Sniper rifle of choice??

MR_BAB

What is you fav sniper rifle(s)?
Mines the SR-25SD or the barrett .50 cal:cool:

Kolya

M21 for me, allows a quick second shot. Granted a good sniper shouldn't need one

MR_BAB

What ya need is a semi-auto sniper rifle!

Hard Larry

To shoot or be shot by?

MR_BAB

to shoot

Hard Larry

Oh OK...well whats the wind speed like?

kaimera

M200 tbh

MR_BAB

hmmm say 6 knots.........elevated position multiple targets

minidazzler

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walther_WA_2000

Walther WA 2000, just look at it and tell me you don't want that!!! It's so god damn goodlooking!!!

Hard Larry

MR_BAB wrote: »

hmmm say 6 knots.........elevated position multiple targets

I'm elevated or the targets are...ah screw it just call in mortars dude.

MR_BAB

http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/rainbowsix/images/e/e2/Sr25-mk11m0-2.jpg

It wasn't me!

I'd have a custom build, personally. It'd also depend on functionality (Anti-personel/anti-materiel). However, that would largely decide on calibre, rather than other aspects of the rifle. For a general-purpose setup, I'd have either a McMillan HTG with adjustable comb or a HS Precision stock, use a Surgeon action with a detachable box magaxine (it can use the ten-round Accuracy International magazines) because barrel changes are relatively easy and it's a good action, and I'd have it in a standard (.30-06) length action. I'd have a Timney trigger, for it's high tolerances over a Jewell, set to about 1.5kg and the barrels I'd have would be a 20" .308 with a 1:12" twist, a 28" .308 with a 1:10" twist and a 27" .300 Win Mag with a 1:10" or 1:9" twist, open to ideas on manufacturer, but I've had excellent experiences with Lothar Walther myself. I'd top it all off with a Schmidt and Bender PMII with mildot reticle in first focal plane. Screw buying factory stuff.

That's only anti-personnel stuff. For anti-materiel stuff, I'd do things differently. It's also skipping over the .338 Lapua Mag stuff, as I wanted to keep the action standard length for a modular rifle, so I don't have a .308 cartridge swimming in a .416 Rigby length action.

concussion

That's all well and good, but where's the flux capacitor??

Manic Moran

The US Army is moving to the M110 semi-auto.

Nothing wrong with having the capability to fire multiple shots. Especially if something has just gone wrong, which occasionally happens. That way you don't need to drag an M4 around as well as a PDW.

I'm not answering the thread, though, since I don't have any notable experience with sniper rifles at all. For a precision rifle, however, I'm looking at purchasing the 32" Barrelled Kel-Tec RFB when it comes out. Shares ammo and magazines with my FAL.



NTM

Hard Larry

Manic Moran wrote: »

I don't have any notable experience with sniper rifles at all.

Have a hunch you might not be alone there Manic

concussion

Manic Moran wrote: »

Shares ammo and magazines with my FAL.

Throwing breaks again huh :pac::pac:

concussion

minidazzler wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walther_WA_2000

Walther WA 2000, just look at it and tell me you don't want that!!! It's so god damn goodlooking!!!

You can have it!!!! It looks like the hideous offspring between an SA 80 and a FAMAS. Yuck.

It wasn't me!

Ick to bullpup trigger on a precision rifle MM, wouldn't go for that at all, unless they're electronic, and I wouldn't fancy an electronic trigger on a service rifle anyway. Then again, I just prefer bolt guns for the precision role. 32" barrel on a .308 is a nice job though, allows even little 150gr pills to hit a thousand with room to spare.

MR_BAB

u have good taste maniac!

OS119

GMLRS. 200lb warhead, 70km, GPS guided. job jobbed.

much easier than all that faffing about with hiding in ditches for a week and shitting in plastic bags...

LD 50

Manic Moran wrote: »

The US Army is moving to the M110 semi-auto.

Nothing wrong with having the capability to fire multiple shots. Especially if something has just gone wrong, which occasionally happens. That way you don't need to drag an M4 around as well as a PDW.

I'm not answering the thread, though, since I don't have any notable experience with sniper rifles at all. For a precision rifle, however, I'm looking at purchasing the 32" Barrelled Kel-Tec RFB when it comes out. Shares ammo and magazines with my FAL.



NTM

No offense Manic, but thats one ugly rifle. But, functionality over fashion.

Hard Larry wrote: »

Have a hunch you might not be alone there Manic

Does COD4 count?!

Manic Moran

Ick to bullpup trigger on a precision rifle MM

It's supposed to have a 2lb trigger, which is pretty good for any sort of mass production rifle. There's no mechanical reason why a bullpup trigger cannot be as good in terms of both pull weight and stages of movement, it's merely a matter of quality of design and production. See, for example, the Desert Tactical Stealth Recon sniper rifle, which has a 1lb match-grade trigger.



It also has a sales price of over $3,500.

NTM

Morlar

I would love to have a go shooting a dragunov.

punchdrunk

yeah that'd do the trick...

It wasn't me!

Manic Moran wrote: »

It's supposed to have a 2lb trigger, which is pretty good for any sort of mass production rifle. There's no mechanical reason why a bullpup trigger cannot be as good in terms of both pull weight and stages of movement, it's merely a matter of quality of design and production. See, for example, the Desert Tactical Stealth Recon sniper rifle, which has a 1lb match-grade trigger.



It also has a sales price of over $3,500.

NTM

Long linkage leads to overly complicated structure to arrange a decent and repeatable sear. It'd be perfect if done well, but it'll be prone to failures to engage the sear, particularly with such a light weight. If it could be perfected, it'd be ideal (30" barrel with the overall length of a 22" barrel? Yes please!) but I'll believe that when I see it. And $3500 is not expensive in seriously accurate rifle terms. Damned affordable if you ask me! My next target rifle will either be a Grunig and Elmiger that costs three and a half grand, or a Bleiker that costs four and a half grand, in euro, and those are iron sights, no two grand's worth of scope in there, something like this:

citizen_p

only ever fired a rifle hunting so i have no idea....
going by the media / games m24:P

Manic Moran

Well, if your criterion for a 'good' sniper rifle is expense, you can have a look at the German DSR-1.



Currently in service with a number of police/counter-terrorism units, and comes at a base cost of only $10,000 before scope (I am not used to counting optics as part of the cost of a rifle, so without scope is a default). Comes with standard features like an every-way-possible-adjustible machined aluminium stock, compared to the SRS's non-adjustible one-piece polymer. The SRS's designer is open about the fact that he made compromises in order to keep costs down, but is equally adamant that the trigger was not one of those compromises. For practical military purposes, it doesn't really matter much if it's a sub 0.2MOA rifle like the DSR or a sub 0.5MOA like the SRS. At 500 yards, the difference is 2.5cm grouping vs 5cm grouping. You'll hit a man-sized target.

NTM

Manic Moran

No offense Manic, but thats one ugly rifle

It's a pre-production photo,they may do something like put a muzzle brake on the end. Currently only the carbine (18") is in production, it looks much nicer. KelTec is expanding the factory to meet demand for the rifles.



NTM

Poccington

Hard Larry wrote: »

Have a hunch you might not be alone there Manic

What gave it away? :pac:

It wasn't me!

It's not about expense either, I was just stating that $3500 dollars is not a lot to pay for a precision rifle (my wallet stings rather a lot from my research on the matter). Personally, for a precision role of any sort, I'd skip right over a bullpup trigger assembly. The overall length issues are less important than trigger functionality for my money. And I know there's only so accurate a rifle needs to be for military purposes, but even from my hunting stuff I demand well below MOA performance. My target stuff does about .25 to .35 MOA, consistently, over very long courses of fire, which is the key. I'm just something of an accuracy snob, and for me accuracy and reliable, precise functionality are the demands.

corklanger

can't go wrong with one of these

http://www.whipperleys.co.uk/acatalog/catapult_info_432.html

easy to use,easy to reload and great accuracy!

Manic Moran

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Personally, for a precision role of any sort, I'd skip right over a bullpup trigger assembly.

Here's your first question, then: Have you ever fired a bullpup sniper rifle? I'm not asking 'have you ever fired a bullpup', as they are usually infantry-grade rifles with infantry-grade triggers. If not, then how can you just casually cast off the bullpup trigger mechanism?

The overall length issues are less important than trigger functionality for my money.

Fair enough. I doubt you're getting in and out of helicopters or HMMWvs much when hunting. How about balance?

And I know there's only so accurate a rifle needs to be for military purposes, but even from my hunting stuff I demand well below MOA performance. My target stuff does about .25 to .35 MOA, consistently, over very long courses of fire, which is the key. I'm just something of an accuracy snob, and for me accuracy and reliable, precise functionality are the demands.

OK, I can see that. But this is a sniper rifle thread, and should probably be rated on the basis of such. It may be instructive to compare with some other sniper rifles out there. For example, the current 'standard' sniper rifle is the Accuracy International, which will get on or about 0.4MOA. The M24 (Basically a Remington 700) which was the standard US sniper rifle for the last few decades and sees heavy police use is about 0.5MOA. The M110 which is replacing it actually is less accurate, about 1.0 MOA.

Whatever the perceived problems are with the trigger of the SRS or DSR, they don't seem to be affecting their practical utility in their designed role when compared with their peers.

Out of interest, what calibres are your sub 0.5MOA rifles? Are any of them .308 or .338L?

NTM

It wasn't me!

Never used a bullpup of any sort actually, but I dislike the trigger linkage design. I'll admit, I'll be the first to venerate it when I see a design that looks to have tiny tolerances, but be completely reliable, but I haven't seen it yet.

Fair point on the bullpup design for vehicles, but if it comromises the function of the rifle, it's not a good trade-off. With regard to balance, nothing wrong with standard bolt actions there either, and I shoot standing in the Olympic disciplines.

My hunting rifle is a Sako 75 in .25-06. My target rifle is .22LR. My next target rifle will be 6mm BR Norma (and the most accurate gun I'm ever likely to own). Shot plenty of well sub- 0.5 MOA rifles in .308 though. Hope to get myself a palma and imperial fullbore target rifle in .308 in the next few years, which'll do sub 0.5 MOA handily enough.

I'm coming at it, from a design and functionality point of view, as a precision shooter, as I'm not a soldier, and the only sniper rifles as such I've used have been Sakos and Savages as far as I recall. I didn't design a target gun above either. That's a practical design to be dragged through all sorts of gick and still be reliable, due to its components. I think all we're disagreeing on is the bullpup design for a precision rifle. I think it's a flawed mechanism without tight tolerances, which I would demand for precision shooting, but the day I see one that defeats that description, I'll be the first to recognise it as a brilliant concept. Like I say, a 32" barrel in a gun the length of a conventional one with a 22" barrel is a great idea, and if it can do that without compromising precise functionality, it's perfect.

Manic Moran

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Never used a bullpup of any sort actually, but I dislike the trigger linkage design. I'll admit, I'll be the first to venerate it when I see a design that looks to have tiny tolerances, but be completely reliable, but I haven't seen it yet.

From what you're saying, you've also not seen one that doesn't.

Fair point on the bullpup design for vehicles, but if it comromises the function of the rifle, it's not a good trade-off. With regard to balance, nothing wrong with standard bolt actions there either, and I shoot standing in the Olympic disciplines.

I believe you'll find that there's a little more steel in the barrel and bolt of a .308 than there is in a .22LR. There's also a tad bit more kick, the centre of gravity and the point of force being closer to the shoulder means less leverage being applied to pull the rifle off target.

I think it's a flawed mechanism without tight tolerances, which I would demand for precision shooting, but the day I see one that defeats that description, I'll be the first to recognise it as a brilliant concept.

Any trigger is going to be flawed from the precision shooter's point of view without tight tolerances. Why are you so stuck on the concept that one cannot build a smooth linkage with no slop? It's a simple matter of machining and polishing.

NTM

It wasn't me!

Manic Moran wrote: »

From what you're saying, you've also not seen one that doesn't.

Not having shot them doesn't mean I haven't examined and discussed the design with people, including engineers and physicists, who are of the same opinion.

I believe you'll find that there's a little more steel in the barrel and bolt of a .308 than there is in a .22LR. There's also a tad bit more kick, the centre of gravity and the point of force being closer to the shoulder means less leverage being applied to pull the rifle off target.

I've shot plenty of .308s. You're talking about stock design more than anything with regard to controlling recoil, and centre of gravity on good rifles for position shooting is a lot further forward than you'd imagine. Having it closer may make a very fast follow-up shot from prone easier, but balance makes feck all difference shooting prone off a bipod anyway, so it's a moot point. The physics is indisputable, but you're ignoring the fact that good stock layout directs recoil horizontally and minimalises turning forces in the vertical plane anyway.

Any trigger is going to be flawed from the precision shooter's point of view without tight tolerances. Why are you so stuck on the concept that one cannot build a smooth linkage with no slop? It's a simple matter of machining and polishing.

NTM

It can probably be done, but I'm not convinced it's not going to cost absolutely ridiculous money to replicate the functionality of a standard trigger group, and if it doesn't at least match it, then whatever you gain in that trade-off is not a good bargain, in my opinion.

Manic Moran

It seems we will need to agree to disagree. Since neither of us can speak on the matter with any authority whatsoever, we are obviously not going to come to a conclusion.

I will maintain that given the stated accuracy levels of the SRS and DSR-1 are on a par with those of the accepted conventional rifles for the same purpose, any theoretical flaws with the bullpup trigger design apparently are insufficient to noticeably affect the rifle's accuracy when the rifle is taken as a whole.

NTM

thermo

I'm new to this side of boards but as far as sniper rifles go I quite like the L42; it's a classic and lovely to fire. Accurate enough and on the plus side ( for me )it has a wooden stock, gives it caractor as opposed to the sterile polymer stocks found on most modern rifles (just my opinion).

thermo

L42 7.62 nato..JPG