Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. Army Upgrades To .300 Winchester Magnum
StrategyPage.com ^ | October 07, 2010

Posted on 10/07/2010 9:55:41 AM PDT by Neil E. Wright

October 7, 2010: The U.S. Army has ordered 3,600 upgrade kits for its M24 bolt-action sniper rifles, which will convert them to the M24E1. This will turn the existing 7.62mm M24 rifles into ones capable of firing the .300 Winchester magnum (7.62x67) round. This is a more powerful round than the NATO 7.62x51 round currently used in the M24. The conversion kit includes a new receiver and barrel, a new scope, a new flash suppressor and a folding buttstock. The conversion will take five years and will cost about $7,800 per rifle.

Last year, the army ordered 38.4 million rounds of .300 Winchester magnum ammunition for its newly modified M-24 sniper rifles, as well as similar SOCOMs Mk13 models. The new ammo costs about $1.30 per round. The .300 Winchester magnum ammo is ordered in minimum lots of 56,160 rounds (117 boxes of 480 rounds each). The entire 38.4 million rounds will last a while.

All this is in response to requests from snipers for a longer range weapon, but not one as bulky and heavy as the 13.6 kg (30 pound) .50 caliber/12.7mm  rifle (which is good to about 2,000 meters). Thus the army is modifying existing M24 rifles to fire the more powerful .300 Winchester Magnum round. It was felt that this gave the snipers all the additional range they needed, without requiring a much heavier rifle. SOCOM has been using this approach since the early 1990s.

The calls were loudest from snipers operating in Afghanistan, where U.S. Army and Marine Corps shooters wanted a sniper rifle that can consistently get kills out to 1,800 meters. The current 7.62mm round was good only to about 800 meters. The 300 Winchester magnum is a more powerful, but not much larger, round than the current 7.62mm one. An improved version of the magnum round is expected to extend that range another 200 meters or so.

There was another option, and that was to replace the barrel and receiver of the M24 sniper rifles to handle the .338 (8.6mm) Lapua Magnum round. Thus you still have a 17 pound sniper rifle, but with a round that can hit effectively out to 1,600 meters or more. British snipers in Iraq, and especially Afghanistan, have found the Lapua Magnum round does the job at twice the range of the standard 7.62x51mm round. The 8.6mm round entered use in the early 1990s, and became increasingly popular with police and military snipers. Dutch snipers have used this round in Afghanistan with much success, and have a decade of experience with these larger caliber rifles. British snipers in Afghanistan are also using the new round, having converted many of their 7.62mm sniper rifles. Recognizing the popularity of the 8.6mm round, Barrett, the pioneer in 12.7mm sniper rifles, came out with a 15.5 pound version of its rifle, chambered for the 8.6mm. But the U.S. preferred the lighter .300 Winchester magnum solution.

This is not the first time the U.S. Army has quickly responded to sniper needs. Two years ago, in response to requests from snipers operating in urban areas of Iraq, the U.S. Army began issuing the M110 SASS (Semi-Automatic Sniper System). Urban snipers often have multiple targets, at relatively short ranges. They needed a semiautomatic rifle. Previously, many snipers have had success using tuned up M-14s (from the 1960s) as sniper rifles. While semi-automatic and rugged, the M-14 wasn't designed to be a sniper rifle. The M110 was a better semi-automatic sniper rifle, since it is inherently more reliable and accurate. As far back as World War II, it was known that there were many situations where a semi-automatic sniper rifle would come in handy. But it's taken over half a century to solve the reliability and accuracy problems.

The M110 is a based on the AR-10 rifle. The U.S. Navy has been buying a similar weapon, the SR25. This is also known as the Mk11 Sniper Rifle System (SRS). These new semi-automatic sniper rifles are 7.62mm weapons based on the designs of M-16 creator, Gene Stoner. The basis for the M-16 was the AR-15, and a 7.62mm version of that weapon was called the AR-10. About half the parts in the SR25 are interchangeable with those in the M-16. The Stoner sniper rifles achieved its high accuracy partly by using a 20 inch heavy floating barrel. The "floating" means that the barrel is attached only to the main body of the rifle to reduce resonance (which throws off accuracy.)

The M110 weighs 7.9 kg (17.3 pounds) in combat, and about 32 kg (70 pounds) with all components of the system. The M110 can use a ten or twenty round magazine. The 128 cm (40.5 inch) long rifle can have a 15 cm (six inch) tube attached to the barrel, which reduces the noise and flash made when the rifle fires, and largely eliminates nearby dust rising into the air, which often gives away the snipers position.

The M110 will gradually replace many of the bolt-action M24s, while the remaining M24s will be converted to fire the .300 Winchester Magnum, for those snipers working somewhere, like Afghanistan, where more range is needed.

 


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: banglist; military; snipers
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last
To: Neil E. Wright

What the F$%^! Over $7,000! Why not just go BUY new ones!!!


41 posted on 10/07/2010 11:25:24 AM PDT by Freeport (The proper application of high explosives will remove all obstacles.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright
The conversion kit includes a new receiver and barrel, a new scope, a new flash suppressor and a folding buttstock. The conversion will take five years and will cost about $7,800 per rifle.

So the only things they're keeping is the bipod and trigger assembly? For only $7800 a rifle?

Mark

42 posted on 10/07/2010 11:30:41 AM PDT by MarkL (Do I really look like a guy with a plan?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

Weighs almost as much as the Barrett which is what they were trying to get away from.


43 posted on 10/07/2010 11:33:28 AM PDT by Eagles6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack

I’ve been wondering lately why no guns are make with the barrel inline with the center of the shoulder pad.


44 posted on 10/07/2010 11:41:33 AM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

make —> made


45 posted on 10/07/2010 11:44:54 AM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Parley Baer

.300 WinMag is a good round for long distance work.


46 posted on 10/07/2010 11:48:00 AM PDT by backwoods-engineer (There is no "common good" which minimizes or sacrifices the individual. --Walter Scott Hudson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SVTCobra03

This looks great. The price I saw on the web is $4,174.


47 posted on 10/07/2010 11:49:50 AM PDT by Frantzie (Imam Ob*m* & Democrats support the VICTORY MOSQUE & TV supports Imam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Parley Baer
$7,800 per rifle for an upgrade? Remington lists the civilian version (308 Winchester) Model 700 SPS Tactical AAC-SD with a MSRP starting at $757.


48 posted on 10/07/2010 11:53:46 AM PDT by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright
The conversion kit includes a new receiver and barrel, a new scope, a new flash suppressor and a folding buttstock.

What aren't they changing -- the trigger guard?

49 posted on 10/07/2010 11:54:23 AM PDT by expatpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petrosius

The Model 700 XCR Tactical Long Range with 300 Win Mag is listed with a MSRP starting at $1407


50 posted on 10/07/2010 12:42:24 PM PDT by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright

51 posted on 10/07/2010 12:49:40 PM PDT by monkapotamus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright
The conversion kit includes a new receiver and barrel, a new scope, a new flash suppressor and a folding buttstock.

In other words, a new rifle. About the only parts not mentioned are trigger, trigger guard and bipod. Since they are replacing the "buttstock" does this mean they are keeping the foreend?

I think some Pentagon purchasing agent just got sold a bill of goods!

52 posted on 10/07/2010 12:53:39 PM PDT by 6ppc (It's torch and pitchfork time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright

if it’s good enough for Talibunny, it’d make a great elk round too.


53 posted on 10/07/2010 1:15:25 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Godspeed .. Monthly Donor Onboard .. Obama: Epic Fail or Bust!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Someone please explain to me why it's costing the Army $7,800 PER RIFLE to upgrade to the M24E1 (aka XM2010)? You could but NEW rifles for that money. What's not mentioned — the original M24 was DESIGNED from the start to be upgraded in the field to .300 Win Mag by unit armorers. From the photos the new rifle is 90 percent cosmetic changes. Anyone have a clue what's going on here?
54 posted on 10/07/2010 7:30:56 PM PDT by MasterGunner01 (To err is human; to forgive is not our policy. -- SEAL Team SIX)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
Oops. That “but” should be “buy”.

Seriously, if we are really wanting to reach out, why not just go with the .338 Lapua Mag? The Brits are fielding it in the L115A3. This looks like another Army waste of taxpayer money when there are better long range precision rifles available of the shelf.

55 posted on 10/07/2010 8:06:22 PM PDT by MasterGunner01 (To err is human; to forgive is not our policy. -- SEAL Team SIX)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Ooops. That “but” should be “buy”.

Seriously, if we are really wanting to reach out, why not just go with the .338 Lapua Mag? The Brits are fielding it in the L115A3. This looks like another Army waste of taxpayer money when there are better long range precision rifles available off the shelf.


56 posted on 10/07/2010 8:07:52 PM PDT by MasterGunner01 (To err is human; to forgive is not our policy. -- SEAL Team SIX)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: LSAggie; TalonDJ; g'nad
Ping - how about this one? OB

Where to start on this one? $7800 is a pretty steep price for an upgrade, especially when they configured the original purchase of the Remington 700 with this kind of upgrade specifically in mind. The .308 cartridge works with the Remington 700 medium-length action. The Army bought them with the long action specifically so they could convert to the .300 WM round by just changing the barrel and opening up the bolt face a bit. Their M24s used for target shooting were converted to .300 WM that way by their own gunsmiths.

I'd like to see how the $7800 per "upgrade" is broken out by component. I bought my Accuracy International .338 Lapua Magnum with high-end scope customized for it for that price. And that was in a quantity of one, and included the 15% excise tax. The government has far more buying power than I do, and all they get is a crummy upgrade for that much money?

Another odd aspect of this purchase is that only the very best shooters can use either the 7.62mm NATO or the .300 WM effectively out to their maximum ranges. The only way to reach out a lot further is the .338 Lapua, which is a long-popular medium-game cartridge. All the R&D for load development was done for free by civilian shooters. The only problem is that the rifles weigh about as much as a GPMG and tripod.

I can see the Army buying new-in-the-box M24s, and bringing in the older .308 versions for conversion. But no matter how well done, or how economical the conversions are, they're only buying about 300m more range. $7800 for another 300m?

Assuming all of this is reported correctly, this is either an overpriced boondoggle, or there's some black item included in the price. Maybe it's the new scope with laser rangefinder, met system, and complete ballistic systems built in. The Air Forces can hide billions of dollars for black aircraft and spacecraft, and the Army can't divert nickles and dimes for something as simple as sniper rifles.

57 posted on 10/07/2010 8:09:31 PM PDT by 300winmag (Overkill never fails)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Titan Magroyne; mylife

* Ping *


58 posted on 10/07/2010 9:27:50 PM PDT by Drumbo ("Democracy can withstand anything but democrats." - Jubal Harshaw [Robert A. Heinlein])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright

Need to replace the M-16 A4 series and the M-4.

This is nice but most troops don’t carry these.


59 posted on 10/07/2010 9:30:16 PM PDT by Del Rapier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bigun

But these guys have to meet all the Gubmint required hoops.

We as taxpayers bitch if they cut corners on this stuff and then we bitch when excessive testing cost to much.

The $900 dollar hammer wasnt just a hammer.


60 posted on 10/07/2010 9:38:44 PM PDT by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson