SCAR-H seen in Afghanistan

091106a_6005m_002-tfb-tm

This photo, which is purported to be real, shows a Ranger using the 7.62x51mm FN SCAR-H ( MK 17 Mod 0 ).

The photo is said to have been taken by Spc. Walter Reeves.

The semi-automatic civilian model is called the FN SCAR 17S and will be on sale early next year.

SCAR-H on display at Tactical Evolution Expo and Conference ’09. Photo by Dominique

Thanks to jdun1911 and SaysUncle for the link.

Hat Tip: AR-15.com

Related

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.


Advertisement

  • viper5552

    it is well that our troops get a weapon more suited to the environment than the previous system.

  • Nooky

    Do you know if the 17S will be sold in canada ?

    So we could import it in europe (You know the place where comes FN Herstal…)

    • http://www.thefirearmblog.com Steve

      Nooky, is the 16S sold in Canada?

  • fng

    Hey Candanian,
    At least you can buy the Tavor.

  • Matt Groom

    I’d rather have the Tavor, personally.

  • Raymond

    You know, I just have to say, the picture looks an awful lot like a it would be a still from a movie, the grain quality, the light quality, and then, I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, but I’ve never seen US army rangers wearing multi-cam and he is definately wearing the crye field pants. My instincts point me towards calling shenanigans

  • Lance

    Only one unit of Rangers use the SCAR. Its not getting super reviews by th Spec Ops community. Im not surprised by a few solders trying this pcie of junk out. Any 308 win wepon is more suited to aftghnistain but a more relighable M-14 is far more used than this plastic junk.

  • Bill Lester

    Lance,

    What’s the source for SOCOM complaints? I’d be interested in reading them.

    • Sterling

      My buddy was in a ranger bat when they tested them. He said they had problems with failing to eject and that when they started beating On them they started breaking. You can beat the shit out of an m4 and it will work, as long as its lubed and kinda clean. 7.62 x 51 is much better suited for Afganistan though.

  • Edward

    The camo design immediately had me calling “waitasec,” not to mention this being a supposed action shot.

  • Lance

    Those are NOT ACUs that Rangers whear nore are they muticam that spec ops use either I think FN stages some pics shots.

  • Bill Lester

    Lance,

    Again, would you provide the source for SOCOM reports that you described on 11/28? Hopefully you’re not just referring to a thread begun in May by one “fluwoebers” at arfcom, before the SCAR was deployed in numbers.

  • Lance

    Yes several posts Lester. I know you love you FN so much. But the facts are from this Blog and from army sources that Alost of units didnt rally like the weapon and the Picture here is doctered the man isnt even in a Army uniform.

    If you love the gun so much you place your hand on the rail after dumping a few mags out of one and burn your hand pal.

    • http://www.thefirearmblog.com Steve

      Lets keep it friendly.

  • Bill Lester

    Lance,

    whoever said I “love FN so much?” I own one FN product, a pistol with nothing to do with the subject at hand. Do I love it? Nope. I like it but I could never be truly attached to a plastic firearm. Given the right offer and my personal FNP would be gone tomorrow.

    Now getting back to the subject at hand. Would you PLEASE provide the reports to substantiate your claim that SOCOM is less than happy with the SCAR? I’m not trying to be argumentative, I’m interested in hearing what has been said about the Army’s newest rifles. If there are reports from reliable sources, not friend of a cousin of a Ranger stuff, I think everyone who frequents this blog would be in your debt by your simple act of posting sources. That’s all I’m asking.

  • Bill Lester

    I should also add that I’ve handled a civilian SCAR-16S and didn’t like it much at all. I personally think the stock is somewhat awkward and doesn’t look to be particularly strong. After just a few minutes handling the weapon, a SCAR isn’t for me. So like all other FN products beyond the FNP I already own, I have no desire to add any of that firm’s products to my personal collection. Well, maybe an M2 but I doubt it’ll happen. ;)

    But that has nothing to do with my dual concerns for the American fighting man’s safety and effectiveness in battle. I want him to have a reliable rifle that will kill our enemies with aplomb. I’m also desirous of all verifiable information on the SCAR as a taxpayer. If the weapon doesn’t deliver, I want my Congressman and Senators to raise holy hell over its acquisition. If the SCAR works as advertised, I want every infantryman in the Army and Marine Corps to carry it.

  • Lance

    The SCAR is for SOCOM only and WILL NOT be standerd issue for Marines and so on. The reports where on the Army times and several blogs a few months ago on this site. The only good things printed about the FN is from FN itself.

  • Tom

    I confess I don’t care for plastic in guns, but I am an old fogy. I would like to see test results of how the plastic lower receiver held up during tests. The SCAR looks awkward to me. The design appears to be very deep from top to bottom. The plastic stock looks like it would shatter with one horizontal butt stroke. I am not used to separate pistol grips. I grew up on M-1 Garands and M-14s.

    I have never liked the M-16/M-4 series. I don’t like dumping dirt and heat into the bolt and chamber area. I don’t like a steel bolt carrier sliding back and forth in an aluminum receiver. I don’t like the lack of primary extraction in the gun. I also feel the standard M198 .223 load is too light. The M282 (?) 77 gr. load looks a lot better.

    I do recognize that the M-16 is here to stay, at least for a while, so the ability to use the ammo and mags is a big plus. I recently got a SIG 556 Classic for myself. Piston driven, AK-47 type action, primary extraction, nice things like that, and uses the M-16 mags and ammo.

  • Lance

    Tom made a good point.

  • pimp mama

    I took this photo, it was not staged and the scar sucks

  • tom

    This photo wa taken by a combat camera photographer in afghanistan by Spc, Matthew Mitten.

  • D

    Army Rangers are not in Afghanistan at the moment.
    Army Rangers are not presently wearing Crye Multicam.
    This is not a picture of a Ranger unit.
    Please check your sources

  • Esteban Cafe

    I don’t know much about the subject matter, but to me the pic looks like a clip from a video game.

    We have sons in the CIA and the Marines (3/3), both headed to Afghanistan in ~May (our Marine just returned from Iraq in ~Oct). We’re proud of them. Iin the Afghan venue both said they’d opt for M14 variants (“SOCOM”?) over the 5.56. The older boy said the .308 is ‘short for the distances’ and that ‘the HS-LD folks use a .300 WinMag where they’d normally employ .308.’ Something about the velocity expanding the round at distance. He may be prejudiced: it’s what he shoots wild boar with.

    Thank you for a great site.

  • 82ND AIR

    There are no US Army units wearing Crye…PERIOD. This photo shows two SCARS deployed in an obvious kinetic op. yet niether one of the “soldiers” appears to even be wearing plate armor???

    I am waving the B.S. flag on this one guys.

  • Allan

    I have to call “BS” on this being an action shot. Work with some Spec-Ops guys and this is not a uniform that Rangers wear.

  • fmrRanger

    I’d like to hear the stories of the SCAR in combat too. No sense in replacing a ‘reliability liability’ with another one. I personally would like to see improvement of or downsize of the M14 action to take something like the 6.8 or 6.5G. A round that weighs less but still brings on a lot more heat than the 5.56. And FWIW, I have a carbine set up like an M4. And while mk262 mod 0/1 is better than the M193/M885 rounds, it certainly isn’t a great alternative with the short barrel.
    Also, in a scaled down version of the M1/1A (M14) action you could load a scaled down long range round better than the AR15 platform. That’s been my suggestion for over 25 years since I’ve known about rumblings of things to replaced the AR15/M16 platform.

  • ap

    rangers do wear multicams

  • Lance

    No every pic ive seen is ACU and or new imporved desert ACUs which arnt multicam.

    • http://www.thefirearmblog.com Steve

      This video shows rangers wearing multi-cam:

  • Lance

    Yeah but no deployed Rangers have been given Multicam. Some have been given improved ACUs which have more earthy colors.

    Read the story

    http://www.army.mil/-images/2009/10/30/54559/

    • http://www.thefirearmblog.com Steve

      Lance, I had not seen that new camo. Thanks for the link.

      Still, while I do not know if this photo is “real” or not, nobody can say with 100% certainty that no rangers in Afghanistan are using multicam (except maybe a ranger currently in Afghanistan)

  • Lance
    • http://www.thefirearmblog.com Steve

      Lance, urrgggh, what civilian uniform is aweful

  • ap

    again, rangers do wear multicam while deployed and improved acus are garbage all they did was add some coyote tan but left the blue gray crap in

  • ap

    rangers are in afghanistan, they do wear multicam while deployed just because you haven’t seen pictures of them or it hasn’t been broadcast to the rest of the world doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.

  • Lance

    So happy to work for the Coast Guard I just wear Black BDUs…lol

  • EricX

    Jesus, is this thread from Retardistan?
    FIRST… YES, the M1 Garand and M14 are nice rifles with reliability and plenty of power but they were replaced 40 freakin years ago… GET OVER IT!!! The Garand will NEVER come back into service! Go have a good cry and compete in a DCM match will ya?
    SECOND… the CRYE Multicam IS used by USASOC and SOF units. What, you think a unit with half a brain and twice that in budget would wear I-SEE-YOU’s in an area where they don’t blend in? Oh yea, the Crye Combat uniform is 50x that of the REMF-friendly ACU’s! To “82nd AIR”… really? Ever been out past Latham DZ to that “off limits” area and seen troops wearing Crye? Funny, it’s been issued to SOF for several years now… I call BS on YOUR assessment and apparently uninformed opinion. The Crye uniform has been in use for several years now in theater… snopes it, whatever.
    THIRD… The SCAR-L/H was designed for and with the assistance of USASOC… naturally you will see SOF units using them… the only surprising thing about this article is that it’s taken this long for a pic of the Mk17 to get out… this rifle has been fielded way before this… surprised it took this long.
    Seriously people, some of you need to either do some fact checking or know what the hell your talking about before spouting idiocies. SOCOM/SOF ain’t big army, we get what we need!

  • destroyer

    thank you eric x for calling out the BS. There are three patterns being evaluated in afghanistan, UCP-D (ACU UCP with coyote brown), Multicam (which has been worn by SOCOM), and Bulldog Mirage (which is the best in my opinion). Source: army times. I still don’t know how Multicam lost to UCP in the competition…

    Yes, the SCAR has been in use by the 75th Ranger Regiment, though im not sure for how long (like they’ll tell us anyways) and special forces. It is a new weapons system with new features, though it is day and night better than a M4 in battlefield conditions. I personally prefer Remington’s ACR :)

    Seriously, people need to do some research before they spout on about BS. I obtain my information from the army times, which is more credible in my opinion than any airsofter’s. I seriously get irritated when people post things that they know nothing about.

    As for the SCAR-H, it is the first military-used “battle rifle” design to come out since the M14, FAL, and G3. I wish i could fire one. They may look ugly but the SCAR 16S (civilian semi-automatic) is a fine weapon that takes getting used to.

    “Army Rangers are not in Afghanistan at the moment.”

    please think before you post!!!

  • Lance

    Theres nothing new about it its a regerataed FNC with plastic outside and a cheap plastic butt stock, and rails all over it. Ive read some not too happy reviews both civilan and military about its durability.

  • EricX

    Actually Lance, the gas systems between the FNC and FN SCAR are similar but that’s about it.
    The SCAR uses a monolithic upper receiver with a polymer lower and the bolt is drastically different. The buttstock is polymer as well and is one of the better features (folds to side, extends LOP and has adjustable cheek riser).
    The problems USASOC was having with them was due mostly to bad polymer and a few other manufacturers errors.
    Once the bugs are worked out, it’ll be a fine rifle.
    Personally, I’d prefer the Bushmaster/Remington/Magpul ACR (aka Masada)… it’s a much better thought out design based on ergonomics and actual operator input.
    Aside from the easy caliber conversion (or barrel type change) the buttstock is better designed (same features as the SCAR but more streamlined and even has battery storage for optics/lights/LAM’s), grip has storage as well (uses MIAD cores which hold 3 types of batteries, spare bolt/pins or boresnake)…
    Better design and features.
    Anyway, the SCAR is a step up from the M14 in a tactical sense (reloading time, ergonomics, adaptability, shootability) and not too far off in accuracy and if Haji is looking to take you with him on his way to his 72 virgins, having that 7.62 firepower is a godsend.

    Oh yea, Magpul has a 7.62 version of the ACR/Masada called the Massoud… google it.

  • Destroyer

    “Theres nothing new about it its a regerataed FNC with plastic outside and a cheap plastic butt stock, and rails all over it. Ive read some not too happy reviews both civilan and military about its durability.”

    So what? the FNC is a fine rifle. The lower receiver and buttstock is polymer, which is different than plastic (just like bakelite is different than plastic…they are all in the polymer family). My opinion is to try a SCAR for yourself before counting on the opinion of other bloggers, COD4 ninjas, and airsofters. Sorry to say, but polymer is just as durable as aluminum or alloys (look in the case of the PMAGs).

    The only complaints I’ve heard are the rear sights…thats it! the FN SCAR was also proven to be second in reliability to the outstanding XM8 (in comparison to the M4, HK 416, & XM8)

    In an essence, all weapons are regurgitated AK47′s or M1 garands with their gas piston operations, rotating bolt design, and trigger mechanisms. John Browning completely revolutionized firearms designs as we know today.

    note: will the chairsofters, gamers, and SF wannabes (who have a friend who’s sister’s father’s friend’s cousin was a Navy SEAL or Delta Operator) think before they post? It will save you the embarrassment.

  • SM

    I’m not an operator nor do I pretend to be. I’m a guy that puts a lot of lead down range for fun. I’ve owned two Colts, a Bushmaster, and a Wilson flat top. The Colts were Colts, the Bushmaster was fine and the Wilson was awesome. I now own a Scar 16S and aside from the cool factor it is an awesome weapon as well. The trigger needs immediate attention but it is amazingly accurate for a battle rifle. It’s refreshing to shoot without the AR style spring rattling the stock against your ear.

    I suspect that if the Scar was priced around $1,500 the criticism would be minimal. I don’t intend to drive an Abrahams over it so the polymer lower will work for me.

  • Lance

    SM no one complained about it as a cilvilan shooter. Its military maodle is whats debateable.

  • SM

    Lance, I understand the issue. I just think that any change in the cultural norm brings about speculation and unsupported criticism. The use of polymer in replacing metal firearm components has been undeniably effective over the years. If the civilian market was flooded with the SCAR 16S, firearms enthusiasts would be able to touch and feel one rather than evaluating it by looking at photographs. I don’t think anyone would suggest that the polymer stock on the M-4 or the frame on the ubiquitous Glock, is any more sturdy than the components on the SCAR. Hopefully the SCAR will never need a forward bolt assist. I guess time will tell.

    • Sterling

      The scar has one, the charging handle works as a forward assist also

  • Destroyer

    SM, my point exactly! the supposed criticisms of the SCAR are inevitable when any new rifle is introduced. God only knows the M16/M4 have had their initiation of growing pains. All weapons have them. Just try something new and if it works, move on. People need to stop being so conservative with the firearms approach and if something works to better suit the military, then let it happen. I honestly could care less what rifle the military seeks to replace the M4/M16; even if it is another AR15 gas piston upper or a direct impingement design that is enchanted by elves to be cleaner and more reliable under battlefield conditions. It makes no difference to me as long as our boys on the ground have a reliable, dependable, effective rifle.

  • Lance

    A piston upper is what the Army wants.

  • ZZ

    As an x Army Ranger of 3 and a half yrs 2/75th .. I will tell you that the scar-h was not my favorite to use. No I never used it in combat, only on the range for testing. There were many reasons, my biggest and it sounds silly but after firing it for a ferw hrs on the range. My cheek started to hurt like hell from that little NUB on the cheek piece. the stock just sits into your shoulder all outta place. Also it just feels so plastic I’m worried the sights get broke off, we are hard on stuff. I bang my shit around nonstop, I use my butt stock for support & other things! That little hinge is gonna snap off!!! Just not a winner in my book!! Many other reasons as well… I suggest you go fire one for a few hrs and see for yourself. On the other hand we also fired the Magpul Masada aka ACR.. Same kinda deal there as well ( plastic) BUT. This just felt better in my hands & it just melted into my shoulder, the trans for swapping was better & faster. So people are aware, SCOM has been trying out new types of BDU different types patterns. This is fact and this has always been the way it is. Always adapting to the type of combat. So the pic could be real. You can’t say that the use of multi cam is a reason to discount it. I never used it, but we did use many others in training.

  • Brian

    Man I love the passion on this site!! Guys … we used to learn how to disassemble M16/14s in the dark because… the damn things fail!! Pistons might be better. I have to admit I can’t take my FN apart in the dark, but I’m not crawling through jerkistan either. I don’t care who wears what ACU’s in what pattern. The 300 win mag and now the 338 Lapua are rounding out the long shooters bag of tricks. I wish I had todays choices 20 years ago, but in fine government fashion I always fear getting issued a piece of crap. If the men in the field don’t like issued gear they’ll pry the AK’s away and shoot the “insurgents” with their own damn ammo!! At home I’ll stick with the Kimber thank you.

  • http://www.milgeek.co.uk Milgeek

    — I was left confused by this discussion…

    I know there is a whole lot of love in America for the venerable Garand/M14 rifles, but to call the SCAR a ‘plastic’ piece of rubbish, and then not provide empirical data to support this contention seems harsh…

    Wasn’t the Armalite a ‘plastic’ piece of rubbish according to many who first used it (and many who still do)? Yet likewise many swear by it.

    …I don’t mean any disrespect to anyone that holds a negative view about the SCAR, but like others in this post I just want to know what collaborative evidence there is out there about it’s actual field performance.

  • Lance

    Look at priveious posts millgeek

  • SM

    The M4 will never go away as the US military’s rifle of choice as long as retired military generals are working for manufactures like Colt Defense. It has nothing to do with performance or reliability. It’s politics and money.

  • Destroyer

    Milgeek, there is no such publications. The only place i heard of the supposed issues with the SCAR were unverifiable reports and blogs.

  • http://www.milgeek.co.uk Milgeek

    @Destroyer

    Thanks for that mate… There reason I was confused is because I haven’t read any bad things on any of the respected military technology sites.

    I agree with the posters who say that the M4 will be arround for a long time, but there again it perhaps deserves to be – there have been several ‘M4 killers’ developed now and none of them have seemed to have shown themselves to be significantly and undeniably an superior weapon (each has it’s own set of quirks)…

    My opinion – and it is just mine – is that we are still putting the cart before the horse… Whether SCAR or M4 it is the ammunition issue that seriously needs to be tackled, not which rifle shoots it.

    I am a 6.8mm SPR advocate myself….There, I’ve said it – hang me! ;)

  • Destroyer

    no problem milgeek. I generally live by the mantra, “lies, damned lies, and statistics”. I am vehemently opposed to the idea of the US military adopting another 5.56mm rifle because it has been proven time and time again the round is inadequate when it is needed the most: in direct combat.

    Yes the M4 will indeed be around a long time. It is not because there aren’t drastically more effective weapons out there, but it is merely because of politics.

    my opinion is that the 6.5x39mm grendel round is superior to anything that is set to replace the 5.56 right now. The 6.8 SPR is roughly equal too. These two rounds have immense potential because not only are they superior to 5.56, but also 7.62 NATO as well. Since there are no longer NATO standard ammunition (each country has different loaded ammo) or magazines (M16 magazines versus G36 magazines), there is no point adhering to NATO standards because the member countries aren’t either.

  • Lance

    Not just the M-4 Destroyer there still Coast guard units with M-16A1s!

  • Destroyer

    I have never dealt with coast guard units (thank god) but i wouldnt be surprised if they carried M16A1s. Many air force units carried them in the early 2000s. Not surprisingly, the M16/M4 will remain in service for a while.

  • Mang

    Nothing to contribute about the veracity of this photo, but if it’s a screencap from a video game, it’s certainly from Modern Warfare 2.

  • Lance

    IKEWorrier I work for the coast guard and yes I lack spell checker. There are many who question the SCAr and half of these FN lover are just as armchair as some who complain about me.

  • IKEWarrior04

    ….Im not gonna sit here and pretend i know the status of the SCAR program cause i dont….they never tell us anything untill they think we need to know..which is last minute most of the time…so lets all be friends and lets wait untill the After Action Reports come out in the Mil times….i know ittl be published there….is the gun prob. having operational problems…sure….i dont doubt it….the idiots upstairs cut the F-22….so theyll cut anything…gas impingment designs need to go plain and simple..it doesnt take a decade to replace the POS…we wont see a new service rifle for another decade..probably when we are out of afganistan….is it strange that there isnt more pictures of the scar in action…not really..OPSEC…remember….im sure the commanders dont want the insurgents seeing exactly what the SCAR equipped Soliers are carrying its a weapon designed for SOCOM remember and socom doesnt go out ad publish a whole lot of pictures…especially of it is of new gear and equipment…..thats my 2 cents on the matter.

  • Blade

    All interesting discussions – I am a fan of the SCAR – as Destroyer points out, every new weapon recieves some initial criticism, and will go through some growing pains. The M4/M-16 has been evolving for 40 years now and it’s not perfect, so give me a break. I am not an FN-nazi, I simply like their products – I like the SCAR a lot. I haven’t had any issues with mine, but then, I haven’t taken it to combat yet so all I can comment on are its handling characteristics and shooting qualities – both of which are superb. It’s reliable, comfortable, handles well, functions flawlessly, and is easy to clean. It’s a clean and cool running rifle. And Milgeek get’s the prize, the issue is ammo – 5.56mm is a varmint round, not a man-stopper – it was a compromise when it was adopted, and it still is. I don’t think there’s any grand conspiracy by “them” working for Colt to keep the M4 in service – it’s simply financial and logistical inertia. It would take BILLIONS to replace all of the service rifles and ammo in stock if we move from 5.56mm. Not justifying it, I think it’s time to start the gradual change (and sell off all the surplus rounds at dirt cheap prices…) – I just understand the realities of the world we live in, and unfortunately $$ often trump best wishes. This isn’t a new problem, look at the Allen conversion after the Civil War – turning muskets to breech-loading cartrige guns. Enjoying the discussion, however!

  • Tom

    Regardless of how good the SCAR is, adoption is unlikely in the current fiscal environment. They are looking at ways to take hundreds of billions out of the long term defense budget, so small ticket items like rifles or handguns aren’t going to make the cut. With it perhaps seeing duty in the sandbox, I would still like to see some after-action reports on how well it did. All I am hearing is rumors about how it is like/disliked by the Rangers who have them.

    It does look like they like the SCAR 17 for the heavier mission in .308. It will probably supplement rather than replace the M4. I don’t know what formal requirements paperwork they need to make this acquisition work. It will be interesting to see what they do.

    With the SCAR currently on the civilian market, it will be interesting to see what happens to price and availability.

  • Chris

    I’m not sure what all the fuss is about. I have a FN SCAR and the use of the ACR. I prefer the SCAR.

    Out of 400 rounds fired no misfire. I prefer it over the M-4 and the M-14. The ACR and M-14 are too heavy. These heavy weapons are more suited for fixed positions and not for running and gunning.
    When your lugging this around for 12 hour days every ounce counts. You will be out of the fight if you have to run with all this weight.

  • cptbadass

    HK 416 No compromise baby! Same ergonomics as the M4, better sights, better performance, and I have definately seen them overseas with my special friends, unlike the elusive, however undoubtably used SCAR. Though, personally, I don’t see any problems with the M4 for regular Joes. I mistreated the crap out of my M4 (I was a bad Soldier), but when I fired her, she didn’t let me down. Besides, I’ve seen plenty of SF guys still using the shorty M4′s.

    The SCAR gets a lot of crap because there are so many people out there who believe that if they defy the wisdom held by others, like those involved in making the procurement decisions, it means they are smarter, much like liberals. Fact is, it passed testing, and turned out to be the best bargin. If the gun goes bang bang, and is cheap, who could complain?So whats the fuss? Can’t we all just get along, like China and North Korea?

    P.S. SPC Reeves needs to take better photos.

  • Buck Adams

    Just saw an episode of Tactical Arms and the host said the FN SCAR Heavy was well received in the Special Operations community as a “Sniper Support Rifle”. The Rambo-types are going to continue using it. The show’s guest, a US Navy SeAL stated that the ultimate goal was to replace the Stoner weapon system with the FN SCAR. That’s the most credible information I have seen on it.

  • Lance

    @Buck Adams
    Yeah but the SOCOM aboandoned the Mk-16for the M-4A1 SOPMOD 2 pakage. So the Mk-17 is the only version in service.

  • LT

    I see Rangers wearing multi-cams here all the time. That pic looks legit to me.

  • Devil Dog

    Someone please ask those of us who are either ignorant or just plain misinformed, to refrain from posting. I’ve been on three different posts here and a certain poster (trying not to call Lance out…LOL) displays all of the above. The standards of the CG are really becoming suspect. The sad thing is he doesn’t even realize it.
    I apologize if any of my statements have offended, but it had to be done.

  • cptbadass

    Lance, lets be specific, did they drop the program before testing was complete like the term “abandon” implies, or did it pass the tests and is ready for orders, but with budgets shrinking faster than Obama’s poll numbers, nobody sees the sense in replacing one 5.56 with another 5.56, so everybody will take the cheaper option?
    The need right now, at least for special people, and I mean that affectionately, is for a 7.62 that can reach out and touch Johnny Chimpo on his mountain peak while he’s filming the next installment of the Afghanistanimation version of the headless horseman. If the mission set requires the Mk16, all the command needs to do is order some. So… its in the store, but no one has taken it to the register yet. At least that is what the FN rep has assured me of at the NRA convention.
    Devil Dog… you are cold blooded, I mean, everybody was thinking it, but no one wanted to say it, then you came along. I mean it was like this unspoken rule, he lost credibility the minute he said he was in the coast guard so everyone kind of let him go, but not you my friend, take no prisoners and flatten the town, Marine Corps style!
    In other news, it looks like the Govt is looking for a new new rifle… http://online.wsj.com/article/AP598defc7e9ee44e4b0b27317973fd7ae.html?KEYWORDS=army+search+new+rifle

  • KAP

    Yes…the FNH SCAR 17S is the best 7.62mm NATO in my collection, howeveer, you can’t buy any additional magazines for it…anywhere, on the net, or in gun-stores. The only people producing them are FNH and they say sometime in June or July 2013, maybe!