Previous Post
Next Post

Let’s say you’re an FN SCAR devotee because…well, who isn’t? You love it because it’s just the thing for knockin’ down those pepper poppers when you’re shooting 3-gun or popping the hell out of feral hogs, maybe even the occasional white tail. But you’d like something a little more maneuverable in a home defense gun. A rifle with a shorter barrel would be ideal. Well prepare to crack your piggy bank because your problems are about to be solved. According to super secret sources who shall not be named, after years of rumors and much hankering by SCAR owners, a certain gun retailer is about to feature actual in-the-flesh FN factory 10-inch SCAR barrels for your purchasing pleasure. And more are in the pipeline through distributors to other shops across the country. Sadly, we don’t have pricing info (word is about $1,100). And, of course, you’ll have to weave your way through the regulatory thickets before taking possession of your shorty so plan accordingly. Still, how cool is that?

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. I know form follows function. And as a Mosin owner I have little room to talk about the apperance of other guns. But that is ugly. Mkaes an AK look good in comparison.

    • Truer words were never spoken.

      And why spend $1100? A decent gunsmith can mod your rod for a whole lot less once you secure a permission slip.


      NOTE: While “sapor in rebus sit, non disputandum” is truth, my mosin is a lot prettier than a lot of modern, ER, stuff. Narf!

    • I dont understand your sense of aestethics? Why do Americans (not all, but many) complain how guns are ugly, then buy a laminate stock in a rainbow pattern?(Im talking about Volquartsen). Guns like the AK or Korobov are beautiful(even this SCAR abomination is nice in some way, but still a 25 cm barrel for 308?)

  2. I know the SCAR is a good gun, but it really looks like some kind of prehistoric fish that killed its prey by appearing in its line of sight and mortifying it to death. It is shockingly ugly.

  3. Ready, fire, aim beat me to it. And the (American version) Tavor requires no federal SBR fee, delay or complications.

  4. If I am wrong pls correct me, but the ten inch barrel will make it an SBR under NFA? Won’t that require additional expense? Just wondering what would prevent them from just issusing a bunch of receivers as pistols ala T/C and its pistol frame. You could then save the SBR fees right?

    • Yeah except the SCAR is better than both overall for a number of reasons.

      AR10s are generally unreliable, expensive junk (with the exception perhaps of the PWS, MR762, LMT, Larue, and Noveske). Finding a accurate one isn’t a problem; finding a sub 2500 dollar, reliable one, though, is like finding a albino unicorn in a snowstorm. and then guess what? the parts aren’t generally interchangeable. Lovely.

      M1As are excellent rifles, although obsolete. Much knowledge is required to properly maintain and lubricate them, much money will be spent to purchase the proper cleaning and maintenance tools, functioning magazines, and accessories should you decide to mount a optic (Sadlak mounts arent exactly cheap). The Springfields are generally hit or miss; I would say most are good, but there are many bad ones (poorly aligned receivers). To get a proper one, you will spend more than the 1500 price point of a springfield (fulton armory, armscorp, etc). I consider them the 1911 of the battle rifle world.

      Then you have the SCAR 17. Its lighter, has significantly less recoil than any battle rifle, is ambidextrous, is truly plug and play, is characteristically more accurate, and less expensive in the long run should you decide to accessorize it. For a tactical battle rifle, I would be hard pressed to decide between one and a FAL (I own both unsurprisingly). For a reliable budget battle rifle, nothing beats the PTR91.

      I’m not replying to Lance since I’ve argued these points countless times before, but I want people to be given good information should they venture into the comments section of a article.

      Anyways, I’m signing off from TTAG after being on a Alaskan adventure. I have decided to fly back and stay until October! >:D

    • For the price, maybe. If given a choice between the three guns (with the cost not being an option), you would probably be mad to not choose the SCAR (I own the other two guns, BTW).

  5. I am not a fan of full power rifles for home defense unless you live on 25 acres out in the country. For the rest of us any miss if going to be a potential collateral damage threat. If you want to give yourself an advantage against an uninvited guest who appears in the middle of the night a pistol caliber carbine is a more practical choice.

    I do have to say that the short barreled SCAR is “one ugly motherf**cker.” I think the Beretta Cx4 is way cooler. It looks like a 40 watt plasma rifle.

