Most accurate rifle + telescopic sight setup for wartime field use?

Factual Questions
21

Seconding what Padeye said, that Sedgewick was killed at 1800 yards by the Whitworth more by luck than anything else.

In 1857 the Army conducted many field tests, and in one of those tests, the Whitworth was shot alongside the Harper’s Ferry. Although the Whitworth outperfomed the HP by a margin of 20 to 1 in all areas, the group dispersion of the Whitworth at 1800 yards was nearly 12 feet. The HP, by the way, never struck the target beyond 1500 yards.

Given that the bullet would impact anywhere within a 12 foot circle, striking a one foot circle (Sedgewick’s head) from that distance was more luck than accuracy.

22

I have a Ruger falling block in 30-06 which will drive tacks. The very venerable falling block action is stabile, incredibly strong, and available from Brownell’s http://www.brownells.com/homePage.asp as a barrelled action in just about any caliber, including a few wildcats.
If I had to rely on a rifle to feed me, or to take out “opponents” at long range(no, I’m not too excited about the idea of killing anyone) it’d be the ruger. It WON’T misfire, it WON’T jam, it doesn’t need a scope to give tack driving performance, a good reliable peep sight works extremely well, and it will take amazing amounts of abuse without causing a moment’s trouble.

Oh, and I think it’s pretty, too!

b.

23

This article mentions a number of sniper rifles used by the Marines throughout the 20th C. That prompted me to take a look at them individually.

M1903A1

M1903A4

M1C

M1D (sort of)

M40A1

M40A3

For the Marines, at least officially, the maximum effective range of their sniper rifles has increased by well over 50% since WWII.

Be sure to check out this impressive list of sniper rifles at http://www.snipercentral.com/rifles.htm .

Yep, that’s Sniper Central, a clearinghouse for all of your sniping needs, which just goes to further show that just about anything is to be seen on the Internet. Except that damned May 33rd thing.

24

Thanks for the link Sofa King !

The M40A3 cited as the latest and greatest USMC sniper rifle is ummm… an interesting looking baby. It may be (one of) the best sniper rifle(s) out there and it sure does look dangerous but (esthetically) that is one butt ugly firearm. Guess it’s “pretty” to the user if it works though!

25

I am suprised no one has mentioned the PSG-1, pride of the Heckler and Koch company. This is a standard NATO sniper rifle I believe.

The Walther WA2000 is the only bullpup style sniper rifle that I know of. It is pretty tiny compared with other rifles, but still manages a 26" barrel by putting the magazine and firing mechanism behind the trigger. Only 72 were made though.

Plan on killing any politicians?

26

red_dragon60 asks (tongue in cheek, I hope);

GAH!
You can’t say that!
He’s only kidding, spook-type dudes. :slight_smile:
Peace,
mangeorge

27

I was going to mention the PSG-1 as well as the Dragunov SVD. Both rifles using the 7.62 (NATO 7.62x51/WARSAW 7.62x54 variations. There is a NATO version of the SVD. I’m unaware of how the NATO version compares.)

I’m under the opinion that bolt action rifles have some inheirent stability over semi-auto rifles but that could be prejudice and according to Janes and other sources both the SVD and PSG-1 are top notch weapons for accuracy.

The design intent of the Dragunov and the PSG-1 is for moving targets at at an average range between 600 and 800 meters (according to those who have used the SVD the shooting gets a bit dicey at greater distances but can drive nails at medium range). One should note that the PSG-1 is not often used for military ops because a) the shell eject sents the casing out about ten feet in an arc that would tend to draw fire and b)it can ONLY be fitted with a Hensoldt 6x42 sight. This alone prevents it from being used by many military agencies. The PSG-1 Hensoldt sight is set up for about 600 meters so it’s designed for medium range sniping (you may ask then how can you compare accuracy with weapons designed for twice that range. The answer is extrapolation.) The PSG-1 has a barrel length of 25.59" with 4 deep grooves and fires a round with comperable ballistics to rifles such as the Dragunov. Also the PSG-1 has to be able to put 50 match grade rounds into an 80mm circle, thats about 3 1/2 inches in diameter, at 600 meters. Thats’ one hell of a shot group.

Dragunov http://www.impactsites2000.com/site3/Dragunov%20History.htm

There is a new variant called the SVD-S which is purportedly a vast improvement over the original. Don’t know much more about the new one other than it can be had in Winchester .308.

