Why Does This Man Not Like The Greatest Battle Rifle?

SCAR vs FAL: Legendary reputation and first impressions

Clint and Alec open by introducing the FN SCAR as a so-called legendary battle rifle, immediately undercut by Alec’s open dislike for it. He contrasts the SCAR with FN’s earlier FN FAL, which he calls the ideal battle rifle and a better evolution of the concept. The discussion highlights the SCAR’s lightweight 7.62x51mm NATO configuration and its monolithic receiver, but quickly turns critical. They mock the polymer “UGG boot” stock and question several design choices that feel clumsy for a modern rifle. Rail space becomes an issue once a light and PEQ/IR laser are mounted, leaving limited room for a proper support-hand grip. The reciprocating charging handle is singled out as a major flaw, especially given that non-reciprocating systems have existed for decades and are standard on U.S. small arms. They argue that much of the SCAR’s mystique and the backlash against it come from its outsized presence in Hollywood and video games, including the iconic “gold scar” in Fortnite.

Pop-culture fame, SCAR 16 jokes, and expensive upgrades

The conversation shifts to how the FN SCAR, particularly the SCAR 16, became a pop-culture fixture through movies, shooters like Call of Duty and PUBG, and Fortnite’s “gold scar.” This visibility fuels both hype and ridicule, to the point where the hosts mention a group text thread literally titled “Scar 16 sucks.” Despite the jokes, they acknowledge that the SCAR’s AR-like controls make it easy for military users to transition from standard-issue rifles, with intuitive reloads and familiar manipulation. However, they emphasize how much money owners often pour into aftermarket parts. They describe replacing many factory components and planning to swap the rail and possibly the stock, criticizing the idea of spending additional thousands of dollars to optimize an already expensive rifle. The SCAR earns praise for its factory trigger and 45-degree short-throw safety, and most controls are considered solid, but the reciprocating charging handle remains a persistent annoyance, only partially mitigated by moving it to the right side.

Grips, ergonomics, and how the SCAR fell behind

Attention turns to the A2 grip, which is criticized for its finger tab and shallow grip angle that feel outdated and uncomfortable. This is contrasted with the older A1 grip and a modern Troy Battle Axe grip, which offer better stippling, texture, and a more favorable angle for contemporary shooting styles. The hosts then step back and acknowledge that, when it was introduced, the SCAR did bring several advanced ergonomic features. These include an enlarged trigger guard for gloved use, an ambidextrous magazine release, a short-throw ambidextrous safety, an enlarged charging handle, a monolithic receiver, and magazines shaped for easier extraction and impact protection. Yet they argue that the platform has not kept pace with newer designs. The reciprocating charging handle is again called out as obsolete, and the rifle’s overall weight and lack of modern rail and weight-saving updates are criticized. They note that while games like PUBG and Call of Duty inflated the SCAR’s reputation, the real rifle now feels behind the curve.

Calibers, SCAR 20 updates, and precision stock debate

The discussion moves into the SCAR family’s caliber options and incremental updates. The SCAR 17 remains a .308 battle rifle and the SCAR 16 stays in 5.56, while the SCAR 20 receives more meaningful modernization, including a 6.5 Creedmoor chambering. The hosts suggest that a publicly available 300 Blackout SCAR-SC would be far more compelling than the current lineup. They describe the SCAR 20 in 6.5 Creedmoor as very enjoyable to shoot, highlighting the Super SCAR Geissele trigger as a major improvement and praising the Hogue Ergo grip despite its finger grooves. Compared to the standard SCAR trigger and A2 grip, the 20’s setup feels more refined and purpose-built for precision. FN’s explanation for not making the SCAR 20’s precision stock side-folding is dismissed as weak, especially since other precision rifles like the FN Ballista and Christensen Arms models use folding stocks without sacrificing accuracy. This leads into a broader critique of FN’s conservative design decisions on the platform.

Traveling with big rifles and why compactness matters

Using personal travel experiences as context, the hosts illustrate why a folding or easily disassembled rifle matters in the real world. They recount flying with heavy, bulky rifles such as Barretts and an HTI packed into Pelican cases, describing the hassle of maneuvering oversized, weighty containers through airports and vehicles. These anecdotes underscore how a non-folding precision stock on the SCAR 20 feels like a missed opportunity, especially for users who travel frequently for training, competitions, or content creation. Even though not every owner needs maximum compactness, the option to fold the stock or break the rifle down more efficiently would significantly improve portability and storage. The segment reinforces the idea that modern precision and battle rifles can be both accurate and compact, and that FN’s refusal to embrace a folding precision stock on the SCAR 20 runs counter to what many shooters now expect from premium platforms.

Monolithic upper, rail and gas block quirks, and FN’s strategy

The hosts return to the SCAR’s core architecture, praising the monolithic upper receiver as a strong, rigid foundation for optics and accessories. However, they question FN’s execution around the extended rail and adjustable gas block. Instead of redesigning the gas system for easier access, FN simply cut a hole in the extended rail so users can reach the gas block, a solution the hosts view as inelegant and indicative of half-measures rather than real modernization. This leads to speculation about how many SCAR platforms FN actually sells and how much the design is driven by military contracts versus civilian demand. They suggest that if FN’s civilian side were given more control to fully update the SCAR—addressing weight, rails, charging handle, and ergonomics—it could compete more directly with rifles like the Mk 27 and other contemporary battle rifles. The underlying theme is that the SCAR’s core is solid, but the surrounding details feel dated and underdeveloped.

SCAR 20 performance, marketing missteps, and rival platforms

In closing, the SCAR 20 is acknowledged as an accurate rifle with generally good performance, though barrel life is mentioned as a concern. The hosts criticize FN’s marketing as dry and uninspired, noting that recent announcements have focused mainly on offering the SCAR 20 in 6.5 Creedmoor and in black, rather than showcasing substantial design improvements. They argue that the SCAR system is enjoyable to shoot but clearly in need of a comprehensive update to stay competitive. Comparisons are drawn to other rifles such as an Armalite and the Galil ACE, which share traits like a reciprocating charging handle and polymer lower while also being available in .308. These parallels highlight that the SCAR is no longer unique in its capabilities. The segment reinforces the idea that, despite its legendary status in games and movies, the real FN SCAR is an aging platform whose reputation outpaces its current design, and that thoughtful modernization could restore its relevance among modern battle rifles.