Joined
·
48 Posts
Hello everyone,
From a technical standpoint is the SCAR stock an effective design for controlling recoil?
Compared to the inline stock of the AR-10 it seems that the SCAR's stock sits low on the rifle. Even more so if you account for the larger and taller bolt carrier group. Wouldn't it have been more effective to have the stock mounted higher to have it more inline with the bolt carrier group?
Is there really a need for the bottom of the stock to start supporting the rifle from the fire control housing?
This question came up while I was watching slow motion footage of the SCAR 17 and even the SCAR 16 when I noticed that the rifles seem to snap upward at the end of their rearward cycle.
Also I'm wondering if any users of the Vltor Receiver extension adapters (that are adjusted high) have noticed that recoil is more controllable.
Thanks!
From a technical standpoint is the SCAR stock an effective design for controlling recoil?
Compared to the inline stock of the AR-10 it seems that the SCAR's stock sits low on the rifle. Even more so if you account for the larger and taller bolt carrier group. Wouldn't it have been more effective to have the stock mounted higher to have it more inline with the bolt carrier group?
Is there really a need for the bottom of the stock to start supporting the rifle from the fire control housing?
This question came up while I was watching slow motion footage of the SCAR 17 and even the SCAR 16 when I noticed that the rifles seem to snap upward at the end of their rearward cycle.
Also I'm wondering if any users of the Vltor Receiver extension adapters (that are adjusted high) have noticed that recoil is more controllable.
Thanks!