FN Herstal Firearms banner

1 - 20 of 51 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,024 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
You'd think the military would have FN address any shortcomings, they had Handl do this instead?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
641 Posts
Not sure what farmerted was reffering to specifically here, but I understand Handl makes SCAR lowers in aluminum or magnesium. I also know that a Navy Seal armorer I've spoken to said their biggest complaint was cracked polymer lowers in the field.

Probably related, who knows.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,699 Posts
Have a link to that thread?

Ah. I remember that thread. I thought maybe it was a thread from another forum. That thread was a cluster **** of people getting in line. :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,024 Posts
Discussion Starter #6 (Edited)

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,129 Posts
There are already a handful of threads about this on the forum that I will not link to. It is all shilling and arguing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kev

·
Vendor
Joined
·
1,756 Posts
This actually might be an interesting case study on how product development is done.

I know nothing about this, so I am just spinning hypotheticals, but I could imagine a scenario where commanders in the field say a cracked poly lower is their biggest issue, but the amount of time/effort for that information to get back up through channels, to determine the extent of the problem, to communicate it to FN, to analyze options, and cost estimate a solution. Plus, since FN have already invested in the molds, they don't want to walk away from that solution without first seeing if there is a solution with polymer formulation, or adding glass fill, or thickening walls, so there is 6 months in R&D ..... net, the official solution is a SLOWWW process.

Meanwhile, Handl can jump right to metal lowers, and since SOCOM is empowered to just buy a commercial solution, bypassing the procurement system, Handl might very well be able to field a solution faster than FN can.

Naturally, FN does not discuss their developments, so to us outsiders, it looks like the military is going to Handl for a solution instead of FN, when reality is that they started with FN.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,418 Posts
You'd think the military would have FN address any shortcomings
They do. Nothing has changed.
NSWC Crane is notified.
NSWC Crane contacts FN.
FN makes changes accordingly.
Gov doesn't own the rights to the TDP on the CAR-H. FN does.
Everything has to be safety certified before being officially fielded.
Units can purchase virtually anything at the unit level, such as the SCAR E.A.C.H.

The weapon still has to meet the weight requirement stated in the contract as delivered from FN.

End of story.

-SS
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,024 Posts
Discussion Starter #10 (Edited)
There are already a handful of threads about this on the forum that I will not link to. It is all shilling and arguing.
I've seen plenty on the Handl lower, nothing about these, must of have missed them. I'd like to see those threads about these though, can you PM me. I searched just for Handl and only got results about the lower.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,212 Posts
Handl has 4 upgrades:
1. Stainless steel gas control screw that won't weld itself in and uses a standard allen wrench.
2. Aluminum stock hinge, SOCOM was breaking them like the stock latch.
3. Recoil mitigation system that prevents SCAR from NOM NOM on optics.
4. Rail assembly.

ROAD HOUSE!
I just went to handl's web site and the Recoil Mitigation System and Rail Assembly must be TOP Secrete, not for civi eyes yet:-D. I am however interested in reading about Socom's adoption of Handl SCAR upgrades from any sources that do not have an invested interest in the company. Like firearm magazines who always fail to comment on the short comings of their advertisers products. All parts wear out with use, so a few pics on a web site does not impress me. I would like to see and independent test that pitted the Handl enhanced version against the OEM version; Run 10,000 rounds through each in a controlled setting, and compare the effects on the individual parts. Other then comparative testing by an independent third party, I have seen enough advertising hype to last me a lifetime. :th_32: It would be great farmerted if you could point me in the direction of FNH OEM failure reports, so I may enlighten myself. Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,024 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
It would be great farmerted if you could point me in the direction of FNH OEM failure reports, so I may enlighten myself. Thanks!
I'm sure FN has all that info for you, just call them up. I can't do the letmegooglethatforyou, so here's the contact info:
FNH USA CONTACTSFNH USA Commercial, Law Enforcement, and Military SalesPO Box 9424
McLean, VA 22102
Phone: 703-288-3500
Fax: 703-288-4507
E-Mail: [email protected]
For sales inquiries please email [email protected]

For customer service inquiries please call (703) 288-3500 option 4 OR 1-855-5FNHUSA
For technical inquiries and/or repairs please call 1-800-635-1321
For FNH USA e-store inquiries, please email [email protected]
For parts inquiries, please email [email protected]
For marketing, tradeshow, public relations or media relations inquiries, please email [email][email protected][/EMAIL]

FNH USA Military Training OperationsPhone: 540-288-2008 Ext. 108
Fax: 540-752-0967
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,356 Posts
third party, I have seen enough advertising hype to last me a lifetime. :th_32: It would be great farmerted if you could point me in the direction of FNH OEM failure reports, so I may enlighten myself. Thanks!

