Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 148

Thread: Archive Thread 10- Question on new USMC sniper rifle.

  1. #76
    Moderator & Go Go Dancer Of Death Chops's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Omar's Tittie Taverna & Grill, Deh Rawod
    Posts
    2,840

    Default

    Yeah I was just interested in hearing how the shorter barrel M14s work out in combat rather than range conditions? And you have to tell us who you're with mate...

  2. #77
    Banned user UDTWOLF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    San Clemente Island
    Age
    34
    Posts
    90

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chops View Post
    Yeah I was just interested in hearing how the shorter barrel M14s work out in combat rather than range conditions? And you have to tell us who you're with mate...
    Pretty much the same as far as accuracy. On the range I have really good grouping and in the field have had the same success. I like it better than carrying an M16A2 that's for sure. What else do you want to know? I mean I am not about to start saying confirms, you know.

    As far as who I am with, that's not important I'm just a corpsman, that's all.

  3. #78
    Senior Member szr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    9,526

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UDTWOLF View Post
    As far as who I am with, that's not important I'm just a corpsman, that's all.
    Coooool man. What MOS is Corpsman, again?

  4. #79
    Banned user UDTWOLF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    San Clemente Island
    Age
    34
    Posts
    90

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by szr View Post
    Coooool man. What MOS is Corpsman, again?
    It's not an MOS it's a rate, pretty much the same thing but the Navy calls it a rate. As far as having a number with it like other branches of the military it will depend on what your specialty is or who you are with like if your FMF you would be 8404 , if you only went through Corps school you are a quad 0, Recon 8427 , it varies upon who you are with.

  5. #80
    Senior Member szr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    9,526

    Thumbs up

    Cool. So those numbers are rates?

  6. #81
    Banned user AK74's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    757

    Default

    god, the modern m14's are sexy!

  7. #82
    Member Twombly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Star Empire of Manticore
    Age
    27
    Posts
    482

    Default

    Well about using a M14 by marines:
    Recon snipers use the M14 DMR

  8. #83
    Senior Member ShakesFIST's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington
    Age
    31
    Posts
    1,358

    Default

    The SOCOM II from Springfield looks better and could make a good melee weapon.

    I heard the SOCOM rifles were EXTREMELY loud for their size due to the short barrel.

  9. #84
    Member jagermeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    in the tall timber with my long gun
    Age
    34
    Posts
    651

    Default

    dude im sorry but you lose a ****load muzzle velocity , knock down power and accuracy when you lop the barrel of a 308 that short. M14 has a what a 22 inch barrel? in a 16 you dont have enough time for all the powder to burn. Contrary to popular belife you can get way more accuracy out of the M16 platform then a M14. Granted you cant argue against the knock down power of the M14 over the M16. After shooting the SOCOM 16 a few trips i was very disapointed and it gets very little play now.The SCAR is the one im holding my breath for in 308.
    Last edited by jagermeister; 11-18-2006 at 03:00 PM.

  10. #85
    Banned user
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    passing through pineland on the way to df's house
    Posts
    935

    Default

    seriously i have no way of knowing who this guy is (no mos for a corpsman - lol!) but there's no nsn for that rifle in the database.

    springfield m1's are crap. no usgi parts. recievers are out of spec. they have the worst qa and qc in the industry (high school kids working after hours on the production line). if you're a civvy and you want a m1 go to lrb, if you're a military unit go talk to smith enterprises. the mk14 has a nsn and is in deployment.

    dw58 and twombly, i'm not "flame baiting" why wouldn't a semi qualify as a sniper rifle if it has the accuracy and the range? if you said complexity and number of moving parts, i'd be inclined to disagree because how many shots does the average sniper throw down range daily? i've previously posted my experiences with pics of the mk11. when i ditched the glass and changed the trigger i was getting 1" groups at 300 yards, not quite top shelf bolt gun territory but plenty good enough. the m118's were still super sonic and stable at 1008 yards. fwiw, i'm not a big fan boi of the mk11, but i feel it's adequate.

    marine mk11 is a different nsn, they have diiferent optics (s&b), rings (badger?) and charginging handle (badger). some of the nsw units have had the original nsn changed to deviate on the optics (mob six going with nightforce).

    and yes, the blaser r93 might be ok for target shooting but it is in no way a martially oriented rifle (crap in my humble opinion). best bang for the buck in .338lm is the sako trg, money no object i'd got with the pgw timberwolf's (with the canadian spec'd uso glass) that the cannuck snipers in the stan are now getting.

    another alternative would be to go with the mauser based cz-452 - gotta love that beefy extractor claw. bed it into a mcmillan stock and add a good barrel and you'd have a formaidable rifle. imho, the remington 700 can't reliably scale up to the .338lm. george gardner at gap takes this path for the .338 (i've owned a couple of his outstanding guns).
    Last edited by maw; 11-18-2006 at 03:57 PM. Reason: toned down the language and the rhetoric a tad.

  11. #86
    Member jagermeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    in the tall timber with my long gun
    Age
    34
    Posts
    651

    Default

    i must have missed the part why we need a new sniper system?

  12. #87
    Avoiding Asshats, Lying Low DeltaWhisky58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Feeling The HateŽ, Jockistan
    Posts
    14,478

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by maw View Post
    seriously i have no way of knowing who this guy is (no mos for a corpsman - lol!) but there's no nsn for that rifle in the database.

    springfield m1's are crap. no usgi parts. recievers are out of spec. they have the worst qa and qc in the industry (high school kids working after hours on the production line). if you're a civvy and you want a m1 go to lrb, if you're a military unit go talk to smith enterprises. the mk14 has a nsn and is in deployment.

    dw58 and twombly, i'm not "flame baiting" why wouldn't a semi qualify as a sniper rifle if it has the accuracy and the range? if you said complexity and number of moving parts, i'd be inclined to disagree because how many shots does the average sniper throw down range daily? i've previously posted my experiences with pics of the mk11. when i ditched the glass and changed the trigger i was getting 1" groups at 300 yards, not quite top shelf bolt gun territory but plenty good enough. the m118's were still super sonic and stable at 1008 yards. fwiw, i'm not a big fan boi of the mk11, but i feel it's adequate.

    marine mk11 is a different nsn, they have diiferent optics (s&b), rings (badger?) and charginging handle (badger). some of the nsw units have had the original nsn changed to deviate on the optics (mob six going with nightforce).

    and yes, the blaser r93 might be ok for target shooting but it is in no way a martially oriented rifle (crap in my humble opinion). best bang for the buck in .338lm is the sako trg, money no object i'd got with the pgw timberwolf's (with the canadian spec'd uso glass) that the cannuck snipers in the stan are now getting.

    another alternative would be to go with the mauser based cz-452 - gotta love that beefy extractor claw. bed it into a mcmillan stock and add a good barrel and you'd have a formaidable rifle. imho, the remington 700 can't reliably scale up to the .338lm. george gardner at gap takes this path for the .338 (i've owned a couple of his outstanding guns).
    Is there any chance you could post this in proper English, i.e. with the odd capital letter and some better punctuation so that an old fart like me can understand it? BTW - Where did I say that you were flame baiting on this thread?

    Semi auto rifles have their place as DMRs etc. - I was probably shooting semi auto 7.62mm rifles accurately before you were out of short pants - but they will not shoot to the level of accuracy achieved from bolt action rifles.

    This thread is now so way off topic that I've almost forgotten what it was about - and it is fast turning into yet another MP.Net p!ssing match.

  13. #88
    Banned user AK74's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    757

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jagermeister View Post
    i must have missed the part why we need a new sniper system?
    its a rumor. but that blazer looks good.

  14. #89
    Member jagermeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    in the tall timber with my long gun
    Age
    34
    Posts
    651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AK74 View Post
    its a rumor. but that blazer looks good.

    did you happen to ready any of this thread? the blazer is crap, and the M40s are top of the line. ive had dumb attacks before so i might be having one now but could you tell me why we would replace the M40s with blazers?

  15. #90
    Banned user AK74's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    757

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jagermeister View Post
    did you happen to ready any of this thread? the blazer is crap, and the M40s are top of the line. ive had dumb attacks before so i might be having one now but could you tell me why we would replace the M40s with blazers?
    um... i said it LOOKS good.

    i idint say it was.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •