Okay, let's say you're in the market to build or buy a dedicated flexible marksman-type rifle, but because the M1a and the mags themselves are pricy, wouldn't an SPR type rifle be just as good as an M1a?  Or is this simple asking too much from the 5.56mm cartridge?

Seems to me that having an SPR-type coupled with 75gr or 77gr bullets would be a cost effective alternative to investing in an M1a and the related gear necessities.

I know that this may be a bit of stretch in comparing these two different rifles, but what do you guys think?

(I know that a TRUE SPR clone can get up there in price, but at least I have enough mags to cover the AR platform, can't say the same for an M1a).

Wasn't the SPR made to fullfill such a role anyway?  Or was it more of a logistics deal (i.e. keep exisiting weapon plaform, minimal training req's, parts availability, etc.)?

I guess I'm trying to justify whether I should buy an M1A in order to satisfy my urge to have a rifle that can be used to reach out to 400-600yds...or whether I should just stick with my trusty AR and just get an SPR-type upper (I won't have to worry about having "enough" mags wtih this one, either).

What is the purpose?

Competitively speaking (go to Jarheadtop.com)
this is Jim Owens Website (he lead the jarhead rifle team to victory 6 years in a row. He says the .223 is superior for match shooting at 1000yds and below.  And yes he uses a .223 at Camp Perry every year depending on condidtions he uses 75grain A-MAX or 80grain VLDs and 68grain ammo at 600yds and below. Call him if you want advice he will let you know what works.

With the 75 grain A-MAX you could probably get consistent reliable kills at 1000yds on human or deer sized targets but with heavy match bullets that don't expand I doubt you would see much success past 700yds.

[b]If it is competition or just accuracy I would reccommend a simple RRA SS DCM Ar-15 (you could have one made with a flattop upper if you planned on using a scope and not competing)[/b]

For serious heavy volume varminting go with a DCM lower (speed black instead of front post) and FF RAS/ RRA SS 1:8 DCM barrel. this will allow for greater cooling without buying all the expensive PRI,  Ops Inc stuff and sighting accessories.


If you are looking for a SWAT/TACTICAL/SNIPER gun that is up to date on features [b]then I would reccomend digging deap for SPR $$$$[/b]

The SPR gives you more tactical flexibility and equal or better accuracy to a DCM rifle. But that flexibility comes at a steep price.

By the way getting rid of the M1A is a good idea.

The Ar-15 balances a lot better than the M1A (you will see an instant gain in accuracy on and even more so off the bench).

That comes from experience (my $2600 M1A would not outshoot my $950 RRA DCM rifle)

I should have made that clear.  Yes, I'm looking more for something along a TACTICAL/SNIPER rifle.  I know that I'll never use it for those purposes, but I want something that I know would easily handle that role without second guessing the rifle's ability to do so.


 

SPR.

Their might be cheeper ways to get the accuracy, but they would weigh more.

For example, build a DCM but with a FF rail forend and and a flat top instead of the A2 "look alike" forend and A2 upper. But those extra heavy match barrels would add more weight.

You would need two scopes on ARMS QD mounts. One would be a ACOG. The other, something in 3-9x variable, but what would depend on what you could afford to pay. The 5.5x TA-55 might work if you don't want two scopes, it has BAC but might be lacking at the upper end.

Oh, wait a minute. Urbankaos04 only said 600m. TA31F on a 20" should handle it. M16A4 barrel might even be enough.

Then the answer is clear :

SPR (It has a scope, you can mount a bi-pod to the rails, if the target is hostile and in strength you can use a sound suppressor to conceal your position, if the mission is at night you can QD optics and add a night scope or IR laser, if you damage the optics or lose zero you can just flip up your back up iron sights- or add a secondary emergency back-up reflex sight etc.  It has tactical supremecy over any DCM rifle and most M1A's under the $5500-$6500 range.
But that doesn't change the fact that it is cost prohibitive to build (which is part of the reason the entire US armed forces only have around 1500 of these).

(I only reccomended the DCM because they are accurate, balanced right stock and cost under $1000)



There are good compromises if you don't have $3500+ Optics $ (+ optional sound suppressor $) to build a pre-ban SPR with.



These include a simple AR-15 with PRI or other brand front sight, KAC 600M (or cheaper) rear sight, KAC FF RAS (or Carbon fiber FF tube), or ARMS SIR, Krieger SS 1:8 double cryoed barrel, 2 stage trigger and scope with normal $100 throw lever rings (not the $350 SPR setup.  that would run in the $1650-$2000 range.

[b]I allready built (and am still building my compromise gun) < it is a $5000 M4 with ACOG

It has to fullfill my CQB/0-300 meter and SPR/600meter requirement.

If I have to take a shot past 600meters I'm going to have to get walking/running because I deffinitely don't have the $ to build an SPR also.[/b]

How about an AR10?

go for a Varminter.  Heavy grain.  Awesome set up and performs great.

But doesn't Varminter have 1 in 9 twist and isn't it not very stable for shooting 75gr +?

My RRA Varminter is 1 in 8 twist  Wilson barrel

As much as I love my M1A I'll have to say the following.  It was designed and built as a battle rifle.  It CAN be made into a designated marksman type rifle, but accurizing it involves a decent stock (i.e. McMillian ideally) and having it bedded.  THEN you add the scope mounting issues and the difficulty of maintaining a consistant mount.

If you want semi-auto, a precision AR will be simpler to maintain.  Go SR25 or AR10 if you want the 7.62 NATOs power.

If pure precision is what you are looking for...bolt gun.

true.  for whatever reason my Varminter can do sub moa groups with 77 grain Federal Gold Match at 100.  haven't tried it at longer ranges yet.

I'm sure a 1:7 is better.

Yes is sounds like a good  thing ,  some of us have a thing in that deep place where once feeling were kept  and in that place is a dark corner and in that corner is a glass case and above the case says "BREAK GLASS IN CASE OF WAR" and in that case is my

Springfield Armory XM-21 with only 4 numbers in the serial number and a REAL leatherwood teloscope .

So i know how you feel

MONGO

If you are talking .308 I reccomend an Ar-10

From my experience with my SA M-21 I realized:

1. The stock is not epoxy impregnated or laminated and will be destroyed by warpage in humid climates
2. the gun shot 1/2MOA-1MOA (not spectacular and I don't know wether it was mounts or what but there were a lot of variables)
3. removing the action from the stock could damage bedding (if it rains on you you have to protect those parts from rust)
4. Without a FA sear the M1A can fire with the bolt open causing an explosion (unlike the Ar-10)
5. weight is very heavy

to correct the defficiecies that I could correct I would have to replace the stock with a Fiberglass Mc Millan and possibly get some Op-rod work through Accuracy speaks and get it finished in Teniffer through EGSW (melonite is licensed tennifer).  At that point my M-21 would be a $5400 gun with the optics and would still be heavy and harder to maintain than the AR-10

[b]The AR-10T for $2400-$3000 with optics will do everything an M21 can do without the 21lb weight (that was what mine weighed with optics and bipod) [/b]

First, let me say that I like [b]BOTH[/b] the M16/AR-15 platform [b]AND[/b] the M14/M1A platform, so don't flame me too badly...

That being said, here's my opinion:

The 5.56mm NATO/.223 round is all fine and dandy for punching holes in paper and shooting in matches. BUT...I really don't consider it a serious anti-personnel round much past 300 meters(330 yards). The lighter projectile is also more prone to wind drift. Heck, the 75gr./77gr. bullets you're thinking about using weigh right about HALF of what the standard bullet from a round of 7.62mm NATO M80 Ball ammo weighs(147grs.). Match bullets weigh even more, with the two most common weights being 168gr. and 173gr.  

The 7.62mm NATO/.308 round starts with more energy at the muzzle than the 5.56mm NATO/.223 and carries that quite substantial advantage down-range to the target at whatever range it is.

You can talk 'til you're blue in the face, but there's really not anything you can say that's going to convince me that the 5.56mm NATO/.223 round is overall equal to/better than the 7.62mm NATO/.308 round.

I'll always consider the 5.56mm NATO/.223 round as a short- to moderate-range cartridge.

I like the M14/M1A rifle, but it indeed was designed as a "battle rifle". It is, after all, pretty much a "product improved" M1 Garand. Being such, it takes more modification & specialized parts(read as: MORE $$$, MAYBE MUCH MORE $$$) to make one match rifle/sniper rifle accurate.

That being said, the M1A I currently own was assembled using all USGI Winchester parts on a Springfield Armory, Inc. receiver. It wears a USGI synthetic stock that has had the selector cut filled in and a black texturized finish applied. There are NO National Match parts on this rifle, yet it shoots sub-MOA with Federal Gold Medal 168gr. Match ammo. And did I mention that's with iron sights? My dedicated precision bolt-action rifle doesn't shoot much better than it does. I've mounted an EO-Tech 552 on it, but it shoots so well, I'm considering putting some sort of magnifying scope on it for use at longer ranges. I got the rifle after reading/seeing [i]Black Hawk Down[/i] and liked the concept of a fast-pointing optical sight on a rifle with more muscle than a M16A2/M4 Carbine.

