• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Purpose built Sniper Rifle vs Precision/Competition Rifle

Anonymoose

Anonymoose

Sergeant of the Hide
Full Member
Minuteman
Dec 7, 2020
146
117
USA
An open discussion on an effective tactical sniper rifle vs a competition rifle. Two different purposes yet both aspire to achieve precision and accuracy on target. While a PRS/Comp rifle needs to make it as easy as possible to make hits on a target it doesn't have to consider lethality while the sniper does. The weight of PRS/Comp rifles make long walks on the beach arduous so this is a design consideration for Tactical Sniper Rifles. It seems we are seeing a migration to a chassis style configuration over more traditional stocks with Sniper Rifles as well. I'd like to hear your thoughts on the differences and why they exist. Another topic of discussion, with a max target range of 1000 meters what is your go to Tactical Sniper Rifle and in what cartridge? Consider everything in that question including full battle loadout weight/volume including rifle.

I'm interested because it seems PRS started out as a way to mimic sniper actions and has migrated into it's own thing with rifles that would be less efficient/effective in a real world tactical/military situation. It makes sense because you only have to hit the target and not eliminate it and very heavy rifles with small caliber projectiles offering lower recoil make this game easier. In contrast, does it take away from the spirit of "Sniper"? I suppose there are thing like Mammoth that try to encompass that spirit but we still see many 6mm rifles on the line.
 
Last edited:
If the mil sniper had the option to choose shit do you not think they might have rifles that look like PRS rifles?

and as an aside....I think mil snipers aim (no pun intended) is to just "hit shit" first and foremost. "Dead right there" is a bonus.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frank Green, 47guy, JakeM and 2 others
pmclaine said:
If the mil sniper had the option to choose shit do you not think they might have rifles that look like PRS rifles?
Click to expand...
Having served I would say no, not completely. The weight is prohibitive for much of what is required and the cartridges are not effective enough. Look at the M40a6 for example. It's looks are somewhat PRS-esque but not quite like a 26" barreled action in an MDT ACC.

If I am just going to hit shit I want to make sure the shit can't point out my location after the fact lol.

It would be cool to see a Sniper competition that encompasses everything an actual sniper needs to do. Cover & Concealment, stalking, etc. Like a civilian sniper school evaluation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Alekzandr, camocorvette, Habu64 and 4 others
Anonymoose said:
Having served I would say no, not completely. The weight is prohibitive for much of what is required and the cartridges are not effective enough. Look at the M40a6 for example. It's looks are somewhat PRS-esque but not quite like a 26" barreled action in an MDT ACC.
Click to expand...

Peeps with the A6 are not in love. People seem to like the XM-3 plenty though.

As far as weight going Mk 13 was not a weight savings.

The mil is currently adopting gear for "the last war".

If they find themselves someplace with cover they will probably be wishing they had more "500 and in" rifles.

A 5.56 is plenty lethal.....guessing a 6.5 would be too.

You are making good points but I think they have less to do with lethality or weight - the powers that be seem to give no fucks about soldier load - I think the focus should be on "What can be provided to a their capable of breaking a rock....that their wont break?"

(The neutral gender pronoun was used purposefully to indicate military priorities.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: RTV, Frank Green, 07SGT4623 and 1 other person
pmclaine said:
and as an aside....I think mil snipers aim (no pun intended) is to just "KILL shit" first and foremost.
Click to expand...
fixed it for you lol

caliber would be the big difference, competition cartridges focused on hitting steel with minimal recoil and fast follow up vs MIL cartridges focused on lethality
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Anonymoose
pmclaine said:
Peeps with the A6 are not in love. People seem to like the XM-3 plenty though.

As far as weight going Mk 13 was not a weight savings.

The mil is currently adopting gear for "the last war".

If they find themselves someplace with cover they will probably be wishing they had more "500 and in" rifles.

A 5.56 is plenty lethal.....guessing a 6.5 would be too.

