Gun Hub Forums banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,055 Posts
Kit?

Box of 400 rounds???

Since the 300WM is a long action and the 308 is a short to convert would require throwing away the action and stock... you could rechamber the barrel I guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
423 Posts
Charlie Petty said:
Since the 300WM is a long action and the 308 is a short to convert would require throwing away the action and stock... you could rechamber the barrel I guess.
The M24 SWS has always been built on a long action for just this reason, so no need to swap actions and stocks. They foresaw a possible need to make the conversion when they moved from the M21 to the M24, but it has always remained a long action .308. Well, until recently I suppose.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,940 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
So, adapting a weapon to .300 Win Mag for nearly 8K is a better idea than buying new weapons, in, say .338 Lapua.

Dunno much about long shooters, just trying to educate myself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,543 Posts
Damn, I need to get some government contracts! $7.8K to change a stock, bolt and barrel plus fit a suppressor. Still, I expect the price includes day/night optics upgrades and by the time you throw in that and the carrying case, the price is about right. I note some errors in the article: the long action doesn't have be be replaced, the feed lips need to be milled out to accept the larger belted case diameter and the "flash suppressor" is (most likely) going to be a sound suppressor (also does flash). If they were replacing the actions, it wouldn't be a conversion and it shouldn't take 5 years-they'd just get the barreled actions off the shelf from Remington. Taking 5 years must mean there's one old tech at the AMU match depot doing the work, I'll have to watch for job openings.

In these kinder, more sedentary days, I expect the Army expects it's short of folks willing to take the recoil of the 8.6 Super Magnum. At least during training, where a whole bunch more rounds are fired than in the real world, Mogandishu excepted. Actually, they did plan the possible conversion out beforehand as noted by a previous poster.

I do believe that the Barrett 98B is a response to a request for proposal from the Marines for a 8.6mm Super Magnum (.338 Laupa) sniper system. The Marines have also done changes to the M40 series, shortening the barrel and fitting a suppressor system amoung the changes. [Thereby also setting the stage for a need for a longer range system :thumbsup: ]
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,055 Posts
I was struck when I read the thing that it sounded much more like internet bmpf than factual reporting

To me a kit is something easily installed by the user and a major barrel change ain't. I also wonder what they would do about the bolt face.

I know that some 300WM is already in use but it probably would give an increase in effective range over the 7.62. But since 50s are already in service would it be prudent to add an entirely different caliber when 50 is already plentiful.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,543 Posts
Charley, .50 BMG ball may be plentiful in theater. However, it's mean radius of dispersion leaves a whole lot to be desired when engaging point targets at extended ranges. .50 Match probably doesn't exist outside specialized units, so the additional caliber isn't really an issue. Besides, our guys have traded with troops from other nations for match quality ammo in other calibers. If we don't have it, someone else might. At least in 8.6 mm SM, getting some from allied forces in the area would be faster than getting from some supply dump in Kabul.

As I noted above, the entire bolt would be replaced when the action was milled and the new barrel fitted.

I expect in this case, "kit", means that someone figured out what parts were necessary and developed packages of all the goodies. Gives new meaning to the phrase "some assembly required".
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,055 Posts
It's coming back to me... NSSF had a bit in their weekly release a few weeks ago about Remington winning a contract for an "upgrade"...

I will never understand how these things work... they are required to use the receiver and trigger but I find it hard to believe that results in any cost saving... :?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
220 Posts
I can see the 5 year time frame. You do a batch, send those to the field, wait for the units to send the old ones back, convert those, send them to the next unit, and repeat until the total inventory has been converted.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
973 Posts
Charlie Petty said:
I will never understand how these things work... they are required to use the receiver and trigger but I find it hard to believe that results in any cost saving... :?
Seems a little like the MEU(SOC) pistols: the only original part was the WWII era frame.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
814 Posts
Mechanically, the idea of buying a long action in .308, so maybe in the future you could re-build it to .300 WM if you need/wanted to, is stupid. As in only a moron would do it that way.

However, look at it from the viewpoint of government procurement: rifles are consumable items. If you buy something that can be re-built and upgraded, you can do that in the future with a "simple" upgrade package.

If the Army had bought .308-specific rifles back then, to buy .300 WM rifles they'd have to do the whole procurement dance all over again; request, bids, testing, legal challenges, etc. If they re-build the existing ones, it takes five years to convert the whole fleet. if they had to buy new, they'd spend five years just getting to the point of signing a contract.