Yeah, I know that for a M1A to shoot that good, you normally have to spend some serious coin. You really don't want to know how cheaply I got this rifle...[:D] God was truly with me that day.

Whatever choice you end up making, both options you're considering look rather pricey.

But it all boils down to this:

Do you simply want to hit the target OR do you want to hit it with [b]AUTHORITY[/b]?

BTW- If you really like the AR platform, then you might want to consider the AR-10. Magazine prices, however, border on the edge of "wallet rape"...

sgtstinger;

If you have a non-match grade M1A with G.I. barrel & fiberglass stock that shoots at or below 1 MOA, even at 100 yd., with a safe trigger, no bedding and irons, you truely are a lucky man...you should have bought a lottery ticket that day!

urbankaos04;

It usually takes a lot of time and money to get an M1A to shoot well consistently, and even then the platform mostly sucks for using optics. While I know the 7.62x51mm is a stronger cartridge than the 5.56mm, it also: is heavier...a lot heavier...and the rifles that utilize it are heavier...and the loaded mags are heavier; generates more recoil, even in those heavier rifles; bucks wind better, but wind is not a major consideration at less than 500yd. unless it is "real" wind and not a breeze, and the heavy 5.56 stuff will also do fairly well; requires, for you, a complete, additional setup of rifle, mags, ammo, etc.

You need to ask yourself what you would like the rifle to do besides hit a target at 400+yd. If you want to punch hard cover, or shoot more at extended distances, especially in windy conditions, the 7.62 is probably best...in the AR10. If soft targets at shorter ranges, or paper out to 800 or so is your most likely use, would go with the 5.56. If you think you may have to haul it around on your back, you can haul over twice the ammo easily at equal weight.

Even though I have both 7.62 and 5.56 rifles, given your limited description, I would think the 5.56 will suit you fine.

I bucked the trend and bought both, an M1A (scoped) for long range (past 600 yards) and I have a M4gery for close in work.

:)
Alex

If you want a precision rifle to be used as a counter-sniper weapon for immediate "stops" at long range, IMO you will need to go with a .308.  It is my opinion and the opinion of many police snipers and instructors that the .223 round does not have sufficient energy at long range for immediate "stops".  
No, I don't want to get shot with a .223 at any distance but I also don't want to bet my life on it as a long-range counter-sniper round.
Keep an AR for general purpose as a patrol rifle but go with .308 if you are going to go with a dedicated counter-sniper weapon.
If you want the best accuracy in that caliber, go with a bolt rifle or consider one of the AR-type semi-auto .308 rifles.  If you go to the DPMS board on the Industry section, you will find a review of the new DPMS .308 that we tested for exactly this purpose.  It performed very well for a rifle that was just getting broken in.  It doesn't cost much more than an entry-level bolt rifle and costs less then most custom bolt-rifles.
Good luck whatever you decide.

EPD1102--

Yeah, I'm beginning to think that maybe I'm asking a bit too much from the 5.56 at extended ranges (but didn't the SPR do well in A-stan?).

One last thing, how well will the .308 punch through hard cover (can you guys give some examples of this?) at, say, 600 yds?  

Even though I am having to sell this I really like the setup and its performance is top notch.
[img]http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid60/p01a814aa5ed71191513ac8d6bbd87145/fc407d38.jpg[/img]
bcr308

On AR15 Ammo Faq, there is a section named how well SS109 penetrates. At the end of that section, it says SS109 cannot penetrate single city block while 7.62 penetrates two easily.

[url]ammo-oracle.com[/url]

Well that is fine if you have a requirment to shoot through bricks.

