SCAR 17 "Real World" Accuracy?

Discuss the FN lineup of tactical rifles; the FS2000, SCAR, and the venerable FAL.
User avatar
flyingirish04
Gold Member
Posts: 4783
Joined: 25 Aug 2008, 21:42
custom title: Mtn Man in Flatland
Location: Great Plains, USA

Re: SCAR 17 "Real World" Accuracy?

Post by flyingirish04 » 30 Jan 2011, 17:41

20 is no problem with the right glass, as Jay said. Especially with on of the Billet, match grade custom builds.
Killed Two Stones with One Bird.

User avatar
blueorison
Competition/Training Mod
Posts: 10628
Joined: 11 Apr 2009, 14:28
custom title: UT/EA Pistol Captain
Contact:

Re: SCAR 17 "Real World" Accuracy?

Post by blueorison » 30 Jan 2011, 22:48

Much lighter. Shorter. Much more compact; operational with stock folded. Adj. gas system. Better recoil management. Better new bbl by FN vs potentially old stock FN FAL (if you get one).

The end.
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity.
The shooter will always matter more than the gear ever will.
Stop relying on others to do the work for you.
Shoot more, worry less.

User avatar
blueorison
Competition/Training Mod
Posts: 10628
Joined: 11 Apr 2009, 14:28
custom title: UT/EA Pistol Captain
Contact:

Re: SCAR 17 "Real World" Accuracy?

Post by blueorison » 31 Jan 2011, 21:22

Scott pm'd me with very insightful information which brought to light many things (thanks Scott!);


1. FAL folding stocks WILL fire folded. Folding stock FAL's do require a different recoil spring that is housed in the receiver to use a folding stock. Called a "paratrooper" style recoil spring & receiver

2. Most FAL's have a 7 position gas adjustment, 8 if you count "off" (with recoil management the main function of all the diff positions). The SCAR only has a 3 position adjustment.

3. More compact? Maybe if comparing a 16" barrel SCAR to full sized 21" FAL, but apples to apples a folding stock FAL with a 16" barrel is 28.5" folded, 38" unfolded (specs from DS Arms website). The SCAR beats it only by a mere 1/2" folded (specs from FN's website).

4. Magpul makes stocks for the FAL.

5. Barrel quality can be undesirable on surplus FAL's of course, but DSA and a few other companies make pretty nice barrels for FAL

The SCAR is surely a bit lighter and more ergonomic, but for $2500 one can buy 2 quality FAL's or 3 surplus FAL's.
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity.
The shooter will always matter more than the gear ever will.
Stop relying on others to do the work for you.
Shoot more, worry less.

User avatar
panzermk2
Forum Supporter
Posts: 11552
Joined: 19 Aug 2008, 15:51
Location: Around here it's more like what can we shoot through next.
Contact:

Re: SCAR 17 "Real World" Accuracy?

Post by panzermk2 » 31 Jan 2011, 23:07

blueorison wrote:Scott pm'd me with very insightful information which brought to light many things (thanks Scott!);


1. FAL folding stocks WILL fire folded. Folding stock FAL's do require a different recoil spring that is housed in the receiver to use a folding stock. Called a "paratrooper" style recoil spring & receiver

2. Most FAL's have a 7 position gas adjustment, 8 if you count "off" (with recoil management the main function of all the diff positions). The SCAR only has a 3 position adjustment.

3. More compact? Maybe if comparing a 16" barrel SCAR to full sized 21" FAL, but apples to apples a folding stock FAL with a 16" barrel is 28.5" folded, 38" unfolded (specs from DS Arms website). The SCAR beats it only by a mere 1/2" folded (specs from FN's website).

4. Magpul makes stocks for the FAL.

5. Barrel quality can be undesirable on surplus FAL's of course, but DSA and a few other companies make pretty nice barrels for FAL

The SCAR is surely a bit lighter and more ergonomic, but for $2500 one can buy 2 quality FAL's or 3 surplus FAL's.


4. Magpul makes stocks for the FAL.



FAIL they only make a fixed stock, they do not make a FAL version of the PRS stock.
Jay Wolf
Pr. Elite Ammunition

"Engineers, the oompa-loompas of science!"

Be'ein Tachbulot Yipol Am Veteshua Berov Yoetz
Image

SpaceCoyote
Junior Member
Posts: 143
Joined: 17 Nov 2008, 11:21
Location: Austin, TX

Re: SCAR 17 "Real World" Accuracy?

Post by SpaceCoyote » 01 Feb 2011, 07:13

panzermk2 wrote:


4. Magpul makes stocks for the FAL.



FAIL they only make a fixed stock, they do not make a FAL version of the PRS stock.

They DO make an FAL version of their PRS stock:
http://store.magpul.com/product/MAG341/85

It IS NOT a folding stock (nor is the PRS for any other rifle model). But is most certainly adjustable for length of pull and cheek weld.

If you're point is that no one makes a "PRS" for folding stock FAL, then that's certainly right. But $2500 for a SCAR seems a lot to pay for a rifle stock.

User avatar
flyingirish04
Gold Member
Posts: 4783
Joined: 25 Aug 2008, 21:42
custom title: Mtn Man in Flatland
Location: Great Plains, USA

Re: SCAR 17 "Real World" Accuracy?

Post by flyingirish04 » 01 Feb 2011, 08:03

I agree, and the more I look into rifles when you are talking of distance shooting or precision, the more you have to look at the custom rout. For the money, they are just a better value than the SCAR is. It may take a bit longer to build or have someone build, but I can honestly say that I can get a superior shooting custom AR in 7.62 for less than what you pay for a SCAR. Now if your argument is that you just like the SCAR, well then, I can't argue against that.
Killed Two Stones with One Bird.

User avatar
panzermk2
Forum Supporter
Posts: 11552
Joined: 19 Aug 2008, 15:51
Location: Around here it's more like what can we shoot through next.
Contact:

Re: SCAR 17 "Real World" Accuracy?

Post by panzermk2 » 01 Feb 2011, 09:38

SpaceCoyote wrote:
panzermk2 wrote:


4. Magpul makes stocks for the FAL.



FAIL they only make a fixed stock, they do not make a FAL version of the PRS stock.

They DO make an FAL version of their PRS stock:
http://store.magpul.com/product/MAG341/85

It IS NOT a folding stock (nor is the PRS for any other rifle model). But is most certainly adjustable for length of pull and cheek weld.

If you're point is that no one makes a "PRS" for folding stock FAL, then that's certainly right. But $2500 for a SCAR seems a lot to pay for a rifle stock.

When did they bring this out? I called them about a PRS for my FAL a while ago.


To bad it will not fit an inch FAl which is what I have.
Jay Wolf
Pr. Elite Ammunition

"Engineers, the oompa-loompas of science!"

Be'ein Tachbulot Yipol Am Veteshua Berov Yoetz
Image

type5
Junior Member
Posts: 14
Joined: 04 Mar 2009, 17:17

Re: SCAR 17 "Real World" Accuracy?

Post by type5 » 10 Feb 2011, 15:47

The SCARS kill the AR's in reliability and the FAL's also and do so with less maintenance.
Accuracy - depends on what you want: if you choose to shoot while walking tacti-cooly 1 minute or 1 1/2 minutes of accuracy with a 4 MOA dot sight just sounds like you are a not too smart person chasing specs and stats. Sorry, no insult intended, but have you thought about it?
I think this is what the original poster was asking about when he asked about real world accuracy.
Tactical accuracy is one thing.
Sub-minute accuracy is another.
Acceptance standard for an M-1 rifle was, as I recall, 2 1/2 MOA from a test fixture. Now factor amunition standards for the same time period: also 2 1/2 minutes from a test fixture.
This means everything considered, 5 MOA was acceptable then - it would be a the acceptable maximums combined.
Guys, that does not even take into account the least accurate variable - the shooter.
So a 1 MOA gun today that a poster above keeps talking about could be 1/2 MOA Rifle + 1/2 MOA Ammunition and a Zero MOA (perfect) shooter.
Now, I am for the most accurate Rifle/Ammo/Rifleman combos we can put together but is the cost of micro MOA Rifle/Ammo combinations for a 2 MOA Riflemen going to make a real world difference? Not that I can imagine.
Now, snipping rifles are another thing and we want and need sub-minute capability. But to compare a sniper rifle to the SCAR, as was done above, is, well, missing the mark by miles!

