What do ya'll think? AR15 or AR10? Educate me please, as I know nothing about SPR's or any type of precision AR. Pictures of your set up is a plus. Thanks guys!!!  

I would go 6.8 if I had it to do over again probably, but this one still shoots amazing groups.

This is a 300 win mag with all the goodies, and was built by GA persision for 1600 yrds
I shoot it at only 1000 yrds [wont post moa's or someone will want pics to verify]









Here is a DPMS  SASS in .762   which I shoot ok with up to 6 to 800 yrds

When I was deciding on my varmint build, I figured I would need to do a ton of shooting with my rifle to master it and get up to sniper quality. Then I would have to shoot regularly to maintain that level of consistency.

With 6.8mm and .308 this was not financially worthwhile. However, I hope to get a 6.8mm upper just to keep around the house and in case I want to hunt heavier game.

The low recoil allows fast target acquisition and quick follow-up shots. I also enjoy the ability to put a Ciener kit in the rifle and shoot .22 for practice and possibly squirrel hunting. Aguila SubSonic Sniper 60gr .22 ammo is perfect for my 1/9 twist and is very quiet, and can be made even quieter than the hammer falling with a suppresser. This seems to be a strong tactical advantage in my opinion.

The Ciener with SSS allows for even faster follow up shots, and I can fairly easily shoot 20-30rds into a 6in area in only a few seconds at 50 yards. The recoil is non-existent.

I prefer shooting my .223 Ar-15 over my M14, but I do not have any experience yet with the 6.8mm

height=8

Quoted: I would go 6.8 if I had it to do over again probably, but this one still shoots amazing groups. i24.photobucket.com/albums/c29/DM1975/Sniper%20Rifle/DSCF1867.jpg

What's that hand grip you've got on there?  Looks comfy as heck.

I lean towards the AR-10 setup for long range work unless you are only shooting at paper targets.  Will a 5.56mm reach out there?  Sure, they've been sucessfully using it in matches for years and even in the Marines you are shooting out to 500 meters on the KD course.  However, while the 5.56mm may reach out that far, what kind of damage it does at those ranges is another story and why I prefer a 7.62mm rifle.  Now you have an accurate round plus the power to reach out there as well as do some damage to targets made out of more than paper.  

height=8

Quoted: What's that hand grip you've got on there?  Looks comfy as heck.

That looks like a Badger Ordnance Stabilizer.

Quoted: I lean towards the AR-10 setup for long range work unless you are only shooting at paper targets.  Will a 5.56mm reach out there?  Sure, they've been sucessfully using it in matches for years and even in the Marines you are shooting out to 500 meters on the KD course.  However, while the 5.56mm may reach out that far, what kind of damage it does at those ranges is another story and why I prefer a 7.62mm rifle.  Now you have an accurate round plus the power to reach out there as well as do some damage to targets made out of more than paper.

+1 for AR10.

Quoted: Quoted: I would go 6.8 if I had it to do over again probably, but this one still shoots amazing groups. i24.photobucket.com/albums/c29/DM1975/Sniper%20Rifle/DSCF1867.jpg What's that hand grip you've got on there?  Looks comfy as heck.

The pistol grip is one I made myself.

Quoted: not sure what you are asking, but Sniper's rifles are bolt action for a reason. Building an accurate AR is easy, but it will cost about  twice as much over a bolt gun. This would be a Sniper's first choice www.adcofirearms.com/random/3rdon70.jpg Here is as close to an SPR as exists outside the .mil www.adcofirearms.com/random/mk12classic.jpg

Could you give us the specs on both of those.

6.5 Grendel. Shoots 0.7 MOA all day long though I can squeeze 0.5 out of it when I'm really on. I think my best 100 yard group was about 0.34 MOA. I use 5 shot groups.

5.56 gets thrown around by the wind pretty bad at 300+

My contribution, DPMS MINI SASS in 5.56 Nato. I am still waiting on his big brother in 7.62 Nato to be delivered. It has been a long ass 4 month wait!

I would build something in 6.5 or 30 cal.  I'm thinking:
6.5 Grendel
260 Rem
308
300WSM

260 Rem and 300 WSM are my favorites of those.  Both require an AR 10 platform.  The 260 might work out best because you can use a standard AR10 BCG.

Key pieces for this kind of build would be(in order):
US Optics scope
Weight - Yes nothing helps you hit at long range like weight.  The rifle with scope should weight ~13 - 15 lbs complete with scope and accesories.
Lilja or Krieger stainless barrel blank with extension fit to your bolt and other machining by a top quality gunsmith - 24+"
Tactical Intervention Specialties sling
Magpul stock - you will probably need to customize this to add enough weight here.
Smooth bottom forend for sand bags and/or a bipod.

I have both a bolt and AR "sniper" rifle.  I have shot both extensively, taken both to sniper schools and deployed both on calls (LEO) as intended.  Pics of each.






I'll note at the beginning of my rant that I am looking at this purely through the eyes of an LEO sniper.  I was not a mil sniper and cannot speak for their needs at all.

In the .308 I shoot 168 grain black hills that is very accurate.  In the AR, I shoot the 77 grain 5.56 black hills that is also very accurate.  At the last school I went to, the AR and .308 did about the same in the wind.  Almost identical wind drift.  They were both equally accurate out to the max range we shot (700 yards).  The AR had less drop at all ranges, but was most noticable inside 200.  

The AR has revealed so many advantages that I now carry it exclusively and the botl gun pretty much takes up shelf space in the arms room (even though I have more money in that gun).  I also get free ammo for the .308 and have to buy my own .223 ammo.  I still choose the AR for a number of reasons.

First - and this a big one for me - is the more controlled penetration of the .223.  Most .308 match ammo (which is what you see at almost all departments) is notorious for overpenetration.  You can expect the typical 168 grain match round to go through your target, and several walls of whatever structure is behind it.  The .308 can be counted on to over-penetrate.  The .223 doesn't do this.  It pretty much stays in the body of humans.

Often, intermediate barriers get brought up.  Well, the .308 isn't so hot shooting through glass either.  It likes to break up, shed it's core, and generally not hit where you want it to.  Glass is the barrier I think most LEO's will be shooting a sniper round through - I can't see many situations where an LEO is going to take shots through brick or other materials where he can't see what he's shooting at.  The .223 performs about the same through glass - it likes to break up and shed it's core, but in the few informal tests I've done (bsically shooting manequine heads in old cars through the windshield), the .223 seems to deviate less than the .308.  I know it isn't scientific going out and shooting cars in a junkyard, but I have noticed trends.  

But say your first bullet doesn't do the job - I can immediately launch another .223 round from my AR with no more movement than pulling the trigger again.  It takes much less time (I can usually fire 20 aimed shots from my AR in the amount of time it takes a bolt gun driver to take 5 shots).  The AR kind of rattles when you shoot it - but otherwise stays right on target.  I have to wait until the recoil of the .308 is done, then work the bolt as fast as possible, then get back on target (which usually involves either me or the gun moving a bit) to fire another shot.  There is no comparison on how fast you can put accurate fire on target between the two.

Also - by use of a stock pouch, I have 40 rounds on the gun that are very, very fast to load (a few seconds) compared to 4-5 rounds that take at least 4-5 times as long to load.  I find that single loading after you expend the magazine is faster on a bolt gun, but you still are limited to 10 rounds on the gun if you use a stock pack with bullet loops.

Lethality is pretty much the same with proper bullet placement between the two rounds at LE sniping distances (basically across the street).  Of course, at longer ranges that I'm sure the .mil sniper encounters, the .308 comes into it's own as far as lethality is concerned.  True long-range shots are about as common as lethal frog attacks in the LE world.  At most of the schools I've been to, you spend more time at longer ranges than you do at the 50 yard line, where real research on the subject has shown that almost all LE sniper shots take place within.  

Of course this is all my own opinion, but I think a precision AR is much more suited to LE sniper work than the .308 bolt gun.  It took me awhile to break away from the older school of thought that the .30 bolt gun was more suitable, since LE sniping grew from military sniping.  The needs of one just aren't the same as the needs of the other.  I have spent quite a bit of my LE sniper trianing doing things like range estimation and unknown distance shooting when on real deployments I have never been more than 125 yards away from where the BG was (and that was a fluke because the BG lived right on the edge of a park and I was able to set up on the other side in what had to be the greatest position of all time - only to have him give up within about 20 minutes - which I'm happy with).

Well, that's all I have to say on the subject for now.

Quoted: I have both a bolt and AR "sniper" rifle.  I have shot both extensively, taken both to sniper schools and deployed both on calls (LEO) as intended.  Pics of each. i14.photobucket.com/albums/a307/jlatzke/Guns/100_2411.jpg i14.photobucket.com/albums/a307/jlatzke/Guns/Gunpics012.jpg I'll note at the beginning of my rant that I am looking at this purely through the eyes of an LEO sniper.  I was not a mil sniper and cannot speak for their needs at all. In the .308 I shoot 168 grain black hills that is very accurate.  In the AR, I shoot the 77 grain 5.56 black hills that is also very accurate.  At the last school I went to, the AR and .308 did about the same in the wind.  Almost identical wind drift.  They were both equally accurate out to the max range we shot (700 yards).  The AR had less drop at all ranges, but was most noticable inside 200.   The AR has revealed so many advantages that I now carry it exclusively and the botl gun pretty much takes up shelf space in the arms room (even though I have more money in that gun).  I also get free ammo for the .308 and have to buy my own .223 ammo.  I still choose the AR for a number of reasons. First - and this a big one for me - is the more controlled penetration of the .223.  Most .308 match ammo (which is what you see at almost all departments) is notorious for overpenetration.  You can expect the typical 168 grain match round to go through your target, and several walls of whatever structure is behind it.  The .308 can be counted on to over-penetrate.  The .223 doesn't do this.  It pretty much stays in the body of humans. Often, intermediate barriers get brought up.  Well, the .308 isn't so hot shooting through glass either.  It likes to break up, shed it's core, and generally not hit where you want it to.  Glass is the barrier I think most LEO's will be shooting a sniper round through - I can't see many situations where an LEO is going to take shots through brick or other materials where he can't see what he's shooting at.  The .223 performs about the same through glass - it likes to break up and shed it's core, but in the few informal tests I've done (bsically shooting manequine heads in old cars through the windshield), the .223 seems to deviate less than the .308.  I know it isn't scientific going out and shooting cars in a junkyard, but I have noticed trends.   But say your first bullet doesn't do the job - I can immediately launch another .223 round from my AR with no more movement than pulling the trigger again.  It takes much less time (I can usually fire 20 aimed shots from my AR in the amount of time it takes a bolt gun driver to take 5 shots).  The AR kind of rattles when you shoot it - but otherwise stays right on target.  I have to wait until the recoil of the .308 is done, then work the bolt as fast as possible, then get back on target (which usually involves either me or the gun moving a bit) to fire another shot.  There is no comparison on how fast you can put accurate fire on target between the two. Also - by use of a stock pouch, I have 40 rounds on the gun that are very, very fast to load (a few seconds) compared to 4-5 rounds that take at least 4-5 times as long to load.  I find that single loading after you expend the magazine is faster on a bolt gun, but you still are limited to 10 rounds on the gun if you use a stock pack with bullet loops. Lethality is pretty much the same with proper bullet placement between the two rounds at LE sniping distances (basically across the street).  Of course, at longer ranges that I'm sure the .mil sniper encounters, the .308 comes into it's own as far as lethality is concerned.  True long-range shots are about as common as lethal frog attacks in the LE world.  At most of the schools I've been to, you spend more time at longer ranges than you do at the 50 yard line, where real research on the subject has shown that almost all LE sniper shots take place within.   Of course this is all my own opinion, but I think a precision AR is much more suited to LE sniper work than the .308 bolt gun.  It took me awhile to break away from the older school of thought that the .30 bolt gun was more suitable, since LE sniping grew from military sniping.  The needs of one just aren't the same as the needs of the other.  I have spent quite a bit of my LE sniper trianing doing things like range estimation and unknown distance shooting when on real deployments I have never been more than 125 yards away from where the BG was (and that was a fluke because the BG lived right on the edge of a park and I was able to set up on the other side in what had to be the greatest position of all time - only to have him give up within about 20 minutes - which I'm happy with). Well, that's all I have to say on the subject for now.

+1

My vote go's for something in the 7.62 x 51mm platform...not my rifle but, it's exactly like it w/a vortex flash hider and IOR optics - Fulton Armory Titan



Cheers,

Sakic #19

If you go with the .308 over the .223 on the premise that you will get longer range out of it be sure your scope will accomodate the added distance.

My .223 Ar15 scope has 80 moa elevation adjustment. So I have a 40 up and 40 down adjustment range. If my ballistics calculations are correct thae I can adjust it out to ~750 yards. That is pretty close to the max range anyone would ever want to shoot with a .223.

I just ran a quick ballistics calculation on the .308 and with my scope it  will only accomadate ~1000 yards with a 175gr bullet at 2800fps. Without more adjustment range or a slanted rail I would only get about 200 yards more out of a .308.

Granted the .308 will hold up to the wind better, all factors considered I havn't been disappointed in going with the .223.

I if I want more range, I will slap on a Bohica .50cal upper and I am good to go lol

I built my SPR in 5.56 because the public range only goes to 200 yds and the private range goes to 600. I figured that if I had access to longer ranges I'd set up a .308 gun or something else in the long range calibers. But for what I have access to my gun is perfect.

Quoted: I built my SPR in 5.56 because the public range only goes to 200 yds and the private range goes to 600. I figured that if I had access to longer ranges I'd set up a .308 gun or something else in the long range calibers. But for what I have access to my gun is perfect. i26.photobucket.com/albums/c108/quantim0/DSC_0177.jpg

That is just pure BADD ASS!!!!

Quoted: I built my SPR in 5.56 because the public range only goes to 200 yds and the private range goes to 600. I figured that if I had access to longer ranges I'd set up a .308 gun or something else in the long range calibers. But for what I have access to my gun is perfect. i26.photobucket.com/albums/c108/quantim0/DSC_0177.jpg

just wanted to say...beautiful rig!

Without a doubt, probably the most informative reply on what most noobs need to know about the ar difference from bolts.  These are the outlying differences and the pros and cons on any situation always take place.  One a call, I would always pick My ar for many reasons, the main one being follow up shots.  If you train properly, you can send 30 rounds down range in a moa group in less than a minute.  Try doing any part of that equation with a bolt.  In my book, never trust one round to take down any thing.  Plinking, varminting, or flat out judgement calls on criminal, never trust one round.

