Civilian FN SCAR 16S Pricing

You better sell your first born, get a second job and start saving: the SCAR-L 16S has an MSRP of $2,696.56.

FNH SCAR 16S (actual photo, not the military version)

itstock posted the information at

They are now available, and allocated to certain distributors at a set number. The MSRP that FN states is still 100% correct at $2,696.56, and EXPECT TO PAY THIS. Your dealer does not have much wiggle room!

They come in FDE with 16″ barrels, and either a 10 or 30 round mag.

If you want one, GO ORDER IT NOW! There will not be a large run as of now, and dealers are ordering for themselves to sell on GB and the like! !

Also, the SCAR-H has not been released in any way, no pricing, and no order information.

It sort of make the civilian Steyr AUG SA seem cheap at a mere $2295.00!

The SCAR-H referred to above is the 7.62mm NATO (.308 Win.) model.

Thanks to Raif for the tip.

Steve Johnson

Founder and Dictator-In-Chief of TFB. A passionate gun owner, a shooting enthusiast and totally tacti-uncool. Favorite first date location: any gun range. Steve can be contacted here.


  • SwissFreek

    Jeeeesus. The thing better be hand-carved from unicorn horn and lubed with angel tears at that price…

  • hga

    Actually the price is not wildly out of line. Factor in these things on top of a premium piston AR:

    Hammer forged barrels (swappable in 5 minutes without tools, retains one MOA *if* you use the iron sights). It would be really nice to be able to have both a CQB and a longer barrel, 5.56x45mm needs all the barrel length it can get. (Also, moving to 6.8 SPC someday is doable.)

    Multi-way adjusting folding stock. And I gather it’s solid.

    MUCH lighter than any piston AR I know of (they all seem to use aluminum forarms which really increases the weight). Achieves it the same way a Steyr Scout does, with fluted hammer forged barrel, aluminum receiver and plastic furnature (I’m *really* interested in the 7.62/.308 H/17S).

    And then factor in that this price is the MSRP for the first batch of them. The price will go down eventually as supply meets demand.

    Or compare it to what it would take to bring a SIG 556 up to its level in furnature and iron sights, and then it still weighs less and almost certainly has better build quality.

  • Specified lube is unicorn pee actually, it’s more compatible with the unicorn horn for long-term wear prevention.

    I guess they just wanted to have them “available,” to say they were available…sales, they apparently don’t want too many of. Wow. It’s a neat rifle and all but you can get a few M4s and a few dozen SKSs for that kind of price. It is to be hoped that, if they get a .gov contract, the price would fall due to the economy of scale.

  • Eddy Alvarez

    this thing may sell better than expected because Obama delayed the ACR. ..I still wouldn’t pay that much for it though.

    (i want ACR :-()

  • harp1034

    I would have to sell about 1/3 of my collection to buy that thing. I think I will past. Way overpriced IMHO.

  • If the SCAR Heavy is within a couple hundred dollars, sorry, I will be at my dealer with a deposit. I’ve lusted after the SCAR-H since I saw it.

    This is pure, unadulterated want. There is no need about it. I rarely want to have the newest toy on the block but I’ve saved my “gimme points” for this.

  • slntax

    [Ed: Guys, lets keep it friendly]

  • Eddy Alvarez

    thank you for moderating that comment. Some people don’t know what a joke is.

    [Ed: Just trying to keep the discussion on track.]

  • jdun1911

    I think FN is targeting the “Real Operators” aka game kiddies and mall ninjas with this price range. Then these people that bought it will start posting comments like “pay to play”, “pay for the entrance fee”, and other crap on gun forums.

    FN is milking the SCAR for all it is worth. It’s a SOCOM rifle that probably won’t ever be use by US Special Forces. All it needed is a “Real Operators” aka a actor to come out from the water with his scuba gear and the SCAR. In big letter “REAL OPERATOR USE SCAR”. With that kind of marketing I’m sure they’ll sell a crap load and have the SCAR in every Super Ninja Special Operator game.

    It is big, heavy, and from what I saw it isn’t free floating. I know that FN said it free floating but when you have the lower rail attached to the barrel then I think we can all agree it isn’t.

    From what I understand the ACR won’t be coming next year if ever. Bushmaster is waiting for the requirements from the military for the next infantry rifle competition. Those requirements might not be available until late 2009. I might be wrong tho but that’s what I heard.

    I just remember Ar15 posted “Real French Operator” coming out from the water with the SCAR. However those French Operator need to learn how to hold the vertical grip right. hahaha.

  • 22lr

    Give me a high end AR for that kind of money. Sorry but im not buying one unless it gets to $1500 or less. *disclaimer* and no I wouldnt pay $2500 for a AR, id buy a nice one for $1500 and then finish my 1903a3 sniper dream job.

  • Big Jake

    I’m not going to worry, the FN FS2000 was $2700 when it first came out. A year and a half later I got mine new for $1850. If you are willing to wait a year or two after the release (assuming they don’t get banned) they will drop to less than $2000, which may be more expensive than a regular AR but about what you would expect for a Gas Piston AR or Springfield SOCOM 16.

  • Jeremy

    I’ll stick with my XCR.

  • Jim Larsen

    The Army’s Infantry School basically wants to go to a 25mm gun for a wide variety of reasons, but SOCOM will likely stay with the SCAR (since they developed it and it meets their tactical needs). SOCOM procurement is independent of the Army.

    Any new rifle or ammo buy requires years of testing and procurement at a huge cost so the USAIS question is ‘what will a new gun or caliber get me in terms of battlefield performance that is worth the bucks?’

    25mm gives them a highly flexible ammunition system that can be tailored to targets (barriers, vehicles, concealed targets, etc.)(flechette, explosive, frangible, AP, API, etc.) and probably more lethal & effective.

    The reality is either caliber (556 or 762) with FMJ bullets have limited effectiveness.

    Haven’t seen the 25mm rounds, but, as all know, the Army ammo plants are running 24-7-365 and can barely meet demand. Copper, brass, etc. availability is a strategic supply and cost issue.

    The interesting question will be the Basis of Issue Plan. Will all get the 25mm or only Combat Arms & MP?

  • Hooah Jones

    Jim Larsen, I think you are confused about the R&D going on to develop a 25mm platform for the squad grenadier. It’s not practical to give every fire team member a 25mm weapon. My understanding is this is a replacement for the M203 series grenade launchers, not a common personal weapon.


    The Army will not replace the M$ as long as Colt still supplies them with weapons. The Army jsut ordered another 8000 or so M4A1 rifles to be delivered this fiscal year, to continue replaceing all the M16A2’s on the battle field. the M16A4 is still going to be around, and be used at the SDMR for quite some time. The reason the Army will not change weapons is because a: most soldiers do not have a problem with how the rifle works in the field, I personally used mine if Afghanistan for 9 months and didnt have a single jam. B: The cost of ammo is already way above budget, and thats jsut for 5.56. For the Army to switch to a new round, like 6.8 SPC. the third and last reason the Army wont change bullits is because a soldier can carry twice as much 5.56 as 7.62 or 6.8 SPC, more ammo, more kills. The 5.56 is not the best round, but its accurate, you can cary a ton of it, and its cheep to make. Personally, i would like to see a better made battle rifle in the hands of our troops, but the M4 is a fine weapon, and as long as the soldier keeps up on cleaning, it will always prefrm…

    2-207th ETT, CJTF Phoenix VII, Afghanistan

    oh, and SF/ODA operators, includeing MARSOF, are most likely going to be useing the HK 416/417, and already are

  • Just ‘Cuz

    Definitely steep on the pricing; given the economy & hopefully supply & demand, the prices will come back in line bit. On the Mil side of the house, its good to see something better getting into the hands of our troops (potentially).

    As to the arguements about the caliber; I think its BS that we can’t make a switch reasonably; the excuse is organizational enertia/red tape, and complacency. The cost of retooling & resupply is nothing compared to a lot of the other other programs out there, and this is one topic that affects most troops. I think the switch to something like a 6.8 is LONG overdue. IMO, the 5.56 is “ok” for some roles, but is not a good all-round infantry round. BTW, the difference in weight / capacity of 6.8 compared to 5.56 is not that much different. The 7.62 I can see that arguement having some merit.

  • CC Coleman

    I think they’ll keep an M4 type but might modify to piston sooner or later. SCAR is just too expensive in the long run. Civy piston AR’s (and aftermarket kits) are going down in price and can get the job done. I see another 50 years of AR due to budget constraints.

  • stryker

    I don’t see the Army switching to 6.8. The re-tooling, retraining, and cost of new parts isn’t particularly significant compared to other programs, but what programs are we talking about? Projects like the JLTV, Predator drone, DUKE, JUKE, Warlock, BFT, etc etc.. cost hundreds of millions of dollars, but the result are incredibly effective in this war, and the merits are pretty much undeniable. With a possible switch to 6.8, what are the pros? You do get better stopping power, but the average infantry squad has huge amounts of firepower as it is (2 SAWs, 2 M203s, 1 .50 cal or MK 19 vehicle mounted. Weapons Squads have 2 240s) compared to a truck full of terrorists with AKs. The cons of the 6.8 are a factor as well. Lower mag cap (unless you get longer 30 rnd mags), heavier ammo for SAW gunners (the change is negligible for the riflemen) unless the SAWs stay with 5.56 and we mess up the round commonality that eases logistics. The 6.8 might do well among buildings in Baghdad, but what about in the valleys of Afghanistan? The round really starts to die after about 400 m, just short of that ridge line covered with Taliban. This isn’t the perfect round, there never will be. Don’t get me wrong, I really really like the 6.8 round, and I think that is perfect for urban ops, but the pros won’t outdo the cons, and tomorrows war might be in valleys, the tundra, a desert, whatever. In order for the Army to completely change the round for its primary small arms weapons system, there has to be a SERIOUS deficiency with the current ammo or monumental improvement in a new round. Neither are present.

    Back to the SCAR.

    There was a soldier in a previous post talking about the reliability of his M4. I wish I’ve had a similar experience, and I do keep my weapon clean, thank you. There are just so many things that can be improved. ARs are soft-shooting and very flexible with optics and other electronics. The Stoner DI system viewed on its own is well engineered and has it’s own advantages. It is smoother operating, doesn’t torque the barrel like piston-op guns do, and is tighter fitting for more accuracy. But the ejector is weak and the ejector claw is sensitive to shell material, the DI system is horribly self-fouling, gas rings get worn out, small bolt lugs crack, and the current trend of short barrels shortens the gas tube and imparts higher pressure on the system while increasing wear and breakage. These aren’t just little, minor problems, they are serious issues that cause the weapon to malfunction and break. Taken as a whole, the AR design is still great, and I don’t feel inadequate or undergunned going on patrol with one, but there are guns out there that leaps ahead. Shouldn’t the best army in the world have the best guns? Name one successful, military-style rifle that also has a DI/Stoner system. You can’t, but piston-op ones are everywhere.
    -SIG 550 series
    -HK 416/17
    -Pretty much every light machine gun ever made.

    But 2,700? That’s a lot, and I know FN is charging a significant profit. More than likely to offset the R&D cost. It is a very nice gun though. I do remember when the FS2000 first came out and that initial price. I’m hoping it will go down like that, and that they have some color besides stupid tan.

  • ghost


    about the 6.8 SPC, your points have merit and there is an alternative, the 6.5x38mm. This would however rudce magazine capacity to 25. On the up side the 6.5×38 has 90-140 gr rounds with ballistics that mirror the 7.62×51 (or surpass). The Marines are currently using M16A4’s standard but I would love to see a new longer range and heavier round put into play. We literally use the one shot one kill method, well aimed single shots. This isn’t because we wouldn’t like to suppress with our rifles but because our rounds do very little to anything or anyone behind cover without a high volume of fire (M249).

    As for this system, I’d love for FNH to put these in the hands of infantry instead of the 16’s and m4’s they currently make. Their IAR idea also has merit, but it would take a lot of dedication to this new system that military brass doesn’t have usually (though the company has a step up by being the incumbent manufacturer). I would love a better system than the adequate weapons we have, ACR or SCAR systems would be more accurate, longer lasting, more reliable, and lighter weight, but these excellent improvements do not make them necessary to uprooting a proven and adequate system.

    And as for the choice between ACR and SCAR, the ACR is set to MSRP at $1,400.00 for the kit, and they have a 7.62×51 in the works (checkout shotshow 2009 on youtube, magpul) I’d love to get one of each, but I’ll get the one that hurts my checkbook less, first.