Someone was very clever, working in the constraints of a perverse system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,714 Posts
Read the article too. My humble opinions; First, putting a Suppressor on a 300Winmag is much akin to the lord putting 38Ds on a cloistered Nun! Second, is it worth all that money for a round that extends useful range of the end-item about 400 yards? The one sniper I believe in stated that the 300Winmag was an 1100 yard gun. That was Carlos Hathcock. While I agree with Pat's assessment about the long-action and playing within the convoluted procurement system, I have to say that they'd be much better off going to say, Accuracy-International, and contracting for 5,000 rifles in .338Lapua. That way, they get the rifles much faster as AI already has a race-ready 338L that's accurate as all getout. Then they'd be good to 1500 yards. Anything past that they either break out the Barretts' or call in Arty. This simplifies the supply-chain emmensely, two rifles to buy spares and ammo for.

As for the long-action thing. It makes sense on the level that the long-action is stronger than the med. or short-action rifles and it's more rigid. Makes for a more accurate rifle. Look at what happens with a stronger action in the M1 Garand. Some receivers have probably seen as many as five or six barrels and are still going. Longevity is a quality all it's own.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
814 Posts
In an ideal world, back when the Army was first doing this, they would have done a parallel-track program:

First, an updated and improved .308. "We want a better rifle, with longer life, more accuracy, and the same .308 performance we've been using. An off-the-shelf product will receiver primary consideration."

Second, extra range. "The Army wants a sniper rifle that reaches past the .308, to the distance of the biggest artillery round safety radius. At this point we do not care what action, or caliber. We will entertain and test rifles every five years until we find what we like. Guys, go to work." Don't try to guide, micro-manage or overly define the end result. Just tell 'em what you want.

But, alas, we know it doesn't work that way.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,277 Posts
While the suppressor does nothing for the supersonic crack of the projectile, it does serve a few useful purposes. It helps reduce recoil, flash, and dust signature. Sound suppressed .300 Win Mag rifles are already in service with SOCOM. For instance, NSWC-Crane modified the barrels of Mk 13 sniper rifles to accept the sound suppressor from the Mk 11 Mod 0 rifle.

As for range, the new Mk 248 Mod 1 load with the 220gr Sierra MatchKing is reported to reach out 300yds further than the older Mk 248 Mod 0 with the 190gr SMK.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,714 Posts
Daniel Watters said:
While the suppressor does nothing for the supersonic crack of the projectile, it does serve a few useful purposes. It helps reduce recoil, flash, and dust signature. Sound suppressed .300 Win Mag rifles are already in service with SOCOM. For instance, NSWC-Crane modified the barrels of Mk 13 sniper rifles to accept the sound suppressor from the Mk 11 Mod 0 rifle.

As for range, the new Mk 248 Mod 1 load with the 220gr Sierra MatchKing is reported to reach out 300yds further than the older Mk 248 Mod 0 with the 190gr SMK.
Dan, do you really believe somebody who gets shot at and doesn't even hear the report for for two-three seconds is gonna look for a very small puff of smoke. They're gonna be starring at their buddy with a third-eye and getting small. Unless they're working within 300 yards(Which, of course, obviates the need for a 300WM)Flash and dust(Which they're all trained to minimize by placing a mat under the muzzle) won't be a problem. And you can bet the cartridges will be loaded with low flash/low smoke propellent. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for 'Tacticool objects' when they have a useful purpose. I would just see more usefulness in a good combination Muzzle-brake/flashhider. An area that's underexplored. Ever see a M4 in the dark? Major 'Here I am' sign.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
Iraq dust is so pervasive that a mat wouldn't be much help, especially in a fast breaking fight. Hopefully we won't be there much longer though...

The M4 at night with GI ammo is no big deal. TTBOMK, all .mil issue ammo uses flash retarded powder. That combined with a flash suppressor works fine. A real suppressor would be even better and I've always wondered my .mil didn't buy something like Innovative Arms's "Grunt" suppressor - about the length and 3/4s the diameter of a soft drink can. Works great!

When the M24 was first developed and fielded, I was at FT. Benning. The trials and tribulations the Army went through were just pathetic. There was strong opposition to a bolt gun led by the AMU. Lots of folks wanted to stick with the M21 despite the many issues with that platform.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,714 Posts
Ahhh, 'Flash-retarded powder'! That explains what I saw. I was at Knob Creek year before last and a guy cut loose with about five mags on Saturday night with an M4. Lit him up like a Marquee! Musta been commercial ammo.
Thanks for the info Al!!
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top