Fired 6.56 mm and 7.62 mm Evolys today. Hugely impressed.

Did FN UK give any information on future developments in their rifle range - will we see a ‘new’ SCAR variant ( apart from the NRCH ) ?

 I got some hands on at DSEI of Evolys and also was impressed with it , crazy light in the 7.62 version yet solid feel .

what did the British Army guys think ?

Did you do any sustained fire testing, or just burst fire for demonstration? Curious how that light barrel does.

I assume it was a very smooth shooter, yeah?

The SCAR Mk 2 already offers several improvements that improve it, including a non-reciprocating charging handle.  FNH has also adjusted the damper rates on the return spring, further softening felt recoil for both versions. There will definitely be a Mk 3 and the Mid-Range Gas Gun (MRGG) shown at SOFIC and MDM exhibitions last week shows the direction of travel. As things stand, you could adopt Mk 2 SCAR today and you would have the best non-AR15 5.56 mm rifle currently available IMO. 

With Evolys we fired 800 rounds from each gun over three hours. Any gun in any calibre will start to overheat after 250 rounds have been continuously fired. By firing controlled bursts with 2- or 3-minute pauses after each 50-round or 100-round belts meant that both guns could carry-on firing without a barrel change.

The really clever thing is the one-piece aluminium receiver. This is every bit as strong as the riveted body of the MAG58, but it has a hydraulic buffer which absorbs recoil allowing light weight and controllable recoil to be combined in a single weapon design. 

Looking forward to seeing SCAR in 6.8x51 mm.

Do you feel that the lack of a QC barrel is a significant problem for this gun, should it go beyond the 'door kicker' type role? I know its meant to be an 'assault machine gun' or whatever terminology they used. So I'm curious in what way it can be used outside of that from your experience.

FN said it would be easy to incorporate a quick change barrel if customers wanted this feature - but it would add system weight. 

Seems like FN did their homework before developing the Evolys. Most users told them that machine guns used in the light role (dismounted) weren't routinely deployed with a second barrel. 

Not to mention QC barrels present some issues now that you are off irons as its very hard to get no POI shift from barrel to barrel each change ,less of an issue with iron signts as each barrel front sight could be adjusted to for its zero

nincomp said:

gatnerd said: Regardless of what word he used, he's describing the bolt bouncing off the rear of the receiver, adding a bit more power to the bolts forward stroke then spring power alone.  Some buffers can also add power to the forward stroke.  A spring type can prevent solid impact with the rear of the receiver,  if it is not fully compacted at the end of the bolt's travel, then use the stored energy to accelerate the bolt forward.  The amount of energy returned to the bolt would likely be higher than if it had impacted the rear receiver.   A hydraulic buffer can also return energy for forward bolt motion, although by design, a certain fraction of the energy has been absorbed.  Nevertheless, since a hydraulic buffer, like an automotive shock absorber system, can be combined with springs and valved for relatively high damping in compression and low damping in "rebound",  it can return a significant amount of energy to accelerate the bolt back to its original position.

So this leads me to the question whether one could use this to increase the ROF to WWII German rates ...

Happy to hear that. Call me a conservative, but I don't trust any mainline SAW/LMG that doesn't have a QC barrel.