  • stryker

    I don’t like the IAR concept. You can’t lay down an effective base of fire if you are constantly changing magazines, and the IAR relies on magazine use. Even if you have beta c mags (which are unreliable and costly), you can only hold half of what you could with a box of linked 5.56. I think the answer to creating a lighter SAW without sacrificing firepower is to lighten the current SAW, the 249. The magazine adapter is garbage since magazines will never feed right, and get rid of these stupid Elcam 145 magnified optics that weigh a ton. Those belong on 240’s, and your team leader with the ACOG will spot for you. Put on a para barrel, an EOTech or a Comp M4, and a lighter skeleton buttstock and you could get that gun down to 14 lbs. The MK 46 is a step in the right direction. Leave it to SOCOM to come up with some good ideas.

    I’d like to a see a machine gun chambered in 6.5. Imagine a 249 chambered in 6.5, how much more lethal and effective would it be? The 7.62 x 51 is a great round, but if we have a round with very similar trajectories and lethality with a much lighter weight and smaller cartridge dimensions, that is an improvement. Maybe then the 240 gunners could dismount and still be able to move and their AG’s could carry even more ammo. That’s more firepower.

  • Alan Roberts

    I’ve been interested in the SCAR for a while now & finally found a dealer in the Dallas area with them – but the MSRP of $2,696.56 seems way out of the window now… They wanted +/- $4,500 for one… Way high in my opinion.

  • Something to think about: For the last 4 years the FN guns have been different in price and design. That has not stopped them from being well sought after. I predict the SCAR will not be as available as the other civilian FN guns, simply because its a military special purpose gun. Just like the SAW. If the SCAR can be purchased for less then 3k dollars, jump all over it.

  • Caruthers

    I agree on most of the points stated above. I love the old 7.62 for knock down and penetration. Ditto on the 6.5.

    I want one of the scar 17’s………….in a year or so; if the rifle is not banned; then I will have to wait………


  • Drew

    I have to say, after having my hands on one…it is a bullet delivery system. Nothing more, nothing less. For the money, there are way better ones out there. If it did something actually innovative like the KRISS Super V then that price could be justified…but alas…it does not. It’s very next-gen looking…but that is about it. I’d use a HK416 or an LWRC any day over this. This is all just my opinion…but…ugliest assault rifle ever.

  • Jebus Theone

    I’ll second the LWRC any day.

    Not just the the best AR, but IMO one of the best carbines in existence.

    This may not seem appopriate, but I think many of the European mftcrs have a degree of elitism/snobbery around them, and I don’t feel this with LWRC; for example, the use of MAGPUL accesories & mags, which imho are the some of the best on the market.

    The only thing I dislike about ARs is the bolt, which i find unnratural, and prefer a SCAR style bolt, as found on many other rifles, including my 10/22!

    Now that would be a funny move. Imagine a Rangers squad kitted with a load of Krinker Plinkers! HAHAHA

  • moreammo

    The way I understand it the SCAR kept the M16 multi-lug rotating bolt to help with it accuracy. They did however change the bolt carrier to aid in reliability.

  • stryker

    It is similar to the M16 multi-lug bolt, but it looks a little more robust and the lugs look a little bigger. That’s a good thing, since the lugs on the M16 bolts are weak and will break easily, especially if you install a piston system that no longer allows gas to flow inside the bolt and bolt carrier, expanding the two.

  • Sean Ingram

    I’d say they’re overpricing the things because they really don’t want civilians to have them anyway but they can’t out and out say that; they can however price the things out of the budget of the average joe.

    I’ll stick with my AK-47s and other basic models; they’re not as sexy and high speed but they get the job done for me.

  • Bobby

    ”I’ll second the LWRC any day.

    Not just the the best AR, but IMO one of the best carbines in existence.”

    The U.S. military needs LWRC rifles.

    I own an M6A2, and M6A3.

    The best carbines ever made. IMHO.

  • stryker

    LWRC rifles are great, but they are so pricey that military procurement for anything other than SOCOM is a joke. The designs are reliable and the quality is awesome, but the cost comes from designing around the faults of the M4 and DI system. It would be much more cheaper to just design a rifle with a piston system native to the design, rather than adapting and modifying parts. There’s a reason why C. Reed Knight has refused to make a piston AR so far- the only advantage is cleaner, cooler running. The military isn’t going to pay extra money for cleaner weapons when they have soldiers with cleaning kits. At 10″ barrel lengths and below, then the piston is beneficial as far as reliability and operating pressures are concerned, but at those barrel lengths, the 5.56 round has such little velocity you might as well be shooting .22LR. If you really wanted to improve the weapon, it would have to be completely redesigned. Piston design, more robust locking lugs, ejector and ejector springs, a bolt carrier riding on rails, more reliable magazines, maybe a folding buttstock. It just so happens that the SCAR has a lot of these features, which is no surprise it got selected by SOCOM.

  • Drew

    Just my two cents… not worth it…and its hella ugly. that’s just personal opinion. The cost of this rifle is outrageous. LWRC is just as guilty…same with the Steyr AUG. Seriously, people, it doesnt cost that much to make a gun…its just perception. This and the AUG, for instance, lots of plastic and steel parts. Novelty sells these guns. The Kriss Super V, for instance, actually does something innovative. The SCAR is just an overpriced delivery system. If you like it, you like it, but FN shouldn’t charge that kind of money. The short-stroke piston technology isnt rocket science and has been around for decades. HK loves to really beat their own drum and FN is kinda guilty of it too.

  • Blade

    I just purchased a SCAR. I am a serious collector of assault rifles and have specimens of all the top of the line models, including the XCR, which also competed for the SCAR contract. I haven’t fired my SCAR yet, but laser boresighted it today with an EOTECH holo. I plan on hitting the range this weekend. Some initial observations:

    Weight. It’s significantly lighter than a similarly kitted out M4. Very nicely balanced, it feels feather-weight but solid

    Ergonomics. It’s a very well set up weapon. The buttstock is genius, it folds, collapses, and has an adjustable cheek rest. The stock is light, but it is TIGHT, no rattle or jiggle, and it ajusts smoothly and positively.

    Rails and attach points. Plenty of rail space and multiple sling attach points for 3, dual, or single point slings. I have configured mine with an EOTECH, a vertical foregrip, and a single point assault sling – no bling, just function.

    Disassembly. Very easy to disassemble and reassemble. Easy to clean. No special tools required.

    My only gripe is the charging handle. It sits about 1/2 inch below the top rail. After latching on my Eotech, I pulled back the charging handle and took a nice chunk of skin off my finger. Now that I’m aware of the issue, I just grasp it differently, but it’s a bit goofy. The handle reciprocates, so I’ll see how that works out firing, but with the vertical foregrip it shouldn’t be a factor.

