Which would you choose? The SCAR or Galil in .308? Well George S. didn’t bother with that question and just got both.

The Magpul Zhukov handguard really caught my attention. While the Galil is not quite like an AK, the Zhukov hanguard was easily modified to fit the IWI Galil. It certainly changes the look quite a bit and looks great.





Advertisement

  • Phillip Cooper

    I’m not sure which I’d have chosen.

  • Mike K.

    Both is always a right answer if you got cash to burn

  • Kelly Jackson

    I don’t know about the SCAR but the Galil is shockingly heavy in .223 it’s like an 8lb rifle.

    • Mmmtacos

      You sure? The .308 version is 8.7lbs unloaded on IWI’s site.

    • 8166PC1

      Reliability doesn’t come without a cost.

      • Sermon 7.62

        AKS-74 is 6.5 lb

        • int19h

          AKS-74 has an 8″ barrel. Cut AR down to the same, and it’ll be at least a pound lighter.

          • Sermon 7.62

            AKS-74 has a 16″ barrel

    • miniguyvegas

      But both of those are 308, so….

  • Christopher Wallace

    SCAR all day.

  • Mmmtacos

    Only reason I’d want the Galil over the SCAR is that it takes the fairly standard magazines. I do like the Magpul handguard too: the stock IWI one looks horrendous and is too short.

    Yes, I know there are third party lowers for the SCAR that take the SR25 mags as well, but it’s like $250.

    Tough choice. The Galil is easily $1,000 cheaper as well, but not quite as sexy or oper8or as the SCAR. No idea on it’s accuracy but probably decent enough anyway.

    Can I take a third choice and just get an AR-10 from someone?

  • D

    The Galil feels like cheap plastic.

    • Malthrak

      Given that it’s got a machined steel receiver and far less plastic in the lower than the SCAR (which has an entirely plastic lower receiver), if you think the Galil feels like cheap plastic, the SCAR is gonna be worse.

      • Sermon 7.62

        I heard the name of the designer is Frankenstein

  • Joe

    Slight weight advantage to the ACE, and at a significantly lower cost.
    I’d have to see some impressive test results to come off an extra grand.

    • Ryan Meyer

      Nope. Scar weighs. 0.7 lbs less.

  • UCSPanther

    I’d rather have an old style Galil in .308 or a SIG 542 if I were to go for a black .308 rifle…

  • 8166PC1

    I wonder which one would be more reliable in the short term and long term? Which one would go the longest without parts breakage?

  • Malthrak

    The Galil hands down.

    $1200+ cheaper.

    Wont damage optics or mounts as the SCAR17 has been proven to in some instances.

    Has a much more solid stock.

    Is actually available if you really want one.

    The question really is…why the SCAR?

    EDIT: that said, you can probably get an equally capable AR10 of some sort cheaper than either 😀

    • Jan Moszczuk

      Accuracy and reduced recoil I guess, although I admit I never shot one

    • Pedro .Persson

      Is there any explanation of why exactly the SCAR 17 damages optics compared to other rifles chambered for the same cartridge and weighting the same?

      • Malthrak

        Something to do with the way the upper reacts to recoil and amplifies it through the top rail. Apparently not an issue for the 16 and, according to some, better or fixed in newer 17’s depending on who you talk to.

        Basically an ACOG will be fine, but something with electronics such as a holographic, may not be.

      • Sean

        Probably happened when these people spend all their money on a SCAR and have nothing left over for a quality optic so they buy whatever optic is out their.

        Many of these Internet warriors that claim SCARs eat optics are using Vortex, Truglo, and some EOTechs that should not be used on any 308.

        I have yet to see an Aimpoint or S&B fail on a SCAR. I do know that multiple EOTech have failed on SCARs, but given what EOTech has been pumping out these last few years, they truly deserve to go out of business.

        I would only look for a name-brand optic that I am 100% sure can withstand the recoil of any 308.

        • Craig Cornejo

          i have a leupold on mine..works great..never a issue..maybe the nut shooting mine my be the only problem..

      • Because of the piston design, the way the recoil impusle is transmitted to the receiver is dramatically different than in AR or AK platforms; it’s a much shorter, steeper acceleration curve than other designs, which means anything attached to the upper is subjected to a harder punch with every round. That big goofy buffer tube on an AR– and the ten miles of recoil spring on an AK– serve to draw out the recoil impulse over a longer distance and longer period of time compared to the SCAR-17, which translates into the difference between getting shoved out of the way and getting punched.

        It’s not really much of an issue if you’re putting high end tactical optics on it, since most of them are specifically designed for hard use afield, but affordable glass falls apart under abuse, and high end bench optics focus their $$$ on glass quality rather than durability.

      • Raptor Fred

        You can kinda sum it up to similar reasons spring piston air rifles lay waste to optics. That’s a lot of mass coming home to an abrupt rest after every round fired. And how that energy is transferred into the optic on a rigid extruded aluminum 1 piece upper. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/648e15a3ca43df35c2f310e797428a0a51f0dbf1d14ec9a58866772176059230.jpg

    • Giolli Joker

      I would take the SCAR, sell it NiB and buy the Galil. 🙂

  • Major Tom

    Galil. That way I avoid the mall ninja tactitards.

    • Tactitard

      My money is on you have never faced a “mall ninja tactitard” from behind your keyboard.

      • Major Tom

        I’ve seen several of them, and several of those had an annoying tendency to be cops.

  • Ryan Meyer

    Scar 17. Military fielded and proven. Plus twice as accurate.

    • 8166PC1

      The Galil has been around since the 1970’s it’s more proven than the SCAR.

      • Ryan Meyer

        Have you fired a Scar? The weight and accuracy are game changers. The Galil as seen above is new. The old school Galil is made with different materials.

        Might need to get a new Galil and try it out. I have owned numerous iterations of the old version and always found them pleasant to shoot. The ergonomics and accessory options were lacking. Plus they were heavy and not as accurate as the newer 308 rifles
        .

      • HKfan

        Ya but the SCAR has been out for well over a decade and has been adopted by some of the worlds best. Galil has been out since the 60s but only 3rd world countries still use it. No 1st world armed forced have ever adopted it. Just like the Uzi, not bad for its time and sure alot of countries may have used it but it can’t compete in no way with modern offering like the SCAR in accuracy, quality, reliability, and especially ergonomics.

        • 8166PC1

          How would the SCAR beat the Galil in reliability?

  • RogUinta

    If I HAD to pick either, I’d go with the Galil…but I already voted with my wallet (AR-10 pattern). The ability to switch between a 24″ precision bull barrel upper and a 16″ carbine for a lot less than the cost of a new rifle makes it the best choice for me.

  • Klaus Von Schmitto

    I’ll take my parts kit HK 91 and use the grand for ammo.

  • Sermon 7.62

    The SCAR, if I had to choose. But both rifles are terrible.
    There is a better choice.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/41972c952c7484c4bd4942ba7c952cb8b1e99ebd574460c592d805da423e807b.jpg

  • 93-in-a-55

    I watched a single .308 ACE fire more than 1500 rounds this past weekend within 3 hours. No oiling. No failures. A half-dozen FAST company Marines were there on TAD, and after running a few mags through the ACE, every single one of them said they preferred the Galil over the SCAR Heavy. Nothing against the SCAR, but the ACE feels good and runs like a tank. And I think UGG boots look stupid.

    • int19h

      I wonder what happened if you gave them the 5.56 ACE.

  • Holdfast_II

    If they repealed my state AWB tomorrow it would be . . . . SCAR 17.

    Right after the Taxor X95.

  • Dan

    My SCAR 17 shoots sub MOA. It is nearly as light as a *lightweight* AR-15, and far lighter than any other medium caliber serious battle rifle I have ever felt. It is combat tested and takes advantage of modern materials and design advances. Stop crying about the stock folding latch. It is an easy upgrade.

    The Galil is great. I have one in .223. This latest one is great. But It is a tarted up modification of a high-quality copy of a 1940s rifle meant to be used by drunk, illiterate farmers. It is great, but that’s what it is underneath.

    To me this is like a choice between Emma Watson and Liza Minelli. Sure the plastic surgery and makeovers have done some good. But in the end of the day one is a grandma and one is not.

