American Snipers Go Magnum
June 18, 2009: The U.S. Army has ordered 38.4 million rounds of .300 Winchester magnum ammunition for its newly modified M-24 sniper rifles, as well as similar SOCOMs Mk13 models. The new ammo will cost about $1.30 per round. The .300 Winchester magnum will be ordered in minimum lots of 56,160 rounds (117 boxes of 480 rounds each). The entire 38.4 million rounds will last a while.
All this is in response to requests from snipers for a longer range weapon, but not one as bulky and heavy as the 30 pound .50 caliber rifle (which is good to about 2,000 meters). Thus the army is modifying existing M24 rifles to fire the more powerful .300 Winchester Magnum round. It was felt that this gave the snipers all the additional range they needed, without requiring a much heavier rifle. SOCOM has been using this approach since the early 1990s.

The calls were loudest from snipers operating in Afghanistan, where U.S. Army and Marine Corps shooters wanted a sniper rifle that can consistently get kills out to 1,800 meters. The current 7.62mm round was good only to about 800 meters. The 300 Winchester magnum is a more powerful, but not much larger, round than the current 7.62mm one. By replacing the barrel and receiver of the $6,700 M24 sniper rifle, for about $4,000, you can fire the .300 Winchester Magnum round. This is longer (at 7.62 x 67mm) than the standard 7.62x51mm round, and is good out to 1,200 meters. An improved version of the round is expected to extend that range another 200 meters or so.

There was another option, and that was to replace the barrel and receiver of the M24 sniper rifles to handle the .338 (8.6mm) Lapua Magnum round. Thus you still have a 17 pound sniper rifle, but with a round that can hit effectively out to about 1,600 meters. British snipers in Iraq, and especially Afghanistan, have found the Lapua Magnum round does the job at twice the range of the standard 7.62x51mm round. The 8.6mm round entered use in the early 1990s, and became increasingly popular with police and military snipers. Dutch snipers have used this round in Afghanistan with much success, and have a decade of experience with these larger caliber rifles. British snipers in Afghanistan are also using the new round, having converted many of their 7.62mm sniper rifles. Recognizing the popularity of the 8.6mm round, Barrett, the pioneer in 12.7mm sniper rifles, came out with a 15.5 pound version of its rifle, chambered for the 8.6mm. But the U.S. preferred the lighter .300 Winchester magnum solution.

This is not the first time the U.S. Army has quickly responded to sniper needs. Two years ago, in response to requests from snipers operating in urban areas of Iraq, the U.S. Army began issuing the M110 SASS (Semi-Automatic Sniper System). Urban snipers often have multiple targets, at relatively short ranges. They needed a semiautomatic rifle. Previously, many snipers have had success using tuned up M-14s (from the 1960s) as sniper rifles. While semi-automatic and rugged, the M-14 wasn't designed to be a sniper rifle. The M110 was a better semi-automatic sniper rifle, since it is inherently more reliable and accurate. As far back as World War II, it was known that there were many situations where a semi-automatic sniper rifle would come in handy. But it's taken over half a century to solve the reliability and accuracy problems.

The M110 is a based on the AR-10 rifle. The U.S. Navy has been buying a similar weapon, the SR25. This is also known as the Mk11 Sniper Rifle System (SRS). These new semi-automatic sniper rifles are 7.62mm weapons based on the designs of M-16 creator, Gene Stoner. The basis for the M-16 was the AR-15, and a 7.62mm version of that weapon was called the AR-10. About half the parts in the SR25 are interchangeable with those in the M-16. The Stoner sniper rifles achieved its high accuracy partly by using a 20 inch heavy floating barrel. The "floating" means that the barrel is attached only to the main body of the rifle to reduce resonance (which throws off accuracy.)

The M110 weighs 17.3 pounds in combat, and about 70 pounds with all components of the system. The M110 can use a ten or twenty round magazine. The 40.5 inch long rifle can have a six inch tube attached to the barrel, which reduces the noise and flash made when the rifle fires, and largely eliminates nearby dust rising into the air, which often gives away the snipers position.

The M110 will gradually replace many of the bolt-action M24s, while the remaining M24s will be converted to fire the .300 Winchester Magnum, for those snipers working somewhere, like Afghanistan, where more range is needed..


––––––––––––-

We pay way too much for this stuff:

Replace the reciever I thought the M24 was already a long action so it could accomodate the 300 Win. Mag

This is long overdue.

Should have gone with the Lapua IMO.  Probably a case of "not invented here" syndrome.

Link to source?

The barrel is the most expensive part (not counting the scope).

