Missing by design....rm9792 wrote:Missing:
Adjustable Comb
Adjustable piston drive
not ambidextrous
no side folding stock
includes folding front and rear sights
barrel replacement with allen wrench in minutes
monorail upper
If you dont want or need any of that stuff then an AR is definitely a better deal. AR does have the advantage of being modular for more variety of calibers and uses. I think the SCAR is a better rifle for front line battle but the AR is better suited for home, rear troops or sporting use.
I didn't want an adjustable comb, but such is available if I wanted it.
I looked at a gas piston conversion kit, but it wasn't worth the price.
My wife is right handed, so an ambidextrous AR is not necessary, although I did consider getting a left handed receiver for mysef and switching out the one on my carbine and using it on my wife's.
I can change barrels by picking up one of my other rifles - no tools necessary at all.
A monorail is nice, but I'm not convinced that it is absolutely necessary.
This build is a first time carbine for a woman who has never fired and/or owned a centerfire rifle, so admittedly it isn't on the same level as a SCAR - which, by the way, I actually think is a nice rifle and wouldn't mind owning one myself. But my point is that I don't blame SOCOM for dropping the SCAR. It isn't the rifle they wanted in the first place. If you read the American Rifleman article about it, it appears as if SOCOM really wanted the 7.62 version all along. You said "the AR is better suited for home, rear troops or sporting use," but SOCOM seems to be satisfied with its M4 brother in 5.56 caliber, the main difference between the two being the "whoopee" position on the selector.
In addition to being a gun enthusiast, I am also a taxpayer. As a taxpayer, I have a stake in the military's good stewardship of the money they spend. I don't begrudge them the cost of upgrading weaponry when such an upgrade is necessary. I'm not convinced that upgrading from the M4 to the SCAR is absolutely necessary.... ....in caliber 5.56. On the other hand, a more versatile 7.62 rifle not only seems justifiable, but actually necessary. The fact that the Army and Marine Corps pulled all their old M14s out of mothballs and refitted them for use in Iraq/Afghanistan indicates what many have thought all along, including yours truly, that it was a mistake to virtually walk away from 7.62 battle rifles 45 years ago.
And for the uses in which 5.56 is a good choice, the added expense of a SCAR isn't justifiable... ...in my opinion. I don't thing there is a problem with manufacturing them for the civilian market for those that can afford them, but I'd rather the military not spend my taxes on them.
). It will be interesting to see how it all plays out. No matter what, either it's a caliber or platform change (or both), that change is guaranteed to come slowly. Until then, the AR design has proven to be an amazingly flexible platform.