Quoted: I have both a bolt and AR "sniper" rifle.  I have shot both extensively, taken both to sniper schools and deployed both on calls (LEO) as intended.  Pics of each. i14.photobucket.com/albums/a307/jlatzke/Guns/100_2411.jpg i14.photobucket.com/albums/a307/jlatzke/Guns/Gunpics012.jpg I'll note at the beginning of my rant that I am looking at this purely through the eyes of an LEO sniper.  I was not a mil sniper and cannot speak for their needs at all. In the .308 I shoot 168 grain black hills that is very accurate.  In the AR, I shoot the 77 grain 5.56 black hills that is also very accurate.  At the last school I went to, the AR and .308 did about the same in the wind.  Almost identical wind drift.  They were both equally accurate out to the max range we shot (700 yards).  The AR had less drop at all ranges, but was most noticable inside 200.   The AR has revealed so many advantages that I now carry it exclusively and the botl gun pretty much takes up shelf space in the arms room (even though I have more money in that gun).  I also get free ammo for the .308 and have to buy my own .223 ammo.  I still choose the AR for a number of reasons. First - and this a big one for me - is the more controlled penetration of the .223.  Most .308 match ammo (which is what you see at almost all departments) is notorious for overpenetration.  You can expect the typical 168 grain match round to go through your target, and several walls of whatever structure is behind it.  The .308 can be counted on to over-penetrate.  The .223 doesn't do this.  It pretty much stays in the body of humans. Often, intermediate barriers get brought up.  Well, the .308 isn't so hot shooting through glass either.  It likes to break up, shed it's core, and generally not hit where you want it to.  Glass is the barrier I think most LEO's will be shooting a sniper round through - I can't see many situations where an LEO is going to take shots through brick or other materials where he can't see what he's shooting at.  The .223 performs about the same through glass - it likes to break up and shed it's core, but in the few informal tests I've done (bsically shooting manequine heads in old cars through the windshield), the .223 seems to deviate less than the .308.  I know it isn't scientific going out and shooting cars in a junkyard, but I have noticed trends.   But say your first bullet doesn't do the job - I can immediately launch another .223 round from my AR with no more movement than pulling the trigger again.  It takes much less time (I can usually fire 20 aimed shots from my AR in the amount of time it takes a bolt gun driver to take 5 shots).  The AR kind of rattles when you shoot it - but otherwise stays right on target.  I have to wait until the recoil of the .308 is done, then work the bolt as fast as possible, then get back on target (which usually involves either me or the gun moving a bit) to fire another shot.  There is no comparison on how fast you can put accurate fire on target between the two. Also - by use of a stock pouch, I have 40 rounds on the gun that are very, very fast to load (a few seconds) compared to 4-5 rounds that take at least 4-5 times as long to load.  I find that single loading after you expend the magazine is faster on a bolt gun, but you still are limited to 10 rounds on the gun if you use a stock pack with bullet loops. Lethality is pretty much the same with proper bullet placement between the two rounds at LE sniping distances (basically across the street).  Of course, at longer ranges that I'm sure the .mil sniper encounters, the .308 comes into it's own as far as lethality is concerned.  True long-range shots are about as common as lethal frog attacks in the LE world.  At most of the schools I've been to, you spend more time at longer ranges than you do at the 50 yard line, where real research on the subject has shown that almost all LE sniper shots take place within.   Of course this is all my own opinion, but I think a precision AR is much more suited to LE sniper work than the .308 bolt gun.  It took me awhile to break away from the older school of thought that the .30 bolt gun was more suitable, since LE sniping grew from military sniping.  The needs of one just aren't the same as the needs of the other.  I have spent quite a bit of my LE sniper trianing doing things like range estimation and unknown distance shooting when on real deployments I have never been more than 125 yards away from where the BG was (and that was a fluke because the BG lived right on the edge of a park and I was able to set up on the other side in what had to be the greatest position of all time - only to have him give up within about 20 minutes - which I'm happy with). Well, that's all I have to say on the subject for now.

Thanks.

BTW - that AR I built up is basically an homage to DM1975's beautiful rig which I'm still jealous of.

In the .308 I shoot 168 grain black hills that is very accurate. In the AR, I shoot the 77 grain 5.56 black hills that is also very accurate. At the last school I went to, the AR and .308 did about the same in the wind. Almost identical wind drift. They were both equally accurate out to the max range we shot (700 yards). The AR had less drop at all ranges, but was most noticable inside 200.

Just to keep facts as facts... a 168 grain Sierra .30 bullet traveling at 2750 from the barrel and the 77 grain .223 round both with a muzzle velocity of 2750 do not have the same wind drift as was stated.  The 77 grain ammo has 40% more wind drift.  If you compare 168 grain at 2650 and 77 grain at 2750 the 77 grain ammo has 27.8" wind drift at 500 yards with a full value 10mph wind.  The 168 at 2650 has 21.8" at 500 yards so that would be 27% more wind drift.  27-40% more wind drift is not "the same" at all.  Additionally the .223 is not a lot flatter shooting comparing 168 grain to 77 grain ammo.  Sure there is a TINY advantage inside 100 yards but by before 200 yards the slower 168 grain ammo has already dropped less.  These are unalterable facts.  Just becasue someone is mistaking a height over bore being greater as much flatter shooting (or is unintentionally misrepresenting that fact is the difference instead of the ammo) does not make it so whether they are a LE sniper or not.  The advantage for a .223 AR is MINISCULE under 200 yards when you compare 77 grain ammo to 168 grain .308 ammo.  The .308 has less drop at 200 yards and all further ranges in this scenario as well and it becomes a bigger difference the further the shot.

Over penetration?  Use 155 AMAX.  For 200 yards and beyond .308 rules .223 from a ballisitcs perspecitve both externally and terminally.  This comparison I quoted read oddly because of the height over bore differences for the two guns.  a .308 AR would have been superior to the .223 AR but the height over bore issues allowed for less elevation clicks and the false appearance of less drop.  The windage was never the same.

