ICANHITHIMMAN
Well-Known Member
It should also be noted that ArmyTimes is not noted for their objective journalism or adherence to the facts for that matter.
Army going to 300 Win Mag for LRH
- Thread starter silvertip-co
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
nitrousmudbogger
Well-Known Member
I guess I misunderstood. We had army socom here testing our rifle for a different purpose and they told us the rem in 338 was a done deal.
Trashcanastan- I like that. I know for a fact there are some .300's in country but who has them and how many I have no idea. I have a few buddies that recently returned from a very rough area (terrain and enemy) and they never seen any. The line units did have the newer MK48 machine guns however. A couple buds of mine that work at the Sniper School were supposed to go to A-Stan for a couple months and do the fielding (training) of the new .300's but as of now it has been canceled. We shall see.
Thanks for your support silvertip.
Are you looking at M118 or M118LR, two totally different rounds. If it's the LR then I will look into it, but I'm betting there is some crazy (stupid) law or regulation saying we can only get it from certain suppliers or something along those lines. We got an alert last month so hopefully we will get some funding and support.
Nailed it!
260shooter
Well-Known Member
Kevin
You posted that the army is back to square one. Do you know if the 338 Norma or the 300 Norma are being looked at as the replacement round for the project?
260
You posted that the army is back to square one. Do you know if the 338 Norma or the 300 Norma are being looked at as the replacement round for the project?
260
joe0121
Well-Known Member
Whats crazy is The are practically rebuilding the rifles from the ground up.
Kevin Thomas
Well-Known Member
The specs for the PSR SOCOM project aren't caliber specific. They list the requirements that the rifle/ammo has to be able to meet, and it's completely open from there. Between weight, accuracy, range, etc., the 338 LM is probably head and shoulders above the rest of the pack, but no, they don't name a particular caliber or cartridge. That's why the 300 Win Mag still has its proponents, as well as a few other cartridges that are being pushed.
We'll see.
Kevin Thomas
Well-Known Member
joe0121,
really not that much of a leap; just switching out the barrel and bolt, and removing the magazine spacer, and you've just turned your 7.62x51 into a 300 Win Mag. That's what the army had planned when they first fielded this system back in the late '80s. Just seems like it lost something in translation, and now they're "discovered" the idea all over again. Go figure.
Somehow, I get the feeling that "Dilbert" is a popular cartoon strip in certain circles of the defense industry. Then again, maybe too close to home.
really not that much of a leap; just switching out the barrel and bolt, and removing the magazine spacer, and you've just turned your 7.62x51 into a 300 Win Mag. That's what the army had planned when they first fielded this system back in the late '80s. Just seems like it lost something in translation, and now they're "discovered" the idea all over again. Go figure.
Somehow, I get the feeling that "Dilbert" is a popular cartoon strip in certain circles of the defense industry. Then again, maybe too close to home.
ICANHITHIMMAN
Well-Known Member
If they were smart and we all know that statement is an oxymoron they would go with the 338 Lapua, if anything it would at least put them in step with the rest of NATO.
I wish to reiterate again that the ARMY initially intended the M24 to be chambered in 30-06 but do to logistics the 308 won in the end.
What would be a real improvement would be to drop the rem 700 platform in favor of a better design.
I wish to reiterate again that the ARMY initially intended the M24 to be chambered in 30-06 but do to logistics the 308 won in the end.
What would be a real improvement would be to drop the rem 700 platform in favor of a better design.
3fingervic
Well-Known Member
No facts in my post, just opinions. If I was starting from scratch I would pick a new side arm (FNP 5.7), new carbine (Beretta ARX 160), and for long range precision work Accuracy International platform in .338 LM.
joe0121
Well-Known Member
From what i read online was they are changing the barrel stock and receiver. This was several months ago so who knows if it changed
joe0121
Well-Known Member
Whats wrong with the rem 700?
Kevin Thomas
Well-Known Member
joe0121,
The stock is just an evolution. Hell even the Marines have changed their original design McMillan "General Purpose Hunting Stock" that came out on the M40s to something new. Kind of a shame in my opinion, since the original stock is (IMHO) **** near perfect. The Army's H&S stocks weren't as durable as the McMillans, and I've heard some complaints about the adjustable LOP becoming loose, that sort of thing. I've seen them come back with all kinds of field expedient fixes to hold them in one position, so there's somethin to the complaints. In any case, a change of stock wasn't part of the plan, just something that came up naturally during the evolution of the rifle.
Barrel, bolt and spacer, and that was supposed to b e the full extent of the switch to 300 Win Mag. These were all still arsenal level fixes, since the M700 is a pretty conventional design. Had they gone with something like the Desert Tactical or PGM rifles being tested today, this would be a field level switch, and we wouldn't be dealing with all this nonsense. A commander, or even the sniper himself could decide to use a bigger hammer than a 7.62, r5each into the tool box and inside of a minute he'd now have a 300 Win Mag for the task at hand.
Perhaps when we get to the point of snipers having caddies and trailing a golf bag, we'll have the solution. "1350 meters, mild wind but gusting. Hmmmm. Caddie, hand me my 338 iron for this one!" A minute later the barrel's switched, the shot's made and Haji has his 72 virgins. Everbody's happy.
The stock is just an evolution. Hell even the Marines have changed their original design McMillan "General Purpose Hunting Stock" that came out on the M40s to something new. Kind of a shame in my opinion, since the original stock is (IMHO) **** near perfect. The Army's H&S stocks weren't as durable as the McMillans, and I've heard some complaints about the adjustable LOP becoming loose, that sort of thing. I've seen them come back with all kinds of field expedient fixes to hold them in one position, so there's somethin to the complaints. In any case, a change of stock wasn't part of the plan, just something that came up naturally during the evolution of the rifle.
Barrel, bolt and spacer, and that was supposed to b e the full extent of the switch to 300 Win Mag. These were all still arsenal level fixes, since the M700 is a pretty conventional design. Had they gone with something like the Desert Tactical or PGM rifles being tested today, this would be a field level switch, and we wouldn't be dealing with all this nonsense. A commander, or even the sniper himself could decide to use a bigger hammer than a 7.62, r5each into the tool box and inside of a minute he'd now have a 300 Win Mag for the task at hand.
Perhaps when we get to the point of snipers having caddies and trailing a golf bag, we'll have the solution. "1350 meters, mild wind but gusting. Hmmmm. Caddie, hand me my 338 iron for this one!" A minute later the barrel's switched, the shot's made and Haji has his 72 virgins. Everbody's happy.
joe0121
Well-Known Member
LOL
Are you talking about the weapon system the is a bull pup design with an AR sort of look to it?
Those look very interesting if I had a million bucks I'd have them. gun)
