Salam HealerofWorlds,
The Quran is not really transmitted like the way Hadith is transmitted. I believe your question is answered in the links below:
http://www.quransmessage.com/articles/hadith%20FM2.htm
I am quoting an excerpt from an article, the link of which I have provided below,
http://quransmessage.com/articles/hadith%20and%20sunna%20FM3.htm
The Quran or any other book for that matter will have a chain of transmission, but that chain does not say anything about the divine applications or religious authority of the transmitted material. The chain of transmission can only help us determine how accurately the information has been transmitted and also the degrees of separation from the original reporter/orater. Hadith is not a source not because of having an isnad, it is not a source because the primary source says that it (Quran) is the only source. After being convinced by the Quran's arguments of its divinity, the matter is really as simple as saying ' because the Quran says so'. This can be an answer to a lot of religious questions because the Quran a lot of times does not elaborate about the reason behind a prohibition, e.g. pork meat, is prohibited, but nowhere in the Quran does God give a reason why.
Sometimes, 'because God/Quran says so' is the only answer to a question.
The Quran is not really transmitted like the way Hadith is transmitted. I believe your question is answered in the links below:
http://www.quransmessage.com/articles/hadith%20FM2.htm
I am quoting an excerpt from an article, the link of which I have provided below,
QuoteRegrettably, many Muslims assert that the Quran has also reached us in the same manner as the Ahadith and Sunna. As discussed, the Ahadith corpus is primarily an oral propagation reliant mainly on 'ahad' transmitters and later committed to text. The Sunna remains a practical propagation of certain practices which possess the consensus of the community.
The Quran on the other hand, has reached us both by a rigorous oral and written form along with the complete consensus of the Muslim communities.
"...Thus, if the Qur'an had been transmitted only orally for the first century, sizeable variations between texts such as in the hadith and pre-Islamic poetry would be found, and if it had been transmitted only in writing, sizeable variations such as those in different transmissions of the original document of the Constitution of Medina would be found. But neither is the case with the Qur'an. There must have been a parallel written transmission limiting variation in the oral transmission to the graphic form, side by side with a parallel oral transmission preserving the written transmission from corruption. The oral transmission of the Qur'an was essentially static, rather than organic. There was a single text, and nothing, not even allegedly abrogated material, could be taken out, nor anything be put in..."
Of greater importance however, the Quran does not seek support because it has community consensus. Rather, it requires one to believe in its veracity once it has presented you with its clear arguments. No scripture can be accepted purely on the basis that the same community profess its Divine origins and have themselves sought to protect it.
Rather, an outsider can only accept its veracity based on the strengths of its claims.
So indeed, there exists a similarity with the Sunna in that the Quran has the consensus of Islamic communities. However, the practices of the communities have no authority in by themselves. Rather, they can only achieve 'religious sanction' from the 'lens' of the Quran's scrutiny.
Furthermore, if belief in the Quran's veracity is admitted, it is clear that the Quran does not support any type of 'Sunna' that does not find sanction from the Quran. For example, both 'Salah' (prayers) and 'Zakah' (alms giving) have scriptural support as to its establishment.
Therefore, Sunna practices of the early communities with regards prayer and alm's giving would be supported by the Quran. On the contrary, Sunna practices for example, involving kissing of the Black Stone, or whispering the 'Iqama' (similar recitation to the Adhan) in the ears of a new born child finds no support in the Quran and therefore should not be regarded as being part of the 'religion' instituted by the Quran.
http://quransmessage.com/articles/hadith%20and%20sunna%20FM3.htm
The Quran or any other book for that matter will have a chain of transmission, but that chain does not say anything about the divine applications or religious authority of the transmitted material. The chain of transmission can only help us determine how accurately the information has been transmitted and also the degrees of separation from the original reporter/orater. Hadith is not a source not because of having an isnad, it is not a source because the primary source says that it (Quran) is the only source. After being convinced by the Quran's arguments of its divinity, the matter is really as simple as saying ' because the Quran says so'. This can be an answer to a lot of religious questions because the Quran a lot of times does not elaborate about the reason behind a prohibition, e.g. pork meat, is prohibited, but nowhere in the Quran does God give a reason why.
Sometimes, 'because God/Quran says so' is the only answer to a question.