Quoted: not sure what you are asking, but Sniper's rifles are bolt action for a reason. Building an accurate AR is easy, but it will cost about  twice as much over a bolt gun. This would be a Sniper's first choice www.adcofirearms.com/random/3rdon70.jpg Here is as close to an SPR as exists outside the .mil www.adcofirearms.com/random/mk12classic.jpg

Actually the Army just adopted a semi auto sniper rifle based on the Knights SR25. I use a GAP AR10 in 308 as my sniper rifle. Semi auto sniper rifles have a lot of advantages over bolt guns. Bolt guns still maintain a accuracy edge but their are many roles a semi auto sniper rifle does much much better. The day of all sniper rifles being bolt guns has long since passed.
Pat

Quoted: Quoted: not sure what you are asking, but Sniper's rifles are bolt action for a reason. Building an accurate AR is easy, but it will cost about  twice as much over a bolt gun. This would be a Sniper's first choice www.adcofirearms.com/random/3rdon70.jpg Here is as close to an SPR as exists outside the .mil www.adcofirearms.com/random/mk12classic.jpg Actually the Army just adopted a semi auto sniper rifle based on the Knights SR25. I use a GAP AR10 in 308 as my sniper rifle. Semi auto sniper rifles have a lot of advantages over bolt guns. Bolt guns still maintain a accuracy edge but their are many roles a semi auto sniper rifle does much much better. The day of all sniper rifles being bolt guns has long since passed. Pat

ETA - full version...

Knights M110 Sniper Rifle - Future Weapons

Full Version of Episode

Enjoy!

Sakic #19

Quoted: I would go 6.8 if I had it to do over again probably, but this one still shoots amazing groups. i24.photobucket.com/albums/c29/DM1975/Sniper%20Rifle/DSCF1867.jpg

Love the rifle

Here is a pic of my stick.
Pat

Heres a Noveske 18" barreled rifle I built awhile back, it has the Noveske matched bolt, and a Young N/M carrier. The trigger is a worked 2 stage that breaks at 2.5#'s.

Heres a 16" Noveske build, the only thing different, is the length, stock, and carrier.


Both together.

One more of the two Noveske builds.

Quoted: In the .308 I shoot 168 grain black hills that is very accurate. In the AR, I shoot the 77 grain 5.56 black hills that is also very accurate. At the last school I went to, the AR and .308 did about the same in the wind. Almost identical wind drift. They were both equally accurate out to the max range we shot (700 yards). The AR had less drop at all ranges, but was most noticable inside 200. Just to keep facts as facts... a 168 grain Sierra .30 bullet traveling at 2750 from the barrel and the 77 grain .223 round both with a muzzle velocity of 2750 do not have the same wind drift as was stated.  The 77 grain ammo has 40% more wind drift.  If you compare 168 grain at 2650 and 77 grain at 2750 the 77 grain ammo has 27.8" wind drift at 500 yards with a full value 10mph wind.  The 168 at 2650 has 21.8" at 500 yards so that would be 27% more wind drift.  27-40% more wind drift is not "the same" at all.  Additionally the .223 is not a lot flatter shooting comparing 168 grain to 77 grain ammo.  Sure there is a TINY advantage inside 100 yards but by before 200 yards the slower 168 grain ammo has already dropped less.  These are unalterable facts.  Just becasue someone is mistaking a height over bore being greater as much flatter shooting (or is unintentionally misrepresenting that fact is the difference instead of the ammo) does not make it so whether they are a LE sniper or not.  The advantage for a .223 AR is MINISCULE under 200 yards when you compare 77 grain ammo to 168 grain .308 ammo.  The .308 has less drop at 200 yards and all further ranges in this scenario as well and it becomes a bigger difference the further the shot. Over penetration?  Use 155 AMAX.  For 200 yards and beyond .308 rules .223 from a ballisitcs perspecitve both externally and terminally.  This comparison I quoted read oddly because of the height over bore differences for the two guns.  a .308 AR would have been superior to the .223 AR but the height over bore issues allowed for less elevation clicks and the false appearance of less drop.  The windage was never the same.

Um - thanks.  I guess the fact that me and the guys I was at the school with were sitting there on the line comparing what we had to dial in for the present wind conditions has nothing to do with your "facts" - but it is what happened.  Also, as stated in my post (which you apparently read with an eye toward your precious ballistics tables instead of what i was actually saying), almost all LE sniping is done withing 50 yards.  

Please feel free to shit talk me at will while puffing up your chest to make yourself feel important.  Great work.  I'll still take my AR on callouts, and you can still sit there and crunch your numbers on your home computers.

Quoted: ...

great post. Thank you for your time.

Quoted: I would go 6.8 if I had it to do over again probably, but this one still shoots amazing groups. i24.photobucket.com/albums/c29/DM1975/Sniper%20Rifle/DSCF1867.jpg

6.8 SPC:

Quoted: Thanks. BTW - that AR I built up is basically an homage to DM1975's beautiful rig which I'm still jealous of.

Yeah, it is a awesome rig, and yes- I have shot it...but not as well as DM did.

Quoted: Quoted: In the .308 I shoot 168 grain black hills that is very accurate. In the AR, I shoot the 77 grain 5.56 black hills that is also very accurate. At the last school I went to, the AR and .308 did about the same in the wind. Almost identical wind drift. They were both equally accurate out to the max range we shot (700 yards). The AR had less drop at all ranges, but was most noticable inside 200. Just to keep facts as facts... a 168 grain Sierra .30 bullet traveling at 2750 from the barrel and the 77 grain .223 round both with a muzzle velocity of 2750 do not have the same wind drift as was stated.  The 77 grain ammo has 40% more wind drift.  If you compare 168 grain at 2650 and 77 grain at 2750 the 77 grain ammo has 27.8" wind drift at 500 yards with a full value 10mph wind.  The 168 at 2650 has 21.8" at 500 yards so that would be 27% more wind drift.  27-40% more wind drift is not "the same" at all.  Additionally the .223 is not a lot flatter shooting comparing 168 grain to 77 grain ammo.  Sure there is a TINY advantage inside 100 yards but by before 200 yards the slower 168 grain ammo has already dropped less.  These are unalterable facts.  Just becasue someone is mistaking a height over bore being greater as much flatter shooting (or is unintentionally misrepresenting that fact is the difference instead of the ammo) does not make it so whether they are a LE sniper or not.  The advantage for a .223 AR is MINISCULE under 200 yards when you compare 77 grain ammo to 168 grain .308 ammo.  The .308 has less drop at 200 yards and all further ranges in this scenario as well and it becomes a bigger difference the further the shot. Over penetration?  Use 155 AMAX.  For 200 yards and beyond .308 rules .223 from a ballisitcs perspecitve both externally and terminally.  This comparison I quoted read oddly because of the height over bore differences for the two guns.  a .308 AR would have been superior to the .223 AR but the height over bore issues allowed for less elevation clicks and the false appearance of less drop.  The windage was never the same. Um - thanks.  I guess the fact that me and the guys I was at the school with were sitting there on the line comparing what we had to dial in for the present wind conditions has nothing to do with your "facts" - but it is what happened.  Also, as stated in my post (which you apparently read with an eye toward your precious ballistics tables instead of what i was actually saying), almost all LE sniping is done withing 50 yards.   Please feel free to shit talk me at will while puffing up your chest to make yourself feel important.  Great work.  I'll still take my AR on callouts, and you can still sit there and crunch your numbers on your home computers.

+1  I got it.....Thanks

Here is a precision AR I've always thought was beautiful except for the riser, not sure why he used it. It looks kinda like a HK PSG1 and I wish it was mine.

I'm a huge fan of MK12 MOD 0 SPRs but I thought I'd post a couple more pics of rifles that look a little different. Here is another one I like.

Quoted: Quoted: Thanks. BTW - that AR I built up is basically an homage to DM1975's beautiful rig which I'm still jealous of. Yeah, it is a awesome rig, and yes- I have shot it...but not as well as DM did.

That 6.8 you have is the reaon for me wanting to change mine out. Very nice rifle and it shoots GREAT...

That is my personal rifle and I agree with Glockfan...the days of the turn bolt is numbered for sniper work except for extreme long rnages were a .338 LP would come in handy but I see semi in .338 are becoming available. With todays technology semis will be good enough for sniper work., they may not win benchrest style competitions but they will be accurate enough make kills for the military or police sniper. BTW mine is as accurate as my issued LTR out to 500 yards which is more than enough for most L.E. engagments...

Quoted: My vote go's for something in the 7.62 x 51mm platform...not my rifle but, it's exactly like it w/a vortex flash hider and IOR optics - Fulton Armory Titan www.fulton-armory.com/TitanRifle22JP3.jpg Cheers, Sakic #19

Wow. I just checked out Fulton's .308's.  Nice rifles and I like that they take DPMS mags, they seem to be the cheapest and best option out there for .308 mags at the moment.  Are the lowers alone actually going for 700 or can they actually be had for less than MSRP like most other guns?

Quoted: Quoted: In the .308 I shoot 168 grain black hills that is very accurate. In the AR, I shoot the 77 grain 5.56 black hills that is also very accurate. At the last school I went to, the AR and .308 did about the same in the wind. Almost identical wind drift. They were both equally accurate out to the max range we shot (700 yards). The AR had less drop at all ranges, but was most noticable inside 200. Just to keep facts as facts... a 168 grain Sierra .30 bullet traveling at 2750 from the barrel and the 77 grain .223 round both with a muzzle velocity of 2750 do not have the same wind drift as was stated.  The 77 grain ammo has 40% more wind drift.  If you compare 168 grain at 2650 and 77 grain at 2750 the 77 grain ammo has 27.8" wind drift at 500 yards with a full value 10mph wind.  The 168 at 2650 has 21.8" at 500 yards so that would be 27% more wind drift.  27-40% more wind drift is not "the same" at all.  Additionally the .223 is not a lot flatter shooting comparing 168 grain to 77 grain ammo.  Sure there is a TINY advantage inside 100 yards but by before 200 yards the slower 168 grain ammo has already dropped less.  These are unalterable facts.  Just becasue someone is mistaking a height over bore being greater as much flatter shooting (or is unintentionally misrepresenting that fact is the difference instead of the ammo) does not make it so whether they are a LE sniper or not.  The advantage for a .223 AR is MINISCULE under 200 yards when you compare 77 grain ammo to 168 grain .308 ammo.  The .308 has less drop at 200 yards and all further ranges in this scenario as well and it becomes a bigger difference the further the shot. Over penetration?  Use 155 AMAX.  For 200 yards and beyond .308 rules .223 from a ballisitcs perspecitve both externally and terminally.  This comparison I quoted read oddly because of the height over bore differences for the two guns.  a .308 AR would have been superior to the .223 AR but the height over bore issues allowed for less elevation clicks and the false appearance of less drop.  The windage was never the same. Um - thanks.  I guess the fact that me and the guys I was at the school with were sitting there on the line comparing what we had to dial in for the present wind conditions has nothing to do with your "facts" - but it is what happened.  Also, as stated in my post (which you apparently read with an eye toward your precious ballistics tables instead of what i was actually saying), almost all LE sniping is done withing 50 yards.   Please feel free to shit talk me at will while puffing up your chest to make yourself feel important.  Great work.  I'll still take my AR on callouts, and you can still sit there and crunch your numbers on your home computers.

Like I said you are confusing height over bore with what the bullet actually does.  A .308 AR will drop less than a .223 AR with the same optic height.  What you saw in your come ups was strictly due to height over bore.  

With a 155 grain AMAX the 77 grain .223 loading does not even have a reduced amount of drop even from the barrel.  It wont yaw so late it cant fragment in smaller statured people or peripheral shots like 77 grain 5.56, has over twice the permanant cavity, etc.  The only drawback is recoil which you stated was a reason for choosing the 5.56 load and its a reasonable decision.  As I said I just wanted the facts to be clear for everyone who is reading.  You made it seem as though 5.56 had some sort of ballistic advantage... it does not.  Its not as flat shooting and does not do as well in the wind.

Is this a "real" military ammo can loaded w/ MK 262 Mod 1 rounds or just a fancy stencil job?

Sorry for the sidetrack, I never saw one of these before.....

mike

Mr. Wilson, I thought the same thing when I saw it!!!!

Quoted: Like I said you are confusing height over bore with what the bullet actually does.  A .308 AR will drop less than a .223 AR with the same optic height.  What you saw in your come ups was strictly due to height over bore.   So what?  If I have to hold over less or put less elevation on my gun at all useable ranges - what does it matter what the bullet does on paper?  Plus - I'm talking about BH 168 - not Hornady 155 grain.  Most departments use a 168 grain match round, and it takes an act of congress to get it changed.  Would I like them to change - sure.  Will they.  No.  Plus, I still am willing to bet if there is someone behind the BG who is hit with a headshot with your 155 grain .308 round, they would be in much more danger of being hit by the remainder of the bullet than they would be with the .223. With a 155 grain AMAX the 77 grain .223 loading does not even have a reduced amount of drop even from the barrel.  It wont yaw so late it cant fragment in smaller statured people or peripheral shots like 77 grain 5.56, has over twice the permanant cavity, etc.  The only drawback is recoil which you stated was a reason for choosing the 5.56 load and its a reasonable decision.  As I said I just wanted the facts to be clear for everyone who is reading.  You made it seem as though 5.56 had some sort of ballistic advantage... it does not.  Its not as flat shooting and does not do as well in the wind.

Maybe not on paper - but I still think I'll stick with the 77grain round based upon my personal experiences with it - not what I've read on a ballistics table.  Your argument with my post has nothing to do with real world shooting - it seems purely based on paper.  That - to me - doesn't represent "fact" at all.  Sorry - I'll stick with what is working for me.  I think it's a safer option, and does the job just fine.

Quoted: I would go 6.8 if I had it to do over again probably, but this one still shoots amazing groups. i24.photobucket.com/albums/c29/DM1975/Sniper%20Rifle/DSCF1867.jpg

where did you get the mono pod for the buttstock, I must have one.

Quoted: Quoted: Like I said you are confusing height over bore with what the bullet actually does.  A .308 AR will drop less than a .223 AR with the same optic height.  What you saw in your come ups was strictly due to height over bore.   So what?  If I have to hold over less or put less elevation on my gun at all useable ranges - what does it matter what the bullet does on paper?  Plus - I'm talking about BH 168 - not Hornady 155 grain.  Most departments use a 168 grain match round, and it takes an act of congress to get it changed.  Would I like them to change - sure.  Will they.  No.  Plus, I still am willing to bet if there is someone behind the BG who is hit with a headshot with your 155 grain .308 round, they would be in much more danger of being hit by the remainder of the bullet than they would be with the .223. With a 155 grain AMAX the 77 grain .223 loading does not even have a reduced amount of drop even from the barrel.  It wont yaw so late it cant fragment in smaller statured people or peripheral shots like 77 grain 5.56, has over twice the permanant cavity, etc.  The only drawback is recoil which you stated was a reason for choosing the 5.56 load and its a reasonable decision.  As I said I just wanted the facts to be clear for everyone who is reading.  You made it seem as though 5.56 had some sort of ballistic advantage... it does not.  Its not as flat shooting and does not do as well in the wind. Maybe not on paper - but I still think I'll stick with the 77grain round based upon my personal experiences with it - not what I've read on a ballistics table.  Your argument with my post has nothing to do with real world shooting - it seems purely based on paper.  That - to me - doesn't represent "fact" at all.  Sorry - I'll stick with what is working for me.  I think it's a safer option, and does the job just fine.

