Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 10/5/2004 2:52:06 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/5/2004 2:53:07 PM EST by Lost-Drive-In]
Back around the time of the Chechen school hostages I saw a photo of a russian semi-auto sniper rifle. I thought that was interesting.

This week or last I saw a post about the US using M-14's as sniper rifles. Ever since I've been thinking about the use of semi-auto's for sniping.

Semi auto rifles are pretty new to me. I never paid much attention to them until recently. I've always been more interested in one good shot.

There are plenty of good bolt actions out there. I'm convinced that a good bolt action sniper rifle doesn't need to be particularly exotic. I'm aware of some of the big calibers, but 7.62 seems pretty much ideal to me.

On to my question:

Heritage and national origin aside, what would be the best platform for a highly accurate semi auto sniper rifle? M-14? AR-10? HK91? Something else?

I wouldn't even have though of this before being impressed with the accuracy of the AR-15. I think that 5.56 is to light for sniper duty, but that's for a different question.

Thanks guys!hug.gif
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 2:53:21 PM EST
M1A....all the way.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 2:56:13 PM EST
PSG1
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 2:58:30 PM EST

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
M1A....all the way.



That is the way I would go...
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:01:48 PM EST
M1A can be built into a damn good rig.
McMillan stock, Krieger or something comparable for a barrel. Reamed flash hider.

This one is mine.......
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:08:59 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:11:44 PM EST
AR10. The M1A/M14 can be accurized, but will not be as accurate, will cost more, will need significantly more maintenance, and it is a poor scope platform.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:13:05 PM EST
I like the FAL platform. The DSA "Greywolf" series are supposed to be sub-MOA but I don't have two grand to find out.

Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:14:42 PM EST
Strickly from mechanical accuracy point of view, I think AR-10 would be the best option.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:16:14 PM EST
Knight's Armament SR25.

Barrett M82A1
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:16:20 PM EST

Originally Posted By yobo:
Strickly from mechanical accuracy point of view, I think AR-10 would be the best option.



ditto
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:16:57 PM EST

Originally Posted By yobo:
Strickly from mechanical accuracy point of view, I think AR-10 would be the best option.



knights 308 mark 11 mod 0
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:17:25 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/5/2004 3:18:37 PM EST by Cincinnatus]
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:17:45 PM EST

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
AR10. The M1A/M14 can be accurized, but will not be as accurate, will cost more, will need significantly more maintenance, and it is a poor scope platform.




+1
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:18:57 PM EST
The answer would be AR-10 or PSG-1 (H&K 91 sniper varient).

The PSG-1 is uberexpensive, and probably not as accurate as an AR-10, if the AR-10 has a good quality free floating barrel.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:19:31 PM EST

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:
PSG1



If you have $11k, some LE letterhead and 7 US parts

Atill not the best.

On a side note, a friend, an LEO (not employed but still commissioned) is thinking about getting one. The Sheriff is his bud, so it would be no big deal. He has the money too.....
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:24:23 PM EST

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:
PSG1



I know they are VERY rare here, VERY big buck$ and have VERY high cool factor but I've never heard anyone describe them as being VERY accurate (as far as sniper rifle goes).

Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:25:16 PM EST
My AR-10(T) has given me no problems and is very accurate. Probably my first pick as an armchair commando sniper rifle.

If I were going to be slogging through mud and foul crap for awhile, then I'd change my vote to the M1A. I haven't tested my AR-10 in nasty conditions, but the M1A has seen it all and still goes bang every time.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:27:37 PM EST
Barret M82!
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:31:03 PM EST

Originally Posted By _Ugly_:
My AR-10(T) has given me no problems and is very accurate. Probably my first pick as an armchair commando sniper rifle.

If I were going to be slogging through mud and foul crap for awhile, then I'd change my vote to the M1A. I haven't tested my AR-10 in nasty conditions, but the M1A has seen it all and still goes bang every time.



I have gone 600 rounds without cleaning on my AR-10 and have never had a failure to feed or fire. Around 4000 rounds through the rifle now. Planerench out.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 3:38:32 PM EST
AR-10T
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 4:00:01 PM EST
Originally Posted By Cincinnatus:


I agree, but that rig is 10k.

SR-25 is amazingly accurate (and expensive)
For the money, the DPMS AR-10 knock off is probably the best deal going.
I would love to get the SEAL SR-25 kit shown above.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 4:11:50 PM EST

Originally Posted By yobo:

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:
PSG1



I know they are VERY rare here, VERY big buck$ and have VERY high cool factor but I've never heard anyone describe them as being VERY accurate (as far as sniper rifle goes).