For most situations when you would need more power than a 5.56, a 7.62x51 is not the best alternative. One of the various .300 magnums would be better thowing moly-coated 240gr SMKs. If you are not limited to using something you already have in inventory as the Army and Marines largely are you should get something that is truely superior.

ikor-

Yeah, I was really suprised when I took it to the range for the first time. I was shooting it with Spanish-made Santa Barbra mil-surp ball ammo. I was shooting 5-shot groups and they were going into 2" - 3" at 100 yards, which I was pretty happy with. Well, I also had packed along 10 rounds of Federal Gold Medal 168gr. Match ammo. So I loaded 5 rounds into the mag and fired the first group. Well, when I get to the target, I discover that the 5 shots had gone into 2 holes. 4 into one good cloverleaf and 1 flyer that was almost touching the other shots. I could cover the group with a nickel. "Well, f**k me. It must be some kind of fluke...let's try that again!" I thought to myself. I load the next 5 founds into the mag and put them down-range. This time, the 5 shots went into 3 holes. One good cloverleaf and two flyers that were almost touching each other and not much further from the cloverleaf. This group was just slightly larger than a nickel, but could still be covered by a quarter. I think I've got a keeper...[:)]

I'm going to take it out this weekend and try it out with the EO-Tech 552 that I put on it.

stgstinger1,

Never change anything in your rifle. I was going to get M1A first then recently their quality decreased because they ran out of GI parts.

stgstinger1,


YOU LUCKED OUT!

Mine was scoped with a 4-14 2nd gen gov't model and had a double lugged (reciever) had a Douglas match barrel, fiberglass bedded stock, match FS, and 2-stage trigger (along with all that other Match BS that SA uses.  It would do 1/2MOA and then 1MOA and then 1/2MOA and maybe 1.25MOA  

I wasn't impressed.

My old bolt gun (.300 mag M-70) I sold shot consistantly under 1/2MOA at 100yds.

[b]The reason for going with the AR-10 is that they are far more scientific (you get an AR-10T and IT WILL shoot 1/2MOA to 3/4MOA consistently at 100yds.

remember the reason SF still uses M-14's is that they are allready in the inventory- if they had their choice it would probably be the SR-25 like the SEALS use. I can't imagine having to do a water insertion with an M-14 on a regular basis - if you didn't strip it in time the whole internals would be red with rust. [/b]

I don't know why people always act like .308 has great killing power at range (at 1000yds from a M1A it is traveling 1100-950fps and that is with a 147 or 168grain bullet (in other words at 100yds it is like shooting (9mm rounds and Sierra MK's don't expand when 9mm hydra shok will).

Killing power? that's a .300WIN MAG game  

FWIW- My M1A was assembled by Ted Brown, who is a pretty darn good M1A 'smith. Could that possibly have something to do with it's accuracy? Maybe...[;)]

My personal self-imposed maximum range limit with the 7.62mm NATO/.308 round is 600 yards. Anything farther and I'd want a .300 Winchester Magnum or possibly a .50 BMG.  

I concur with that, in terms of

A.Immediate stop
B.Bullet drop / trajectory

GreenO......how stupid can you possibly be? It has been MONTHS since I have read anything as idiotic as you have posted.
Jim Owens(jarhead team) 6 victories in a row?
Where? I have shot on ALL WI state teams with Jim as coach(and shooter)for 20 years and he knows the 308 vs 223 game as well as anyone.

223 superior at 1000+ yards? Have you ever shot a long range match? See you at Lodi at long range regionals and palmas this summer.

Owens uses 223 at Perry? Ask him when he shot Perry last with 223.

Your $2600 MIA would not outshoot your 950 RRA DCM? Not possibly shooter was it? Who double lugged your MIA? Not Springfield. Never. You probably had some Mall Ninja build your gun, or read about it in a magazine.

Slam fire without FA sear? In a M14 trigger group? Do you mean disconnector? IDIOT!

Alex F and Sgt Stinger did the right thing, but then again they sound like riflemen, not bullshit artists like you. Yes, this is a rant!
My concern is that new shooters would believe the garbage you have posted.

True riflemen will ultimately own AR15's, MIA's, AR10's, and enjoy the different calibers, but never believe the 223 is viable beyond 300yds except for punching paper.

...and thats why you need different guns for different jobs, which means go out and buy that damn thing! [:D]

Damn I guess I really have to get an AR10A4... I know shot placements are more critical but still, you know.

GreenO......how stupid can you possibly be? It has been MONTHS since I have read anything as idiotic as you have posted.
Jim Owens(jarhead team) 6 victories in a row?
Where? I have shot on ALL WI state teams with Jim as coach(and shooter)for 20 years and he knows the 308 vs 223 game as well as anyone.