    Bottom line, on the surface it seems to be all that it’s designed to be. Having been in an organization that helped test the SCAR, I know it’s had its growing pains. However, FN overcame the SCAR’s initial troubles, and it appears to be a truly ground-breaking weapon.

    As for the price, I purchased mine new in the box for $2500 – that’s including tax. Not bad in my book. Comparable to any top of the line assault rifle – Galil, Steyr, FS2000, XCR etc. Time will tell if it lives up to its press, but so far, I am VERY impressed. When placed side by side with my XCR (designed to compete for the SCAR contract) the SCAR is lighter and feels much better ergonomically. It is also much more flexible in terms of its ability to be configured. The trigger pull is smoother and lighter. The XCR has better magazine release controls, but that’s the only points I’ll give my XCR over the SCAR. I’ll see how the field firing goes!

  • Drew

    I have to say, I would like to fire an FS2000 and compare it to the SCAR. I wont knock the SCAR any more. It’s not my cup of tea. I know the gun works and works well…so I will say it’s pure taste. NOW…as for the magazine it comes with… I’ve seen these half-painted AR-15 magazines that look half-assed. For $2500 I’d expect more given that I know the MFG costs per rifle.

    Now, I’ll pose this question:

    HK G36 vs. FN SCAR vs. HK 416…. who would come out on top?

  • Blade

    Drew – concur on the SCAR magazine, that was definitely a put-off. It’s a basic STANAG 16 mag with half a paint job. I guess the good news is that if you fancy matching mags, you can buy some cheap mags and paint them yourself and save a bundle as opposed to a proprietary mag like the Steyr. Many manufacturers also offer composite mags in coyote which would blend nicely.

    It would be interesting to compare the SCAR/G36/416. I suspect a lot of it would boil down to taste and feel. I suspect that in terms of reliability, accuracy, performance and handling they’d be much the same. I have found the G36 to be cumbersome, I would put that in a third. The 416 is a fine weapon and I can’t knock it. Having worked now with both, I must admit I do refer the SCAR in terms of feel and handling – it carries well and presents well. We’ll see how it fires for the final verdict, it’s the only one I haven’t fired!

  • Destroyer

    thank you blade. btw…nice to meet another FN SCAR 16S owner. It is a fancy bullet delivery system, but i can understand why SOCOM and 75 Ranger Bn uses it…

    idk about yours, but mine is terribly accurate

  • Blade269

    Destroyer – I am very satisfied with both the accuracy and reliability of the system. I have an Eotech holo mounted on top and a vertical foregrip – it handles very nicely and stays on target very precisely. Glad to hear you are having the same results with yours. SOCOM made a good choice going with a family of weapons, and I believe time will only improve the system as the minor defects it now suffers are winnowed away through upgrades and product improvement initiatives. I think the fixes will be minor and low in cost, on the whole it’s a tremendous effort right out of the gate for FN. As for the $$, it’s right on par with some of the other top of the line assault weapons I have purchased. Although I would have love to get one for $1K, I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect to get a cutting edge weapon for the same price as an AR. I have a lot of AR experience and quite frankly, my ARs don’t leave the safe anymore, I shoot my more “exotic” weapons simply because I like to shoot them better and they handle much more smoothly than the AR. What I will say for the AR is ergonomically, it’s set up pretty nicely for the selector and the magazine release, that’s about the extent of it. While I give credit where credit is due to the AR for its rightful place in history, if the AR-180 had come along a couple of years earlier I don’t believe the AR-15 would still be around except as a curiosity. Have you ever worked with an AR-180? A fine weapon that came just a tad too late and never found a market.

  • Destroyer

    blade 269, i totally agree with you. Every bad thing i hear about the FN SCAR is usually from wanna be operators who read unsubstantiated internet sources and think that they are the gospel. My brother is very pleased with the SCAR and i am with mine; Im glad that you are. People’s opinions that FN produces junk are simply bullshitting themselves and everybody around them (is that why FN produces 70% of the small arms for the military because they are junk? 😉

    Yes, i have a Trijicon ACOG on my SCAR 16S and use magpul PMAGs with them. It would be nice if they were even 1500 but that is asking way too much. Like you said, i hope they iron out any issues that arise with minimal cost and more rifles are produced, and the cost goes down.

    Like or not (im about to anger some AR15 fanboys im afraid), the AR15 is a obsolete design. Cutting edge is block shaped bolt carriers and improved ergonomics. Ambidextrous rifles are also essential to the future (im especially biased in this opinion since im left handed). The AR15 has had its day, though better technology exists for civilians and, more importantly, for military and police.

    answering your question, yes i have worked with a AR180. My dad owns one of the original AR180s from armalite made in the late 1960s (he is very possessive of it also :), and it is a fine weapon…miles better than the AR15 direct impingement design. It has always perplex me why the military never looked into this rifle. Politics i guess. I guess it earned the name “widowmaker” with the Provisional IRA.

  • Blade269

    Destroyer – I enjoyed your comments and pretty much concur wholeheartedly. I have to scratch my head at the SCAR detractors who say the rifle offers nothing new. Really – what IS new in firearms? I think the SCAR is innovative and represents the next generation of assault rifles designed for and with heavy input from the operators who use them. The SCAR specs were let to correct a myriad of deficiencies found in the AR-15 systems, and I think it meets the mark. There are number of really great innovations from the polymers used in the construction to the features like the stock, sling attach points, bot carrier, etc. The comments on the stock being cheap just don’t correlate with what I’ve actually seen on the weapon – mine is tight as a drum and functions flawlessly. The days of using a rifle as a platform to carry a bayonet into battle are over – when’s the last time anyone delivered a horizontal butt stroke in combat I wonder? The SCAR stock does what it’s supposed to better than any other current platform – it provides a solid support structure to accurately aim the weapon – whether you’re going light or in full armor, and for a variety of body shapes and optics configurations. I sound like a salesman, I guess I’m just really digging my new rifle. I own an XCR (which gets compared to the SCAR a lot) and it is indeed a fine rifle, but very different in terms of configuration and feel. The XCR is a bit more “conventional” than the SCAR – to me the SCAR is better balanced and fights better.