    • Malthrak

      Your SCAR17 comes in at 8lbs from the factory, lightweight AR’s are sub 6lbs (sub 5 for true lightweight builds). The SCAR17 is whole 0.5-0.7lbs lighter (depending on who’s spec sheets you look at) than a Galil ACE in 7.62×51

      Likewise, the fundamental internal operating mechanisms are not original to either and both derived from weapons designed long before either of us were born. To make one out to be an overgussied geezer while the other is some pinnacle of modern design, in either direction, is woefully inaccurate.

      • Haulin’ Oats

        Smith and Wesson M&P 10 is a scaled up AR-15, is reliable and weighs in at 8lb. As a bonus, they cost around $1100-1200 and the new version in 6.5 Creedmoor will run you around $1500 with a free float rail.

        • Dr. Longfellow Buchenrad

          Your comment is sound, but I really just upvoted you because of your name.

      • Dr. Longfellow Buchenrad

        Its not fair to compare the weight of a .308 semi to the weight of an AR15. Pretty much the lightest you can find a .308 AR is 7.5lb unloaded. Given that the SCAR is 8lb thats pretty good, but the Galil isnt overly heavy either for a .308.

    • Sermon 7.62

      Here we go again

      Drunk, illiterate farmers. Blah-blah. Modern materials. Blah-blah. Design advances. Blah-blah

      Bullcrap

      • pin

        Yeah they should’ve added one, ‘lack of wise of money’

  • Frank

    Galil by 100000000000000000%

    Galil is a combat proven design in use by many threwout the world. scar H is a plastic POS adopted by a some loser in the Pentagon,and rejected eventually by SOCOM, in favor of M-110 and M-14 designs.

    • Vitor Roma

      Hummm, one can say that the Scar-L isnt better than the M4A1, but the H version is definetly superior to the M-14 and way handier than the M110.

      • Sermon 7.62

        M110 is not in the same class at all

    • blob

      >ejected eventually by SOCOM, in favor of M-110 and M-14 designs.

      no it’s not

    • HKfan

      You really are clueless. Cost and logistics were behind the cancelled orders of the 5.56 SCAR. If the SCAR is such as plastic POS, why was the 7.62 SCAR chosen to fill the gap of the 5.56 SCARs that weren’t purchased.

      As of 2017, SOCOM does not use any M14 design and the M110 was replaced by the H&K G28 over a year ago.

      SCAR has been out for over a decade and has been tried and tested by numerous 1st world countries(US, UK, Germany, France, Japan, Belgium). Galil is used by 3rd world countries that are just using it because they will still be using it in a decade.

      SCAR is hands down more accurate, reliable, quality, and especailly ergonomic than any Galil, 1960s Galil or 2017 Galil?

      Thats like comparing a 1911 with a Glock. Logic chooses Glock

  • Pedro

    Have both, I’d take the SCAR into a fight and use the Galil to hit someone when I run out of ammo.

    • It does seem to be much more of a bayonetter’s rifle, dunnit.

  • iksnilol

    Cut down the Galil (Barrel and stock) and mount it underslung on the SCAR:

  • John Worrel

    I’ve a SCAR-17 and being hard on optics is just nonsense.

    It shoots better than I do. I’ve Vortex Viper PST 4-16 and Timney trigger and will take the short stroke piston any day over the long stroke.

    Yes it’s expensive but one gets what one pays for.

    • Malthrak

      The SCAR17 is hard on many optics, but not all. Something like an ACOG or Viper PST will be fine, but a much lighter built optic or anything with electronics (like a holographic sight) will often encounter issues. FN has also made changes so that these issues are reduced, older SCAR’s had much greater issues.

      Also requiring a several hundred dollar trigger upgrade on a $3k gun is rather absurd. If it shoots better than you do, you may have saved yourself 4 digits and gotten a gun that would otherwise be just as functional XD

  • Raptor Fred
  • Big Daddy

    I shot the SCAR and have friends who own them. Great rifle, very accurate, lightweight, little recoil, a little strange on the recoil. There’s some nice stuff out there for them. But after you get the add ons, mags, optic and so on it’s a lot of money. I can buy some type of AR10, a nice optic, upgrades and a some ammo to shoot with for less than just the rifle itself.