[b]Last time I talkedto Jim Owens He said he preffered the .223 for DCM matches and used one at Camp Perry to shoot 1000yds

I don't see the big issue here Armalite sponsered a man last year who won Camp Perry with a Armalite DCM Ar-15

Jim Owens led the Marine Crops Rifle team to victory in 6 out of the 7 years that he led it- long time ago. (I wasn't talking about some civilian team he now runs- at his age he would be lucky to win anywhere he is getting pretty old I know he still competes but I doubt he is a candidate for winning the nationals)[/b]

223 superior at 1000+ yards? Have you ever shot a long range match? See you at Lodi at long range regionals and palmas this summer.


[b]No I haven't but I've talkedto enough people like you to know you obviously shoot an M1A and obviously are terribly closed-minded and biased toward it
I have owned andfired both and don't plan on getting another M1A[/b]

Owens uses 223 at Perry? Ask him when he shot Perry last with 223.

[b]Last year when I talked to him he said that he was currently shooting DCM and 1000yd matches at Camp Perry with a Ar-15[/b]

Your $2600 MIA would not outshoot your 950 RRA DCM? Not possibly shooter was it? Who double lugged your MIA? Not Springfield. Never. You probably had some Mall Ninja build your gun, or read about it in a magazine.


[b]I bought my gun from Springfield and it had the shipping tag,SA certificate of authenticity, and assorted BS to proove it- it was one of a very limited 1993-1994 run of PRE-BAN DOUBLE LUGGED RECIEVERS so reallyno-one double lugged it- it was built that way[/b]

Slam fire without FA sear? In a M14 trigger group? Do you mean disconnector? IDIOT!


[b] You need to use your brain a little more often

I said it WILL FIRE (NOT SLAM-FIRE) if you open your M1A's bolt 1/4inch to 1/2 inch and pull the trigger you will notice that the hammer falls unlike ar-15's and that hammer actually will hit the firing pin and causeyour rifle to explode THIS IS COVERED IN THE M1A OWNERS GUIDE SOLD BY FULTON ARMORY -- if your ammo is dirty or out of spec or your rifle jams with the bolt nearly closed it can fire out of battery and explode- M-14's will not as the sear will not allow the hammer to fall.[/b]

Alex F and Sgt Stinger did the right thing, but then again they sound like riflemen, not bullshit artists like you. Yes, this is a rant!
My concern is that new shooters would believe the garbage you have posted.

[b]I don't knowwhat exactly wins you the elevated and pompous title OF "RIFLEMEN"  I am a member ofthe Army National Guard (MOS: 11B) and have qualified Rifle Expert   the last three times I have qualified CONSECUTIVELY (std 300meter pop-up course qualified 39/40, 37/40, 37-40 and that mean I am currently meeting the criteria for entry into Army sniper school (although my unit does not have sniper slots [/b]

True riflemen will ultimately own AR15's, MIA's, AR10's, and enjoy the different calibers, but never believe the 223 is viable beyond 300yds except for punching paper.


[b]My breed of true rifleman knows that should his country call he will need to depend on his ability to save his life and kill the enemy from 0-550meters with the 5.56mm cartridge- I do not have the luxury of believing that it is good for nothing more than paper punching- to do so would severly limit my effectiveness as a soldier. People like you try to placedoubts in the minds of my fellow soldiers and it is wrong we are issued 5.56mm rifles and we have no choice but to depend upon them to kill out to the max effective range of our weapons[/b]

I'm not saying there aren't good M1A's but in order to address all the grievances I have with the system it would have to be:

A. M-14 ($8000 or so) to solve the open breech explosion worries.
B. finished in Tennifer $500
C. fully Accurized with a SS Krieger Barrel $1600-2000(consistently shooting 1/2 MOA or less
D. Have a Mcmillan ajustable fiberglass stock $750 bedded and ready to go.
E. Have a scope mounted with the SA whitefeather mounts ($??)

On a M-14 this costs approx: $12000 On a M1A this costs $5500 or so.


[b]WHY SPEND ALL THAT $$ WHEN I DON'T NEED FA CAPABILITY AND CAN BE WITHOUT THAT WORRY AND MASSIVE COST BY SPENDING $3000 ON A SCOPE EQUIPPED AR-10T?[/b]



[b]I've learned one thing over the years and thatis that I do not get lucky with guns- if I want the accuracy I am going to have to have it built accordingly[/b]

Look, guys...

I think we're pretty much talking about a counter-sniper rifle here. One's that more geared towards military applications & enviroments. I think that during/after Afghanistan, the Army & Marine Corps discovered that they needed something with a little more "reach" than the standard-issue M4 Carbine without having a dedicated sniper team attached to an Infantry Platoon. I'm not bad-mouthing the M4, so please refrain from flame-bombing me. FWIW-  I'm putting together an M4-clone as my current AR project.

