CA - SCAR-L Hands On Review @ AEX

[mhe]

But if you use a peq box you'll have unsightly wires sticking out of your lovely new SCAR!! JKS

 

Honestly, I'd be shocked if this couldn't run 9.6 reliably. 1000 rpm in an AEG is really not that much, my stock TM AUG worked for over 5 years on nylon bushings at about 1050rpm before it broke a gear and my ICS has been going for about 3 years without a hitch. I think it's just the retailer making excuses for not being able to fit a 9.6v by saying that it's not recommended.

 

Just my 2 pence

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Errr, the 9,6V batteries DO fit? So what's the point? Yes, only Mini-type, but 9,6V do fit.

The real SCAR fires at lowly 600rpm anyways, so no highspeed tuning for me. I'll be happy with accuracy and range, rof does nothing for me, as I almost only play woodland.

[tome]

Err. I mis-read the oringinal article. Sorry

[Azulsky]

Anyone else thing the stock makes this gun look like ######, besides the fact that its no more than a glorified m4, and has already been beaten by a hk416 in extreme condition testing.

[Fiach]

I've already picked up the JLS black SCAR-L becuase I love the look and feel of the SCAR. I do want to get a high end AEG SCAR though I'll only pick one up if they do them in black too. TAN isn't very good in Irelands countryside and it'd stick out like a sore thumb against my Russian Tiger camos

[Azulsky]

Ill wait for a SCAR H

[AussyMurphy]

I just want to know how the new hop-up performs.

[Jagdraben]

Anyone else thing the stock makes this gun look like ######, besides the fact that its no more than a glorified m4, and has already been beaten by a hk416 in extreme condition testing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Too bad SOCOM adopted the SCAR not the HK416.

 

I've already picked up the JLS black SCAR-L becuase I love the look and feel of the SCAR.  I do want to get a high end AEG SCAR though I'll only pick one up if they do them in black too.  TAN isn't very good in Irelands countryside and it'd stick out like a sore thumb against my Russian Tiger camos 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It's called spraypaint, have you heard of it, motherfrakker?

[/samuel l jackson]

 

®

 

I wonder if the MIAD will fit the CA SCAR....

[Oliver Twist]

I dont see why it wouldn't, the SCAR lower might aswell be a polymer M4 lower.

[Fiach]

I suppose I could spray it, then agan CA could have just made it in black instead of that cack arsed tan

[Angry]

As has been pointed out already, tan might be great in Iraq, but frankly its ridiculous in British woodland.

[Azulsky]

Too bad SOCOM adopted the SCAR not the HK416.

 

It is too bad, FNUSA has been on its knees for the US Military, which is why they win every freaking contract to make most of our crapola, that and the US government sees $$ before quality

 

Its ok really, SOCOM will be using HK 5.56 mags in them anyway

[Jagdraben]

It is too bad, FNUSA has been on its knees for the US Military, which is why they win every freaking contract to make most of our crapola, that and the US government sees $$ before quality

 

Its ok really, SOCOM will be using HK 5.56 mags in them anyway

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What's really too bad is that H&K is the darling of the US military.

 

XM29? H&K. XM8? H&K. MK 19 Mod 3? H&K. MK 23 Mod 0? H&K. JCP? H&K.

 

Who was it that asked H&K to develop the HK416? The United States military.

 

The simple fact is that the US military loves H&K but buys from FN. There's probably some sort of reasoning in there. Like H&K taking it in the *albartroth* from Colt. Which is funny when you consider the fact that Colt is impotent.

 

In short, we are forced to conclude that the US military buys from FN-H for the following reasons:

-Colt is impotent, and;

-H&K is a push-over.

[Oliver Twist]

As has been pointed out already, tan might be great in Iraq, but frankly its ridiculous in British woodland.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

The problem with your logic is that CA is just making a replica of a real weapon, and frankly, I'd be concerned if America was planning to set its independence in stone - once again

[mrblah]

What's really too bad is that H&K is the darling of the US military.

 

XM29? H&K. XM8? H&K. MK 19 Mod 3? H&K. MK 23 Mod 0? H&K. JCP? H&K.

 

Who was it that asked H&K to develop the HK416? The United States military.

 

The simple fact is that the US military loves H&K but buys from FN. There's probably some sort of reasoning in there. Like H&K taking it in the *albartroth* from Colt. Which is funny when you consider the fact that Colt is impotent.

 

In short, we are forced to conclude that the US military buys from FN-H for the following reasons:

-Colt is impotent, and;

-H&K is a push-over.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

H&k priced themselves out of the market by not allowing their patented designed weapons to be license to american gun manufactures, and unwilling to manufacture their weapons on american shores.

 

As someone mentioned that FN bows down to the US military's needs. Well, quite frankly, all the major manufactures do. A military contract with the U.S. is like winning the lotto for these manufactures.

 

As for the CA scar, I plan on waiting til the other manufactures release their versions.

[Jagdraben]

H&k priced themselves out of the market by not allowing their patented designed  weapons to be license to american gun manufactures, and unwilling to manufacture their weapons on american shores.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That explains why H&K built a factory in Virginia: Because they're unwilling to make their weapons on US soil... oh... wait.

[michaelmike]

Anyone else thing the stock makes this gun look like ######, besides the fact that its no more than a glorified m4, and has already been beaten by a hk416 in extreme condition testing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

well,can't say too much about the stock,as beauty is truely is in the eye of the beholder,as for me i don't see any problem with the stock,but the fact,not some some fuzzy feeling about a certain look,is that SCAR is NOT a glorified m4,it has a piston operated gas system,rather closer to FNC 5.56.As its m4 look-alike external,it just intended to have a similar ergonomics of the m4s.

