02-11-2005, 06:52 AM
You asked for it (a mate of mine merged a a-10 and a canberra together), I give you the The Wartberra!
![[Image: wartberra.jpg]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v207/BOB.T/wartberra.jpg)
02-11-2005, 08:25 AM
Here\'s what I know of the SCAR.
Not many of those CQB Heavies were ordered. Most of them are DMR\'s and other types. I think it\'s basically replacing the M14 altogether.
The military wants a collapsable stock, and it looks like it\'s folding so it\'s not a direct rip off of the XM-8. It\'s just what they want.
The charging handle can be taken off and put on the opposite side if you prefer to change it. Some say it lets in more sand and dirt in but I doubt that it would matter anyways. It\'s a FN weapon.
I don\'t like the front sight post though. It looks like it could snag on stuff. I think it would be better if it could fold.
Wouldn\'t it be cool if the .276 pederson could be reinvented and issued in this thing?
Not many of those CQB Heavies were ordered. Most of them are DMR\'s and other types. I think it\'s basically replacing the M14 altogether.
The military wants a collapsable stock, and it looks like it\'s folding so it\'s not a direct rip off of the XM-8. It\'s just what they want.
The charging handle can be taken off and put on the opposite side if you prefer to change it. Some say it lets in more sand and dirt in but I doubt that it would matter anyways. It\'s a FN weapon.
I don\'t like the front sight post though. It looks like it could snag on stuff. I think it would be better if it could fold.
Wouldn\'t it be cool if the .276 pederson could be reinvented and issued in this thing?
02-11-2005, 09:09 PM
Yellowbelly i thought that the cqb heavy is only cqb because of its barrel length which can be modified to make it a normal carbine.
02-12-2005, 12:41 AM
yeah that\'s right tomcat. It just has a shorter barrel. But I wonder if the longer version have a longer upper reciever because an 18\" barrel might look kinda funky if it\'s so short.