FN SCAR-L or M4 Carbine?

All right, I'll play your theoretical little game since it's obvious you will probably never own or actually shoot any of these and all of your "questions" are merely exercises in theoretical rhetorical fantasy.

However, my rules.

I like the M4 Carbine. I played with the FN-SCAR and straight-out didn't like it. I found it to be a derivative work with a bunch of fancy "ergonomic" furniture without significant advantage other than reverting to the gas piston system similar to the AR-18 designed by Eugene Stoner back in the 1960's, without much more to recommend it over the tried-and-true AR-15 design. While I would have preferred our military had adopted the AR-18 instead of the 15, now that the 15 is in the logistical system, no other weapon system offered by anyone, not the SCAR, not the XM8, nor the HK416, offers enough actual advantage to justify overhauling the current small arms logistical system to replace the M16 family (which includes the M4 carbine).

So there's my answer: M4 -- because nothing else is enough of an improvement to justify the expense of switching over. I especially dislike the XM8, because that's just too much crap plastic all over the gun creating multiple points of failure. Don't care about "6000 rounds apiece" -- Big deal. I only care about what will make sure our boys come home, and none of the designs offered appear to improve that enough.

There's my opinion. Enjoy.

M4 Carbine Replacement

Well, since the SCAR design really doesn't offer any major advances over the M4, I'll go with the M4. That's why the military hasn't adopted the design. It simply isn't cost effective to replace every M16 and M4 with a different design that offers no real advantage.

EDIT: Yes, the SCAR was in service in limited use, like you mention. We aren't stupid- we know that. It has not replaced the M4, however, and the requisitions for the SCAR-L have been halted. The SCAR-H, however, is still being acquired for limited use. SCAR-L versions (i.e. the Mk 16) have all been removed from service, though kits to convert the SCAR-H to fire 5.56x45mm NATO (and possibly even 7.62x39mm, since that was one of the original design parameters) are being acquired.

Still, the firearm does not offer enough overall benefit to justify replacement of the M4 platform, which is the modern evolution of the most successful US issue rifle ever to be fielded.

If I am the US Army quartermaster (and the US taxpayer), I am thinking the M4 is best because the M4 is 30%-50% less cost than the SCAR-L.

There is nothing about the SCAR-L that makes it worth the additional cost as a standard issue carbine.

Typical posting fr a child that plays war video games! In the ' chat scenario"( trying hard not to laugh) any US, UK or Western /NATO( hell lets thrown in the Russian, Indians even Chines!) would simply call on an airstrike or artillery strike- problem solved. And western forces are going to use whatever's issued- UK, the L85a2, US the-4a1, French the FAMAS, etc. SF forces may use the HK416 or the SCAR or the M-4/ C-8. But even the " snake eaters" are probably going to the same thing- call in an airstrike, then creep up and mop up the rest or capture a few for intel. Modern military forces can afford to kill more efficiently - why use a 300-600m bullet when a hellfire missile or 500 lb gravity bomb can do the job?

M4, or even better, M16a4

The M4's disadvantages are only that of myth. The round is twice as effective, the "Jamming" problems have been 99.9999% resolved, and the only other thing I can think of is range. IN WHICH THE M16 EXCELS ON! And not the crap a1 or a2, but the a4. Its WAY more reliable. People are just to caught up on the past and only have bad memories of the a1, so they don't give the M16 a TRUE think over.

FN SCAR is a much better rifle but its about twice as expensive as an M4.

Fn Scar-l

Unless the SCAR fires miniature tactical nuclear warheads, there's no advantage over the M4.

The problem with both is they shoot a weak round. The 223 (5.56 NATO) is a marginal round. The original round was the 222 Rem. It was weak. They tried to fix it by going to the 222 Rem Mag and the 223. Both were still lame. NATO tried to fix it by taking the 223 and going to the 5.56 NATO which has a bit more chamber pressure. It is still lame.

Get the FN Scar Heavy which shoots the 308.