But still, $4k is a bit much.  I'm sure that figure includes installation and smithing, but dang, you know?

.338 Lapua FTW

WTF is this 8.6mm round they keep mentioning?

Or is our author just a dyslexic idiot?

_MaH

Well then that article has lost all credibility because the author is an idiot

No the Lapua is too close to what the 50 BMG does you need something smaller and cheaper. I have shot precision 300 WM for a long time it is an amazing round.

LINK

I can see how the M24 might cost $6700 with the high end optics and such.  But $4000 to rebarrel it?  Bullshit.

And they shouldn't have to replace the receiver.  The Army went with a Remington 700 long action so that it could later be converted to larger calibers if it became necessary.

Should have gone with the .338 laupa. The Ar-10 varients would have filled the old ranges needed out to 800yrds and the 338 could have done 16-1800. The 300 is only going to be able to pull off 12-14. If you've got to rebarrel and change the receiver anyway you might as well have gone with complete new rifles. They could sell the old M24's off pretty easily.

reading is key

Thank god...now maybe I can get some Mil-Surp LC brass for one of my elk rifles.  

Shortage of 300 Mag next

Not all THAT close to a 50,  I like the 300WM, Shoot it  a lot in competition.  The Lapua would have been better in this application.

8mm is roughly .338 caliber.



 

Hasn't AMU been using it awhile? Seem to recall a Shooting USA episode...

Wait until they get their hands on your healthcare...



$13,000 to set a bone that is already healed, and another $9,000 for a cast.





 

Yes.

8.6x70 is .338 LM

Who's the idiot again?

I think the AMU uses a 300 WSM.

dumb move, .338 lapua FTW

Tagged.

Wait, if they have to replace the reciever, they'd also have to replace the stock, right?

What's left? The trigger and optics?

Fuck you!  I'm trying to read several things at once!

<––-Walks away with his newly earned shame

_MaH

Maybe Uncle was concerned about Lapua's rep for short barrel lives

They may be replacing the receivers because of high round counts, not because of compatability issues.  The high cost also more than likely includes spare parts and support.

Yep



 

While the check book is still open why not just make the jump straight to .338 Lapua?

Possible, though barrel erosion is a factor with the 300WM as well.

No shit I work in health care and was just told how great socialized medicine would be by a patient.. "just look at mexico and canada and how cheap their drugs are there"

I told him to let me know when mexico delivers the next drug discovery or development, and reminded him he would most likely die before he could see a doctor that could diagnose the problem he has and write him a cheap prescription... but thats another discussion. Totally.

In all fairness, ammo cost and R&D may have been a deciding factor too.  Good 300WM loads are essentially "off the shelf" in the US.

The Lapua may have required a development program or an overseas supplier.

Can't recall where I heard it, but I heard a figure of only 500 rounds of barrel life for Lapua vs. at least 2000 for 300WM...

You heard wrong.  Do you really think other mils around the world would field a rifle that has 500 rounds of barrel life?

My BIL was shooting a 300WM in the stan last year

Probably a Remington barrel.  I have a Rock on my .338 and it's logged 1200 rounds and still shooting under 1/2 MOA.  Mike's products kick ass.

What is wrong with .338 like our allies use?????

Really?  I wonder which bullet weight they arrived at that conclusion with. IIRC foriegn militaries uses a 250gr bullet at somewhere around 3000FPS.  

To other militaries?

They would probably send them to captain crunch before letting them fall into the hands of civilians.

This

It's a good thing I reload my hunting rounds and have plenty of supplies.

Good point.  Start banging magnums through it after years of hard use and some internal stresses might snap.

 

They are not select fire so there is no reason they can't, though I agree they will not.  I'd bet said rifles are more worn out than some might think or that the USMil would want to admit.

Followed by increase in production and more common civi usage due to military use.  How many of you guys own a Beretta M9?

The new 300 win mag 220gr MK 248 MOD 1 has an effective range of 1500 yards...The military chose this over 338 Lapue due to cost...

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2009infantrysmallarms/tuesdaysessioniii8524.pdf

Why wouldn't they just rechamber existing barrels?  Still .30 caliber.

Twist rates, barrels already worn, extractor issues,  receiver needs to be tweaked to feed correctly,  Several reasons come to mind.

I was wondering that.  I saw the title and said to myself "what happened to the .338 LM?"

At least they are giving the snipers what they're wanting.  (It does sound expensive, but we are talking about people that sign contracts for $100K toilet seats and hammers after all...

Snipers are cheap as all get out-they take out targets that would otherwise require air strikes, arty, etc.

They should have sold the .308s to us and bought new rifles with the profit +$4000