You are making good points but I think they have less to do with lethality or weight - the powers that be seem to give no fucks about soldier load - I think the focus should be on "What can be provided to a their capable of breaking a rock....that their wont break?"

(The neutral gender pronoun was used purposefully to indicate military priorities.)
Click to expand...
Even more to my point. the XM-3 is preferred to the chassis rifle. I am not concerned with what the military is doing with this discussion. I'm talking about a purpose built tactical sniper rifle vs a heavy ass target rifle. If I were purchasing a sniper rifle for a SHTF situation I'd buy a TacOps hands down. I totally agree with your 500 and in statement although I might go 700 and in. Modern optics make this easier. On the battlefield 5.56 is intended to critically wound the enemy who would then require medical attention, consuming resources. Of course it is lethal but with ball ammo "immediately dead" isn't its forte.
 
THEIS said:
Hi,

Per whom?

Sincerely,
Theis
Click to expand...
Per our friend up there. I have no evidence of this.

You have direct experience with this. I'd love to hear your thoughts. Although they may be a bit biased now 😉.
 
Anonymoose said:
Even more to my point. the XM-3 is preferred to the chassis rifle. I am not concerned with what the military is doing with this discussion. I'm talking about a purpose built tactical sniper rifle vs a heavy ass target rifle. If I were purchasing a sniper rifle for a SHTF situation I'd buy a TacOps hands down. I totally agree with your 500 and in statement although I might go 700 and in. Modern optics make this easier. On the battlefield 5.56 is intended to critically wound the enemy who would then require medical attention, consuming resources. Of course it is lethal but with ball ammo "immediately dead" isn't its forte.
Click to expand...


I dont know about that "designed to wound" principle.

Our military has too many experiences where "we" won the battle but just about every guy surviving left the line wounded. Wounded guys will kill you.

In a desperate fight there are no stretcher bearers nor is a rifleman leaving the line....there are lots of examples of this in our history.

We should not come to expect our dominance in the mideast will be the norm......and even there terrain, conditions and our own use of force policy worked to the enemies advantage allowing them to for a time overcome that dominance.

Ammo and rifles for the Infantry are designed to kill....typically with a 4 MOA acceptable standard. No one in their right mind would accept a rifle designed to be less than lethal.

Im enjoying the conversation. I dont have experience in combat but I once talked to a veteran.

mariocommandant.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mudmarine, TriggerJerk!, PusherX11 and 1 other person
THEIS said:
Hi,

Per whom?

Sincerely,
Theis
Click to expand...


The XM-3 generally was accepted well based on anecdotal comments because it was good enough in areas where there was less distance available and for vehicle use its size made it handy.

The mil aint buying them though especially at the costs it seemed they were charged for them.

The M40 is a musket, a lovable musket, but a long gun all the same.

A6 isnt even a field gun.....supposedly its for training and school use.

Perhaps its weakness are based on chosen chassis.
 
Anonymoose said:
👀 So you're extremely experienced and knowledgeable on the subject then. 😉
Click to expand...


In theory.

Im not the larper coming on here asking weird shit about comparing military rifles to PRS rifles when the choice in mil rifles often has nothing to do with the users desires or the effectiveness of the actual item issued nor does a bunch of people playing a game have much to do with people playing the ultimate game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SortOfClear, GhostFace and 308pirate
"Rifle Schmifle"

In the future your care will be less about your rifle more about "How am I going to avoid the surveillance technology in order to actually do the job"

Its not going to matter what rifle you have when the sky is full of cheap tech to locate you and it will be capable of killing you.

Latest issue of Leatherneck had a two page ad from Draeger promoting air quality devices.

Thinkers know the next war, if against a peer, will be underground....how long the shots gonna be?

Get a rifle with a microbial film on it that will allow easy wash off of the sewer water.

And good ear pro.......its gonna be loud.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alekzandr, M8541Reaper and LV Precision
pmclaine said:
In theory.

Im not the larper coming on here asking weird shit about comparing military rifles to PRS rifles when the choice in mil rifles often has nothing to do with the users desires or the effectiveness of the actual item issued nor does a bunch of people playing a game have much to do with people playing the ultimate game.
Click to expand...
Neither am I. I am looking for a discussion on effective tactical sniper rifles to effective PRS competition rifles. The primary goals of each system, how the designs compliment those goals, and how each system differs from one another. This has nothing to do with the military and the "next war" which is already underway and it has nothing to do with camouflage and traditional weapons.

If I reflect on what motivated me to start this tread it would be the divergence of "Sniper" rifles and "Sniper Competition" rifles. PRS and long range tactical competitions seem to be influenced by and in the spirit of sniper operations. Much simplified but at least in the spirit. In order to be competitive shooters are moving towards small projectiles with big charges for less recoil, flatter trajectories, and as a result far less energy on target. This doesn't bother me but I would like to see more competitions that spec a good "killing" round and either limit the specs of the rifle through rules or limit it through a natural filter like the Mammoth course. Most would not want to lug their 40lb 5' long PRS rig through that course. Maybe put caliber classes within these Mammoth style comps. Like a .338LM class and a .308 class. Main shooter has to shoot .338LM and secondary has to shoot .308 with targets at distances at which those rounds are effective.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: Downtown
This is going to get crazy. I really don’t care if I have a .22lr or a canon. I’ll use what ever is necessary for my survival.

Looking at your direct question some comp rifles really aren’t that far off from a service rifle. Take an AI for instance it’s been voiced as a top snipers rifle. Does it do a few fancy things yes.
Caliber wise if you desire to kill something you will get the job done. It doesn’t matter if you use a hammer or a hatchet. The end result is the same. Did a little looking around and found this. Many 6mm today are way more efficient.

The report went on to list the advantages of the smaller 6 mm caliber: greatly increased velocity, flatness of bullet trajectory, reduced recoil, a 100% increase in penetration compared to the former .45-70 Government cartridge, and the ability to carry twice the number of cartridges per individual sailor or Marine.
The report also acknowledged that the 6 mm round had two principal disadvantages: first, as a small-caliber round, the 6 mm bullet would not sufficiently wound an enemy to put him out of action, and second, the "shock" or stopping power of the smaller bullet would not "stop the onset of excited men at short range". In answer to these objections, the report gave three responses: first, "the battle of the future will be fought at long range, and men will not live to come to close quarters with an enemy who stands his ground"; second, "99 percent of wounded enemy soldiers were unlikely to investigate the severity of their wound, but simply retire to the rear", and last, "the explosive effect of a small-caliber, high-velocity bullet against the human body—the bullet tumbles or fragments to produce devastating wounds against bone or fluid-filled organs—would be more incapacitating at all ranges than wounds made by a slow-moving bullet of large caliber".
 
Rutter said:
This is going to get crazy. I really don’t care if I have a .22lr or a canon. I’ll use what ever is necessary for my survival.

Looking at your direct question some comp rifles really aren’t that far off from a service rifle. Take an AI for instance it’s been voiced as a top snipers rifle. Does it do a few fancy things yes.
Caliber wise if you desire to kill something you will get the job done. It doesn’t matter if you use a hammer or a hatchet. The end result is the same. Did a little looking around and found this. Many 6mm today are way more efficient.

The report went on to list the advantages of the smaller 6 mm caliber: greatly increased velocity, flatness of bullet trajectory, reduced recoil, a 100% increase in penetration compared to the former .45-70 Government cartridge, and the ability to carry twice the number of cartridges per individual sailor or Marine.
The report also acknowledged that the 6 mm round had two principal disadvantages: first, as a small-caliber round, the 6 mm bullet would not sufficiently wound an enemy to put him out of action, and second, the "shock" or stopping power of the smaller bullet would not "stop the onset of excited men at short range". In answer to these objections, the report gave three responses: first, "the battle of the future will be fought at long range, and men will not live to come to close quarters with an enemy who stands his ground"; second, "99 percent of wounded enemy soldiers were unlikely to investigate the severity of their wound, but simply retire to the rear", and last, "the explosive effect of a small-caliber, high-velocity bullet against the human body—the bullet tumbles or fragments to produce devastating wounds against bone or fluid-filled organs—would be more incapacitating at all ranges than wounds made by a slow-moving bullet of large caliber".
Click to expand...
Awesome info. Thanks!

