Kinetic Development Group has announced the MREX, a new M-LOK equipped forend for the SCAR platform. The full release can be read below:
Easton, MD—15 JAN 15—Kinetic Development Group LLC
Kinetic Development Group (KDG) is proud to announce the debut of their first SCARcentric product – the MREX.
The SCAR is one of the most tested, reliable high-end weapons systems of our time. USSOCOM has put more rounds through the SCAR in testing than any other small arms platform in US history. Our forces have carried it into battle against our enemies on multiple continents. It can be accurately said that the SCAR is reliable and durable as an AK and as light and accurate (and nearly as ergonomic) as an AR15/M4. It is well engineered carbine…but what the heck happened when the FN Engineers designed the front end of the SCAR? Many shooters compare it to a 6 inch piece of 2×4 with cheese graters on all 4 sides! Where are you supposed to put your support hand if you have even one accessory mounted to those plastic rails?
Darren Mellors, David Loeser and AJ Lafferty, formerly of LWRCI, founded Kinetic Development Group to find solutions to problems with various high quality small arms platforms. The team recognized this as one of the shortcomings of the FN SCAR L/H.
KDG cringed at the thought of our troops dealing with the crowded front end of a weapon that seemed to have forgotten the shooter must be able to grasp it effectively. The standard SCAR forend forces Warfighters to compromise on the way they shoot as well as their choice of accessories. There should be no need for such a compromise, so KDG set out to make a change.
You can buy any number of ‘cheese grater’ Picatinny forearm extensions to bolt on in the hopes of increasing effectiveness. However, by adding the MREX forearm, you have the certainty of doing so. The shooter will have room not just for desired accessories, but also more area to comfortably grip the rifle. Changing the barrel on a SCAR while using other ‘furniture’ systems can be a difficult ordeal. Where other receiver extensions fail the MREX succeeds by allowing quick change of different barrel assemblies. KDG offers three lengths to accommodate standard and short barrels, and offer negative space mounting options in MLOK and the KDG standardized modular rail system.
The MREX is also compatible with FN’s MK-13 EGLM grenade launcher with the MREX Grenade Launcher accessory kit.
With the MREX, a shooter need not adapt shooting technique to properly use a properly equipped SCAR. The weapon itself is changed to suit individual needs and is done with engineering grace and precision. The MREX solution adds minimal weight to the firearm; what it does add is minimal and well balanced. It increases the accessory capability, improving proper placement and increasing weapon ergonomics, for instance by offering a rail step-down in front of the BUIS to mount lights and lasers. Mounting your PEQ here not only tucks it away with a very low profile, but also reduces the height over bore axis reducing the offset of your IR laser illuminator.
We are confident you will be astonished at how different an MREX-equipped weapon shoots and feels. Watch for this and other innovative KDG products coming soon.
The initial paragraph makes me wonder if they have actually talked to people who have deployed with the SCAR family. There is a reason the SMUs don’t use them.
Care to elaborate?
There are some US special operations units who run the SCAR. Not saying they’re SMU, but they are SpecOps.
Care to elaborate?
It’s a weapon that is suited for the range, not combat. There are real reasons that it wasn’t adopted and they weren’t only financial.
While great in theory, the SCAR is NOT a reliable weapon and has been proven in combat to be hazardous to the health of the weapons operator. Thats why many prefer to carry older weapons that they were hoping to have a better replacement for ( i.e the scar) than actually carry the scar proper. With that being said, it would be awesome if this company could fix the issues of this gun that FN won’t fix, like it not getting enough gas to push the bolt back and reload a round after shots reliably. If this company could get it working right, it would be a great gun, but as of now, its not reliable enough for anyone in their right mind to trust it in combat.
That’s interesting and I am NOT doubting what you say. I have an early commercial model that I have put a couple of thousand rounds through without cleaning once and it hasn’t had a single malfunction. Granted, I wasn’t shooting in true combat conditions but this wasn’t just straight square range use either. I just cleaned if for the first time and the gas block key/cover/switch (I am not going to look up the correct name for the part just to act like I know what to call it) was locked up to the block with carbon and took some tools to get it out. It was pretty dang dirty. I would like to see any testing or documentation out there about issues if only because I have learned that anything “new” often grows a “I heard…” reputation that sometimes isn’t deserved.
I had high hopes for the SCAR. Light weight 7.62 battle rifle paired with a 1-6 or a 3-18 for longer range. However, I ended up sticking with a much heavier 16 inch SR. The only reason some spec ops still use it is for two reasons. 1. Its the only 16 in or shorter 7.62 gun they can get their hands on, and it was new and different. Not only is the gas system and rail length an issue, so is the trigger (the Mk20 trigger is ok), Barrel change is not as time saving as switching your 14.5 and 10 inch M4 uppers, recoil impulse is not great. The suppressor they shipped with is the longest, heaviest, loudest that could have been designed. Better off running a TitanQD from a 2010. This is the problem when building guns to meet a requirement list. It is like MDMP, sometimes you get a crazy ass product. Sometimes a RDM model is much better. You pick an existing platform that is an 80 percent solution and throw your resources at making it meet your needs.
The people who I have heard speak ill of this rifle, also located in Virginia Beach, note undergassing in addition to a host of issues that arise when you’re carrying the rifle long distances, in bad weather, and crap temperatures. I’m in no way dismissing your thousands of rounds at the range, as that’s all I have to show on my rifles aside from occasional mountain rucks, but thousands of rounds at a range isn’t as likely to induce malfunction as a few hundred rounds under stress and exposure. In fact the only people I hear regularly speak well of the SCAR platform are those who own it for recreation or those whose work is in relatively forgiving environments.
The MREX looks like a solid add-on for the people who are forced to use this rifle and I can’t wait to hear how it stacks up to the Primary Weapons Systems SRX
Most reports of under gassing are simply user ignorance. Number 1 there is a gas regulator. Number 2 they try to use m118LR in 13 inch guns. Yes sir using the right gas in a vehicle is important. Same with a weapon. 118 is for 24 inch barrels. Slow burning powder. The Scar H is an 8 puns 7.62. That’s amazing capability.
SOCOM dropped the SCAR because it would not hold an optic. They found after extensive firing the rifle would vibrate lose almost every optic they put on it. I have a SCAR 17 and I really like it but the recoil of the damn thing shuts off my peltors every few shots.
Let me open an old wound.
https://soldiersystems.net/2010/05/11/scar-reaches-milestone-c/
Who needs that much rail space? Put your damn hand on the magwell like everyone else. “Hey let me take apart my $3000 battle tested rifle and put some brand new company’s accessory on it so I can make it look different and void my warranty?” FN knows what they are doing, they have been in business for like a hundred years? Stop fuc**** with perfection.
This was a joke, right?