PSG-1 http://www.remtek.com/arms/hk/mil/psg1/psg1.htm

At five grand the PSG-1 is possible the most expensive UN approved sniper weapon in use today. The fifty-cal long round is supposedly verboeten by the Geneva accord for use on anything other than anti-equipment use.

p.s. Apparently Sig has a new one (SigArms model 550) that goes for around ten grand. I know nothing about it but saw a picture. This gun looks like a match weapon in high caliber. It has every doodad you could think of but adjustable cheekplates do not make for a military weapon. Still if it shoots to match it’s price it must be hella accurate.

28

A bit off the subject…but not much.

Does anyone know where the term “sniper” comes from?

It comes from shooting snipe!

Don’t know about anyone else, but when we sent people snipe hunting, we didn’t give them a gun. Just a bag…:slight_smile:

29

The Barret M82 comes in at $7300. I don’t know if NATO uses it though. .50 Cal is hard to pass up, however.

30

(Italics mine)

I’ve seen lots of exotic and heavy-duty weapons posted in this thread, but let’s not forget the constraints of the OP.

If I were a sniper I sure wouldn’t want to have to lug a Barrett .50 across a desert or fiddle around with a semi-auto carbon fiber stocked forged unobtainium barrelled whizbang one-off special while slogging through a jungle.

Bolt action .308, please.

BTW, no one has really addressed the scope issue. Bueller? Anyone?..

31

Shiva;
You must’ve missed Sofa King’s post above.
Good links, and they got your .308, and scope, covered.
The last link, “Sniper Central”, does make me a bit nervous, though.
Peace,
mangeorge

32

Yeah mangeorge I caught Sofa King’s links above. Good workingmans rifles there. I was just grumbling about the heavy/exotic stuff 'cause I’m a Luddite and a stickler.

Prepare to be nervouser(?): http://www.snipercountry.com

33

Sorry, Shiva, couldn’t get past the “In-Country Briefing”.
:smiley:
Nervouser than ever.
Peace,
mangeorge

34

Oh, I don’t know how heavy the Barret .50" would be. Let’s see - about 15kg for the rifle, another 10kg for the ammo, maybe a CAR-15 and five or six magazines totalling 5kg… about as much as a machinegunner would carry back in the 7.62mm days. You’d have to be a big guy, but you could do it.

35

The Light .50 weighs 28lbs so you are pretty close on the weight of the gun itself, as well as the ammo weight but otherwise you are comparing apples and watermelons.

The role of the Barret is not the same as the role of the machine-gun or even the light machine-gun. Machine guns are typically anti-aquipment and supressive fire tools, LMGs’are pretty much supressive fire tools. The Barett L .50 is a precise weapon for lightly armored targets. A heavy machine gun like the Browning M2 (ma-deuce) often fires a SLAP round (Sabot.Light.Armor.Piercing. Teungsten Carbide dart moving at over 4000 FPS) which has great penetration on billet armor up to and above 4 inches w/o much spalling, wheras an LMG like the M-60 (7.62MM NATO) usually uses FMJ ammo which can be stopped by sandbags effectively. The Barett Light .50 fires three types of ammunition, BMG (Browning Machingun. 660 Grain bullet at 2800 FPS muzzle velocity) which is pretty much standard FMJ ammo, then there is the M8 API (Armor Piercing Incindeary. Good on light armor or LAVs’), the primary round used by the Barett is the MK211 RAUFOSS (it’s made in Raufoss Noroway). The RAUFOSS is AP Incindeary and HE (wow!). The RAUFOSS is almost like a multi-stage rocket. First you have the incindeary package, followed by a C-4A charge, which is then followed up by a tuengsten carbide 7.62 penetrator round. Basically if you want to hit someone/thing inside a lightly armored vehicle or inside a light bunker you use this round.

Also with machineguns you have a crew to operate and carry them, wheras with a sniping “team” working in the mode of traditional snipers you may have a crew of two but you are not going to want to lug 60 lbs of sniping gear on top of your personal weapon/gear.

The USMC does use this weapon in the infantry/scouts but apparently not in the same manner as more traditional sniper weapons are used by Army sniper teams.

36

Umm, Zen… I wasn’t talking about roles. I know what a machine gun is for. I’m talking about what an infantryman cares about the most, weight.

Now, I used to carry an FN-MAG, 550 rounds of 7.62mm ammo, a spare barrel and assorted gear myself for forced marches of up to 60km, at one point in my life, so I know it’s possible for a guy in good enough shape to carry that much around (BTW - what crew? All I got was an assistant with 300 rounds and a pair of binoculars). Yes, I know that the Barret isn’t used for close fighting, but then neither are those TOW missiles I’ve see AT troops strap to their back, and they can’t weigh much less.

All I’m saying that as an infantry weapon (and by infantry, I mean guys who get where they’re going by foot) a 0.5" sniper rifle is quite viable.

37

sure that may be acceptable for Canadians to lug around a 10.85 (not to mention the 10+ kilo tripod if you used it. with the bipod it’s not that bad) kilo gun and 25+ kilos of ammo but you people are used to suffering like that (what with your huge tax rate and having to bear all those Keanu Reeves and Michael J Fox jokes). Normal people would never carry that much weight on top of your pack and gear (let alone the indignity of carrying a firearm made in Belgium).
:wink:

Seriously though, the role of the gun does have a lot to do with it. You can carry a lot of weight if you want to, but it just isn’t that acceptable to do so in a highly mobile job like recon or regular sniping. Hell three guys can lug a MK-II and a few hundred rounds but that does not make it a good idea to do so if you are deep in the poop with just the three man team.

38

What, do I write with a Canadian accent?

While I have the greatest respect for the Canadian people and the Canadian military (if, in fact, Canada has a military; I’m taking your word for it) the closest I have ever been to the world’s second-largest country is Upstate New York.

Frankly, as the SMDB’s token Israeli (currently expatriate), I’d think that my nationality would be fairly well known by now. Maybe I should go down to MPSIMS and start flirting in Hebrew (hi buba, ma koreh?).

Anyways…

I don’t know why you’re so shocked by the weight. I mean, in an infantry unit everybody carries something - be it radio, M-203, mortar, RPG, stretcher, jerrican or more - and the MAG is only the heaviest (BTW - that much ammo is only 15-17kg, not 25, and we used the bipod). They tend to give you equiptment to match your size and strength, and if you’re in good enough shape, you can handle anything. As for recon - if your talking about recon troops, special forces, then there’s no need to worry about their mobility. Those guys are animals.

Maybe the U.S. military does things differently, but according to IDF doctrine, the machine gun (formerly the MAG, currently the Negev 5.56mm) is a crucial squad-level weapon, used both for suppressive fire and close assault. No unit would go out for an assault, raid or ambush without at least two per platoon. In fact, the machine gun is considered the gunner’s personal weapon, and while he generally isn’t expected to take it on guard duty, he’ll take it everywhere else.

As my Lieutenant told me once, during Basic Training: “If we could issue a MAG to every soldier in the army, we would”. Now, I assume he was just trying to make me feel better, but he still made his point.

One more thing:

  1. Like the Minimi, also known as the SAW?

  2. At least the MAG was based on Browning’s excellent BAR, and is a much better weapon than the M-60.

  3. Shalom, Opal!

39

Sorry for assuming you were a Canadian, I honestly thought that the SOG folks were the only people other than some smaller south American units still carrying that weapon. And while many people denegrate the combat effectiveness of the Canadian military the North American Special Operations Group are pretty bad-assed people person for person.

And the “made in Belgium” comment was in jest, I have carried (among other things) the M-249 (actually jumped with one tethered to me about a meter below my feet more than once). And while the SAW is not my favorite weapon (I prefer the M-4 with M-203 for rolling around in the dirt.), it still weighs in at only about half what the MAG weighs, not to mention that the MAG of today is pretty much the same gun as designed and implemented in 55’.

Seriously I don’t want to put down the MAG, or the Barett for that matter, but my training and experience has always leaned towards “lighter is faster and faster is better”. Units that operate in squad or platoon strenght can certainly benefit from medium to heavy weapons support but when your biggest compliment is usually smaller than a light platoon you get in the habit of counting those kilos against ground you can cover.

I don’t think we are that far off from each others opinions really, I certainly agree that such heavy weapons are indeed man-portable, but I think that the definition of “sniper” varies widely from unit to unit and theater to theater, as you served with the IDF (an admirable group of tough men and women and a credit to Israel) your day-to-day combat readiness roles are quite different from those of typical US SF or Ranger groups who typically train to fight on someone else’s lawn and focus heavily on functioning behind enemy lines with little or no resupply. In those situations every Oz you spend on weapon weight costs you time that could be spent doing your job.

:slight_smile:

It’s funny that you expatriated from there to here, I had planned to do the reverse myself in 94 but was unable to do so at the time. I had made a friend in Sayeret Egoz and hoped to serve with him if posible(of course now it looks like Egoz might be disbanded or possibly turned into a reserve unit like Rotem.).