Posted on 12/20/2010 8:59:57 PM PST by ErnstStavroBlofeld
The U.S. Army has delivered, to troops in Afghanistan, 250 upgrade kits for their M24 bolt-action sniper rifles. These kids converts the M24s to the more powerful XM2010 sniper rifle. This main changed is allowing 7.62mm M24 rifles to fire the .300 Winchester magnum (7.62x67). 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 XM2010 weighs 8.5 kg (18.7 pounds) and is 1.33 meters (52.2 inches) with the flash suppressor. The conversion of all 3,600 M24s will take five years and will cost about $7,800 per rifle
(Excerpt) Read more at strategypage.com ...
I can't remember the elevation requirements because I haven't shot competitively in almost 20 years There was a reason we were shooting win mag at 1000 yards and not 30-06 or .308. Performance.
The sling, if I'm not mistaken.
For USA, WWII lasted 3.7 years. :)
True, but I thought I’d be kind and use the ‘39-’45 figure...(else I would’ve had to say “longer than WWII lasted...”) Seriously, do they have only *one* guy/gal working on this, part time?
I have a Winchester Model 70 in .300WinMag, it has a muzzle brake and a light contour barrel, probably not the most “consistent” type of barrel for sniping at over 500 yards.
It is my choice for elk here in Alaska but for bear I prefer my .338Win with the heavier bullets.
You are probably on Big Sis' Walmart list of suspicious characters with that item request.
I don't know how to post a pic, but the Blaser LRS Tactical .300 Win Mag. is on my Christmas Wish List (how about it Santa?).
Thanks for the post! Hopefully, Santa has room in his sleigh for two.
By having it as an "upgrade" to an existing weapons system, it doesn't necessarily have to pass the acceptance tests of a new rifle.
Of course, the big reason is that as an upgrade package, they can probably charge 3 times the unit cost of a new rifle. Plus, they can keep introducing new and costly upgrade packages to correct deficiencies. If anyone gripes about one of the future upgrades being too expensive, it can successfully argued that it is absolutely necessary because we already have soooo much money invested, that we can't turn back now.
WHAT A SCAM.
Which, by the way, probably needs a costly refurbishment and retrofit program to work with the "upgraded" rifle.
Of course, in 5 years, the retrofitted sling will be found to be deficient and we will need a upgrade program to develop a state of the art rifle sling for the weapon system.
Thank you!
Much better optics than the 65-year-old military issue units originally last fielded with those older items. Remember, the scopes for the Garand were 7/8-inch units, not even the 1-inch diameter optics most usually seen on hunting rifles nowadays, and far from the 30mm optics units usually fitted on current military equipment.
That said, an old Garand or Springfield will usually outshoot most M16/Kalishnikov family rifles in use today. And my own Garand, fitted with a Soviet PSO-4 scope more usually found on the Soviet SVD/Dragonov sniper's rig, is easily capable to 800 meters, probably to 1KM if conditions are favourable.
Obscelescent is not obsolete- and far from useless. Training and practice come first, not equipment.
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.