    If I had to go to war that’s a different story, I haven’t tested either rifle that way and cannot, those who have said they are problematic. The Galils of the past do not have problems as far as I know as a battle rifle. In this version I do not know.

    I’d love to own either rifle or both and I am sure they perform well. It’s all upto the person and his wallet. The only way to find out a baseline of combat reliability is to go through a carbine course with one. If it makes it than you have yourself a good gun.

  • Dr. Longfellow Buchenrad

    The .308 that I would get if someone else was paying: SCAR

    The .308 that I enjoy shooting most: M1A

    The .308 Ill actually spend my own money on: AR pattern

    The .308 that Ive given pretty much no consideration to: Galil

  • SP mclaughlin

    I was confused at first why an ACR handguard was on the Galil ;_;

  • Corey Sledd

    Not hard to choose when you can find a Scar 17 for 1300 plus tax. Sometimes people get lucky.

  • HKfan

    This makes so much sense, comparing a 21st century rifle vs a 1950s era rifle that has to be outfitted with every modern attachment which is still inferior to the SCAR in accuracy, ergonomics, reliability, and quality.

    • int19h

      Can you cite the data (and the sources), based on which you’re making the claims about reliability and quality?

      • HKfan

        I don’t have any sources to cite because real-world experience and field use is what I consider data.

        Most data lab experiment tests are just stupid for firearms application. For example, in 2006, 2,000+ soldiers were surveyed after coming back from Iraq-Afghan about their weapon systems and only 58% said that they were satisfied with the Beretta M9. 46% (almost half!) were not confident with the M9’s reliability. The M9 has the lowest levels of soldier confidence out of the weapons surveyed (M4, M249, etc.) and 26% (over a quarter) had at least one stoppage with an M9.

        Now based on this survey, the M9 must be an unreliable POS right? Well, we later learned that instead of the Army buying Italian Beretta/MecGar magazines, they started purchasing hordes of POS Check-Mate magazines. After this happened, malfunction and reliability problems with the M9 skyrocketed. When they went back to Beretta/MecGar mags, problem solved.

        So if we use solely data, according to the survey, the M9 is the lowest scoring weapon system that these soldiers had with them,
        along with the M4, M249, etc.

        You are not going to find any data showing how a Glock is XX.XX% more reliable than a 1911 or that a HK is XX.XX% more reliable than a Ruger by XX.XX%. Field use and real world application is what ultimately assesses a weapons qualities, not a data sheet.

        While the Galil was generally reliable, the SCAR will feed virtually any ammo you put through it. Countless torture tests have been conducted with the SCAR in adverse conditions and it is amongst the top in reliability, Well above a Galil.

        Regarding quality, have you ever held a SCAR and a Galil next to each other, stripped them, and compared them? The SCAR is precisely built with no sloppy parts or play between the upper and lower, the magazines/followers are buttery smooth, cycling the action is very smooth, and the tolerances are tight. It feels like a bank vault. The Galil is a rattle box. I have seen stamped AK47s with better quality and finishing than some Galils. The Galils I have seen (10+) have all rattled, the charging handle is unergonomic and no where near as smooth as a SCAR or even some AKs, and the stock magazines are crap. The Israelis documented receivers cracking on the 308 versions only after moderate use which was one reason they simply don’t use it any more.

        • int19h

          “Real-world experience and use” is exactly the kind of data I’m asking. But unless you have personally used both in the field, you’re relying on some other sources. What are those sources?

          For that matter, who exactly is using Galil ACE in the field today?

          Also note that if you’re talking about older Galils, they’re fairly different from ACE, so your experience / knowledge is not necessarily relevant. It would be a lot like trying to talk about M4A1 based on your experience with M16A1 back in Vietnam.

          • Sermon 7.62

            Chile, Colombia, Honduras and Vietnam use it as the standard-issue

  • Louis C

    Now I want a Zhukov handguard for my 7.62 x 39 Galil ACE.

  • Craig Cornejo

    i have a scar 17..dont have a galil..its most likely a great rifle..i never had any issue with optics..i have 3 on it at differnet times.. $300.00 then a $600.00 and now a $1800.00 one..maybe the ones from wal-mart are breaking??

  • Adam D.

    Anyone know the rail extension on the SCAR?

  • Gary Kirk