There are obviously three schools of thought about how to solve the problem.

The first school of thought centers on a simply modifying the M16A2/M4 with a free-floated barrel that's longer and probably heavier. Also with some sort of magnifying sight. Fielding this concept Army & Marine Corps-wide would be relatively easy and inexpensive.

The second school of thought involves the M14, a 7.62mm NATO-chambered rifle that's still in the Army & Navy/Marine Corps inventory. While not a large number remains, there still should be enough to field the concept Army & Marine Corps-wide. Modifying the M14 shouldn't be all that hard, but there few armorers familiar with the M14 as compared to the M16-based family of rifles. Also, money-wise, we're talking about just a few simple modifications to each rifle, not a full-blown M21 conversion/build.

The third involves a blend of the first two concepts. An AR-based rifle in 7.62 NATO/.308 caliber, like the AR-10. [b]Holy Cow! Whoda thunk it?!?! The more powerful 7.62mm NATO round in a "package" that EVERY infantryman is already familiar with.[/b] The Navy SEALS are already using such a system. This would probably be the most expensive route, since all-new rifles would have to be contracted for.

The concept of having one marksman-type rifle, counter-sniper rifle, SPR, accurized rifle or whatever you want to call it in [b]EVERY[/b] Infantry Platoon is an idea whose time has come. Time will tell which route that the Army & Marine Corps will take. Surely there will be some politics involved. Surely there will be some controversy. Surely there will be different people unhappy with the choice for different reasons. But whichever choice is made, the folks on "our team" will have a better piece of equipment in the field with them.

GreenO-
I've carried a M16A2 rifle in defense of my country before. If need be, I'd [b]GLADLY[/b] do so again. I was trained on one and was quite competent with one. I always fired "Expert" during qualification. I also am not trying to "place doubts in the minds" of your fellow soldiers, please see the first two lines of this paragraph. I simply stated my opinion(please see the second line of my first post), which is still my right, isn't it?  

urbankaos04-
Sorry for "hijacking" your thread, bro. [BD]

Good Luck on you decision...please be sure to post pics!  

 

"The second school of thought involves the M14, a 7.62mm NATO-chambered rifle that's still in the Army & Navy/Marine Corps inventory. While not a large number remains, there still should be enough to field the concept Army & Marine Corps-wide. Modifying the M14 shouldn't be all that hard, but there few armorers familiar with the M14 as compared to the M16-based family of rifles. Also, money-wise, we're talking about just a few simple modifications to each rifle, not a full-blown M21 conversion/build."

[b]That is close to what the 82nd Airborne did-

I heard contracted rifles from Springfield Armory (probably m-14's) and I saw a picture of one- now looks can be decieving but I saw a std rifle (not a national match gun) with one of the bigger (I think it was) 5power ACOG sights.[/b]

As long as you have a platoon for support I guess you don't need XM21 XM-25  style "surgical precision" I think that was the solution for getting the range without breaking the bank.

[img]http://www.army.mil/operations/oef/images/1Apr0382nd4.jpg[/img]

[img]http://www.army.mil/operations/oef/images/1Apr0382nd6.jpg[/img]

[b]It looks like the ACOG and M-14 stock combination might not be very compatible with body armor[/b]

I think that is the first M-4 I've seen without the foregrip attached

MaverickMKii......you are correct and the AR10 platform is probably the "bridge" to our next battle rifle. It has all the benefits of the AR, no bedding, no gas piston, and the benefit of being able to exchange uppers in the field. Crane (naval spl warfare) has been experimenting with .243, .270, .276 etc calibers for 5 years that I know of, possibly more. The Picatinny rail opens all sorts of sighting options. A few of us here in the Milw area have the Eagle A4 short barrel with Aimpoint ML's and it is 1.5 - 2 MOA and tactically fast. If you decide to get one be sure to install D ring on extractor, mandatory for function below 30F.

Ok, I'm an AR10A4 moron, what is a D-ring? (is there a similar stuff for AR-15? I thought heavy duty springs were all I needed)

This kind of thing is extremely important to me since I was the only whacko in my area to go shooting when the it snowed to 20+ inches. (and got the car stuck, of course)

You're not a moron maverick, I didn't know what these were either until I had failure to extracts on a AR10T that was flawless in warm temps....anyway there are a number of mfrs offering d-rings or o-rings to beef up the extractor strength, and I believe Wolf spring Co offers heavy duty springs. My problems were solved with the Armalite service dept (o-ring) and haven't had a hiccup since. I actually put my lowers in a -10f freezer regularly to test various sights, etc and the weapon has been flawless.

Comforting to know there is another crazy out there shooting in the winter....but 20" of snow could is a push, you qualify as a honorary cheesehead.

OK, lots of topics covered in this thread, also lots of misinformation and plain old BS! I don't claim to know it all, but I do know the following for a fact:

Penetration - M855 (S109) 5.56 will out penetrate the 7.62 M80 Ball @ 800m! Check the NATO test results if you can't stomach that fact. And don't mention using 7.62 AP (black tip) either. Any leg knows that it was never issued to riflemen! MG's only.

Killing power - I'll be trite. It's where you place your bullet. With todays new soldiers, the green rifleman stands a better chance of hitting accurately with a 5.56 in the 'fog of war'. The 5.56 Mk262 Mod0 (77gr Black Hills) is doing a fine job in Afganistan and Iraq. This from returning SF people (including a GB Col.) and SOTIC instructors, not from wankers who get their info from glossy-paged magazines in the drugstore. Watch out for a new 6.7x43 round being put through its paces now. 125gr. BTHP @ 28ooMV!

M14's - Crane had the best 10,000 in the military put in storage. 3,000 were issued ti the USMC to be built up as DMR rifles quite a while ago. Many made it into combat. The photos that GreenO posted looked suspiciously like examples of them! Notice no stock liner screws, stocks appeared to be modified GI glass.

SPR's - Original intent was not only as a squad or platoon DMR. Other intended use was as a Sniper/Observer rifle, allowing better backup for the guy holding the M24 if the action got hot. The sniper would carry his M24 in the dragbag with his M4A1 in the slung position. His observer carries the SPR, extra ammo, spotting scope, etc.

SA M1A's - accuracy variable, quality variable - everyone knows this. Apparantly what escapes many is the ability and knowledge to mount a scope on this rifle PROPERLY! I'm not going into a lesson here and now, but lets just start with the fact that if you don't use either the BPT, ARMS or Smith Ent. mounts along with a set of REAL professional steel rings, you don't have squat. SA mounts are for posers! SA does, however, still manufacture and sell double-lugged receivers. They're to be found on the Super Match and White Feather models.

All in all, if you're convinced by reading the fantasies printed in the 'jerk-off' books and kicked around on the 'net by computer commandos, go ahead and flame away - 'cause you no longer posess the capability to learn the truth - so it doesn't matter what you think. If, on the other hand, you want to know the difference between fact and fantasy, go ahead and research what I've posted. Most of the value gained from the quest for the truth is learning how to find it.

McBoingBoing616... all good info and accurate, especially as it applies to the M25..except..Springfield SM receivers are single lugged at the rear only, the only double lugged receivers I am aware of are the USMC guns and some outstanding jobs done by Clint Fowler.

I had a ARMS mount but I mounted it myself (I used loctite and really torqued everything down- but I still think that the variances I had may have had something to do with scope mounting.) I'll never know but I really torqued those screws (with T handled allen wrenches and a spanner wrench mounted on a ratchet wrench.)

The 82nd DMR rifles may well be old ou-of mothballs M-14's (I was looking on military photos.net and saw a guy post that it was a new production M-14 from Springfield Armory

He was probably full of shit -- I was wondering why if they had a choice for new items they wouldn't have opted for AR-10T's

that explains that.

Accurate????

Are we sure the rifles used to build the DMR's came from inventory at Crane? Seems the Marines had plenty sitting around since they went to the M16A2's for match use. One of the big reasons for pushing the M14 for use in the DMR program was the cost savings from available inventory. Crane had little to do with the DMR program, WTB took care of this one.
Telling stories about a sniper carrying an M24 and an M4 and his spotter carrying an SPR. What the hell is that about. The SPR is a weapon peculiar to the NSWF community. One would think the M24 would be associated with an Army type. So how are we integrating these two weapons?
Why aren't you raising the BS flag on this one?

FWIW Sierra 80 gr .224 loaded in .223 Rem. can and do shoot inside of 175 gr from 308 Win at 600 yards i.e. less wind drift.

Ballistik,
          You're absolutely right about the difference between the SA rear-lugged receivers and the double-lugged variety, which outside of civy gunmakers, I've only seen on USMC team rifles. Sorry, temporary brain fart.

Hambone,
        You, however are an example of the type of people that my post was aimed at.
First - you say that Crane had little or nothing to do with the USMC M14-based DMR? In fact, most of the ex-team rifles were flat worn out! The rifles were procured from Crane at the cost of $1 each and shipped to Quantico for rework. I never said that they were built at NSWC Crane, so please don't put words in my mouth, and read more carefully before you try to jump in my shit.

Secondly - It appears to me that you lack facts or reading comprehension. The BS Flag is not just raised, it's flying high! The SPR in all of its variations is a SOCOM rifle. That means just about every branch EXCEPT the USMC gets this rifle. It was developed originally by the USAMU, (that's ARMY!) on a conversion of the SFG (that's ARMY) Enhanced Carbine at SOCOM's request. It was adapted for SF use in several different variants, all in use today. The US Army has snipers, trained at Benning Sniper Schools, and also has SF Snipers, trained by SOTIC at Bragg. This is where the doctrine of sniper/M24, observer/SPR was originated! The SOTIC instructors train the snipers that may go back and in turn become sniper instructors at Benning.

Finally - You need to go out and buy a new can of Campbells, 'cause you've mixed up all of the letters in your alphabet soup. I believe that the rifle you're refering to is the USMC SMR or Special Marksman Rifle. Very similar to the Army's SPR, or Special Purpose Rifle that I refered to in my previous post. You didn't even hit the backer on this one.

Don't cause me to embarass you by doing your homework for you again. Read the posts thoroughly and do the research before cocking your keyboard! A little etiquette lesson is called for - Don't be so eager to rudely call somebody out on something before you politely ask them for clarification. The face you save may be your own.

McBoingBoing616

Jump in my shit?

Hit the backer?

Cock your keyboard?

You crack me up. Sounds like you have been in Bldg4 at Quantico.
The intent here is to try and help the newbies and keep them from making the mistakes I (we?) made many years ago, before the internet.

But I enjoyed your rant. Campbells soup? Waaaaaa

"THE ONLY GOOD DEMOCRAT IS A DEAD ONE"


DAMN RIGHT! (unless of course they are the dumb FL variety that vote for republicans by accident)

Because AR-10T's take a special magazine. You have to have your M-14 mags modified to fit. And its never been used in combat so they don't trust it. M-14's and M1A's-and some were M1A's M14s dont come in green cammo pattern synthetic stocks- take a magazine that is in stock and has a NSN number and doesn't need to be reworked by a armorer.

The 101st Airborne got a $30 Million supplemental to buy mission specific equipment before the start of this war. And they did buy some Springfield M1A's with synthetic stocks with some of that money-along with things like battle axes, scaleing ladders, grappling hooks, fire extinguishers, and other items for the city fighting they expected after they got out of the desert.

If the Army were to make a DMR standard the AR-10 or SR-25 would be a better choice and they could then buy mags in quantity.

ballistik,
          I agree with you 100% on the intent to help newbies avoid making the same mistakes that we did. Hell, I asked a question on this board a while back and when no one seemed to have the answer, I went ahead and performed the experiment myself, and posted it right here for the benefit of others! It dealt with the removal of the factory compensator from the Colt MT6400 (civy M4) and the subsequent installation of the SOG ARMORY A2 legal lookalike replacement. I'm not looking for accolades, just trying to explain where I'm coming from.

It's only when I try to seperate the wheat from the chaff on this site and get back stale Wonderbread covering green baloney do I get pissed off!

Come to think of it, what relevance does a round that won't feed through the AR15/M16/M4 magazine have to a discussion about sniper-DMR type rifles? I'm sure that we'd all just love to go into combat with a single-shot! FWIW - I refer to the 80gr. SMK load mentioned. Just to rub it in!

The AR10 issue is not dead by any means. I know that y'all realize that the only reason that the AR10 must use a slightly modified M14 magazine in its 20rd. version is the preban-post ban law pertaining to civilians. And don't even worry about them, they're good to go for serious use!

The Army, on the other hand, doesn't have to worry about Klintons silly-assed law, and ArmaLite is completley capable of making new mags for them.

If any of you read Precision Shooting (not any of that drugstore newstand crap) be looking for an article on the suitability of the AR10 w/Leupold LR M3 scope for military use as a sniper/DMR-type rifle. The author is Col. David Liwanag, SF, current CO of the USAMU, and just back from Iraq! I don't know when they'll publish it, but I do know that it's being written as I type this!