I understand from old Soldier of Fortune articles that they are capable of 1/2 MOA, perhaps 1/4 MOA. At the time I read the article, I wasn't as good at evaluating such claims, but if true that's damn good for a semi-auto sniper rig. Match grade M14 clones are good for about 1 MOA. The only 7.62 semi that beats them for accuracy is the AR-10 and clones, properly dressed.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 4:48:50 PM EST
What about the Walther whatchamacallit - comes in .308 or .300WSM... I think they made only 600
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 5:10:50 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/5/2004 5:13:23 PM EST by Lost-Drive-In]

Originally Posted By CAMPYBOB:
I saw a photo of a russian semi-auto sniper rifle. I thought that was interesting.

you probably saw a dragunov svd...which is not a sniping rifle per se, but rather is deployed as a squad marksman's rifle. it does meet nato sniper rifle accuracy/repeatability standards.

you may also have seen a civilian version, the tigr, being used...or perhaps a vepr or saiga hunting rifle (which bears a resemblance to a russiam military rifle when scoped).

the russians police/special forces appear too be using bolt action snipers, in the main.



I don't remember for sure, but I'm pretty sure that it was a Dragunov and that it was described as a "sniper rifle". My thought was that it was interesting that the russians were not using bolt guns, but that was obviously a misunderstanding.

Thanks!

I never expected such a good responce to what I figured to be a pretty simple question.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 5:12:49 PM EST
There is no such thing. Semi-autos are for designated marksmen; not snipers.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 5:16:47 PM EST

Originally Posted By BB:
There is no such thing. Semi-autos are for designated marksmen; not snipers.





M-21? Barret M82, Barret XM107? Dragunuv, a DMR fielded as a sniper rifle? The AR10s and SR25s in US service now?
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 5:20:04 PM EST
I'll vote for the AR-10. Its a great rifle and anyone familiiar with the AR15 can make a smooth transition. Example: Private Snuffy can blast away with his M16A2, drop it, pick up the AR10, and have all the knowlege he needs to fire, correct malfuntions, clean, maintain, etc. the weapon.


Side note, its sort of funny how folks hype up the Barrett 82 as a sniper rifle when in fact accuracy is not its stronge point. Sure, it can put out some impressive firepower and do some serious damage but it only gets 2-3moa accuracy. Even if you go to the Barrett website I don't think you'll find any claims of accuracy from this impressive rifle.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 5:26:57 PM EST
The Barret will hold a pretty decent group at 1000m, much better than 2-3 MOA. Closer to 1 MOA. The reason is: you need to be able to fire repeatedly to disable armored vehicles or other targets quickly, as it is much faster than a bolt action, and it is necessary to engage quickly, before they get your position.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 5:28:16 PM EST

Originally Posted By Jeep29:
I'll vote for the AR-10. Its a great rifle and anyone familiiar with the AR15 can make a smooth transition. Example: Private Snuffy can blast away with his M16A2, drop it, pick up the AR10, and have all the knowlege he needs to fire, correct malfuntions, clean, maintain, etc. the weapon.


Side note, its sort of funny how folks hype up the Barrett 82 as a sniper rifle when in fact accuracy is not its stronge point. Sure, it can put out some impressive firepower and do some serious damage but it only gets 2-3moa accuracy. Even if you go to the Barrett website I don't think you'll find any claims of accuracy from this impressive rifle.



The FA50 is supposed to be more acurate than the Barrett.

www.cobb50.com/
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 5:39:52 PM EST
If you get George to build you a 10T..........you will have:
1) a rifle that cost about the same as OEM
2) odds that it is sub 0.5MOA
3) it will work
4) and so on

I have a std 10A4 build by Richard Clancey [yepper, chrome lined] that is .3XX off the tail gate of my truck. Give me a GG&G rail, BO rings, USMC Unertl M40 scope and I bet it would hold its own against the M40A1 that I humped.

Thanx ARMALITE,

Dave S

And my AR-10(T)? Well now, ......
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 5:42:42 PM EST
If you go to SWFA and look at the photo contest entries - that is me with my M1A hitting 12"x12" steel plates out to 800 yards with M118LR

It is a plain jane STD M1A with an ARMS 18 and Tasco Super Sniper.

It did just fine for me, but I lost it at 1000...probably the 22" barrel -or me!!
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 5:44:35 PM EST

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
The Barret will hold a pretty decent group at 1000m, much better than 2-3 MOA. Closer to 1 MOA. The reason is: you need to be able to fire repeatedly to disable armored vehicles or other targets quickly, as it is much faster than a bolt action, and it is necessary to engage quickly, before they get your position.



The only M82 I have fired was NOT accurate. 1000meters was almost impossible to hit a 18" target.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 5:45:54 PM EST
I'm surprised I haven't seen a Remington 700PSS mentioned. M24 clone that bitch. I want to do that.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 5:49:51 PM EST

Originally Posted By wheelow:
I'm surprised I haven't seen a Remington 700PSS mentioned. M24 clone that bitch. I want to do that.



Uh. Yeah.

He said semi-auto.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 5:50:21 PM EST

Originally Posted By wheelow:
I'm surprised I haven't seen a Remington 700PSS mentioned. M24 clone that bitch. I want to do that.


I have not found a gas tube on that damn rifle yet.

Dave S
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 5:51:43 PM EST

Originally Posted By slash-5:

Originally Posted By wheelow:
I'm surprised I haven't seen a Remington 700PSS mentioned. M24 clone that bitch. I want to do that.



Uh. Yeah.

He said semi-auto.



lol, jesus christ. Yeah I just caught that. Sorry, LONG day at work with a bitching manager.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 6:02:35 PM EST

Originally Posted By Planerench:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
The Barret will hold a pretty decent group at 1000m, much better than 2-3 MOA. Closer to 1 MOA. The reason is: you need to be able to fire repeatedly to disable armored vehicles or other targets quickly, as it is much faster than a bolt action, and it is necessary to engage quickly, before they get your position.



The only M82 I have fired was NOT accurate. 1000meters was almost impossible to hit a 18" target.



I put 6 out of 10 shots into a body target at a 1000 meters with the M82 with M33 ball ammo no less. The first 2 shots went right over the target due to the quick temperature rise from our initial reading (in the morning at Yakima) and pluging the temp thru the sniper tables for M33 ball. The rest of the shots I missed were due to the fact that M33 ball sucks for accuracy.

However, if you want real accuracy the M82 shouldn't be your first pick, a McMillan .50 is hard to beat.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 6:13:34 PM EST

Originally Posted By CAMPYBOB:
I saw a photo of a russian semi-auto sniper rifle. I thought that was interesting.

you probably saw a dragunov svd...which is not a sniping rifle per se, but rather is deployed as a squad marksman's rifle. it does meet nato sniper rifle accuracy/repeatability standards.

you may also have seen a civilian version, the tigr, being used...or perhaps a vepr or saiga hunting rifle (which bears a resemblance to a russiam military rifle when scoped).

the russians police/special forces appear too be using bolt action snipers, in the main.


More info

CW
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 6:15:52 PM EST

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:

Originally Posted By Planerench:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
The Barret will hold a pretty decent group at 1000m, much better than 2-3 MOA. Closer to 1 MOA. The reason is: you need to be able to fire repeatedly to disable armored vehicles or other targets quickly, as it is much faster than a bolt action, and it is necessary to engage quickly, before they get your position.



The only M82 I have fired was NOT accurate. 1000meters was almost impossible to hit a 18" target.



I put 6 out of 10 shots into a body target at a 1000 meters with the M82 with M33 ball ammo no less. The first 2 shots went right over the target due to the quick temperature rise from our initial reading (in the morning at Yakima) and pluging the temp thru the sniper tables for M33 ball. The rest of the shots I missed were due to the fact that M33 ball sucks for accuracy.

However, if you want real accuracy the M82 shouldn't be your first pick, a McMillan .50 is hard to beat.



I think that was the point. The Barrett semi is the worst of the .50s. It is an inaccurate design. Planerench out. (still cool)
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 6:27:36 PM EST

Originally Posted By 50cal:
M1A can be built into a damn good rig.
McMillan stock, Krieger or something comparable for a barrel. Reamed flash hider.

This one is mine.......www.hunt101.com/img/212320.jpg



This is the one I'd use.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 6:38:08 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 6:41:05 PM EST
Chuck Taylor builds his rigs out for about $2,000/each including labor. That's relatively cheap in the accurate bolt gun world. As far as being ideal, the 7.62 NATO round is far from ideal. It doesn't deal well with even light cover at a moderate distance. It's a good round, but far from perfect. .338 LM, .257 STW, or .30-338 work quite well at distance and all should punch through bullet proof glass and plate armor. Even the non-exotic rounds like the Remington Ultra Mag lines will reach out and touch someone. The .300 RUM will go out past a mile.

From my reading (take that for what it's worth) most SWAT shots are taken from 150 yards or less, where 5.56 works just fine.

How far are you planning on shooting?

And to answer your question, I'd take an AR-10 or M-14, with a strong leaning to the AR-10. Both are capable of respectable ccuracy.

Remember the Alamo, and God Bless Texas...
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 6:46:25 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/5/2004 6:48:06 PM EST by GodBlessTexas]
.

Remember the Alamo, and God Bless Texas...
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 6:46:29 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/5/2004 6:49:54 PM EST by eodtech2000]

Originally Posted By Planerench:

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:

Originally Posted By Planerench:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
The Barret will hold a pretty decent group at 1000m, much better than 2-3 MOA. Closer to 1 MOA. The reason is: you need to be able to fire repeatedly to disable armored vehicles or other targets quickly, as it is much faster than a bolt action, and it is necessary to engage quickly, before they get your position.



The only M82 I have fired was NOT accurate. 1000meters was almost impossible to hit a 18" target.



I put 6 out of 10 shots into a body target at a 1000 meters with the M82 with M33 ball ammo no less. The first 2 shots went right over the target due to the quick temperature rise from our initial reading (in the morning at Yakima) and pluging the temp thru the sniper tables for M33 ball. The rest of the shots I missed were due to the fact that M33 ball sucks for accuracy.

However, if you want real accuracy the M82 shouldn't be your first pick, a McMillan .50 is hard to beat.



I think that was the point. The Barrett semi is the worst of the .50s. It is an inaccurate design. Planerench out. (still cool)



The M82's we had at our EOD unit would shoot at best about 1.5 MOA, with M33 ball it was closer to 2 or 3 MOA, a friggen shotgun at a 1000 meters.

1st SFG would run Hard Target Courses at Yakima Training Center and my EOD unit had a excellent repoire with the SF Cadre, we cleared several areas for them. One of the main objectives of Hard Target is the shooting of Missiles like SCUD's, the object is to put several rounds into the propellant section of the Missile. The M82 does this very well at this as it can fire accurately and fast enough.
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 6:48:36 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 6:51:06 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 7:02:38 PM EST
AR10.

Hands down.


Link Posted: 10/5/2004 9:10:22 PM EST

Originally Posted By Paul:

Originally Posted By BB:
There is no such thing. Semi-autos are for designated marksmen; not snipers.



Whatever action the rifle will be more accurate then the shooter for years of practice. People don't miss shots because of the rifle, they miss because of their lack of skill. The biggest factors in making long distance shots are the ability to estimate ranges and the weather.

Even a common old one MOA .308 rifle can hit the chest of a man at 900 yards ... but can the rifleman behind the trigger?

What's the bullet drop at 900 yards with your favorite cartridge?

What's the wind drift of a 4 mile an hour crossing wind?

How can you manage to see a man at 900 yards?




Very well put.

sst7
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 9:12:12 PM EST
No one mentioned Bushy's .308...any input on it - good or bad?
Link Posted: 10/5/2004 9:17:17 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/5/2004 9:20:37 PM EST by JHP]
Blah to the bush and the AR10 - just get an M1A and be done with it.
--------------------
Whatever action the rifle will be more accurate then the shooter for years of practice. People don't miss shots because of the rifle, they miss because of their lack of skill. The biggest factors in making long distance shots are the ability to estimate ranges and the weather.

Even a common old one MOA .308 rifle can hit the chest of a man at 900 yards ... but can the rifleman behind the trigger?

What's the bullet drop at 900 yards with your favorite cartridge?

What's the wind drift of a 4 mile an hour crossing wind?

How can you manage to see a man at 900 yards?
---------------------
I agree with this, but would counter by saying I'd have all of that info in my dope book and on my rifle stock. For my M1A w/ M118LR I believe I was +36MOA (100yrd zero) at 900 and for a 4 mph wind I'd go +2moa in the direction needed.

My 10x scope is adequate for location and target ID - though I'd use some binos for rapid target acquisition.

That said, it is also easy to miss at 900 and beyond...way too easy - especially on a moving target
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top