[McGee]

Hello, I am new to this forum and came in search to answers for my questions about the FN SCAR (specifically the heavy, shooting .308). How reliable is the scar? I have narrowed it down to a custom built Ak (shooting .308) and a FN SCAR (also shooting .308) I am still considering the H&K 416 too (civilian version). The Kalashkinov is dubbed as they most reliable system every produced. The most durable.. But not the most accurate, nor the lightest. And after shooting a friend of mines SCAR and Ak, I see no problems in the function of either. I have seen the Ak put through many extreme torture tests (like Ak Operators Union Local 47-74) but havnt seen the SCAR put through any tests. Has anybody on here put theirs to the test..? How does it hold up compared to an Ak in extreme conditions, such as dropping it from trees, dragging it through mud and rocks and sand, and generally abusing it in extremely cold weather...?

Any information and help would be greatly appreciated and Respected. Thanks for your time and consideration,
McGee

(Also, if this has already been posted elsewhere, in similar topic, please let me know.)

 

[Big Muddy]

The SCAR is highly reliable Several hundred rounds down the pipe plus however many the previouse owner put down it and not a single malfunction. As far as AKs being reliable depend on who makes them. i would not under any circumstance trust my life with my piece of junk Romanian WASR 10 or any rifle put together by Century Arms.
And by the way, welcome to the Forum!

 

[Rizza32]

I dont know if its possible to compare a Scar 17 and an Ak. But if you want an accurate, modern, light weight, reliable piston driven system you are definitely going to pay a good price for it. Or...you can save some money and buy the reliable AK of yester year. As far as the HK MR556, it is heavier but also a great option. All depends on what you want to do. Obviously the HK is not a .30 but is still comparable to the Scar 17 in price. There is a video of a drop test on the Scar on youtube. Painful to watch and the Scar wasnt in the best shape after.

 

[Aging Disgracefully]

A couple of responses:
1. The SCAR and your standard issue AK (or the M1a and your standard issue AK, HK MR762 and your standard issue AK, etc.) is not a comparison of ".30" cals in the sense that the 7.62X39 is one of the weaker 30 cal rounds, with performance that falls far short of the 308/7.62 NATO;
2. Reliability: I have never had an failure to complete the firing cycle with any of my 17s. Never. I'm sure it has happened with 17s but I think my experience should give you some idea of its statistical potential with good ammo;
3. Reliability: In a test I went >4k rounds without cleaning one of my 17s rifles. I noticed no performance issue. I know of a local range with a rental SCAR 16s who (I am pretty sure) went well over 10k round with only a few passes of a Bore Snake and that is it. They finally had to clean b/c there was so much carbon in the piston housing that it wouldn't cycle reliably.
4. Reliability: I have dropped my SCARs. Even on concrete. Maybe not Peruvian concrete and from 10m (or whatever it was) but I have done it. I have repeatedly made the disastrous mistake of letting my nephew use them. They just kept chuggin.

 

[DrToyHoarder]

:greatpostsignsj1: Mines not been through much abuse, but 1000 rounds in the 17, and about 2 k in the 16 with no fte,ftf, or hiccups of any kind. And i have to admit to shooting alot of bulk cheap ammo.

 

[BOOMSLANG]

Welcome to the forum ! I don't think you can go wrong with the 17, it's a FN BEAST, never had any type of failure with any of the four SCARs I own. I do however take care of my weapons and have no desire to drag them to the range behind the dually, being after playing dress-up their north of 5k each. I know they'll take it, the HEROES in the sand box have proven that. I don't need some jack-off stuffing Twinkies in the action to prove anything more to me than at best case scenario, their poor attempt at being a comedian. I do however think no vault is complete without a AK in there, but would not make it a big dollar investment, just a low level option. I would doubt that the SCAR 17S would disappoint you in any way ! Happy hunting . Just my .02

 

[Cadpack]

http://fnforum.net/forums/fn-scar-16s/17495-fn-scar-history-specifications.html

3.2.3.10 Reliability. The SCAR L, while following the appropriate maintenance schedule shall have a minimum Class I, II, and III Mean Round Between Failures (MRBF) as listed in the below table.


Failure Class MRBF Maximum allowable Failures permitted in 16,000 Rounds


I (MRBF) 2,000 8
II (MRBF) 8,000 2
III (MRBF) 15,000 1 *


* No broken parts causing weapon to cease function.


Failure Classification:


Class I: A failure that may be immediately clearable by the operator within 10 seconds or less while following prescribed immediate action procedures.


Class II: A failure that may be operator clearable requiring more than 10 seconds but not more than 10 minutes. Only the equipment and tools issued with the weapon may be used to clear the weapon.


