SCAR Goes To War

Strategy Page ^ | 5/13/2009 | Strategy Page

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

Two years after completing field testing, the new American assault rifle, SCAR, has been issued to a battalion of U.S. Army Rangers, who are headed for Afghanistan. SCAR (Special operations forces Combat Assault Rifle) was a SOCOM (Special Operations Command) effort to develop a new assault rifle that had some of the characteristics of the (now abandoned) U.S. Army XM-8 rifle. SOCOM had the money, and authority to develop their own weapons. And SCAR is mainly for use by SOCOM troops.

.

SOCOM wanted a weapon that did everything the XM-8 did, and a little more. Back in 2003, SOCOM asked rifle manufacturers to submit proposals, and FN (a Belgian firm) came up with the best ideas. One advantage FN has was its ability to quickly implement requests for design changes. FN’s rapid prototyping shop was often able to turn out a new part in hours. This, and FNs long history of good weapons design, gave them the edge. SCAR has a more reliable short-stroke, gas piston operating system, and a floating barrel for better accuracy, plus several other improvements over the current M-4/M-16.

There are two basic models of the weapon. The 5.56mm SCAR-L weighs 7.7 pounds (empty), while the 7.62mm SCAR-H weighs 8.5 pounds (empty). A 30 round 5.56mm magazine weighs a little under a pound, while a 20 round magazine of 7.62mm ammo weighs a little over a pound. Special sights can weigh a pound or two, so a fully loaded SCAR won't weigh much more than ten pounds. FN also came up with a grenade launcher for SCAR.

Both models operate the same way, and have many interchangeable parts. SCAR-L is basically a replacement for the M4, which was designed (with a shorter barrel) as a “close combat” version of the M16. The SCAR-H will replace the M14, a 1950s era 7.62mm weapon (a replacement for the World War II M1) that is still favored for long range and sniper work. The SCAR design is the result of much feedback from the field. For example, the rate of fire was lowered to 600 RPM (rounds per minute) from the 800 typical with the M14 and M16. This makes SCAR easier to hold on target when firing full auto.

SCAR-H can be quickly converted to fire AK-47 ammo (the 7.62x39 round) with a change out of the barrel and receiver. Both models can be fitted with a longer and heavier sniper barrel. Thus this ability to quickly change the barrel length enables the SOCOM to equip their troops with the specific weapon they need. SCAR is also built to be more rugged than the M-16. The barrel is good for some 36,000 rounds, twice as many as the M-16. Barrels may be switched by users without special tools. Both models of SCAR take all the special sights and other accessories SOCOM troops favor. SCAR is meant to be easily modified and personalized for each user. It’s expected that SOCOM experience with SCAR will influence the next generation of U.S. Army and Marine Corps small arms.

[Bender2]

Re: Thus this ability to quickly change the barrel length enables the SOCOM to equip their troops with the specific weapon they need.

Takes me back to my Stoner 63 days!

That... was one hell of a weapons system!

Eugene Stoner, God bless him, devised the 63 as a revolutionary concept for a weapons platform that would be built around a common receiver and certain interchangeable components and could be transformed into a rifle, carbine or various machine gun configurations by simply fitting the appropriate parts to the basic assembly.

Before the nitpicking starts, yes there were a few quirks with this system... but like all hot gals and kick ass firearms, you need to fiddle around with them to make them work perfectly!

The SEALs did okay with it. Or so Thomas... told me so.

Like my Official Keeper... old Dapper Dan--

I still have my main love... Old Tommy Boy!

If Red Xs above, go to http://world.guns.ru/machine/Stoner63lmg-1.jpg or http://www.fiftiesweb.com/tv/magnum-pi-selleck-1.jpg

[happinesswithoutpeace]

/mark for later

[blackie]

My Bushmaster M4 A3 works just fine for the old curmudgeon...

[PapaBear3625]

Unless theyre way behind enema lines they are unlikely to carry a conversion kit.

Plus the upper receiver will be the heaviest and most expensive part of the rifle. I would prefer to just have a couple of complete rifle versions back at base, and grab the one that's most appropriate to the mission.

[Atlas Sneezed]

THAT’s more like it!

[PapaBear3625]

Apparently, and I am not at all sure of the actual metrics, but I have been recently instructed that the two rounds are not quite identical, and one should not use the MILSPEC ammo in a civilian .308. Or is it vice-versa?

I think it's you should not use civilian ammo in a military-type rifle without checking its suitability. I managed to damage my Garand by using 30-06 ammo that was intended for bolt-action rifles, and was WAY hotter than WW2 rifle specs.

[Nat Turner]

I was a tanker and got familiar with the FN from the M240 MG. It was rugged, disassembled quick and cleaned quickly. I never had an M4, the 240 was far better than the M60 and a lot lighter than Ma Deuce or the M85.

