Jump to content

Classic Army - SCAR-H Pics


orca

Recommended Posts

You know, I think I've seen more arguments started by SCAR fanboys than any other type :rolleyes: People don't want to hear, "I like this better" anymore. They only want to hear, "This is the only way to do it!" Who gives a darn whether the Army wants it this way? This is AIRSOFT, not the friggin military. Say what you want, this is FAKE. Let us play the way we want and leave it at that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 142
  • Created
  • Last Reply
No it's not.

 

Receiver is made from two parts, upper and lower, connected with two cross-pins. Upper part is made from extruded aluminium, lower part is made from polymer. SCAR-L and SCAR-H use similar upper receivers that differ only in the size of ejection port. Other different parts include caliber-specific bolt, barrel, and lower receiver with integral magazine housing. Parts commonality between SCAR-L and SCAR-H is astonishing 90%.

Yes, it is.

 

It uses a larger round and has a beefier looking mag. That quote is talking about the upper receiver; the lower receiver on the SCAR-H is much beefier giving the entire gun a much "larger" look than the SCAR-L.

 

And since when is the heavy variant of a weapon not beefier than the light variant?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forget the barrel and the length it adds.

 

Just comparing the receivers, personally, I think the H looks beefier. And that long barrel is hideous; a SCAR-H with a very short barrel is just perfect.

 

1024511597_31ccb5d994.jpg

1024511601_460c44c9a8.jpg

 

I mean c'mon. Even if you don't like SCARs, you have to admit that looks okay. Oh, and it needs to be black.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know you don't have to be rude to other members of the forum, being one makes people like you a lot less. Even if you do speak facts you didn't have to tell him to "pull your head out of your *albatross*," you could have just said "I believe your opinion is incorrect" or something nicer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Can't they make a *fruitcage* Gen III stock?!  Is that too much to ask?!

yes...

They would need to make new mold tools and that is expensive.

 

also, I wonder the quality of the gear box. I recommend if you have a scar lite to put a screw in the back of the spring guide to hold it in place. I wonder if they fixed this on the new heavy and worked out some of the small stuff that is just well odd.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Remember: You are entitled to your opinions, just as I am entitled to my facts.

 

:pirate:®

Are you kidding? I've yet to see any.

 

I saw a lot of "It's longer" and "No, it isn't" but no actual data or anything that resembles a fact.

 

And I'd love to see what "facts" you can come up with to change an opinion about something.

 

All I'm saying is that the larger mag and magwell, along with the shorter mag, give the SCAR-H a bulkier look, in my opinion.

 

You've yet to produce one fact that would make me think differently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

lol, jagdraben is an *albartroth*. hes making an argument for the sake of it, i notice it a lot. its always a case of "you have your opinion, and i'll be right" or something to that affect.

 

it seems clear to everybody other than him what you're talking about. the larger magazine and surrounding area, combined especially with the shorter barrel, give the SCAR-H a more menacing profile, it looks chunkier, more meaningful.

 

i know jack about the real steel specs, but from a purely aesthetic point of view, it looks 'heavier', which is directly linked to it being more manly then the scar-l(adyboy)

Link to post
Share on other sites
lol, jagdraben is an *albartroth*. hes making an argument for the sake of it, i notice it a lot.

Yeah, but once in a while it's fun to see if he actually has a point backed up with facts.

 

i know jack about the real steel specs, but from a purely aesthetic point of view, it looks 'heavier', which is directly linked to it being more manly then the scar-l(adyboy)

That's all I was saying. No need for real specs, it just looks bulkier. People can agree or disagree, but it might be difficult to prove either opinion wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
G&G trades? On a STAR gun? But G&G haven't even thrown up any pictures of their H yet?

 

I am a bit confused tbh!

 

oh wait a minute...whoopsie :rolleyes:

 

hehe, sorry i thought you meant the G&G. but yes G&G did throw up some images and they have the fugly G&G trades.

 

http://www.airsoft-news.eu/e107_plugins/au...AR/image007.jpg

 

:(

 

its up to STAR and VFC now..

Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you kidding? <snip>

 

You obviously haven't been around me long enough to know, so I'll enlighten you: When I use the :pirate:®, I'm joking. Further, the quote itself would have been a hint, as the line is frequently used as a joke in arguments and debates.

 

lol, jagdraben is an *albartroth*.

 

Yes, I am.

 

hes making an argument for the sake of it, i notice it a lot.

 

What good is an opinion if it's never tested?

 

it seems clear to everybody other than him what you're talking about. the larger magazine and surrounding area, combined especially with the shorter barrel, give the SCAR-H a more menacing profile, it looks chunkier, more meaningful.

 

i know jack about the real steel specs, but from a purely aesthetic point of view, it looks 'heavier', which is directly linked to it being more manly then the scar-l(adyboy)

 

Beefier, to my mind, implies that the gun is larger in all dimensions. The SCAR-H is not wider, it is not taller, it's just heavier and longer. It is not a significantly larger gun, ergo I feel the term 'beefier' to be inappropriate. The term 'beefier' would be perfectly acceptable to use when comparing, for instance, the USP45 to either of the other full-size USPs.

 

Ah don't worry Render, I agree with you. Jagdraben thinks he is a firearms expert just because he owns a Kimber and an M1A.

 

TOP thinks that he's cooler than everyone else because his parents have bought him three Xbox360s, a guitar, and an amp.

 

I don't consider myself a firearms expert, just as you don't consider yourself a wet-nosed snobish brat. I consider myself a firearm aficionado. This is because I have used a large number of handguns, rifles, and shotguns, know how to operate most of the rest, and have a better idea than most of what these various cartridges are capable of doing upon striking something other than paper or steel. Being a firearms expert would imply that I know exactly what most cartridges are capable of, that I know how to field-strip and clean most weapons made by man, that I have fired most of those guns, and that I reload my own cartridges.

 

Oh, and you forgot the Ruger 77/22 and the Benelli M1 Super90.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the use of session cookies.