Class III: A failure of a severe nature. The failure; (1) is operator correctable but requires more than 10 minutes, (2) operator cannot correct and requires assistance (no time limit), (3) requires higher level of maintenance, or authorized operator correction cannot be accomplished because of unavailability of necessary tools, equipment or parts.

 

[Canyon Man]

I have the information I believe you're looking for. I've done my own torture test to my Scar 17, twice...It did fine with dirt, water, and mud covered on it. The first time I did it, I had to push the stock trigger forward 3 or 4 times to help it reset as dirt got into the lower receiver which forced that issue. (This can also happen with an AK, or worse, sometimes cycling issues too) The second time I did it, rifle more broken in, that problem didn't happen. I wish I had video taped this lol. It never failed to cycle or fire, not once. Put the round in the chamber, and ejected perfectly EVERY time ! As for dragging it and dropping it...I haven't done that, but with what I've done it wouldn't be a problem. The VLTOR receiver extension puts an AR buffer tube type butt stock on it, and that takes care of the possibility of the stock SCAR's polymer butt stock breaking, and I have an aluminum SEAL lower receiver on order from Stryker Enterprises. I believe the polymer lower is fine, but I like the ruggedness of aluminum also. I would like to get aluminum case deflectors also. I'm not sure they are available on aftermarket parts yet, but will have them made at a local place if not...pretty simple task, may be pricey to have done though. I'm considering doing a few up and selling some to recoup my cost if I go that route. Now this makes for a pricey rifle, but cheaper than buying several others that aren't as good. You will have a very reliable rifle with interchangeable barrels, which AK don't have, and more ergonomic than AK. If you get a 7.62 x .51 AK you will have rare and hard to find magazines...a no go in an end of days situation for sure. Also, the 7.62 x .39 AK is definitely not even in the neighborhood as the 7.62 x .51 Scar 17 round for down right power and distance. The Scar can be readily scoped too. So if you want drop proof ruggedness, the SCAR can be equipped, although it's rugged enough in it's stock configuration to withstand any conditions you will run into anyway. But I do understand and know where you're coming from regarding a rugged rifle stand point. Also, you can keep the stock lower and butt stock on it and keep it very light weight for run of the mill hiking, camping, and general outdoor use. A light weight 7.62 NATO caliber rifle is an essential for deep woods or desert fun. The SCAR blows the AK away in EVERY category, even in durability...and definitely accuracy...I answer your question with this...it's a no brainer...the SCAR BEATS AK in EVERY category. This is not an opinion, this is a fact. I demand...DEMAND...the above listed requirements out of my go to gun !(And don't forget, you're an AMERICAN) I have spoken !!! : )

 

[Spilz]

Buy an AK. You could get a reliable AK, 10 magazines and 3,000 rounds for around $1,000 if you do your homework and wait for the right deal. Everyone should have one.
A SCAR 17s and 3,000 rounds will cost you upwards of $4,000. By the time you add optics and other upgrades that this forum makes you buy you're talking $5-6k. Suppressors and sbr, aftermarket trigger, extra parts kit, an aftermarket aluminum lower, upgraded butt stock, aftermarket rail extension, NV, a SOAMR an EACH, slings and mounts, more magazines, a 16s just because..... The list goes on and on. Next thing you know, you've got $15k+ in the baddest rifle ever and your wife hates you. Then you realize the black one may actually be more accurate than FDE so you buy you're 2nd SCAR just to make sure. This all may sound crazy but these kind of things happen around here ALL the time.
Not to me of course but others...

Should have just got an AK. :lol: :-D

Welcome to the Forum!

 

[Bkelly47]

My 2 17s both have over 12k rounds through them and I can count on 1 hand the number of stoppages I've had.

 

[Big Muddy]

Canyon Man, if you come up with an anodized case deflector that keep my 16 from bouncing shells off my shoulder please PM me. I'll buy one in a heartbeat.

 

[McGee]

I think I should clarify my purpose a bit more. I plan on using either a SCAR (in .308 or an Ak (Vepr or C39 chambered in .308 for predator hunting in Alaska. I plan on moving there soon, and feel as though if the gun is reliable and accurate, it doesn't have to be a bolt action to be a good hunting gun. Plus, a semi-auto .308 that is accurate would be great for follow up shots (incase of a bad shot or a miss). I will consider, however, that this is only my speculation- things may not be the same in real life situations, but i'm willing to try and find out. And so I will most definitely take care of my gun of choice, cleaning it and such- not trying to abuse it. But if the situation comes, it needs to be able to handle it well, and repeatedly without ANYTHING breaking. I don't need to be 100 miles from nowhere, hunting, and have a weapon that fails me. Thanks so much for the replies so far!

