How about selecting a Sniper Rifle?

B

Bill Marsh

Joined
Mar 26, 2002
Messages
1,861
I have always liked the idea of high tech rifles. Something that will put a hole anywhere you like from a long distance away. What optics? Caliber? Stock?

A close friend has a 300 mag Police sniper rifle that he really likes.

http://www.snipercountry.com/InReviews/Rem700PoliceDM_300WM.asp

I have not fired it. He lives near Los Angeles, but has invited me out. I have another friend here in Georgia who had one, but decided to sell it because "It hurts too much to shoot."

The curiosity is that my friend who likes the 300 mag is a Filipino. Very thin but tough guy. My other friend who sold his weighs at least 300 pounds. Another tough guy. I wonder if my Filiipino friend just recoils with the rifle blast while my big friend had to absorb the shock? :confused:

Whatever. Does anyone have an opinion about a good sniper rifle / optics combo that will deliver serious accuracy?
 
At what range?

Out to 300 meters, there are numerous rifles from Winchester, Savage, and Remington that will drill precise little .223 holes in your target all day long without beating up your shoulder. (They can shooter further, but you'll have to pay a lot more attention to wind and elevation, and be sure your rifle has a tighter twist for heavier bullets.)

In .308, you can repeat most of what I just said, only at 600 meters. Further if you're really good, etc, etc.

In .30-06, you can get another 150 meters or so.

Add another 150 meters for .300 WinMag.

More distance comes with more recoil and faster barrel erosion.

Now, there are some good wildcats that use 6mm or 6.5mm bullets, but you have to decide whether you're willing to roll your own, how accurate you want to be, and at what distance.

If you just want to shoot little one-hole groups at 100 meters, get a 6mm PPC. No recoil, incredible accuracy. Makes a good little deer round at that distance, too, and you can be good enough to put it right under their jaw.

John
 
Bill Marsh said:
The curiosity is that my friend who likes the 300 mag is a Filipino. Very thin but tough guy. My other friend who sold his weighs at least 300 pounds. Another tough guy. I wonder if my Filiipino friend just recoils with the rifle blast while my big friend had to absorb the shock? :confused:
Click to expand...

I used to see this all the time. The best I can figure is that your theory is correct -- a smaller shooter will move more, and therefore disappate more of the recoil. It's not a subjective thing either, it can be seen in the bruises or lack thereof.

The difference between a well-made sporting rifle and a production "sniper" or "countersniper" or "tactical" rifle is about $1000 and a Kevlar stock. The results on paper tend to be about the same, given the same shooter, glass, and ammunition.

If I wanted something that no one else at the range had and I had a good line of credit, I'd probably buy one of these. I'd stick a nice Leupold on top of it. There are scopes that are a bit better but the prices increase dramatically beyond that point and are not proportional to the performance IMO. I have absolutely no need for such a thing and will probably never own one, but I certainly wouldn't turn a free one down. (Now you guys know what I want for my birthday this year.)

How much do you want to spend? The sky's the limit.

There are a number of ways to get into a very accurate rifle for very little money (mine ran less than $200, glass and mount inclusive) but such solutions tend not to be very high tech, if that matters. :)
 
Dave Rishar said:
I used to see this all the time. The best I can figure is that your theory is correct -- a smaller shooter will move more, and therefore disappate more of the recoil. It's not a subjective thing either, it can be seen in the bruises or lack thereof.

The difference between a well-made sporting rifle and a production "sniper" or "countersniper" or "tactical" rifle is about $1000 and a Kevlar stock. The results on paper tend to be about the same, given the same shooter, glass, and ammunition.

If I wanted something that no one else at the range had and I had a good line of credit, I'd probably buy one of these. I'd stick a nice Leupold on top of it. There are scopes that are a bit better but the prices increase dramatically beyond that point and are not proportional to the performance IMO. I have absolutely no need for such a thing and will probably never own one, but I certainly wouldn't turn a free one down. (Now you guys know what I want for my birthday this year.)

How much do you want to spend? The sky's the limit.

There are a number of ways to get into a very accurate rifle for very little money (mine ran less than $200, glass and mount inclusive) but such solutions tend not to be very high tech, if that matters. :)
Click to expand...



Dave,

I really like the Walther WA 2000, distinctive look. Love the bullpup design. But two problems. Apparently they made less than 200 of them from a 1970s design and I burned my mouse finger clicking on the price. $9,000 w/o glass in 20 years ago!!

I like the .308 caliber. I thnik that the 300 mag might be more than I want to trigger off, but maybe I will visit my friend in California and try his gun. I would be somewhere in between my large and small friends in that I am 6'1" and weigh 200 pounds.

But I do like an unusual look to a rifle, like the Walther WA 2000. But even if I could find one, I doubt that I would pay the price.

I have a 30-06 S&W Bolt action rifle and it is pretty accurate. I just fantasize about a kevlar stock bullpup with a good 'scope.

I had one of the Steryr AUG Green rifles and few years ago. Neat looking. Very underpowered scope. Paid $600. SOld it for $2400. :D :D :D Thought that I had really made a killing (sorry about that), but now I see them in the $6,000 range! :( :o :mad: :(
 
Recoil and whether or not it bothers you is largely psychological. Yes, there is a poiint where pretty much anybody will get there butt stomped but for most it is mental and something that can be trained away.
If you want to try precxision shooting but are not ready to dump $$ into a custon:
1) FN SPR
2) Savage Tactical in the McMillan A3 stock
3) Remington P series
4)Howa Varmint/CZ Varmint
5) Rem VLS(varmint laminated Stainless)
Any of these will give you a nice shooting rifle- may need bedding,trigger work and crown inspection by a good smith. They will get you shooting, see if you treally like it and hold resale well if you don't like it. A day of training with an instructor will help to get the most from your rifle.
Optics:
1) Nikon Buckmaster 4.5-14 Mildot/target turrets(250.00)
2) SS10X42 from SWFA(300.00)
3) Sightron S3(??)
4) IOR 2.5-10X42 P8(600-750)
5) Nikon Tactical(600-800)

This is all about "starting" if you were serious about "sniping" you would not be asking :) LOL!!!

If serious:
1) GAPrecision.net
2) Search Terry Cross KMW solutions
3) Jerry Rice at NorCal Precision
4) Jared Joplin
Optics:
1) USO
2) Schmidt and Bender
3) IOR

Bill
 
One rifle I forgot- If you can find an older Winchester HBV with Stainless barrel in mint condition- They are real shooters...
Bill
 
All the major makers will have a rifle suitable for accurate long range shooting. I'd probably go Savage because of cost. Why pay more?



munk
 
Dave,

Inquiring minds want to know. Less than $200 with glass??

I'm all ears. It would be hard to get a Handi Rifle all set for that little.

Do tell!

Tom
 
I'd like to know how he does it too. Must buy a military surplus mauser, and add a scope for a 100.00

Interesting thing about Leupold glass; my late great gunsmith friend did not like it. Go figure. I like it OK- can't seem to get quite as sharp a pict as say a Burris...I can't afford it anymore anyway. Isn't it Simmons that has a new good cheap scope?


munk
 
How could I forget the milsurp route?

:o

I guess a MN, scout mount, and low price scope would do it.

K31 probably too, as well as a Mauser.


Still would like the specifics though!

Tom

PS Always liked Leupold. Burris does have great clarity, but the eye relief didn't seem as generous.
 
You could always go the custom route and have someone build you one. I've always lusted after the USMC M40A1 built off a Remington 700 action synthetic stock heavy barrel Leupold scope, i miss playing with those.
 
Sheesh- you know how much the military pays for those!!!??? A bunch. A whole whole bunch- when they're done tricking it out and throwing away what they don't want I think it's well over 5000 bucks. It might be 8 or 10- don't recall.

munk
 
So, again, Bill:

At what range? And at what kind of target?

If this is a dedicated paper puncher or varmint gun (also useful on annoying humans), a .223 or .22-250 may do everything you want, for as far as you want- with little recoil and flat trajectory.

There are a number of ways to get into a very accurate rifle for very little money (mine ran less than $200, glass and mount inclusive) but such solutions tend not to be very high tech, if that matters.
Click to expand...

I'd be interested, too, Dave. Especially since I can't see any except for the 6.5mm Mausers being described as "very accurate", and the base rifle alone would run over $200, and even NEF rifles with glass would be more. Give.

J
 
gravertom said:
Inquiring minds want to know. Less than $200 with glass??
Click to expand...

I got my Savage .270 at a gun show for $150. I put a Bushmaster lense on it for $89. The groups at 200m are practically touching each other. I know many would say "yeah but that's a deer rifle", right. But I say, "what's the difference?":D

Well, I think a good question is what are the Army snipers using today? What were those guys in that movie Jarhead shooting? Those seemed compact, light, and accurate. Is that the trifecta that distinguish "Sniper Rifle" and "Deer Rifle"? I'm curious myself.
 
The military tends to use heavy-barreled variants of the Remington 700. They are heavy. The problem with using a HB distance rifle for hunting, is that it's just hard to maneuver with a deer looking at you, because of the weight and long barrel.

I HAVE done it, but my mojo was strong that year. Took a little buck with a Remington 700 PSS loaded with .308 armor-piercing expanding rounds (Winchester 180-grain SXTs) at 96 yards, IIRC. Fired one-handed, with the buttstock in the center of my chest, from a tree stand. Little buck ran 30 meters, and lay down.

Not a practical deer rifle, unless your shots are long, and you have a rest or bipod.

John
 
Is the HB for accuracy? I thought it was used in barrels to keep the heat/ware to a minimum. That wouldn't really be an issue in a sniper would it?

I guess you have to give up accuracy at greater distances when you start shortening the barrel? Those Rem700's have 24" on them, and go steady at 600m, right? So what happens when you come down to 20", and 18"? Cuz Ive been thinking of going to a composite stock (wood is perty but heavy) and an 18" barrel bolt action for hunting. It would just be easier to walk around with. I would think the same for snipers. Why would they need to carry those monsters? I thought they'd want to be stealthier and less weighed down?
 
BTW, if I had the 9K, I'd just spring for the Barret .50. Noones mentioned it, so I thought I'd throw that up for discussion sake. Heard she throws em steady up to 2 miles.:D
 
Well, in theory, barrel stiffness does two things: reduces harmonics/vibration in the barrel, and keeps the barrel from heating up as quickly (which can cause movement of point of impact from point of aim).

IN THEORY, a shorter, stiff barrel will be as accurate- and perhaps even more accurate- than a longer barrel, because there will be less barrel length for vibration in the barrel to disturb bullet path. What will change is velocity. The shorter barrel will be more repeatable, but the velocity loss will cause more of a rainbow trajectory, making elevation for shots at distance harder.

In reality, all bullets describe something off an elongated half-circle, dropping from the barrel from the moment of firing. They all fall at the same rate- gravity- but their velocity will put them at different points than each other. At longer distances, the shooter's barrel is actually pointing up, while the optic ('scope) is pointing at a much lower point, where the target actually is. For those without a lot of time and dedication, higher velocity rounds make real world hits easier. If cartridge A has dropped 10" at 200 meters, and cartridge B has dropped 5" at 200 meters, which will have dropped more at 500 meters? :D

The down side, is that larger-bore, higher velocity rounds will usually erode barrels a lot quicker, and have more recoil. Higher velocity, smaller bore rounds will have little drop, and not a lot of recoil, but lighter weight bullets will tend to lose energy more quickly at range...at which point, they drop. They are also easier to be blown off target in wind.

Does that help at all, or further muddy the waters? :D

John
 
Some barrel weight helps a steady hold/follow through in unsupported positions. It is less affected both as it heats up and to atmospheric temps. The M40A3 weighs in at roughly 17.5 lbs. A very nice and VERY accurate(proper components/build specs) M40A1 can be built for a skosh under 3K. Cold Bore Shot is one of the key elements in a good barrel. The first round from a cold clean barrel MUST be in the 5 shot group. There is a reason many competitions allow "fouling shots" before shooting for record.
Unless you handload, .308 is the rule and the standard- it has been ballistically tested ad nauseum and match ammo is plentiful. Try reselling a custom tactical rifle in 6mmXC.
Bill
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top