There really isn't any failure reports because there isn't any real failures. Yeah there is one here and there but no real issue. It is a quality platform.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,699 Posts
There really isn't any failure reports because there isn't any real failures. Yeah there is one here and there but no real issue. It is a quality platform.
The only cracked lower I have ever read about was the one from that youtube video of the soldier dropping it on the concrete intentionally. I was unaware that this was a problem too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,625 Posts
This actually might be an interesting case study on how product development is done.

I know nothing about this, so I am just spinning hypotheticals, but I could imagine a scenario where commanders in the field say a cracked poly lower is their biggest issue, but the amount of time/effort for that information to get back up through channels, to determine the extent of the problem, to communicate it to FN, to analyze options, and cost estimate a solution. Plus, since FN have already invested in the molds, they don't want to walk away from that solution without first seeing if there is a solution with polymer formulation, or adding glass fill, or thickening walls, so there is 6 months in R&D ..... net, the official solution is a SLOWWW process.

Meanwhile, Handl can jump right to metal lowers, and since SOCOM is empowered to just buy a commercial solution, bypassing the procurement system, Handl might very well be able to field a solution faster than FN can.

Naturally, FN does not discuss their developments, so to us outsiders, it looks like the military is going to Handl for a solution instead of FN, when reality is that they started with FN.
Development was done by Milestones - very rigorous testing - enduser feedback - implement changes - produced small number of weapons - repeat process - reach next milestone - there are ALOT of steps I am leaving out but its so others can get the gist...
GEN Brown at the time ensured this was done and ensured the enduser got the changes "they" wanted WAY before the milestone was reached to start limited production and issue of the system. SCAR Reaches Milestone C - Soldier Systems Daily

Special Operations Command: Transforming for the Long War
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,024 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Thanks bayonet, Stryker, and Art, for actual information as I have not heard of any of this SCAR improvement program before. The freaking blowhard peanuts really come out of the gallery.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
129 Posts
I am here FNFORUMS because I was looking at the SEAL, I'd love to see some video of BTW. I have heard of the HANDLE. What was it doing? I see that pic there, that is crazy. Is the any vids-pics of the silly stuff? Sorry I know I am new here. But I dont trust the internet as far as I can throw it. anonymity and all. WHY is HANDLE not at FNFORUMS? This seems like the place to be for them. If this Handle program works I would be willing to take a look, curious to say the least.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
Scars eat optics. - Page 8 - AR15.COM

Scars eat optics. - Page 9 - AR15.COM

Here's what Handl's up to on other forums.

#1 the word allegation means an unproven assertion, the situation surrounding what happened to Handl Defense would be an incorrect use of that term.

The Federal Bureau Of Investigation's Intellectual Property Right's Coordination Center had an agent look into the matter surrounding what happened on that site. She was assigned to the FBI field office in Chicago. She said that the Handl lowers specific measurements had been transmitted between several members of that site. She then said that she was going forward the case to the office in Washington D.C.

When the owners of that site were confronted with the evidence of what had happened on that site, they cancelled Handl Defense's sponsorship and refused to take calls.

Some seriously shady **** goes on over there. IWC was treated the same way. Discredit, slander, and libel your competitors, then push your product in it's place.

People in that place have a bad history, that is why they can't be out in the open, because they have screwed over some big fish (not Handl or IWC BTW), who want blood.

#2 QA/ QC issues with Handl Defense are over blown, period. The fact they mostly come form the aforementioned site, lends to questionable credibility. All of these "issues" have yet to be documented in video or pictures. What has been noted is that many people think they can install a Handl lower like an AR lower. Simply, you can not, it has to be installed exactly like the directions says, especially in initial mating. The FN SCAR is not as precisely built of a weapon, like a Novseke, MEGA, or LMT.

The lower is atrocious on the FN SCAR, Handl was the first to figure it out (dremeling a stock lower does not count) in mid 2011 Handl had CAD drawings and 3D prototypes, even before people had taken dremels to stock lowers. It is why the competition had to reverse engineer it, they had to get the specific measurements, it is why they have taken so long, they had to wait for some else to figure it out a few critical specifics first, take it, then make their own.

The Handl has been tested to MIL-STD 810-G, It has had extensive testing. It has been tested and in compliance with the Spec sheet for the CAR-H with round counts doubled. The rest of the gun breaks before the Handl lower does. Alan Handl deals with AQ/AI issues personally, as in stops what he is doing goes out to the shop checks the lower, installs it, tests it, shoots it, often videos it. Considering who just got done testing it, and recommended it for adoption, he damn well better. The only testing the Handl lower has not had is what NSWC Crane is going to do. Even though they have done it all in house
 
1 - 20 of 51 Posts
Top