Once I got to the range, I learned that the Handl lower would lock the bolt back with 1 round still in the magazine...every time. I tried multiple magazines (Magpul and KAC); all had the same result.

When I contacted Rainier about the issues I'd been having with a $400 paperweight, I was told "we don't handle that, call Handl". That was it; they didn't even give me the number.

When I called Handl about it again, I was told that someone would get back to me. A week later, I tried again and was left on hold for 40min before the line disconnected.

I understand what you're trying to do, but you have a long uphill climb; at this point, I not only wouldn't recommend Handl, I strongly feel that they and/or Rainier owes me $400 or a lower that actually works properly...and I feel that neither has been interested in stepping up and settling that debt to date.

I still have a Handl lower that's a $400 paperweight.


- Jake

EDITED TO ADD: New Handl lower showed up at my shop on 6/1. Looks perfect. Thank you, Fox33C1.

 

[Fox33C1]

#1 PM inbound with info

#2 who did you talk to at Handl? Jon, Mike, Aaron, Brooks, or Alan himself? (I need to know who to get after)

#3 some back story... Before the new leadership team signed paperwork, we asked to know the whole story of the company. I wanted to know the CS issues upfront, I knew chunks, but not the whole story. When one of the first sets of lowers came off the machines (they subbed out) there was a run by one of the machinists who indexed the trigger module from the bottom of the trigger guard instead of from the top of the trigger module.

I am not a machinist but I understand that if the CAD file is inverted like that there is issues.

Since the first run was 100% fine, they only checked so many of the next few runs. (I have one of those first few, 10k and counting, not an issue) Intermixed in the next few batches is where the improperly indexed lowers got sprinkled in. It is estimated that of the first few hundred, 5-10% or so got out the door that fit the profile above.

Needless to say the old QA guy got fired and the shop was promptly dismissed. It took awhile to figure it out as, since there are no SN# and 90-95%+% of the first batches worked just fine. Considering I have a perfect lower that "didnt work or fit" on one of my SCAR's, many times complaints were not taken as legitimate. I find that a small number were absolutely legitimate.

There is a 100% guarantee return policy for manufactured defects. Since you got it from Rainer (they received the first non pre-ordered), I presume this fits the case.

Since this event in 2012 there have no returns based off of manufactures defects (BTW Handl trigger module + Giessle triggers + OEM grip screw = trigger issues (have to use the one handl supplies). Pretty much all of the issues boils back down to one guy in a shop who wasn't paying attention and another who lost his job for doing the same.

I apologize it has taken this long to get to you. I will get it sorted, and then some.

 

[AresGear_Jake]

The lower's been on your desk for about a month now with no comms. Any progress?


- Jake

EDITED TO ADD: New Handl lower showed up at my shop on 6/1. Looks perfect. Thank you, Fox33C1.

 

[Fox33C1]

Jake,

I just got back from SOFIC and I got to dig in to your lower. I have some videos I am going to send to you. The 7075 aluminum versions of the trigger module were designed to be very tight fitting, we want to utilize those trigger modules in the mk.20 and CSR. When you see a SCAR H shot under high speed from a 6 o'clock high position, or from a 4 o'clock low, while secured to a sled, you see a lot of movement. The receiver is extruded 6061 T6, IMO not enough to handle all the stresses that the 7.62x51 puts into the platform. 5.56, 300blk, or even 7.62x39 there is a lot less movement. Its like those guys who used to drop 350 small blocks in S-10 pickups.

Now for a CQC or MBR the lower tensile strength of AZ 31 Mg is fine as we are more concerned about making spec sheet weight. It adds much more structural rigidity than the polymer. But the weight requirements of the MK.20 or SASS applications are different. We can go with the ideal application of material (7075) as a stressed member. Instead of the trigger module just hanging off the bottom of the gun, it now adds a structural reinforcement to the platform. These Aluminum versions are also just a bit longer as well. The receiver base plate just vibrates like a tuning fork under HS video. That obviously had to go as well.

The offset is that it is tight. It needs to be assembled in a specific manner. As in where you can "slap" an AR closed, you cant do that with a stressed member trigger module. (There is video) There is a procedure; put the trigger module in, pinch it tight with support hand, pull towards the rear while pushing the take down pin (Pinch, pull, press). Since I joined Handl Defense I have been bitching about how sometimes we don't provide enough direction for the end user. We are working on rectifying that, but before I joined in it was 3-4 guys trying to do the job of 10 and it was showing.

Shoot me an email, or the group doesn't mind I'll post up the videos here.

 

[Matt Landfair]

Videos work great here!

 

[patriot_man]

This has definitely piqued a few questions:

1st: is the magazine base pad issue being remedied?
2nd: AR-15 grips won't fit - was compatibility overlooked by the engineers at FN?
3rd: if the stock was mounted higher would recoil be more controllable? - i.e. no cheek piece (like how the buffer tube in inline with the BCG on an AR-15)