[mrblah]

That explains why H&K built a factory in Virginia: Because they're unwilling to make their weapons on US soil... oh... wait.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

O really? you sure that facility actually produces weapons? Or is it just H&k's headquarters and repair facilities. Last time i checked, but i could be wrong, was all H&K weapons were made in germany hence why they sport export markings (made in w. germany or made in germany, in addition to the VA address), unless noted on the markings. Btw, you can confirm this on h&k's website.

 

As for my original posts, I can only confirm what I read a while back, when colt/fn/h&k submitted their rifles for the future U.S. contract. H&K might have changed their original stance since then, i honestly don't know.

[Jagdraben]

They built it for their anticipated contracts for the XM29 and XM8. The factory is probably empty and/or sold to someone else.

 

In any case, they're perfectly willing to build factories here, and they did it before. It wouldn't surprise me if they did it again. Or if they decided to use the factory to build and sell civie-legal HK416s and -417s.

[Pain_is_Red]

I don't see the battery capacity as being a problem unless you're counting on volume of fire to solve your problems.  At which point, seeing as it's a V2 gearbox, simply get the CA M16 wiring harness (the one that leads to the forend) and use a large battery inside an AN/PEQ-2 battery box. 

 

The way I read the review, using a 9.6V battery is not reccomended if you keep the stock spring in place.  Look at the rates of fire.  With a stock spring the SCAR put out 800 rounds per minute using a 8.4V battery and 1000+ using a 9.6V.  The latter corresponds to a operating speed within the gearbox that will damage components, and the review states that.  With the M120 spring the rate of fire was reduced, which would slow down the speed at which the gearbox internals operate.  Rounds per minute with the M120/9.6V combination were equal to what the gun put out using the stock spring and an 8.4V battery.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Firstly, I don't know if I quite savy the idea of an AN/PEQ. Secondly with the mini batteries they dont' last as long (obviously) in the field as do the large batteries, regardless of whether you are a full auto nut or not! Also on the same lines, if I decide to upgrade it to a 120 that is even less battery life per game that I will get as apposed to a large, and because of CA's dee-dee-dee idea of having to unscrew the stock to access the battery that adds another potential problem. That's all I was getting at. We went from being told this thing was gonna to be able to take EITHER a mini in the front of the gun OR a large battery in the stock...Soooo...happened?

[mrblah]

They built it for their anticipated contracts for the XM29 and XM8. The factory is probably empty and/or sold to someone else.

 

In any case, they're perfectly willing to build factories here, and they did it before. It wouldn't surprise me if they did it again. Or if they decided to use the factory to build and sell civie-legal HK416s and -417s.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

hopefully, or they can sell it to FN

[Jagdraben]

What happened? They did some basic structural engineering and realized that they couldn't fit a large battery in the butt stock of the SCAR without sacrificing the accurate dimensions of the stock.

[mhe]

Looking at how the battery sits in the stock, may it be possible to just raise or remove the cheekpiece and push the battery into the stock from above? Would seem a lot more reasonable to me that way...

Because having to unscrew things in the field sucks big time.

 

Also I'd like to see a picture of the folded stock with the battery in it - are there any wires hanging around?

[Angry]

The problem with your logic is that CA is just making a replica of a real weapon, and frankly, I'd be concerned if America was planning to set its independence in stone - once again

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What? I'm sorry but I'm totally at a loss about what point you're trying to make.

[olbertus]

In AEX's case, yes they have told me when somethign has been "merde" in the past, even when it's a product they sell. A few years ago AEX dropped the entire ICS / Airsoft Elite line of AEG's for sales or service due to poor quality issues. On AEX's end, with their 45 day warranty, they cannot afford to sell products that are poor quality.

 

Anyway just a little defense for AEX's review. I personally appreciate the time they took in making the review. The fact they hustled and posted it pre-release. The fact they stripped down this AEG more then I've ever stripped down any I own And even reported some numbers on a stock and upgraded spring. I hope they get more sales due to this review for the effort they put into it.

 

If you don't like any part of the review don't buy the gun. As far as people not liking the color... That's the US military's fault for specing it. Don't like the stock, That's FN's Fault. CA just made a replica.

 

-Orca

 

OK fair enough I stand corrected it just seems like there is very little integrity among airsoft retailers from many of the stories I have heard but it sounds like these dudes are ok.

Just for the record I like the SCAR desert scheme and the overall design including the stock, I just would prefer black although I am warming up to desert tan (this is the "socially relevant" colour in the current conflicts) so as a replica of course the CA is spot on

[Psychosis]

It's unfortunate I don't have sufficient funds for the CA SCAR... and the JLS seems to be of mediocre quality.

 

Firstly, I don't know if I quite savy the idea of an AN/PEQ. Secondly with the mini batteries they dont' last as long (obviously) in the field as do the large batteries, regardless of whether you are a full auto nut or not! Also on the same lines, if I decide to upgrade it to a 120 that is even less battery life per game that I will get as apposed to a large, and because of CA's dee-dee-dee idea of having to unscrew the stock to access the battery that adds another potential problem. That's all I was getting at. We went from being told this thing was gonna to be able to take EITHER a mini in the front of the gun OR a large battery in the stock...Soooo...happened?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You are aware that there are 1400, and now 1500 mah mini batteries on the market now right? That's the same capacity as the first large nicad batteries available... there should be no issue whatsoever with battery life.

 

I've never understood what the issue is with the perceived lack of longevity with minis - I've been running 600 mah minis a long time and I've never had to switch it out for my backup when it died - I've blown through approximately 1400 rounds in a single day with one mini.