 

[stumblebum]

Well in that case, it makes a lot more sense to face a grizzly bear with a SCAR 17 than an AK, just from the difference in rounds. And then do what everyone else up there does - carry the biggest-bore revolver you can as backup!

I think I should clarify my purpose a bit more. I plan on using either a SCAR (in .308) or an Ak (Vepr or C39 chambered in .308) for predator hunting in Alaska. I plan on moving there soon, and feel as though if the gun is reliable and accurate, it doesn't have to be a bolt action to be a good hunting gun. Plus, a semi-auto .308 that is accurate would be great for follow up shots (incase of a bad shot or a miss). I will consider, however, that this is only my speculation- things may not be the same in real life situations, but i'm willing to try and find out. And so I will most definitely take care of my gun of choice, cleaning it and such- not trying to abuse it. But if the situation comes, it needs to be able to handle it well, and repeatedly without ANYTHING breaking. I don't need to be 100 miles from nowhere, hunting, and have a weapon that fails me. Thanks so much for the replies so far!

 

[marko]

I've been a few below zero with the SCAR and it's function has been flawless. I don't have an AK in .30, but I can attest to the accuracy of the SCAR.

 

[McGee]

What kind of ammo do you shoot? Brass or steel cased?

 

[Chunknled]

If you were to shoot steel case ammo, I would only only use that for plinking around. If I were 100mi from nowhere like you mentioned, I would use brass cased ammo.

 

[McGee]

I agree,

 

[WarMachine]

Here's the way I look at it... in the remote mountains of Afghanistan, the Grizzlies shoot back at our special ops guys deployed there, a number of which carry SCAR 17's.

So yeah, you'll be fine.

 

[McGee]

Here's the way I look at it... in the remote mountains of Afghanistan, the Grizzlies shoot back at our special ops guys deployed there, a number of which carry SCAR 17's.

So yeah, you'll be fine.

Real good comparison

 

[Canyon Man]

Just getting back to this thread...had to buy a new computer modem gees lol. A .30 cal AK would definitely do what you want too...I owned a Yugo M77 for a brief time, and it was ok. It didn't like hunting type ammo. The soft tip ammo would get caught on the edge of the barrel about once per 20 round mag. It just didn't seem to like soft tips. I can't recall the brands and bullet grains I was using, as it's been a few years back now. But that was an issue for me. I had done some research and found other people claiming the same issue. Someone had commented to use smaller grain bullets for it. But the AK is definitely a simple yet rugged rifle, and I don't think anyone can deny that. I spoke with another person that owned an AK and he said his AK rifle did the same thing with soft tips. (His was a 7.62 x .39 cal tho ) And I really don't know if soft tips are a common issue with AK's...though I would advise a little research in that area if considering using that type of ammo for your uses. I don't shoot a lot of soft tip through my scar, but have run some with no issues. I've read about some negatives using soft tips in semi auto rifles. But for me, I like a rifle that shoots everything. I ran 40 rounds of steel cased ammo through my 17 just to see if it would fire it, and it did with no problems. I like running the ZQ ammo, no bimetals in the bullet. Another thing with that YUGO M77, I found mags for it just by luck, a local place carried some brand new, but they were like 60 or 70.00 each, and didn't want to modify those mags to have it stay open on the last round. That's another feature the 17 has over the AK. But I will not knock the AK platform, but something inside me didn't feel right making the enemies preferred weapon my choice. I'm not saying anything is wrong with it, it just kind of ate at me for me personally. But yes, a great simple design it is. The 17 is expensive yes, but is versatile and can be run in a light weight configuration, or a little heavier if u want more aluminum on it. Stay open on last round, scope friendly, and ease of barrel changes are naturally the big issues I prefer SCAR. Those features on a light weight rifle made it worth the investment for me. I don't see my 17 having a parts breakage being an issue for me in the middle of nowhere...and I commend the foresight of that thought process in a rifle purchase. I take very good care of my firearms, but do test those I call go to guns. Nothing more than a Soldier may encounter. I had my FNS .40 cal long slide feed ramp slightly shaved to improve ease of bullet feeding into chamber. This striker fired pistol fires flawlessly through multiple water submersions and dirt covered. I added that just to kind of show where I'm coming from on my desires from a firearm. They have been tested and proven, I know they'll work if heaven forbid I need them under such circumstance, and now they get treated like royalty to get long life from them. Not many people do the adverse conditions test as I do, so I hope in some way my posts helped. : )