From your unbiased perspective, which do you like better: the 416 or the SCAR L? Also, how does the recoil of the 416 compare to the SCAR L because there are a lot of people out there who haven't fired either that say the recoil is lower in the 416.
By the way, what did Vicker's think of the SCAR? :?
I'm a huge believer in "staying in your lane". I'm not a professional trigger puller, Specwar guru or anything like that.
My opinion is just that, it's an opinion, and one that's based on shooting these on a range and in classes, not on a two way range and not really putting them through any serious test protocols.
Having said that.....the HK 416 10.5" and the FN SCAR-L CQC are both top of the line carbines. The FN is softer shooting even though the HK is heavier. I've fired both full auto, and both perform in an outstanding capacity, and I sure as hell wouldn't feel under armed with either.
If BIG ARMY felt the need to upgrade their stocks of M16A2's, M16A4's, M4 and M4A1's, with a minimum of cross training and materiel.....the HK 416 is a winner. You simply replace the upper receiver and the buffer and spring arrangement and you're good to go, no need to buy whole rifles.
If SOCOM or BIG ARMY decides that they need completely new carbines, built from the ground up as entirely new platforms, then the FN SCAR series is definitely a top tier candidate.
FOR ME, the FN SCAR-L CQC was much more ergonomic than a M4 or HK 416, lighter than the 416, and more controllable under full auto fire than either the M4A1 or the 416. The ability to change out barrels easily and quickly (with the provided tool) is a serious bonus.
Anyway, you asked.........that's my answer......