Help the Marine Corps decide on a new caliber for their sniper rifles
- Thread starter Marine sniper
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
BHP9
Well-Known Member
I understand that thyere are a few of these in the system.
.338LM
.338LM
Brent-AR-30-338
Well-Known Member
Well I have researched for years, trying to make that same decision....
I don't know why why still issue the .308 as a marksman round, just not enough.
I ended up going with the .338 Lapua version in Ar-30.
factors-
cost- $1500
weight- 14.5 lbs.
bolt action = accuracy
5 rnd mag
brass - lapua #1 in quallity
The 338 edge was my 2nd choice, but the AR-30 was less $.
I really like the rifle, and has become #1 in my collection.
matter of fact, I'm planning on throwing a jet suppressor on it in the near future...hehe.
either cartridge/way, a 300 SMK rules the long range world at the moment imo
I don't know why why still issue the .308 as a marksman round, just not enough.
I ended up going with the .338 Lapua version in Ar-30.
factors-
cost- $1500
weight- 14.5 lbs.
bolt action = accuracy
5 rnd mag
brass - lapua #1 in quallity
The 338 edge was my 2nd choice, but the AR-30 was less $.
I really like the rifle, and has become #1 in my collection.
matter of fact, I'm planning on throwing a jet suppressor on it in the near future...hehe.
either cartridge/way, a 300 SMK rules the long range world at the moment imo
Fiftydriver
Official LRH Sponsor
There are a couple ways to go here. Unfortuantely, with the military, unless you can get cases by the mil count and have a barrel life of 3000 rounds, you will not get alot of attention from them. Thats unfortunate because alot of extremely effective weapons systems have been overlooked.
What do I think would be ideal, well, certainly the Edge and Lapua would be hard to beat no matter how you look at them.
If an even lighter weapon system was wanted I have always thought that a 338 WSM loaded with a 250 gr SMK would be very hard to beat for those used to the 308 this would be a dramatic boost in performance. This idea comes from looking at what would attract the military, very long barrel life, good ballistic performance and hard hitting out to well past 1500 yards.
Would this be my idea of the ideal sniper round, nope, but it would be appealing to the military. It would not run with the Edge or Lapua but it would be a vast improvement over the 308.
My idea of the ultimate sniper chambering. Well, I would lead more toward performance then anything else. This is all theoretical mind you at this time. The 338 Allen Magnum and all 338 wildcats based on the 408 Chey tac case are just to extreme for military use. Barrel life is to short, they can be a bit finicky over wide temp changes. Ballistically, nothing would outperform them in a conventional chambering but still, just to extreme.
Now jumping up to the 375 cal class, that has much more merit. Barrel life would not be doubled but it would be close to that. Plus, for military purpose, the use of temp stable stick powders would allow much more consistant peroformance over a wide range of enviornmental conditions.
Rifle weight could easily be limited to 16 lbs and terminal performance would be head and shoulders above anything short of the 50 BMG and ballisitically, it would not be far behind the 338 AM but with a heavier terminal payload.
Only problem, bullets. Sierra is making the 350 gr SMK which may be a good choice. I would have much preferred to see a 375 to 380 gr SMK but I guess that was not believed to be a good idea because it was asked for.
I would imagine a 380 gr SMK style bullet loaded to 3200 fps with comfortable pressures would be very hard to beat from any direction you looked at it from. Barrel life would be great with this pressure level, accuracy would I am sure be amazing, rifle weight would be acceptable and terminal performance would be simply amazing.
I suspect this would also be a bit extreme for the military but man would it be an impressive weapon system. Imagine a 16 lb suppressed 375 Allen Magnum..............
Kirby Allen(50)
What do I think would be ideal, well, certainly the Edge and Lapua would be hard to beat no matter how you look at them.
If an even lighter weapon system was wanted I have always thought that a 338 WSM loaded with a 250 gr SMK would be very hard to beat for those used to the 308 this would be a dramatic boost in performance. This idea comes from looking at what would attract the military, very long barrel life, good ballistic performance and hard hitting out to well past 1500 yards.
Would this be my idea of the ideal sniper round, nope, but it would be appealing to the military. It would not run with the Edge or Lapua but it would be a vast improvement over the 308.
My idea of the ultimate sniper chambering. Well, I would lead more toward performance then anything else. This is all theoretical mind you at this time. The 338 Allen Magnum and all 338 wildcats based on the 408 Chey tac case are just to extreme for military use. Barrel life is to short, they can be a bit finicky over wide temp changes. Ballistically, nothing would outperform them in a conventional chambering but still, just to extreme.
Now jumping up to the 375 cal class, that has much more merit. Barrel life would not be doubled but it would be close to that. Plus, for military purpose, the use of temp stable stick powders would allow much more consistant peroformance over a wide range of enviornmental conditions.
Rifle weight could easily be limited to 16 lbs and terminal performance would be head and shoulders above anything short of the 50 BMG and ballisitically, it would not be far behind the 338 AM but with a heavier terminal payload.
Only problem, bullets. Sierra is making the 350 gr SMK which may be a good choice. I would have much preferred to see a 375 to 380 gr SMK but I guess that was not believed to be a good idea because it was asked for.
I would imagine a 380 gr SMK style bullet loaded to 3200 fps with comfortable pressures would be very hard to beat from any direction you looked at it from. Barrel life would be great with this pressure level, accuracy would I am sure be amazing, rifle weight would be acceptable and terminal performance would be simply amazing.
I suspect this would also be a bit extreme for the military but man would it be an impressive weapon system. Imagine a 16 lb suppressed 375 Allen Magnum..............
Kirby Allen(50)
justgoharder
Well-Known Member
380gr at 3200fps !?!?!?!?
I think that an improvement over the .308 is a good thing, but the big .338's and 408 CheyTacs etc. are too extreme on many different fronts. It's been noted already that the military is going to look at the econimics...ie barrel life, brass availability etc. I could see a unit being outfitted with say the 7 SAUM or 300 Win Mag (some units already carry the 300 Win mag) and maybe having one guy hump a .338 LM. That makes sense, and would cover things well.
1500 yard shots are still a much more rare occurence, but a practical round like a 7 SAUM or even the 300 Win mag gives the Sniper a boost over the .308 when shooting 800 to 1000, and can reach out further if need be. In all actuality 1500 yards would be a pretty specialized kill, and when it comes to specialized killing most of that is happening at night from 500 yards on in to knife point...doting more on the cover of night, good planning, good night vision, and high percentage shot distances.
1500 yard shots are still a much more rare occurence, but a practical round like a 7 SAUM or even the 300 Win mag gives the Sniper a boost over the .308 when shooting 800 to 1000, and can reach out further if need be. In all actuality 1500 yards would be a pretty specialized kill, and when it comes to specialized killing most of that is happening at night from 500 yards on in to knife point...doting more on the cover of night, good planning, good night vision, and high percentage shot distances.
bwaites
Well-Known Member
Shawn Carlock says, "If it seems like I am opinionated on this I am, I am tired of our guys being saddeled with equipment that just is not up to the task. If they need 1500+ yard capability I say we do what we can to give it to them."
I agree 100%.
The problem is that the military has repeatedly proven that they don't take the best.
Going WAAYYYYY back, the 30-06 was chosen over the .276 (the Petersen, if I recall correctly) because we had stockpiles of 30-06 ammo.
The .308 was chosen over the 30-06 as a sniper round because the load out was better. (Carlos Hathcock shot a 30-06 in combat if I remember correctly. If it was his round of choice, I would hope that the military would at least think about it, nope, .308!!!!)
The .223 was chosen over the .308, again, because the load out was better.
Did anyone ask the guys actually shooting the rifles? NOPE!!!
There are all kinds of other examples.
So, IF you want the military to consider a new weapons system, you have to look at what is readily available and then try to fathom WHY they would change, first, then decide WHAT they should change to, second.
No proprietary round will make the cut. I prefer the .338 EDGE over the Lapua, because the brass is made here, among other reasons, but it won't survive the military cheese grater because it isn't a known quantity and it isn't loaded by any major manufacturers.
If you don't recognize that, tell me why our guys still have .223's when the 6.8 and 6.5 Grendel have BOTH proven to be MUCH more effective at stopping the bad guys! Never mind that both are now being loaded by major ammo suppliers, they STILL can't get in the door for service issue rifles!
SO...if the change is to be made, it must be an already proven round, a round proven not just ballistically and on the bench, but one that has been proven in battle. We have allies fielding the .338 Lapua, and LOTS of experience now with it in Afghanistan and Iraq. Out to about 1500 meters, it looks very similar in drop to the .50 BMG, so guys could switch back and forth without much problem figuring out where their scopes needed to be set.
Me, I want the .338 EDGE; but for LOTS of soldiers, (and our guys deserve to have the best!) the .338 LM seems to make sense.
I know that Shawn and Kirby know WAY more about rifles and ballistics than I ever will, but I do know a little (probably a VERY little compared to some!) about military acquisition and how they decide on things, and I don't think the other rounds have much chance.
Bill
I agree 100%.
The problem is that the military has repeatedly proven that they don't take the best.
Going WAAYYYYY back, the 30-06 was chosen over the .276 (the Petersen, if I recall correctly) because we had stockpiles of 30-06 ammo.
The .308 was chosen over the 30-06 as a sniper round because the load out was better. (Carlos Hathcock shot a 30-06 in combat if I remember correctly. If it was his round of choice, I would hope that the military would at least think about it, nope, .308!!!!)
The .223 was chosen over the .308, again, because the load out was better.
Did anyone ask the guys actually shooting the rifles? NOPE!!!
There are all kinds of other examples.
So, IF you want the military to consider a new weapons system, you have to look at what is readily available and then try to fathom WHY they would change, first, then decide WHAT they should change to, second.
No proprietary round will make the cut. I prefer the .338 EDGE over the Lapua, because the brass is made here, among other reasons, but it won't survive the military cheese grater because it isn't a known quantity and it isn't loaded by any major manufacturers.
If you don't recognize that, tell me why our guys still have .223's when the 6.8 and 6.5 Grendel have BOTH proven to be MUCH more effective at stopping the bad guys! Never mind that both are now being loaded by major ammo suppliers, they STILL can't get in the door for service issue rifles!
SO...if the change is to be made, it must be an already proven round, a round proven not just ballistically and on the bench, but one that has been proven in battle. We have allies fielding the .338 Lapua, and LOTS of experience now with it in Afghanistan and Iraq. Out to about 1500 meters, it looks very similar in drop to the .50 BMG, so guys could switch back and forth without much problem figuring out where their scopes needed to be set.
Me, I want the .338 EDGE; but for LOTS of soldiers, (and our guys deserve to have the best!) the .338 LM seems to make sense.
I know that Shawn and Kirby know WAY more about rifles and ballistics than I ever will, but I do know a little (probably a VERY little compared to some!) about military acquisition and how they decide on things, and I don't think the other rounds have much chance.
Bill
Last edited:
silvertip-co
Well-Known Member
Apologies but the .308 ought to do in this non expert's opine.
Last edited:
James Jones
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2002
- Messages
- 2,854
The 338 Lapua is already in use with alot of countries around the world as a precision rifle , either built by Accuracy Internatioal or Sako. the power is their with that round the data is their from many other contriesusing it. The 338 Lapua will probably be the next NATO-ized round.
In a 15lb suppressed rifle the recoil is very managable , the accuracy is great , the sound and site signature are both greatly reduced with the suppressor. The ammo seems to be pretty widely available seeing that its used by other countries.
Now if I were a sniper in Iraq right now with the possibility of the high volume shooting that can happen I'd like to know that my ammo would be alot more readly available from a high volume support weapon like the M2 with the 50 BMG rilfes or the M240 with the 308's , now granted it won't be match quality ammo you will be getting but at least it will go bang in your rifle and give you a chance.
I don't remember who built the gun , either Robar or McMillan , but a very short light weight 50BMG bolt rifle was made , it was in the area of 12-15lbs and the velocity loss with the short barrel was not as bad as expected. It was called a Desert Rhino if I'm not mistaken
In a 15lb suppressed rifle the recoil is very managable , the accuracy is great , the sound and site signature are both greatly reduced with the suppressor. The ammo seems to be pretty widely available seeing that its used by other countries.
Now if I were a sniper in Iraq right now with the possibility of the high volume shooting that can happen I'd like to know that my ammo would be alot more readly available from a high volume support weapon like the M2 with the 50 BMG rilfes or the M240 with the 308's , now granted it won't be match quality ammo you will be getting but at least it will go bang in your rifle and give you a chance.
I don't remember who built the gun , either Robar or McMillan , but a very short light weight 50BMG bolt rifle was made , it was in the area of 12-15lbs and the velocity loss with the short barrel was not as bad as expected. It was called a Desert Rhino if I'm not mistaken
Ya know, most of the posts sound great, however in my opinion the best thing for our military to do is to give the soldiers and marines permission to use what they have.
I mean an F16 is not effective if the pilot is not allowed to fly it.
Mike Alford
I mean an F16 is not effective if the pilot is not allowed to fly it.
Mike Alford
Fiftydriver
Official LRH Sponsor
Justgoharder,
I suspect my 375 AM will easily be able to drive a 380 gr SMK style bullet to 3200 fps in a 32" barrel, rather comfortably in fact.
The reason I think this is because my 338 AM will drive a 350 gr ULD RBBT to 3200 fps easily in this length barrel so with the larger bore diameter, less baring surface and faster burning powders, I suspect 3200 fps will be an easily reached velocity with my 375 AM and this class bullet, just need the bullets to prove my theory now!!!
Kirby Allen(50)
I suspect my 375 AM will easily be able to drive a 380 gr SMK style bullet to 3200 fps in a 32" barrel, rather comfortably in fact.
The reason I think this is because my 338 AM will drive a 350 gr ULD RBBT to 3200 fps easily in this length barrel so with the larger bore diameter, less baring surface and faster burning powders, I suspect 3200 fps will be an easily reached velocity with my 375 AM and this class bullet, just need the bullets to prove my theory now!!!
Kirby Allen(50)
Fiftydriver
Official LRH Sponsor
Mikenc,
Oh they can fly them, they just can not shoot back at what is shooting at them.
I have a friend that is a Falcon pilot in the Montana ANG and he went over to Iragi a couple times before the war started up. He said they would patrol the no fly zone everyday.
He said the reason, basically from the sounds of it, they were bait!!! Hard to believe but let me explain. THey would be fired upon by SAMs all the time. Luckily the 16s technology is far above what the Iragis on the ground had for missiles. Anyway, they would get fired upon and radio it in and ask for permission to engage the fire location as firing on a US warplane is considered an act of aggression, no S___!
But now, they would be told to continue their patrol and then the ground crews would radio another jet to take out a predetermined target. Seems that one pilot would get shot at, then another somewhere far away would get permission to take out a target. Not sure how this works to be honest.
If you have a target you want to destroy, level the **** thing and let the boys protect themselves at the same time. Seems war has become to bogged down with rules of engagement and even those have been twisted against our troops.
I am in total agreement, If our boys need 1500 yard reach, give them what they need to ge the job done the most efficent and effective way possible.
The comment about the 308 will work, sure it may possibly reach that far and if it hits the target, human anyway, they will have a very bad day but why not give our boys the technology needed to give them a far superior advantage, especially if we send them off EXPECTING them to come back home.
Just does not seem to make sense anymore to be honest.
Its to bad its not like it was in WWII. Let the military fight the war, keep the **** press out of the war zone or at least prevent them from reporting until the **** thing is over. War is dirty and often ugly, the press is why the US citizens are not in favor of this war and its the politicians that are tieing our troops hands behind their backs or using them for bait.
Not right, this war would be over if the military was in charge. Hell, at this point, turning Iraq into a sheet of glass would be fine with me. No thats not politically correct but its what I feel.What we did was a good thing, what we are trying to do is a good thing, but its getting to the point that not another troops life is worth it anymore because the **** politicians are hell bent on using this for the next election. Very sad.
Alright, sorry for the derailment, back to the subject, sniper rifles.
Kirby Allen(50)
Oh they can fly them, they just can not shoot back at what is shooting at them.
I have a friend that is a Falcon pilot in the Montana ANG and he went over to Iragi a couple times before the war started up. He said they would patrol the no fly zone everyday.
He said the reason, basically from the sounds of it, they were bait!!! Hard to believe but let me explain. THey would be fired upon by SAMs all the time. Luckily the 16s technology is far above what the Iragis on the ground had for missiles. Anyway, they would get fired upon and radio it in and ask for permission to engage the fire location as firing on a US warplane is considered an act of aggression, no S___!
But now, they would be told to continue their patrol and then the ground crews would radio another jet to take out a predetermined target. Seems that one pilot would get shot at, then another somewhere far away would get permission to take out a target. Not sure how this works to be honest.
If you have a target you want to destroy, level the **** thing and let the boys protect themselves at the same time. Seems war has become to bogged down with rules of engagement and even those have been twisted against our troops.
I am in total agreement, If our boys need 1500 yard reach, give them what they need to ge the job done the most efficent and effective way possible.
The comment about the 308 will work, sure it may possibly reach that far and if it hits the target, human anyway, they will have a very bad day but why not give our boys the technology needed to give them a far superior advantage, especially if we send them off EXPECTING them to come back home.
Just does not seem to make sense anymore to be honest.
Its to bad its not like it was in WWII. Let the military fight the war, keep the **** press out of the war zone or at least prevent them from reporting until the **** thing is over. War is dirty and often ugly, the press is why the US citizens are not in favor of this war and its the politicians that are tieing our troops hands behind their backs or using them for bait.
Not right, this war would be over if the military was in charge. Hell, at this point, turning Iraq into a sheet of glass would be fine with me. No thats not politically correct but its what I feel.What we did was a good thing, what we are trying to do is a good thing, but its getting to the point that not another troops life is worth it anymore because the **** politicians are hell bent on using this for the next election. Very sad.
Alright, sorry for the derailment, back to the subject, sniper rifles.
Kirby Allen(50)
Kirby A
I agree, it's a shame "we"(being our politicians) send the men and women of our military over seas and expect them to fight a war without wounding or killing or sheading any blood other than our own. There is no politically correct way to fight a war.
Give the troops of the U.S. Military what they need and let them do their jobs and this mess would be over in no time flat.
Mike Alford
I agree, it's a shame "we"(being our politicians) send the men and women of our military over seas and expect them to fight a war without wounding or killing or sheading any blood other than our own. There is no politically correct way to fight a war.
Give the troops of the U.S. Military what they need and let them do their jobs and this mess would be over in no time flat.
Mike Alford