    How do you like your ACOG on the SCAR? I went with the EOTECH since all my SCAR shooting is 100M and in. I did put a TRIJICON Reflex on my XCR and love it, even if it does have that evil scripture reference on the serial number.

    I concur, the AR-15’s day is done, I hope. Piling on the AR-180 thread, I think if the AR-180 had competed head to head with the AR-15 it would have won hands down and US military arms development would have gone in a very different direction. The AR-15 has been a great platform for developing some significant technological advances, but the gas impingement system just sucks for fouling and heating. It is my hope that the next step for us is getting out of the 5.56mm business, but that’s a long way off.

    I will end this disjointed diatribe by trumpeting the assault rifle that has been and always will be at the top of the heap for me – the Galil SAR in 7.62mm. Compact (16.5″ barrel), great caliber, well balanced, rugged, utterly reliable – comfortable to shoot. If I could pick the weapons I take to the fight my rifle would be my Galil, hands down. For my handgun, I go back and forth – I really love the HK USP .40, but I also love the SIG P220. I would definitely NOT be carrying a Beretta M9, but that’s another whole discussion. Thanks for the great conversation!

  • james

    that price isent bad at all ive payed more for handguns before thats well worth the price i might get two

  • jeff

    i bought the scar 16s in jan i love this thing i am in the army 11B baby so i am very familar with the m-4 the scar 16s blows the m-4 out of the water the price is a little steep but well worth it very well built and just kick ass all around i am waiting to see the 17s come out and will be snatching one up when it does

  • Drew

    What is the real functional difference between the LWRC, HK 416, HK G36, the ACR, and the SCAR?

    They’re all short stroke gas piston systems firing the same ammunition with similar barrel lengths. Aside from the G36 they all use the SAME MAGAZINES…which is a good thing of course. But…

    FN really didn’t make anything THAT innovative. Same sh.t different packaging. What R&D did they really have to do? Does the gun work? Is it accurate? Is it reliable? Well sure, but don’t act like other guns couldn’t be used well in it’s place. The price tag, given the cost to manufacture (which I know to an approximation) and the minimal R&D required to come up with this gun (which isn’t anything groundbreaking) doesn’t dictate a pricing over $2,000. In fact, this is bad business. If you wanted mass-adoption, price it just above the M4/M16 series because they would still make a profit.

    This is typical European BS. We’re probably helping pay their socialist taxes over in the EU while they make money off of the American gun-owner, and at the same time knocking us in Europe as cowboys and crazies while they sip on their effeminate cappuccino.

    Over $2k is refriggindiculous. Next time, FN, spray paint the entire magazine, and not just 3/4 of it…that was SOO LAZY of you twits. I’ve already sold mine and am thinking about TDI Vector.

    That said, Glock needs to make an assault rifle.

  • stryker

    Drew, there is a functional difference between those guns listed.
    “What is the real functional difference between the LWRC, HK 416, HK G36, the ACR, and the SCAR?”

    Other than the fact that the SCAR is a long stroke system, these weapons are nearly identical in operation, but the devil is in the details. The G36, ACR, and SCAR have extensive polymer parts, which was the big deal breaker for the XM8. It seems like people are comfortable with polymers lowers, but not uppers. The ACR has a great placement for their bolt hold-open, the piston ARs and SCAR have them in the “standard” AR position, and the G36 lacks one entirely. Being one who has owned a weapon without one, I can say that it is a big deal. The charging handle location is big too. I hate the one on the G36. It is ambidextrous, but it’s also hard to get to in a rush. The AR’s position is slightly better, and the SCAR has theirs so close to the top rail that it can’t be used with an EOtech without busting a finger or knuckle. It just seems like the SCAR got the most stuff right in one package at the right time. Do I think it warrants a $2500 price tag? No, probably not. That’s business though, not socialism. In case you forgot, big business is the enemy of socialism. So what you’re really doing is feeding the european business fatcats. At FN isn’t as bad as HK, who would insult our intelligence by making “civilian” models good for plinking and thats it.. a 2 grand plinker? No thanks, I’ll take my $200 Ruger 10/22 and have just as much fun.

  • Phillip Caldwell

    I finally have a SCAR 16s allocated to me…The price is $2800….what is the “real world” pices out there?

  • Blade


    I have to side with Stryker on this one. I would ask a rhetorical question which is “what is ‘revolutionary’ when you’re talking an assault rifle?” Firearms are really not all that different in principle now as they were in WWI – WWI featured “assault rifles”, automatic pistols, submachine guns, machine guns, etc. Of course, the materials are different, manufacturing processes are different, etc., but the PRINCIPLES are really not so different. What FN has done with the SCAR has tried to apply all the lessons learned from customer input (namely USSOCOM) and put them all into one weapon, given certain constraints (like it must use 5.56mm or 7.62 NATO, STANAG magazines, etc.). Given the specs as set forth by USSOCOM, the SCAR really answers the mail. Is it perfect – not yet, but it’s a year old. The M4s we use now are the latest revision of a design that started in the 50’s and was fielded in the 60’s, and it’s still got bugs. The SCAR is an amazing weapon right out of the gate – give it a few years and it will be even better. From my personal experience, I love the SCAR. It is well balanced, light, maneuverable, utterly reliable (I have yet to have a FTF) and modular. It is a clean weapon (even with dirty ammo) that is easily the easiest weapon I own to keep on target. It is easy to adjust for different shooting conditions and simple to operate. As for its price tag, that’s just the free-market system. You can buy an AR for $800 and modify it as best you can to incorporate most of the features you get in a SCAR and you’re up around $2K, and it’s still a crappy AR. If you want a superior weapon, you’re going to pay a higher $$. You find that in any product line. You can get a perfectly reliable Hyundai with a 100K warranty for about 1/3 to 1/4 the price of a BMW or Mercedes, so why doesn’t everyone buy a Hyundai? For that matter, you can put all kinds of bling on your Hyundai including a boss stereo, flashy rims and wheels, a spoiler and tint job, etc. but at the end of the day, it’s just a pimped out Hyundai. Or, you can spend the same $$ on a basic BMW. I’ll take the BMW if I can afford it, just me. Not trying to preach or teach Economics 101, but most of the squawking I hear about the cost of the SCAR really isn’t about the weapon, it’s about the $$ – it boils down to the fact that like the BMW, not everyone can afford a SCAR, but that doesn’t mean the SCAR isn’t superior. It’s a fox and the grapes thing. Get your hands on a SCAR if you can and take it to the range, I think you’ll find it’s well worth the $$. My two cents.