Just out of curiosity how many times have you actually used that rifle? PHX is a pretty big city and I can't even remember the last time a sniper did anything but watch what happens through his glass.

I don't mean to be disrespectful, or even to insinuate anything bad, but devl is correct on this. I do understand your point though, it's just that it's a misrepresentation of the ballistic facts and you are touting your vast experience as an LE sniper as proof that we should listen to you. So I'm asking you, are one of the few LE snipers in the country that have actually pulled the trigger, or are you mostly long range recon with a lot of paper experience?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Like I said you are confusing height over bore with what the bullet actually does.  A .308 AR will drop less than a .223 AR with the same optic height.  What you saw in your come ups was strictly due to height over bore.   So what?  If I have to hold over less or put less elevation on my gun at all useable ranges - what does it matter what the bullet does on paper?  Plus - I'm talking about BH 168 - not Hornady 155 grain.  Most departments use a 168 grain match round, and it takes an act of congress to get it changed.  Would I like them to change - sure.  Will they.  No.  Plus, I still am willing to bet if there is someone behind the BG who is hit with a headshot with your 155 grain .308 round, they would be in much more danger of being hit by the remainder of the bullet than they would be with the .223. With a 155 grain AMAX the 77 grain .223 loading does not even have a reduced amount of drop even from the barrel.  It wont yaw so late it cant fragment in smaller statured people or peripheral shots like 77 grain 5.56, has over twice the permanant cavity, etc.  The only drawback is recoil which you stated was a reason for choosing the 5.56 load and its a reasonable decision.  As I said I just wanted the facts to be clear for everyone who is reading.  You made it seem as though 5.56 had some sort of ballistic advantage... it does not.  Its not as flat shooting and does not do as well in the wind. Maybe not on paper - but I still think I'll stick with the 77grain round based upon my personal experiences with it - not what I've read on a ballistics table.  Your argument with my post has nothing to do with real world shooting - it seems purely based on paper.  That - to me - doesn't represent "fact" at all.  Sorry - I'll stick with what is working for me.  I think it's a safer option, and does the job just fine. Just out of curiosity how many times have you actually used that rifle? PHX is a pretty big city and I can't even remember the last time a sniper did anything but watch what happens through his glass. I don't mean to be disrespectful, or even to insinuate anything bad, but devl is correct on this. I do understand your point though, it's just that it's a misrepresentation of the ballistic facts and you are touting your vast experience as an LE sniper as proof that we should listen to you. So I'm asking you, are one of the few LE snipers in the country that have actually pulled the trigger, or are you mostly long range recon with a lot of paper experience?

Again, I must be missing where I touted my vast experience.  I am just saying I have had some experience, and made decisions based upon those experiences.  I gave the reasons why.  Do what you want with it.  I'm not trying to mislead anyone as you seem to think I am.

I'll just say this - it's none of your business whether I've shot anyone or not.  Even though you claim not to intend any offense, you are basically doing the internet version of squaring off with me.  You're calling me out.  Sorry - not going to play your game.  I think if you were actually interested, you would have posed the question quite differently.

I hope what I posted helped some of you out there and gives you food for thought.

Quoted: Again, I must be missing where I touted my vast experience.  I am just saying I have had some experience, and made decisions based upon those experiences.  I gave the reasons why.  Do what you want with it.  I'm not trying to mislead anyone as you seem to think I am. I'll just say this - it's none of your business whether I've shot anyone or not.  Even though you claim not to intend any offense, you are basically doing the internet version of squaring off with me.  You're calling me out.  Sorry - not going to play your game.  I think if you were actually interested, you would have posed the question quite differently. I hope what I posted helped some of you out there and gives you food for thought.

Actually My questions were exactly what I said they were, just an attempt to find out where you are coming from. You were giving info that is slightly misleading when compared to my "PAPER" knowledge of balistics which jives with what devl said. You seem to easily take offense when your opinion is questioned, and claim that your LE status is all we need to know to believe you. I think I'm well within the rules of info gathering to find out why that LE experience should change my mind about my paper experience. How stupid would I be to just believe it because "You Say SO".

This is how the sharing of knowledge and discussion happens. I say to you that a Chevy 1500 is the truck you should buy and you say to me "Why? What experience do you have with that truck that should give your opinion weight?"

Again, I meant no offense, I just wanted to know why I should stick your info in my very beat up grey matter file system.

Relying on paper ballistics without verifying them under real world conditions is a mistake.  You would be amazed at how different a bullet can behave from what the charts say.  SPDSNYPR thanks for the post, and you are right, it will take a huge lawsuit where an agency pays millions because a 168 overpenetrated before they will consider changing caliber or even bullet weight.