are all remington r5's milspec?

[cwhardee13]

are all the r5 remington rifles milspec? or is there a variant that is not? if so can someone explain the difference?

 

[BillR]

The Remington catalog says "Has the same 5R rifling as the M40 sniper rifle" does not say anything about being Mil Spec unless I missed something.

 

[LouBoyd]

What dies milspec mean? It means that it conforms to a set of military specifications whch pertain to that particular device. To me milspec means acceptably rugged and acceptably accurate consistent with securing low bid contracts.

Many barrel manufactures do not follow military specifications choosing to rely on their reputations among competitive shooters instead. I don't know where Remington gets it's R5 barrels. If I was buying one I'd want to know if it's cut, buttoned, or hammer forged and what barrel maker produced it.

Does anyone here know what reputation Remington's M40 rifles have for accuracy? I'd expect it to be "acceptable".

 

[archangel1usa]

I read on one of the forums that Remington won the military contract recently based on accuracy against other highly respected barrel makers.

 

[Trickymissfit]

What dies milspec mean? It means that it conforms to a set of military specifications whch pertain to that particular device. To me milspec means acceptably rugged and acceptably accurate consistent with securing low bid contracts.

Many barrel manufactures do not follow military specifications choosing to rely on their reputations among competitive shooters instead. I don't know where Remington gets it's R5 barrels. If I was buying one I'd want to know if it's cut, buttoned, or hammer forged and what barrel maker produced it.

Does anyone here know what reputation Remington's M40 rifles have for accuracy? I'd expect it to be "acceptable".

I cannot see any commercially produced bolt gun being a "mil-spec" gun. One of the main ideas of being mil-spec is the idea of all parts interchanging with each other. The bolt alone would kill that idea.

Yesterday I got a good look at an M40 snipers rifle and a Rock River AR in the back of a buddie's cop car. He said he was shooting groups in the half inch area with Federal factory loads (I don't know what load in .308 he was using). He did say that it was getting hard to get those half inch groups these days as the barrel was starting to open up. Honestly the barrel looked very similar to a regular .308 varmit from Remington. The scope was a 3.5x-10x in MK. IV mounts, and had the big tactical turrets on it.
gary

 

[Trickymissfit]

I read on one of the forums that Remington won the military contract recently based on accuracy against other highly respected barrel makers.

I would seriously doubt that a factory Remington barrel would run with the big dogs. But they might have brought a "ringer" to the match. Anyway Jerry Stiller got the contract, and what barrel he's gonna use I don't know.
gary

 

[Boss Hoss]

Edited

Edited

 

[Johnboy]

the 5R milspec is based on the M24 sniper rifel.to me from what I can see and say is this.the barrel used to make a 5r milspec is one that did not make it to a M24.and by not useing it for the M24 they put it on an action to sale to use.they started this in 2003 I think may be wrong.

was told one time the barrel and rifeling was built around a 168gn SMK.but most who own one finds out it will shoot a 175gn SMK just as good if not better.the twist is 1:11.250 the rifeling has a rounded face ( not flat )allowing the bullet to travel down the rifeling better with less copper build up.I can say from owning one it does clean up really fast.

I will all so add that the rifel is a great shooter with any type of bullet.even when one can not reload it shoots about anything.but most who do not reload buy the FGMM ammo.eith in a 168 or a 175gn load.but when one can reload its a whole different world.been able to load with a 168gn VLD,168 gn SMK,175gn SMK,and now a 208gn A-max.all give me very good accuracy.just seems to shoot anything you want it too.and thats with little time and effort with the loads of choice.

now,Remington does offer the barre in one or two more rifels.they are not stainless though.forgot just what they are.will have to look and see just which two they are.but for me I would just get the 5R and walk away from the others.the cost is $1000 +/- and you have to get your FFL guy to go through Acusport t get one.or find one on a gun site of some sort.Remington does not show in any way that they even build it.why I cannot say or haven't been told.but they make about 250 each year.so geting one can be hard at times.

as of two years ago the offer two different cals.a 223 with a 1:9 and a 300wm with a 1:10 twist.and both have the same rifeling as the 308.and that the other two rifels/cals shoot just as good.

OK just looked up the other two rifels.one is a M700 Taregt Tactical.sorry its just one other rifel.but both the 5R and the M700 Target Tac have hammer forged 5R rifeling.and yeah almost forgot to say.the 5 stands for 5 grooves.

OK,I hope that I have said just what you wanted to hear.or atleast tried to.

 

[Trickymissfit]

If the guy did not have a bore scope it could just have been getting fouled. Mil-Spec is just that and it controls processes not an individual platform in general such as an aircraft or anything that the USG may procure. There are many parts contained in the aircraft for example that are COTS. The military even on the most sophisticated weapons systems that exist are moving more and more to COTS. This does not mean that the platform does not contain individual parts specifications which will of course require "qualification testing" and configuration control to ensure compliance to those specification which include lifecycle for example. You mentioned Jerry Stiller and he has a background in this due to his "other" employer.

For example the old specification that a "Facility" had to be qualified to in order to manufacturer certain parts was MIL-I-45208A which has been replaces with commercial standards.

Hope this clears up any questions.

I came out of a TACOM plant, and milspec has little to do with the processes involved. The initial contract sets up the process the parts are to be made in as well as conform to. That's why you see all those government folks in there acting like they have the slightest idea what is going on (98% don't). To make a change in the process involves more red tape than can ever be imagined, and 99% of the time the folks making the final say have no idea what you are talking about. But trust me a major factor in the milspec doctrine is part interchangability, and is rarely violated (but it has in the past). The single worst example I can think of is the U2 spyplane. Even the sheetmetal panels were one up stuff. In a tank the onlything that is not milspec is the turret mount and gun mount, as each unit is fit to the turret and the hull. With rifles and shot guns one needs only to look at the basic M16 and 12 gauge shotgun. Virtually anything can be removed from one gun and installed on another. Jet engines are another story, and usually held to a "built unit spec" for a good reason. Yet the engine will always bolt right into every airframe from that block number
glt

 

[Camshaft]

The Army uses Schneider 5r barrels in their m24 rifles, so my guess is maybe these rifles have Schneider barrels installed from them remington factory.

 

[Boss Hoss]

Edited

 

[Trickymissfit]

The correct term for that is "IR" Interchangeable Replaceable have been in Military Aerospace for over 25 years and am intimate with this. Deal with the USG customer all of the time working mostly Deviation or other contractual matters on aircraft being delivered (was in the Procurement/Subcontract Management for 24 years)



The Program you mentioned is one that we support still but that thing is 50 years old and things have changed since Kelly was running that place 30 years ago. How long have you been retired---must have been a while because the game has changed quite a bit...

don't envy you!

Your refering to the U2 of course! I was surprised that nothing much framewise interchanges; even though the air frame was basicly a modded F104. Land based stuff thrives on parts interchangability. As it should. At onetime I worked in the TF56, TF41, and few few other gas turbine designs that shall remained unnamed. Learned to deal with the "dragon lady." Then it was off to TACOM, and she was outta the picture. A year later the woman shows up, and I reached for the Malox.

With land based stuff and NATO specs ontop of that, you learn the art of parts interchangability. Just becomes a daily matter of fact.

Does Remington use a Schineder barrel? I have no idea, but it makes sense that they would. Yet I doubt the barrels interchange unless all the actions are identical. That's doable, but not with the machinery in the Remington plant.
gary

 

[Greyfox]

I have three of the Reminton Mil-spects. The first one I bought a about five years ago was an incredible shooter with .25 MOA out to at least 500 yards. Shot quite a few 5 shot bug holes with it at a hundred. It liked 165 and 175 SMK's. It cleaned up in a third the time as my other 700's, and would hold accuracy for at least 200 rounds before cleaning. I think this is the biggest benefit to the 5R barrel. I used it a lot for competition and hunting but eventually groups opened up to an inch at about 2500 rounds. It probably would have gone longer but I shot it very hot at competitive events. Gave it to my son in law for hunting. The second one was not as accurate as the first one, but would do a .5 MOA. The third one is as accurate as the first but more selective about with bullet choice and load. All three rifles shot Federal 168 SMK factory loads into a half inch at 100 yards right out of the box. It surprised me that the distance to the rifling is very long. A 168 SMK is barely in the case when contacting the lands. Doesn't seem to matter much. Likes a 2.8" OAL with a SMK, the standard length of the Federal load. Probably one of the Military specifications.

 

[Johnboy]

now that the name Schneider has been said it does make since to me about the barrel maker.my good friend did a full research on the rifel when we found out about it.so this is where my info comes form.

said that we the US of A paid the barrel maker alot of our money to test just what it would take to shoot a 168/175gn bullet the best.I really think it was the 168gn bullet.but we shooters who own one find that they shoot a 175gn just as good if not better.along with many other bullets and weights.thats why it has a twist of 1:11.250,its what he came up with for that bullet.

we all know how long the throats are in all Remington rifels.but those who own or did own a 5R know how well they do shoot a loaded round at SAMMI specs.

again as said before they just shoot right out of the box.for me mine has not yet seen a factory load.loaded for it for its first and will for its last.

again I cannot realy say why we are able to own a rifel such as the 5R Milspec.maybe its just as I said before.would think if the barrel wouldn't pass for a M24 that the barrel maker wouldn't just melt it and start over.to much time in makeing it to waste.I would even do the same.I just wouldn't say OK its no good for the US ARMY so trash it.no I would say put it on an action and sale it to those who want it.its money in his pocket.

for me its all about being able to afford a rifel that shoots like a 5R does.when I can afford a custom I will get one.but haveing the choice of an everyday rifel or a 5R yeap I'll buy one any day.they even make a great hunting rifel.so I have both wolrds in one.