  • Drew

    I’m aware of all of this and I’ll disagree respectfully. I owned a SCAR when they first came out and got rid of it recently. I really wanted to like it. I probably put 6k rounds through mine. By itself, it’s a respectable gun in my opinion, but it comes down to just “not being my bag”. I won’t knock the gun. There are PLENTY of worse rifles out there. A lot of my complaints about it are my own personal opinions and preferences. Regardless, it is a good investment to own one (I simply wanted a Vector more).

    Personally there are other guns that do it’s job similarly well. I just don’t think this gun platform is head and shoulders above the rest in terms of the others in the field. The SCAR does have alot of things going for it. I’m just as accurate with my Steyr AUG, though I know both rifles really can perform. I used the $ from the SCAR I sold back to the dealer to put towards a TDI Vector…which I love.

    As for the business of FN, they’re getting the pricing they think they can get away with. It doesn’t cost all that much per unit to make a SCAR…same is true with the ACR. For now, they are the latest and greatest…thus the premium.

  • Drew

    I had a experiment today.
    I will be a man eat my words when I am wrong.

    Someone brought their SCAR, and we had an AUG (16in barrel), semiauto G36 clone (SL8 conversion), FN FS2000, an LWRC, and the Ruger piston AR.

    The SCAR more than held its own. The G36 was fun but I can see how the charging handle “looks good on paper” but not useful when you need to grab it in a pinch. The FS2000 was alot of fun to shoot. The groupings were all very respectable. The AUG held it’s own but I hate casings ejecting an inch from my eye.

    I like the SCAR much more now than I’ve given it credit. The SCAR charging handle isn’t my favorite but with some fine-tuning, it could be great. I may buy a SCAR again…if I do, I’ll throw away that half-assed dipped magazine that comes with it immediately.

    I have a company that might make some aftermarket things for the SCAR thanks to this experience. Would anyone be interested? If so, what would you ideally like to see made for the SCAR?

  • stryker

    Blade nailed it.

    You can pay a grand on a basic AR and easily spend another 1500 on accessories to make it like a SCAR- BUIS, stocks, piston kit, rails, ambi selector, etc… so why not buy a product that already has that stuff and a few things that an AR can’t have? like a folding stock and a heftier bolt. It’s just a better package, if you choose to save up for it. Granted, there is nothing “revolutionary” about the SCAR, but TBH there hasn’t arguably been anything revolutionary in the assault rifle world since the bullpup configuration that was refined in the 70’s. Ever since then we’ve gone through delayed-blowback, tilting bolt, DI systems, and holy crap! Look who wins the SOCOM Trials, a long-stroke piston, rotating bolt system ala Kalashnikov. We have come full circle.. So have there been any “revolutions” in the entire gun world? Probably not, considering that the vast majority of pistols are still recoil-operated, and that many modern assault rifles use some form of piston and rotating bolt. I guess you could say the latest original, successful system is the inertia-driven system by Benelli.

  • Blade


    Have enjoyed the discussion. Drew, I think your side by side experience with the SCAR was interesting from the perspective that many times, a firearms choice boils down to personal experience/use/comfort and preference. For example – I think Glock arguably makes one of the finest combat handguns on the planet. Utterly reliable, durable, accurate, simple, and quickly into action. However, I can’t stand them – part of it is ergonomics based on my shooting style/holster preference/presentation form and part of it is just “feel”. Give me a SIG P226 over a Glock 17 any day of the week. Objectively is the $900 SIG really better than the $500 Glock? I think so but would probably have legions of Glock nuts that would vehemently disagree. I think the SCAR is similar to the SIG. Manufactured to a high standard and finish and top of its type, but in the end still subject to individual likes or dislikes. Stryker was dead on – so goes the old saying “there is nothing new under the sun, only history doomed to repeat itself”. Firearms are much the same, history repeating itself. I think the SCAR elevates those concepts that work to a new level of form and function. I will admit that the half-painted single SCAR MAG is LOW rent. I use coyote P-MAGS with Ranger baseplates in my SCAR and love them. Some things I think the SCAR can improve upon (and an enterprising manufacturer could capitalize upon) are certainly a canted charging handle. I think a slight half moon shape canted downward at 20-30 degrees off horizontal would resolve all the issues with rail clearance. I think there is also room to improve on the feel and quality of the selector switch – wider and longer, and made of metal vs. plastic for a more positive feel and engagement. Just a couple of ideas up front.

  • Drew

    Titanium carbide bolt? How’s that sound for discussion?

    Yea a new handle is actually in the works. It will take some time but I will announce it once ready.

    Speaking of the Glock, our first product will be for the Glock 18. Dare I say it’s the most fun one can have with their clothes on.

  • monkey

    Just got my fn scar16s. 2800 with three 30 round mags. range test tomorrow 😉

  • Jeff

    I agree with some of Blades comments
    My new Scar 16s shot sub 1.5 MOA groups with the factory sigts and Lake City steel core ammo at 100 YDS. My biggest complaint would be the saftey as it is nearly not acessible from the firing grip of either hand.
    The half painted mag is low but over all this weapon is better than the
    M&P 15T I own in accuarcy, fit and finish. The operation and take down is simple and ergonomic and this could be the next gen replacement for our troops….lets see what the Army and Marines think!

  • Ammochris

    After reading most of this post, I went and spoke to the guys using them (SCAR-L CQC Model) at their compound here in the desert. They’re still “field testing” them and say they’re by far the best guns they’ve used. I have not used them personally, just giving you the no B.S. opinion of the gun from the guys the SCAR was made for-USSOCOM.

  • Blade


    Are you in Arizona? Doesn’t really matter, just curious. Anyhow, glad to hear the fellas you talked to were happy with the weapon. I continue to have nothing but good results from my SCAR. I have had the same experience as Jeff with the safety and the charging handle, but those are relatively minor and I hope there will be some good after-market or drop in replacement parts to make the safety and charging handle better. I continue to work with a wide variety of weapons and keep coming back to my SCAR as by far the best of the 5.56mm guns. I will confess, I still believe the Galil is king of the hill when it comes to assault rifles, but that ship has long since sailed!

