Comments on: Civilian FN SCAR 16S Pricing http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/ Firearms not Politics Fri, 10 Feb 2012 23:24:58 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: DocM http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-48245 DocM Wed, 01 Dec 2010 18:16:15 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-48245 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] 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]

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: DARIVS http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-44282 DARIVS Mon, 11 Oct 2010 06:40:14 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-44282 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. 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.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: stryker http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-41218 stryker Wed, 25 Aug 2010 00:04:04 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-41218 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! 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!

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Blade http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-41039 Blade Sun, 22 Aug 2010 02:10:34 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-41039 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. 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.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: shrader http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-40999 shrader Sat, 21 Aug 2010 02:31:28 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-40999 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. 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.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Drew http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-37883 Drew Thu, 08 Jul 2010 00:46:25 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-37883 Hella, 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! Hella,

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!

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Steve http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-37881 Steve Thu, 08 Jul 2010 00:38:51 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-37881 hella, try gunbroker.com hella, try gunbroker.com

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: hella http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-37856 hella Wed, 07 Jul 2010 18:38:40 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-37856 Hi, 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? Thanks! Hi,

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?

Thanks!

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
]]> By: stryker http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-36660 stryker Tue, 22 Jun 2010 03:04:15 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-36660 SCAR scrapped in SOCOM? I thought 1/75 was still issued them. SCAR scrapped in SOCOM? I thought 1/75 was still issued them.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: 18C http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-36641 18C Mon, 21 Jun 2010 08:18:19 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-36641 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. DOL 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.

DOL

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Alan Roberts http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-36459 Alan Roberts Wed, 16 Jun 2010 04:08:15 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-36459 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. 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.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Drew http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-36445 Drew Tue, 15 Jun 2010 19:41:37 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-36445 Sean, 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. Sean,

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.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Sean Ingram http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-36292 Sean Ingram Sun, 13 Jun 2010 23:28:23 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-36292 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. 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.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Blade http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-36280 Blade Sun, 13 Jun 2010 17:02:15 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-36280 Alan, 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. S/F, Blade Alan,

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.

S/F,
Blade

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Alan Roberts http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-36273 Alan Roberts Sun, 13 Jun 2010 05:43:13 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-36273 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. 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.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Blade http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-32446 Blade Mon, 03 May 2010 23:32:34 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-32446 Chris, 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! Chris,

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!

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Ammochris http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-32168 Ammochris Sun, 02 May 2010 08:52:50 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-32168 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. 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.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Jeff http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-30966 Jeff Sun, 18 Apr 2010 12:09:50 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-30966 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! 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!

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: monkey http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-30620 monkey Mon, 12 Apr 2010 06:54:55 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-30620 Just got my fn scar16s. 2800 with three 30 round mags. range test tomorrow ;) Just got my fn scar16s. 2800 with three 30 round mags. range test tomorrow ;)

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]> By: Drew http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2008/12/03/civilian-fn-scar-16s-pricing/comment-page-1/#comment-30245 Drew Wed, 07 Apr 2010 02:36:48 +0000 http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=3523#comment-30245 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. 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.

Please rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
]]>