User avatar
fatherfoof
Senior Member
Posts: 3089
Joined: 06 Dec 2008, 00:56
Location: Lone Star State

Re: SCAR 17 "Real World" Accuracy?

Post by fatherfoof » 11 Feb 2011, 00:46

If accuracy is the true goal, skip red dots and obtain a cross hair scope. Virtually any rifle can be tightened up, but red dots are to quickly get somewhere on target--not for a precision shot. Only a respectful submission.
Please PM Me for LE/Military Access

User avatar
blueorison
Competition/Training Mod
Posts: 10628
Joined: 11 Apr 2009, 14:28
custom title: UT/EA Pistol Captain
Contact:

Re: SCAR 17 "Real World" Accuracy?

Post by blueorison » 11 Feb 2011, 01:47

fatherfoof wrote:If accuracy is the true goal, skip red dots and obtain a cross hair scope. Virtually any rifle can be tightened up, but red dots are to quickly get somewhere on target--not for a precision shot. Only a respectful submission.
Gold Star.
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity.
The shooter will always matter more than the gear ever will.
Stop relying on others to do the work for you.
Shoot more, worry less.

tombirdman
Junior Member
Posts: 83
Joined: 23 Sep 2008, 15:19

Re: SCAR 17 "Real World" Accuracy?

Post by tombirdman » 15 Feb 2011, 19:52

SeaHawkDriver-B wrote:I mean I don't give a crap what the factory or some "bought-off" gun journalist wants to say about it. I want to know how accurate the gun is from REAL owners who don't have corporate entities or sponsors to appease. It does me no good to put a high-dollar scope and bipod on the thing if the bullet holes are going to be a foot apart at 500 yards; if thats the caes, I'd rather SBR the gun and limit its optical abilities to under 300 yds with low magnification. Of course the ability of the shooter is key, but how does the gun stack up against other .308 semi's at longer distances.... again, actual opinions of owners, not what the book says.
:wall: :wall: :wall: :wall:


I have both a 16s and 17, scoped with an ACOG31 & Elcan 1.5 to 6.
I have a ACOG 5.5x on my FAL.
The Marines accepted the HK machinegun. I wasn't and don't believe they bought HK rifles.

The SCAR is so far ahead of the compitition it isn't worth arguing about. !!!
I will not even honor anyone with the long diatribe about my toy being better than yours. That's pure stupidity ! This is America and one is free to like what they want and then put their money where their mouth is by going out and buying it.

There are tons of great rifles out there.
I just prefer the SCAR as does the military and many individuals.

As far as accuracy of the SCAR at distance is concerned. I don't think there is a semi out there that will beat it unless you are willing to paqy 2 or 3 times as much for a custom supper gun.

Truth to be told, with this SCAR, you are more likely to miss because of human error than gun error.

We are entitled to our own oppinions and I obviously have mine.

Don't waste your time expecting me to argue with your oppinions.

I won't !

Research it, shoot it and come to your own conclusion.

Here are a few pictures - just for eye candy. Double click them if you want the pictures larger.

1.

Image

2.

Image

3.

Image

4.

Image

Enough said.


I don't mean to be argumentative but I have my own experienses, a couple of guns, and a whole lot of testing and shooting under my 66 year old belt, so, as a member of this forum, I feel I am entitled to MY oppinions .

They are only mine !


With this said; I do have an HK SL8 that is sub moa and qualifies, easily, as a sniper.
A 223 sniper is not the best caliber but it would certainly do the deed out to 400 yds.

:ponder: :ponder: :ponder: :ponder:

.
Last edited by tombirdman on 15 Feb 2011, 20:23, edited 1 time in total.

tombirdman
Junior Member
Posts: 83
Joined: 23 Sep 2008, 15:19

Re: SCAR 17 "Real World" Accuracy?

Post by tombirdman » 15 Feb 2011, 20:14

blueorison wrote:Scott pm'd me with very insightful information which brought to light many things (thanks Scott!);


1. FAL folding stocks WILL fire folded. Folding stock FAL's do require a different recoil spring that is housed in the receiver to use a folding stock. Called a "paratrooper" style recoil spring & receiver

2. Most FAL's have a 7 position gas adjustment, 8 if you count "off" (with recoil management the main function of all the diff positions). The SCAR only has a 3 position adjustment.

