/k/ - Weapons

1: Money.

2: Money.

3: The Scar-17 has a tendency to destroy optics from what I've read.

4: Money.

>>523423

>money

explain f-35 and zumwalt then

>>523424

F-35 is a blanket project used to launder money through unbeknownst military projects or CIAnigger ops.

Battlefield Vegas says they've yet to have a single part on the SCAR they've had since they opened break despite having over a million rounds in it (I assume they're separating breaking and springs/barrels which "wear out")

The SCAR would be really popular if it sold for 1000 bucks. What's so expensive about it?

>>523419

Money.

Everyone like the SCAR, but it's too costly.

The HK is nearly $1000 less than the SCAR per gun.

Add millions of bribes by HK and free rifles because their real cost is a fraction of that so they can give away a lot of free samples and they're the ones securing all the European markets (the 416/417 are G36 that came out of the closet, they were mechanically a mix of an AR-10 and an AR-18 to begin with. Meaning they can perfectly make HK416/417 with their old machines with little to no changes, it's largely just cosmetics).

Burgers can't into rifles so them saying they want this or that but never doing it is nothing new. But the rest is quite sad because yeah the SCAR is probably the best assault rifle in existence… but since cheaper exist and no politician want to give a few millions to it's military if they can avoid it in any way it's a pricetag nobody wants (and said pricetag is perfectly within the norms of such contracts, FN it's not the OICW or anything).

>>523424

See >>523427

>>523432

FN is the expensive part.

1. The 5.56

>>523455

how cheaply could it be manufacture?

>>523476

Because all of the tooling is in place and they've already made back the cost of such, it could be priced similarly to a crap AR.

But FN is a big name that demands a big price tag. A bit like how Gaston Glock wanted his guns sold for cheap in the US but marketing convinced him to sell it for more to prevent it looking like hot garbage.

>>523476

Manufacturing costs are a tiny portion of MSRP, most of it is marketing, transportation, sale, legal fees, duties, licenses…. If the US government made the M4 it would cost a hell of a lot less. Think of how many guns are sitting in a gun store, essentially in storage, their price is inflated by the gun store clerks who stand around and have to be paid 8 hours a day. Same for the truck driver that moves them, the government officer that stamped some license, and so on.

I know in East Europe governments were making second gen AKs for the then-equivalent of $15 a rifle. Of course these AKs were garbage compared to SCAR but still, it shows how low costs can go.

>>523488

>If the US government made the M4 it would cost a hell of a lot less.

Per unit cost on an M4 carbine is something like $240.

it is funny how much the thing costs considering the base design is cost saving.

the long squar upper is because it's extruded 6061 aluminum, purely cost saving. the "so old" AR with a forged 7075 is much much stronger. full of cost saving nylon parts, not quite as bad as the F2000, but close.

what the SCAR really is, a modern AR-18. cheapest, most mass producible rifle possible. but it's priced like a low production high quality rifle, which is hilarious to me.

>>523496

MCX Virtus is stupid, i wouldn't even call it an ACR since it lacks almost all of the UI improvements the others have.

XCR is probably the best, and most under-rated, in that stack. early versions had some problems but the v3 is a well made rifle that will last.

>>523493

I'd need to check, but that price was like a decade ago if I recall corrrectly.

>>523476

Very cheap, they extrude the receiver out of 6xxx aluminium and then mill it cutting down the cost significantly. Everything else about the rifle is comparable to any other short stroke piston rifle, hell, it uses more polymer than most guns, that should be cheaper to mass produce.

>>523493

That's still purchased from colt right? It would be even lower with direct manufacture, colt still has legal costs, licensing costs and so on.

>>523476

You'll find out in less than 7 years.

>>523496

Kek.

The HK 433 is literally a conversion HK33 with new furniture.

It's HK response to the German army "Can you make rifle even cheaper than the HK416" (which is already cheap as fuck).

>>523519

It was the last FN contract if I recall, right after they took the M4 away from Colt.

>>523522

Isn't the reason they're holding this competition in the first place that the HK416 is too expensive? That's what they're saying everywhere.

>HK33

That's basically a small G3. The German army would never scrap G36s in favour of modernized G3 or whatever.

It seems that they will blend the HK416 (which is just an AR) with the G36 (which is a clusterfuck blend of the G3, AKs, ARs and SGs).

Seems promising.

>>523522

>The HK 433 is literally a conversion HK33 with new furniture.

What? No, the 433 is gas operated (short stroked) and the HK33 was recoil based (roller delay… just a small G3 as >>523527 said).

Also, where on earth did you heard the 416 was cheap as fuck?

>>523526

According to this article, the number they are paying is nowhere near that, they claim it goes about 642 ameribucks, which seems far more reasonable.

http://www.guns.com/2013/02/26/fn-lands-army-m4-contract-underbids-colt-remington/

more than half the fucking thing is plastic and it has a reciprocating bolt

do the math

>>524216

>HK33

You're literally retarded. Try to understand why.

>>524216

Didn't the HK33 use a Mannlicher clip loaded into a fixed mag through a hinged side door? OR was that the 36?

Also, I'm pretty sure it was a delayed blowback, not gas operated.

>>524236

That was the 36.