    • I Would rather trust a .308 JSP or HP than a 9x19mm or .45 ACP, the secret is building a house with concrete instead of plaster.

  6. Did FNH purchase this site or they still have their g strings in a knot over losing the military contract? I bet this shorter version only works if you feed it special ammo. That seems to be a SCAR specialty.

    • You kidding me? The only thing I haven’t run through my SCAR 17 is corrosive primed crap. Even cheapo off-brand dirty-as-hell steel cased stuff has run like clockwork. Are we talking about the same rifle here?

  7. I have an SBR, e.g. a Standard Barreled Rifle.

    If I’m of a mood for a short barrel, I pick up a handgun.

  8. “Sadly, we don’t have pricing info (word is about $1,100)…how cool is that?”

    A barrel for $1100? That’s as cool as lava. That’s as cool as a giant carbon-fiber wing on a ’90 Civic. That’s as cool as a three-way with a married couple from Yonkers in their retirement community in Punta Gorda. That’s as cool as the original side of the pillow. Cool, man.

    • Y’know, I’m goin’ to be liftin’ some o’ those lines — with proper attribution, o’ course.


  9. Id hate to see the muzzle flash, and I’ve shot my jungle carbine without the flash hider, id imagine this is way worse, this for home defense!?! You must be on crack.

    • Here’s one that doesn’t.

      But for the record, I don’t consider GLOCK-brand GLOCKs to be ugly. They’re plain, and functional. They’re not pretty, they just “are.”

    • No Glocks. But I own Mosins and an SKS. I think I’m qualified to call a gun ugly. Also a Sigma. Which is Glockish. The ugliest part about a Glock is the price. 600 bucks for mass produced plastic?

      • $400 for me!!! One of my prefered FFLs just became a Glock LEO dealer and Fire/EMS personel are eligable. Now I actualy have an excuse to buy another Glock.

    • In a half century it’ll be retro and cool, but right now it’s no swan.

      Not that a TT-33 will win any beauty contests, but I’d own one o’ them over any two Glocks.

      Just how I’m wired, though. Feel free to think me the one with no taste.

      ‘Course, I’m right…

  10. A 10 ” 308 as a home defense firearm?
    I used to hunt rabbits w/16″ 308, in the desert, that’s how my tinnitus started.
    Sometimes the jokes write themselves!

  11. velocity on that puppy is gonna suffer, may as well shoot the .300 aac or the 7.62×39, that’s a hell of a lot of powder wasted and a hell of an expensive round to waste on a 10 inch barrel. smh. I don’t get .308 in 16inch barrels, much less and SBR like that

  12. I’m sure most folks who dropped the fat stacks of cash for a SCAR have the dollars to share for this if they want it… looks regardless.

  13. Still, how cool is that? That’s F-N cool. Get out the NFA for the sbr, asap.
    Break the piggy bank and get a can for it while you’re waiting for the barrel.

    • At least with a can it’ll be less likely to ruin your ears as a “home defense” weapon, and the short barrel will keep the can from sticking into your neighbor’s yard.

      Silly overall, though.

  14. Modern sport/combat rifles are becoming so boring. If I’m spending time and money with the nfa system it sure won’t be something as hideously ugly as a scar.

  15. I don’t see the point of a 10″ barrel on a .223 or .308. Compared to a 16″ barrel, there is a colossal performance decrease and increase in muzzle blast. Now, with 300BLK a 10″ barrel is useful. Otherwise consider a Tavor.

  16. Wow, I am having a hard time imagining anyone using a SBR version of a SCAR HEAVY as a “home defense” weapon.

    First, it would be horrendously deafening and you would have to wear ear pro of you may as well just throw flash bangs in your house at the bad guys without wearing hearing protection. Same effect. You would stun yourself and potentially rupture your ear drums you would not be able to deal with a threat.

    Second, can we talk about “over penetraction” in your typical suburban American house.

    Cool factor? Way high.

    Practical factor? Way low.

    • The standard barrel length on the SCAR H/17S is 16″…carbine length. Put a great optic on it and you’ve got a very useful precision rifle, as well as one that can double for all the other things you can do with a carbine in certain “social” situations.

Comments are closed.