Efficiency and Effectiveness were once described to me this way. If you have a fly on your window you can kill it with a hammer or a flyswatter. Both are effective, only one is efficient.

Now, with your info, if I can eliminate a target from the fight with a 6mm round then I can also be more efficient with my loadout vs .338LM for example. Short action, smaller mags with higher capacity, etc. Given the option I would still pass on a very long and very heavy 6mm rifle for fighting purposes though. Maybe those 18" and shorter 6.5CMs are more attractive In this instance...

It's the friggin laser beams that we need. Batteries are heavy and create their own issues though. Where are you Elon?
 
There are needs and wants.
Neither apply to military gear.
It all depends on who stroked the acquisition guys the best, or who has offered them a job after retirement.
How do you think that remington managed to keep winning the solicitations when there are better actions available?

What they need is a simple two tiered system (this is opinion).
A good, accurate and reliable semi-auto sniping system chambered in a modern cartridge to maximize range an effectiveness. (6.5 CM or .260).
This has the capability of allowing consistent hits on non-gender specific, humanoid targets up to and a bit beyond 1000 yards in a field environment, but is quite capable in the closer range environments found during MOUT operations.

An ELR rig capable of delivering accurate fire in excess of 1500 yards. .338 Norma or .300 Norma.

Neither of these rigs are suitable for PRS, but they are suitable for combat roles.
PRS, much like USPSA, pushes the envelope and some of that gear ends up with the warfighters. It also drives innovation like riflescope design construction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FriedAss
fdkay said:
There are needs and wants.
Neither apply to military gear.
It all depends on who stroked the acquisition guys the best, or who has offered them a job after retirement.
How do you think that remington managed to keep winning the solicitations when there are better actions available?

What they need is a simple two tiered system (this is opinion).
A good, accurate and reliable semi-auto sniping system chambered in a modern cartridge to maximize range an effectiveness. (6.5 CM or .260).
This has the capability of allowing consistent hits on non-gender specific, humanoid targets up to and a bit beyond 1000 yards in a field environment, but is quite capable in the closer range environments found during MOUT operations.

An ELR rig capable of delivering accurate fire in excess of 1500 yards. .338 Norma or .300 Norma.

Neither of these rigs are suitable for PRS, but they are suitable for combat roles.
PRS, much like USPSA, pushes the envelope and some of that gear ends up with the warfighters. It also drives innovation like riflescope design construction.
Click to expand...
I like your tiered suggestion. can a semi-auto be accurate enough out to 1000? What are we considering accurate enough? 1moa at 1000 is 10 inches which is easily a miss on a gendervoid biped.
 
Doesnt PRS have "tactical class"?

Guessing that has rifle qualifications but isnt the greatest requirement that it be a tactical caliber - .308 typically?

People stay in tactical class for love while others get different calibers to overcome the problems associated with tactical calibers.

Does the terminal performance of the bullet matter if misjudging the wind creates a miss?

You can overcome that some with increased caliber but than you introduce other issues - weight, cost, training required, some traditional training areas arent even approved for the potential range increase.

Another part of the thought process is who is the end user? A special unit, STA Platoon, Company marksman........I think as you increase the caliber you need to increase the training....that would apply to hobbyist shooters as well as military users.

Being hobbyists we probably get better access to training using our own dollars - current shortages not considered.

Sucks but not all mil is going to be able to ensure the training to get people where they need to be.

Mil seems to be looking for a jack of all trades rifle based on recent experience.....I think there needs to be choices.
 
Last edited:
Anonymoose said:
I like your tiered suggestion. can a semi-auto be accurate enough out to 1000? What are we considering accurate enough? 1moa at 1000 is 10 inches which is easily a miss on a gendervoid biped.
Click to expand...
Typical shoulder width of a CIS gendered bipedal male is 18 inches.
A 1 MOA rifle is entirely capable of making that shot, the advantage of either of the 6.5 variants is that they are affected by wind less than a .308, so the wind call is SLIGHTLY less critical.
To be sure, the hits can be made with the .308 as well, but the hit percentage goes up with the faster, flatter cartridges that have higher BC's.
 
I never was a sniper but I spent a lot of time walking in uniform carrying a rifle and stuff. To me - the biggest difference between a competition rifle and a "tactical" or duty rifle is the competition is shot a lot and carried little while a duty weapon is carried a lot and shot little.

You need to put a lot of thought into the portability and durability of a duty weapon along with lethality, etc. Duty weapons won't always be lugged around in a vehicle or on the perimeter of a FOB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vio515, tex68w, LV Precision and 4 others
fdkay said:
Typical shoulder width of a CIS gendered bipedal male is 18 inches.
Click to expand...

As we move away from the traditional definitions and ideas of "masculinity" the benefit is we make our enemies job that much harder....assuming no trans breast augmentation to offset the effect of soy.

“We make men without chests and expect from them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst.”​


― C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man
 
  • Like
Reactions: WATERWALKER, Bakwa and demolitionman
I was never a sniper but spent a good amount of time around them out in bad guy country and Im friends with a few of them today. I was a designated marksman and a machine gunner, odd combination. I have squad mates that went SOCOM route and are still doing the secret squirrel shit.

The military is using a two rifle type approach to sniping and has been for a while now. For shorter range engagements we have the M110 and it's shorter barreled cousin that I believe is being designated the M110A1. The M110 has proven to be very effective in shorter range engagements but still has been smoking dudes out at distance.

There has been testing with 6.5 CM out of AR10s.

The bolt guns are primarily being used as a longer range weapon. Lot's of 300 Winmag bolt guns being used currently and the MRAD is coming online to bring 300 Norma and 338 Norma.

There is a lot of shit changing in the sniper world right now and when you add in the quirks of SOCOM it gets even more complicated.

Lastly, the 5.56 wasn't designed to wound. If you read the battle reports from advisors in the early days of Vietnam, they described the horrific wounding capability of the 20 inch M16 at the shorter distances fought in Vietnam. Those reports were used to help the adoption of the M16. On a related note, Ive shot a few people with the 5.56 and have seen a bunch of guys shot with 5.56. It'll kill the shit out of you. My brother in law was was a Marine Infantryman in Fallujah and has the same experience.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: FriedAss, Mudmarine, epaultmbt and 4 others
As to the original question, Id say the biggest difference between sniper rifles and competition rifles are durability and weight. Military sniper rifles are heavy because they are very rugged and overbuilt to survive being dragged through the brush, jumping from planes, etc... But they are not purposely made to be heavier.

I love my AI AT. It shoots great and is rugged as hell. But it weighs a lot. If I were going out into the wild on a sniper mission I would rather have something a bit lighter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tex68w and pmclaine
I think we really need more “I’m not but here’s what I would do” or “I’m not but I heard.”

You’re likely not going to get any real input from actual experience as these conversations don’t accomplish anything useful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spife7980, cruiserweight, MTB doc and 4 others
The problem with large, heavy recoiling, bolt action rifles when you are occupying a hide that MAY get overrun, or you may have multiple, short exposure targets is, well, it is large and heavy, follow up shots are MUCH slower and trying to fight out of your position with a 26" barreled MRAD is considerably harder than doing so with a 20" barreled AR (which is far from ideal).
If your in the business of stacking bad guys within 700 yards, with fields of fire limited by the streets between buildings, an accurate, reliable semi-auto is hard to beat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FriedAss
Hi,

Let get to the real difference without beating around the bush, lol....

Lets take a full tilt PRS built rifle with foundation stock, origin receiver, bartlen barrel, all the works...fully equipped ready to shoot.
Lets take a full tilt "Mil" rifle...AI for this scenario....fully equipped ready to shoot.

Same shooter shoot both rifles for groups AND for timed impacts from 100-1000 yards. See which has better results.

Now take both rifles and throw them over a 20 foot wall onto the ground on other side.

Same shooter walk around wall and repeat the shooting scenarios...See which has better results.

Someone do that and revert back to this thread, lolol

Sincerely,
Theis
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Terry Cross, TriggerJerk!, M8541Reaper and 7 others
Anonymoose said:
I'm interested because it seems PRS started out as a way to mimic sniper actions and has migrated into it's own thing with rifles that would be less efficient/effective in a real world tactical/military situation.
Click to expand...
Maybe a bit off of the actual thread but an important point.

IHMSA started out being a handgun sport where people could shoot their hunting style handguns and improve their technique. Now, the handguns and the techniques are totally impractical for handgun hunting.

Cowboy action shooting was a way for folks to shoot their western style handguns and rifles and had some fun. Now, it is mostly a quick shooting competition with handguns and rifles customized well beyond typical cowboy use and shotguns that rarely if ever saw use in the “old” west. And, combined with clothing having price tags that would water the eyes of a nyc stockbroker, it is as expensive or more so than any shooting sport.

See the Pattern. Its a road often traveled.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hereinaz
Huskydriver said:
Op where did you serve and with whom?
Click to expand...
Nothing special. I was active for 4 years 95-99 stationed in Hohenfels 1-4 Infantry. Spent most of my days in the Box "LARPING". Although some of us were deployed for Operation Joint EndEavor for short term stints. I was the designated marksman in the squad. I carried an M24 and an M4 or just an M16 depending. During Joint EndEavor we spent most of our days training those deploying there. I was then Ohio NG for the next 2 years of my obligation. An infantry unit that was typical NG. My obligation ended on September 8th 2003. I was not called back after 9/11. I had a 2 month old daughter at that time so I wasn't eager to go but I would have happily if asked.

I didn't spend much time in real world conflict although my time in Bosnia was fairly action packed. My time in the Box (200+ days/year) provided intimate familiarization with effective and efficient combat loadouts and gear. I don't claim to be an expert or some high-speed operator. Just someone with a little more experience than none at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FriedAss and Huskydriver
Worth what you paid:
PRS is completely unmoored from any semblance of practically these days. That’s me on the outside looking in. A 25 lb 6mm BRA with Gucci paint job and 30” barrel is a cool comp rig and all...but why would that make sense in any other context? To say nothing of the bipods, tripods, bags, etc. Look at what folks show up to a PRS comp with. How much room and weight allowance is there for R/T, batteries, etc.? I know it’s the internet and everyone here can hump 120+ lb rucks all day every day with no ill effects and use 20 lb comp rigs to hunt because it’s “what we’re most familiar with.” Still...
 
  • Like
Reactions: FriedAss and S12A
DJL2 said:
Worth what you paid:
PRS is completely unmoored from any semblance of practically these days. That’s me on the outside looking in. A 25 lb 6mm BRA with Gucci paint job and 30” barrel is a cool comp rig and all...but why would that make sense in any other context? To say nothing of the bipods, tripods, bags, etc. Look at what folks show up to a PRS comp with. How much room and weight allowance is there for R/T, batteries, etc.? I know it’s the internet and everyone here can hump 120+ lb rucks all day every day with no ill effects and use 20 lb comp rigs to hunt because it’s “what we’re most familiar with.” Still...
Click to expand...
My lawn dart knees wouldn't stand 5 minutes of standing still with a 120lb ruck these days.

I haven't been involved in long range shooting since leaving the military. A little while ago I picked up a Mossberg Patriot in 6.5CM on a complete whim, total impulse buy while wandering around Academy. Then started doing some research which led to putting that POS in an MDT chassis which only made it a cooler looking POS. Then I find this place and get all tight in the pants with the cool chassis rifles and buy a Bergara BMP. Made more bad money decisions and put that into a KRG Bravo decked out with lots of goodies. I've thought of competing in PRS but the more I see and hear about it the less I'm interested. I like this rifle in it's current configuration it weighs about 16# and shoots well but I miss the feel of the old M24 a bit too. Now I obsess over the TacOps thread which I know will only lead to more bad money decisions. Bad for the wallet but good for the soul.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: FriedAss, Alekzandr, Habu64 and 2 others
Tac Ops could be a rifle that you may consider a highly functional common denominator.

Its weakness is its desireable strength - the bedded stock.

The Marine Corps had absolutely strict rules about the people fielding M40s doing anything other than bore punching them.

All other work requires higher echelon service.

As the M17 pistol indicates the mil preference now is "plug and play".

Taking a rifle out of service to bed a fiberglass stock after being dropped over a twenty foot wall is a detriment compared to "replace chassis, torque bolts to 65 inch pounds".

Tac Ops is my style of rifle but it might be too pure bred for "General Issue".
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJL2
pmclaine said:
Tac Ops could be a rifle that you may consider a highly functional common denominator.

Its weakness is its desireable strength - the bedded stock.

The Marine Corps had absolutely strict rules about the people fielding M40s doing anything other than bore punching them.

All other work requires higher echelon service.

As the M17 pistol indicates the mil preference now is "plug and play".

Taking a rifle out of service to bed a fiberglass stock after being dropped over a twenty foot wall is a detriment compared to "replace chassis, torque bolts to 65 inch pounds".

Tac Ops is my style of rifle but it might be too pure bred for "General Issue".
Click to expand...
Right on. I can see why it's not the ideal solution for a mass issued mil rifle. It was the same with the M24s, clean the bore and give it to the Armorer. Although, I might ask for a complete replacement if I dropped my rifle over a 20 foot wall. They would deny the request of course and instead give me a big bottle of 800mg Motrin.

BUT, I still want a TacOps...
 
  • Like
Reactions: LoCal247
Anonymoose said:
Right on. I can see why it's not the ideal solution for a mass issued mil rifle. It was the same with the M24s, clean the bore and give it to the Armorer. Although, I might ask for a complete replacement if I dropped my rifle over a 20 foot wall. They would deny the request of course and instead give me a big bottle of 800mg Motrin.

BUT, I still want a TacOps...
Click to expand...


Get a TacOps......
 
  • Like
Reactions: VargmatII and Anonymoose
I'm with you...it's taken me a long while to realize that, in many ways, a Delta-51 is my ideal rifle. It'd be nice to get a "light" version that scaled at 8 lbs or less, too. I like the rifles I have just fine...but...man...
 
Anonymoose said:
It was the same with the M24s, clean the bore and give it to the Armorer.
Click to expand...
Point of fact, the M24 could be serviced by the sniper just shy of messing with the small adjustment screws on the trigger and rebarreling it. That's why it came with all the tools and spare parts, it wasn't for the armorer, it was so the sniper could disassemble it, replace parts, and reassemble it in the field. Hell the TM walks you through replacing the firing pin.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huskydriver
THEIS said:
Hi,

Let get to the real difference without beating around the bush, lol....

Lets take a full tilt PRS built rifle with foundation stock, origin receiver, bartlen barrel, all the works...fully equipped ready to shoot.
Lets take a full tilt "Mil" rifle...AI for this scenario....fully equipped ready to shoot.

Same shooter shoot both rifles for groups AND for timed impacts from 100-1000 yards. See which has better results.

Now take both rifles and throw them over a 20 foot wall onto the ground on other side.

Same shooter walk around wall and repeat the shooting scenarios...See which has better results.

Someone do that and revert back to this thread, lolol

Sincerely,
Theis
Click to expand...
191ACB3E-0A08-475D-9710-031E8109FD19.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Anonymoose
The mission always defines the equipment.

A PRS larper will shoot his matches every weekend, go home, and continue his life.

A sniper may have varying tasks over the course of a week, 12 month, or 18 month deployment, or on a rotating alert cycle every day, week, and month of the year for years -- often wearing at least his armor, Dome of Obedience (tm) and his load-bearing set (whatever Uncle or his own mission requirements call for). Some will be static or on foot for a few hours or days -- some with their kit or set in a vehicle, some with the Big Green Wart (tm) on his back.

A long PRS match may be a four-day weekend in zip-off leg trousers and Tiva sandals, sleeping in hotels the night before, or perhaps every night.

A sniper's alert schedule may be six weeks, prepared to go anywhere, or be tasked with supporting a varied set of missions. A Leg Army sniper may have to haul around his rifle and equipment suite every farking day (often through the night), perhaps in-and-out of vehicles or over extended distances and terrain for days. Dismounted ops with all his other ass-pain gear will dictate how much he wants it to weigh, balanced by whether or not it holds zero, and desired effects the second he acquires, identifies, tracks, and engages the target.

No one wants to haul around unnecessary length, weight, or bulk. I've never seen a sniper hauling half a dozen different bags and squeeze-pillows on a strap of tubular nylon hanging off their web gear.

Better is better, can't argue with a Wonder-6.5 or some other magnum. But his gear has also got to be durable and consistent, and standard enough to teach new (young / partially-trained and inexperienced) people who constantly cycle into units and slots.

An Army Acquisition Corps (the guys who buy stuff for the Army) friend asked me why and how Special Force's purchasing cycle is so much shorter and faster. I explained it to him, and added (because it doesn't seem to tick off our Command Sergeants Major so much) "It's got to fold up small, fold out big, weigh nothing, do its job better than what we have, and be in an outrageous color no one else in the military will tolerate."

PRS and other disciplines add value from the old saw, "If it's stupid but works it isn't stupid."

Very few guys demand something heavier, longer, or bulkier without gaining a distinct advantage.

Oh, and PRSers don't have people shooting back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FriedAss, Noob Sammich, S12A and 8 others
Hi,

Just FWIW....for the love of God lol.

If you have not served in military sniper billet; do yourself a favor and do not attempt to counter anything sinister just typed, lol.

The outcome will not be on your side.

Sincerely,
Theis
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJL2
Having worked with various departments and getting to know their SWAT snipers, I would say they would pass on the 20lb 6mm and stick with the Tac-Ops Tango 51's they have already. They just work and there is no real reason to change anything.

As for police snipers, public perception is a real concern as well, and I would say something like the Tango-51 vs a full blown PRS rig in a fancy chassis also likely draws less negative attention from the public eye as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pmclaine, sinister, Anonymoose and 1 other person
THEIS said:
Hi,

Just FWIW....for the love of God lol.

If you have not served in military sniper billet; do yourself a favor and do not attempt to counter anything sinister just typed, lol.

The outcome will not be on your side.

Sincerely,
Theis
Click to expand...
Why would anyone, in their right mind, do that?!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lowlight
The Everyday Sniper Podcast: New Training Seasons Starts Now
Replies
0
Views
115
Lowlight
Lowlight
Lowlight
The Everyday Sniper Podcast: Big Jim Fish: $2k Optics Talk
Replies
3
Views
386
db2000
db2000
Lowlight
The Everyday Sniper Podcast: What is a Marksman ?
Replies
2
Views
369
Ezana4CE
Ezana4CE
Z
Organisational View of PRS
Replies
86
Views
2K
Long Range 338
Long Range 338
S
PRS/GP rifle: Sanity Check?
Replies
5
Views
570
DeathBeforeDismount
DeathBeforeDismount
Top Bottom
Back