When the Army decided to field the SPR & SPR-A rifles in the Philipines and Afganistan, why did they outfit them with the Leupold M3 over stuff like the US Optics or Trijicon ACOG?

When we first heard about the SPR it appeared to be designed to fill the role of medium range precision rifle, accurate beyond what standard M4's or M16A2's are capable of, without being a full blown sniper rifle.  Now the whole concept looks like its gone downhill to the point of being nothing more than a Spec Ops "My gun is cooler than yours" competition. Must be fun having all that money to play with when the tax payers want blood ;)

Hey Guys,

It is my understanding that these rifles were built by the Army Marksmanship Unit for the Spec Ops Guys. It is what they wanted. They have great flexability to use what they want and their seem to be allot of them fielded in the current configuration. I think they have what they want.

I understand that price is an issue it always is when you are limited to issue Items, however these guys are usually not limited to Issue Items, they usually have more flexability than regulars.
Lets not forget the whole HK offensive handgun project for SOCOM, Have you seen any of those GIANT guns being carried?
Fact is that with the limited ranges of the 5.56mm round 62 and 77 gr. bullets, 800m is about it. Anything beyond that is going to be tough, an 800m. shot takes a considerable amount of raw tallent even for the best shots, especially when you consider wind dope, slope dope and all the other dopes encountered in real world terrain. I still believe that the same mission can be accomplished with an SN4 or 12 in a much more compact package.
IMHO
cp

EagleCp and others the US Army already uses the M3A - why add more types of glass - when teaching a Sniper - i.e. the SOTIC course - using the M24 w/ M3A (possibly switching to the M3LR) why not then use the M3LR on the SPR - commonality of training - which makes stresful action easier to replicate.

Quoted: AR15fan, The collapsible stock has no bearing, it is an operator mod.  I happend to like being able to adjust my LOP to different positions. I have yet to see a SPR with an Aimpoint mounted - not to say it does not happen.  I have seen SR-25's mounting aimpoints for use in Urban areas - this would be an option if one was issued a SPR and was going to be exclusivley in an urban setting and not required to place sub-moa results.

Hi ya,

Vic here....The SPR I built for my LE community did utlilize both a Comp-M and the Leupy for perimeter 30yrd and in work. We changed back and forth. Presently, since our Doc Optics rest atop the Leupy, we now have the BEST OF BOTH WORLDS for our wonderful bad people. btw...nice topic!

Vic

Canadian Tac.
This is true, However, The Army also widely uses the TAO1NSN and this sight has seen extensive use in the Current War, like you said "commonality which makes stressful action easier to replicate." I know, I know, the TAO1NSN is calibrated for the 14.5 inch barrel but I use it on a 20" bushy Flat Top and at 400 to 600 meters as long as I take a 6 o'clock hold on the pop up target its bye-bye baby.
Remember I really like the M3LR scopes but I just think that on this particular system there may be better choices in a more compact scope to accomplish the same missions.
cp
out!

As far as collapsible stocks go, they make a lot of sense for modern military applications.  The best use is while wearing body armor, especially utilizing a four position stock.  For a smaller guy, wearing body armor and shooting a full length stock can be a bit odd; forget a good checkweld and I'm screwed if the optics have a short eye relief.

I am setting up my SPR with a TA31, but i can see why the Army used the M3. a M3 does give you the flexibility to use a 3x to 10 x.  If I had to take a shot out to 500 plus yarss, I rather have a M3 instead a TA01, or SN4.  besides, I think SN4 is a great optic, but it is just over rated.