Armory Sponsor
Posted: 9/29/2008 12:30:23 PM EDT
|
It might be heresy asking this here... and it is a little apple to oranges, but... I'm wanting to get into some 'heavy" caliber shooting... mainly just for the fun of shooting things far away. I might get into competitions later; I might not. So, that said... Why should I get into .50 BMG vice .338 LM. I don't want to just put rounds down range, I want to do so accurately. 'Good' .50 is going to cost me just as much as .338, and the .338 should still be more accurate (assuming I do my part.) I may not be taking out an APC with it, but if I want to f-up an old car, I imagine the .338 will do well enough to put holes in an engine. There are some nice rifle options around for both calibers... but most .338s I can swap a kit for .308 (I have some FALs that I love, so keep a lot of .308 on hand.) Any thoughts? I'm still on the fence... |
|
I've followed the AR15.com mantra: Get Both. However, I understand that isn't always an option. Pros on getting the 50 BMG now: 1. Likely to be banned. 2. Likely to be banned first. 3. You can shoot FCSA or NCSA competition with it. 4. Its really cool. 5. It pisses off the liberals. 6. You put more lead/steel on target with one shot 7. Brass is CHEAPER than 338 Lapua Brass 8. Several guns available cheaper than a typical 338 Lapua 9. Loaded plinking ammo widely available 10. Surplus components widely available for cheap loading. Pros on getting the 338 Lapua now: 1. Lighter than 50 BMG, usable for hunting. 2. Ballistically similar to a 50 when you use 300 SMKs. 3. Typically more accurate than a 50 BMG 4. Uses standard reloading presses & die sizes 5. Brass is much more consistent than 50 BMG brass. 6. Burns 1/2 as much powder 7. Burns $0.035 primers 8. Accurate SMK Bullets cost $0.50 Cons for 50 BMG: 1. Heavy Gun 2. Specialty reloading tools & press 3. $0.35 primers 4. Twice the powder of 338 per shot. 5. $2.00 accura bullets (Amax) Cons for 338 Lapua: 1. No plinking ammo available. 2. Brass @ $2.10 each 3. Can't shoot it in F-class (muzzle brake) or FCSA competition All this said, I picked a 50 BMG first because of the potential for them to be outlawed first. I make most of my gun purchasing order decisions based upon my read of what Congress will do. Just thought i'd give you a few ideas based upon my opion owning both rifles. FYI my AR-30 338 Lapua shot a 0.337" 5-shot 100-yard group you can cover with a dime this past weekend with 89.0 RL 25, 300 SMKs, and Fed 215M primers. No special brass prep except for annealling every other firing and Partial FL sizing. I've shot several 10" groups at 1000 yards with my ALS 50 BMG and Amaxs and I don't shoot for group, I shoot for score. Never have shot my 338 past 600 yards and then only at steel. -David Edgewood, NM |
Point taken. I've got all that specialty ammo too. Not much opportunity to shoot the pyrotechnic stuff, though in the desert southwest. That stuff will seriously catch things on fire, especially the Spotter Tracers, with which I have personal experience in West Texas. -David Edgewood, NM |
The 50BMG is one bad ass looking weapon. However personally i would prefer to get a .338 lupa mag rifle since it just seems more practical of a weapon. The fifty is just so large and heavy i can't see myself wanting to lug that thing around. While the .338 i can carry like a regular rifle. Unless you already have a long range rifle, like say a .308 or something, then i would probably get the 50BMG since you already have a rifle to carry around. I'm not worried about them banning the 50BMG either. I'm thinking even if they do ban it, then i will get a 20mm rifle registered as a destuctive device to piss off the liberals even more 
|
+1.....apples to oranges. I believe the .338 Lapua was the 1st and only round designed specifically for sniper rifles. I guess you might say it bridges the ballistic gap between the .30 caliber and the .50 bmg. However, even though .50 bmg rifles are sometimes used as sniper rifles, they are not really accurate enough to be considered "true" sniper rifles, even with the best top notch ammo. I say if one wants the ultimate long range sniper rifle, he should buy a .338 Lapua precision rifle, but if one wants the ultimate long range destroyer of man, metal, and machine, he should buy a .50 bmg.  Due to the cost os ammo, I prefer a .300 Win Mag as a long range sniper rifle. But I also have a chubby for .50 bmg's. 
|
LOL. Go tell the FCSA guys that their rifles aren't "really accurate enough" and see what they say. You might want to put on multiple .308 trauma plates first, though. |
I was wondering how long it would take for someone to argue my general comments..... I never said they were not "really accurate enough" to get the job done. I said that 50's "are" used as sniper rifles, but are not really "true" sniper rifles. All that mass and power comes at the price of some accuracy. If you think about it, just about any fairly accurate rifle can be used as a sniper rifle, as there really is no standardized definition of a sniper rifle. However, "consistent" sub MOA accuracy is pretty much the general consensus. The US Military standards for a sniper rifle are even 1 MOA or better. And the "majority" of 50's out there are not capable of "consistent" sub MOA accuracy, even with good match grade ammo. Plus, there is no 50 out there that can do the kind of long range accuracy (1000+ yds) that a high end .338 Lapua Mag sniper rifle can do such as a SAKO or Accuracy International. That's really all I was getting at, especially since the original poster of the thread said that he may get into competitions later on. I wasn't not knocking the 50 by any means. In fact, I'm dying to get a Barret myself. But as with all rifles and ammuntion, they are application specific. If one needs to penetrate and/or kill at long or extreme ranges, the 50 is very likely the best solution. And I've seen some pretty amazing accuracy evaluations from 50's loaded with quality match grade ammo. But for human targets under 1800m, a .338 LM sniper rifle is the better choice, hands down unless we're talking about targets that are suspected to be wearing some seriously heavy duty body armor. In fact, the round has proven its ability to penetrate most military body armor at ranges up to 1000m and has a maximum effective range somewhere in the arena of 1700-1800m. This evaluation comparison of a .338 SAKO and AI show the SAKO TRG-42 putting 3-rounds into 3" at 940 yds.  Comparison |
|
Now actually, there are plenty of bolt action 50 BMGs that will shoot consistently sub MOA. Barrett 99, ALS, AR-50, State Arms, Ferret50, BGA Viper, McBros Tac-50, and probably several I am forgetting. Shooting Sub MOA at 100-200 yards and shooting Sub MOA at 1000 yards are two very different things that aren't related to the gun. At 1000 yards, its the shooter. So long as a gun will group 5 shots into 1-1.5 inches at 1000 yards, it'll be competitive at 1000 if the shooter does his part. That excellent group you speak of with a TRG-42 had a skilled shooter who was LUCKY as well as skilled. And in my opinion, 3-shot groups don't mean crap. They're just for gun writers to brag about. You have to get lucky to have some consistent conditions as well as the skill to read them and shoot the gun to get that sort of accuracy. At FCSA competition, we occasionally see 3-4" 5-shot 1000-yard groups with 50 BMGs. They're the exception rather than the rule a number of guns can do that with the right handload. It's the SHOOTER & conditions that make the real difference whether it can be done. And as for competition, you can't shoot a 338 Lapua in F-class anyway because they don't allow a brake and a 338 Lapua is brutally punishing without one. Of course you can't shoot one in FCSA (its not a 50). I don't think you can shoot one in ANY-ANY highpower competition because it has to be between .223 and .30 caliber. That said, 338 is more practical in most applications for long range shooting and is EASIER to load accurate ammo for, largely because Lapua brass is awesome and most 50 BMG brass requires a good bit of work to get to that point. In the end, if you really want a competition rifle, neither of these choices are suitable. Get a 6.5-284 for competition. Get a 338 Lapua for long range hunting. And get a 50 BMG for when a tyrant comes knocking. -David Edgewood, NM |
 I just got this 338LM last week. Price is a non issue because you just have to pay for descent guns. This is an AWSM. My next purchase is a 50 so Im starting the research now. Hope to get it in a few months was looking at the EDM or maybee the McMillan or maybee GA Precision. Rich |
As david said there are several rifles available that are just as accurate as their 338 brothers I think of the two I would get a 338. Lighter package, seems to be more load data, and the rifles themselves are a little less expensive. I own a Barrett 82. I got it to make big holes and big noise. If I remember correctly the current record for the longest shot by a sniper was a Canadian using a Mcbros based 50 |
I did it the other way around. That's my next purchase. I bought this the other day: 
|
Did you read the article? They are talking about 5 shots in 4 inches routinely at over a half mile. No matter what FCSA says, the .338LM is a better sniper weapon than the .50BMG. |
There's no reason to get into a pissing match here. My point is that there are very capable 50 BMG rifles AND SHOOTERS who can put 5 shots into 4 inches at 1000 yards. I don't believe there are many SHOOTERS who can put 5 shots into 4 inches at 1000 yards WITH ANY GUN routinely. Doping the wind is simply too big of a factor. My point is, an accurate rifle can't shoot consistent 5-shot groups less than 4 inches on a regular basis WITHOUT a hell of a shooter behind the trigger. I think sometimes we get way too tied up in equipment and forget that it's the SHOOTER that is responsible for long range accuracy. And "BETTER sniper weapon" is about as vague as you can get. Better for what? It all depends upon the mission parameters. Anti-personnel out to 1500 meters? 338 Lapua is likely better. Radar Control panel in a thick metal box at 1200 meters? Likely the 50 BMG would be better. Let's not over-generalize here. -David Edgewood, NM |
|
Fair enough... I didnt mean the question about reading as a slam in anyway, so if that was misunderstood I apologize. I agree with your points. I am not knocking the .50BMG as an accurate weapon. You are also certainly correct that the shooter is the important part assuming some level of quality in hardware. Agreed, "sniper weapon" is vague, however, I would use that term as an anti-personnel weapon and not anti-materiel. |
100% Agreed. -David Edgewood, NM |
Right. "No matter what the group of individuals who collectively have more experience at long-distance shooting than any other non-military organization in history say, I obviously know more about it than they do." Someone with experience will always tell you that suitability hinges on application, and there are no universal answers. Realistically, though, there's far more documented evidence of shooters taking .50s out past 2000 yards than there are of guys with .338s even coming close. Hell, look at Skip Talbot's shoots at 3500 yards. Half a mile is only 880 yards. The .338 has an advantage over the .50 at shorter distances, but it's never going to beat it for kinetic energy, versatility, or overall maximum range. |
|
Shot for shot, the 338 LM will get better accuracy from group to group than a 50 BMG. Very few, very very few 50 shooters can back up a good group with a .50 where as a 338 LM shooter can do more consistantly. For the most part the .50 BMG ballistic coefficients suck, and suck badly. After working at 2 different .50 manufacturerers, I can tell you with the variety of mil surp ammo out there, which the average .50 shooter will be firing, that the accuracy of most rifles is lacking. You will need very expensive to load ammo to get the most out of a .50 I've fired a lot of 338LM's. I would rather have one of those for precision long range marksmanship. Granted the .50 will tear shit up more effectively, but you have to hit it to destroy it. The M107 has problems currently tha the Army isn't happy about. Yes, some rifles have some truly amazing accuracy, but for the most part they are 3 MOA shooters with the ammo fed them. Some of the rifles are worse, I've seen it first hand. For anti personnel and true precision fire, give me the 338 LM. |
Just so we're comparing apples to apples, the highest BC 0.338 diameter bullet I know if is a Sierra Match King 300 grain HPBT which has a BC of 0.768. This is a dedicated precision/match bullet and retails for around $0.60 each. This is the bullet I shoot. A 250 gr Lapua Scenar 338 Bullet has a BC of 0.675 anc costs around $0.67 each. The highest BC 0.510 diameter bullet I know of is an 800 grain brass solid, as manufactured by Ten-X-Bullets, Barnes, Lapua, etc has a BC of 1.10. Price is $2.00 each. Even the readily available Hornady Amax has a BC of 1.050 for $1.50. Most mil-spec bullets for 50 BMG have BCs of around 0.65 because they were designed for machineguns, not for man-portable rifles. Now comparing 338 Lapua match bullets with mil-spec 50 BMG bullets for BC isn't really a fair comparison as there are no "BALL-quality" bullets for 338 Lapua, although there are some designs that meet the Hague Convention rules of combat. -David Edgewood, NM |
|
True. But for the most part recreational shooters will be firing mil surp stuff that has a BC of around .340. A lot of guys won't be buying the uber expensive projectiles for the .50's I've reloaded 338 LM rounds for about $2.00 each. I used the 250 Sierra's and Lapua brass with Federal Gold Medal Match primers and 4831SC powder. |
Comparing milsurp ammo 50 BMG to match-grade 338 Lapua is an unfair and inappropriate comparison meant to sway an argument in a particular direction. I'm sure anyone witha 50 that is serious about accuracy will be shooting match bullets, just like anyone serious about accuracy would buy a Lapua and not shoot the cheapest damn round nose soft-point .338 caliber bullets out there. As you can see, these rediculous arguments frustrate me to no end. Make fair comparisons. Different calibers Match to Match. Different calibers Milsurp to Milsurp. Same caliber Match to Milsurp is valid. Where do you get that there is any 50 BMG milsurp ammo with BC's of 0.340? Do some research. All US milsurp 50 BMG bullets are in the 0.6xx to 0.7xx range for Ballistic Coefficient. If you don't believe me, plug the specifics into any available BC calculator such as the one at www.handloads.com/calc/. Most FCSA folks that shoot a lot of milsurp will tell you that anything from M8 API to M33 ball will have around a 0.6x BC. Several of these cats I know have derived BC for their milsurp bullets by shooting them through chrony's at two ranges to develop true BC's. And they come out in the mid 0.6x range. THERES NO WAY ANY 50 BMG BOATTAIL BULLET FROM 633 to 690 GRAINS HAS A BC OF 0.340! And yeah, I can load 338 Lapua for around $1.17 a round. 300 SMK Bullet: $0.60 89.0 RL-25: $0.25 GM215M Primer: $0.04 Brass Wear: $0.23 (assumes 10 firings, anneal every othe firing, and $2.25 new brass) TOTAL RELOAD: $1.12 per round -David Edgewood, NM |
Armory Sponsor