3. More compact? Maybe if comparing a 16" barrel SCAR to full sized 21" FAL, but apples to apples a folding stock FAL with a 16" barrel is 28.5" folded, 38" unfolded (specs from DS Arms website). The SCAR beats it only by a mere 1/2" folded (specs from FN's website).

4. Magpul makes stocks for the FAL.

5. Barrel quality can be undesirable on surplus FAL's of course, but DSA and a few other companies make pretty nice barrels for FAL

The SCAR is surely a bit lighter and more ergonomic, but for $2500 one can buy 2 quality FAL's or 3 surplus FAL's.

Mine is an early DSA with STEYR stamped on the barrel.

I had always heard that FALs weren't accurate - this one is!

.

User avatar
blueorison
Competition/Training Mod
Posts: 10628
Joined: 11 Apr 2009, 14:28
custom title: UT/EA Pistol Captain
Contact:

Re: SCAR 17 "Real World" Accuracy?

Post by blueorison » 15 Feb 2011, 21:21

+1 for Steyrs.

Tom, did you colour or replace your upper receiver on the FDE

I love the SCAR. First time shooting it was virgin at the match; everything seemed intuitive. Just played with it a few days ago, again. Have never done accuracy testing with it, but I'd be willing to bet on FN's h-forged bbls. Would love to do an accuracy test at 100-300 yds, though.

.223 does completely find at 500 yards. Past 600 I would use a faster, heavier round... a 6mm variant, perhaps. I don't like carrying around heavy rounds and a extremely cumbersome custom rifle. Especially when the technology makes even semi-autos incredibly effective these days.
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity.
The shooter will always matter more than the gear ever will.
Stop relying on others to do the work for you.
Shoot more, worry less.

User avatar
panzermk2
Forum Supporter
Posts: 11552
Joined: 19 Aug 2008, 15:51
Location: Around here it's more like what can we shoot through next.
Contact:

Re: SCAR 17 "Real World" Accuracy?

Post by panzermk2 » 16 Feb 2011, 03:48

tombirdman wrote: I had always heard that FALs weren't accurate - this one is!

.

FALs assembled by Century arms live up to that claim. A well assembled FAL or a DSA is very accurate for a combat rifle.
Jay Wolf
Pr. Elite Ammunition

"Engineers, the oompa-loompas of science!"

Be'ein Tachbulot Yipol Am Veteshua Berov Yoetz
Image

tombirdman
Junior Member
Posts: 83
Joined: 23 Sep 2008, 15:19

Re: SCAR 17 "Real World" Accuracy?

Post by tombirdman » 16 Feb 2011, 12:15

blueorison wrote:+1 for Steyrs.

Tom, did you colour or replace your upper receiver on the FDE

I love the SCAR. First time shooting it was virgin at the match; everything seemed intuitive. Just played with it a few days ago, again. Have never done accuracy testing with it, but I'd be willing to bet on FN's h-forged bbls. Would love to do an accuracy test at 100-300 yds, though.

.223 does completely find at 500 yards. Past 600 I would use a faster, heavier round... a 6mm variant, perhaps. I don't like carrying around heavy rounds and a extremely cumbersome custom rifle. Especially when the technology makes even semi-autos incredibly effective these days.
.


The FDE color is just what I got.
Different light and different angles change the colors.
I think FN made it that way for camo effect.

I have bench rested al 3 rifles as has my son - police marksman. We both get under 1 moa, closer to 1/2.

That doesn't mean I could hit the broad side of a barn in a tight situation. Just that I couldn't blame the gun.


Thanks for your reply !

Tom

.

User avatar
blueorison
Competition/Training Mod
Posts: 10628
Joined: 11 Apr 2009, 14:28
custom title: UT/EA Pistol Captain
Contact:

Re: SCAR 17 "Real World" Accuracy?

Post by blueorison » 16 Feb 2011, 13:12

Great, straight up answer. Thanks, Tom!
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity.
The shooter will always matter more than the gear ever will.
Stop relying on others to do the work for you.
Shoot more, worry less.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest