Tweet
Bigger calibers always mean bigger rifles, heavier ammo - which is fine if the engagement ranges are routinely 1500 yards now. Are they, really? Or is someone fishing for a new USMC Contract for a few Million dollars? I vote the Marines just build Long Action 700s in .300 Mag/.338 Mag, if anything more is PROVEN to be needed. CC
-
Colt, Glock and Remington factory trained LE Armorer
LE Trained Firearms Instructor -
How big is big enough?
SamComment
-
A Scout-Sniper has a Radio, Right? Isn't it part of their job to notice what they cannot take care of with a single rifle bullet, and call for Artillery or Air? CCColt, Glock and Remington factory trained LE Armorer
LE Trained Firearms InstructorComment
-
I'd have to agree with Mr. Howard that the main danger isn't usually another rifleman, but artillery and long range MG fire. But if they could give the Marines a sniper rifle with longer effective range to use if needed, why not ?? A .338 on the same Remington platform could give another 400 or so yards to use if needed. The weight carried into the field doesn't change in a major way. I think it comes down to not wanting to retrain some armorers in Langley doing the loading and support. If a .338 can buy enough additional range to pick of a bad guy on a mortar or manning a MG, bringing more of our guys home, isn't it well worth the small amount spent and the effort ?? If our Marine snipers are outclassed over here in Nevada at the Mountain Warfare Training Center by the English and Canadians due to us not having a rifle with enough range, shouldn't that be a sign something needs to be done to change that ?? I think in America we have had a long standing tradition of making a effort to bring the biggest stick to the battlefield we can, we bring the best trained people. Why would we consider not properly equipping our solders to do the best job they can ??
ChrisLast edited by Chris W.; 06-28-2015, 09:43.Comment
-
One of the bleats I hear from the 5.56MM/M4 fans over the 7.62MM for regular issue is always "we don't need long range .30 caliber Battle Rifles any more, we have Air Support and Artillery at the end of our radios". (I don't necessarily support this, but it is the excuse for the mouse gun as standard issue.) Why would this not be the case for the Marines, Snipers as well as regular troops?
My point is, yes, you could go to a .338, but why not just have .308's for "regular work" and the Barrett .50 cal to deal with any exceptions? Remember the opening scene in "Shooter"? The .50 BMG has a LOT more payload options.
How did they set up the war game to "prove" the 7.62MM is so dangerously inferior? Do we have written reports of our troops put in actual danger from not having .338's?? If you need a .338, why not the .50?? Or just have them drag a 37MM wheeled gun around?? CCLast edited by Col. Colt; 06-30-2015, 08:58.Colt, Glock and Remington factory trained LE Armorer
LE Trained Firearms InstructorComment
-
More likely an improvised Anti-tank sub caliber training device. My dad commanded a company of 57mm Antitank (british 6 pdrs.) guns in the ETO. He had his mechanics fabricate brackets to mount M1's on the 57's for practice. Literally shot out the barrels on the M1's.
Last edited by jgaynor; 07-02-2015, 08:18.Comment
-
Come on , let's not let logic and facts get in the way of a good story .
ChrisComment
-
We used to always joke when I was in the Marines that we were never known for having the best gear. But we were known what we could do with it.
Comment
-
If you are having problems hitting your target at 1000 yds with a 7.62, you won't improve with a 338. I owned a Barrett, clip fed, one of the early ones (they were fairly cheap then). Sure, that puppy would hit at incredible distances (you checked your target with a 5 minute drive down range), but to be accurate took a LOT of concentration. It pushed more than kicked, but don't think that push wasn't violent. The Marines have what they want, and they obviously like the 7.62. I still hate having to give up my M14 for the M16. I was deadly with the 14.
jtComment
-
been there with the 308, in my experience the M40 in its 1968-69 form was a great sniper rifle and with the improvements even better, fine caliber and worked great for many years, and even now at shorter ranges, but there are better options in a package that isn't much heavier. A 700 Rem in 300 win mag has longer legs than a 308, so does a 338 Lapula and 338 ultra. My point is that you don't know whether you will need to shoot a bad guy at 600 yds or 1500, why not carry a rifle that can do it at either distance. As to cost , when they are spending 100 mil for a fighter a few new rifles isn't going to break the bank and if they do 300 win mag they can get in on the army ammo contract for ammo that will work in temp from cold to hot. If I was outfitting my son for the sand-box I would want him to have a min. 300 win mag and know how to use it..
just an old Marine gruntComment
-
My son traded in his beloved 300 Savage for a 300 WSM. His excellent record for bringing home the venison went to hell in a hand basket. Invited him over for a session on my range. I handed him his rifle, no cartridge in chamber, and told him to hit a quarter at 100 years (something he regularly did with his 300 Savage). When he pulled that trigger, I witnessed one of the worst trigger jerks ever. He jerked so hard he pulled the rifle back into his shoulder. He looked so surprised I had to laugh. That 300 WSM was beating him to death. He returned to the 300 Savage, and his kill count went back to normal. I had a 300 Rem Mag that I absolutely hated. It kicked like a freaking whipped mule. It was all I could do to fire a five shot group. This from a guy who likes to shoot a 416 Rigby for expensive grins.
Sure the Corps can get bigger bangers. They can use any banger they want. They want the M40 platform, and there are good reasons they feel that way. Let those who crawl through the deep grass to engage their enemies make the decision. They know best.
jt
PS
The 30-06 was used by the Corps in WWI with great success. One Marine sniper received the DSC for killing six Germans at 1440 yards with his A5 scoped 1903.Comment
-
Methinks we have bigger problems.. New Obama DOD budget.....
sigpic"Give Me A Fast Ship And I Will Sail In Harms Way" John Paul Jones, U.S. NAVYComment
-
If you are having problems hitting your target at 1000 yds with a 7.62, you won't improve with a 338. I owned a Barrett, clip fed, one of the early ones (they were fairly cheap then). Sure, that puppy would hit at incredible distances (you checked your target with a 5 minute drive down range), but to be accurate took a LOT of concentration. It pushed more than kicked, but don't think that push wasn't violent. The Marines have what they want, and they obviously like the 7.62. I still hate having to give up my M14 for the M16. I was deadly with the 14.
jt
Here is a photo of me in 'Nam in 1967 along the Go Cong River with my M16 A1. It was totally unreliable and shortly thereafter I threw it in the river. The Marines gave me an M14.. The best thing about the M14 was it fired every time I pulled the trigger-
The good old days..... Right?
Last edited by John HOLBROOK; 07-17-2015, 03:51.sigpic"Give Me A Fast Ship And I Will Sail In Harms Way" John Paul Jones, U.S. NAVYComment
Comment