So how much of a meme is the SCAR really? I have cash saved up and I can buy one new from the factory.
>meme
>from the factory.
I get that this is shitposting but come on.
16 or 17?
Full NATO only.
>>29504472
I'm still deciding. I have a shit ton of surplus Colt mags I use in my AR so I was thinking the 16, but I also want the 17.
the 16 is the best alternative to the ar15, out of the box it has great irons and a very nice muzzle break that works very well. generally ar15's are favored because of parts availability and customization - not saying that the 16 isn't, just not as much.
the scar 17 is the best semi auto .308
plenty of fags are going to cry about the reciprocating charging handle but these same faggots don't cry about ak's
>>29504490
Doesn't the SCAR have a slightly different magwell where it can't do pmags, but it can do pmags? Did they change that?
Or am I confusing this with the HKMR556A1?
>>29504522
you have to dremel out a small portion of the magazine, there are plenty of videos of how to do this. failing to do so however will damage your bolt.
>>29504516
They are fags, but the AKs handle is is situated where presents less of a danger of wacking your hand.
>>29504551
you can switch the handle to the other side if needed
>>29504549
It should be able to do regular STANAG mags though, like OPs surplus stock though, right?
>>29504457
They're great guns. SOCOM and OIF/OEF have proven that many times over by now, and so has civilian use over the past years.
There's nothing "meme" about them, but one reality is that:
>The 16 doesn't really do anything an AR doesn't do for cheaper, or that would ever make a difference or be noticed by anyone but the most demanding end users, if at all
The 16 is still a great gun though, but the 17 has a better niche considering the market for 7.62 autos.
I'd still pass on buying a SCAR currently though. FNH hasn't been manufacturing/importing them recently and the price has gone way up. 16s/17s are currently around $2600+/$2800+ new most places you look, and before they were running $2,400~/$2,600~ new not too long ago.
>>29504457
17 is cool and all, but I can't get past how completely fuckugly it is.
easily one of the most hideous firearms I've ever seen.
>>29504522
You aren't supposed to use pmag gen2's in the 16s. They push the bolt release up and into the bolt carrier. You get metal on metal when the gun cycles. This can easily be fixed with a file and 2 minutes.
>>29504490
If you want a battle rifle go 17. If you prefer 5.56 go SCAR16.
USGI or Gen3 pmags work okay.
>>29504569
Oh yeah
>>29504571
yes, no problem. not too sure about lancer, troy, or other plastic mags. USGI or STANAG will be just fine.
>>29504522
>can't do pmags
>but it can do pmags
>>29504593
Lancers are GTG. If you can still find them, EMAGs should work great in a SCAR also.
>>29504611
I meant e mags.
Sry senpai
>>29504457
If you like it, buy it. If you end up hating it, it just means someone else gets a discount and you lose a couple of hundred dollars.
Or you could go out to a range and rent it a few times rather than get angry when you relied on /k/ instead of doing a test drive.
it's bretty gud :DDD
but, it depends on your budget. for the same price of a scar 16 you can build a decent ar, get an acog, mags and ammo - which may leave you more satisfied.
>>29504522
The SCAR was designed in 2003 to work with the standard GI magazine.
The PMAG came in 2007 and it wasn't until Gen 3 that they fixed the notch for the bolt hold open to be square. But you should still check to see if they raise up the BHO arm because polymer.
You may recall the hoopla a few years back about some military folks wanting to ban the PMAG and which spurred the Gen 3 development. It was because the M27's magwell couldn't take them. HK's civ MR556 magwell was known to be tight, but it was the M27 variant where aftermarket magazine/drum tests along with other requirements were watered down because only FN bothered to listen to the initial solicitation for open bolt capability. Colt tried later, but by the end they neutered the competition so much that HK won mostly because of weight.
>>29504649
EMags were designed around the HK416's magwell restrictions yet still feature M2 feedlip geometry and thus require modification for the SCAR.
As others have mentioned it's a simple modification that will eliminate unnecessary wear on the bolt stop and bolt face when using those magazines. However, neglecting to perform said modification or using standard M2 Pmags will not cause any malfunctions or reliability issues to occur.
M3 Pmags correct the compatibility issue but are otherwise shit magazines. I recommend Lancers or factory steel mags for the SCAR.
