FN SCAR, FS2000, PS90...I've lost interest

Winz

Winz

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
261   0   0
More of a discussion really.

Is it just be or are FN guns of recent really well intentioned guns that seemed doomed with awkward designs?

The FS2000 was all the rave when word about it first came about but not only is it rather expensive but the unwieldy nature of the rifle is weird. Mag changes seem to require a harakiri motion for the operator and when something goes wrong there's the awkward poop-shoot cover. With the Tavors on their way to Kanuckistan, no one here seems to still be interested in the FS2000.

The SCAR systems. I have no doubt that they'll do the job and serve the SOCOM ski team well. My comments are more on the design perspective. Maybe someone can help shed some light.... :)

-WHY would you make a system that requires full separation removal of the trigger group and buttstock to get to the bolt carrier? Furthermore, you have to deal with not losing that little charging handle pin.

-If FN considers the QB change a necessity for the operator, why did they make it a 6 set-screw operation requiring a torque wrench set to 62 lbs?

-Mk13 grenade launcher attachment. When the attachment is on the SCAR rifle, the trigger unit of the M13 grenade launcher encases the mag and effectively lengthens the mag well. Can someone show/tell me how this affects the operator to do press-tug when inserting mags?

The way I see it, the (untested) Magpul/Bushmaster has some features that trumps the SCAR for a few design ideas. The Bushmaster ACR maintains the AR style split receiver to access the bolt carrier quickly without separating receiver/stock. The QB change is done with a simple rachet lever attached. The charge handle is further forward closer to where your left hand would be anyway.

As for the PS90, well NATO toyed with the idea of a PDW shooting AP darts :p HK and FN just raced to answer with expensive steel dart guns....

I don't know, all seem really cool at first and then I've just got bored
 
Last edited:
id have a PS90 if they were the same price as they were when we could import them, and reloading components were available.

other than that i agree with the above
 
Winz said:
The FS2000 was all the rave when word about it first came about but not only is it rather expensive but the unwieldy nature of the rifle is weird. Mag changes seem to require a harakiri motion for the operator and when something goes wrong there's the awkward poop-shoot cover. With the Tavors on their way to Kanuckistan, no one here seems to still be interested in the FS2000.
Click to expand...

While I admit the FS2000 looks a little ungainly, the rifle is very well ballanced on the pistol grip. There is nothing too difficult with the mag changes, they just don't drop free like an AR. I have yet to see a feed issue with it in nearly 1000 rounds. Also, you have access to just as much of the chamber to clear a jam as most other rifles -just a different position and perspective. Keep in mind the rifle is also completely ambidexterous- a big plus.
The reason they are so hard to get is due to getting them shipped out of the States is proving so difficult -essentially most everyone has written them off as unobtanium.
If I could get hold of a Tavor, I'd do a side by side shoot off...
 
Actually I really like the PS-90. I'd have one if they were available (without having to sell body parts) and there wasn't the ammo issue.

I'd have an AUG too if they weren't prohibited :mad:

That being said I think the next big hit will be the ACR/Masada from Bushmaster. I'd like to get one geared for accuracy (match bull barrel) to use as a non-restricted varmint gun.
 
2000-3000$ for the privilege of shooting 5 rounds per mag? No thanks.

That's really all I needed to know. Sure, they look cool... but that's it.
 
Soli said:
2000-3000$ for the privilege of shooting 5 rounds per mag? No thanks.

That's really all I needed to know. Sure, they look cool... but that's it.
Click to expand...

Then you should have no more than an SKS in your collection if that is your priority...

:rolleyes:
 
Soli said:
2000-3000$ for the privilege of shooting 5 rounds per mag? No thanks.

That's really all I needed to know. Sure, they look cool... but that's it.
Click to expand...
That's just the way she goes though! Considering all semi rifles are suppose to be 5rds, there's really no difference between 5 rds in a beat up milsurp compared to 5 rds in a high speed ultra modern shooter. So, it all boils down to what looks cool and has the most value in the eyes of the owner.

I wonder if the ancient romans use to scoff at people with wrist straps on their slingshots? "Who need's a wrist strap anyway? They're expensive and they're just more parts to break. Plus with that strap you could kill more plebs in the market in less time! Ban slingshots with wrist straps!!"
 
Last edited:
beltfed said:
While I admit the FS2000 looks a little ungainly, the rifle is very well ballanced on the pistol grip. There is nothing too difficult with the mag changes, they just don't drop free like an AR. I have yet to see a feed issue with it in nearly 1000 rounds. Also, you have access to just as much of the chamber to clear a jam as most other rifles -just a different position and perspective. Keep in mind the rifle is also completely ambidexterous- a big plus.
The reason they are so hard to get is due to getting them shipped out of the States is proving so difficult -essentially most everyone has written them off as unobtanium.
If I could get hold of a Tavor, I'd do a side by side shoot off...
Click to expand...

+1.
I was never a big fan of bulpup designs, but I have to admit, I really liked the balance and feel of the FS2000.
It's a fun rifle to shoot and accuracy is decent to boot.
 
The bushmaster/Masada all looks good on the paper so it's preformance is all theoretical or based on in-house testing. The SCAR is tested by the 3rd party aka the government with certain standards. You will be a paying guinea pig or one of the civilian beta testers for Bushmaster that will benefit the later version.....or you can pay to get a polished product straight from the FN where the government had paid for a large part of the beta testing.

FN2000 is a failure, but I see that for pride they will keep it on the catalogue instead of marketing the SCAR. No one significant is buying FN2000. If it is not for the american civilian market, they probably need to close that line. I bet they are begging the Belgium government to ditch the FNC to keep the local plants opening. So far the beligum military seems to be rather half assedly buying a few here and there - sounds like political pressure than real need.

The P90 is an outdated conceptthat has died with the coldwar. Iraq has showed that when TSHTF, you want every crew servered weapons in your convoy even if you are some REMF type. Why would you want to have a P90 when you get into a serious firefight? When you are a supporting guy, and you need to shoot at something - chances are that the situation goes pretty bad and you probably wish you have mini-nuke to get out of the situation. For civilian market, the non-AP version of 5.7 is BS. A 40gr Amax clocks at 2100fps is like trying to shoot a 556 at over 300m at point blank. It is novelty item, it looks cool and it is a pure paper punching tool with expensive ammo.
 
Greentips, I agree with most of your post. Although I do believe the ACR will be decent. I don't think Magpul will let Bushmaster get away with any shortcuts for this product. The Magpul name is still associated to this rifle. So far I haven't seen anything that was crap come out of Magpul. We'll see. The concept is excellent. Just waiting for the execution.

As for the FN P-90. I don't completely agree with you there. For most military use sure, its not a good mainstream or crew weapon. Different ammo, the limitations etc. However for Police. I like it. This would be like saying the MP5 was useless. When in fact it's a very effective weapon for police roles and some specialized military uints. This is where I see the P-90 working. Small compact, 50 rounds in a mag (for non civi version), armor piercing, tumbling round, less change or ricochets and supposibly very good for not overpenetrating due to the tumbling nature. Up until only the last few years the shorty AR types weren't really considered reliable. Reliability isn't an option for police/military specialized use.

As a Civi. Yup it's a neat collector piece with fun ergonomics for CQB style practice. The ammo though is a pain. Especially since we can't use the stuff this firearm was meant to shoot. The price and ammo situation insures I'll never buy one. But... I still like it. I still like the Steryl AUG as well even though it's dated by today's standards. Both weapons were ahead of their time and fairly innovative.

The ACR isn't really anything ground breaking. It's more of an update of existing firearms. Sort of like an AR 2.0 :). The main reason shooters in Canada will flock to them is the non-restricted status and good ergonomics.
 
Last edited:
cancer said:
Ban slingshots with wrist straps!!"
Click to expand...

Funny you should say that. AFAIK, Australia has done just that.

I'd have an FS2000 if parts were available - forward ejection is the way to go, and you can make the mags come out easier by removing the rubber dust gasket. But I've seen and experienced too much breakage to own a gun without a supply chain backing it up.
 
acrashb said:
I'd have an FS2000 if parts were available - forward ejection is the way to go, and you can make the mags come out easier by removing the rubber dust gasket. But I've seen and experienced too much breakage to own a gun without a supply chain backing it up.
Click to expand...

Parts are available through FN USA
 
The "USA" part is the issue. Getting them in-country strikes me as problematic. It's hard enough getting parts for a Walther from Nicholls, who is a Canadian supplier.

Compare to Glocks and 1911's - parts everywhere.
 
The FS2000 isn't that bad of a gun. (Yes I owned one for a time and will regret selling it.) It solves the Bullpup problem of being able to shoot support side from behind cover. The system is very well thought out. When I first looked at the bolt carrier, it reminded me of the FN Minimi (M249 in US Forces speak). Compact, well balanced and points very naturally.

The SCAR is one of the best combat rifles ever produced. Uses a bolt carrier that is a close copy of the HK G36. Comfortable and points very well. Don't get too excited about this quick change barrel rage. The SCAR will have the future ability to configure to shoot the enemy's ammo (7.62 x 39) for missions when re-supply is an issue...or other Special OP / Black OP needs. The idea behind the barrel conversion is not to have the civilian shooter change it out in one minute to shoot cheap ammo and look cool. I also don't see the point of being able to immediately gain access to the bolt group and pull it out.

The P90 and MP7 do what they were designed to do very well, punch soft body armour. Don't start berating those systems because they are not the greatest combat rifles in the world. They are not designed for that. The need was to have something that was smaller and lighter than a standard 5.56mm combat rifle that could still defeat body armour.
 
greentips said:
The bushmaster/Masada all looks good on the paper so it's preformance is all theoretical or based on in-house testing. The SCAR is tested by the 3rd party aka the government with certain standards. You will be a paying guinea pig or one of the civilian beta testers for Bushmaster that will benefit the later version.....or you can pay to get a polished product straight from the FN where the government had paid for a large part of the beta testing.
Click to expand...

I want to stress this point. As mentioned at the beginning of this thread, the ACR is untested by a significant third party body and has yet to prove itself.

I have no doubt that the SCAR will serve its purpose very well.

My original comments are from a theoretical design perspective regarding the SCAR system as well as other FNs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom