Armory Sponsor
Posted: 6/25/2008 4:46:22 AM EDT
|
Looking into basic commercially available platforms that can be tweaked into long range accurate rifles with widely available aftermarket parts and service. I remember reading that some Canadians(?) connected out around 2500 yards in Afghanistan, what platform were they using? Suggestions and links to more info? |
|
Don't know a whole lot about platforms, but there are plenty of rifles that would probably interest you. Barrett 99, AR50 starts out the low end around $3k with Windrunner in the midrange and Accuracy International topping the list around $12k They aren't AR15s or Remington 700s though so as far as aftermarket parts you're basicly going to be stuck with what comes with the gun. If you're looking for accuracy forget about the Barrett 82. Its a great rifle, lays down alot of fire, and is a blast to shoot but accuracy is NOT its strong point. |
|
The Canadian shot was either the 11th or 12th shot at that target. Rifle was a McBros Custom Tac-50. 2500 yard 1-shot kills are virtually impossible. Very few people ever hear that Canadian sniper had shot 10 or 11 times prior to the one he connected with the bad guy. For maximum accuracy with a 50, i'd suggest something built on a McBros action. Action Gun Works (Randy Dierks) is a top builder. I wouldn't, however, suggest a 50 for maximum accuracy out to 1000-1500 yards. A 338 Lapua will likely do better. And i'm not biased toward the 338 Lapua, i've got one 338 Lapua and 2 50 BMGs but it's much easier to make the 338 Lapua shoot. -David Edgewood, NM |
Yea David but which gives you more gratification the .338 which is easier to group, or the .50 which can give you good groups but requires a bit more effort? Is it not the point of the FCSA competitions to challenge yourself and your rig to achieve the best possible accuracy? Also why are the competitions limited to 1000 yards, why not 1500 or 2000? Perhaps if the ranges were set out to 1500-2000 the groups at those ranges would improve and the round as a whole could be developed further? ETA: Exactly WHY is the 338 more inherently accurate then the .50? Since a .510 bullet is nearly 2 times the weigth of the 338 you'd think it would be a bit easier to group closer together. |
|
Dark Kermit: You read me wrong. I love 50 BMG and it's the only caliber I shoot in competition because it is great fun and plenty challenging. I'm just saying for killing critters, terrorists, etc out to 1200-1500 the 338 Lapua is more inhereintly accurate. And 50 BMG bullets can be had up to BC's of 1.050 or so with 800 grain solids. Mil-spec projectiles for 50 BMG are around .650. 300 grain 338 Sierra Match Kings which I use are .768 BC above 2300 fps, .760 from 1800 to 2300. Several things are not in the favor of 50 BMG, in my opinion. 1. Brass is not top quality. Even the best TZZ brass can't touch Lapua quality/consistency. 2. The cartridge is not as magically balanced as say 308 WIN, 338 Lapua, or 6.5-284. These rounds have some sort of magical ratio to case capacity to bullet weight and diameter. 3. Recoil. A 50 just has too much recoil (even though checked by a brake). Due to longer barrels necessary to shoot it, the gun moves before the bullet has left the barrel...somewhat more than most other calibers with shorter barrels. -David Edgewood, NM |
Your right I did read you wrong, my apologies. Maybe it would have been better to have had the .50 standardized like the other rounds you mentioned. To your knowledge were any of the rounds you mentioned great at the time of conception or after being standardized did the round become "perfected" if you will? This next question is a general one. To anyones knowlege have there been any rounds that have met their demize because of standardization? I mean it can only be a good thing right? 
|
) that all manufacturers could follow, consistent quality would increase?
|
I think the 50 BMG not being standardized by SAAMI (Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers Institute) is definitely a downer for the 50. If you'll notice, most loading manuals don't have 50 data in them and when they do, its based upon the 45" barrel data from the M2HB machinegun. Some progress has been made with 50 BMG referenced by Hodgdon, VV, and Hornady in their loading manuals but data remains limited. Standardizing the 50 BMG and commercial components from companies such as Lapua would really help the caliber. Frustrating that a round that is approaching its 100th birthday has yet to be recognized by SAAMI while new rounds like 6.8 SPC sailed through without issue. Of course the 308 has had 50+ years to get perfected. 338 Lapua has only been around since the early 1980's. I'm not sure about 6.5-284. FCSA shooters have made tremendous strides in progressing the accuracy of the 50 but I do believe that the cost of the components and rifles will always be a hinderance for development and experimentation as compared to 308. 6.5-284, and especially 223. Experimenting with 50 BMG is exponentially more expensive than with lesser calibers and without being a legal "highpower" cartridge, the number of folks playing with it is just much lower. Think of the number of folks shooting service rifle at Camp Perry each year compared to the FCSA shooters at Raton in July. There are about 75-100 of us at Raton every summer. I'm not sure how many HUNDREDS make it to Camp Perry for the national matches. -David Edgewood, NM -David Edgewood, NM |
Thanks for taking the time to address my questins David. Larry A. |
|
I appreciate the information you all brought to this thread. The Tac-50 guarantees 1/2 MOA, stock, and that's comparable with both my DCM and BAR-10, a figure I can work with. Availabilty of ammunition is also a consideration. I'm looking hard at the Tac-50. Thanks for the replies. |
|
Just so you don't get dissappointed if you can't get to 1/2 MOA at 1000 yards with the Tac-50, not many folks can REGULARLY shoot sub 6" groups at 1000 yards with a 50. About 4-5 folks that I know of. I'm sure the RIFLE is capable of that accuracy with a well-tuned load and experienced shooter but extending that accuracy out to 1000 yards is problemmatic. The Tac-50 is an excellent choice. I just wouldn't get too hung up on accuracy guarantees when you are talking long range. -David Edgewood, NM |
Click on red(added by me.) nmmi's right. FoF |
First, the projectile is out of the gun sooner in a 338 than a 50. This is the important factor and why it is a challenge to shoot the 50. A 50 cal rifle will move as much as 1/8" before the projectile is free of the bore. If you position is not exactly the same shot after shot, grouping will be poor. For a 223 the movement is about .030" and a 338 about .060". There are more componants and better componants available for the 338. The case is very important for accuracy and the 338 has some great cases available from Norma and Lapua. There are also more bullet,powder,primer combinations possible for the 338 while the 50 is basically limited to two good powders and one primer and a lot of different projectiles. LAst but not least is the 300gr Sierra Match King available for the 338, which is considered by some as the best projectile in production. BC matters little to accuracy. What matters is consistancy of the flight of the projectile in terms of pressure/time in the barrel, velocity, precession, stability and similar factors. Where BC does matter is time of flight. The longer the time of flight the more magnified will the errors and inconsistancies be at the target. Dave Ferret50 |
|
And if it was possible to have an unbiased source, TeamFerret would be the one. He builds rifles and uppers in 50 BMG, 338 Lapua, and 408 Cheytac. He even offers field changeable barrels and bolts to convert a 50 to 338 Lapua. Anyway, thanks for the clarification, Dave. It was unfortunate that you couldn't make it to Raton this year. -David Edgewood, NM |
Armory Sponsor