  • Alan Roberts

    Well, I stopped in at S.A.W. Inc near Dallas today (Saturday) & was finally able to get my hands on a SCAR 16. I had been told that prices had dropped, that they were now about $2,300 or so. I had my checkbook in my pocket ready to buy. Well, I looked at it and yes, it is nice – but nothing spectacular. When I asked the price I was told “forty-nine ninety-five” I thought I must have misheard and said “Excuse me, did you say four thousand, nine hundred and ninety five dollars?” to be told “Yes.” I’m sorry but, as much as I wanted one, I don’t see how anyone regardless of one’s wealth, can possibly justify this kind of money on such a rifle. IMO, there is absolutely no way at all that this rifle can possibly command such a price. I have a DSA SA58 (FN 7.62 like I used in the Rhodesian infantry 35 years ago), a SIG 556 SWATT, A Bushmaster AR15 & an Arsenal AK – each costing substantially less than half of what S.A.W. wanted for the SCAR. My FN is one of the finest money can buy today and there is no way the SCAR is worth 2.5 times what I paid for it. I said to the dealer that I liked it – but only up to $2,200, handed it back to him and said there was no way I would pay $4,995 it. I think it is a total rip-off.

  • Blade


    I’m sorry your quest for a SCAR continues to meet with challenges. I agree with you – $5K is obscene for any but the most rare of assault weapons, and certainly not for a new production gun like the SCAR. I think $2-2.5K is reasonable for a SCAR given the others in its neighborhood like a Steyr AUG, Galil, ACR etc. I’m not sure what the folks at SAW Inc are thinking when they put a gun out at that price – perhaps there are actually people who will pay that for a SCAR? If that’s true, and the market supports it, you should consider going through something like Gunbroker or GunsAmerica, there are lots of SCARs out there in the price range indicated above. For my part, I wish the SCAR were cheaper, but high-end assault rifles for the most part live in the $2K range, and I will say the SCAR stacks up against any of its competition. Whether you’re looking for an addition to a collection, or the best assault rifle you can get as a solo gun in your locker, or as a 3-gun competition gun the SCAR is going to work for you. I don’t work for FN, just love their guns.

    Good hunting.


  • Sean Ingram

    I saw a guy shooting one this weekend at the range. It is a nice looking piece to own but it didn’t cause me to salivate about getting one. The guy shooting it was employed by Homeland Security and he seemed to be a bachelor probably with enough money to buy personal shooting toys. I’m satisfied with my AR and my AK-47s.

  • Drew


    I’ll chime in here. Yea the SCAR has a refinement to it, and it’s a good gun, but there IS alot of hogwash marketing and other jibberjabber going on surrounding it. The price is simply what they can get away with and sleep at night…soundly and on very expensive beds.

    Functionally it is not as if the SCAR does things that other assault rifles could never do before, but FN realizes that with our twit politicians toying with the idea of another Assault Weapons Ban, and how people are still buying up guns and ammo despite them not being cheap AND despite the economy still in the gutter…FN thinks they can get away with it. For the most part, they’re right. $2000+ for what’s basically refined Kalashnikov technology chambered in 5.56mm is not in the ballpark for most folks. Still while it’s a novelty and considered exotic, they’re trying to cash in while they can.

    Seriously that half-painted magazine that comes with it is the dumbest thing I’ve ever seen in my life. It’s like some teenager did it in their garage while still in the gun. If they want to charge over $2k for it…little things like that shouldn’t be there. They should’ve came with a tan P-MAG and a case, but what do I know. You’d be surprised how cheap guns are to make (assuming you don’t have ridiculous labor contracts or super-exotic materials). The variable costs allow for a very high profit margin.

  • Alan Roberts

    Yes Blade, I agree that 2 – 2.5k would be acceptable, at a push, for the SCAR. In fact, if he had told me $2,500 I probably would have bought it on the spot – but at $4,995 I just won’t do it. You can go on a 7 day fishing trip to Alaska, including airfare from Texas, for about that price – or an overseas trip to Europe… With my military background and experience I really enjoy guns and shooting and have built up a small collection – to which the SCAR would make a nice addition but, as much as I like FN too, they can keep it for that crazy price. If I do come across one in this lower price range I would probably buy it. My SIG 556 SWAT is a very similar gas/piston mechanisim and is wonderful to fire. It cost me +/- $1,800…

    I agree with you too Drew. It’s a nice rifle but I think, as you say, the hype about it, the fear of guns being banned or confiscated – are all being used by dealers to try keep the prices up as high as they can possibly get. Oh well, they won’t be getting my money and I can live without it unless it drops to a reasonable price.

  • 18C

    The Scar program was scrapped about 4 months ago or so in SOCOM. It is a truly amazing weapon and has been put to good use over here. It maintains it’s ability to fire after extensive (intentional) abuse in sand dirt and grime even after about 10K worth of rounds with only two F2F. I feel there is limited to advantage to the scar heavy in an urban environment, but defintley one in a more open terrain such as Western Afghanistan. Barrel changing does require use of the SCAR tool kit which includes a preset torque wrench and torx adapter. Changing the barrel also requires you to re-zero of course. I have broken one MK 16 out of the 6 issued and none of the MK 17 of the 6. On the MK 16 the handle being made of composite cracked all the way through the receiver rendering the lower half inoperable. Due to the lack of parts available via FN the weapon system was never fixed.


  • stryker

    SCAR scrapped in SOCOM? I thought 1/75 was still issued them.

  • hella


    I’m trying to find a SCAR for my husband’s anniversary present. But I know nothing about rifles… could you point me towards the right direction? Where’s the best place to buy one and what should i be looking out for?


    • hella, try

  • Drew


    Scottsdale Gun Club (Scottsdale, AZ) has lots of them. They’re very nice and can talk to you if you need them to send it for purchase/pickup at another gun store.

    They only really come in one color that I’ve seen, and maybe 2 magazines…no special case or anything. If you want accessories you might want to let him put add-ons on it himself, as they aren’t cheap and neither is the rifle.

    He’s a lucky guy!

  • shrader

    I think the military will stick with the 5.56 over the 308 in battle rifles because instead of killing people it wounds and takes more people off the battle fields (the guy or guys carrying him off, medics and every other person that has to see or help him, doctors nurses and so on) as opposed to just 1 being dead.

  • Blade

    Shrader – I have to admit, your comment seems a bit off the wall given the thread is about the SCAR. It’s also kind of a silly statement to make, given that the military is actively seeking alternatives to the 5.56mm round. The 5.56mm will be around for a long time because of $$, we have millions of rounds and billions of $$ invested in 5.56mm weapons, you can’t just start over. But the “wound vs. kill” to take folks off the battlefield is a falicy. This isn’t the civil war. When a soldier or Marine shoots some clown, it’s to kill, not wound. A dead enemy is one who won’t give you any trouble. A wounded enemy is one who will shoot you in the back or roll a grenade under your ass when you’re not looking. When I shoot a fella, I want him to go down on the first round, and stay down. I’ll shoot his buddies afterwards if they’re dumb enough to stick their heads out or try and drag Johnny Jihad into the bushes. And oh by the way, there’s no better incentive for a Muj to pack it in then when his comrade goes down with a really spectacular fatal wound. Makes martyrdom seem a lot less fun. We are and will continue to seek more lethal munitions that can kill at longer distances, with better ballistics for more accurate engagements, and for better penetration characteristics, whether the munitions are designed to penetrate (body armor, cover) or not to penetrate (frangibles). You’re killing me here with this stuff.

  • stryker

    Are we talking about the US military? lol As far as regular army units are concerned (Infantry, Airborne Inf, MP’s etc) all shots are taken at center-mass. It doesn’t matter if we’re talking about CQB range or hundreds of meters. The point of this is to get the most lead into the target as quickly as possible. Center-mass double taps are guaranteed to do it. In a battalion scout/sniper section, they are taught to aim for center-mass as well, and if the enemy is visibly wearing body armor, the pelvis and lower abdomen is the next target since it is quite large and could disable mobility. In fact, snipers are a good example of the “wound vs kill” arguement. Line unit snipers rarely tasked to kill large amounts of people. Snipers are more likely to destroy materielle like generators, or target specialists like commo operators and higher ranking targets. The whole point is to disrupt the enemy’s operations, not kill all of them. That’s the job of crew-served weapons and CAS or IDF. A dead soldier is left where he is until the end of combat. A wounded man requires at least another soldier to stabilize bleeding, transportation, etc, that’s two soldiers out of the fight. 3 wounded soldiers is 6 out of the fight- now the entire squad is combat ineffective. Now if we want to talk about SOG units, then the shoot to kill arguement is entirely valid. These are the guys who will aim for the T-Box for instant capacitation because they have the training and the equipment, and sometimes their missions call for it. In Ranger batt, there are a lot of proponents of higher sternum targeting. They aim for the portion of the sternum just below the throat where the collar bones meet. The theory is that your target will be close enough to center-mass to hit reliably even if you miss, and there is a chance that you might hit the lower cervical spine for instant incapacitation. But for the majority of the regular army, it’s center-mass. Even if he isn’t dead, that’s why you always double-tap as you clear the objective, and grenade checks are a regular part of EPW search procedure. That’s all Level I training and battle drills, should’ve have learned it in basic or boot camp.

    With the 5.56 or .308 arguement, there was nothing wrong with the 5.56 round in its original form and use. The original 55-grain M193 when at the proper velocities (2700 FPS and above) literally explodes inside the body, leaving a bigger permanent cavity than any other FMJ assault rifle caliber. This reliable fragmentation was the main wounding factor of the 5.56 round, not penetration. Unfortunately, that perfect balance has been completely thrown off with the move to shorter-barreled carbines and the heavier M855 round modified to extend ranges on SAWs. Now we have less barrel and heavier bullets to produce lower velocities, causing the current 5.56 round to inconsistently fragment from round to round, even at ranges as short as 45 m with the M4. I’m not saying we should go back to 20 inch, .30-06 battle rifles, just use the right ammunition and give us a little more barrel. An M193 bullet out of a 16 inch barrel will reliably fragment up to 100 meters, 65 more than the current. The only cost is a 1.5 inch longer barrel. The 5.56 was never meant to penetrate, and rifleman are not trained to shoot enemies through cover. Even if it does penetrate, we are doing damage comparable to a .22LR with that much loss of velocity. Penetration is the role of the 7.62 round and above. The 5.56 round is also MUCH lighter than the 7.62 NATO, or even 7.62 x 39. Less weight = more ammo = more firepower. And we all know that along with water, the last thing you want to run out of is ammo. I carried 13 30 round mags in 4 triple mag pouches and my weapon during my last deployment, that’s 390 rounds. I doubt I could carry that much 7.62. The 5.56 is sufficient if utilized properly!


    I’ve handled the SCAR 16, and I like the lightweight and balance is better than the SIG 556. But it’s way overpriced for a carbine with a stock that can’t bash doors down like a good AK-47. I certainly won’t liquidate my Sturmgewehr 44 for one. Even the grandfather of assault rifles with all its prototype flaws will at least hold its value, and this rifle probably will not.

  • DocM

    On May 4th 2010, a press release on FNH USA’s official website announced the SCAR Acquisition Decision Memorandum was finalized on April 14, 2010. This is an approval for the entire weapons family of the Mk16 SCAR Light, Mk17 SCAR Heavy and the Enhanced Grenade Launcher Module. [15]

  • Tonocilot

    I love the Scar-H, sad part is I live in California so there is no possibility of me ever getting it unless I move to a Gun-Friendly state. But regardless of where I live any thing over 3,000 for a scar-H is not worth it. Even if you purchase any type of firearm (pistol or otherwise) if at any point this nation would come on the verge of civil war. The U.S. Government would cease all weapons. I mean its more likely we would get hit by a zombie apocalypse, yet with Gun Law restrictions growing and tightening up like a noose around the neck. Its only a matter of time before Fire Arms are completely illegal.

    The Funny thing is, Gun laws do not protect the American Public yet restrict them of the ability to protect themselves. A gun carrying criminal will carry a gun regardless of what the law states. Yet a Law Abiding citizen will not carry one if the law says they cant. Gun laws rob Americans of there constitutional right to “bear arms”. Yea the above was a huge jump off subject but I wanted to say it lol

  • wharfrat1940

    I just purchased a new SCAR 16S Special Edition with a SN below 50 equiped with an EOTech 555 (also special edition, low SN for $4995. The gun store owner got FN to let him have this rifle several years ago and it has never been fired. He also threw in a nice case, several extra magazines, two 100 rd boxes of 5.56 x 45 mm ammo. This brings the actual cost of only the rifle somewhere around $4300. I know that not many people will pay this much, and I actually thought about it for 2-3 days, plunking down the cc just 3 hours ago! Looking forward to testing her out at the range. I might add that I also own these other FN guns – the PS-90, FN-2000 and their pistol known as the Five-seveN. I love all of them and am looking forward to getting acquainted and firing the SCAR 16S