[Uri’el-2012]

Proponents assert that the Grendel is an ideal middle ground between the 5.56 mm NATO and the 7.62 mm NATO, taking the best attributes of each. It has a flatter trajectory and retains greater terminal energy at extended ranges than either of these cartridges due to its higher ballistic coefficient.[2]

from 6.5 mm Grendel

I shoot pop bottles with 5.7x48.6 at 500 yds

[Concho]

.30-06 was not developed from the .45-70. It may have been developed because of the -70, but the development of the .30-06 was from the .30-03, from the 6mm Lee Navy, from the .30-40 Krag, as a result of the new Mauser bottlenecks that was kickingass on the .45-70.

Ballisticly the .30-06, .308 or 7.62x51 are similar. The .308 was developed from the .300 Savage or T65 research, it is not a cut down .30-06. The reason they went with the Savage round had to do with case capacity and taper of the case for ejection in full auto fire, and political issues with Britain.

[PapaBear3625]

Incompatibilities between 7.62 NATO and .308 Winchester

[Noumenon]

Even with a 5.56, a head shot’ll do the trick. If you can reliably shoot 4 moa, you’re good to go.

I do like my FAL, though. It’ll do until I can get my hands on one of these in .308 ...

[smokingfrog]

Thanks for the link.

Gonna have to read that one later.

[calex59]

You are essentially correct on your assessment of the two rounds, as they were originally developed the .308 developed 2860 fps(I am pretty sure, might want to check that) and the 30-06 developed 2970 fps, both using a 150 grn bullet. The velocity differential remained about the same with other weight bullets. The .308 was simply a short version of the 06 round and developed the same pressures in a shorter case. New powders have make both considerably more powerful today.

I prefer the 06, simply because I grew up with it, took my basic training with it, switched to the .308 when the M14(great gun BTW)came out and got out of the Army before the M16 came along.

I know the 06 round, I load for it and can do it in my sleep if I have to and never saw the need to go to the .308, but it is superior in the fact it uses less brass, less weight, to get the same job done

I was always puzzled why they developed it however, when they had the .300 savage round waiting there just screaming to be used in a modern day assault rifle. I guess wanting to keep a full power load won out on that one.

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

30-06 has a bigger punch. Like a 38 and a 357

[calex59]

.30-06 was not developed from the .45-70. It may have been developed because of the -70, but the development of the .30-06 was from the .30-03, from the 6mm Lee Navy, from the .30-40 Krag, as a result of the new Mauser bottlenecks that was kickingass on the .45-70. Ballisticly the .30-06, .308 or 7.62x51 are similar. The .308 was developed from the .300 Savage or T65 research, it is not a cut down .30-06. The reason they went with the Savage round had to do with case capacity and taper of the case for ejection in full auto fire, and political issues with Britain.

Thanks for calling him on that, I was going to but decided not to bother but I think it needed to be said. As I said in another comment, I was always puzzled why they didn't just use the .300 savage right out of the box, except they probably wanted to get a little more power. Mistake IMO, it was powerful enough, was even lighter than the .308 and was more akin to the Russian 7.62X39, would have been easier to hold on full auto. That M14 was a bear to shoot full auto!

[wastoute]

I have fired my .223 Spacegun at 1000 yds in competition using 80 gr Sierras. I asked the guys in the pits and they assured me the rounds were supersonic going over and got very nice groups (at least for me). I did however pop about half the primers on that load so haven't done it again. That said all I wanted the round to do at 1000 yds was make a hole in paper. If I wanted more than that I would adjust accordingly. (Poking holes in paper is about like breaking glass as far as I can see.) .308 is marginal on staying supersonic as is 30-06 at 1000 as well, I wouldn't risk either my Supematch .308 or M-1 loading for supersonic at 1000 (not wanting to bend op rod). I have considered putting a fore end handstop on my Tikka COntinental .270 as I think I could push that to be well above supersonic at 1000 without concern but the bullet is a bit light. I suppose to really stay powerful at 1000 one really needs to go 300 win mag or above. ANyway, just thinking out loud.

Μολὼν λάβε

[TLI]

SOCOM wanted a weapon that did everything the XM-8 did, and a little more.

How about a lot more? Apparently this one has been around a while. Don't know why SOCOM had to go to FN and not American companies. (Magpul/Bushmaster)

[xsrdx]

Don't know why SOCOM had to go to FN and not American companies.

FNH USA is an American company based in McLean, VA and the SCAR is produced in Columbia, SC alongside other US military contract small arms like the M240 and M249/Mk46/Mk48 machine guns.

The SCAR will also be available semiauto only for commercial sale soon, as the SCAR 16S/17S in 556/762.

FN Semiauto Carbines

[xsrdx]

The semiauto rifle is actually available for sale today, but limited quantities and demand have driven prices well above the $2600 MSRP.

But kudos to FN for selling it on the commercial market.

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

I wouldn’t be surprised if they planned to make the XM-8 in Murtha’s district $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$